|
Post by mcqueen on Jan 20, 2008 13:35:14 GMT
1st shot of Enterprise in space dock Kirk is so damn hot- I hope he can act. Ooooh! Winona Ryder is in it? I didnt know that.
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Jan 20, 2008 15:32:08 GMT
Squee? Really?
I love me some Trek, but the idea of a prequel is leaving me so cold I can't even describe it.
I want a Deep Space Nine movie but as the Star Trek canon pretty much pretends that none of it ever happened, it's not likely.
|
|
|
Post by mcqueen on Jan 20, 2008 20:45:42 GMT
Squee? Really? I love me some Trek, but the idea of a prequel is leaving me so cold I can't even describe it. I want a Deep Space Nine movie but as the Star Trek canon pretty much pretends that none of it ever happened, it's not likely. Well the Sisko is dead/a prophet and Odo is part of the great link so it would be hard to come back from that. just read that Winona is playing Spock's mum!! Potential car crash! Yay! Christmas hurry up and come! the HQ trailer will aparently be online tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Rad on Jan 20, 2008 22:44:16 GMT
I don't really want a prequel. I'd like a movie set after DS9/TNG/VOY. Scratch that, I want a new SERIES set after those. I know it won't happen, but that sucks. I was very invested in that world and would like to see what happened next, not go back to what came before all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Cherubic on Jan 20, 2008 22:51:24 GMT
Yes, but Voyager kept showing us what happened next (time police and very dull uniforms) and it was very very boring.
I want the fedaration to collapse goddamn it.
|
|
|
Post by Rad on Jan 20, 2008 23:21:58 GMT
Actually, I always thought the Federation would face collapse or very iminent change after all the stuff that went on in DS9 and late TNG. Voyager was pretty much out of the Federation for all but the finale (which I have largely forgotten), but I'd be interested to see if its Maquis influence had any implications for Federation policy.
I'd like to see something say ten, twenty years after the series we had finished, with the Federation in crisis. Possibly terminal crisis, as the Federation is a bit rubbish and slightly evil.
I'm sure the novels cover this stuff, but Star Trek novels are bad.
Anyway, back to the film. I am kind of looking forward to it. I think some of the casting is inspired, some is random, and I'd like to see the early days of the Kirk crew. But only once. And I'm assuming this is being set up for a franchise of prequels that then make the whole sequence go out of order a la Star Wars. And we all know from that experience that pequels do not always = good.
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Jan 20, 2008 23:58:52 GMT
Thing is, at least with Star Wars, George Lucas had planned nine films and made the middle three first, but pretty much knew what was going to happen in the first three.
This movie's going to suffer the same as Enterprise, trying to invent a history that didn't exist and slot it into existing canon. It could be bad.
We'll never get a post DS9 movie because all the stuff that that raised about the Federation being a bit wonky made a lot of fanboys cry because it wasn't the shiny happy future that Rodenberry invented. The only evil in Star Trek can be external - humans and the Federation are back to being super-duper, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Cherubic on Jan 21, 2008 8:05:06 GMT
Did Will Crusher spurn your advances junky?
Joel - is that Star Wars stuff actually true do you think, or something he made up for an interview to justify making the prequels, because if he'd been planning them for 30 years and they still turned ou that bad he's a moron.
I don't really mind the idea of a prequel. I probably won't go and see it, but I do think Trek was better when they actually did have to seek out New Life and New Civilisations, rather than shoot them with death rays for having funny foreheads. Or saving whales. They should do that more.
|
|
|
Post by mcqueen on Jan 23, 2008 0:37:23 GMT
I drifted away from Star Trek after the Next Generation - did they finally show themselves to be a bit immoral and ill advised in sticking their bland schnoz into everyone's business?! (i bet will crusher was behind the evil) DS9 showed there was a secret police of the Federation called section 31 that assinated leaders and things that were illiegal but covered them up so that the Feds would never be implicated- Starfleet knows but turns a blind eye. It was interesting but I have to say if you invest in the idea of Star Trek then there really shouldnt be a section 31, it sort of made a mochery of all the agonising Picard used to do- Section 31 were always there to do the dirty work. Oh and someone mentioned the Maquis- The Dominion wiped them all out when the Cardassians joined- it was brutal and really quite sad.
|
|
|
Post by Rad on Jan 23, 2008 11:42:19 GMT
Not the Maquis that went on Voyager though, they didn't die.
|
|
|
Post by jetsetwilly on Jan 23, 2008 12:02:47 GMT
That was actually a good episode of Voyager - when they got the message from home and realised that all the Maquis were dead and the Dominion were kicking everyone's backside back home. Then in typical Voyager style they ruined it the next season when B'Elanna Torres was suddenly revealed to have gone a bit mental with grief and was basically self-harming, but had been able to hide it from everyone for six months.
|
|
|
Post by mcqueen on Feb 14, 2008 10:20:00 GMT
Oh bloody NO!!!!!!!!!!!
'Star Trek' pushed back to 2009 Paramount shuffles major releases By PAMELA MCCLINTOCK
'Star Trek' Paramount is pushing back the release of J.J. Abrams' "Star Trek" from Dec. 25 to May 8, 2009, saying the pic's gross potential is greater as a summer tentpole.
Move was part of a major reshuffling to the studio's release calendar, as well as to DreamWorks' release sked. A second key change: DreamWorks' 2008 Ben Stiller summer comedy "Tropic Thunder" is moving from July 11 to Aug. 15.
That's likely to mean that another film will take "Tropic's" old spot on July 11, particularly since there is such a dearth of broad comedies in the May-July stretch.
Like Par, many of the majors are likely to revisit their release skeds in the wake of the writers' strike as they try to balance out their 2008 and 2009 calendars.
"Star Trek" has no competition in its new slot -- at least not so far, although it opens one week after 20th Century Fox bows "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" and one week before Sony is slated to bow sequel "Angels and Demons."
|
|
|
Post by jetsetwilly on Feb 14, 2008 10:27:27 GMT
I smell fear. Star Trek: Nemesis was slaughtered at the box office by Die Another Day, Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings (and even Maid in Manhattan) - ok, there's no LOTR film this year, but Bond and Potter are all present and correct. Does that mean the film just isn't shaping up very well?
|
|
|
Post by Robbing the Dead on Feb 14, 2008 10:30:31 GMT
I'm not much of a Star Trek fan but I saw the trailer for this when I was seeing Cloverfield and now I can't wait for it to come out. But I do hate it when they promote films so early: the end of December was bad enough, now it's May 2009!
|
|
raven
Jane Asher
Slap the Butcher!
Posts: 120
|
Post by raven on Feb 14, 2008 13:12:43 GMT
I am Legend managed to gross over $500,000,000 and that was released in December. I'd imagine both films would appeal to same type of audience.
|
|
|
Post by QuincyMD on Feb 14, 2008 14:05:56 GMT
Apparently it's so they can reshoot sections, owing to the writers strike the Director (also a member of the WGA) couldn't change one word in the script during filming and now the strike is over he's taking the opportunity to tweak the film.
|
|