The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > General Star Trek Discussions > Prime Trek
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Do you think Prime Trek will be depicted again?
No 7 70.00%
Yes 0 0%
Maybe 3 30.00%
Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-19-2012, 03:38 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

I'm not into a Star Trek: The NEXT Next Generation concept either. It seems to be what a distressing majority of fans want, but it also seems too 'obvious' an idea to be very interesting in most circumstances. I think it would be a mistake.

There was that Star Trek: Federation not-quite-pitch that I thought had potential. But so far for me that's been the only exception.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-19-2012, 04:25 PM
DNA-1842's Avatar
DNA-1842 DNA-1842 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland, Europe, Terra - ZZ9 PluralZAlpha
Posts: 3,594
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samwiseb View Post
I'm not into a Star Trek: The NEXT Next Generation concept either. It seems to be what a distressing majority of fans want, but it also seems too 'obvious' an idea to be very interesting in most circumstances. I think it would be a mistake.

There was that Star Trek: Federation not-quite-pitch that I thought had potential. But so far for me that's been the only exception.
Sad to say, I think you are right. I don't want you to be, but the new ground would feel too oft tread.

Too soon, too soon.

But it will return. Like Doctor Who did. Same show, just a huge mix up that changes the implications of the backstory. But it will not be yet.
__________________
Gronda Gronda to all Zarking Hoopy Froods! Bowties are cool.
I Am A Friend Of


(And an indirectly founding patron of the Elizadolots Avatar Thingy.)
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-19-2012, 05:28 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

So far everything that has been suggested, worked on or been actually done was knee-deep in the waters of continuity obsession. Star Trek - The Beginning was based on ENT, Star Trek - Federation was a continuation of 24th century Trek and AbramsTrek throws virtually everything together without cooking anything new out of it.

As long as the fans, the studio and the creative folks are continuity obsessed the franchise will be in decline.
Shouldn't be that hard to just do your thing and if you want to tie it to some degree into what has become before. As you pointed out it works well with Who.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-19-2012, 07:01 PM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,985
Default

What decline? If you ask me Trek just came back from the dead.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-19-2012, 08:06 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

Beats me. But then again I'm not seeing how the movie was continuity obsessive either.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-19-2012, 10:59 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

If anything, it's that it seemed to break continuity that caused so many problems for so many ('But Kirk was born in Iowa'..........'Starships didn't look like that in TOS'...........'Kirk doesn't know how to drive a car' and a hundred others) when it came to the film.

But it probably comes back to Dumb Green Frat Girls (or Orions) or something like that.

Personally I didn't find it too heavy on the obsessive but obviously I can't say that for everyone else. Although at the moment I don't think it's a definitive back from the dead. I'd say the body got a dose of the medicine it needed at that time (and we all know sometimes the medicine you need doesn't always taste good for everyone!) but that we're not in unequivocal recovery mode yet. We still need to see how the sequel turns out.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 05-19-2012 at 11:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-20-2012, 01:12 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

I'd say the next movie is as much a sure thing as Iran Man 2 was. And that comparison being made, it could still disappoint and perhaps even cause the public to reassess. But I think it would take more than one sucky movie to derail the film franchise at this point.

However it is a 'film' franchise now. And accepting that the prior films are/were essentially outgrowths of the TV franchise (mostly TV actors, and at least the appearance of a maintained continuity), I think we have to treat this new franchise as a separate beast: in other words the health of one franchise does not determine the health of the other. JJ Abrams has made a commercially viable product based on the elements of ST that are considered the most culturally iconic. But I suspect it's still 2005 as far as the 'actual' (TV-based) ST franchise is concerned. How do you bring it back? If you're not yet sure, then you remain in silent wait-and-see mode while the current movie franchise does its thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
If anything, it's that it seemed to break continuity that caused so many problems for so many ('But Kirk was born in Iowa'..........'Starships didn't look like that in TOS'...........'Kirk doesn't know how to drive a car' and a hundred others) when it came to the film.

But it probably comes back to Dumb Green Frat Girls (or Orions) or something like that.
The argument being that the movie got that part wrong just as it did those other things. So I don't see... oh, nevermind.
__________________


Last edited by samwiseb : 05-20-2012 at 01:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-20-2012, 01:48 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

I've usually been inclined to use the X-Men to X2 comparison myself, but I doubt there's a lot in it.

I think that allows for universe expansion and a better story after 'the origin film' while retaining some energy and fun (unlike Lindelof I'd rather not invoke The Dark Knight because I don't want the sequel to become a darkly lit bombastically self-important ramble. Sure that seems to work for Nolan and the Batman character but I don't really want that transferred over to Trek) about itself.

That, and that I'm not to hot on Iron Man 2 and would hope we don't end up in that route.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-20-2012, 02:04 AM
omegaman's Avatar
omegaman omegaman is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penrith NSW Australia
Posts: 4,603
Default

The 'Kirk doesn't know how to drive a car' never held water anyway, watch a Piece of the Action again and you'll see that Kirk knows all about the 'starter' and clearly looks for it on the floor of the vehicle. He knows, he's just a little rusty that's all, despite what he say's.
__________________
TREK IS TREK. WHATEVER THE TIMELINE!

The next TV Series should be called STARFLEET!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-20-2012, 02:38 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
I've usually been inclined to use the X-Men to X2 comparison myself, but I doubt there's a lot in it.

I think that allows for universe expansion and a better story after 'the origin film' while retaining some energy and fun (unlike Lindelof I'd rather not invoke The Dark Knight because I don't want the sequel to become a darkly lit bombastically self-important ramble. Sure that seems to work for Nolan and the Batman character but I don't really want that transferred over to Trek) about itself.

That, and that I'm not to hot on Iron Man 2 and would hope we don't end up in that route.
Well, so would I. I was looking at what I considered a 'realistically' worst case scenario (although I still 'like' IM2).

But I think certainly in the case of sequels like X2, Spider-Man 2, Terminator 2, Hellboy 2 and yes, The Dark Knight (though it seems there is the potential for misunderstanding whenever anybody mentions that last) the second film is typically the 'thematic core' of the franchise, or the film that the director presumably wanted the freedom to make upfront had the audience and studio been ready for it. (Oh, and then the studio makes a lot more money and the director either walks away from the third film or has his vision compromised by studio politics.)

If the new movie is more of an Iron Man 2, it could be a little harder to defend Abrams' vision for ST. But we might take reassurance in the fact that his directing career will be riding on this as well.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:02 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.