[tetanus4breakfast]

For those who need it:

I am a huge Batman fan, have been reading the comics for well over 15 years and have a giant collection of back issues from Kane to Miller to now current running issues. I own every movie and the collectors box of each so you can imagine how important Batman Begins was to me.

When I first saw the new Batmobile I didn't know what to think. Unlike the new Enterprise this thing was a complete redesign of the original. The only similarity it held was that it was black. (And it wasn't even the same black.) I was lost for words. How could Nolan do this?

Then I saw and heard (and felt) it in action. And I will never look at the original design in the same way. The tumbler is the meanest, most badass batmobile in the history of the Batman franchise.

Why this extended analogy??? Because I want everyone to have faith. Mine was shattered when I first saw the still image of the Tumbler. But I was wrong to judge.

This is what I want to inspire. Have faith in this: When you see the new Enterprise in action, and I can gaurantee that this Enterprise will deliver more action than ever, you will be blown away and you will rate it equal to, if not more highly than the original and beloved TOS Enterprise.

And its not even THAT different.

Do not boycott this movie on the grounds of one image. Please, have faith. Stay true to Trek.

[tomcatjosh]

THANK YOU! Another Similarity Between Trek And Batman!

[Glacial]

Good God, if anyone boycotts a movie because they don't like how the spaceship looks, they need a hobby or something.

I don't like the new look, but c'mon guys, it's a friggin' movie, not religion!

[Redshirt Bob]

Originally Posted by Glacial

I don't like the new look, but c'mon guys, it's a friggin' movie, not religion!

Says you!

Originally Posted by tetanus4breakfast

Why this extended analogy??? Because I want everyone to have faith. Mine was shattered when I first saw the still image of the Tumbler. But I was wrong to judge.

As a big Batman Begins fan, I hear you. But Nolan said right at the start that it was a reboot and that it had no connection to the Burton / Schumacher movies. JJ and co. made it to sound like a prequel, which it is most obviously not. It's not like Nolan said that the Tumbler would eventually transform into Keaton's Batmobile.

[Omikse]

Originally Posted by Glacial

Good God, if anyone boycotts a movie because they don't like how the spaceship looks, they need a hobby or something.

I don't like the new look, but c'mon guys, it's a friggin' movie, not religion!

Hold your tongue on that one. I bet there is a star trek religion out there. I will stack my account on it. If someone can prove to me that there isn't I will delete this account and leave forever.

[Akula2ssn]

Heh, you do have to admit that Star Trek does share some of the inconsistencies and contradictions of organized religion.

[Redshirt Bob]

Originally Posted by Omikse

Hold your tongue on that one. I bet there is a star trek religion out there. I will stack my account on it. If someone can prove to me that there isn't I will delete this account and leave forever.

Church of Trek: The sci-fi religion that doesn't take all your money.

[vuedoc]

Look, no offence to those who appreciate Batman. I am also a longtime fan and I really loved Batman Begins, and as a result, I chose to disregard everything Tim Burton did becasue the newer movie made more sense to me about how the character came to be, what he stood for, and why.

But the similarities go only so far. Batman had a joke of a series in the 1960s, a smattering of animated versions over the past 40 years, and most of the history/canon came from comic books, which also attempted to re-work and re-tell the stories. People loved it when the Dark Knight graphic novel was published because it was almost like a welcome change. Remember Man of Steel 20 years ago? No one scoffed at that either because Superman's history was always in flux from the start.

Star Trek is just different. For me, there has always been a flow to the way the different series and movies connected and created the history. It was a history that no one ever tried to change or reimagine or improve upon before. I started watching during my most impressionable years- age 5 to be exact- when the facts really sunk in and became very important to me. OK, maybe my Bible analogy on another thread was a little too much, but for me, re-writing Trek history is like... I don't know, changing nursery rhymes or Aesop's fables- they were things I grew up on, my childhood memories. It was a history that went beyond comic books, variations, new artwork every few years, new publishers every so often. I've never heard of "canon" applied to DC of Marvel comics the same way it has been applied to Trek.

So while I understand the Batman/Superman/James Bond/BSG re-boot analogies that are being made, I hope that some will appreciate how I think it is unfair to apply the same gestalt to STAR TREK.

[Redshirt Bob]

Originally Posted by vuedoc

So while I understand the Batman/Superman/James Bond/BSG re-boot analogies that are being made, I hope that some will appreciate how I think it is unfair to apply the same gestalt to STAR TREK.

You see, I wouldn't have minded that if that's what JJ and co. told us right from the beginning. They were so vague with how they were going to handle canon that now we don't know what kind of product we're dealing with.

[tetanus4breakfast]

Originally Posted by Redshirt Bob

You see, I wouldn't have minded that if that's what JJ and co. told us right from the beginning. They were so vague with how they were going to handle canon that now we don't know what kind of product we're dealing with.

This is why instead of engaging in "idle speculation" you should wait until the final product before you let it upset you so much.