The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > I can't shake the feeling that...
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 01-13-2009, 10:20 AM
MissionTrek08's Avatar
MissionTrek08 MissionTrek08 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,562
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MigueldaRican View Post
Not just that. How is it possible for ideas to change during filming? Oh, man, that's unheard of!
Funny that you mention it, because TREK was definitely one movie where the writing COULDN'T change during filming, due to the Writer's Guild strike.
__________________

MISSION:TREK's in-depth review of STAR TREK


Proud member of the Friends of Zardoz Association. Avatar courtesy of Eliza's House of Avatars with three convenient locations near you. Free balloons for the kids!
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 01-19-2009, 10:42 PM
phlashman phlashman is offline
Midshipman
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 17
Default

My guess is that if this movie turns out to be a blockbuster we won't many changes in design (I'm betting that if it turns out to be a big hit we'll see a sequel of some sort) too much $$$ involved not to. But if they take a lot of hits about changing things too much we'll probably see some adjustment toward ship design. Although, that might be a moot point. We all may be shocked and surprised when we see the actual film...some of this may just be smoke and mirrors we may be getting toyed with.

Just Sayin...
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 01-20-2009, 07:28 AM
CAPTAIN MOUSE's Avatar
CAPTAIN MOUSE CAPTAIN MOUSE is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Placerville,CA
Posts: 2,564
Default

I just love how people take any changes to Trek as a personal attack. Like the executives at Paramount see us all and singles one person out and says..."See that fan right there? That one is really pissing me off. So lets redesign Star Trek and really toy with 'em.
__________________
CAN YOU CATCH SECOND HAND STUPIDITY? OR SHOULD I BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE WATER HERE? - JEFF DUNHAM
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 01-20-2009, 11:42 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Actually, there are quite a few of us who feel insulted by the "fuglyprise" (my personal term for the Abramsprise) as well as the other changes that are being made to our (yes, I said "our") favorite sci-fi franchise. Nobody is being singled out. Each fan has an individual voice and you are hearing those voices cry foul. I don't think I recall ever seeing one post in which anyone said Paramount was redesigning Trek just to "toy with" that one, particular individual. Have you?
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 01-20-2009, 03:10 PM
thestartrekker's Avatar
thestartrekker thestartrekker is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
While I wouldn't be surprised if the classic NCC-1701 makes a brief cameo in the movie at some point (perhaps in a special effects-laden moment illustrating the divergence of the two timelines), I do think the revised NCC-1701 will be the ship for any future sequels...
Well they stuck the Millenium Falcon in FC, so anything is possible. Hell, until the movie is released, who knows how messed up the timeline will be. Alternate universe or whatever. I just hate being placated to. Tell us its a Battlestar Galactica reboot, and we know where we are. Fine. Telling us it fits in here and there, some things change, maybe its all put to rights at the end, give me a break.
__________________
You may find that having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. This is not logical, but it is often true." Spock (Amok Time)

Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 01-20-2009, 03:55 PM
MigueldaRican's Avatar
MigueldaRican MigueldaRican is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim View Post
Actually, there are quite a few of us who feel insulted by the "fuglyprise" (my personal term for the Abramsprise) as well as the other changes that are being made to our (yes, I said "our") favorite sci-fi franchise. Nobody is being singled out. Each fan has an individual voice and you are hearing those voices cry foul. I don't think I recall ever seeing one post in which anyone said Paramount was redesigning Trek just to "toy with" that one, particular individual. Have you?
You're absolutely right. Here's a change that was really insulting: the militarization of the Federation. It offended Roddenberry himself, and was fuel for him saying that a lot of the movies are not canon. This did not stop Trekkies from liking the movies. Even the beloved Wrath of Khan, in which that military feeling really makes its presence.
__________________
01001110011011110010000001101101011011110111001001 10010100100000011000100110110001100001011010000010 00000110001001101100011000010110100000100000011000 10011011000110000101101000
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 01-20-2009, 04:14 PM
thestartrekker's Avatar
thestartrekker thestartrekker is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MigueldaRican View Post
You're absolutely right. Here's a change that was really insulting: the militarization of the Federation. It offended Roddenberry himself, and was fuel for him saying that a lot of the movies are not canon. This did not stop Trekkies from liking the movies. Even the beloved Wrath of Khan, in which that military feeling really makes its presence.
The military felling was always there. From phasers to photon torpedos.
Kirk even reminds his crew it wasn't a democracy, HE was in command. The uniforms of TOS, to me seem more militaristic than TNG. Phasers definetly look like pistols, and the whole Cold War, Klingon-Romulan thing. Not that I don't like it when I watch it, great episodes, movies etc. But Starfleet, while exploring was always a military arm of the Federation.
When they tested computers on the Enterprise to take the place of the crew it wasn't an exploration exercise that was tested, but a Starfleet military exercise.
__________________
You may find that having is not so pleasing a thing as wanting. This is not logical, but it is often true." Spock (Amok Time)

Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 01-20-2009, 06:34 PM
MigueldaRican's Avatar
MigueldaRican MigueldaRican is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 765
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thestartrekker View Post
The military felling was always there. From phasers to photon torpedos.
Kirk even reminds his crew it wasn't a democracy, HE was in command. The uniforms of TOS, to me seem more militaristic than TNG. Phasers definetly look like pistols, and the whole Cold War, Klingon-Romulan thing. Not that I don't like it when I watch it, great episodes, movies etc. But Starfleet, while exploring was always a military arm of the Federation.
When they tested computers on the Enterprise to take the place of the crew it wasn't an exploration exercise that was tested, but a Starfleet military exercise.
So you disagree with Roddenberry?

Anyway, yes, the basic set up for a military was there. But the military feeling was not. It was more about the mission of scientific discovery and peace. Really it could have anything else. Just a group of humans, each at the top of their professions, on a mission of discovery, bring the guns in case anything weird happens. In fact that's exactly what it was.

Star Trek II brought with it a more militaristic feeling. Roddenberry may have intended for the basic military setup, but he never intended for it to be the focus, which is why he was unhappy when they did that very thing with a lot of the movies.
__________________
01001110011011110010000001101101011011110111001001 10010100100000011000100110110001100001011010000010 00000110001001101100011000010110100000100000011000 10011011000110000101101000
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 01-20-2009, 09:45 PM
MonsieurHood's Avatar
MonsieurHood MonsieurHood is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,352
Default

All this arguing is pointless. The film is made, it is done. Whatever we're going to see, is what we're going to see, it's already in the can. That having been said, I hope the originator of this thread is right on the money.
__________________
"One of the many, the proud, the friends of Zardoz".
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 01-21-2009, 01:56 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

I tend to agree that there was always a military component to Starfleet from the very start, but Roddenberry wanted to focus on the exploratory side of Starfleet as that was TOS was supposed to be about. Looking back at TOS it's clear there was an offensive and defensive role that Starfleet played in protecting the Federation - it just wasn't the focus of the stories until Harve Bennett came in and was a big proponent of amping up that side of Starfleet for the films.

Switch of creative team, switch of focus.
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 12:25 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.