The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Canon Debate - Does it exist & is Canon important to you?
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 01-12-2009, 03:06 PM
Scribbler's Avatar
Scribbler Scribbler is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 726
Default

Canon is the most important thing in the world. This film should be destroyed and all memory of it erased from history. After a suitable period of mourning, a new film will emerge from the ashes. It will contain every single detail from the original series no matter how meaningless. The Enterprise will look exactly like the old one with a new texture which will be exactly the same as the old but also new and also old. The original cast will be returned to their original ages and will perform scripts cut and pasted from original episodes. JJ Abrams will be punished by regressing him to a foetus like in 2001. He will be known as "the Abramfoetus". So mote it be.
This is the law of the Canon.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 01-13-2009, 05:07 AM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Saint View Post
Precisely. They sold it as the real deal until photos came to light, then they backpedaled. And as for the 'nostalgia' angle -- that's the only reason to use the names and relative likenesses of the TOS characters. If they're going to go that far, they may as well go all the way. Nobody's asking for cardboard -- we're asking that an effort be made to stay true to the original given the fact that they're using (at least vague approximations of) the original characters. An effort to make this not look like a post-TNG film set in the pre-TOS timeframe.

An effort. Instead, they give us, "It's not a reboot! It's NOT A REBOOT!" Then the pictures come out. "It's not a... oh, s**t. Um... okay, well, it's um... a PARALLEL UNIVERSE! YEAH! See? Still not a reboot!"

Please.
Exactly! I just wonder why some others can't understand this very elemetary point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scribbler View Post
Canon is the most important thing in the world. This film should be destroyed and all memory of it erased from history. After a suitable period of mourning, a new film will emerge from the ashes. It will contain every single detail from the original series no matter how meaningless. The Enterprise will look exactly like the old one with a new texture which will be exactly the same as the old but also new and also old. The original cast will be returned to their original ages and will perform scripts cut and pasted from original episodes. JJ Abrams will be punished by regressing him to a foetus like in 2001. He will be known as "the Abramfoetus". So mote it be.
This is the law of the Canon.
This statement may be laced with a liberal coating of sarcasm, but for the most part it's right on the money. The only thing I don't mind is the cast. For the most part, the actors portraying these iconic roles at least vaguely resemble who they are supposed to be, with a few exceptions. To me, Karl Urban looks more like Gary Mitchell than Dr. McCoy. And Chekov's hair is just wrong. And Simon Pegg looks more like a young Tim Conway than Scotty. But they did the best they could in that regard. However, in every other respect, they dropped the ball in a big way. In my humble personal opinion, which is vastly different than yours, of course. But that's why we're here, right? To share opinions and debate. Since there's nothing that can be done now except go see the movie and hope for the best.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 01-13-2009, 07:02 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,257
Default

First, marketing is not supposed to reveal all the secrets of the movie. Second, get the facts right. JJA et al were always ambiguous about whether it is a reboot or not precisely because this movie is neiteher a reboot nor no reboot.
Third, perhaps it matters more how the new actors PLAY than to which degree they resemble the original actors? To tell you a secret, these actors are hired to play e.g. Kirk, not to play Shatner playing Kirk
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 01-13-2009, 07:34 AM
Darmok's Avatar
Darmok Darmok is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 114
Post Continuation more important that canon.

As a fan for two decades now (since I was 4,) in addition to the episodes and movies, fallowing the timeline and advancements i.e. Star Trek encyclopedia, chronology, Star Trek Star Charts (which is stupendous,) and lack of Phase II.....I love canon. I love how successfully it has developed and continues despite a few hiccups. Star Trek has one of the most well developed canons that it is indeed "The history of the future."

Do we stay true to who we are and what we want. Would we let Star Trek come to an end because of our strong beliefs and values in canon?

.....Canon is very important to me and it would be hard to let go but I would if it would see the franchise survive to its 50th or even 100th anniversary!
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 01-13-2009, 08:04 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

It still seems clear that there are two ways to approach the film.

Those that feal cheated, those that don't. I thoroughly admit to being in the latter category, but it seems to be pointless to now keep going round the same old points. By now, each fan has picked what approach they want to take. There will be no further advancement until seeing the full film, because no-one is going to change their approach now.

All we're doing is repeating ourselves over and over, so why not put it temporarily to one side until we know exactly what we are dealing with.

Because, despite the insistence of many, we actually don't know anything 100% until we see the film.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 01-13-2009, 08:31 AM
MrQ1701's Avatar
MrQ1701 MrQ1701 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Espanola, New Mexico
Posts: 3,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
It still seems clear that there are two ways to approach the film.

Those that feal cheated, those that don't. I thoroughly admit to being in the latter category, but it seems to be pointless to now keep going round the same old points. By now, each fan has picked what approach they want to take. There will be no further advancement until seeing the full film, because no-one is going to change their approach now.

All we're doing is repeating ourselves over and over, so why not put it temporarily to one side until we know exactly what we are dealing with.

Because, despite the insistence of many, we actually don't know anything 100% until we see the film.
I agree 100%
__________________
To secure the peace is to prepare for war. -Metallica
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 01-13-2009, 09:55 AM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darmok View Post
As a fan for two decades now (since I was 4,) in addition to the episodes and movies, fallowing the timeline and advancements i.e. Star Trek encyclopedia, chronology, Star Trek Star Charts (which is stupendous,) and lack of Phase II.....I love canon. I love how successfully it has developed and continues despite a few hiccups. Star Trek has one of the most well developed canons that it is indeed "The history of the future."

Do we stay true to who we are and what we want. Would we let Star Trek come to an end because of our strong beliefs and values in canon?

.....Canon is very important to me and it would be hard to let go but I would if it would see the franchise survive to its 50th or even 100th anniversary!

consistency is very important but when it comes to movies it is not everything. I can forgive alot for a brilliant movie.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 01-13-2009, 10:15 AM
Dominus of Megadeus's Avatar
Dominus of Megadeus Dominus of Megadeus is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by only1jamest View Post
I have to admit that I am more of a Battlestar Galactica (1978) fan than Star Trek. When the BSG franchise was reimaged in 2005 I was skeptical, but waited to see it before I made an opinion. The changes to BSG were far more radical than anything we have seen or heard from Trek XI. In the original, Starbuck was a man, Boomer was black man, Baltar was an evil egomaniac, Tigh was a true Officer and a Gentleman, and all Cylons were machines. In the new Starbuck is women, Boomer is an Asian women and a cylon, Baltar, well somethings don’t change, Tigh is a drunk and a cylon, and don’t get me started on the Cylons. One more thing the ships themselves are radically different., but like Star Trek, the story has nothing to do with the ships. Guess what I like it, I haven’t missed it, and I can’t wait for the final 10 hours to see how it ends.

The changes to Star Trek are superficial in comparison to BSG, and I have not seen or heard anything that I cant live with. I am looking to be entertained. If JJ and company can do that then it will be worth the 80 to 90 bucks that I am going to dish out on the May 8th (I plan on having a date.) If my date puts out then it will be a really good night even if the movie is bad. (When I saw ST:V my date put out, bad movie, but a good night. When I saw ST:IV my date didn’t put out, good movie bad night. When I saw ST:X I had no date, oh well would have been a goodnight.)
Here! Here!

Hello, fellow Trekker & member of TRTF (The Rag Tag Fleet)! I'll be eagerly watching the final 10 hours of BSG too, as I eagerly await May 8th!
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 01-13-2009, 10:30 AM
Dominus of Megadeus's Avatar
Dominus of Megadeus Dominus of Megadeus is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAPTAIN MOUSE View Post
I just enjoy TOS for what it is...a progenator of what we will have in Trek today. I can see to a lot of people that "change" is often scary and uncomfortable. However to think it will not happen? Well is pretty silly. Times change. I for one do not wish to revisit the 60's and 70's of Trek. I refuse to wear polyester leisure suit jumpers and get a "Mike Brady" hair-do. those are thing of the past that had their time. In order to progress things have to move forward. We live right now in a more progressive era. If Star Trek is going to have a place in this time it must progress too.

LOL!!! "Polyester leisure suits???" "Mike Brady hair-dos???"
As bad a things are in America right now...please...PLEASE don't let us go back to those days!

Asthetically, I agree that the style and look should reflect the hope we have today of how our tommorrow should look. The look stylized in TOS reflected the hope of how tommorrow should look for them, and a lot has been prophetic. Cellular phones kinda look like communicators (but they don't work on sub-space bands). There ARE medical tri-coders (as read some where in a CNN story). Physics are tinkering with transporters, beaming sub-atomic particals from one place to another. How insightful those writers were back in the 1960s! However, computers that sounded like they needed Metamucil...consols that had buttons as big as bricks...data devices, when compared to 2G, 4G, and 8G memory sticks (let alone Mini SD cards), look like slices of cornbread baked by that co-worker that claims she is a good cook, but everyone knows her cornbread tastes like cardboard but nobody has the heart to tell her so all eat it with that squiggly peanut-butter smile...Ahem, I digress. Goofiness strikes again.

My point is that some areas those techo-prophets missed the mark. So, perhaps, stylistically, it's time for a new word. Time for a new vision of the future, while still embracing the essence of Trek: The Human Adventure.

Last edited by Dominus of Megadeus : 01-13-2009 at 10:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 01-13-2009, 10:43 AM
Scribbler's Avatar
Scribbler Scribbler is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 726
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Am-Zim View Post
In my humble personal opinion, which is vastly different than yours, of course. But that's why we're here, right? To share opinions and debate. Since there's nothing that can be done now except go see the movie and hope for the best.
Of course, you're perfectly entitled to feel the way you feel. Sorry, I was trying to be funny (and evidently failing miserably!) - I didn't mean to seriously attack anyone. I just personally feel it's a shame that you've set the bar so high in terms of so many aspects of continuity, e.g. if you wanted every small thing like Chekov's hair to be the same - you were almost guaranteed to be disappointed. I hope you enjoy the new film, I really do. Could I ask a question - it's one that's been asked before but I'd like to hear your view on it, if that's ok?
TOS Klingons were totally different physically from the TMP ones and there wasn't an "in-story" explanation at the time. The time period being later in the story wouldn't account for a radical change in physionomy. Did that not bother you as a severe canon violation?
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 04:18 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.