[RedShirtWalking]

Originally Posted by starbase63

Thing is, this isn't the first time he's said it.

And now that we know the bulk of the movie is in an alternate timeline, we know how they say they respect canon...by completely side-stepping it!

You realize of course, if the movie underperforms or even fails and Paramount reverts to form, who are they going to blame for the bad showing at the box office? You don't think they'll blame the general public, do you?

It's not the first time he's said something to that effect, no, but people continue to freak out for something that is a throwaway quote. They want people to see this film and if they tell them that it's for the Trekkies then people aren't going to go because of the negative societal connotation that involves. It's just that simple.

Besides, far too many people assume that they're side-stepping canon all over the place because it makes it easier to be negative about the film.

I DON'T WANT to see a move that was made for Trekkies---and I *AM* one. I want to see a great movie that tells a great story.

I say what I've said for a while: let's wait and see what the movie actually turns out to be and *then* take up the pitchforks and torches if it turns out that the movie sucks.

This comment of JJ's is just not a big issue.

[Gunny1]

Originally Posted by williamLX

700 hours in not a little time, and even watching all 700 hours would not be enough as human memory being as it is, by the time you are a few hours into this mountain you will have forgotten some of the little details that sad nerd trekkies hate to see ignored or contradicted.

There's a world of difference between merely 'watching' something, and 'researching' something! You certainly don't rely on fallible human memory, for one thing - if you are not surrounded by AT LEAST two dozen legal-sized notepads, armed with a half-dozen pens, and ready with a pile of file index cards to cross-reference between your notepads, you're not even TRYING.

(You could do the same thing with nothing more than a laptop, granted - but I've always found it easier to write-and-watch than type-and-watch, and besides - by the end of the day, the shear clutter makes you feel like you've done something... *Grin*)

[horatio]

Oh my god, he said it again! Who brings the wood and who the matches?

[I-Am-Zim]

Originally Posted by williamLX

700 hours in not a little time, and even watching all 700 hours would not be enough as human memory being as it is, by the time you are a few hours into this mountain you will have forgotten some of the little details that sad nerd trekkies hate to see ignored or contradicted.

That's why Michael and Denise Okuda put together the truely excellent Star Trek chronology. JJ and his crew should have used it. I doubt they did.

[horatio]

Orci and Kurtzman said that they used MA. Let's not forget that some things in the chronology are "overwritten" by events in ENT.

[starbase63]

Originally Posted by williamLX

700 hours in not a little time, and even watching all 700 hours would not be enough as human memory being as it is, by the time you are a few hours into this mountain you will have forgotten some of the little details that sad nerd trekkies hate to see ignored or contradicted.

For example...

The research needed for the current movie would not have required studying all 700 hours of material, would it?

Plus, a simple trip to Amazon.com to get a copy of The Star Trek Encyclopedia and The Star Trek Chronology would answer most questions. Anything not in those books can be found either at st.com or Memory Alpha.

[starbase63]

Originally Posted by Gunny1

There's a world of difference between merely 'watching' something, and 'researching' something! You certainly don't rely on fallible human memory, for one thing - if you are not surrounded by AT LEAST two dozen legal-sized notepads, armed with a half-dozen pens, and ready with a pile of file index cards to cross-reference between your notepads, you're not even TRYING.

(You could do the same thing with nothing more than a laptop, granted - but I've always found it easier to write-and-watch than type-and-watch, and besides - by the end of the day, the shear clutter makes you feel like you've done something... *Grin*)

Word, Gunny...

[starbase63]

Originally Posted by horatio

Orci and Kurtzman said that they used MA. Let's not forget that some things in the chronology are "overwritten" by events in ENT.

They must not have read the entry on Chekov too clearly...

[horatio]

Originally Posted by starbase63

For example...

The research needed for the current movie would not have required studying all 700 hours of material, would it?

Plus, a simple trip to Amazon.com to get a copy of The Star Trek Encyclopedia and The Star Trek Chronology would answer most questions. Anything not in those books can be found either at st.com or Memory Alpha.

But are not TOS, Nemesis and ENT most relevant for their story?

[horatio]

Originally Posted by starbase63

They must not have read the entry on Chekov too clearly...

I am not familiar with the precise ages of th TOS characters, but is not Yelchin 18 or 19 and Pine in his middle or late twenties?