Printable View
I think that it is too soon to call. It really doesn't matter what the setting/characters are, as long as it has a good story and they do a good job. Yeah, those are big ANDs, but they are the same ANDs that make r break all movies. The best concept can skill become a terrible film, and a poor initial concept can be made into a great film. It all depends of just how they do it.
I made it very clear, but I see people just reading over because they just want Trek.
I went up and down about Enterprise and it failed but the die-hard fans don't want to admit it because they have taken it as faith and blinded. The prequel did not work there and won't work in the movies. B&B was one of the big problems with the project and prequel was the second with Enterprise.
When this bombs in the box office and oh this will for the many reasons I have posted previously then this will be said the DVD sales is what it is about and when the DVD sales are not that great after all the collectors buy it and the few people that liked the movie. It will be a truimph because well the DVD sales were good, yeah.
I heard this from the Enterprise people enough. What I am saying is being skipped over just so people can celebrate what they think will be good because they already see it as a box office smash.
You talk about my cyncism looking at the track record of bomb: Insurrection; Nemesis; Voyager TV Series and Enterprise TV Series fine, as it is waaaaaaaaaaay too early to say this is a bad idea, but you all are saying read what you said guys this will be a success and will be huge. This is what you are saying. Compairing special episodes that were announced as revisions as examples guys read what I said earlier I even underlined it.
That is what I said if they say it is revisionist I won't have an issue, but they are not. That is why I have an issue. Alot of you jumping to the defense of the show missed that part, which means you are not reading what I am saying but just want to promote your idea this Kirk and Spock in the Academy idea is great. They are not calling it a revisionist guys so quit calling it that.Quote:
Originally Posted by V'Lor
They are not even saying this is a redesign like Batman;Year 1 which was a revision by Frank Miller on Batman or Even the Superman Miniseries that recreated John Byrne. None of that has been said what that is by anyone JJ Abrams or Paramount.
Now let's add some talk here: Gary Mitchell
What is his importance if they do this prequel and how this will be addressed to the importance of Star Trek: TOS?
In a way, the latest news renders a lot of this discussion somewhat moot. Or at least places us firmly back in the realm of complete speculation...
http://www.nowplayingmag.com/content/view/3623/2/
(Ganked from Robin Laws' Blog...)
Wow, I find this good news this is not this concept possibly not it. As I stated before I like JJ Abrams work and that direction was not the way to go.
He has a fondness of the characters does not mean it is a film in the past, but may incorperate some of the actors? After all Spock is still alive IRL and in the ST Timeline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Burke
And it's not that we have any resemblance to a bunch of old women sitting around gossiping eh Doug? :)
Us? Noooooooo! Why would you ever suggest such a thing? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by IceGiant
AHEM...
Well, words from JJ Abrams himself has it that he has no such specific concept decided yet but he is considering a storyline set in the same timeline as Kirk. I guess we became victims of an unsubstantiated internet rumor.
:p
Yep. That's what I linked to... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by REG