I have heard nothing about Mongoose getting the rights, and they have denied it every time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cut
But if they did, I would be happy, because it would be STAR TREK TRAVELLER! :)
Allen
Printable View
I have heard nothing about Mongoose getting the rights, and they have denied it every time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cut
But if they did, I would be happy, because it would be STAR TREK TRAVELLER! :)
Allen
And I would be sad, because it would be Mongoose.Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenS
Better Mongoose than Games Workshop.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
Oh well...someone's going to be unhappy no matter what happens.
Allen
Agreed. Not because I have anything against Mongoose or Traveller, but I have completely lost confidence in Mongoose to put out quality product right now. The Universe of Babylon 5 for Traveller was horrid, and I don't think they've managed to release a single Traveller product yet (except maybe 760 and T&G) that wasn't full of mistakes and ommissions. Believe me, I'm rooting for them to get it right, I think they have the potential to do a killer Trek adaptation for Traveller. They just don't seem to have the attention span yet to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
Sadly, Adamant dropped their plans to do Final Frontier: The Unauthorized Sourcebook for Traveller.
If it's any consolation, I'm pretty sure I've decided to drop/delay my TOS adaptation for Rogue Games Thousand Suns RPG, and instead gear it toward the new Trek universe/timeline. But I'm not sure if it would appeal to anyone here. It would likely result in some fluff and tech stats that I would adapt for CODA though.
I am actually toying with the idea of having my current post-Dominion War campaign encounter the Abrams alternate reality. When you consider the silly from one movie and blow that out for two more movies which he'll probably do, it would create some really whacked out parallel Federation by 2377. Good for comic relief at the least. :)
In The Grim Darkness Of The Future, There Is Only... LOVE!Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenS
A skirmish-level miniatures game of seducing green alien chicks.
I thought it was great, and three of my friends who have never been trek fans now are. I think this was a much needed change in Trek - one thing that always nagged me was how perfect everything was portrayed and how characters seemed a little shallow... Rebooting back to this time makes things much more interesting to go back do have a do over - think about a campaign that you had a break in and came back for later and just started from scratch... There are so many possibliities, and a new fan base to come in and enjoy the experience as well. The thing that was bothering me - Trek productions always came across as though it was on stage, but it made performances forced, theatracal which I did not care for, this new crew, blocking and acting just rocked.
I love the new Kirk, and I love the other's performances and characters (although Spoke and Uhura really threw me).
Great flick.
They have denied it, because everything about Star Trek didn't sit too well as it were with the members of their creative team. As with Stargate, they claimed that they'd probably go for the license, if they had people thrilled about that setting.Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenS
Now we have a new, modern Star Trek.
It is a matter of time, before Mongoose jumps at this license.
Whether they'd get it is another matter...Quote:
Originally Posted by Cut
Why shouldn't they? As far as it seems, they keep paying all their licensing fees.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
There are a lot of 'ifs' with a new Trek RPG. Does Paramount even want a new RPG - it might not be worth the effort for them? Also what other RPG companies would want it? I could see Margaret Weiss Productions going after it as they like Mongoose do a lot of licenses and which of them has 'prettier' books which is a factor. Actually, I could see WotC making a run a Trek RPG, I suspect they were kind of going for that when they bought LUG. Still for some reason I just don't see a new RPG happening.
My understanding is that, at this time, CBS Consumer Products has no interest in issuing a license for an Trek RPG game. The amount of work for them (in the review and approval process) is more time-consuming than other products and not profitable (enough). I don't know the details nor how much this was based on previous associations with companies like LUG and Decipher.
OK, I saw the movie tonight... I liked it, and it fit my requirements for continuity, what with time travel and old Spock and all, but the "feel" wasn't quite there. Sort of like Coke Zero. Acceptable, and I'm going to have to live with it, being a diabetic now and all..
Aieeeee!Quote:
Originally Posted by Owen E Oulton
Ok, I'll ramble a final time on this thread before moving on.
But so far I couldn't quite pinpoint why I reacted so vividly toward this movie. Yeah, I found it bad, but so were a lot of episodes in any series. I didn't like Insurrection either, and I don't quite know what to think about Nemesis. But this morning I finally understood what was really bugging me.
Let's admit I'm just one of those fanboys, allergic to change of any kind, and who will complain endlessly because the pips on the Captain's uniform are not the right size. Let's admit I'm suffering the TNG effect, and that I'm wailing that Trek is dead because TNG is nowhere like TOS, which was my Trek.
There is one big difference.
A hard core TNG fan (like me, BTW) can't just ignore TOS. It's part of the continuity, it's part of the universe, and you actually need to have watched some episodes of TOS to better understand episodes from TNG. The same can be said for DS9, VOY, and even ENT (like the MU episode, for instance). The die-hardest TNG fan can't just say "Huh, who is this Kirk character anyway", so a TOS fan could still take comfort in the knowledge that his favourite characters somehow still exist in the current continuity, no matter how much he can despise it.
But now ? The Federation I knew is... gone. Picard did not happen. Sisko did not happen. Even Enterprise can be ignored. The fact also that, save for the Vulcans and Romulans, no alien seen on screen was a known species hints for me to the fact that Andorians, Tellarites, Betazoids, Trills... probably won't happen either in the new universe and that new ones will take central stage.
And it will be the only Trek around. A newly converted fan will be able to say "Who is this Picard character, anyway ?" and be right (except if he wants to understand why Spock tugs at his uniform when standing on ;)). The Trek I knew and loved has not only been superseeded (sp ?), it has been erased. It's not a bad prequel, which could be ignored, it's a full rewrite which makes everything else ignorable.
So I think this is why I reacted that harshly after seeing this movie. Without it, I could have let it pass by thinking it was another ST:V floating around. Now, and with all these good opinions, it's not an option anymore.
Anyway - time for me to move on. I accept my role as a dinosaur who will revel in things long obsolete. I'll watch the next movies probably - but like I watched the Wolverine movie last week: to enjoy two hours of FX and mindless action while munching M&M's. When I want to watch Star Trek, I'll be watching DVDs of the former 5 series.
And if I meet RPG players who want to play Star Trek because they like the new move, I'll probably spend some time explaining to them that I'll play in an alternate universe where Vulcan still exists and where there is something called the Prime Directive... ;)
I think I can make the cross between mine, the prime Star Trek, or Star Trek 1.0, and Star Trek 2.0, the alternate reality or the Abramsworse, no, I should mind my spellin g the Abrahmsverse, and stick to what I have come.
But C5 speaks out somethings that are very close to what I feel and have tried to put my fingers on.
As him I am coming from a TNG background.
I will still not be purely a Dinosaur. I probably will hope that Star Trek 2.0 will get better and more Trek-like for my feeling in the following movies. But Original Star Trek will be what remains close(r) to my heart.
And I really, really had to laugh out loud over Owen's Coke Zero comparison.
Owen, thank you, I shall use that one. You made my day :)
Actually I think this is a benefit of the movie. The alternate reality means that "Old"-Europe, erm -Trek still exists. Do you remember the TNG-episode "Parallels", where Worf constantly jumps between parallel-universes? One of them is "ours" and one of them is the "new" one. None of them predominates or is the "true" universe, it's just one of many. This new reality is similar to the Mirror-Universe as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by C5
And yes, I was a TNG-Trekkie as well, although I really liked the ENT-approach either.
However concerning the plotholes, I would recommend checking out "Countdown", the comic, which tells the story of how the movie happend. There is a nice summary at memory-alpha.org. It actually settles some issues, although the science is so bad that it hurts. ;)
I finally figured out an analogy for those who disliked this movie for its lack of vision. It would be like a Star Wars reboot in which they removed the Force. I mean you have Jedi and everything else, but the Jedi get their abilities from technology and training alone and the Force has been written out of the continuity. This hypothetical reboot is funnier and more entertaining than the prequels and people absolutely love it. However, some fans are really unhappy that the Force, the one thing which made Star Wars special to them is gone. Everyone who likes the new movie is saying - well, the Force is what brought down the franchise, the Force just doesn't work for mainstream audiences, etc. They might be right, but for some fans it is a little too much. That is what the loss of an utopian promise from Star Trek means to some of us fans.
Anyway, I'm at a place of acceptance of the new Trek. At the very least we have a new sci-fi franchise for the masses, which is always a good thing. It might lead to something more substantial in the future. It's also nice to have a little break from the superhero movies during summer. Hopefully, by 2011 I'll be ready to watch the sequel as a fluffy sci-fi movie and just enjoy it for what it is.
I hated the movie. Simple as that. I tried to go in with an open outlook, but in the end I can't accpt it as star trek.
Now my wife loved it. But she didn't like TOS at all and is a NG fan.
I found your comments on this subject very compelling. I translated your post into Dutch so that I could share and hopefully discuss it better with my fellow Dutch fans on our Star Trek fan-forum. I credited the quote to you, I hope you don't mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Johnson-Weider
http://forum.federation.nl/viewtopic.php?p=43846#43846
I highly enjoyed the movie by the way, but also missed Roddenberry's utopian vision.
Sure translate and post as you desire. I assume anything posted on the Internet might end up anywhere if you're lucky.
I have found this thread very therapeutic and might try going with the wife to see this movie at the end of the month. She is also a Trek fan and hasn't wanted to see the movie. Going to see it with her might give me a different perspective on the movie. I don't know, though I might need months instead of weeks to come at this movie with a better attitude.
It's not Trek? Really? I sure as heck felt like Trek to me. As most of you probably know, I grew up with only TOS. My interest in Star Trek predated The Motion Picture, but I followed the progression of the many series through Enterprise (which I loved).
No, this new movie is not the ultra-utopian TNG; it's not supposed to be. TOS was never meant to be a TNG utopia; TOS characters had real flaws and conflicts, and technology was usually the problem, rather than the solution.
This movie shed that antiseptic veneer of the last 20 years and returned us to a time where we're not perfect, but we can overcome our imperfections to work together to achieve something great. Where a young, conflicted soul can realize he can become more than what he is and then actually do it. Where a young man split between two disparate worlds can begin to reconcile his two conflicting halves and gain wisdom.
Star Trek isn't about utopia. Star Trek is about moving past our differences to work together in a galaxy that is far from utopian.
So, for me, the movie achieved the goal of bringing back the feel of the original Star Trek. I guess you could adapt a Frank Miller quote and say that JJ gave Star Trek its b*lls back.
I have to ask how is this new Trek society any different than today's society? What has changed in 250 years? I mean we are quite a different society today that we were in 1750. So how has is the future different? I think the answer to this is why I would say that this new Trek has actually lost its b*lls. :D
We don't want this thread dumped in the politics forum, do we? : PQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Johnson-Weider
I have all sympathy for you and for those who share your opinion. But I would encourage you to look at it another way. And it has nothing to do with whether or not the movie is good or bad, or whatever the writers, producers and other fans say, and I'm not going to lay out this long speech about alternate timelines and whether or not they continue.Quote:
Originally Posted by C5
To say that the original has been "erased" is a state of mind, not a fact. It's a choice. You don't have to make it. Consider this...
In the fictional "canon" universe, it is FAR easier to look at the new Trek and the unexplained discrepancies and decide for yourself that this is a reboot, pure and simple. One has to fill a lot of holes in the story to explain details of why the simple destruction of the Kelvin would have changed history so radically (the other starships, the purported size and design of the new Enterprise, Romulans, San Francisco vs Iowa, etc.). It can be done, but it takes work and imagination to fill those holes. But why do it?
There is only ONE thing in the new movie that would make you believe that this new Trek is inextricably tied to the original: Leonard Nimoy. What if, for instance, Spock Prime had been played by Quinto in old-age makeup? Forget the original series and its spinoffs for a moment. Treat the movie as standalone at face value. The character of Old Spock came back in time. But who is to say that this Old Spock is our Old Spock? Yes, JJ and Orci might say so, but their philosophy of "an infinite number of realities" also does not preclude it.
If that's the case, then you can determine for yourself that this new film is simply a reboot, like Galactica or Batman. Again, it's a state of mind.
Now, you might say that even if it is a reboot with no connection, that still leaves the original series and its spinoffs dead. Absolutely not! Look at the store shelves. The books continue. The toys continue. Gaming continues. There is more happening with "old" Trek right now than with "new" Trek. Further, when was the last time you saw "old" Trek so alive? With new fans coming in? With wives and friends not only liking the new, but asking to see the old?! A cable network in Canada is adding the entire classic Trek lineup to their video on demand system. And CBS and Paramount are here right now delivering the shows and films in Blu-Ray, not burying it, pretending like it never happened. Do you think these DVDs have ever sold as well as they are selling now and this year? I bet you more people are watching "The Doomsday Machine" this week than it had viewers when it originally aired. And when was the last time that there was sooo much activity on Trek forums? When was the last time this forum was so active?
Yes, that's alive in the "meta" sense (outside the Trek universe) but, again, there are still new stories based on the old Trek coming out in books and comics and fan fiction for the long foreseeable future, and nothing but the promise of a sequel for new Trek for the time being. Star Trek Lives, indeed.
The new film? Take it or leave it. It changes nothing other than the fact that this is one of the best times in maybe 15 years or more to be a Trek fan. The deaths of icons such as Kelley and Doohan, or even characters such as Kirk didn't kill off Star Trek, and this movie certainly won't either.
To paraphrase the words of another, we are now all children of two worlds, and fully capable of deciding our own destiny. The question we face is which path will we choose? :)
Count me as another fan who was displeased with the new movie. I won't expand on comments because I think most of my problemas with the movie have been cited along this thread: bad plot, stylistic decisions, acting etc. Just to position me in the fan country, I'm a fan of TOS, TNG (my favorite) and DS9. I didn't care for Voyager and positively disliked Enterprise.
As for backing up the new franchise, even though I disliked the new movie, I can't say I agree. I can only things I like. I don't have an unconditional love for things Trek, so I don't feel like I should help maintain a vision I don't connect with. And I don't really feel we, a sfans, need it. Star Trek had its time and as TV shows go, it had an incredible longevity. How many shows can say they have 5 seriers under their belts? Maybe Law & Order (not five, but it comes close). ;)
Tchau!
Actually (read: hilariously), the L&O franchise can count The Wire, Homicide: Life on the Street, The X-Files and therefore Millienium and The Lone Gunmen as well as co-continuities, beating out Star Trek by... seven.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred
Blame Richard Belzer : P
You presented a lot of very valid points (including the fact concerning the liveness of this board: I probably posted more this week than the entire last year - that, and I heard people in the street talking about Star Trek, and that never happens in France), and I appreciate your positive thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by mechascorpio
Right now, I'd love to see you right when you predict that the entire franchise will benefit from this renewal of interest.
What I fear is that "old" Trek (that is, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT - TOS is probably certain to gain viewers as people will want to see some Kirk action while waiting for the next movie) will suffer the same fate as the original BattleStar Galactica series. I have not been following closely (and did not watch BSG), but it seems to me now that few people have heard of the original series, and if so only as a thing of the past. Right now, I see the same thing happening to post-TOS Trek in the near future.
And of course, while I can still imagine that "old" Trek still exists somewhere (the same way I edited some movies or episodes from my personal continuity), if there is absolutely nothing to back it up save a few antique toys and a handful of books, it's not much more than a fanboy fantasy.
Only time will tell us who's right. I dearly hope you are. :)
There is a huge difference between BG and Star Trek, the old BG only had a season's worth of episodes. Star Trek will survive on in syndication, as it has since the beginning, for many decades. I am positive that some people who enjoy this new Trek will check out the old Trek and it will soldier on into the future. Personally, I don't think there will be a new TV series with the reboot. I think Paramount knows that the success of the movies requires there to be only the movies. So just is sheer quantity of hours of entertainment, old Trek will dominate the new franchise probably indefinitely.
I tend to agree that the new film and likely film series will not have much an impact on the perception of past Treks. The old Bond movies aren't forgotten nor are the pre-Batman Begins Bat-films (although the later ones get the scorn they probably deserve).
I also doubt there will be a new TV show based on this - which is probably a pity, because a lot of the issues people have with the reboot are really issues better handled on a weekly television series. What I'd really love to see is more of the British television or American cable series concept of seasons of like 10-12 episodes. Really get some high quality stories, good budget, no filler, no weekly grind.
and if they do do a series, say on Sci-Fi or Spike (Who use to have the syndication license before SciFi (oh wait what is it called now? Syfy?)) maybe it could be about another ship. That would be a background to the Enterprise. But it can't be the Farragut, they blew her up as part of the armada.
I was talking about the movie with a friend of mine at work, and we came up with something that I think might have been missed on this board; if it hasn't, I apologize.
While this movie does not capture the "spirit of Utopia" that has been built up around the Trek Franchise, it does do a great job of capturing the spirit of TOS.
The orginal show was about larger than life heroes swashbuckling their way across the stars, getting in big bar fights, blowing up alien supercomputers, and seducing the alien slave girl.
Yes, this movie is lacking in the moral lesson that we got from most TOS eps., although maybe "be true to yourself" is the lesson? And there are some omissions and alterations that aren't quite like the original show. And we sorta revert back to the "Guys rule; girls get to the back!" male-centric themes from the 60's. But all in all, this show is more like TOS than TNG.
Liveblogging the viewing:
# Everyone talks moviespeak. "It's the only way!"
# "Citizen?" Can't they tell who he is? He's carrying a cell phone, can't they scan it and determine who he is?
# These kid actors needed a few more rehearsals.
# Man, everyone's so serious. THIS IS IMPORTANT. WE ARE FILMING BACKSTORY.
# Dude it's yakface from DS9. Or is it a Klingon? He's got head ridges. I think this alien fails the squint text.
# Is there a scriptwriting school where they give you a book with cliché dialogue to get you from plot point without having to make the audience pay attention? Protagonist makes pass, mentions name, sex interest deflects with farm sex joke indicating cosmopolitan attitude, barfight begins, protagonist punched, mentor appears and gives advice, protagonist acts like he's not interested, follows it anyway. LEVEL CLEARED. SAVE Y/N?
# Apparently Starfleet's admission requirements are as follows:
1. Can you find a shuttle.
Yes? YOU ARE IN. HERE'S A SPACESHIP.
# I like how patient these guys are. It's not like they could show up at Romulus and say "Hi, we have a supership from the future, let's conquer the galaxy." No, let's wait around punching Klingons for 25 years.
# "Tracking solar systems"?
# It'd be nice if they chose someone with a pretty voice for Uhura.
# What's wrong with the Farragut? Don't like bad weather?
# Hey they filmed this in Toronto too! Oh wait that's just San Fransisco Brutalized.
How d'you do that?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
Hey nothing bad about Uhura, I've got my approaching-middle-age geek crush on her. (How scary is it I was still in my 20s when I joined this site ten years ago.)Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
I was trying to remember where I'd see Zoë Saldana before. Imdb reminded me she actually played a Trekkie in "The Terminal".
Er...they did. I think Zoe Saldana's voice is gorgeous. Your lack of taste is your issue, dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tatterdemalion King
# Cue the stargate theme! Hey, it's the Enterprise.
# How can they walk around this set without shades?
# Nice kitbashing job, CGI dudes.
# "Jump to hyperspace!" Look, guys, Star Wars is not a universal language. Are their sensors broke?
# AUGH WHY IS THERE A ZOMBIE BURN VICTIM ON THE BRIDGE
# Did everyone just die? Why are they on the bridge?
# Okay, I know we're all tired of technobabble, but "lightning storm in space?"
# I'm probably one of the few people on this planet who gets teary when I see someone with swollen hands.
# NOOO YOU'RE DESTROYING SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
# How'd they know the Narada was Romulan?
# "Hi Chris, I'm Nee-Ro!" Distinguished pronunciation fail.
# Um... you know, I actually think the makeup on this show is worse than usual for Trek. The Romulans don't really look sinister, they look kind of... Neanderthoid.
# Nonsensical callback!
# This movie feels short.
# I like the shuttle controls.
# This movie is aping BSG effects style without BSG's well-practiced effects direction.
# They're kind of inconsistent with the sound-in-space thing.
# Why do they have chutes instead of antigravity pods or something? Or space-bikes! They could space bike down to the platform!
# I'm no rock climber, but fighting at that altitude should tire you out pretty fast.
# Starfleet vs. Romulan Pirates of the Neutral Zone
# We must protect... Our Cultural History! Isn't that like Parliament hiding in the Museum of Civilisation?
# Way to suck, Starfleet.
# Meditating around a fire is not a logical reaction to this crisis.
# Vulcan can support 6 billion people? I'm assuming that means they have a few arcologies around somewhere.
# Subspace frequencies can help... why?
# This movie should probably have started with Romulus blowing up.
# Nero, Khannabe. He's got his own brainworms, his own superweapon, his own lackey, his own sob story. Seriously, guys, Khan was Khan. You did it already.
# Spock... is a crazy old man living in a cave. Do TOS characters have to come to such pathetic ends?
# Why is Spock piloting a ship? Don't they have... pilots?
# No technobabble is not an excuse to not think things through. For example: Delta Vega is Vulcan's moon?
# Do any of these actors have a theatre background?
# This is hell, and there are midgets.
Okay I'm done for now... I'll pick it up at 1:21:30 later.
Talking about the details is against board rules, last I checked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cut
I thought the new film was very good & very much like the old Star Trek formula. I still think Wrath of Khan is the best ST film but this is one at least #3 for me.
It's really a re-imagining of Star Trek just like the new BSG re-imagined the old BSG.
But what still made it Star Trek is that at its core, the movie is about friendship & loyalty between Kirk, Spock & McCoy as well as the other main crew members.
The way I see it, the story in the new Star Trek film doesn't change the old stories or canon from TOS. Instead, it's created an alternate timeline or alternate Star Trek universe. This way, future movies or TV series are free to create new stories w/o being restricted by the canon from previous films or series. It's really a whole new Star Trek universe to explore.
I must say the audience in the theater I saw it seemed to enjoy it immensely as well.
I think it's doing well enough in the box office for Paramount to do a sequel. I wonder if it will give impetus to a new Star Trek series as well?
Check this out
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1910892