Jump to content
D6 Online 3.0
Sign in to follow this  
hellsreach

[Star Trek] I'm really trying hard...

Recommended Posts

I am sure I will get flamed or blasted here, but I personally LOVED Enterprise.. (I can hear the dorks falling off their chairs.) Why? Because it was entertaining, and to me, it seemed more.... reasonable... as in, I could actually picture us in the future ending up like that.... I could careless that this didnt happen until the TOS era, or this didnt happen until the TNG era... .who gives a crap... Just watch it and enjoy.

 

I won't flame you! I think that TNG was probably the best Trek series (and yes I mean better than even TOS). But I just finished watching the entire Enterprise series and thought it was way better than DS9 and Voyager. Yeah, some story arcs like the Temporal Cold War and T'Pol's drug addiction got kinda wacky, but other than those it was overall pretty good.

 

I also found it ironic that as prequel series to TOS, it was partially stuctured as a throwback to Roddenberry's original concepts for Trek. Archer was the captain most like Pike and Kirk. T'Pol was a Vulcan science officer like Spock but actually more based on Captain Pike's logical female "Number One" from the first (failed) pilot of Trek. And the Captain's best friend and confident was the chief enginner, this time. Funny that so many Trek geeks hate Enterprise when it is in some fundamental ways the most like Roddenberry wanted Trek to be in the beginning, before it took off into this huge franchise with movies and 3 24th century series.

 

And hey, no one can deny that T'Pol was the hottest vulcan of all the centuies!

 

Yeah, you and me are defintely a minority on here that even like Enterprise. But I got your back, Alucard. :cool:

 

You Know... I am a big Trek fan, and I sick and tired of the "dorks" and "geeks" out there that pick and pull apart the Trek movies and Tv Shows... its a movie, its Star Trek, GO WATCH IT, sit back leave your Spock ears at home, and your Klingon dictionary on the shelf...

 

Amen. I'm a fan but not a Trekkie or Trekker. It's a humongous mega-franchise. The parts you don't like doesn't have to ruin the parts you do like. Just pick and choose what you like and disregard the rest.

 

The series I don't like aren't because of me picking them apart like the Trekkies do. IMO, most of the actors from DS9 graduated from the William Shatner Bad Acting Academy and thus suck (only Kirk should be able to get away with it). And about all the characters are not interesting to me. Especially Sisko. The way he delivers his lines he comes across as a lame fruitcake of a commander I just can't take seriously. Voyager was a slightly better show with some better characters but I just couldn't stand Captain Janeway's annoying voice and hairdo!

 

But you know what? I don't try to tear apart the shows, and I don't feel they reuined my Trek in slightest way. I just don't watch the shows I don't enjoy, like I disregard the first, fifth and tenth Trek movies. That way they don't effect the rest of the Trek that I do like. It's just like the Star Wars Expanded Universe. The parts I don't like never happened in my mind, and that way I can just sit back and enjoy the parts I do like.

 

I cant wait for this Re-Invention so to speak of the movie, it looks freaking awesome...

 

I saw another trailer today and yes, it just looks amazing. I read part of an interview with a couple of the writers of the comic book prelude and they spoke in reference to the Trek geeks that worry about the movie's time travel making some changes to their precious Trek contuinty...

 

They gently reminded these fans that with the release of this new movie, their DVD collection of previously produced Trek series and movies will not suddenly change content like a photograph in Back to the Future. Your favorite Trek DVDs will not start to fade away like Marty McFly. They will remain unchanged, and you should be able to enjoy them entertainment, the same that you did before the new movie.

 

This new Trek is an attempt to do something new and bold with the classic original characters, instead of rehash the same old same old. If you can stop worrying about the rediculous fear that this movie will somehow change the Trek collection you already have, you may be able to enjoy the movie on it's own merits. Just pretend this is an alternate reality (like the mirror universe) that has no effect on "your" Trek, and maybe you'll end up liking it on it's own. Think of this movie as a "What If?" story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I won't flame you! I think that TNG was probably the best Trek series (and yes I mean better than even TOS). But I just finished watching the entire Enterprise series and thought it was way better than DS9 and Voyager. Yeah, some story arcs like the Temporal Cold War and T'Pol's drug addiction got kinda wacky, but other than those it was overall pretty good.

 

I totally agree, I loved TNG... I liked TOS too, but I didnt sit there and say that didnt happen.. or like I love when the first TNG movie came out, me and my buddy went to the movie, and these dorks behind me were complaining about the enterprise bridge set up, saying how wrong it was, and how stupid the movie is now to them... I told them to shut the F up, trying to watch a movie...

I also found it ironic that as prequel series to TOS, it was partially stuctured as a throwback to Roddenberry's original concepts for Trek. Archer was the captain most like Pike and Kirk. T'Pol was a Vulcan science officer like Spock but actually more based on Captain Pike's logical female "Number One" from the first (failed) pilot of Trek. And the Captain's best friend and confident was the chief enginner, this time. Funny that so many Trek geeks hate Enterprise when it is in some fundamental ways the most like Roddenberry wanted Trek to be in the beginning, before it took off into this huge franchise with movies and 3 24th century series.

 

agreed again.

 

And hey, no one can deny that T'Pol was the hottest vulcan of all the centuies!

 

oh god was she so hot, and if you saw star ship troopers 3, she was in it, with longer hair.... hot..

 

Yeah, you and me are defintely a minority on here that even like Enterprise. But I got your back, Alucard. :cool:

 

thank you my friend

 

 

Amen. I'm a fan but not a Trekkie or Trekker. It's a humongous mega-franchise. The parts you don't like doesn't have to ruin the parts you do like. Just pick and choose what you like and disregard the rest.

 

The series I don't like aren't because of me picking them apart like the Trekkies do. IMO, most of the actors from DS9 graduated from the William Shatner Bad Acting Academy and thus suck (only Kirk should be able to get away with it). And about all the characters are not interesting to me. Especially Sisko. The way he delivers his lines he comes across as a lame fruitcake of a commander I just can't take seriously. Voyager was a slightly better show with some better characters but I just couldn't stand Captain Janeway's annoying voice and hairdo!

 

But you know what? I don't try to tear apart the shows, and I don't feel they reuined my Trek in slightest way. I just don't watch the shows I don't enjoy, like I disregard the first, fifth and tenth Trek movies. That way they don't effect the rest of the Trek that I do like. It's just like the Star Wars Expanded Universe. The parts I don't like never happened in my mind, and that way I can just sit back and enjoy the parts I do like.

 

 

 

I saw another trailer today and yes, it just looks amazing. I read part of an interview with a couple of the writers of the comic book prelude and they spoke in reference to the Trek geeks that worry about the movie's time travel making some changes to their precious Trek contuinty...

 

They gently reminded these fans that with the release of this new movie, their DVD collection of previously produced Trek series and movies will not suddenly change content like a photograph in Back to the Future. Your favorite Trek DVDs will not start to fade away like Marty McFly. They will remain unchanged, and you should be able to enjoy them entertainment, the same that you did before the new movie.

 

This new Trek is an attempt to do something new and bold with the classic original characters, instead of rehash the same old same old. If you can stop worrying about the rediculous fear that this movie will somehow change the Trek collection you already have, you may be able to enjoy the movie on it's own merits. Just pretend this is an alternate reality (like the mirror universe) that has no effect on "your" Trek, and maybe you'll end up liking it on it's own. Think of this movie as a "What If?" story.

 

lol I love that comment, "fade away like the picture..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And hey, no one can deny that T'Pol was the hottest vulcan of all the centuies!

 

oh god was she so hot, and if you saw star ship troopers 3, she was in it, with longer hair.... hot..

 

I've never seen that, but now I have a reason to. I can remember a couple Enterprise episodes where she had long hair. One she was ingognito on a pre-warp planet, and another was an alternate future. I'm sure it was a wig, but still. I'm a long hair freak and I've always thought that was the only way that T'Pol could be any hotter. Her short hair suited the character, but I just love long hair on women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've never seen that, but now I have a reason to. I can remember a couple Enterprise episodes where she had long hair. One she was ingognito on a pre-warp planet, and another was an alternate future. I'm sure it was a wig, but still. I'm a long hair freak and I've always thought that was the only way that T'Pol could be any hotter. Her short hair suited the character, but I just love long hair on women.

 

The movie is bad. I mean like indy bad... but she is hot so it makes it all worth checking out lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Star Trek: Countdown TPB changed to show as "In Stock" over a week ago on Amazon, but I had to wait for another payday to order it. The price went down a couple dollars so I'm glad it worked out like that. I did order it last night.

 

I guess they may have waited until issue #4 was at least available before the TPB was. I'll may let you guys know what I think after I read it, but then again I've read it's not really meant to be a stand-alone story as much as a prologue, prelude, prequel, or backstory to the movie, so I may just wait to give my opinion until I see the movie. Hell, I may just even wait until the week of the movie to even read it.

 

I received the TPB today, damn quick for free shipping (ordered it with something else to equal $25 total).

 

After I finish with re-watching my Bond films (87-08), I am going to switch to re-watching the Star Trek movies, with select TOS and TNG episodes most relavent to the movies thrown in. Of course I'm going to watch them in chronological order (time travel elements notwithstanding). This will be in preparation for the new movie, but the Countdown TPB will replace Nemesis because I'm not going to watch that piece of crap again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something just came to mind after seeing the preview... I believe in the preview it says....

 

FORGET EVERYTHING YOU REMEMBER (or know) ABOUT STAR TREK"

 

So right there, its telling you, this is not your typical star trek....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's be more specific:

 

(1) Star Trek's first season was on during its best timeslot, Thursdays at 8:30. Back then primetime on Thursday nights still an excellent timeslot as it is today. But it's ratings and ad revenue were poor. There was talk of cancelling Trek then, but they didn't.

 

No, not true, they kept moving the timeslot, and alot of the fans would loose track, not watching and therefore the rating suffered,

 

 

(2) For Trek's second season, it was moved to make room for a new show they hoped would do better its time slot, and their gamble worked. The new show was an instant success, doing way better in that timeslot than Trek had. Trek was moved to Friday at 8:30, a slot with less veiwers for any show. Trek did even worse it's second season, and that was really no big surprise because it was a worse time slot.

 

I don't know alot of what the studio decided to do with the show during its later season, but as you were wrong on your first point I'll take this with a pinch of salt,

 

 

(3) However, this time NBC knew that moving the show to Friday night was their own doing and decided not to hold that against the show. They renewed it but decided to move it again. But their Thursday night line-up was doing well and they didn't want to upset that, so they initially scheduled Trek season 3 for Monday night at 8:00 because it could only do better there. But the show that was there (a mid-season replacment for a show that had been cancelled during season 2) ended up doing so well and they decided before season 3 that they shouldn't upset that either. NBC was not contractually able to cancel it since it had already been renewed, so they ended up moving Trek to Friday nights at 10:00, which was of course its death sentence. They wanted it at the end of the primetime lineup so it wouldn't bring down the other higher rated shows on Friday nights.

 

There were people who had it in for the show from the begining,

this is just an excuse,

 

 

It was actually set to be cancelled mid-third season but NBC couldn't come up with a mid-season replacement in time that year so it just continued until the end of the season by deafult. NBC really regreted renewing it the previous year.

 

This is all public knowledge and easily verifiable. Trek picked up a much larger fan base while the show was in syndication. Sure, I agree if a show gets a bad time slot right off the bat then it may never get high enough ratings to give it a chance. But Star Trek started with one of the best possible timeslots (then and today), the highly coveted primetime Thursday night.

 

But as I've already stated, the timeslot Moved, alot

 

 

Nielsen ratings are the #1 determining factor of how much money networks can make from ad revenue, because sponsors will pay bigger bucks to have commecials on higher rated shows. And the monetary success of a show has two main factors, gross amount of money it makes and the cost to produce it. Those two factors reduce to one concept by simple subtraction: the net income earned by the show = profit.

 

And the Niesen ratings system was designed to be a random cross-section of veiwers. With the # of Niesen families being a fairly high percentage of the total poluation of TV veiwers, the statistical soundness of their system is fairly high.

 

 

Is it possible for a show to have significantly more or less total viewers that the Nielsen Ratings would indicate? Of course it is possible, but the probability of that is small. But we really don't have any data about the number of viewers that aren't counted through the Nielsen ratings system, so that's speculation. I doubt a very accurate poll on non-Nielsen families at the time Trek was on the air could be possible to test that possibity. But since the ad sponsors didn't know about those possible uncounted vewiers, the show was not sponsored enough to make it enough net/profit.

 

Again as I already stated, the ratings suffered do to the unpredictable timeslot, people lost track, ratings went down, (there are Star Trek books covering these facts if you should wish to read them)

 

 

Syndicated shows also have ratings and the ratings may possibly be better than when they show was on the air. That was defintely the case for Trek. Nowadays video sales for shows are also numbers and hard countable money, and the success of some DVDs may imply that the show may have been more popular than the ratings had indicated when the show was on TV.

 

Again, not so, look at Firefly a show that suffered due to being treated in a very similar way to the early Star Trek, its timeslot being bounced around, its rating fell, and it was cancelled while they where still producing the show,

 

Rating wise it stank, Fan wise it was a hit, (hence the following movie, even thought the studio pulled the show early)

 

DVD sale are not related to the rating a show could get, just the fan based it could have, and I've already shown you Fan base does not always show in rating (the rating of a show heavly affected by how the studio wishes to air the show)

 

 

We can use vague terms like "fan support", but in reality "fans" are just veiwers, and the "support" that counts the most are Niesen ratings. Sure, fans can have a letter-writing campaign and that may have a little clout,

 

No not at all, fan support kept Voyager on air, more than one the studio went to cancel the show, and it was kept going ONLY due to fan support,

Roswell as well was almost cancelled but was kept going due to fan support

Fact

 

but ultimately, TV networks are a business and the goal of business is to make money. Letters and petitions aren't cash. Ratings are cash.

 

LOL, thats nice and simple, but the facts are alittle more complicated than that,

 

 

If a network can clearly see that a show has the support of a lot of vocal fans, but the ratings don't match and the show still don't generate enough net income through ad revenue, then at the end of the day it's still all about the money. It would be very poor business to extend the life of a show for too long because of fans that are not supporting the show financially in great enough numbers. So to giant corporate entities like TV networks, the "fan support" that counts the most is Nielsen viewer ratings, because that's what counts the most to advertisement sponsors.

 

Again, read my previous statements above,

 

 

 

So, fans are viewers, numbers are numbers, ratings are ratings, sponsors are sponsors, and dollars are dollars.

 

Yes,

 

A moderate fan is counted just the same a die hard fanatic.

 

No

 

 

How well united the fans are and their overall presense can attract new fans and bring in higher numbers of veiwers. But when they are all counted in the end, 1=1 for ratings.

 

So therefore, number of fans = money.

 

Well, word of mouth can help a fan base, such as with Firefly, alot of people missed the chance to see the show the first time around, but Fans don't = more Fans unless there is a show with some sort of broader appeal,

 

fans = money? well needless to say fans will support something they like by buying more product,

 

But look at it this way, they could easly make money out of Firefly the fan base is there (go check out the products that are still being produced for this show) so they already have a fan base for the show, yet no new seasons?

 

They could make money there, but they don't,

 

 

 

I agree that timeslot can defintely make a difference, but what it makes a difference to is the # of veiwers. Star Trek's Friday time slots didn't help it, for sure.

 

Star Trek: TOS and Enterprise both lacked the numbers (and thus the monetary income) to continue longer than they each respectively did.

 

No, Star Trek: TOS and Enterprise are to very different things

One is a good show abused in its timesloting, the other was simply a crap show that many Trek fans turned away from,

 

Not the same by any means, if Enterprise had started the franchise there would not have been a string of the spin off shows and movies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Something just came to mind after seeing the preview... I believe in the preview it says....

 

FORGET EVERYTHING YOU REMEMBER (or know) ABOUT STAR TREK"

 

So right there, its telling you, this is not your typical star trek....

 

No, because they are re-setting the clock, they go back in time and change the timeline (in effect creating a new parallel timeline)

 

So assume nothing, this is a clever way to reboot without breaking canonical Trek, (hence Nimoy Spock) it just rewrites it,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I won't flame you! I think that TNG was probably the best Trek series (and yes I mean better than even TOS). But I just finished watching the entire Enterprise series and thought it was way better than DS9 and Voyager. Yeah, some story arcs like the Temporal Cold War and T'Pol's drug addiction got kinda wacky, but other than those it was overall pretty good.

 

Thats because you are not a Trekkie ,

You don't realise how much canon they broke,

 

I also found it ironic that as prequel series to TOS, it was partially stuctured as a throwback to Roddenberry's original concepts for Trek. Archer was the captain most like Pike and Kirk. T'Pol was a Vulcan science officer like Spock but actually more based on Captain Pike's logical female "Number One" from the first (failed) pilot of Trek. And the Captain's best friend and confident was the chief enginner, this time. Funny that so many Trek geeks hate Enterprise when it is in some fundamental ways the most like Roddenberry wanted Trek to be in the beginning, before it took off into this huge franchise with movies and 3 24th century series.

 

No, wrong most of those choices were due to the studio suits messing with the idea (but you are right on one thing, they did try to mine the original show for ideas, but badly messed it up, in the same way you would expect a butcher to succeed at brain surgery)

 

 

And hey, no one can deny that T'Pol was the hottest vulcan of all the centuies!

 

Yeah, you and me are defintely a minority on here that even like Enterprise. But I got your back, Alucard. :cool:

Amen. I'm a fan but not a Trekkie or Trekker.

 

LOL QED

 

 

It's a humongous mega-franchise. The parts you don't like doesn't have to ruin the parts you do like. Just pick and choose what you like and disregard the rest

 

The series I don't like aren't because of me picking them apart like the Trekkies do. IMO, most of the actors from DS9 graduated from the William Shatner Bad Acting Academy and thus suck (only Kirk should be able to get away with it). And about all the characters are not interesting to me. Especially Sisko. The way he delivers his lines he comes across as a lame fruitcake of a commander I just can't take seriously. Voyager was a slightly better show with some better characters but I just couldn't stand Captain Janeway's annoying voice and hairdo!.

 

What? dude? DS9 had some of the best written shows,

and Sisko came from a deeper place than other characters

while Voyager was weaker in both Character and Writing,

(I could go in to further detail but I won't)

 

 

But you know what? I don't try to tear apart the shows, and I don't feel they reuined my Trek in slightest way. I just don't watch the shows I don't enjoy, like I disregard the first, fifth and tenth Trek movies. That way they don't effect the rest of the Trek that I do like. It's just like the Star Wars Expanded Universe. The parts I don't like never happened in my mind, and that way I can just sit back and enjoy the parts I do like.

 

But unlike the lack of canon in Star Wars "Expanded Universe"

all the Trek movies are Canon

 

 

 

I saw another trailer today and yes, it just looks amazing. I read part of an interview with a couple of the writers of the comic book prelude and they spoke in reference to the Trek geeks that worry about the movie's time travel making some changes to their precious Trek contuinty...

 

They gently reminded these fans that with the release of this new movie, their DVD collection of previously produced Trek series and movies will not suddenly change content like a photograph in Back to the Future. Your favorite Trek DVDs will not start to fade away like Marty McFly. They will remain unchanged, and you should be able to enjoy them entertainment, the same that you did before the new movie.

 

I already cover this in my last post

 

 

This new Trek is an attempt to do something new and bold with the classic original characters, instead of rehash the same old same old. If you can stop worrying about the rediculous fear that this movie will somehow change the Trek collection you already have, you may be able to enjoy the movie on it's own merits. Just pretend this is an alternate reality (like the mirror universe) that has no effect on "your" Trek, and maybe you'll end up liking it on it's own. Think of this movie as a "What If?" story.

 

No, this new movie is Canon, not a "What If"

(thats why the Original Spock is in it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I know some folks dig Star Trek and some folks don't, but let's try to keep this conversation civil alright folks?

 

It's starting to get a little heated in here and I think people just need to take a nice deeeeeeeep breath and be a little more respectful when responding to to others.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And may I remind everone that in the late 70's they were originally planning on making another TV series with the original crew, but the huge success of Star Wars made Paramount decide they wanted to make movies instead. So we can all speculate what if since that show never got made, but it's possible that Star Wars is partially responsible for the success of the Star Trek franchise today. :cool:

 

 

 

Yes there was another Trek show in the pipeline at the time (Phase 2)

but the only reason they made it in to a movie was due to the up surge in demand for Sci Fi movies (and yes Star Wars did contribute to this)

 

But Star Trek was already successful ten years before Star Wars

with its own fan base, (so you could make the claim that Star Trek made Sci Fi more popular, along time before Star Wars, Star Wars at this time has not had a string of successful TV shows (although I do think the up coming show will be worth watching I doubt it will have spin offs)

 

But Star trek has contributed to many parts of modern life (Unlike Star Trek)

Think of the cam shell mobile phones (inspired by Trek, fact)

or the PADD's in Trek predating PDA's or the way some Cam Corders (even the name) look like Tri Corders,

 

Or the fact that so many scientists and astronauts were insipred to do what they do by the shows (and not Star Wars)

 

Star Trek is the first and only Sci Fi that has meaning and substance,

 

While Star Wars is just Space Opera (if done on a sometimes epic scale)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone know where the original "Final Arc" of Star Wars was mentioned and described in some detail by George Lucas?

I mean the projected Parts 7 through 9? (AKA "The THIRD Trilogy")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anyone know where the original "Final Arc" of Star Wars was mentioned and described in some detail by George Lucas?

I mean the projected Parts 7 through 9? (AKA "The THIRD Trilogy")

 

Well Lucas now denies that there was ever meant to be a third trilogy,

 

But a clue to this could be in a court case he had against Glen a larson,

who had Battlestar Galactica at the time, I remember that it was said in court that there was certain secret info that Lucas kept in his safe, that only three other people knew off, and the court case was against Glen a larson for using this secret storyline of Lucas, (and this story related to Star Wars)

 

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey folks!

 

Since it looks like this thread is moving off topic and everyone appears to have gotten their feelings about the new Star Trek flick out in the open I'm going to go ahead and close this discussion.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...