Star Trek XI- Official now- 12.25.2008 (merged) - Page 15

Phil Florian · 11-20-2007, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR

Not that it's all that surprising but this whole movie is doomed to 'failure'- the fans will go apeshit over every change and any little thing they don't like and I don't think the general public is all that interested in seeing a Star Trek movie.

I think folks are interested in Star Trek that is good and fun. With the exception of the later sucky ones, they all made money and some made a handy amount of money, especially compared to relatively slim budgets. Star Trek IV, the most "mainstream" and "old school" of all of them did the best of all of them. Even the crappy Shater-lead follow up made money. Just because the franchise was driven into the ground by folks with limited imaginations, that doesn't mean that someone coming along with something fresh that wouldn't ignite interest.

Fanboys will tear the film apart...but they likely are the same ones that thought IV was too "silly" but who cares...people flocked to that movie far more than the more "hard core" Nemesis which boasted more action chops and serious content but none of the charm or vision of hope that Roddenberry poured over his original creation.

If JJ takes the show to its roots and gives fans (and fanboys) some of the old school charm of the original with his updated sensibility for pacing and characterization then I think we are in for a nice movie. The plot, though involving Time Travel, is the only thing that makes me somewhat nervous but I think it is the jolt in the arm the franchise needs. Anything to get us away from the last 10 years of dreck put out by Paramount with Star Trek's name on it.

**HTF Ads**

Jason Seaver · 11-20-2007, 10:14 AM

Everyone's quoting this, so what the heck...

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR

Not that it's all that surprising but this whole movie is doomed to 'failure'- the fans will go apeshit over every change and any little thing they don't like and I don't think the general public is all that interested in seeing a Star Trek movie.

The general public wasn't all that interested in seeing another Batman movie before Warner Brothers hired a bunch of talented people to strip away what was embarrassing and highlight the core appeal of the concept. MGM found a lot of success doing the same thing with James Bond. Star Trek is in a similar position - people all over the world know what it is, this group of characters specifically, but it's had so many spin-offs and spoofs attached to it, and so many people treating it as kitsch, that it's sometimes hard to see what people love.

Yes, there will be some die-hard fans (and some old people who just have a knee-jerk resistance to change) for whom the new film won't sit well. But I really believe that if Abrams does a good job, this will be another Batman Begins or Casino Royale.

TravisR · 11-20-2007, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Seaver

Yes, there will be some die-hard fans (and some old people who just have a knee-jerk resistance to change) for whom the new film won't sit well.

Yeah, I was referring to the overly zealous and vocal fans but I did generalize them all into one group which isn't fair.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Seaver

But I really believe that if Abrams does a good job, this will be another Batman Begins or Casino Royale.

I'd love for everyone to enjoy the movie and bring up my quote in a year and mock me.

Quite honestly, I think this movie is right up Abrams' alley and he's going to nail it but I'm only interested in this movie because of his previous work and not because of any love of Trek.

Lou Sytsma · 12-10-2007, 12:39 PM

Spy pics of Chris Pine as Kirk plus some of an Orion slave girl

Hard to make out uniform specifics but it looks like there is an arrowhead pip on his collar. I assume its an Academy related uniform.

Lou Sytsma · 12-11-2007, 08:29 AM

Two little tidbits for today.

First up, this is Leonard Nimoy's first day of shooting for ST XI.

Secondly, a recent rumour about a possible element of the plot has been confirmed as incorrect:

Spoiler:

Brian D H · 12-11-2007, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lou Sytsma

Secondly, a recent rumour about a possible element of the plot has been confirmed as incorrect:

SPOILER ..................................... is not appearing in ST XI.

So, if the rumour that something is NOT appearing is INCORRECT does that mean that it IS appearing? I'm confused.

Lou Sytsma · 12-11-2007, 04:49 PM

Quote:

So, if the rumour that something is NOT appearing is INCORRECT does that mean that it IS appearing? I'm confused.

A difference which is no difference, is no difference.

Jose Martinez · 01-04-2008, 07:05 PM

Can't believe no one has mentioned this yet: Tyler Perry is the latest casting addition.

IGN: Perry Joins Star Fleet

Lou Sytsma · 01-15-2008, 07:43 PM

A description of the upcoming Star Trek XI teaser has been posted.

Trek Movie has confirmed its accuracy and I expect this Friday when it debuts with Cloverfield that many die hard Trek fans will be firing their "Canon"'s on JJ ABrams.

Sam Favate · 01-16-2008, 06:42 AM

Word is also out there that the movie may move up its premiere to Dec. 19, which I think is preferable to Dec. 25.

Lou Sytsma · 01-16-2008, 03:32 PM

Yes I heard that too. Probably not a bad idea. At least JJ convinced Paramount not to release these summer.