Carnifex Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article2843289.ece They can officially flush this film down the toilet now as far as I'm concerned.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 I like Winona Ryder. I'm not sure how well she'll play Amanda. She's not the mommy sort to me. Amanda has to be a top-notch mom with a peaceful but emotional side to her. Winona is a bit zany to me. Warm, apple pie baking mommy, nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnifex Posted November 11, 2007 Author Share Posted November 11, 2007 She's a disgraced thief who's trying to relaunch her career by squeezing into the only genre that would even be willing to accept her... As far as I'm concerned she should be on a pavement somewhere with a placard "Will work for food". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antigini Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 When I heard about this last night, I immediately thought it was going to go to hell. I suppose i'll just have to go see the movie and make that decision for myself next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 someone will leak it and tell us if it's crap or not. people will still watch it. if only, to make fun of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 What I really hate about this, is that they're trying to use all them 'great' holywood actors, making it from a 'real' scifi movie into nothing more than your average holywood flick. There'll be no chance on a follow up series, not much chance on extra movies with the same crew, .... Also the prequal thing they want to try yet again, but this time in an even more difficult setting (with characters already known to the viewer, but looking quite differently). The whole premise for the movie sux, the actors they choose s##k, I haven't heard one single thing about it that I thought didn't s##k. I truely hope this movie will go down movie history as the biggest cash spender generating the least income for all those dumb blowheads in Paramount. Instead of trying to rewrite the star trek past, they should have a look at our own real history to see what may work and what will not! Bah, death to all of them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dBLOOD Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 Hmm... I agree with you Tetsuo, but I can not and will not accept that bulls### they (Star Trek production team) say why they do not continue telling the future of the Star Trek Universe (they always say, it has become to a too complicated, too complex thing, in wich they can not follow aspects anymore, or something like that)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slug Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 I would say that sagas usually cease to be escapist satisfaction when they reach a certain level of content because they generally become too convoluted or downright self contradicting. Stargate has managed it already, what where did humans come from? Earth, then the Ancients? That said you can still use the 'tax office on Betazed' defense to state that anything can be enjoyable if its well written and played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiggy Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 Star Trek is the future, its about future technologies. FUTURE is the key word when it comes to Star Trek. By delving into the past the identity of what Star Trek is, is lost. Even if this show is a success and there is a TV spin-off series how exactly will a show based in the past inspire a new generation of technologists and scientists like TNG did? In my opinion it will just be like any other mind numbing TV show. If PS wont come back as Captain of the Enterprise then make Frakes Captain and continue where we left off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 Star Trek is the future, its about future technologies. FUTURE is the key word when it comes to Star Trek. By delving into the past the identity of what Star Trek is, is lost. Even if this show is a success and there is a TV spin-off series how exactly will a show based in the past inspire a new generation of technologists and scientists like TNG did? In my opinion it will just be like any other mind numbing TV show. If PS wont come back as Captain of the Enterprise then make Frakes Captain and continue where we left off. Star Trek as a series does not have a future (not in the near future), they have done it to dealth!! As for Winina Ryder being in it is a joke as she is nothing more than a common thief get her out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 Stargate managed to do a series despite big names in the film... but I think that is something of an exception... of course, this is all predicated on the assumption that any series that followed up would be about the same crew and not simply a show in the same time period. Personally, I have to side with those who think that this film is now beyond redemption. It's smacking of something that JJ has come up with and is just hammering into the Star Trek mould. Not to mention the clear desire to stick popular actors in there. What a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 I have to say that a lot of people were upset when ST:TNG was made instead of continuing the original series. Kirk was our captain, not that bald guy, Picard. Then, they kept going making more series. Not all of it was great, but not all was terrible either. We adapted. We acquired new favorites. A new generation was born and they became fans because of the newer stuff. There will be a market and fanbase for the new movie. Paramount is banking on it. If Dr. WHO, BSG, and Bionic Woman can be reimagined, they will try it with Star Trek. It's to big a cash cow to forget about. They are hoping enough time has gone by for a new market of potential fans to have grown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiggy Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 TNG was different we went forward not in reverse. As I said in my post that was another show about the future just as the show in the 60's was about the future. FUTURE being the key word. Even though Enterprise did have a hand full of good episodes and the best special effects of any Trek series it wasnt about the future so thus died. They should learn from Enterprise. I agree that bringing big acting names into the film is not going to do the film or Trek any favours. It is however essential that we see characters to which fans can relate, that is essential. As there is a small part for Nimoy I assume that this will be a flashback film. I get the feeling that if Ryder was at here height in her career she would probably laugh at being offered the role. I now want this film to flop so Shatner can turn round and be smug about it, then paramount will bring him back and make a real effort to make Star Trek popular again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 There's a place for everyone in this movie except Shatner. :-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Maybe they're holding him in reserve 'till right before release, so we all have at least 2 people we want to see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnifex Posted November 12, 2007 Author Share Posted November 12, 2007 I think Nimoy is a sellout for doing this film... Star Trek has always been about the fans.. and it's been ovbious since inception that this reboot would be trampling all over it's history and legacy, to the point that it's really only been aimed at a new audience, with the studios thinking that the exisiting fans would put up with anything as long as it had Star Trek in the title. Shatner will gain a lot of kudo's for not doing this, regardless of what his personal reasons are. I have no doubt that this will be popular.. but that's exactly the point.. Star Trek has never appealed to the masses, so to make a version that will, it's obvious that that version will be miles away from what drew the fans i the first place. For the real fans, that stuck with the show through thick and thin and put up with being labled just for the love and loyalty of the show, Star Trek is dead... it's just another piece of fodder for the general populace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QUEENSPOCK Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 shanter wanted to do the film and was annoyed that he wasn't asked to do it i am against the film Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiggy Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Queenspoeck thats exactly my point. If it flops Shatner can come on TV and make loads of jokes about it then Paramount in a last distch attempt will bring him back into the franchise. So really its a good thing hes not in the new film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEAT84 Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Personally, I have to side with those who think that this film is now beyond redemption. It's smacking of something that JJ has come up with and is just hammering into the Star Trek mold. Not to mention the clear desire to stick popular actors in there. What a joke. Since when is Winona Ryder a popular actor? The last time she was on camara was when she was shoplifting. It could be worse. The could've gotten Britney Spears to play his mother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Eh, you know what I mean - personally, I've seen drift wood that's more attractive and talented but I digress. Amnot Borg... I see where you're coming from... Everytime some old show is scheduled for a resurrection, the old fans come out and go "THIS IS WORSE THAN HITLER TIMES PARIS HILTON!" BSG and Bionic Woman both took established premises and turned them on their head... with Star Trek XI... we don't really know what Abrahms is going to do... although I imagine being pretentious and a lot of wigs ill be involved. Based purely on my gut instinct, I'm not really feeling this to be the kind of... reimagining that BSG and Bionic Woman were. It sounds too similar, whereas those two shows have both managed because they went in a different direction... The jury is still out on FLASH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now