Astrotoy7 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I just put it "star trek galaxy class mars training" into google. Here's the reference he probably got it from: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Unnamed_Galaxy_class_starships#Utopia_Planitia.2C_Mars nice find I guess we can officially say its not canon but cool little EU trivia tidbit me likey Im amazed you find time to watch Trek Lynky, in between all those robots and samurai mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 So Spock and McCoy (especially Spock) are shallow? O rly? You want shallow? Try sitting through an episode of Voyager. Yes, Voyager was, for the most part, shallow drivel. As was Enterprise, for the most part. Anything that added any kind of depth to Spock's character happened in Wrath of Khan, The Voyage Home, and TNG. Every aspect of TOS was just plain two dimensional. And that includes Bones, to be quite honest. Voyager at least had some serious character growth. I'm talking hardcore development. There isn't a single character in Voyager that didn't become so much more than they were in the beginning of the story, with the notable exception of Kes - who they got rid of at the end of season three. Voyager was, in my humble opinion, easily one of the best series, second only to Next Generation. Enterprise was quite ridiculous, I agree. There are a handful of episodes I genuinely enjoyed, though the majority of them, particularly after the Xindi storyarch, I just didn't bother watching. The Temporal Cold War had potential, but they pissed it away quite brilliantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Shallow? In a show like Trek, the characters develop with the story. The story is first. You get small glimpses of what people are thinking, but it's all between ship goes here, stuff happens, shooting starts, etc. Trek isnt a character piece. Roddenberry always described Trek as "Bonanza In Space" Some of its characters have become iconic due to the strength of their performances or memorable scenes they were in. :"KHAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNN!" Other characters changed more over time as their development could be interpersed into diversed or shortened story arcs. For myself, watching Jonathan Archer go from green and keen to jaded through such a long story arc was the most entertaining part of Enterprise. The others characters I really enjoyed following in Trek were Data and The Doc from Voyager. Kirk and Picard, for all their hijinks and great speches, got nowhere near as much 'room to grow', not due to the actors being incapable - the shows simply werent written to portray that. It was great in Enterprise to have the Captain as the character who does all the growing, as its usually the peripheral characters that get that type of treatment by writers. That being said, I dont think we're going to get a hige character emphasis in the film. Its interesting Abrams has said this Trek is going to be more like Star Wars than the trek people are used to. Interestingly ILM are also doing the effects this time, though they have done Trek before it must be said mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 nice find I guess we can officially say its not canon but cool little EU trivia tidbit me likey Im amazed you find time to watch Trek Lynky, in between all those robots and samurai mtfbwya I have the entire series of TNG, DS9 and VOY as well as all 10 movies (that are out now. I'm not gonna bother with TOS though cause I never really got into it... and I think I'll end up getting ENT some time in the future. Plus, it's not that hard to be interested in multiple things. Be it anime, Star Wars, videogames, women, Star Trek, videogames, women, movies... and more videogames... and I think I mentioned women in there too. After all this running around, I'm still not going to ask people to show me their references when I'm having a normal conversation with them just so I can verify what they're telling me is correct XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Negative Sun Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Its interesting Abrams has said this Trek is going to be more like Star Wars than the trek people are used to. That's exactly what I was thinking when I was watching the trailer (in glorious 720p, yes Astro ) I have never watched a Trek movie or even a full episode of any Trek series, but this 2 minute trailer has me mesmerized about this franchise like nothing before...It's making me interested in the Original Series and some of the older movies, any particular episodes or movie recommendations are more than welcome btw Casting Zachary Quinto as Spock is a stroke of genius IMO, he's one of the best TV actors out there at the moment and he looks born to play that role! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 longstoryshort: In the 1986 book {More words} Sorry Astro, but it doesn't hold water, why was the issue of entering an atmosphere so worrisome to the crew in the ToS then? (Gene wrote those too) That's right, cause they didn't have an anti-grav drive, they had impulse engines and their Warp Drive, not once was another drive system mentioned. I'll never buy the build on the ground theory for pre or ToS era ships, especially for ships as ungainly as the trek ships (the Warp nacelles alone would rip off from the stresses in such a standard launching from earth, I could maybe buy a Moon surface launch... but that still would be stretching it for me). Add to this the inclusion of such a thing as a space-dock in the Movies (Gene had an hand in those too, at least the first few), it all but kills the build on the ground theory for me. Sorry mate. OT: As long as the movie is entertaining it'll be cool with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth InSidious Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 I thought this was what spacedock was for... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Sorry Astro Sorry mate. lmao...no one has apologised to me that much in my whole life Not even when my gal lost my favourite cat!(Astro Jr) luckily he was located in washing hamper shortly after... No need to apologise. Whatever your (or my) notions may be, they are ultimately irrelevant. The screencap I posted from the trailer shows what the writers think, and as this is a movie as opposed to a treatise on starship engineering, the writers take on it is what matters. People having trouble living with this engineering dilemma should close their eyes during these bits of the movie I personally am more interested in peoples reactions to the idea rather than the idea itself. I have no idea myself as to what would be feasible or not in the 23rd century I'd venture to say that alot of people throwing their 2c in about this issue have had zero starship design and fabrication experience. It would be interesting to see what actual experts in the aerospace field have as their take on the matter mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth_Yuthura Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Okay... I'm not a trekie, but I do like TNG, DS9, and Voy. I'm rather disappointed that they are making a new movie that takes Star Trek... back in time. I think that the original series should be forgotten and left behind. Any new Star Trek movie should be going forward, not revisiting a classic. They enhanced the Original movies to be better than the show, but now you have to go back to using those 'brick' communicators, magnetic cassette tapes, and all the other technology that's obsolete today. It doesn't make sense that they would use those 200 years later, so why make a 'futuristic' movie with classic features? Erase Star Trek and replace it with something that might actually be a look into the future. It was not meant to be a classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 I'm pretty sure that it landed. They droped the crew off on some planet and flew away with just Reiker and the kids. The Enterprise D could not land unless it was a crash landing and even then it was just the saucer section, and the Saucer would be a total loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Negative Sun Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 If Bill says it's ok then it must be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 They probably paid him to say it was okay XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 Or bought Priceline stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 Article - New Version Of Star Trek Trailer - Now with THREE Spocks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 lmao...no one has apologised to me that much in my whole life I say sorry a lot sometimes... I was tired and in a 'sorry' state too! I'm not saying this 'build on the ground' plot point will dampen my judgment of the film, I watch movies like this to eat popcorn and be entertained, before and after the fact is the time for this kind of thing as every sci-fi movie has its plot 'moments' like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 One of the main reasons why I'm going to watch this film is simple. Lenord Nemoy will be the last of the original cast to return to the big screen. Defrost Kelly and James Dohan are dead and gone. William would have been nice to see; however, I'm just glade to see at least one of them in Star Trek again. Spock hasn't been seen since Star Trek: TNG episodes Unification I and Unification II. He is such a Star Trek legend, and this may be the last time we will see him. God bless him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynk Former Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 I loved DeForest Kelley's cameo in TNG with Data. “You treat her like a lady, and she’ll always bring you home.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 I loved DeForest Kelley's cameo in TNG with Data. “You treat her like a lady, and she’ll always bring you home.” That was a skin chilling moment. Your reminder also gave me chills. How about the episode where Scotty walked into the Enterprise holodeck remake? Both men are legends. I wished they made a small part for Shatner; however, I understand the issues with continuity. We will never have Star Trek movies similar to the first six ever again. Star Trek XI will remind us about the excitement; however, it will never capture the true mannerisms of the original cast. I hope this movie does well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 I watch movies like this to eat popcorn and be entertained.. cmon Red. Yes, this is what normal people do, but look at us, where we are, and what we are talking about We must embrace our freakiness. mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedHawke Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 cmon Red. Yes, this is what normal people do, but look at us, where we are, and what we are talking about We must embrace our freakiness. I do, and I noted it... and after the fact is the time for this kind of thing as every sci-fi movie has its plot 'moments' like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 I thought this was what spacedock was for... ? Funny you should say that. Look back at the Next Generation movie First Contact. The moment where the Borg come into range of Earth you will notice something missing. How did the Borg make it passed - Whatever happend to the space station that lingered around Earth? It is in almost every other movie. Something that big doesn't vanish over night. Star Trek: TNG episodes that involved Earth also didn't have it. What?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chevron 7 locke Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 The borg might not have seen the spacedock as a threat, just because it's big doesnt automaticly mean it's armed to the teeth with heavy weaponry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 The borg might not have seen the spacedock as a threat, just because it's big doesnt automaticly mean it's armed to the teeth with heavy weaponry. Thats true. I wonder why it wasn't added to the movie though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chevron 7 locke Posted November 29, 2008 Share Posted November 29, 2008 Because the borg saw it as a threat and destroyed it? or maybe the Jem'Hadar got it during their attack on earth in the Dominion war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.