Star Trek Franchise

[superwesleybros]

Anyone here a Trekkie or Trekker?

I for one am. Back in 2007 I was introduced to the Original 1960's show and I fell in love with the show.
I have seen all of the original series, 98% of the Next Generation. part of DS9, Voyager and Enterprise...the Latter 3 were awful IMHO. I have also seen all 11 Star Trek movies.

What are your thoughts and stories? I'd love to talk to fellow Trek loving Mario fans.

[Serum]

I like Star Trek, a lot. I don't know if I'm a "Trekkie" or a "Trekker" (I don't even know the difference.) but personally, I'm a fan of the 'Next Generation,' and Patrick Stewart in general.

My favorite of the movies are II, III, IV, Generations and First Contact. My favorite of them is probably "Generations," because of Malcolm McDowell's enticement with the Nexus, which is sort of Nirvana personified-- like if joy were something tangible like a blanket and you could wrap yourself in it, forever. I don't care if it's not real, I want that.

[superwesleybros]

I like Star Trek, a lot. I don't know if I'm a "Trekkie" or a "Trekker" (I don't even know the difference.) but personally, I'm a fan of the 'Next Generation,' and Patrick Stewart in general.

My favorite of the movies are II, III, IV, Generations and First Contact. My favorite of them is probably "Generations," because of Malcolm McDowell's enticement with the Nexus, which is sort of Nirvana personified-- like if joy were something tangible like a blanket and you could wrap yourself in it, forever. I don't care if it's not real, I want that.

My favorites are II, III, IV, VI, First Contact and ST:2009. I didn't care for generations as it killed off my favorite captain, James T. Kirk. but my personal favorite is Star Trek IV. I loved the time travel experience and the whole 1980's feel.

[Serum]

I didn't care for generations as it killed off my favorite captain, James T. Kirk.

William Shatner wrote a book that continued the story after "Generations," called "The Return" in which Spock revives Kirk and he goes on some new adventures-- I read it many years ago, I forget most of the plot. I also had an audio-book version of it that I think was read by James Doohan.

Also, I'm more of a Picard person, myself, although I love Kirk, too. But they're too completely different captains of two completely different Enterprises, so it's like trying to compare apples and oranges. But "Generations" is my favorite because of Malcolm McDowell and the whole "Nexus" plot, which is something I find fascinating, the idea of the personification of personal joy into your own private paradise.

[superwesleybros]

William Shatner wrote a book that continued the story after "Generations," called "The Return" in which Spock revives Kirk and he goes on some new adventures-- I read it many years ago, I forget most of the plot. I also had an audio-book version of it that I think was read by James Doohan.

Also, I'm more of a Picard person, myself, although I love Kirk, too. But they're too completely different captains of two completely different Enterprises, so it's like trying to compare apples and oranges. But "Generations" is my favorite because of Malcolm McDowell and the whole "Nexus" plot, which is something I find fascinating, the idea of the personification of personal joy into your own private paradise.

I haven't read the book. In all honesty I didn't hate Generations I liked the Nexus and the paradise plot. (Kind of reminds me of Rosalina and her story from Mario Galaxy) I judge it too harshly, I've only watched it once. When I watch it again i'll watch it for the story. When I watched it the first time I was just wanting to see Kirk and Picard kick butt. lol.

[Wesr]

I grew up on reruns of the original series and the first few seasons of Next gen. I read the books Shatner wrote and they weren't bad but like the Star Wars novels are sort of a Universe onto themselves not used in the movies. The new movie i just couldn't get into. I sorta liked Enterprise and DS9 but to me the worst show was Voyager.

[Serum]

Dammit wesley this is a Mario forum not a Star Trek one! *makes an angry Mccoy face*

He listed it under "General Talk" so it's okay.

[superwesleybros]

Dammit wesley this is a Mario forum not a Star Trek one! *makes an angry Mccoy face*

The Sun is angry at me. :p

[Redstar]

I like Star Trek, a lot. I don't know if I'm a "Trekkie" or a "Trekker" (I don't even know the difference.) but personally, I'm a fan of the 'Next Generation,' and Patrick Stewart in general.

"Trekkie" is generally a pejorative used by other science fiction fans to denigrate fans of Star Trek because it's generally seen as "soft" sci-fi.

"Trekker" is what a lot of Star Trek fans prefer to be called. There's a third group that likes to be known as "Trekkies" since they're proud to be geeks and don't care what others think.

What are your thoughts and stories? I'd love to talk to fellow Trek loving Mario fans.

My father introduced me to Star Trek and to science fiction in general, though I got into the harder stuff on my own. My brother and used to watch Voyager every night. It was generally episodic and we liked that.

I tried TNG, but I felt most of the episodes were hit-or-miss. I much preferred TOS once it started airing late. I watched and enjoyed nearly every episode. It was just much more fun and at times thoughtful than the later series.

Enterprise was good for awhile and I really enjoyed their take on Vulcan society, but the fact that they kept slipping into "old Trek" by revisiting the Augments, Borg and Klingon just meant that they really had no idea how to strike their own path in Trek canon. The Xindi arc did nothing to help.

I haven't watched all the films, but I've enjoyed most of those that I have. I really liked First Contact, Insurrection and Star Trek 2009, but I found Wrath of Khan to be massively disappointing considering how physical and intellectual the original episode was. I did not enjoy seeing Kirk and Khan facing each other through video screen.

[superwesleybros]

I haven't watched all the films, but I've enjoyed most of those that I have. I really liked First Contact, Insurrection and Star Trek 2009, but I found Wrath of Khan to be massively disappointing considering how physical and intellectual the original episode was. I did not enjoy seeing Kirk and Khan facing each other through video screen.

Wow, I love Wrath of Khan. I did wish to see Kirk and Khan duke it out but I could see that it was more of a character driven plot.

[Prime Evil]

*makes an angry Mccoy face*

An angry Sylvester McCoy face, at that.

Seriously, now:

I consider the original "Motion Picture" an excellent cure for insomnia. I have the VHS "Director's Cut" wherein the first 10 minutes or so is a black screen with orchestral music. I haven't watched 2 or 3 yet, if only because I still have an overriding mortal terror of the mind-controlling "earwig." (PROTIP: Earwigs don't actually like to go inside your ears. )

4, I enjoy very much. I wish we could today have magic pills that regenerate internal organs.

Haven't really seen enough of 5 or 6 to comment.

I have very few memories of Generations, except that I got the Engineering playset for Christmas that year. I even think I saw it on the big-screen on Christmas Day...it was overwhelming. So much so that I have a big blank spot where it should be!

Didn't see any of the later ones, though I think I watched First Contact on TV at one point. It was the one where Farmer Hoggett develops warp-drive.

JJ Abrams' 2009 remake is about the only thing I'll admit to when people ask me if I like Star Trek. It's an excellent movie in its own right, and a very, very good Star Trek movie. The time-travel stuff even works, if you're as insane as I am (meaning: I can actually wrap my head around it, or wrap it around my head, and understand how it works).

[Redstar]

I haven't watched all the films, but I've enjoyed most of those that I have. I really liked First Contact, Insurrection and Star Trek 2009, but I found Wrath of Khan to be massively disappointing considering how physical and intellectual the original episode was. I did not enjoy seeing Kirk and Khan facing each other through video screen.

Wow, I love Wrath of Khan. I did wish to see Kirk and Khan duke it out but I could see that it was more of a character driven plot.

To me, about the only things that saved Wrath of Khan were Shatner and Montalban's performances.

[superwesleybros]

KHAAAAANNNNNN!!!! oh wait I mean KOOOPAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

[Roareye]

Big fan of Star Trek in almost all of it's iterations. Each series has it's share of bad episodes, and as a fan of any show you come to expect that.

The films have declined, moreso than the series. I actually liked Enterprise as I preferred the character element of it, and how Johnathon Archer evolved from wet-behind-the-ears Roddenbury "The universe is so cool!" to a harsher, more decisive and defensive personality. "Home" was a sublime episode in Season 4 where he's talking to the Captain of the Columbia (Hernandez) who is the same as he was at the start of Season 1, and you can really tell the evolution of a man who has cracked under pressure. When you look at these elements, the show was a success. However it was marred by other issues, but I still liked it.

The films' decline is more obvious. First Contact was great, but Insurrection was well made but felt like an extended episode. Despite only one actual movie 'failure' with Insurrection (Which was still a fun movie nonetheless), they decided to try and shake it up with Nemesis which was absolutely horrific and ended up being the worst of the series. What followed is only a small mark away from that - the abysmal Star Trek 2009. It wasn't a Star Trek film, it was a bastardisation. I didn't mind the new universe, I thought the destruction of Vulcan was a great idea and this style of reboot really did give the franchise some extra kick. Fantastic special effects (That far outdid the work of the director - Abrams), some great actors unfortunately playing out one of the worst scripts ever written (Despite being laced with excellent fan-service) and direction which truly showed a lack of understanding. J.J. Abrams has never been a great director, and his lack of understanding source material or acknowledging the use of "the moment" was extremely prominent in this movie. I tried, I've got it on Blu-Ray and keep on trying but I can't love it. It fell down on two key areas - the script and the director. With two such dismal failures, it stands as an empty and lifeless spectacle of special effects brilliance. The story was immature and under-developed, most of the characters (Bar Kirk and McCoy) were given no real depth of characterisation in the script that fit and Spock was brilliantly acted but on a script that betrayed the purpose of his character.

To clarify my belief that Abrams is an awful director, it really does come down to 'the moment'. At any point, when he could have made the film hard hitting, powerful and reach deeper he jerked his hand away in either fear or negligence. The moment when Kirk's father flies his ship to his own demise, for example. That would have been hauntingly beautiful if he'd kept the camera on the ship slowly moving into the Romulan Mining Craft and let muted audio of the explosions do the work, and leaving it for just a moment. That would have hit hard, you would have felt his loss, it would have been noble. It would have meant something. What Abrams did was his usual bodge job of "Sits in chair, flies in ship, body flies at screen, big boom - all done, let's go home happy days, whogivesaflyingfuck". That glorious moment was butchered by Abram's lack of quality direction, as was what should have been a similarly haunting and amazing moment when Vulcan is destroyed. Instead it's painfully forgotten within 2 seconds, the moment is jumped in order to preserve Abram's "I don't give a shit" policy, the nobility and the pain of loss is only realised by Spock (By this time, everyone would at least know someone from Vulcan) but it is portrayed like a teenager who missed a goal at a football match, and gets his bitch to kiss it all better. Add to this the script for Scottie was horrendous, unless they can write him more as a genuine character and not a caricature they can sod off, as were moments of the script for Uhura, Chekhov (Who is suddenly super-wonder-boy! We have a new Wesley Crusher, ladies and gentlemen... -_-) and the abysmal Christopher Pike.

I am going to watch the second one to see if, now they have the "We must seperate the two universes" idea out of their head, the writers can actually manage a half-decent movie. I have no doubt it will be poorly directed, as it is Abrams again, but the writers have written and produced good things before this so I have hopes they can forgo the bull this time and make a script worthy of the name "Star Trek". If "Star Trek 09-2", or whatever it'll be called, sucks donkey nuts then I'll abandon hope for the team and forgo any further purchases until a new team is installed.

[1upmushroom]

I'm actually a huge fan of all the original Star Trek movies (from the Motion Picture to Star Trek 6). I just like the original team so much. Haven't seen the other movies. I only remember a couple of the original episodes.

[Redstar]

Star Trek 2009 certainly had its holes and weak moments, but it should be taken into consideration the the film went into production during the 2007-2008 writer's strike. Star Trek's writers were obligated to not revise their work, forcing Abrams to direct what he had and little more.

As you do have interest in seeing the sequel you might like to know that Zachary Quinto has stated that the writers now have the freedom to revise their work. It's almost a daily process developing something far more sophisticated and fun than the first.

"It was the middle of December and finally I had to be like, 'We need to read the script. They waited a pretty long time, but that's because they were working on it. There was a writer's strike the first time so they weren't able to let the script evolve. Now it's really changing...on a regular basis."

It would have been nice to see a far more polished work, but it's still fascinating to see a project realized in its original form rather than after various iterations.

[Roareye]

That's cool Redstar. The actors were all good (Except Scotty), and the special effects were masterful. I still believe it will be badly directed, I have a very low opinion on J.J.Abrams (I doubt he'll lose any sleep over it lol) but have faith that at least the writing can be improved upon this time and I hope that it will produce a quality movie this time around. Was not aware they were in a writer's strike during the first film, but I really don't understand this "obligated not to work" bollocks.

As a writer, if I was developing something from the heart I'd bloody work on it. Never gotten the idea of strikes in an entertainment medium which you surely only get into because it both pays well AND is fun.

[Redstar]

Was not aware they were in a writer's strike during the first film, but I really don't understand this "obligated not to work" bollocks.

If they chose to write than they probably would have been kicked out of the WGA. Unions have tricky politics in the U.S. Oftentimes they truly help the workers and artists but lately it seems like they're just out for themselves.

What would really suck is if this constant rewriting only results in a worse film.

[Roareye]

Say I was to go to America as a writer, would I need to be in the WGA?

If I was director if my own projects, then technically as Director there is nothing to stop me rewriting/writing in that capacity?

What if I was 'caught' writing during a strike, what would being out of the WGA mean?

America has a different work ethic (And political style in general) than the UK, so in the UK I don't have to be in a Union of any kind to write. My lack of knowledge on the American political infrastructure is likely to blame here. Would I be unable to write by some weird magical bullcrappery if I weren't within a writing Union? Would people just not take my name seriously in a business even if I was a proven name because of not being within a Union? I love writing, and if I were passionate enough about a project (Such as my own) I wouldn't give a toss if I were kicked out of 'a Union', I'd be pissed off at the Union for daring to tell me to stop doing the work I enjoy and I'd add a few colourful words in there for good measure.

[superwesleybros]

I enjoyed ST: 2009. Sure it was't normal trek but it's something to get the wheels of something awesome going. I think it had an amazing cast to re-create the original 60's actors. It's a Star Trek action movie, but is that really a bad thing? Each movie is good in their own respect, but you got to appreciate it for what it's worth. I just hope the rumors about Khan being in the new one are false. I don't want to see a remake of Space Seed or Wrath of Khan.

[Redstar]

Say I was to go to America as a writer, would I need to be in the WGA?

If you wanted to write for Hollywood-produced films you probably would.

If I was director if my own projects, then technically as Director there is nothing to stop me rewriting/writing in that capacity?

If your project is independent then you can do whatever you want. You could screen it theatrically in a four-wall or take it to festivals without worry.

America has a different work ethic (And political style in general) than the UK, so in the UK I don't have to be in a Union of any kind to write. My lack of knowledge on the American political infrastructure is likely to blame here. Would I be unable to write by some weird magical bullcrappery if I weren't within a writing Union? Would people just not take my name seriously in a business even if I was a proven name because of not being within a Union?

In theory, the WGA is there to protect the interests of the members it represents. The writer's strike was fighting for better pay and representation, so presumably most members understood that holding out was a good thing for their long-term careers.

I'm not particularly familiar with how the WGA works, but they generally determine who gets screen credit. If several teams each wrote consecutive scripts for a single project the WGA would decide who gets credit and pay. For example, Super Mario Bros. had four teams of two writers each write their own script. In the end, only three writers of the eight total received credit. Considering how badly Hollywood treats scripts and writers being in the WGA can really protect you.

[nettana]

I like the old star trek tv show and star trek next generation ( love Piccart and Data.. these characters are epic!). But I have to admit that I've never seen the newer ones. Can you suggest me one of the shows especially? Maybe I will take a look then....

I thought of getting also some merchandise! I saw that there exist stark trek bath robes, I think that's funny!

[Redstar]

I would be seriously pissed if the latest rumor that Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Khan is true. That would be terrible, terrible casting, not to mention blatant whitewashing of a clearly Indian character. At least Montalban had the excuse of acting in a time when you were either white or an extra.

[Prime Evil]

I would be seriously pissed if the latest rumor that Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Khan is true. That would be terrible, terrible casting, not to mention blatant whitewashing of a clearly Indian character. At least Montalban had the excuse of acting in a time when you were either white or an extra.

Think I heard somewhere that he's going to be playing an original character. Even though this is a reboot, I suspect Abrams and co wouldn't want to needlessly retread old ground.

[Redstar]

Actually they did confirm a while back that it is indeed Kahn. Remember its an alternate timeline guys so i am not suprised they would bring back an iconic character like Khan.

Cumberbatch as Khan was never confirmed; it was only rumored by a "strong source." While there was no official denouncement of the rumor, several members of the cast have stated he is not playing Khan. It's just not clear yet and I doubt it will be until the trailer is out.