Well sadly it seems they have to destroy an "Enterprise" every new (old/prequel) film, wonder if they run out of designations before the #1701. Or maybe they start wit 1201, instead, so they can burn some 500 of them.

There are only 26 letters in the alphabet.

Only 26 letters but an unlimited number of alternate realities.

Especially the mirror universe where the Enterprise has a goatee.

I moved out of that human 'Sardine Can', a long time ago.
People who live around me, have 'land', and respect each others property rights.
I found abuse of others to be normal human behavior, when jammed together too tightly. Go with the flow.
Maybe you should move, if that bothers you .

Or not.

I watched the trailer again and it doesn't seem so bad to me. Yeah, this will obviously be very action oriented and not at all like Star Trek: The Motion Picture but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

The alien woman looks like an Asari from Mass effect, and so do the other aliens! Should be a Mass Effect movie.

There should absolutely be a Mass Effect movie. My guess is that it hasn't happened yet for legal reasons or maybe Bioware is just not interested.

To sum up this thread--expectations not met.

Just like they've not done so for the previous two films. Obviously you're not the target audience. Feel how you like about that, but it won't change anything. If this movie tanks, ST films will stop again for many years like after Nemesis until another reboot happens. If it succeeds, we'll get a fourth film like these.

We will not get whatever it is some people seem to think they should be making. Oh wait, if they did THAT people would complain like they did for SW Ep7 that it was just rehashing a previous film and introduced no new ideas. Except Into Darkness did rehash and didn't introduce much new.
So damned if they change things, damned if they keep the same. Things that didn't change should have, those that did change shouldn't have.

Obviously they'll follow the money. That's all that matters to Paramount and their shareholders.



The Jedi Master

In many ways, you're right about the fact that they'll do whatever to make a buck and satisfy their shareholders, but I think there's still some basic logic that can be applied.

First of all, I'm thinking that if they want to make it completely different than the original series, and the fans of that series aren't the target audience, then why use the Star Trek name? If you don't want to appeal to the fans of Star Trek, it seems like you're alienating any audience you might want to appeal to by using it.

Second, you can keep the themes the same without duplicating previous movies. TESB did not duplicate many of the story elements from ANH (no Death Star, no big space battle, etc.), but yet was consistent in its approach and themes. TFA was a direct rehash of specific story elements, such as a new version of the Death Star, a new space battle, a new orphan on a new desert planet, a new mask-wearing villain, and the list goes on. I don't think you have to duplicate a film to maintain its spirit when you make a sequel. If that were true, every Star Trek episode and movie would have been identical.

Is it really necessary to destroy the Enterprise in almost every movie now?

You'd think after losing 1-2 of them, the Federation engineers will come up with better shields, stronger hull material, tougher offensive and defensive weapons with faster firing rate and more simultaneous firing points instead of one or two beams at the time.

...and most importantly, another name for the vessel!

I'm in the minority here, but I look at the new Star Trek films as the best "reboot" of any series made.

Yes, it blows up real good, but that's not mutually exclusive from it being an enjoyable film to watch.

And if we compare it to the other Star Trek films - with the exception of Wrath of Kahn - they're hands down better.

All the other Star Trek films seemed pretty transparent efforts to milk money from fans and viewers by standing the cast of the original series in front of a camera, plot be damned.

I won't address the fact that one of the original series characters was invented for the sole purpose of having someone that looked like Davy Jones on the screen to improve rating....or that the actor that plays that role now had to learn how to do a Russian accent - though he's a born and raised Russian and has an authentic one in real life.

Would that have been the wrath of Madeline Kahn? Oh, you really meant to say Wrath of Khan.

Voyager prolly had the best writing.

So we're going to keep playing this? OK.

you had said


So "and you kids get off my lawn" is obligatory after
a comment like that. It's a joke, by the way. Apparently
you can't quite see that.

I imagine I have the better part of a decade on
you, but I have nothing against change, I find
it is as often as not for the better, and generally,
when there's a choice between new better and new
worse, people tend to go for new better, so
in the long run, we advance. Has something to
do with the amygdala, I think...

And I got all the elbow room I need, thanks.

I still say the Best Star Trek films IMO are Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan, Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

They call it Star Trek because franchises and sequels do a lot better than fresh properties, hands down. Reusing a name for a totally unrelated project will get you better returns than an unheard name, where more often than not the public response is "what's that? I'll wait for it to be out on video."

So, Hollywood Money Making 101--reuse a well-known name and your advertising is 80% done, you get a built-in audience...then you make 1000 changes to the "old" formula because you want to make more money than those old films did, and you do that by trying to broaden the appeal. If you alienate 100 in an attempt to appeal to 1000, so be it.

Remember that the so-called old fans abandoned them on Nemesis. There was supposed to be one final TNG cast film and it was shelved permanently. That rejection combined with the low ratings of Enterprise sealed the fate of "classic" Trek. It was branded a money loser. The reboot was an attempt to take the base formula and make it a different way. It succeeded and made more money than any of the 10 previous films.

Why would they ever think they were doing the wrong thing?



The Jedi Master

A joke?...lol...no I've heard that common 'insult' decades ago, thrown at others for years.
And the amygdala has to do with 'fear'. Something I've learned to overcome by exposure.
Some refuse to face it. Some just freeze up and deny it.
I have learned to deal with it.

I was trying to be nice, and possibly pass on some new information.
But it's all PWEC, if you want the truth. Maybe you really don't, I have no idea.
So I PMed you.

Or...if you'd like your truth in public, I can post it in the PWEC.
But my position here does not allow me to answer you in the Community Hall.
Cause the truth is, the direction of the "CHANGE" is, of course, PWEC material.

Unless one thinks the world is all roses and lollypops right now....... ....and getting better every day.
Right?

I request you read my PM, or, if you require an audience, we can go to the PWEC.

But I believe, you sir....are 'very' wrong.
This world is NOT getting better, and the "Change" we've been receiving for the past 7 years, or even the past couple 'decades', is NOT good.
I though everyone knew that.