Mr. Sinister Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Hahahahahahahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Han and Leia living in a trailer with the wookie chained to an old tire out front. Milleneum Falcon in blocks in the front yard. Han on a lawn chair drinking a bud light reminiscing with Lando about the time he had him frozen Luke on the couch working thru the emotional scar tissue with a therapist... Father killing, sister kissing hallucinator Shouldn't they be drinking Colt 45's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 How'd they manage to get Kershner working on it? Abrams probably has a cloning machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Shouldn't they be drinking Colt 45's? No, just Lando Luke will be drinking Bacardi Breezers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Abrams probably has a cloning machine.Begun, the Clone Star Wars have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toe Jam Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 They rewrote the script to better emphasize Luke, Leia and Han for Episode VII and give them a proper sendoff. Apparently Kirshner and Abrams are redoing it. The original script focused on the younger generation. Apparently, JJ Abrams wants to send the 3 stars of the original trilogy out with a bang before focusing on the new crop of heroes. Sounds like they're goners. I wouldn't be surprised if he killed them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrFan Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I like him but was disapointed by Star Trek into darkness. The movie was not as good as Star Trek 2009 and just looked like The Wrath of Khan revisited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toe Jam Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I like him but was disapointed by Star Trek into darkness. The movie was not as good as Star Trek 2009 and just looked like The Wrath of Khan revisited. Is that really a bad thing though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrFan Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Is that really a bad thing though? It's not a bad movie, but I was expecting something new, new characters, new storyline, and overall I liked the previous one better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Thrawn series! But please make Jarrus a legitimate BA and not a whiner like he was in the book. I'm not a book fan but I read that particular series aren't the original actors too old for that one? How about the series with the Aliens from outside the Galaxy, the ones that killed Chewbaca? (only other Star Wars books I read) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Is that really a bad thing though?Not necessarily, but when it's done by someone who doesn't really understand what Star Trek is about and changes things on a whim, it's a bad thing. There's the obvious question of why they got a White British actor to play a man described in Space Seed by the ships historian as someone "from the northern India area, I'd guess. Probably a Sikh. They were the most fantastic warriors." Nothing against Cumberbatch, as I think he showed to be a great actor and villain, but he's not Khan Noonien Singh. On top of that obvious change in making him white, they over-did his superiority. That scene where Kirk beats his face into oblivion and he doesn't even flinch? Come on. Magic blood that brings people back to life? Don't be ridiculous. He's an augment instilled with the greatest genes that mankind has to offer making him very strong and smart (and aggressive), but he's still human. The thing about Star Trek 2009 that gave me hope was that by creating this alternate timeline, it gave the Enterprise the possibility for all new adventure while not forsaking the past, but it seems like instead they chose to go for the exact opposite of trying to repeat an adventure while forsaking the past. I would go on to complain about how they've made Spock much too emotional. Also, whatever happened to Spock's feud with his Dad, Sarek, for his decision to enter into Starfleet instead of the Vulcan Science Academy? They completely changed Uhura's personality and over-did her lingual skills in having her speak perfectly fluent Klingon when in Star Trek VI she had to refer to a Klingon-English dictionary to respond to a message from a Klingon listening post asking them to identify themselves. And then there's the lack of attention to detail when it comes to science, which the original series paid close attention to, even if it's in the background and not thrown in your face. I saw a video some time ago (can't seem to find it again) where they showed a scene in the turbolift from the original movies where they were traveling, if I recall correctly, from the Shuttlebay to the bridge. In this scene, if you pay attention to the lights in the window, they toggle between moving vertically and horizontally as the turbolift changes directions (you'll also hear as the turbolift slows and speeds up when about to change directions), and the people who put the video together put up a map of the ship showing the location of the turbolift as it actually moved through the ship from origin to destination and it all matched up perfectly. In Star Trek 2009, on the other hand, you have Spock walk into the turbolift from Shuttlebay and then one second later the door opens and he's on the bridge. Abrams was not a fan of Star Trek growing up, and it's clear he doesn't understand what it's really about. They're decent Star Wars movies, but they don't fit Gene Roddenberry's vision for Star Trek. edit: well that came out a lot longer than I originally planned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I'm not a book fan but I read that particular series aren't the original actors too old for that one? How about the series with the Aliens from outside the Galaxy, the ones that killed Chewbaca? (only other Star Wars books I read) You're referring to the Yuuzhan Vong. And yeah, that would make for a great trilogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 It would be great if episode vii focused on Han and Leia trying to convince chewbacca to enter rehab for opiate addiction. Also have a subplot where Luke goes around the galaxy looking for a job but can't find anything consistent, so he decides to take online classes at the academy he planned to go before episode 4s events swept him up. Perhaps Chewbacca gets paranoid and offended and rats out Han for murdering Guido. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 I am the biggest Star Wars nerd of all, I love a lot of the books. I loved the Thrawn series, but I do NOT want to see those made into movies. There were some things I completely loved but other things I hated. I hated the Emperor being brought back. I hated the whole Luuke deal and Jorus and especially the sloths that canceled force powers... NO, I don't want that at all. I want a new story that hasn't been done and as others have pointed out, the new Star Trek movies are more Star Wars movies to me, JJ Abrams doesn't get Star Trek. I'm not a Star Trek fan. But, I loved the new movies. I trust Abrams to do it right and I'm not hard to please in terms of so many fans of today. When the original trilogy came out, there were not expectations. People loved them. They were not perfect movies. They were cheesy, they had whiney characters (Luke), they had annoying characers (Ewoks), but IMO, it didn't matter, they were great. The Prequel trilogy is the same way in that yes, Anakin was whiney, that was his character, the jedi were stiff and formal which is what they are supposed to be, Jar Jar was annoying, like the Ewoks. I think the difference is that people over time, had their own idea of what the prequels should have been and it was set to fail from the get go. My son loves the Prequels, so do I. I think that the new movies will be both loved and hated as well. All that aside, I really want to see movies set in the Old Republic timeframe. I think the Skywalker story was told, 6 movies was enough. I don't think 9 were needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Not necessarily, but when it's done by someone who doesn't really understand what Star Trek is about and changes things on a whim, it's a bad thing. There's the obvious question of why they got a White British actor to play a man described in Space Seed by the ships historian as someone "from the northern India area, I'd guess. Probably a Sikh. They were the most fantastic warriors."I'm trying to figure out why that's a big deal considering that Khan in the original movie (by all measures one of the best Star Trek movies) was Mexican with a very non-hispanic accent.Abrams was not a fan of Star Trek growing up, and it's clear he doesn't understand what it's really about. They're decent Star Wars movies, but they don't fit Gene Roddenberry's vision for Star Trek.edit: well that came out a lot longer than I originally planned.And yet you have Nimoy (the quintessential spokesman for all things Star Trek) who has starred in both of Abrams' offerings, if there was something so sacrilege about Abrams' vision I can't imagine he signs on for one much less two movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I'm trying to figure out why that's a big deal considering that Khan in the original movie (by all measures one of the best Star Trek movies) was Mexican with a very non-hispanic accent. And yet you have Nimoy (the quintessential spokesman for all things Star Trek) who has starred in both of Abrams' offerings, if there was something so sacrilege about Abrams' vision I can't imagine he signs on for one much less two movies. Well, there's always the money! Actually, I thought it was a brilliant conceit that had its roots in Star Trek to change the time line. Otherwise, they were too hamstrung by too many television shows, movies, books, etc. This way, they can build their own universe without navigating the mine field of what was done in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bliz Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Well, there's always the money! Actually, I thought it was a brilliant conceit that had its roots in Star Trek to change the time line. Otherwise, they were too hamstrung by too many television shows, movies, books, etc. This way, they can build their own universe without navigating the mine field of what was done in the past. Every time there's a super hero reboot, they tell the origin story. I was never a big Trek guy, but I also thought it was a very smart idea to tell the origin story of the Enterprise crew (which as far as I know had never been done before) as a way to tell new stories while paying homage to the original series. And I thought the casting job was just brilliant. fwiw the two biggest trekkies I know both loved the first movie. And most people I know who had little to no familiarity with the original series also could enjoy the first movie, without feeling like it was a thing strictly for the hardcore fans. That is an achievement. Some are upset that Uhura knows more Klingon in this movie than she did in the original series? That's fine. I have no complaints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Oh, I really liked the "we're in an alternate universe" justification. Thought it was a great way of glossing over any differences that people might want to nit pick over. There were whole boatloads of OTHER plot holes that really, really, tick me off. A super nova is threatening the galaxy? Anybody ever heard of the inverse square law? The explosion is doing to destroy Romulous? An explosion takes how long to travel from one star system to another? Enterprise leaves the destruction of Vulcan. (At warp speed, to escape the destruction.) Spock grieves. Kirk and Spock argue about which direction they should be heading. There's a fight. Kirk loses fight. Spock orders Kirk kicked off the ship. Security puts him in a life pod. . . . Which happens to land on the planet containing Spock. A planet which is close enough to Vulcan to see it with the naked eye, but which is undamaged by the adjacent planet being swallowed whole by a black hole? The Enterprise has been at warp for what, 20 minutes? And has traveled roughly the same distance as from the Earth to the Moon? If you want to get into more esoteric things, now, . . . Federation starships are now build on planets, and have the ability to land on them? The bridge viewscreen is a windshield? Starships now dogfight each other at ranges, and speeds, which are visible to the naked eye? From Into Darkness: "These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise" is supposedly an oath that Captains swear? Come on. That's the lamest excuse to work those lines into a script I've ever seen. The Enterprise warp reactor is now the size and appearance of the reactor on the second Death Star, with arc-welder-style contacts which are "aligned" by some guy jumping up and down and kicking them? And, when said reactor gets switched on, and said guy is standing two feet away, inside said reactor, what he gets is some radiation that causes him to die, a half hour later? ---------- That said, I liked both JJ Trek movies. I like seeing the characters. The one liners. The "Kirk sleeps around" jokes. (If you ever watch the deleted scenes from JJ's first Trek, there's another really good one, in there.) I don't watch these movies to improve my science education. They're entertainment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I'm trying to figure out why that's a big deal considering that Khan in the original movie (by all measures one of the best Star Trek movies) was Mexican with a very non-hispanic accent.Khan in the original movie was played by the same man who played him in the original series episode "Space Seed", Ricardo Montelban. And the description of him wasn't a historical description, but rather an observation based on looking at him while he was being revived. The historian painted a picture of Khan showing him wearing a Turban as well, but you don't seem him actually wear one because he likely wasn't actually a Sikh, but perhaps a mix of multiple races in search of the best genes. Now, suddenly, the ideal human is a pale white person which means he likely doesn't carry the blood of any non-white people. And let's not forget this is not a re-imagining, but rather it's supposed to take place in an alternate time-line that split off long after the events of the Eugenics Wars (hell, we've already surpassed that time in real life, Khan should be off in the Botany Bay right now), so you can't use the alternate timeline as an excuse, either. And yet you have Nimoy (the quintessential spokesman for all things Star Trek) who has starred in both of Abrams' offerings, if there was something so sacrilege about Abrams' vision I can't imagine he signs on for one much less two movies.I dunno, maybe he's eased up in his old age, or perhaps he's just good friends with Abrams. I really respect that back in the day when they were making Star Trek: The Animated Series, he refused to sign on to participate until they brought Nichelle Nichols aboard, because he recognized that an important part of Roddenberry's vision was for a future with the races united Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Yeah, but I'm still pissed that Peter Jackson didn't use real Ring Wraiths in LOTR! Simon Pegg isn't Scottish either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Simon Pegg isn't Scottish either. Neither was Jimmy Doohan, but they both were fine for the role. Would you feel the same if Uhura was suddenly white? Already completely changed her personality to not be very Uhura-like, may as well make her white while we're making other people white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Neither was Jimmy Doohan, but they both were fine for the role.Would you feel the same if Uhura was suddenly white? Already completely changed her personality to not be very Uhura-like, may as well make her white while we're making other people white.Ricardo in Khan looked nothing like an Indian Sikh, instead he looked very white, so much so that when you see him in the original series you can see just how much make-up was applied.Yet you accept this presentation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Ricardo in Khan looked nothing like an Indian Sikh, instead he looked very white, so much so that when you see him in the original series you can see just how much make-up was applied. Yet you accept this presentation... First, Montelban did not look like that when he was original cast in the role of Khan. Secondly, I don't believe there was a very large Indian population in America in the 1960s when the role was created. Unfortunately the census does not seem to separate Indians from the rest of Asia, and while it is difficult to come to an exact number even looking at the number of Asians overall, they only comprised 0.3% of the population, so Hollywood will do what it must. Either way, Khan is clearly supposed to be someone who has some pigmentation in his skin, when you cast a pale white person, you may as well just create a new character. Also, another thing to note with the picture you posted brings back the attention to detail they used to have. His costume, and the costume of his crew, were constructed from upholstery and wiring from a starship with the idea being that they had to scavenge everything they could from the ship to survive on that hostile world. edit: Looking at Space Seed Khan, I also noticed that Cumberbatch appears a bit young for the role as well. Montalban was around 46-47 when he played a freshly-revived Khan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I'll look past the fact that I keep reading the wiki article in your posts. Costumes are totally irrelevant to this discussion since both have very different visions of the universe, the original series used a lot of bulky fabrics which looked futuristic back then, Abrams sees the future as being much more form fitting and slim. As far as there being fewer Indian actors in the 60's and 80's, if they wanted one they would have gotten one. Instead they got a Mexican, painted him up and put a wig on him. Then in Khan they didn't even do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I'll look past the fact that I keep reading the wiki article in your posts. Costumes are totally irrelevant to this discussion since both have very different visions of the universe, the original series used a lot of bulky fabrics which looked futuristic back then, Abrams sees the future as being much more form fitting and slim. Oh, I wasn't trying to make a comment on Abrams' costumes, just pointing out another example of the kind of thought put into such small details for the original series movies (like my previous comment about the turbolifts). I wouldn't expect Khan to have a costume anything like The Wrath of Khan in the new movie because he hadn't been marooned on a hostile planet with only the ship to scavenge materials from. I do think the uniforms in the new movies look very good. As far as there being fewer Indian actors in the 60's and 80's, if they wanted one they would have gotten one. Instead they got a Mexican, painted him up and put a wig on him. Then in Khan they didn't even do that.Maybe. But either way, Montalban set the precedent for what Khan is. Completely changing his race feels the same as I previously compared to, making Uhura white. If you want Benedict Cumberbatch to be a Villian why does he need to be Khan? Can't they make an original villain for him to make his own? I was really hoping that by making the alternate timeline, they'd move away from trying to rehash the past, instead it seemed like they forced Khan in there probably because The Wrath of Khan is the only Star Trek thing Abrams bothered to watch in preparation. And you don't need to be a life-long Trek fan to make a good movie, either. Nicholas Meyer, the director of The Wrath of Khan and The Undiscovered Country (my two favorite Star Trek movies, with VI actually being my favorite) hadn't watched an episode of Star Trek before he was given the job. But then he went back and watched every episode of the original series to understand what he was getting into, and the results were very good. At this point, I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree, since we seem to be overtaking a Star Wars thread with Star Trek talk. Feel free to have the last word, though, not trying to silence your heresy. And now for an non-sequitur connection. Cumberbatch, who most recently portrayed Khan, played Sherlock Holmes in a newish series. Nicholas Meyer, the man who gave us The Wrath of Khan, wrote a Sherlock Holmes book, the Seven-Per-Cent solution (later turned into a movie not directed by him). edit: damn it, I didn't intend for this post to be another wikipedia-size wall. *sigh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.