If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   William Shatner on JJ Abrams: "He's being a pig. He's collecting the two franchises and holding them close to his vest. He's gone too far this time." KIRK HAS SPOKEN   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 156
    More: Hero, William Shatner, J.J. Abrams, Will I Am, Eddie Redmayne, Josh Holloway, Guardians of the Galaxy, Days of Summer, John McClane  
•       •       •

6051 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 13 Feb 2013 at 12:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



156 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-13 12:05:26 PM  
static.tvguide.com
"Soon I will have Babylon 5 AND Stargate...and I will be the Supreme Power in the UNIVERSE!"
/Diabolical Laughter
 
2013-02-13 12:09:25 PM  
They should let him do Indiana Jones too.
 
2013-02-13 12:21:42 PM  
Or a TJ Hooker remake.
 
2013-02-13 12:48:58 PM  
Abrams offered Captain Butthurt a cameo in the first ST movie and he refused, wanting a bigger scene.
 
2013-02-13 12:53:58 PM  
I! AM! KIROK!

/*cough*cough*
 
2013-02-13 12:54:09 PM  
Jeez Shat, don't be such a dick.  Oh wait--too late.
 
2013-02-13 12:57:15 PM  
Just keep Lindelof or whatever the f*ck his name is away
 
2013-02-13 12:59:26 PM  
Hero tag is right. fark that lensflaring hack.
 
2013-02-13 01:01:54 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: Abrams offered Captain Butthurt a cameo in the first ST movie and he refused, wanting a bigger scene.


images.betterworldbooks.com
Bought it for a buck. In it it details Shat's obsession with 'line counting' in that in every episode of ToS, he had to say the most line. So him being pissed the Nimoy got so much screen-time would explain for his refusal for a cameo.
Not getting an invitation to the new one would explain him trying to piss all over JJ
/lensflares
 
2013-02-13 01:02:55 PM  
JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.
 
2013-02-13 01:03:41 PM  
Star Wars was low quality pap to begin with. It started out as cheesy action sequences and weak dialogues wrapped up in lame plot twists, it'll end up that way in Abrams' hand. That's all Star Wars is. You can't ruin something by making it stupid and puerile if that's what made it entertaining tin the first place.

And, let's face it. His version of Star Trek isn't exactly the first entry in the franchise that failed to hit it out of the park and devolved into goofy sci-fi action, unlikeable characters and painfully implausible plot lines.
/ complaining that J.J. Abrams is going to ruin the spirit of Star Wars is like complaining because they handed the keys to the Transformers to Michael Bay....
 
2013-02-13 01:04:51 PM  
Bill is just saying what everyone is thinking.
 
2013-02-13 01:05:34 PM  

Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.


No. You are wrong.
 
2013-02-13 01:07:03 PM  
FTA:  "I think of him as a buddy of mine. I've taken him out for sushi. I think it's time for J.J. and I to have another sushi and let me put him straight about two of the largest franchises," Shatner said to Movie Fanatic, before joking, "not employing me in either one of them is just foolhardy."

You owe me a keyboard, Bill.
 
2013-02-13 01:07:31 PM  
Bill: get a life.
 
2013-02-13 01:07:45 PM  
AAABBBRRRAAAMMMSSS!!!
 
2013-02-13 01:08:56 PM  

Dear Bill,


The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:


www.startrek.com


So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul
 
2013-02-13 01:09:23 PM  

Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.


I would say good bit of trolling, but nah.....way too obvious.
 
2013-02-13 01:10:31 PM  

Bslim: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

No. You are wrong.


No. YOU are wrong.

[/argument]
 
2013-02-13 01:13:09 PM  

ristst: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

I would say good bit of trolling, but nah.....way too obvious.


Not trolling... I enjoy almost every other part of the Star Trek universe but despite numerous chances I never could get into TOS.
 
2013-02-13 01:13:14 PM  
I can't wait for JJ's Star Wars hype train. "Is that tall, woolly person in the trailer actually Chewbacca? Or is it really new character "John Harrison" like they keep telling us?"
 
2013-02-13 01:16:33 PM  

Desquamation: ristst: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

I would say good bit of trolling, but nah.....way too obvious.

Not trolling... I enjoy almost every other part of the Star Trek universe but despite numerous chances I never could get into TOS.


60's SciFi is an...acquired taste.
 
2013-02-13 01:17:53 PM  
No matter how much we biatch and moan in this thread, we're all going to be lined up on opening day, demanding that they take our money.
 
2013-02-13 01:18:02 PM  

Vegan Meat Popsicle: complaining that J.J. Abrams is going to ruin the spirit of Star Wars is like complaining because they handed the keys to the Transformers to Michael Bay....


I don't think Michael Bay is capable of making a great movie.  I think Abrams is.

As for ruining the spirit of Star Wars, I hope he does.  I hope he ruins the spirit of "merchandising first" that embodied every SW film after Episode IV.  I hope he takes the SW universe and ideas, which are endlessly rife with possibilities, and develops a film that is not some stupid thing for the kiddies.  Star Wars could have been farking great in the hands of good writers and directors--and casting agents.  Hopefully now we will have those.  Lucas was terrible at all three.
 
2013-02-13 01:19:51 PM  
You have to hand it to Abrams, it takes guts to step into this. Star Trek movies have always been a mixed bag, based on a number of directors, to the point where we have the even/odd joke. Plus the series have always given fans multiple different points of reference. But Star Wars (at least the movies), for better or worse, has always been Lucas, and despite the fact that Star Wars has been a bit bumpy as of late....the minute we get a Star Wars movie that isn't Lucas, it's going to ruffle feathers. I think that's why  you say Del Toro, Spielberg, Bird, and Abrams himself at one point all turn it down.
 
2013-02-13 01:24:17 PM  
there....that settles it.
s20.postimage.org
 
2013-02-13 01:30:28 PM  

Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.


So does your Mom.

Desquamation: I never could get into TOS


Unlike me who got into your Mom
 
2013-02-13 01:31:19 PM  
You know... I think JJ Abrams is better suited to Star Wars then Star Trek.

Don't get me wrong here, I enjoyed the new Star Trek movie quite a lot and am looking forward to the sequel. It was fun, well paced and they totally nailed the characters. But the plot was a mess of holes and incongruities, and they didn't even remotely try to give an inkling of a fark about any of the science they ran roughshod over - even moreso then the previous movies and TV shows usually did - and the villain was a well-acted cardboard cutout who made no sense at all. (SPOILER: seriously, you're pissed off because Spock didn't save your planet in time with the gunk, so you go back in time WITH the goddamn gunk and don't bother to just give it to your planet and say "Hey, in about 50 years you guys are REALLY going to need this for some inexplicable reason. So hold on to this, and reverse-engineer my more advanced ship from the future ship in the meantime to give our empire a distinct technological advantage." No, instead you try to kill all the people who were trying to help, and forget all about Romulus... WTF? And that's just for starters...)

But Star Wars isn't about high-minded ideas, social commentary and speculative fiction on the nature of the effects technolgical advancement and contact with alien races might have on our species... Star Wars is a fantasy adventure. You can say "FARK YOU" to the science so long as the story is fun and the archetypes well executed. I think that would have played to JJ's strengths much better. For Star Trek the details are more important than with Star Wars. In Star Wars you throw a couple deus ex machinas in there and no one bats an eye. They even have a thing just for that! The force! Perfect for Abrahms.
 
2013-02-13 01:31:37 PM  
Shatty's just mad because Nimoy got to star in the reboot and he didn't. When Shatner starred in Generations, you didn't hear Nimoy whining about it, did you? (Nimoy was probably happy to have dodged that bullet, but I digress...)
 
2013-02-13 01:35:54 PM  
Give him the Harry Potter license and then we can finally do the best three-way crossover trilogy that fanfic writers can churn out.
 
2013-02-13 01:35:55 PM  
 
2013-02-13 01:40:13 PM  

jayhawk88: for better or worse, has always been Lucas


From what I've heard repeatedly over the past couple of decades, the very best things in Empire Strikes Back did not come from Lucas.  Supposedly, members of the production team fought hard for the much darker themes in the film.
 
2013-02-13 01:40:42 PM  

Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.


I think you have that backward.  TOS is the one Trek to rule them all.
 
2013-02-13 01:41:41 PM  

Strolpol: Give him the Harry Potter license and then we can finally do the best three-way crossover trilogy that fanfic writers can churn out.


Hmmm...I'm not sure Yoda, Dobby, and a mess of tribbles would make it past the censors.
 
2013-02-13 01:46:09 PM  
He should offer shat some significant screen time in the new Star Wars, as some bald headed alien then edit it down into some throw away gag.

/there will be hell toupee
 
2013-02-13 01:46:34 PM  

LoneWolf343: 60's SciFi is an...acquired taste


Oh c'mon....who wouldn't love that classic 23rd century stuff (designed in the 60s of course)?  Black leather casing....silver highlights....
 
2013-02-13 01:49:43 PM  
I'll see the next new Trek movie, but I consider the current movie series as a parody. They'll stumble along for awhile, then reboot Star Trek yet again eventually.
/and your little Star Wars TOO.
 
2013-02-13 01:49:53 PM  

StrikitRich: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

I think you have that backward.  TOS is the one Trek to rule them all.


Well if we are going to make references to "rings":

images4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-02-13 01:50:28 PM  
Man, being called a pig by the biggest ham in the acting world must sting a little!
 
2013-02-13 01:50:36 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: Abrams offered Captain Butthurt a cameo in the first ST movie and he refused, wanting a bigger scene.


At this point, Shat might make an excellent Harry Mudd.
 
2013-02-13 01:51:39 PM  

Red Shirt Blues: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

So does your Mom.

Desquamation: I never could get into TOS

Unlike me who got into your Mom


I hear she calls you her "Big Mugatu."
 
2013-02-13 01:51:46 PM  

ristst: jayhawk88: for better or worse, has always been Lucas

From what I've heard repeatedly over the past couple of decades, the very best things in Empire Strikes Back did not come from Lucas.  Supposedly, members of the production team fought hard for the much darker themes in the film.


True, Kershner was probably the driving force on that movie, but it was still Lucas' story.
 
2013-02-13 01:52:16 PM  
keithroysdon.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-13 01:52:46 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul


You, sir, should shut up for you are not even worthy to carry Shatner's tired, old wrinkled testicles.
 
2013-02-13 01:53:29 PM  
I'm not that big of a fan of Abram's Trek, though I don't hate them. That said, with him in doing both series, I hope he doesn't start homogenizing things. Lens flare and shaky cam are almost a given, so let's hope he doesn't start using the same type of character development and other tropes across both movies.
 
2013-02-13 01:55:17 PM  

Kurmudgeon: I'll see the next new Trek movie, but I consider the current movie series as a parody. They'll stumble along for awhile, then reboot Star Trek yet again eventually.
/and your little Star Wars TOO.


Your user name. Appropriate it is.
 
2013-02-13 01:56:41 PM  

Ennuipoet: [static.tvguide.com image 210x305]
"Soon I will have Babylon 5 AND Stargate...and I will be the Supreme Power in the UNIVERSE!"
/Diabolical Laughter


Well, if it reignites those two franchises...
 
2013-02-13 01:59:09 PM  
Pic of JJ in article screams for a "WFT is this shiat" caption.
 
2013-02-13 02:01:26 PM  

mongbiohazard: (SPOILER: seriously, you're pissed off because Spock didn't save your planet in time with the gunk, so you go back in time WITH the goddamn gunk and don't bother to just give it to your planet and say "Hey, in about 50 years you guys are REALLY going to need this for some inexplicable reason. So hold on to this, and reverse-engineer my more advanced ship from the future ship in the meantime to give our empire a distinct technological advantage." No, instead you try to kill all the people who were trying to help, and forget all about Romulus... WTF? And that's just for starters...)


Nero and Spock Prime got sent back a lot more than 50 years--I think it was more like 100 years, and they had no way to control the time warp.  I don't think the movie ever revealed Nero's age, but even with Romulans living as long as Vulcans, it's quite possible he would not have lived long to be there to prevent the destruction of Romulus in that timeline.

Also, I suppose that seeing his planet destroyed could have also destroyed his sanity, basically turning him into the "Star Trek" equivalent of a reaver.
 
2013-02-13 02:02:50 PM  
How the fark is William Shatner 81 years old?  He looks 65, tops.  That man must have the best plastic surgeon in the world.
 
2013-02-13 02:06:00 PM  

FloydA: No matter how much we biatch and moan in this thread, we're all going to be lined up on opening day, demanding that they take our money.


Uhhhhhhhh, no.

/No.
//I don't do first run flicks.
///Too expensive, too much talking, too many breeders with screaming crotch fruit.
////Wait 2 months and catch it at the second run theaters for about 3 bucks.
 
2013-02-13 02:06:10 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: Bslim: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

No. You are wrong.

No. YOU are wrong.

[/argument]


No - You are BOTH wrong!
 
2013-02-13 02:06:48 PM  

FLMountainMan: How the fark is William Shatner 81 years old?  He looks 65, tops.  That man must have the best plastic surgeon in the world.


He's pickled from all the Romulan ale he's drank over the years.
 
2013-02-13 02:07:45 PM  

anfrind: t's quite possible he would not have lived long to be there to prevent the destruction of Romulus in that timeline.


So he farking tells them that he's a time-traveler and he's trying to help them. And they make sure they have people in place through the generations who can help the situation. It's like the Fifth Element almost.
 
2013-02-13 02:07:55 PM  
The best Star Trek movie was the one with the whales and the old lady regrowing a kidney.
 
2013-02-13 02:09:34 PM  

anfrind: Also, I suppose that seeing his planet destroyed could have also destroyed his sanity, basically turning him into the "Star Trek" equivalent of a reaver.


The way Nero spits out the "I do not speak for the empire" line implies that he may have tried.

// apparently, the Romulans look at a weirdo who shows up one day all "I'm from the future! All is doomed! Here, take these gifts of technological advancement!" the same way we look at Timecube guy
// a possible explanation, not the explanation
 
2013-02-13 02:18:44 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul


If you wish to engage in an actual discussion with Bill on this topic, I suggest you head over to reddit. He's a regular on /r/startrek.
 
2013-02-13 02:31:26 PM  

PainInTheASP: Jeez Shat, don't be such a dick.  Oh wait--too late.


I think you dont understand Shatners method of extremely dry humor.
 
2013-02-13 02:34:42 PM  
I'm just surprised Abrams is still alive. If any other nerd had been given the reigns to Trek and Star Wars they would've literally exploded with glee.

/Yes. Literally.
 
2013-02-13 02:39:36 PM  

FLMountainMan: How the fark is William Shatner 81 years old?  He looks 65, tops.  That man must have the best plastic surgeon in the world.


It's all that faster than light travel

/relativity
 
2013-02-13 02:40:52 PM  

Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.


You have no Earthly idea of what you are speaking. Abrams made the engine room of the Enterprise look like a desalinization plant, blew up the very civilization that shepherded humanity into the stars, and still managed to trip over his miniscule dick in doing it. The gaping flaws in logic he created in the story line of Star Trek (In Name Only) are obvious to even a casual viewer.
 
2013-02-13 02:41:04 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: StrikitRich: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

I think you have that backward.  TOS is the one Trek to rule them all.

Well if we are going to make references to "rings":

[images4.wikia.nocookie.net image 550x421]


Habitation or docking?
 
2013-02-13 02:42:55 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

You have no Earthly idea of what you are speaking. Abrams made the engine room of the Enterprise look like a desalinization plant, blew up the very civilization that shepherded humanity into the stars, and still managed to trip over his miniscule dick in doing it. The gaping flaws in logic he created in the story line of Star Trek (In Name Only) are obvious to even a casual viewer.


Have you watched Enterprise?  After doing Season 1, I can totally see how the Abrahams Enterprise is an outgrowth.  And after (2009), Enterprise is the only canon series, so it makes sense.  And by the time of that movie, Vulcans were no longer shepherding us into the stars, we had helped establish the Federation and were independent of the Vulcans.  Kind of like the colonies and Britain reuniting under NATO.
 
2013-02-13 02:48:07 PM  

Soulcatcher: AAABBBRRRAAAMMMSSS!!!


Came for this! leaving amused.
 
2013-02-13 02:49:50 PM  

karnal: Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul

You, sir, should shut up for you are not even worthy to carry Shatner's tired, old wrinkled testicles.


Ok... so Star Trek 5 isn't the worst star trek of ToS run of movies?
 
2013-02-13 02:49:51 PM  
Abrams seems to have a decent name in Hollywood, and I could never figure out why.  I never fully looked at the films Abrams was responsible for until just now, and now I'm baffled.  The films he was a part of are complete dreck.
 
2013-02-13 02:51:59 PM  

President Merkin Muffley: Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul

If you wish to engage in an actual discussion with Bill on this topic, I suggest you head over to reddit. He's a regular on /r/startrek.


Then I would have to go be on Reddit.

So rock and hard place with that argument.
 
2013-02-13 02:54:10 PM  
I'm mostly worried about that "young Han Solo" slide show at the bottom of TFA.  PLEASE tell me that the next SW movie isn't going to contain classic characters with new actors!

JJ Abrams, if you're reading this, go play KOTOR and KOTOR II and learn about how easy (and awesome!) it is to make up fresh stories at different points in galactic history.
 
2013-02-13 02:56:36 PM  
Abrams: It's funny -- a lot of the people who were proclaiming that he must be in this movie were the same people saying it must adhere to canon. Well, his character died on screen. Maybe a smarter group of filmmakers could have figured out how to resolve that.

Well, this is alternate universe Trek, so how is that problem exactly?
 
2013-02-13 03:01:44 PM  

LeafyGreens: Abrams: It's funny -- a lot of the people who were proclaiming that he must be in this movie were the same people saying it must adhere to canon. Well, his character died on screen. Maybe a smarter group of filmmakers could have figured out how to resolve that.

Well, this is alternate universe Trek, so how is that problem exactly?


It is NOW.

It wasn't then.

The story of ST09 was that old spock from the 24th centruy comes back with red matter. There is no red matter when Kirk is dead. Red matter as a lot device, is meh at best of course, yet that IS the story. You can;t have him on there or it ruins the "drama" of whether the crew will unite in time to save the galaxy.

*NOW* that we've established that Kirk and Spock are on the Enterprise and you have all your main supporting cast you could 100% have Kirk cameo or what not.
 
2013-02-13 03:06:45 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: I'm mostly worried about that "young Han Solo" slide show at the bottom of TFA.  PLEASE tell me that the next SW movie isn't going to contain classic characters with new actors!


Worse; Disney is debating full spinoffs (Han Solo and Yoda are the two I've heard mentioned) in addition to Episodes 7-9.
 
2013-02-13 03:10:56 PM  

Droog8912: Abrams seems to have a decent name in Hollywood, and I could never figure out why.  I never fully looked at the films Abrams was responsible for until just now, and now I'm baffled.  The films he was a part of are complete dreck.


I'm with you there.  let's see his directorial efforts:

-Star Wars: Episode VII
-Star Trek Into Darkness
-Super 8
-Undercovers (TV series)
-Star Trek
-Anatomy of Hope (TV movie)
-The Office (TV series)
-Mission: Impossible III
-Alias (TV series)
-Lost (TV series)
-Felicity (TV series)

Okay, MI3 and Super 8 were admittedly good, and Star Trek was great.  He was involved with the initial concept of Lost and stopped directing after making the very expensive pilot episodes, so can he really take credit for the whole show?  Alias was okay, but forgettable.  One episode each for The Office and Felicity, and a failed show (Undercovers).  That's it.

So, how the hell did he land two of the biggest scifi franchises out there?  Is it really from all the Lost hype?  Or his Executive Producer cred (Fringe, Lost, Alcatraz, etc)?
 
2013-02-13 03:12:22 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: President Merkin Muffley: Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul

If you wish to engage in an actual discussion with Bill on this topic, I suggest you head over to reddit. He's a regular on /r/startrek.

Then I would have to go be on Reddit.

So rock and hard place with that argument.


/r/startrek is a solid group of people. It's civil. I won't hold a gun to your head, but don't automatically assume we're all 12 year olds juiced up on ecto cooler over there.
 
2013-02-13 03:22:14 PM  
I'd be pissed too if the character I made famous worldwide was depicted as a whiny little biatch in the new film.  The way they handled his promotion was a farking joke and, at least for me, really ruined the whole movie.

I don't know if it was Abrams or one of his hack writers that came up with the whole YOU NEVER LOVED YOUR MOTHER nonsense, but if I was Shatner, I'd find the guy responsible and punch him right in the balls.

30 some odd years of canon and that's the best shiat you can come up with to get James T Motherfarking Kirk in the captain's chair of the Enterprise?  GTFO.
 
2013-02-13 03:24:22 PM  

TheHumanCannonball: I'm not that big of a fan of Abram's Trek, though I don't hate them. That said, with him in doing both series, I hope he doesn't start homogenizing things. Lens flare and shaky cam are almost a given


i1125.photobucket.com

/Verily!
 
2013-02-13 03:24:58 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Or a TJ Hooker remake.


With John Travolta in the lead role just to piss off Shatner.
 
2013-02-13 03:25:46 PM  

anfrind: Nero and Spock Prime got sent back a lot more than 50 years--I think it was more like 100 years, and they had no way to control the time warp. I don't think the movie ever revealed Nero's age, but even with Romulans living as long as Vulcans, it's quite possible he would not have lived long to be there to prevent the destruction of Romulus in that timeline.



The precise amount of years is moot. The Romulans have a whole civilization. He doesn't personally have to live 100 years to be able to save his people. He knows he went back in time to before Romulus was destroyed, it's ludicrous that he (and his crew) would do anything other than make a b-line straight for the homeworld to deliver them the key to their salvation AND the technological jump-start they'd need to challenge the Federations hegemony. The tech to save his people alone was the most cutting edge technology the Vulcans of the future could devise... and had powerful military applications.


Also, I suppose that seeing his planet destroyed could have also destroyed his sanity, basically turning him into the "Star Trek" equivalent of a reaver. 

And all of his crew as well? I think a better analogy would be Moby Dick's obsessed Captain Ahab then the chemically induced madmen who are the Reavers... but even if he decided to go all Captain Ahab I can't believe his crew wouldn't have mutinied promptly. They had the chance not only to save their world, but to possibly give their people the advantage they might be able to use to subjugate the galaxy right there all around them.

Even without reverse-engineering the future technology in his ship - or contained in the smaller ship in its hold - just look at what that one bafflingly heavily armed mining ship was able to do to the Federation fleet. What do you think that ship could have done if he had bothered to just make a farkin' phone call to Romulus, "Hey buddies, I got a Romulan ship from the future, and I'm about to go fark up the Federation's day BIG TIME. Back me up, biatches and we can rule the galaxy!"
 
2013-02-13 03:27:04 PM  

President Merkin Muffley: Jim from Saint Paul: President Merkin Muffley: Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul

If you wish to engage in an actual discussion with Bill on this topic, I suggest you head over to reddit. He's a regular on /r/startrek.

Then I would have to go be on Reddit.

So rock and hard place with that argument.

/r/startrek is a solid group of people. It's civil. I won't hold a gun to your head, but don't automatically assume we're all 12 year olds juiced up on ecto cooler over there.


Well I assume Fark is full of mysognistic assholes who repeat the same lame ass jokes over and over again. There are a small few who break up that monotony and they are worth spending time with.

As I understand it, most of reddit is even worth.
 
2013-02-13 03:33:59 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: President Merkin Muffley: Jim from Saint Paul: President Merkin Muffley: Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul

If you wish to engage in an actual discussion with Bill on this topic, I suggest you head over to reddit. He's a regular on /r/startrek.

Then I would have to go be on Reddit.

So rock and hard place with that argument.

/r/startrek is a solid group of people. It's civil. I won't hold a gun to your head, but don't automatically assume we're all 12 year olds juiced up on ecto cooler over there.

Well I assume Fark is full of mysognistic assholes who repeat the same lame ass jokes over and over again. There are a small few who break up that monotony and they are worth spending time with.

As I understand it, most of reddit is even worth.


*Worse
 
2013-02-13 03:35:51 PM  

Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.


Kids...
 
2013-02-13 03:45:52 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: karnal: Jim from Saint Paul: Dear Bill,
The last time we let you have any say in Star Trek land you gave us this:
[www.startrek.com image 320x320]
So your opinion on how any franchise should be run is invalid. Shutup and stop whining that Abrams didn't ham-fist you into ST09 like he did Nemoy.

With utmost respect,

Jim from Saint Paul

You, sir, should shut up for you are not even worthy to carry Shatner's tired, old wrinkled testicles.

Ok... so Star Trek 5 isn't the worst star trek of ToS run of movies?


Yes it was....still, you are not worthy.
 
2013-02-13 03:47:24 PM  
Also I think Shat is a lot more "tongue in cheek" than you nerdlings give him credit for.
 
2013-02-13 03:54:55 PM  

Madbassist1: Also I think Shat is a lot more "tongue in cheek" than you nerdlings give him credit for.


He's also old. REALLLY old. Like, grandpa, you don't get to use the remote control anymore old.
 
2013-02-13 04:01:23 PM  

Bslim: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

No. You are wrong.


Well, season 3 was pretty crappy.
 
2013-02-13 04:03:03 PM  
 
2013-02-13 04:04:12 PM  
He's probably the most talented director

img.myconfinedspace.com
 
2013-02-13 04:28:40 PM  

mongbiohazard: anfrind: Nero and Spock Prime got sent back a lot more than 50 years--I think it was more like 100 years, and they had no way to control the time warp. I don't think the movie ever revealed Nero's age, but even with Romulans living as long as Vulcans, it's quite possible he would not have lived long to be there to prevent the destruction of Romulus in that timeline.


The precise amount of years is moot. The Romulans have a whole civilization. He doesn't personally have to live 100 years to be able to save his people. He knows he went back in time to before Romulus was destroyed, it's ludicrous that he (and his crew) would do anything other than make a b-line straight for the homeworld to deliver them the key to their salvation AND the technological jump-start they'd need to challenge the Federations hegemony. The tech to save his people alone was the most cutting edge technology the Vulcans of the future could devise... and had powerful military applications.


Perhaps, although there are ways to build a plot that avoids that hole.  Off the top of my head, maybe he doesn't know which exact star went nova and destroyed Romulus, for example (which is still pretty shaky given that even a 20th-century scientist could recognize a star at risk of going nova, but no worse than the idea of a supernova destroying Romulus in the first place).

Someone earlier in the thread also remarked that a crazy guy claiming to be from the future and predicting the doom of Romulus might seem as crazy to 23rd-century Romulans as the Timecube guy seems to 21st-century humans.  Although I suspect we'd have a different view of the Timecube guy if he possessed powerful weaponry centuries ahead of our time.


Also, I suppose that seeing his planet destroyed could have also destroyed his sanity, basically turning him into the "Star Trek" equivalent of a reaver.

And all of his crew as well? I think a better analogy would be Moby Dick's obsessed Captain Ahab then the chemically induced madmen who are the Reavers... but even if he decided to go all Captain Ahab I can't believe his crew wouldn't have mutinied promptly. They had the chance not only to save their world, but to possibly give their people the advantage they might be able to use to subjugate the galaxy right there all around them.


I'd agree that Captain Ahab is a better analogy, but as I recall all of Nero's crewmembers (or at least the ones who had speaking roles) were just as psychotic as Nero himself was--a ship full of Ahabs, so to speak.  Which might not be that far-fetched, since the entire crew witnessed the destruction of Romulus, not just Nero.

Which makes me wonder: if Spock had not had such a firm grip on his emotions, would watching the destruction of Vulcan have driven him just as mad as it did Nero?
 
2013-02-13 04:32:43 PM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Bslim: Desquamation: JJ's Star Trek is better than TOS.

/TOS sucked.

No. You are wrong.

Well, season 3 was pretty crappy.


The TOS films were infinity better than the TNG films and JJ's Star Trek film was Star Wars only not as intellectually deep.
 
2013-02-13 04:35:36 PM  

Mugato: was Star Wars only not as intellectually deep.


is that a joke?
 
2013-02-13 04:38:59 PM  
I don't have the guts to post it on reddit where he might see it... But:
Shut up, Bill.
 
2013-02-13 04:41:09 PM  

A Terrible Human: The best Star Trek movie was the one with the whales and the old lady regrowing a kidney.


Well you certainly live up to your name with that comment...
 
2013-02-13 04:41:55 PM  
Pleeease find a role for the Shatner in Star Wars VII.
 
2013-02-13 04:44:57 PM  

Madbassist1: Mugato: was Star Wars only not as intellectually deep.

is that a joke?


Yes, that was a joke. Meaning that it was even dumber than the worst Star Wars movie. Christ, what concept doesn't need to be explicitly explained to everyone?
 
2013-02-13 04:50:17 PM  

Ennuipoet: [static.tvguide.com image 210x305]
"Soon I will have Babylon 5 AND Stargate...and I will be the Supreme Power in the UNIVERSE!"
/Diabolical Laughter


If that were only true he would have my vote.
 
2013-02-13 05:06:36 PM  
As the proud owner of this
fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net
All I can say is, Kirk has spoken. Chris Pine is all well and good, but he'll never be half the Kirk Shatner was.

\ It's in a lovely 11x14 black frame on my wall. Every so often our eyes lock while I pick my nose.
\\ I enjoyed JJ's Trek but it aint really Star Trek
\\\ TOS is the best, despite Fark's hardon for DS9
 
2013-02-13 05:12:20 PM  

FloydA: No matter how much we biatch and moan in this thread, we're all going to be lined up on opening day, demanding that they take our money.


I'm already camping...
 
2013-02-13 05:16:44 PM  

Madbassist1: Also I think Shat is a lot more "tongue in cheek" than you nerdlings give him credit for.


Well you are talking to a group of people who probably can't read the article because it may have words with more than two syllables...
 
2013-02-13 05:21:44 PM  

anfrind: I'd agree that Captain Ahab is a better analogy, but as I recall all of Nero's crewmembers (or at least the ones who had speaking roles) were just as psychotic as Nero himself was--a ship full of Ahabs, so to speak.  Which might not be that far-fetched, since the entire crew witnessed the destruction of Romulus, not just Nero.

Which makes me wonder: if Spock had not had such a firm grip on his emotions, would watching the destruction of Vulcan have driven him just as mad as it did Nero?


Did they break all of their little ships?
 
2013-02-13 05:24:27 PM  

mongbiohazard: anfrind: it's ludicrous that he (and his crew) would do anything other than make a b-line straight for the homeworld to deliver them the key to their salvation AND the technological jump-start they'd need to challenge the Federations hegemony.


I'm pretty sure the movie made it clear the Narada by itself outclassed and outgunned the entire Federation flotilla sent to aid Vulcan, having previously taken out a large group of Klingon birds of prey days before.  I'm also pretty sure Kirk in the movie made his point rather clear that it didn't matter where the Federation ships rallied up at, Nero would mow them all down like grass.  No need to visit Romulus.
 
2013-02-13 05:26:33 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: anfrind: I'd agree that Captain Ahab is a better analogy, but as I recall all of Nero's crewmembers (or at least the ones who had speaking roles) were just as psychotic as Nero himself was--a ship full of Ahabs, so to speak.  Which might not be that far-fetched, since the entire crew witnessed the destruction of Romulus, not just Nero.

Which makes me wonder: if Spock had not had such a firm grip on his emotions, would watching the destruction of Vulcan have driven him just as mad as it did Nero?

Did they break all of their little ships?


No, but he could have used the Star Trek: Save the Whales slingshot around the sun time travel thing to save his planet as he did Earth.
 
2013-02-13 05:38:17 PM  
Not to defend the Abrams trek movie, but say Spock did slingshot around the sun and go back to stop Nero from destroying Vulcan. How exactly was he supposed to do that? The Federation fleet was still outgunned. What plan can you come up with that would overpower the Narada and prevent the destruction?

All I can think of all of ships targeting the drill immediately upon exiting warp, but even then they get destroyed by the Narada. Still, no drill saves Vulcan. Unless Nero decides to detonate red matter on the surface... However, if he never captured Spock to begin with, then Nero has no red matter.
 
2013-02-13 05:44:46 PM  

theurge14: mongbiohazard: anfrind: it's ludicrous that he (and his crew) would do anything other than make a b-line straight for the homeworld to deliver them the key to their salvation AND the technological jump-start they'd need to challenge the Federations hegemony.

I'm pretty sure the movie made it clear the Narada by itself outclassed and outgunned the entire Federation flotilla sent to aid Vulcan, having previously taken out a large group of Klingon birds of prey days before.  I'm also pretty sure Kirk in the movie made his point rather clear that it didn't matter where the Federation ships rallied up at, Nero would mow them all down like grass.  No need to visit Romulus.



It sure couldn't hurt to coordinate with the Romulan Empire though, and considering that in the relatively near future - especially for a spacefaring race - the planet was going to be destroyed when their sun inexplicably went nova. And they had the one thing that could stop that from happening in the hold of their ship.... and they didn't even drop it off at the Romulan science academy or something.

And tactically speaking, even if their one inexplicable heavily armed mining ship was a match for the entire Federation fleet, it never hurts to have a damn wingman - let alone if that wingman is the entire Romulan fleet or a good number of their best warships. The enterprise wouldn't have escaped if they so much as had ONE ship accompanying them, and the combined might would have made conquering the rest of explored space much easier.

Hell, a couple of fighter escorts and maybe Spock couldn't have even crashed his little future science vessel into the Romulan ship before being destroyed. Either way, striking it out alone and hiding from everyone, including your own people, while destorying planets on your own would be almost the dumbest single course of action they could have possibly decided on. Pretty damn close to it, anyway...

Hell, they went back in farking time, and their navigational computers could have told them in about 0.1 seconds to what year, so they'd know they had allllll the time in the world to get their rampage on - but with a little planning they could have done it unstoppably.
 
2013-02-13 05:59:42 PM  
Have FUN with it!
 
2013-02-13 06:02:09 PM  
Anybody click through the "Who should play a young Han Solo" thing at the bottom. I kinda like the idea of Zachary Levi doing it. If they pick someone like Zac Efron, though, I WILL take hostages.
 
2013-02-13 06:10:17 PM  

ThatBillmanGuy: Not to defend the Abrams trek movie, but say Spock did slingshot around the sun and go back to stop Nero from destroying Vulcan. How exactly was he supposed to do that? The Federation fleet was still outgunned. What plan can you come up with that would overpower the Narada and prevent the destruction?

All I can think of all of ships targeting the drill immediately upon exiting warp, but even then they get destroyed by the Narada. Still, no drill saves Vulcan. Unless Nero decides to detonate red matter on the surface... However, if he never captured Spock to begin with, then Nero has no red matter.



That's the thing... The more you examine the plot the more it just crumbles apart. Almost none of it made any sense at all, and the bad guys were pretty much completely nonsensical.

I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL, the science made no sense at all (how the hell was future Spock going to see Vulcan destroyed from a moon in another system without a serious telescope and years to wait for the light to reach him?) - but JJ had a LOT of baggage to shed while reintroducing the old characters to a new audience, so I gave him a mulligan on the plot. He got the characters right, and made them interesting, and made someone new to the series understand WHAT was interesting about them, and that was all very important.

Now for this next Star Trek, I'm hoping that now that the introductions have been made the plot will be a lot tighter. If it isn't I'll be pissed, and it's just going to be just plain sloppy on JJ's part.

But Star Wars are adventure stories... Plot holes and Republican science aren't as big deals to those movies.
 
2013-02-13 06:10:54 PM  
i.imgur.com

lh3.ggpht.com

I always feel there's an eerie resemblance...
 
2013-02-13 06:12:51 PM  

Droog8912: Abrams seems to have a decent name in Hollywood, and I could never figure out why.  I never fully looked at the films Abrams was responsible for until just now, and now I'm baffled.  The films he was a part of are complete dreck.


Essentially, if you want to consider the summertime blockbuster movie as a legitimate type of cinema, it is the pallet fro which he paints to borrow a cliche. And many regard him as a master of the craft. Very much in the same way that people used to regard lucas and spielburg.
Spielberg is now making serious films, lucus? Hes strong on the tech development, abrams and the other guy are the new popcorn film guys that our children are going to grow up to remembering fondly as the movie guys who shaped them.

You'll get over it
 
2013-02-13 06:14:35 PM  

mongbiohazard: I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL


It was full of plot holes and ridiculous coincidences. And don't tell me "this is just a sci-fi movie". These people get paid a shiatload of money to write this shiat.
 
2013-02-13 06:27:35 PM  
Shut the fu(k up Bill.  Your time in the sun as far as Star Trek is concerned has come to an end.  For once have some decency in your life and move on Mr. Ego.
 
2013-02-13 06:40:29 PM  

mongbiohazard: I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL, the science made no sense at all (how the hell was future Spock going to see Vulcan destroyed from a moon in another system without a serious telescope and years to wait for the light to reach him?) - but JJ had a LOT of baggage to shed while reintroducing the old characters to a new audience, so I gave him a mulligan on the plot. He got the characters right, and made them interesting, and made someone new to the series understand WHAT was interesting about them, and that was all very important.


I was 100% with you, right up to here.  I think Abrams used the history of the characters as a crutch to drive the plot contrivances.  Why was the guy who flunked out of Space School, snuck on board the ship, and was just marooned from the ship put in command?  Oh, because he knew about the bad guy's plan because he knew the old guy from the future.  Let's forget for a second that the Federation is well aware that alternate universes exist where a Spock with a goatee is the most evil sonofabiatch in the Empire; I'm sure there are no razors in the future.  But I'm sure his word was good enough.

My point is, take out the names "Spock" and "Kirk", along with the rest of the backbone of the Federation setting, and the movie loses any illusionary vestiges of credibility.
 
2013-02-13 06:43:28 PM  

born_yesterday: mongbiohazard: I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL, the science made no sense at all (how the hell was future Spock going to see Vulcan destroyed from a moon in another system without a serious telescope and years to wait for the light to reach him?) - but JJ had a LOT of baggage to shed while reintroducing the old characters to a new audience, so I gave him a mulligan on the plot. He got the characters right, and made them interesting, and made someone new to the series understand WHAT was interesting about them, and that was all very important.

I was 100% with you, right up to here.  I think Abrams used the history of the characters as a crutch to drive the plot contrivances.  Why was the guy who flunked out of Space School, snuck on board the ship, and was just marooned from the ship put in command?  Oh, because he knew about the bad guy's plan because he knew the old guy from the future.  Let's forget for a second that the Federation is well aware that alternate universes exist where a Spock with a goatee is the most evil sonofabiatch in the Empire; I'm sure there are no razors in the future.  But I'm sure his word was good enough.

My point is, take out the names "Spock" and "Kirk", along with the rest of the backbone of the Federation setting, and the movie loses any illusionary vestiges of credibility.


Actually:  I retract that; the Federation had no reason at all to listen to Spock, they had absolutely no farking clue who he really was or where/when the hell he was from.
 
2013-02-13 06:51:43 PM  

mongbiohazard: ThatBillmanGuy: Not to defend the Abrams trek movie, but say Spock did slingshot around the sun and go back to stop Nero from destroying Vulcan. How exactly was he supposed to do that? The Federation fleet was still outgunned. What plan can you come up with that would overpower the Narada and prevent the destruction?

All I can think of all of ships targeting the drill immediately upon exiting warp, but even then they get destroyed by the Narada. Still, no drill saves Vulcan. Unless Nero decides to detonate red matter on the surface... However, if he never captured Spock to begin with, then Nero has no red matter.


That's the thing... The more you examine the plot the more it just crumbles apart. Almost none of it made any sense at all, and the bad guys were pretty much completely nonsensical.

I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL, the science made no sense at all (how the hell was future Spock going to see Vulcan destroyed from a moon in another system without a serious telescope and years to wait for the light to reach him?) - but JJ had a LOT of baggage to shed while reintroducing the old characters to a new audience, so I gave him a mulligan on the plot. He got the characters right, and made them interesting, and made someone new to the series understand WHAT was interesting about them, and that was all very important.

Now for this next Star Trek, I'm hoping that now that the introductions have been made the plot will be a lot tighter. If it isn't I'll be pissed, and it's just going to be just plain sloppy on JJ's part.

But Star Wars are adventure stories... Plot holes and Republican science aren't as big deals to those movies.


I agree completely.  The plot of Star Trek just pulled me out of the movie.  Perhaps because I have a little background in the military, the whole promotion thing was where I literally exclaimed 'WTF is this shiat?'
 
2013-02-13 06:56:14 PM  

born_yesterday: born_yesterday: mongbiohazard: I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL, the science made no sense at all (how the hell was future Spock going to see Vulcan destroyed from a moon in another system without a serious telescope and years to wait for the light to reach him?) - but JJ had a LOT of baggage to shed while reintroducing the old characters to a new audience, so I gave him a mulligan on the plot. He got the characters right, and made them interesting, and made someone new to the series understand WHAT was interesting about them, and that was all very important.

I was 100% with you, right up to here.  I think Abrams used the history of the characters as a crutch to drive the plot contrivances.  Why was the guy who flunked out of Space School, snuck on board the ship, and was just marooned from the ship put in command?  Oh, because he knew about the bad guy's plan because he knew the old guy from the future.  Let's forget for a second that the Federation is well aware that alternate universes exist where a Spock with a goatee is the most evil sonofabiatch in the Empire; I'm sure there are no razors in the future.  But I'm sure his word was good enough.

My point is, take out the names "Spock" and "Kirk", along with the rest of the backbone of the Federation setting, and the movie loses any illusionary vestiges of credibility.

Actually:  I retract that; the Federation had no reason at all to listen to Spock, they had absolutely no farking clue who he really was or where/when the hell he was from.


However he would have known how to pull strings and politics.  All it would take is an audience with the right person and Future Spock could say:  "You are developing this weapon on this planet, this plan is currently in progress, if you point a sensor in this direction, you will discover a planet you never knew existed, Oh, and here are some physics discoveries that you won't discover for 80 years.  Now, with that out of the way, let me tell you something really important..."

He could have gone to Vulcan, those guys tend to take logic pretty seriously.
 
2013-02-13 07:08:12 PM  

kim jong-un: However he would have known how to pull strings and politics. All it would take is an audience with the right person and Future Spock could say: "You are developing this weapon on this planet, this plan is currently in progress, if you point a sensor in this direction, you will discover a planet you never knew existed, Oh, and here are some physics discoveries that you won't discover for 80 years. Now, with that out of the way, let me tell you something really important..."

He could have gone to Vulcan, those guys tend to take logic pretty seriously.


Then it could very well have been bearded Spock, escaping from the Empire to wreak havoc on this timeline for his own nefarious ends?  Maybe the first part of what we saw was a lie, or misrepresented, and Evil Spock actually did destroy Romulus on behalf of the Empire, and escaped to an alternate timeline to bide his time.  Now that would have been an actual plot twist; Nero was actually telling the truth, and evil Spock was the liar.  In any case, I thought the movie and Abrams were both really overrated; YMMV.  I'm sure he cares what I think; I'm surfing the net in my underwear.

I will agree with this, though:

Mugato: mongbiohazard: I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL

It was full of plot holes and ridiculous coincidences. And don't tell me "this is just a sci-fi movie". These people get paid a shiatload of money to write this shiat.

 
2013-02-13 07:34:48 PM  
i.imgur.com  img341.imageshack.us

If he does good, JJ Abrams will see the cowboy one more time. He'll see the cowboy two more times if he does bad.
 
2013-02-13 08:14:46 PM  

Ennuipoet: [static.tvguide.com image 210x305]
"Soon I will have Babylon 5 AND Stargate...and I will be the Supreme Power in the UNIVERSE!"
/Diabolical Laughter


YOU STAY AWAY FROM STARGATE
 
2013-02-13 08:20:18 PM  
Plinkett explains why Abrams' rebooting of Star Trek was actually the right move, and not a bad movie:
http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-trek/star-trek-09/

Seriously... If you guys are going to jump on RedLetterMedia/Plinkett reviews as the de facto reasoning behind the Star Wars prequels sucking, then you need to at least respect his review of Star Trek which ultimately explains that it's what was needed, and it was a decent movie despite some flaws.
 
2013-02-13 08:39:16 PM  
Abrams should merge the two franchises and then everyone'll be happy!  Trek Wars!
 
2013-02-13 08:58:27 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: I'm mostly worried about that "young Han Solo" slide show at the bottom of TFA.  PLEASE tell me that the next SW movie isn't going to contain classic characters with new actors!

JJ Abrams, if you're reading this, go play KOTOR and KOTOR II and learn about how easy (and awesome!) it is to make up fresh stories at different points in galactic history.


This, dammit. Telling more backstory about the characters we've known for decades only cheapens them.
 
2013-02-13 09:18:22 PM  

trapped-in-CH: Abrams should merge the two franchises and then everyone'll be happy!  Trek Wars!


Cool. Maybe we'll get this "Enterprise vs Star Destroyer" thing settled once and for all.
 
2013-02-13 09:30:26 PM  

Mugato: mongbiohazard: I'm sure it sounds by now like I hated the movie but I really didn't - I really liked it quite a bit. The plot was sloppy as HELL

It was full of plot holes and ridiculous coincidences. And don't tell me "this is just a sci-fi movie". These people get paid a shiatload of money to write this shiat.



I totally agree, which is why I'll be holding the plot of the sequel to a much higher standard.

But for this reboot he had a tough job to do... Shed the baggage of decades of TV shows and introduce the characters to new generations of fans who weren't even alive when TOS was aired (hell some of their PARENTS weren't even alive then - /cry), make them understand why those characters are interesting and introduce the universe. And he only had 2 hours to do it, not a season of episodes. I think he did it well, and so for me the gaping numerous plot holes were secondary.

But if he pulls that shiat again I'm not going to be so understanding the second time around. Now everyone knows who is who and what is what. Now he's got to tell a good story, and plot holes the size of Romulus aren't going to cut it.

And yeah, "it's just scifi" is a ridiculous pantload. I expect MORE from scifi, not less. It has farking science in the name.
 
2013-02-13 09:31:53 PM  
Honestly... talented and capable directors able to take well known sci-fi franchises like Star Trek and turn it into something on the big screen that is, not only financially successful, but halfway decent, is a rare thing.

I am halfway curious what another trilogy might bring if a bit of thought was put into it.  And for fark's sake, keep Lucas out of the damned writing.  There will be no one to stop us this time.
 
2013-02-13 09:52:53 PM  

thezeroroom.net

/hot like a flare

 
2013-02-13 09:59:23 PM  
The Clones Wars cartoon is more Star Warsy than Star Wars ever was.
 
2013-02-13 10:11:57 PM  

kim jong-un: Perhaps because I have a little background in the military, the whole promotion thing was where I literally exclaimed 'WTF is this shiat?'


Perhaps it was because Kirk's scores were exemplary in the Academy (we don't know) and that Pike had a serious hero hard-on for Kirks dad (that part we do know) ... So, on a ship full of cadets.. why not go with your gut?
 
2013-02-13 10:13:22 PM  
Shatner, like Little Richard, has become a caricature of himself. Why should I give a crap what he thinks?
 
2013-02-13 10:19:28 PM  

trapped-in-CH: Abrams should merge the two franchises and then everyone'll be happy!  Trek Wars!


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-13 10:24:22 PM  

fusillade762: trapped-in-CH: Abrams should merge the two franchises and then everyone'll be happy!  Trek Wars!

Cool. Maybe we'll get this "Enterprise vs Star Destroyer" thing settled once and for all.


I thought it was settled. A Star Destroyer, that does indeed have shields, that doesn't just fire "lasers," with a squadron of tie-fighters screaming out the bay doors would easily defeat the Enterprise.
 
2013-02-13 11:05:31 PM  

FuryOfFirestorm: Shatty's just mad because Nimoy got to star in the reboot and he didn't. When Shatner starred in Generations, you didn't hear Nimoy whining about it, did you? (Nimoy was probably happy to have dodged that bullet, but I digress...)


In Generations, Scotty is saying Spock's lines and Chekov is saying McCoy's. They barely changed the script after Nimoy and Kelley turned it down.

A scene was written for Star Trek (2009) that had Nimoy's Spock watch a fairly long holographic message from Shatner's Kirk, but Shatner was never offered it. It's widely repeated that Shatner and Nimoy have contracts guaranteeing equal compensation if they both participate in a Star Trek production. It was obvious this scene for Shatner wasn't equally valuable as Nimoy's significant role in the movie.

If Shatner wanted to keep playing Kirk he shouldn't have agreed to kill Kirk. It took a whole movie to resurrect Spock after Nimoy killed him, and nobody wants to do a sequel to the Nexus space heaven thing in Generations to explain how Kirk would come back.  If you're not sure about dying, make sure you die in something good enough to have a sequel.
 
2013-02-13 11:44:15 PM  

Cerebral Knievel: Essentially, if you want to consider the summertime blockbuster movie as a legitimate type of cinema, it is the pallet fro which he paints to borrow a cliche. And many regard him as a master of the craft. Very much in the same way that people used to regard lucas and spielburg.
Spielberg is now making serious films, lucus? Hes strong on the tech development, abrams and the other guy are the new popcorn film guys that our children are going to grow up to remembering fondly as the movie guys who shaped them.

You'll get over it


I only looked at wiki, and his credits there are: absolutely terrible writing credits in the 90s, mediocre producing/directing of action films in the 00s, and then Star Trek.  As someone who isn't a fan of Star Trek (not that I dislike I, I just never got into it), I thought his version was a decent scifi film but not amazing.  I have nothing to "get over"; I'm not upset by any stretch, simply unimpressed by him and don't think he's worthy of so much attention.  But, hey, at least he isn't Brett Ratner.
 
2013-02-14 12:20:22 AM  
Just give us more of this:

i172.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-14 12:36:02 AM  
s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com
s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com
/pvponline.com
//very dead on sometimes
 
2013-02-14 08:21:42 AM  

Nem Wan: If Shatner wanted to keep playing Kirk he shouldn't have agreed to kill Kirk. It took a whole movie to resurrect Spock after Nimoy killed him, and nobody wants to do a sequel to the Nexus space heaven thing in Generations to explain how Kirk would come back. If you're not sure about dying, make sure you die in something good enough to have a sequel.


In JJ's convoluted universe, this is a different timeline, one where Kirk 2.0 might not die in the Generations movie scenario. Therefore, Shatner could come back as Kirk 2.0 from the future. It would be farking stupid but it wouldn't violate canon.
 
2013-02-14 08:28:55 AM  

mongbiohazard: Hell, they went back in farking time, and their navigational computers could have told them in about 0.1 seconds to what year, so they'd know they had allllll the time in the world to get their rampage on - but with a little planning they could have done it unstoppably.


More likely is that the computers told them they were at Ceti Alpha VI. It's the equivalent of the BSOD in Trekverse, right?
 
2013-02-14 08:50:12 AM  
ZeroCorpse

Plinkett explains why Abrams' rebooting of Star Trek was actually the right move, and not a bad movie:
http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-trek/star-trek-09/

Seriously... If you guys are going to jump on RedLetterMedia/Plinkett reviews as the de facto reasoning behind the Star Wars prequels sucking
After their Indiana Jones review stated Shilabuff is a great natural actor, didn't they loose all credibility?
 
2013-02-14 09:41:39 AM  

Mugato: Madbassist1: Mugato: was Star Wars only not as intellectually deep.

is that a joke?

Yes, that was a joke. Meaning that it was even dumber than the worst Star Wars movie. Christ, what concept doesn't need to be explicitly explained to everyone?


Wow, asshole. With all the farking star wars nerds running around here it was a farking legit question. And I had you favorited. Revoked!

*sniffle*
 
2013-02-14 10:09:00 AM  

OnlyM3: ZeroCorpse

Plinkett explains why Abrams' rebooting of Star Trek was actually the right move, and not a bad movie:
http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-trek/star-trek-09/

Seriously... If you guys are going to jump on RedLetterMedia/Plinkett reviews as the de facto reasoning behind the Star Wars prequels suckingAfter their Indiana Jones review stated Shilabuff is a great natural actor, didn't they loose all credibility?


Citation needed.
 
2013-02-14 10:27:46 AM  

Jim from Saint Paul: OnlyM3: ZeroCorpse

Plinkett explains why Abrams' rebooting of Star Trek was actually the right move, and not a bad movie:
http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-trek/star-trek-09/

Seriously... If you guys are going to jump on RedLetterMedia/Plinkett reviews as the de facto reasoning behind the Star Wars prequels suckingAfter their Indiana Jones review stated Shilabuff is a great natural actor, didn't they loose all credibility?

Citation needed.


That Plinket guy really gets sucked off a lot around here. And he is funny and does have some insight but it's nothing most geeks don't already know, he just put it alongside some laborious editing.

Yes, unfortunately despite how vast the Star Trek universe is, going back to the Kirk/Spock well was a wise move because of name recognition. And making it look more like a Star Wars movie (each of which still made a shiatton more money than any Trek movie, no matter how the internet community hates the prequels)  was also the right call. All of that is obvious.

It just sucks that the TNG movies were all so terrible. If they didn't completely drop the ball on the TNG movies they could have had their own Wrath of Khan and wouldn't have to go back to Kirk/Spock. Which they took a few stabs at but failed miserably
 
2013-02-14 11:08:16 AM  

Mugato: Jim from Saint Paul: OnlyM3: ZeroCorpse

Plinkett explains why Abrams' rebooting of Star Trek was actually the right move, and not a bad movie:
http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-trek/star-trek-09/

Seriously... If you guys are going to jump on RedLetterMedia/Plinkett reviews as the de facto reasoning behind the Star Wars prequels suckingAfter their Indiana Jones review stated Shilabuff is a great natural actor, didn't they loose all credibility?

Citation needed.

That Plinket guy really gets sucked off a lot around here. And he is funny and does have some insight but it's nothing most geeks don't already know, he just put it alongside some laborious editing.

Yes, unfortunately despite how vast the Star Trek universe is, going back to the Kirk/Spock well was a wise move because of name recognition. And making it look more like a Star Wars movie (each of which still made a shiatton more money than any Trek movie, no matter how the internet community hates the prequels)  was also the right call. All of that is obvious.

It just sucks that the TNG movies were all so terrible. If they didn't completely drop the ball on the TNG movies they could have had their own Wrath of Khan and wouldn't have to go back to Kirk/Spock. Which they took a few stabs at but failed miserably


Well there are a couple of writers that come up with the ideas and then one of them do the voiceover.

I gladly suck their dick, GLADLY I SAY, when it comes to their TNG reviews and the Episode 1 review. Their 90 minute review was more entertaining then that movie was.

I 100% enjoyed this:

ecx.images-amazon.com

better then Generations, Insurection and Nemesis. It's on par with First Contact.

Yes, William shattner ghost writing his own masturabtory fantasies is more entertaing then Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis.

To be clear I enjoyed the last Indiana Jones so I respectfully disagree with them on that and the ST09 review was nothing special really.

 I just 98% agree with everything "he" says in the reviews I mentioned.

/Movie Picard, we'll call him "Larry"
 
2013-02-14 11:10:28 AM  

TV's Vinnie: [i4.ytimg.com image 320x180]

JJ Abrams' MY Little Pony:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STZfXF1f66M


This.   Is.    Abookmark.
 
2013-02-14 12:14:28 PM  
OnlyM3:Seriously... If you guys are going to jump on RedLetterMedia/Plinkett reviews as the de facto reasoning behind the Star Wars prequels sucking After their Indiana Jones review stated Shilabuff is a great natural actor, didn't they loose all credibility?

God dammit! L-O-S-E. Lose. Opposite of gain. WTF is so hard about spelling that word these days????

/MSNBC spelled it wrong too, Idiocracy is already here
 
2013-02-14 12:16:34 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: I 100% enjoyed this:

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

better then Generations, Insurection and Nemesis. It's on par with First Contact.

Yes, William shattner ghost writing his own masturabtory fantasies is more entertaing then Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis.


If you think he wrote ANYTHING of that novel I have an actual starship to sell you, cheap.

/not on par with ST:FC
 
2013-02-14 12:47:56 PM  

peterthx: Jim from Saint Paul: I 100% enjoyed this:

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

better then Generations, Insurection and Nemesis. It's on par with First Contact.

Yes, William shattner ghost writing his own masturabtory fantasies is more entertaing then Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis.

If you think he wrote ANYTHING of that novel I have an actual starship to sell you, cheap.

/not on par with ST:FC


That's why i said "ghost writing".
 
2013-02-14 12:51:11 PM  

Jim from Saint Paul: That's why i said "ghost writing".


Shatner's name on the novel really bugs the shiat out of me, since he said he never watched an episode of TNG yet the book is almost entirely within the TNG universe. Pocket should be ashamed of themselves.
 
2013-02-14 12:55:45 PM  

peterthx: Shatner's name on the novel really bugs the shiat out of me, since he said he never watched an episode of TNG yet the book is almost entirely within the TNG universe. Pocket should be ashamed of themselves.


He "wrote" a book where Kirk was resurrected by the Borg. If you had a gun to his head you wouldn't get Shatner to tell you WTF a "Borg" is.
 
2013-02-14 01:08:51 PM  

Mugato: peterthx: Shatner's name on the novel really bugs the shiat out of me, since he said he never watched an episode of TNG yet the book is almost entirely within the TNG universe. Pocket should be ashamed of themselves.

He "wrote" a book where Kirk was resurrected by the Borg. If you had a gun to his head you wouldn't get Shatner to tell you WTF a "Borg" is.


Pssst.

I don;t CARE who wrote it guys. It was entertaining.
 
2013-02-14 09:58:58 PM  
As someone who became a Trekker in 1968, I have to place TOS on a pedestal. (DS9 is my favorite spinoff). That said, I feel the original pilot (the complete version, with Jeffery Hunter), stands up quite well for being some 50 years old.

/get off my lawn
//I'll give you $5 to cut it first.....
 
2013-02-14 10:05:13 PM  

Lee451: As someone who became a Trekker in 1968, I have to place TOS on a pedestal. (DS9 is my favorite spinoff). That said, I feel the original pilot (the complete version, with Jeffery Hunter), stands up quite well for being some 50 years old.


Wasn't Spock kind of a spaz in that episode?
 
2013-02-14 10:06:42 PM  
Headline is             missing           several out-of-place             pauses.
 
2013-02-15 02:04:10 AM  

Lee451: As someone who became a Trekker in 1968, I have to place TOS on a pedestal.


I love that f;ans think using this term somehow legitimizes it more than "trekkies."
 
2013-02-15 08:49:19 AM  
Mugato: Yes, it is clear his character was not fully developed at that point.

/Trekker;Trekkie. It is still one of the most influential TV shows in  history.
 
2013-02-15 10:44:12 AM  

peterthx: Jim from Saint Paul: I 100% enjoyed this:

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

better then Generations, Insurection and Nemesis. It's on par with First Contact.

Yes, William shattner ghost writing his own masturabtory fantasies is more entertaing then Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis.

If you think he wrote ANYTHING of that novel I have an actual starship to sell you, cheap.

/not on par with ST:FC


You're correct, it was better than First Contact.
 
2013-02-15 01:21:56 PM  

Shadowknight: Lee451: As someone who became a Trekker in 1968, I have to place TOS on a pedestal.

I love that f;ans think using this term somehow legitimizes it more than "trekkies."


That could be because trekker is what the fans tend to call themselves, and trekkie is what pompous blowhards call them to try to dismiss them as irrelevant.
 
2013-02-15 02:01:31 PM  
chewielouie:
You're correct, it was better than First Contact.

cache.ohinternet.com


"We are V'Ger!"
/aware of what Roddenberry supposedly said about the Borg homeworld
 
2013-02-15 04:28:45 PM  

Madbassist1: Shadowknight: Lee451: As someone who became a Trekker in 1968, I have to place TOS on a pedestal.

I love that f;ans think using this term somehow legitimizes it more than "trekkies."

That could be because trekker is what the fans tend to call themselves, and trekkie is what pompous blowhards call them to try to dismiss them as irrelevant.


See, I don't care that people like Star Trek.  I don't even care if you want to dress up and go to conventions.  Everyone has their obsessions, and someone as geeky as me shouldn't pass judgement.  And the show itself, dated as it may be, was groundbreaking and created modern sci-fi as we know it.  I don't care for it, but we wouldn't have Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, or any of the other properties we know today without it.

But getting all pedantic about a term like "trekkie" or "trekker" is just idiotic.  It doesn't lend any credibility one way or another.

But, I suppose that particular war is lost.  Apparently someone at Google is a "trekker," since it's an accepted word on Chrome while "trekkie" is flagged as a misspelling.
 
2013-02-16 05:14:58 AM  

Shadowknight: But, I suppose that particular war is lost. Apparently someone at Google is a "trekker," since it's an accepted word on Chrome while "trekkie" is flagged as a misspelling.


Ouch really? I was just being a dickhead with you, but is that is farked up, right there.
 
Displayed 156 of 156 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report