New movie Kirk and Spock pic.

[Hector]

Remember How Star Trek always tried to slip in a moral message? Didn't they try to teach tolerence, and open Mindedness? Well...it looks like they failed with Their very own Fans.

[The Bat]

I'm all for open-mindedness-
But this is personal--

For those who feel optimistic about this new movie.
I ENVY you.
I wish i could see other actors and a new treatment of this material ,
but , i cant. The interpersonal relationship between the 3 main characters
is historic. re-capturing that is gonna be tough--
Like putting lightning back into a bottle.
Very talented people have tried.


I totally understand that thinking...Nimoy & Shatner ARE Kirk & Spock to Me!! But in spite of that fact...I still chose to be optimistic.


Here's some Star Trek wisdom for the nail-biters: Having is not such a pleasing thing, after all, as wanting.

Great quote! Spock to Stonn, in "Amok Time"!

[jaypiscopo]

Don't get me wrong, I'm nervous that they could possibly screw up my beloved Trek. But I'm not going to judge the movie based on some pre-release stills It's amazing that you can tell that this movie is **** based on the above mentioned stills , JOHN

Hey- if its good- ill see it-
but im not gonna run out and wait in line for it when its released-
for me- if there is an argument here- it's not about
prejudging a movie based on stills-
a picture does paint a thousand words though-
its whether its valid to hold your own ideas about
a myth-
without being accused of closed mindedness-

this could be good gameshow-
show stills from movies
and people have to guess whether the movie sucked or not-
based on imdb ratings

Remember "The Legend of The Lone Ranger" with Clinton Spilsbury-
I knew that was going to suck based on the stills-
Throw me a parade!

[Mikey]

YouTube - I'm Captain Kirk!

m

[fallensaviour]

I quote our beloved Enterprise Captain:



CAPTAIN KIRK: Now, now, Mr. Scott. Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant.

Exactly!!!

[Tyme2tyme]

Like putting lightning back into a bottle.
Very talented people have tried.
Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes
Bryan Singer's Superman-
Those and many other remakes have really dissapointed me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm nervous that they could possibly screw up my beloved Trek. But I'm not going to judge the movie based on some pre-release stills

If I was starving and offered a spoonful of ****, I still wouldn't eat it.

It's amazing that you can tell that this movie is **** based on the above mentioned stills , JOHN

[jaypiscopo]

I'm all for open-mindedness-
But this is personal--
It's perfectly valid for someone to hold onto a personal image of a myth.
For me, Batman NEVER had nipples on his uniform.

As to multiple actors playing a single character-
In most cases ,actors are interpreting literary figures--
James Bond, Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes- and the like
The character is relatively developed- the actor, if properly cast, just has to interpret the meaning the writer intended.
Roddenberry was collaborating to huge extent-
The kirk, spock and mccoy characters were developed in large part by the actors themselves.
Nimoy invented the neck pinch- right?

For those who feel optimistic about this new movie.
I ENVY you.
I wish i could see other actors and a new treatment of this material ,
but , i cant. The interpersonal relationship between the 3 main characters
is historic. re-capturing that is gonna be tough--
Like putting lightning back into a bottle.
Very talented people have tried.
Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes
Bryan Singer's Superman-
Those and many other remakes have really dissapointed me.
as to this movie- if i hear its ok-- i'll rent it
in the meantime. Thank God for Star Trek Remastered
Here's some Star Trek wisdom for the nail-biters: Having is not such a pleasing thing, after all, as wanting.

[darklord1967]

Remember How Star Trek always tried to slip in a moral message? Didn't they try to teach tolerence, and open Mindedness? Well...it looks like they failed with Their very own Fans.

I quote our beloved Enterprise Captain:



CAPTAIN KIRK: Now, now, Mr. Scott. Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant.

[The Bat]

Remember How Star Trek always tried to slip in a moral message? Didn't they try to teach tolerence, and open Mindedness? Well...it looks like they failed with Their very own Fans.

[Mikey]

fans really need to just sit back and enjoy what they got.

If I was starving and offered a spoonful of ****, I still wouldn't eat it.

[Iron_fox85]

also you fans need to lighten up. this is for a new generation. images may look horrible for you but to me i am loving it i am gonna watch the film first then judge it for myself. fans really need to just sit back and enjoy what they got.

[Iron_fox85]

kickass!!!

[darklord1967]

Kirk never existed before William Shatner.

Indiana Jones never existed before Harrison Ford either. But that didn't stop other actors from playing him and chronicling his adventures at other stages of his life.

[darklord1967]

DarkLord. . . .not disagreeing with you, but observing. . . didn't you have a problem with Batman wearing an armoured suit. . . as it just didn't fit with your beloved classic Batman. Aren't trekies by that logic intitled to the same with the ship design?

Well two things:

1) My point about Trek purists not giving the new film a chance had nothing to do with an updated ship design. It had to do with their seeming inability to see anyone else but Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelly in the roles of the classic Trek characters.

However, as for ship, design, I understand (and to some extent agree with) a certain amount of logic regarding an insistence on continuity. I'm not sure that the new film should boast an all-new ulta modern Enterprise, especially if it's a time travel tale which features Leonard Nimoy as Spock (which is a clear indication that established classic Trek continuity should probably NOT be discarded... even if this IS a re-boot)





2) My objection to Batman wearing bulky (overly ornate) movie armor was rooted in two fronts:

A) Firstly, there was my belief that the character (as established in the comics) was not nearly as concerned about self-preservation as he was about mobility, speed, stealth, and agility... all of which I felt the armor seriously compromised.

Aesthetically, the character intended a very simple organic look to his uniform that was contradicted by the overly sculpted look of the movie uniforms (especially after Batman Returns).

So this first objection was based on a violation of the established character's psychological intent for his selected uniform when establishing a crime-fighting night persona.

Even if I had an issue with the "new" Enterprise design (which I do not, because I have not seen it), there would be no link between the design of the ship and the "psychological intentions" of the Trek characters.





AND

B) My belief that the "realistic" justifications for The Batman to wear armor in the movies simply held no water and were illogical since it was a surreal comic book based series of films to begin with. I did not believe that the rules of our "realistic" world necessarily had to apply in a Batman movie since it's a fantasy action film.

Also there was the issue of how little protection the armor seemed to afford the character in the films as evidenced by dog bites, fingernail stabs, etc... all of this, despite the fact that the kevlar armor is stated as being bullet, slash, and stab resistant.

So this objection is based on in-universe logic established by the filmmakers themselves.


I was clear to say, even then, that if necessary, I could have accepted the Batman movie armor IF the in-universe logic for its use were at least consistent with the "rules of realism" as established in the films themselves, and IF it aesthetically fit with the character's needs and aesthetic intentions (scare people, simple organic night-creature image... not "techy")

[Tyme2tyme]

When Sean Connery WAS James Bond, the concensus was that nobody else could play the part. Over the years many actors (George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan) played the part to varying success. I personally considered Mr. Connery as the true version of Bond. These days, I have to say that Daniel Craig has raised the bar and just may be better than the "original" Bond. I'm giving the new cast a chance!, JOHN