Star Trek discussion

[Chyron8472]

There is a thread about Star Wars, so I'm creating one about Star Trek.
Anything Star Trek, not just games.


First, I've been looking around for downloadable Star Trek games to no avail. It would seem that I'm not the best at taking care of my old PC game media, and as such am not able to readily locate my Armada, Armada II, Away Team or A Final Unity CDs.

Fortunately, I often made disc images of games that I own, but it still would be rather nice if I could buy these online, or to expand my library with such as Starfleet Command or Bridge Commander.

[DAISHI]

Some of the old Star Trek Original Series adventure games were tops. That 25th Anniversary one is awesome.

[Everlast]

You never could tell the difference between a dicrystalline ethoriter and a dicrystalline etherizer being implemented to the FTL drive core when it was being used in the enterprise!

If someone can explain me how this can be explained according to the anthropic priniciple i will give you a subspace transgenic biopunk i bought from a Star Trek store.

:p

[harrisonpink]

You never could tell the difference between a dicrystalline ethoriter and a dicrystalline etherizer being implemented to the FTL drive core when it was being used in the enterprise!

If someone can explain me how this can be explained according to the anthropic priniciple i will give you a subspace transgenic biopunk i bought from a Star Trek store.

:p

It's really quite obvious. One sits directly behind the deflector dish and enables the ship to take tachyon pulses and "invert" them. Any time Picard uses an "inverse tachyon beam", it's directly caused by the dicrystalline ethoriter. The dicrystalline etherizer attaches to the front of the ram scoop allowing ionized hydrogen particles to be collected and used to flood plasma conduits in case of warp core breach.

It's simple, really.

[LuigiHann]

I was never really into Star Trek, but since the shows popped up on Netflix I've been watching them constantly. I like TNG a lot, and the other series are all okay. TOS holds up surprisingly well. I watched one episode of the Animated Series, and I think I'm done with that. I like Enterprise more than I expected, but I'm kind of sick of it by now. Still not crazy about Voyager, although it slowly grows on me. DS9 isn't on Netflix yet so I've only seen a couple of episodes of that.

I like how every episode of TNG seems to be genuinely thought-provoking in some way, in terms of universal issues that you can relate to. Voyager seems to be trying to do that, it just doesn't do it nearly as consistently or as expertly. Enterprise occasionally tries but it seems to mostly be straightforward adventure stories by comparison.

Interestingly, the first episode I ever saw of any Star Trek series was several years ago, and it was the TNG episode "Family," in which Picard visits his brother in France, and Worf is visited by his parents. Just that one episode, completely out of context. It's a good episode now that I know what was going on, but I'm pretty sure it's one of the worst possible entry points to the series. Not sure how that happened. I basically completely forgot about the experience until I rewatched it on Netflix.

I'm starting to slow down now, since I've watched every Q episode, nearly every cross-series cameo episode, every Borg episode (of TNG, not all the Voyager ones yet), and most of the episodes that I've seen recommended in various top 10 lists. If anybody here has any suggestions of hidden gems among the shows, I'll check them out.

[Chyron8472]

I do love DS9. There's a lot of character development and recurring guest stars. It also discusses religious belief, which TNG unfortunately treats as archaic.

I'm actually a fan of all the series, except for TOS. Many of TOS' plotlines are extremely similar to each other (eg. an alien/robot attacking or invading the ship; a robot killing/controlling all life it encounters which can only be defeated by telling it that itself is evil; the away team on a planet is being killed off except for the senior staff; etc.) and it may be renown for addressing certain social issues of its time but I'm not old enough for those to speak to me like they might have to my parents.

And of course there's the rule that the even numbered Trek movies are the best (ie. Wrath of Khan, Voyage Home, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, and Nemesis) with the exception of the newest movie, Star Trek XI (2009), which is one of my favorites.

[DAISHI]

Enterprise started strong, broke down in the middle then picked up a bit. There were two or three key cast members who disagreed with the producers and directors about the direction of the show, which was also tied to network meddling.

DS9 sort of lost the point of Star Trek, in a good and bad sense, depending on where you stand. If you like Battle Star Galactica and Babylon 5 and the more action oriented (while still meaningful) direction, then those were good for you. If you enjoyed the more idealistic TOS and TNG shows that tried to portray a more idealistic/ambitious humanity and that focused on capsule shows in which classic science fiction ideals were written, you were one of those that was irked.

[LuigiHann]

And of course there's the rule that the even numbered Trek movies are the best (ie. Wrath of Khan, Voyage Home, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, and Nemesis) with the exception of the newest movie, Star Trek XI (2009), which is one of my favorites.

I haven't seen it yet, but I've heard that Nemesis was relatively terrible, so the alternating-curse kind of broke at that point. I'm still mildly interested in seeing it. I've seen all of the other "good" films, as well as Star Trek 3 and Generations, both of which I thought were not that bad. And I found The Voyage Home to just be absurd, though it had a couple of good moments I just couldn't get over the whale thing.

[Friar]

I never agreed with the rule in the first place. I founf The original film being better than Voyage home, for instance.

Also DS9 is the best series of the lot that I've seen (excluding Voyager, enterprise and animated. I've heard they weren't that great anyway.). I felt that TNG was limited with what they could do. Every other episode seemed to be about somwone getting possessed by some gaseous alien who boarded. DS9 provided better character development and could regularly introduce new characters and have old ones return.

[DAISHI]

The reason people didn't like the first movie was because it meandered while pandering to the Space Odyssey crowd. Was just too indulgent.

[gamer247]

I think the sequel to the 2009 movie is coming out next summer.

[Shadowknight1]

I haven't seen it yet, but I've heard that Nemesis was relatively terrible, so the alternating-curse kind of broke at that point. I'm still mildly interested in seeing it. I've seen all of the other "good" films, as well as Star Trek 3 and Generations, both of which I thought were not that bad. And I found The Voyage Home to just be absurd, though it had a couple of good moments I just couldn't get over the whale thing.

Nemesis had potential. It would have succeeded had they given the movie to Frakes, but instead they let a non-fan direct, and then Rick Berman bled the heart out of the movie by chopping away at it to get the movie "just under two hours". Yes, that was his goal, as moronic as it sounds.

I loved Star Trek 2009, and I can't wait for the next one. I'm glad that they're taking their time with it and working for a better movie, not just a rush-job to please the suits.

Oh, and best DS9 episode? In my opinion, "Far Beyond the Stars" is a winner.

[Chyron8472]

Fans complain about Nemesis because Data dies. There are books and comics out that apparently make B-4 into Data again with the information transfer Data did in the movie.

Well, you know what? Data wanted to be able to die. Have none of these people ever seen the 2-part TNG episode "Time's Arrow"? In it, Data's head is found in a cavern confirming that Data would at some point go back in time and then die. Geordi asks Data about it, and Data says that he wants to be mortal. He doesn't want to out-live all his friends countless times over. He finds comfort in his apparent mortality. Further, Data is on a quest to find his own humanity and many consider there to be no better show of one's humanity than to sacrifice oneself for the sake of another as Data did in Nemesis.

All of this befits Data. I don't see why people have a problem with it.

[Chyron8472]

DS9 sort of lost the point of Star Trek, in a good and bad sense, depending on where you stand. If you like Battle Star Galactica and Babylon 5 and the more action oriented (while still meaningful) direction, then those were good for you. If you enjoyed the more idealistic TOS and TNG shows that tried to portray a more idealistic/ambitious humanity and that focused on capsule shows in which classic science fiction ideals were written, you were one of those that was irked.

I like TNG and DS9 both. I never could get into other sci-fi shows. They're just not Star Trek. I can't... I don't know what it is, but I love Trek and don't care much for any of the other shows. Granted, I didn't watch DS9 much when it was on the air, but that was because the series started when TNG was still running, ended when Voyager was already running, and the first iteration of the title theme/opening credits was too long/slow. Then I went to college and took time to watch every episode online, and now I love it.

In behind the scenes footage of DS9, they talk about how not all the galaxy is idyllic such as humanity and Earth had become by that time. Other races in the galaxy have problems that haven't been solved yet, and chief among them are the Bajorans, who had just come out of a 50 year long occupation by Cardassia.

[Vainamoinen]

All of this befits Data. I don't see why people have a problem with it.

I found Star Trek X to be seriously boring (after a fabulous Star Trek VIII and an OK Star Trek IX). My critique would not be that Data dies, but that it adds nothing to the narrative and that they essentially use his twin brother as a cheap alternative, so actually no great loss is felt. That was storytelling at its worst. But, granted, I only saw that movie once and never felt the need to do it again.

[Alcoremortis]

I think Star Trek X is the only of the TNG movies I've seen. All I remember was being extremely confused and also mildly bored, especially since I'd just watched all the TOS films.

[MusicallyInspired]

I never understood the appeal of DS9. It was so dramatically different than anything else Star Trek that was ever made. It wasn't about exploration, befriending new worlds, discovering strange phenomena. It was about politics between the Federation, Bajorans, and Cardassians. And then shortly after it became a war story about the Dominion. In light of those facts, it's almost exactly like the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Done better, no doubt, but still not my cup of tea. I never did warm up to any of the characters either. Just not likeable at all. Except for Worf when they brought him on.

I loved Voyager. People say the first couple seasons were the best, and while I agree they were good, I think that the series only got better as it went along. It had its drab points which is why it's not the best series, but it definitely had enough highlights to keep it afloat for me. TNG will always be the best, though.

[corruptbiggins]

I have to say I'm just about nerd level obsessed with Star Trek, though not as much in recent years (mainly due to the lack of anything new). And I've never bothered myself with the animated series. And I find it a struggle to watch most of the original series. But I grew up with all the other series and most of the films and love them all to varying degrees from DS9 at the top and Enterprise at the bottom (only just though, it's a close thing with Voyager but as a whole I enjoyed Voyager more than Enterprise, despite the huge advantage Scott Bakula gave Ent.). I watch those series at least once a year, always leaving DS9 for last as there isn't much in the TV & film world that I like more than the last 9 episodes of the last season (hell, it's hard to beat the entire last 3 seasons, especially the 7th).

As for the films, I do enjoy watching them all, again some more than others. After my most recent spell of going through them all a few weeks ago I got to pondering (again) my order of preference. This is what I came up with (just using numbers as I'm lazy): 6, 8, 11, 2, 3, 1, 7, 4, 10, 9, 5.

[DAISHI]

I like TNG and DS9 both. I never could get into other sci-fi shows. They're just not Star Trek. I can't... I don't know what it is, but I love Trek and don't care much for any of the other shows. Granted, I didn't watch DS9 much when it was on the air, but that was because the series started when TNG was still running, ended when Voyager was already running, and the first iteration of the title theme/opening credits was too long/slow. Then I went to college and took time to watch every episode online, and now I love it.

In behind the scenes footage of DS9, they talk about how not all the galaxy is idyllic such as humanity and Earth had become by that time. Other races in the galaxy have problems that haven't been solved yet, and chief among them are the Bajorans, who had just come out of a 50 year long occupation by Cardassia.

I like both of them for different reasons, but DS9 and Voyager certainly took Rodenberry's concept of an evolving humanity that had drawn nearer to a peaceful ideal and hammered on it. Obviously you've thrust that humanity into a conflict with the Bajoran and the Cardassians so not all things can be fruit and flowers (and interestingly enough that conflict formed the basis for conflicts in Voyager at the start of its run), but there's still a bit of that grandiose concept that got gnawed away in the process. Again, whether that's for better or worse is up to perception. I had plenty of B5 friends who loved DS9 but disliked TNG. Though for my money B5 is far better than DS9.

[MusicallyInspired]

Another thing DS9 did (and now also Star Trek Online) is pit the Klingons against the Federation. Isn't that, like, impossible considering a certain episode in TOS where an alien species forced the two to co-exist in peace because they were too dangerous to the galaxy to be at war? And threatened to take action if they broke that peace? I've never seen the episode myself, but I've heard people talk about it.

Also, is J. J. Abrams EVER going to make those other Star Trek movies?? Last I heard all the actors had signed up for a 3-movie contract. Star Trek the movie was released...and then nothing. Just Abrams saying "I don't want to do anything unless I'm really excited about it" He shouldn't have gotten everybody's hopes up.

I loved his Star Trek. Nice and fresh. And a perfect way to reboot the series. Alternate universe. And for everyone else there's still Star Trek Online.

[Alcoremortis]

I'm watching Star Trek RIGHT NOW! (TOS)

Discuss.

[PimPamPet]

I love TOS. It's my favorite Trek series, just barely ahead of TNG. Even though the writing definitely got stale by the third season, the characters were so well-balanced and engrossing they managed to keep it afloat.

Anything post-TOS is a different animal to me. I still love TNG, DS9 and Enterprise, but they don't feel the same as classic Trek. Maybe it's just because I grew up with TOS (one of the few things me and my dad share our enthusiasm about).

I hated Voyager. I found none of the characters likable and many episodes felt like repeats from stories/themes that had already been covered in the earlier series. The extremely wooden acting didn't help either. Boring!

I've also never agreed with the theory that only the even-numbered movies were any good. I loved The Motion Picture and The Search for Spock, whereas I felt The Voyage Home and Nemesis were particularly lacking (I still don't get why TVH is so popular, it's completely ridiculous).

Bad Star Trek video games have always been a dime a dozen (Star Wars games are the same way), but I agree that 25th Anniversary was pretty damn good.

^ Btw, Alcoremortis, are you watching the classic versions or the remastered episodes of TOS? I still can't decide which I like better. The new version obviously has the advantage in terms of picture clarity, but there is a certain charm to the old special effects that is lost in the CG adaptations IMO.

[Alcoremortis]

I'm watching the remastered ones because those were the ones I could find. They're pretty decent in my opinion. I've had more than my share silly special effects with Doctor Who anyways.

Also, in my opinion, The Voyage Home is great because it's ridiculous. I really love it when shows/movies don't take themselves so seriously. And the humor in that episode was spot on, making it the most memorable (and quotable) Star Trek movie that I have seen. Then again, I am a Doctor Who fan first and foremost so I guess I've always taken a bit of a lighter view of Scifi. I don't really understand super drama and seriousness, being a light hearted soul of joy and innocence.

[MusicallyInspired]

Star Trek 25th Anniversary, Star Trek Judgment Rites, and Star Trek TNG A Final Unity are all fantastic games and all with the original voice actors filling their roles. I still weep for Secret of Vulcan Fury.

[DAISHI]

Star Trek 25th Anniversary, Star Trek Judgment Rites, and Star Trek TNG A Final Unity are all fantastic games and all with the original voice actors filling their roles. I still weep for Secret of Vulcan Fury.

GREAT GAMES. Think I'll do a Let's Play of 25th Anniversary :)

Final Unity used to flabbergast me as a kid!

[DAISHI]

Another thing DS9 did (and now also Star Trek Online) is pit the Klingons against the Federation. Isn't that, like, impossible considering a certain episode in TOS where an alien species forced the two to co-exist in peace because they were too dangerous to the galaxy to be at war? And threatened to take action if they broke that peace? I've never seen the episode myself, but I've heard people talk about it.



The Organian Peace Treaty, imposed by a society of beings so advanced they could halt the actions of Humans and Klingons throughout the Galaxy. As far as I understand, the Organians continued their advanced evolution to a point that they departed the Galaxy.

[Chyron8472]

I also like Star Trek Armada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Armada) 1 and 2, and Star Trek Away Team (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Away_Team).

I have heard Starfleet Command 1 and 2 are good, but have never played them.


You know, another reason why I think I never liked TOS so much is because I never really cared for various overacted scenes (such as in "The Naked Time" when Sulu is attacking people with a rapier in the corridor). I guess that's another advantage TNG has over TOS for me: Patrick Stewart is a much better actor than William Shatner.

Don't get me wrong, he was great in the movies (except Star Trek V, of course) but in the show, he's just not nearly as good as Picard.

[Shadowknight1]

Also, is J. J. Abrams EVER going to make those other Star Trek movies?? Last I heard all the actors had signed up for a 3-movie contract. Star Trek the movie was released...and then nothing. Just Abrams saying "I don't want to do anything unless I'm really excited about it" He shouldn't have gotten everybody's hopes up.

I loved his Star Trek. Nice and fresh. And a perfect way to reboot the series. Alternate universe. And for everyone else there's still Star Trek Online.

Number 2 is in pre-production now and JJ has confirmed he will be directing it.

[MusicallyInspired]

FINALLY some news. Thank you! :)

[Shadowknight1]

You're welcome. Of course, going into pre-production now mean that we're looking at either December 2012 or Summer 2013 as release dates.

[MusicallyInspired]

It's better than..."sometime in the future".

[doodo!]

I'm going to be ignorant. The new TOS sucks, it takes a 50 year universe, spanning over intertwined series and all the sudden just reboots everything. The only thing Star Trek about it is the characters, and even they are totally inaccurate and reinvisioned and full of plot holes that under artistic license, some guy can just say it's my own vision.

The franchise is 50 years old, the universe is huge, you don't do that to a thriving universe, franchise, that reptilian mother fucker. It's one of the worse things I've ever seen with film, for some guy to come along and claim the entire star trek universe as his alternate universe. It's a kick in the balls and I don't understand how you guys can go on and on about star wars but arent enraged by this atrocity!

He took Gene's vision and made his own universe...that doesn't bother any of you? It bothers me...who does this visual effects twat think he is? It's an outrage...and you forgive too easily...

It doesn't even feel like a Star Trek movie, and they cram Leonard into just to remind us that they are raping the original series and entire franchise, they're like...remember that other Star Trek universe, that has nothing to do with this stupid fake universe because it's some BS alternate universe...??

[Alcoremortis]

A well known news source begs to disagree.

Completely accurate and serious news report. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02LgdXVkXgM)

[DAISHI]

A well known news source begs to disagree.

Completely accurate and serious news report. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02LgdXVkXgM)

That is gold.

GOLD!

[doodo!]

It is not a Star Trek movie, doesn't feel like one, doesn't make me think, it's a insult and a disgrace , and if he had any true vision he wouldn't lean on some body's elses's and rape it to be his own sex slave...

Bad movie, poor poor concept, weak, let star trek die please so we can bury it in some decency. It totally derailed the universe and that's unacceptable.

Who the hell does this guy think he is?

CGI is crap, who cares? Because it's eye candy that means something is going for it? Please...


This is not Gene's vision, it's JJ's money whore vision, rebooting an entire trekkie universe. If you like this movie, sorry, you're a disgrace to trekkies around the world.

He took the universe as his own, he has no right, damn right fans own it more than he does. If he had any creativity he'd make his own movie series, instead of raping something as famous as Rod Sterling work...

He can go dig himself a hole. People call him a visionary, I think he's a HACK

[Chyron8472]

The problem with the Prime universe (from whence came old Spock) is that there is so much established canon spanning so many shows and movies, that it limits a screenwriter's ability to create new and fresh material without stepping all over the toes of the rest of the canon material.

The new movie's plot inconsistencies and apparent differences occuring prior to the Narada's arrival not withstanding, the TNG series outright explains that creating a new universe does not negate the old one. As Data himself said in the episode Parallels, "For any event there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determine which outcomes will follow, but there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen do happen in alternate quantum realities."

So, to follow the events of an alternate universe doesn't negate the Prime universe, but it does allow for new and fresh stories to be told that aren't bound by every previously established rule regarding the events of the Prime timeline.

I, for one, understand and support what has been done.

[Alcoremortis]

The problem with the Prime universe (from whence came old Spock) is that there is so much established canon spanning so many shows and movies, that it limits a screenwriter's ability to create new and fresh material without stepping all over the toes of the rest of the canon material.

The new movie's plot inconsistencies and apparent differences occuring prior to the Narada's arrival not withstanding, the TNG series outright explains that creating a new universe does not negate the old one. As Data himself said in the episode Parallels, "For any event there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determine which outcomes will follow, but there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen do happen in alternate quantum realities."

So, to follow the events of an alternate universe doesn't negate the Prime universe, but it does allow for new and fresh stories to be told that aren't bound by every previously established rule regarding the events of the Prime timeline.

I, for one, understand and support what has been done.

Quoted for truth, I couldn't have put it better myself with a hundred silly pictures and videos.

[LuigiHann]

I kind of wish that the new movie series could spin off into a new TV series, since a TV show would allow them more opportunities for throwbacks and homages and cameos. But really I have no problem at all with the "time travel reboot." I think it's a clever solution to the continuity problem, and Spock Prime's role in the film was handled quite respectfully of the original series.

I mean, probably the best Star Trek movie so far, First Contact, was based around an idea that required them to take a character from TOS and recast him and totally redesign the character beyond recognition, and it was perfect.

I really like most of the new cast, I hope that in the sequel they work a bit more on making Sulu resemble his TOS self a bit more. He never had a huge role in the series but George Takei sort of brought a cool dignity to the role and sometimes a really cool sense of dry humor, and John Cho doesn't really convey that at all for me. It was nice that he got to fence, though. The rest of them all do a pretty good job of being what I would expect them to be.

And speaking of accurate and serious videos, I do sort of feel bad for William Shatner being left out of the film. Here's his reaction to the recasting of Captain Kirk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRQvfMX38q8

[Chyron8472]

As I recall, in the behind the scenes section of the Star Trek (2009) DVD, Abrams talks about how Star Wars is comparatively more action and Star Trek is comparatively more cerebral/intelligent, so what he thought the Star Trek franchise needed was to have a bit of Star Wars injected into Trek.

[DAISHI]

I understand where Abrams is coming from and I liked his movie, but I miss old Trek.

[Alcoremortis]

Hopefully, they don't inject too much Star Wars into Trek. I don't want to be having "Kirk shot second" arguments or anything like that.

[MusicallyInspired]

Star Trek was long dying. It needed a reboot. I still think it was the best way to do it. And like I said earlier, there's always Star Trek Online which takes place in the prime timeline 40 years after Nemesis and acknowledges the events of Abrams' Star Trek before the time travel.

[doodo!]

You guys are missing the point. Star Trek is great and all but it's something its not now, it's been diminished to a flashy space action film with little intellectual property left for it, it doesn't make an impressive quantum argument for itself, fans of the film do that for it.

If anything it takes beloved characters and rewrite their entire backgrounds and uses it as a excuse to make a new Star Trek movie. He's a hack....

Who the FCK cares what he thinks alternate universe or not he's hack, he took the franchise as his own, made lame excuses under artistic license, changed, ruined, hacked everything Star Trek is about. He should of used his own material but instead he took nostalgia and ruined it...

Any true fan would be like , meh...

Stupid changes, as bad as Jar Jar and little Anakin Skywalker. Oh My God...

The argument he has made is weak, and ultimately self serving and it comes down to him milking a franchise in his own vision , and he single handedly destroyed everything star trek stood for to make his alternate universe BS that Hollywood will now feed off of. *BEEEP* him!

In the 60s, Gene had such amazing , deeply intellectual ideas that they couldn't even air the episodes! This guy is no visionary, people give him too strong of a case, argument, when in actual fact his argument, case is WEAK and he is a WEAK artist milking nostalgia and warping and perverting everything that nostalgia is about.

*BEEP* him!

I rather see it die, honestly. I rather would, than some half brained artist come along, take Gene's TOS and just create his alternate Star Trek. WTF?

He should have thought of something more original or made his own movie series inspired off of star Trek, I could have respected that.

URGH! What the hell....what the hell?

Updating the content for future generations would have been one thing, but warping and perverting the material to a flashy, low substance, I've seen it once in my life film,ooooh it's modern and all colorful....oooooh. WHAT A INSULT! It's not even the same sort of material as before, it lacks most if not all intellectual substance a film could have!

It focuses on writting the characters in a common, practical , mostly expected way, that is typical of movies, but not even true to the star trek character universe. *BEEEEEEP* him

There are no real similarities here , there is no star trek, it's not rebooted, it's not saved. It's ARGHGHGHGHHGHGHGHGHGH!

[Chyron8472]

What you're saying Doodo is that you're a more philosophical/cerebral kind of person, and from your point of view, shows from the Prime universe are largely more thought provoking while this new movie is conversely filled with eye candy.

I can see why you might be upset, but I really do disagree. Star Trek needs to do more than appeal to only its hardcore fanbase. I've recently watched several behind the scenes clips on youtube for this movie, and at one point they talk about how they had various people such as a very hardcore Trek fan, a moderate fan, a casual fan, and a newbie to the franchise and how they tried to develop Trek such that it would have appeal to each one of these people.

Where I come at it is this: I loved Enterprise, and I was very disappointed when they cancelled it after season 4 (when TNG, VOY and DS9 had seven). Unfortunately, I could see how one might not get into it if they weren't already a Trek fan held over from other shows (given the level of wonderful fanservice), and so I can see why Trek needs to evolve if it plans to stay alive and successful for future installments. If the existing fanbase can't support Enterprise past the fourth season, then Trek needs to widen its fanbase by creating wider appeal.

[doodo!]

I'm really impressed, you showed me respect even when I trashed something you enjoy, love. Impressive! I'm very impressed, most people would have attacked me. I don't want to imply I'm cerebral philosophical, my friend. I'm very impressed.

I let myself go on this, just to see that interaction. I hadn't expected such a impressive result. Thank you.

I feel strong vibrations in you, the force is strong with this one (XD) . Wow, that was not a typical or anticipated response to such a rant.

[Chyron8472]

I'm really impressed, you showed me respect even when I trashed something you enjoy, love. Impressive! I'm very impressed, most people would have attacked me.
You're not required to like the new movie. I'm just saying that there is evidence to support that Trek can't survive if it doesn't find appeal to the market, which apparently Enterprise did not (much to my dismay.)

I don't want to imply I'm cerebral philosophical, my friend. I'm very impressed. But you are. Why else would you have so many "musings" on these forums? As such, I can see why something with less philosophy and more action would have lesser appeal.

However, [insert humorously facetious "I'm right and you're wrong" line here] :D

[MusicallyInspired]

You...are a strange duck, doodo. I don't take anything you say seriously. I can't.

[Shadowknight1]

You know what doodo, I'm going to say that you apparently have no idea what you're talking about. Every person that's been involved in Star Trek over the past 50 years has said that it has remained true to Roddenberry's vision. And that's including Gene's son.

Also, a lot of old school Trek fans enjoyed it. Second time I went to see it, an older gentleman was sitting nearby and he said as the credits rolled, "I've been a fan of Star Trek since the first episode aired, and this was fantastic."

So yeah...what is it that he saw in the film that you apparently didn't?

[corruptbiggins]

Speaking about the new film, I'm actually pleased that Damon Lindelof is involved with writing it this time around as I feel that he was one of the better writers for Lost (even including the finale) and the script/story can only benefit from his involvement.

[Friar]

Well, even if the reboot wasn't to the liking of some of the die-hard fans, they do have hundreds of episodes to fall back on to watch instead.

Personally, I view films on their own merits. Sure Star Trek XI wasn't pure star trek, but it was still a fantastic film. I loved it. (Although not as much as I liked "First Contact, the motion picture or the one with the refugees.) That's probably the reason I love the Star wars prequels. Sure they're different from the originals (focussing on one man's life struggles as he turns to the darkside, turning against hundreds of allies, instead of a small group turning against an evil dictator from the get go. One trilogy is all about emotions, whilst the other more about purpose.)

[doodo!]

You know what doodo, I'm going to say that you apparently have no idea what you're talking about. Every person that's been involved in Star Trek over the past 50 years has said that it has remained true to Roddenberry's vision. And that's including Gene's son.

Also, a lot of old school Trek fans enjoyed it. Second time I went to see it, an older gentleman was sitting nearby and he said as the credits rolled, "I've been a fan of Star Trek since the first episode aired, and this was fantastic."

So yeah...what is it that he saw in the film that you apparently didn't?

You named one person, not really convincing, even if it's his son, who didn't write episodes, mind you or work on them, as far as I'm concerned. Not the mention the fat check that went to the family.

And a lot of old school Trek fans didn't enjoy it.

Wheres your argument? I don't see it...

Peace....

Musically Inspired, the way I look at I'm not glued to any word, moment, my whole life is a illusion or lie, or acting, or speaking, and then speaking like math it adds up or subtracts from idea and then I interpret things in my own way and this whole reality is rather pointless, because I honestly don't even feel truly alive.

[Chyron8472]

a lot of old school Trek fans didn't enjoy it.

Such as?

I loved it. (Although not as much as I liked [...] the one with the refugees.)

Which one is that? Generations? Insurrection? The Final Frontier? Wrath of Khan?

Only one of these has "refugees" in it, but they play such a small part in the overall movie that I'm confused.

[Alcoremortis]

Such as?

Um...lots of people, but you wouldn't know any of them and I don't talk about them because that would be mean.

<.<

>.>

[doodo!]

Such as?




But my friend, couldn't I ask the same thing, I could say some random guy in the theater said I've been a star trek fan all my life (assuming I didn't make it up to argue) and I loved this movie, it's better than Wrath of Khan, hot damn..

Wouldn't really add anything. I mean it's implied, the truth, the real truth about reality? Arguing is logically flawed. I know that sounds stupid, BS, but it's more or less true for most things, especial simple things like a movie where opinions aren't unified even though they aren't really divided.

It's implied people like the movie, people don't, if it weren't implied we'd all be exactly the same. :)

[Friar]

Such as?



Which one is that? Generations? Insurrection? The Final Frontier? Wrath of Khan?

Only one of these has "refugees" in it, but they play such a small part in the overall movie that I'm confused.
"Such as?" Doodo. :P
Insurrection. Where the enterprise interfere with the planned movement of a small civilization and they all turn into refugees trudging through the countryside. Then worf goes through puberty.

And Generations holds a special place in my heart for being the first piece of star trek I ever saw.

[doodo!]

Does it really matter? My family doesn't like it that much, Trekkie, can quote the episodes and knows all the trivia and he's pretty involved, and then my brother another Trekkie doesn't like it. But my sister and my other brother do, and so does my mother who is a Trekkie herself .

But, it's the same type of argument as :

A. This is not a ufo, it's some jewish kid's frisbee
B. Prove it
C. can't...

See what I mean, it's just two sets of opinions to one issue that don't ultimately prove anything. So arguments of this nature are really just designed to share an opinion.

I'm sure people enjoy it, but my brother a Trekkie doesn't, my father is sort of meh about it. And I am a some what Trekkie, not enough to be tried , but enjoy TOS and other series and movies.

I like lots of traditions or ...um...I like alot of things to be pure, original, there in lies my own personal opinions, which don't even really exist as if I thought about them, I soon realize how dumb it is to argue something that is in this world with multiple different opinions, perspectives.

BUT, morals are different I don't compromise those, but a movie? I just ranted for fun, I was bored...

[Friar]

In case that post was directed at me: I don't really care whether you like it or not (well, it's interesting to hear what you have to say, but it doesn't matter.) I like it, and as long as enough people like it to get a sequel or two going, I'm happy!

My post ""Such as?" Doodo. :P" was just me being smart-arsey and naming you as one such disliker.

I'll leave this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbJ-y6BWfUc) here.

[doodo!]

Yes, well if everyone was cool with that no one would be needy, insecure with subjects like this or argue silly things. But, I suppose if you're into Star Wars, Bluray could still rightfully piss people off.

[Chyron8472]

I soon realize how dumb it is to argue something that is in this world with multiple different opinions, perspectives.

What is the point of conversation then?

Debate, even pointless heated debate with no foreseeable resolution, is part of having relationships with other people. If all we ever said about things was: A:"Hey, check this out." B:"Okay." A:"Do you like it?" B:"No." A:"Why not?" B:"It doesn't matter/I don't want to talk about it/It's only my opinion so who cares"... well, then life would be rather dull and boring.

Take Dashing, for example. He knows what he likes, and is adamant about maintaining his point of view. If all he ever said about BTTF (for example) was "It sucks, but it's only my opinion so who cares why you should agree with me?" then that would be the end of the conversation. The same can be said for why he thinks every MI2 is the best Monkey Island game and CMI is crap. It's not that I agree with him, but at least I get to know the man the more he talks about his position and why he feels the way he does.

This is called getting to know someone. Debate and arguement are important parts of developing friendships. Without it, how can anyone really be sure how someone truthfully feels about a certain issue if they don't ever get emotionally invested in defending their position, and why should anyone care what anyone else has to say if no one's opinion means enough to argue about?

People argue. That's part of life. It's part of getting to know other people, and expanding ones understanding of the thoughts and feelings of those around them.

[Chyron8472]

This is why it bothers me for people to say "It's just an opinion so why argue." If my opinion doesn't matter enough for you to argue with me about it, and your opinion doesn't matter enough for me to argue with you about it, then why do we bother to talk at all?

I'm not saying we shouldn't talk, I'm saying we should and that people who say opinions don't matter enough to argue about have no concept of what having a relationship really means.

[doodo!]

Thanks for sharing with me. Still, I think we could respect one another opinions. But I was immature just our of boredom, and there you have it. We have a strange sense of amusement.

[Armakuni]

Some of the old Star Trek Original Series adventure games were tops. That 25th Anniversary one is awesome.
Agreed, those are great... I love how they're even voiced by the original actors.

I also like the cheesy FMV ones, like the Klingon one... that comes with that incredibly lame CD containing Klingon language learning lessons - now that I think of it, I believe I still have that CD in my closet somewhere :D

[DAISHI]

My next Let's Play is definitely the 25th Anniversary :D

[Shadowknight1]

Thanks for sharing with me. Still, I think we could respect one another opinions. But I was immature just our of boredom, and there you have it. We have a strange sense of amusement.

I apologize, but I get annoyed by some "Trekkies" dismiss the movie out of hand. It just seems like a lot of Trek fans are forgetting one of the key philosophies of the Trek universe. IDIC. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.

Now, I will say this. At least you gave it a chance. I do know someone who absolutely refuses to watch it and has even left the room when his brother played it.

[doodo!]

I apologize, but I get annoyed by some "Trekkies" dismiss the movie out of hand. It just seems like a lot of Trek fans are forgetting one of the key philosophies of the Trek universe. IDIC. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.

Now, I will say this. At least you gave it a chance. I do know someone who absolutely refuses to watch it and has even left the room when his brother played it.

:) It's easier to be human, than it isn't. So I was human. Well, than it is to try not to be human. No hard feelings. I'm weird, I mean no complex, or conceit, I can change my opinions, feelings, within the hour or 5 minutes.

I don't feel real, nothing feels absolute. I assume if I saw the movie in a different light I would enjoy it. These words are superficial. I know , I like you guys, I want to be your friends, but you can't really hold me to my words, XD can you hold me to that?

Peace everyone. I do have a few core beliefs, I do, but not when it comes to arguing some one else's interests, opinions. Unless, I think that person is twisted and evil. :D

I think the other side should only be accessed when necessarily and both sides should be real, true, honest, thought about, if possible pure.

[DAISHI]

I just think the new Star Trek lost some of the soul that the old ones had.

[MusicallyInspired]

Of course it did. It wasn't the same person nor team that made it. That doesn't mean it doesn't have soul at all, though.

[Alcoremortis]

Loss of soul is only a product of the fact that we are moving into the future, a place where people have no soul or morals, but do have tons of neat gadgets if Red vs. Blue is to be believed as an authority on the subject. Which they probably aren't.

[DAISHI]

Of course it did. It wasn't the same person nor team that made it. That doesn't mean it doesn't have soul at all, though.

Yeah but the loss of it means something especially to people who grew up with it. I don't think it's too far right of the arguments being held in the King's Quest forum about 'what is' King's Quest.

[MusicallyInspired]

That's a good point. However, King's Quest doesn't have NEAR the amount of material that Star Trek does. Star Trek had five iterations of spin-off shows with multiple seasons worth of stories, a cartoon, 10 full length feature films, dozens upon dozens of video games, countless novels, comics, and parodies as well as fan fiction, consistent multiple conventions a year, and more and it all lasted for decades and is still going strong despite the Abrams reboot. King's Quest had a fraction of that. I think Star Trek is allowed to be a little bit different now. King's Quest barely had over a decade's worth of games with only 8 titles. It never had a chance to reach the potential it could have.

[DAISHI]

Yeah. I won't argue that. The truth is that Star Trek was choking on itself. The fans weren't happy even when producers gave them what they thought they wanted. The throwback Enterprise never had the right chemistry after the first season, and it went with long arcs over short ones. Voyager stumbled hard toward the end of its run. And DS9, love it though I did, put Trek on a path I don't think was sustainable. Trek isn't inherently going to reach the action heights of BS9 or Galactica, not in that universe. The tone for Trek in that vein was set.

Every true Trek fan knows that Star Trek was dying slowly, and we were partly culpable. After Enterprise we were in the midst of having the first time in a long time where there was NO Trek on television and no movies planned. People were saying maybe the franchise needed a rest for a while. And, I think that especially in that light, it's good to have a fresh approach to classic characters. It's not like this iteration damages the standard Trek continuity or leaves no room to go back to that universe in the future.

[Vainamoinen]

I just think the new Star Trek lost some of the soul that the old ones had.

Certainly true. Abrahams did not really know the series and just constructed a movie around the most popular things about the franchise. That way, I can understand the Trekkies' disappointment with the "new" Star Trek. Personally, I saw this movie as some kind of ST parody - the best kind, mind you. I really liked it, for its characters, on its own. Just as I liked Spaceballs without even knowing Star Wars. ;)

[Friar]

This is why it bothers me for people to say "It's just an opinion so why argue." If my opinion doesn't matter enough for you to argue with me about it, and your opinion doesn't matter enough for me to argue with you about it, then why do we bother to talk at all?

I'm not saying we shouldn't talk, I'm saying we should and that people who say opinions don't matter enough to argue about have no concept of what having a relationship really means.

I don't know. I for instance don't care whether people like or hate something, so long as they can support their arguement. I learnt a long time ago that you can't make someone like something they don't with words. Imagine me trying to convince you that marge simpson is the love of your life, or that marmite and jam pizza is really nice (which in incidentally it is.) Or athat any food you hate is actually really nice. It can't be done. People feel what they feel when they watch a film. You can't change that with words.

That said, I do enjoy reading people's views and present my own. I still argue if something they said was untrue or or untrue for me.

On that note: what was everyone's first episode, and what would you suggest are good starting points for newbies?

[gamer247]

Who's to say Gene Roddenberry wouldn't have liked the new movie, for all we know he might have thoroughly enjoyed it.

[DAISHI]

Nobody's saying he wouldn't, but it's not what HR would have created either.

[Shadowknight1]

Certainly true. Abrahams did not really know the series and just constructed a movie around the most popular things about the franchise. That way, I can understand the Trekkies' disappointment with the "new" Star Trek. Personally, I saw this movie as some kind of ST parody - the best kind, mind you. I really liked it, for its characters, on its own. Just as I liked Spaceballs without even knowing Star Wars. ;)

Except Abrams didn't write the movie. And the writers are fans and know the material well.

The problem the way I'm seeing it is that it suffered from a lot of First Movie Syndrome. We have to introduce these characters and places to people who don't know them(the non-Trekkies), and we have to make it feel like there's a reason for this crazy mix-match of people can work together, so we throw in a threat to Earth. That's the big problem with Trek movies and why they have a hard time fitting in with the themes of the shows. They can't focus on something like a diplomatic meeting or something like that for a 2 hour movie.