XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise   
   XPost: rec.arts.startrek.current   
   From: anybody@anywhere-anytime.com   
      
   In article , Flip Wilson   
    wrote:   
      
   > On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 01:02:54 +0000, Kweeg wrote:   
   >   
   > >   
   > > Indeed. Three words "The Next Generation" if that was not a remake / reboot   
   > > of the franchise I dono (by "Anybody's logic) what was.   
   >   
   > I would say it's more of an extension of the franchise, not a remake.   
   > After all, this was not adventures of Kirk & Spock we were seeing. This   
   > was a new crew in a new time period. TNG didn't wipe out what happened   
   > before. It didn't (intentionally) try to change or invalidate what already   
   > happened. TNG blazed it's own path.   
      
   Correct.   
      
      
      
   > This, on the other hand is a reboot/remake/reimagining or whatever they   
   > want to call it. I'm sure Kirk and Spock are the most recogniseable names   
   > in Trek. A high Q rating does not necessarily lead to "I'd sure pay $9 to   
   > see that in a theater". I'd also have to say that the characters are   
   > popular in no small part because of the actors who played them, which are   
   > now being replaced.   
   >   
   > At any rate, this is crap. I'll probably not be seeing this movie.   
      
   Correct again.   
      
      
   There seem to be a lot of so-called fans who think you can tag the name   
   "Star Trek" onto any old garbage with spaceships in it and that really   
   is "Star Trek" - that's like taking the label off a bottle of Coca-COla   
   and sticking it onto a bottle of orange juice and expecting everyone to   
   believe it is actually Coca-Cola.  :-\   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)