From: your.name@isp.com   
      
   "Mr. B-o-B"  wrote in message   
   news:alpine.LNX.2.00.1012161954520.29763@conan.grunners.com...   
   > Your Name cried from the depths of the abyss...   
   > >   
   > > Even worse, some idiot in high places decided it was then a good idea to   
   > > "reboot" Star Trek as a movie (which was basically what "Enterprise"   
   tried   
   > > and failed to do on TV) with the usual silly ideas that make it barely   
   > > recognisable, and now there are two conflicting franchises under the   
   "Star   
   > > Trek" name.   
   >   
   > I have mixed opinions on this.  One one hand I agree.  On the other hand I   
   > feel this was kind of a cool thing.  The original crew is too old now   
   > (many dead), but everyone loves them.  With the story what it was in the   
   > movie they are now free to do what they want without conflicting with any   
   of   
   > the existing story/time lines.  So we get to look forward to seeing Kirk   
   in   
   > action every few years.  I can live with that.   
      
   There are infinite stories within the Star Trek universe that could be told   
   (if they actually found writers with proper creative talent), they could   
   even do mvoies / shows about Kirk and co. with new actors ... but there's no   
   need to make idiotic changes that don't fit with the established history   
   (like having all the characters at the academy at the same time - it's "Star   
   Trek" not "Dawson's Creek"!).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)