home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.tv.star-trek      William Shatner told 'em to get a life      5,088 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 3,803 of 5,088   
   J. Clarke to All   
   Re: Star Trek: Discovery star replies to   
   26 Jun 17 22:53:30   
   
   XPost: alt.startrek, rec.arts.startrek.current, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: j.clarke.873638@gmail.com   
      
   In article ,   
   anim8rfsk@cox.net says...   
   >   
   > In article , Obveeus    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   > > On 6/26/2017 7:47 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:   
   > > > On 6/26/2017 4:29 PM, Obveeus wrote:   
   > > >>   
   > > >>   
   > > >> On 6/26/2017 7:01 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:   
   > > >>> In article ,   
   > > >>>   Dimensional Traveler  wrote:   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>>> On 6/26/2017 3:04 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:   
   > > >>>>> In article ,   
   > > >>>>>    Dimensional Traveler  wrote:   
   > > >>>>>   
   > > >>>>>> On 6/26/2017 2:03 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:   
   > > >>>>>>> For your reference, records indicate that   
   > > >>>>>>> Wouter Valentijn  wrote:   
   > > >>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>>> Another Reboot. That much is certain.   
   > > >>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>> Just the opposite.  They announced that Discovery is supposed to be   
   > > >>>>>>> set in the classic ??Prime???1?2? timeline.    
   That?? why   
   > > >>>>>>> doing what   
   > > >>>>>>> they??e   
   > > >>>>>>> doing is problematic well beyond any cries of racism or other   
   > > >>>>>>> intolerance.  It was problematic when they did the same thing with   
   > > >>>>>>> Enterprise.  It?? just dumb to depict things 10 or 100   
   years   
   > > >>>>>>> prior to   
   > > >>>>>>> Kirk as being more advanced than what even Picard had just   
   > > >>>>>>> because our   
   > > >>>>>>> tech has taken off in the present.  It certainly *should* have   
   > > >>>>>>> been a   
   > > >>>>>>> reboot.   
   > > >>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>>> Either that or, like I?? sure I?綮e said before,   
   someone   
   > > >>>>>>> needs to sit   
   > > >>>>>>> down with all the property in the franchise and work out a fully   
   > > >>>>>>> coherent continuity.  One that they can stick to for all *future*   
   > > >>>>>>> production as well, of course.  All this piecemeal shit has become   
   a   
   > > >>>>>>> real anchor around the neck of the Trek universe.   
   > > >>>>>>>   
   > > >>>>>> The "creative" types would hate that.  They want to be able to put   
   > > >>>>>> their   
   > > >>>>>> own stamp on it without being "hampered" by being consistent with   
   > > >>>>>> what   
   > > >>>>>> others have done.  Why do you think Abrams burned the whole thing   
   > > >>>>>> to the   
   > > >>>>>> ground and started over from scratch?  Why do you think every other   
   > > >>>>>> Superman or Spiderman movie is a reboot, origin story?  Because the   
   > > >>>>>> "creatives" want it to be _their_ vision that controls.   
   > > >>>>>   
   > > >>>>> That's partly it.  You've also got the part where the "creatives"   
   > > >>>>> won't   
   > > >>>>> (some say can't) read the source material, and nowadays won't watch   
   > > >>>>> source material.  Brannon Braga was apparently proud of having never   
   > > >>>>> seen an episode of real Trek, which is how he ended up writing   
   Zephram   
   > > >>>>> Cochrane as a black woman.   
   > > >>>>>   
   > > >>>> I think the "won't read/view source material" is part of their   
   > > >>>> egotistic   
   > > >>>> "I can do it better! if you just don't bother me with the truth"   
   > > >>>> problem.  So the two are sides of the same metaphorical coin.   
   > > >>>>   
   > > >>>> Plus there's the whole "I'll sue you if you ever read or watch   
   > > >>>> something   
   > > >>>> of mine and then ever in your life make something I can claim was   
   > > >>>> unconsciously influenced by my work!" thing.   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>> Well, yeah, but refusing to watch an ep of Trek when you're making   
   > > >>> eps of Trek ...   
   > > >>   
   > > >> Alternatively, Simon Pegg is a huge TREK fan and he put all kinds of   
   > > >> stuff into the film to make TREK fans happy and they still complained.   
   > > >   
   > > > He didn't get rid of the Abrams stink....   
   > >   
   > > The third entry in the series was much better than the second.  The only   
   > > real stink in it was a bunch of stupid motorcycle stuff.  Of course, I'm   
   > > dreading the fourth film somewhat because I'm not looking forward to   
   > > Chekov getting run over by the ship and written off.   
   >   
   > You're honestly the first person I've heard rate BEYOND any better than   
   > 'worst of series, crime against humanity'   
   >   
   > Even the people that actually watched it felt that way.   
      
   I gave up on it after they destroyed yet another Enterprise.  You'd think   
   that having lost so many ships with that name, the Federation would take   
   the hint.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca