XPost: alt.startrek.voyager, rec.arts.tv   
   From: David@block.net   
      
   On 2/22/2013 7:19 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   > In article , David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >> On 2/22/2013 4:30 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   >>> In article , David Johnston   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>> On 2/21/2013 10:30 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   >>>>> In article   
   >>>>> <8a6e3540-b4f9-407a-be17-4dc689e4f223@w14g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, Ed   
   >>>>> Stasiak  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Ubiquitous   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> By Caillan Davenport   
   >>>>>>> Posted at February 21, 2001   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> As the article is 13 years old, what was the verdict?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Not really relevant any more - JJ Abrams has killed off that entire   
   >>>>> timeline completely with his silly pretend Star Trek movies.  :-(   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Since Abrams is using "Time travel always spawns a new universe" no he   
   >>>> hasn't.   
   >>>   
   >>> Since we're now never ever going to get a real "Star Trek" movie or TV   
   >>> series again, he HAS killed it off.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Well of course not.  Shatner and Nimoy are really, really freaking old.   
   >   
   > I didn't say the original actors / characters. I said real "Star Trek" ...   
      
   Which is TOS.   
      
   > as in something that actually fits with the facts, etc. of the original   
   > shows / movies,   
      
   Thus each successive series doesn't qualify due to their discrepancies   
   from the original and each other.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)