[Unknown Target]

Discuss:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/21/leisure.startrek.reut/index.html

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- More than three years after the last "Star Trek" movie crashed at the box office, the venerable sci-fi franchise is being revived by the director of the upcoming "Mission: Impossible" sequel, Daily Variety reported in its Friday edition.

[Flipside]

Meh, sounds like the Dreaded 'Starfleet Academy' I predicted about 3 years ago...

'You will be carrying live phasers, but there will be no call to use them.... Kirk! Do you get that, numbnuts?'

[Grey Wolf]

Still treating this as a rumor. It's been out there since about the time of Nemesis, but who knows what will make it to production.

[Shade]

Poor horse... can't they just give it a proper burial instead of savagely beating the corpse over and over again?

[neo_hermes]

but savagely beating the horse is so Fun.  maybe hollywood has made a sport out of Star Trek movies..

[StratComm]

It can't be as bad as Ep. I.


































Can it?

[Kie99]

Shame, I was hoping for another totally original Star Trek film.

Star Trek XI:  The Download for Data

The crew of the Enterprise must steal it from Space Dock, and go back to the planet where they found B4. Unfortunately, while they are there they meet a Romulan Bird-of-Prey and must sacrifice the Enterprise and beam down to the surface, from there they find an enhancement for B4 which would give him Data's intelligence, as well as his memories. After they find this they will take over the Bird of Prey using phasers they kept in secret, travel back in time and go to Dr Soong's home. Once there Dr Crusher must risk her life to put Data's personality and intelligence into B4.

[neo_hermes]

....

[Ulala]

....

[IceFire]

Wow...does not have me jumping out of my seat at all.  And I love Star Trek stuff...

[Flipside]

It's a pity really, they made Star Trek and Next Gen movies, they couldn't make a Voyager movie very easily, which leaves DS9, which had awesome movie potential that was never used.

I really wonder sometimes what these execs are thinking.

[an0n]

They shoulda just gone Pearl Harbour in Star Trek's ass.

Start it out with some cadets coming out of the Academy at the start of the Dominion War, have them fighting for a while, then bring them back to Starfleet Headquarters for some reason, show the Breen attack on Earth, then finish the last 45 minutes of the film with them fighting through to the end of the war with all but two of the main characters being killed off. The heroic Captain gets paralysed in the 'Cardassian Rebellion' battle, and the tough grunt ends the movie saying he's heading back out to fight the continuing ground-war against some random Dominion ally in the border colonies.

[Paragon]

Please, you all don't really think

Star Trek XI:  The Download for Data

The crew of the Enterprise must steal it from Space Dock, and go back to the planet where they found B4. Unfortunately, while they are there they meet a Romulan Bird-of-Prey and must sacrifice the Enterprise and beam down to the surface, from there they find an enhancement for B4 which would give him Data's intelligence, as well as his memories. After they find this they will take over the Bird of Prey using phasers they kept in secret, travel back in time and go to Dr Soong's home. Once there Dr Crusher must risk her life to put Data's personality and intelligence into B4.

is serious, do you?  Its a joke.

Here, read your hearts out.

[Sandwich]

I'm actually encouraged by this. Yes, it sounds like it has great potential for lameness, but look at it this way. They aren't going to have William Shatner or Leonard Nimoy in any sort of roles (besides perhaps a gratituous "old friends remeniscing" scene at the beginning or end), which means that we'll be watching completely (ok, mostly) unheard-of actors. What that means is that the doors to doing movies that aren't "The Never-Ending Adventures Of Kirk & Spock / Picard & Riker", but are set in the Star Trek universe. This, I believe, will allow movies that are much more in tune with what people want to see these days - heavy realism in their entertainment (the reality show phase a few years back, which birthed pseudo-reality / documentary-style TV shows such as 24, Firefly, BSG, and Lost).

Imagine, if you will, a movie with a similar feel to, say, Predator, just with Trek universe elements. Or a reimagining of Trek in the same way that RDM reimagined BSG.

ALthough the path may be rough and tumble, I think the direction could be excellent.

[Mefustae]

Imagine, if you will, a movie with a similar feel to, say, Predator, just with Trek universe elements. Or a reimagining of Trek in the same way that RDM reimagined BSG.

ALthough the path may be rough and tumble, I think the direction could be excellent.

"Reimagine Trek"?! Are you f***ing crazy? I'm all for a little more realism in Trek, but the idea of Trek is to have a happy future. If someone reimagined Trek to resemble something like modern BSG, you will have seriously pissed off one of the largest and most dedicated fan-bases in the world.

[Flipside]

Depends how it's done, it's ok to walk a thorny path as long as it leads to Eden.

[Mefustae]

That's a valid point, but I doubt anyone will want to incite the wrath of thousands upon thousands upon thousands of nerds, geeks and dweebs. They may be losers, but together they are strong...

[Unknown Target]

I'm thinking they'll try to pull a RDM, but won't understand the fact that Trek needs some happiness or else it's not Trek.

$20 says they give everybody projectile weapons, modern-military type uniforms, and have them off blowing the crap out of something.

The best Star Treks, IMHO, were the original ones; especially II, IV, and VI. What did they all have in common?

1) Lovable characters; one of the reasons we all love Star Trek is because the characters are so...real while at the same time being the best friend you never had, imo. Personally I love Kirk more than Picard's crew because A) I like it old school, and B) Picard and his people are just a little too perfect and wear their hearts on their sleeves 24/7.

2) Smart plots: II, IV, VI and First Contact (forget the number) all had interesting, smart plotlines that were engaging to the viewer. Not so in recent "omg kill them because they're bad" STs.

3) Comedy: Star Treks were funny, and a lot of that came from the characters interaction. Nowadays the push to gritty "realism" just makes everything so...depressing.

and lastly:

4) Cool starship battles: Now I think this is where the old series shines, because rather than "Target the nearest bad guy and fire," it was really like the captains were thinking and all the like; especially in ST II, with the whole Khan nebulae thing; a classic.


Anyway, end of rant, and what does this movie have?

1) Lovable characters: They better be good, because they're brand new on the screen. They better be hard-pressed to make it good.

2) Smart plots: From all indications it looks to be a cut and dry sci fi war movie.

3) Comedy: Oh please. It's about war, and everyone knows that once Hollywood makes a serious movie about war, no jokes are allowed.

4) Starship battles: As of yet undecided, but it will probably be like Nemesis and "circle around while firing and doing stupid things!"



Anyway, that's my $.02.

[Flipside]

Yeah, thing is that concerns me is Star Trek has always been at least 50% about finding solutions to problems by using at least 2 pages of Technoblurb. That's half the fun of the fantasy. It will be interesting to see how they manage to do this without creating something that has nothing whatsoever in common with the Star Trek universe, as Mefustae said.

If people cannot relate to anything or anyone in the film, them they will have a very hard job selling it as a Star Trek movie.

[Turnsky]

i'll wait until something more concrete arises before i either think it's a good thing, or just roll my eyes at how **** it could be.

either way, i'm not holding out a lot of hope, i mean, a great deal of trek's fans will generally dislike anything that isn't that rose-tinted utopian vision that gene roddenbery had in mind when he created star trek. they don't like anything that's "Dark" the borg, for example, were initially portrayed as the darker side of technology, etc, but i digress, either way, a movie that rakes in dough at the box office is a no-brainer these days, i mean, look at some certain star wars prequels, a series that will draw in decent ratings and isn't taken off the air after a few seasons, that's the hard part.