kfowler5

Ships Crew
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    4

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by kfowler5

  1. Posted · Edited by kfowler5

    Click for Spoiler:

    How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

    Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

    Click for Spoiler:

    the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
    One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

    Click for Spoiler:

    they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
    , and they shouldn't.

     

    You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

    First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.

    Well, the fact is that Gene Roddenberry has been gone a long time, and those that worked with him, and succeed him have delivered several products, movies and TV, that have had continually diminishing audience. No one knows what Gene Roddenberry would want now, and it's an unknown whether he could connect with a younger audience. The fact that Star Trek was Gene's brainchild is completely irrelevant. Audiences change. What appeals to that audience either changes or fails. And rewriting a piece of science fiction history doesn't come any where near being the same thing as trying to rewrite actual history, like World War II. Your service to our country, admirable as it should be, and notwithstanding, making a comparison between a work of fiction like star Trek and the real history of World War II was a bit ridiculous.

     

    I'll repeat what I posted before: This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life. It's going to go a long way toward resurrecting Star Trek in the minds of a greater audience. Had they got hung up on please the minority of fans who are, in turn, hung up on the "canon", the likelihood of appealing to a wider audience goes way down.

     

    I don't agree with your statement that this movie was a disgrace to Gene's memory, but if that's your opinion, well...so be it. I doubt that Paramount would have kept Gene around after the way the ratings on the various TV series and the box office receipts of the movies kept falling. Your reaction to movie brought one thing to mind - one commercial I saw for the movie last week that said "This isn't your father's Star Trek."

     

    This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life. It's going to go a long way toward resurrecting Star Trek in the minds of a greater audience. Enjoy it or don't. Either way, this is now the direction Star Trek takes. Get used to it.

    Well I won't get used to it and you shouldn't either. I have news for you, it is the minority who decides the future of TV & Movie franchises in this world not the majority. Lots of great shows got canceled because of people like me and movies never saw sequals because of people like me, GET USED TO IT. And by the way when Gene was alive, he owned the rights to Star Trek so I assure you if he was still around this movie would have never been made.

  2. Posted

    Click for Spoiler:

    How can anyone tell me that destroying Vulcan was great. And the Enterprise looks to futuristic to be in the 23rd century. My god can't anyone leave 43 years of canon alone. If they wanted to do a movie like this it sould have been based in the future, that way even the di-hard fans would be happy. No all we want to do barf.

    Don't agree with you in the least, especially on

    Click for Spoiler:

    the idea of leaving 43 years of canon alone.
    One, it's fiction,and two , it's science fiction. Nothing is written in stone. If Spock's death at the end of Wrath of Kahn and his resurrection in the Search for Spock didn't tell you that liberties can be taken, then nothing will. I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan for the vast majority of Star Trek's existence, and I for one am extremely glad they rebooted this series and the Star Trek genre. It was getting long in the tooth. So, no,

    Click for Spoiler:

    they can't leave 43 years of canon alone
    , and they shouldn't.

     

    You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but rest assured that even among "die hard fans", the majority who have already seen this movie enjoyed it, and the rest that will see (again, and again) will enjoy it. This movie has given the franchise a new lease on life.

    First when spock died and he was resurrected, Gene Roddenberry made sure Paramount the explaination of Spocks return was believable. And yes they should take some liberies, but destroying vulcan was over the line. Well sir I am 70 years old and have been a Star Trek fan all my life not most of my life like you. Any star trek fan who like this is not a die-hard fan, they just like the special effects. So you think it's ok to rewrite history, fine how would you like it if they rewrote the history of WW II like the holocaust never happening, I know I wouldn't I fought in it. But thats right you were just a glimmer in your fathers eye during the time when real history was being made. And yes it is Science Fiction which means it has to be believable. And real Star Trek fans like to see continuaty in their shows. And as for the technology, fine they have been tech but Gene Roddenberry would have made sure that was also explained properly. And finally I believe 100% if Gene Rodddenberry was alive he would have never let this film be made they way it was made, And I have news for everyone out there Star Trek was Gene's brainchild and everyone seems to forget how he would have liked Star Trek to continue, and I assure you this was not the way he would have wanted it to continue. And this movie is a discrace to his memory.