Star Trek 3 to be like TV series

[Rac80]

Here's a different case: The Will Smith "I, Robot" film. Is it Science fiction?

)

I have to say yes in this case. It has the speculative science, futuristic setting and such and also passes the filter in the literary definition which separates it from fantasy - the imaginary elements are contextually plausible and it is not supernatural.

Would you agree or disagree?

it's sacrilege SACRILEGE I tell you! It's a crime that movie was ever made, Asimov is screaming from the grave- how dare they turn Dr. Susan Calvin into a hottie! [/end rant]

 

[Bluce Ree]

More on this movie. The title is Star Trek Beyond, and Justin Lin is starting to talk about it. Also flying around is the rumor that the additions from Simon Pegg are not very Trek-like. Besides that, Lin assures us that we are going into space on the 5-year mission. Also being rumored is the introduction of new aliens and maybe a new planet.

If they wanted to add new shit into Trek, they needed to pick up in the Prime universe and be out of the Alpha Quadrant. All the planets in the Alpha Quadrant have been mapped and the ones who do not belong to the Federation would either belong to the Romulans or Klingons or Cardassians or the Breen or Andorians or the Tholians or....you get the idea. The Alpha Quadrant is not explored in this Trek, but later in the timeline the other planets are known. You cant just put new star systems into the mix. That would be like adding in a new continent between Europe and the United States in some movie about the colonial period.

But whatever...

There can be planets and races we haven't heard about even as far forward as TNG. Think of how vast space is and that, by TNG, although the Federation had only explored about 19% of the galaxy, in that 19% there must be vast amounts of space and planets and races encountered, not all of which were touched upon in any of the series. Most of the stories revolved around the "usual suspects" races.

 

[Joelist]

There can be planets and races we haven't heard about even as far forward as TNG. Think of how vast space is and that, by TNG, although the Federation had only explored about 19% of the galaxy, in that 19% there must be vast amounts of space and planets and races encountered, not all of which were touched upon in any of the series. Most of the stories revolved around the "usual suspects" races.

Exactly. In fact two of the biggest complaints Trek fans had about NuTrek was them not being on the five year mission and the constant reusing of existing aliens. Both are being addressed. Hopefully this means we'll also see another big problem addressed - not EVERY story has to culminate in a threat to the Earth.

The Trek movies (both old and new) have suffered from being "too epic". Trek needs to tell smaller scale stories also in order to be effective. A lot of our favorite examples of Trek are these "small set" stories, and I do think a good movie could be made in the same manner - smaller scale story, new races, out on the mission and using state of the art visual effects.

 

[Overmind One]

Exactly. In fact two of the biggest complaints Trek fans had about NuTrek was them not being on the five year mission and the constant reusing of existing aliens. Both are being addressed. Hopefully this means we'll also see another big problem addressed - not EVERY story has to culminate in a threat to the Earth.

I dont recall fans complaining about "reusing existing aliens". But I bet Abrams complained about it. Bigger complaints came regarding the basic storylines like Uhura and Spock as lovers, the uniforms, the Enterprise itself, the way the crew interacts and lack of any feeling of being on a ship in space. One of those interior scenes looked like the inside of Enterprise was a two story shopping mall. Totally disconnected from the brewery vibe of the Engine Room or the completely illogical Engineering section we saw in Into Darkness (was it the inside of an astronomical telescope control room? Not sure).

The Trek movies (both old and new) have suffered from being "too epic". Trek needs to tell smaller scale stories also in order to be effective. A lot of our favorite examples of Trek are these "small set" stories, and I do think a good movie could be made in the same manner - smaller scale story, new races, out on the mission and using state of the art visual effects.

I agree with that. But you cannot just leave the HUGE glaring mistakes uncorrected in NuTrek. If any of those smaller scale stories involves using transwarp beaming from a suitcase or wrist device, or bringing a loved one back with magic Kahn blood from a tribble, then it is a fail. They can make transwarp beaming have a fatal flaw which prevents it from ever being used again. Say it tears subspace or something.

Frankly, I just cannot picture any of these new characters smoothly discussing warp fields, transporters or using some sort of trick to get more power out of phasers, etc. They all seem so shallow. Spock does not seem like he knows that much in NuTrek. I would not expect him to speak of ancient Vulcan techniques or rituals. Scotty seems like a clown, a geeky dude who likes to tinker and get drunk but somehow is brilliant? Chekhov. Why? There is no USSR claiming they invented everything to frame the reason Chekov is in Trek. Uhura was cool on her own, but now she is just Spock's bitch. Not cool.

 

[Joelist]

The thing is, the big disconnect with the Trek fanbase wasn't brought about by Trek 2009. It had its tiny groups of people who disliked a thing here and there but as a whole Trekdom accepted that film. It was Into Darkness that caused the wholesale alienation of the Trek fanbase. And while things like Khan's magic blood (it even resurrects Tribbles) ticked us off so did the plot being utterly illogical nonsense.

Even in its bad installments Trek usually had at least featured a coherent and logical storyline. Characters actions made sense and were in context to their motivations. Even in things like Spock's Brain this was true. Even Trek 2009 had a coherent and logical story (albeit simplified) and character actions were reasonable and their motivations understandable.

Enter Damon Lindelof for Into Darkness (the same "writer" who perpetrated Prometheus and Lost).

While 2009 had a couple of goofy elements Into Darkness had a flood of them, and with the magic blood of Khan entered a whole new realm of nuttiness. To make it worse the plot was a disconnected, illogical mess and because of it character actions repeatedly made no sense (wait, this sounds just like...Prometheus). Trek fans expect better - the only other piece of Trek that had this type of writing issue was Nemesis. And I would say Into Darkness and Nemesis are peas of an awful pod.

 

[Overmind One]

Simon Pegg will also star in Star Wars VII. Like I have been saying, I have absolutely NO confidence in the skills of Simon Pegg as a writer. Sure, in Star Wars he can be whatever or whomever he wants and so what? Everything goes in Star Wars. Like Abrams, he will see Star Trek as a mere sideline because his type is more into the pew pew and special effects and "colorful action" thing.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/simon-pegg-star-star-wars-6050011

Why don't they just bring in Seth Rogan to play somebody in Trek? Its a goner now. It really does not matter what they come up with this time around if they have not fixed transwarp beaming or magic Kahn blood. With those things around, one will always be thinking "Hey, why are they using the Enterprise when they can just beam from earth to Romulus (or wherever)? They can allow the entire crew to be killed and simply release a new aerosol version of Kahn's blood to revive them.

Pegg is a hipster, and he will give us a hipster Trek by ruining Justin Lin's work. That can easily be done by adding just the tiniest little things. Imagine, portraying Spock with a pointed nose along with the pointed ears. Minor, right? Not really. Scotty not being able to do magic with the engines and ship systems is not Scotty. And I wonder whose idea that crusty little alien was? Could have been Pegg. Im so bummed...

 

[Overmind One]

The thing is, the big disconnect with the Trek fanbase wasn't brought about by Trek 2009. It had its tiny groups of people who disliked a thing here and there but as a whole Trekdom accepted that film. It was Into Darkness that caused the wholesale alienation of the Trek fanbase. And while things like Khan's magic blood (it even resurrects Tribbles) ticked us off so did the plot being utterly illogical nonsense.

ST 2009 did not grate the fans as badly as STID because the 2009 film was a premiere...a first film after a long hiatus. Still, fans immediately complained about the tech of the movie and the Enterprise and the product placement and how they made Kirk so immature. It was not until STID that fans started looking for cohesion in NuTrek, and STID ruined it for both films. Now, both films are not nearly as highly regarded as they were when there was only ST 2009. It had a retroactive effect.

Even in its bad installments Trek usually had at least featured a coherent and logical storyline. Characters actions made sense and were in context to their motivations. Even in things like Spock's Brain this was true. Even Trek 2009 had a coherent and logical story (albeit simplified) and character actions were reasonable and their motivations understandable.

100% agree.

Enter Damon Lindelof for Into Darkness (the same "writer" who perpetrated Prometheus and Lost).

While 2009 had a couple of goofy elements Into Darkness had a flood of them, and with the magic blood of Khan entered a whole new realm of nuttiness. To make it worse the plot was a disconnected, illogical mess and because of it character actions repeatedly made no sense (wait, this sounds just like...Prometheus). Trek fans expect better - the only other piece of Trek that had this type of writing issue was Nemesis. And I would say Into Darkness and Nemesis are peas of an awful pod.

I agree, Nemesis was crap. But I still liked it better than ST 2009 and STID. The last Ttrek movie I really enjoyed was First Contact. I really liked Insurrection too, but it was written too much like a TV episode two parter. It did not feel like I was watching a movie.