OT: Star Trek 11 (?) news...

[Renegade 13]

That's just scary...

[geoschmo]

Imperator Fyron said:

Woah, Trek has an established time line? It seems to shift and bend as the writers see fit (like that awful Enterprise...).

Yes, it does to a point. And screwing with it has never led to much success, as shown by the pitiful ratings Enterprise got. After people got over the titilation of a hot Vulcan babe being slathered with gel in the decontamination booth, the series kind of petered out.

[Atrocities]

I sware to God if Superman has a giant spider in it, I will kill have to kill some...

Years ago when they first started to work on a new Superman story the creative consultant they brought on board was the fat dude who wrote and directed Clerks. I recently watched an HBO special of some of his speaking engagements and I have to say that he is one funny dude with some really interesting stories. One such story was about this producer who wanted giant spiders in superman. The superman gig fell through but this same produce went on to produce the abissmal Will Smith movie Wild Wild West. And guess what, it had a giant metal spider.

So who knows what kind of movie Superman will turn out to be. I am suprised that Superman wasn't made out to be a black gay man who grew up hating his father in an anti-social geo-political family.

I do have a question though, why is it that the Gay community always tries to promote that super hero's such as Superman, Batman, and such are gay? Superman is NOT gay, and while the Adam West version of Batman might be open to interpitation, the most recent Batman movie clearly proves that Batman is not gay. (They got us on Robin though, theres no getting away from that one.)

Spiderman is also not gay, strange and quite possibly a virgin, but most definatly not gay.

But back onto topic about Star Trek. If they do go ahead and make this "new" movie, as they are indicating they are planning to do, then all hope for a successful restart of the franchise is in question. Quite frankly they dropped the ball with Enterprise and UPN. (Don't get me started on UPN.)

Enterprise proved that there was no fan interest in a pre-TOS series or movie. Yet here we are, reading about some dumb *** yuppy produce trying to make what is essincially a pre-TOS series with TOS characters. This is without a doubt, one of the dummest dip**** things any one in hollywood has ever concieved of and the fact that they are seemingly going ahead with this project just proves that hollywood, especially Paramount Pictures, is way the hell out of touch with those who would be, and quite possibly are, its target audiance. WE DON'T WANT A REMAKE OF TOS! Give us something new, not something old made into something new.

[NullAshton]

So... let them produce the movie, let them fail horribly at it, and let them learn their lesson because of the few hundred million or more dollars they lost. Not like we lose anything.

[dogscoff]

Atrocities said:
the fat dude who wrote and directed Clerks.

The fat dude is Kevin Smith. Go watch Dogma, I love that film.

I do have a question though, why is it that the Gay community always tries to promote that super hero's such as Superman, Batman, and such are gay?

Because they like big muscly men and they wish those characters were gay? I have to say I've never heard of anyone "promoting" superman et al as gay, although I'd bet that a google for "Superman slash" (with safe search turned off) would yield an awful lot of results.

It might also have something to do with the buttock-hugging tights. And I daresay there are gay men who can identify with the whole secret double-life thing that most superheroes lead. And the fact that although you see superheroes spending a lot of time with hot girls in spandex, they don't seem to get laid all that often. And most of the costumes are, let's face it, a bit camp.

Superman is NOT gay, and while the Adam West version of Batman might be open to interpitation, the most recent Batman movie clearly proves that Batman is not gay. (They got us on Robin though, theres no getting away from that one.)

Go and find yourself a copy of a book called "how to be a superhero" by Mark Leigh and Mike Levine - it is extremely funny, and explores the whole "Boy Wonder" thing quite humourously. Oh hell, here's the amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/156...lance&n=283155
(Not to be confused with "How to be a Superhero" by Dr Metropolis)

Spiderman is also not gay, strange and quite possibly a virgin, but most definatly not gay.

Peter Parker married the offensively out-of proportion Mary-Jane Parker nee Watson (After his first squeeze was thrown to her death off of a suspension bridge by his best friend in a goblin outfit, IIRC), so I very much doubt Spidey's a virgin. Of course, getting married proves nothing these days and some would say he's trying to prove something, marrying a barbie doll like that...

Now Captain America, he is sooooo gay:

[Azselendor]

After reading Starczynski's and Zabel's pitch, I can safely say those two need to be hurt. With a rock or something.

His basic pitch is to reboot trek from before the original series where they find an ancient and obscure civilization with tons of nifty gadgets and stuff for a pilot. (There is a reason why B5: Crusade failed. There is a reason why Glen Larson's Buck Roger's season 2 failed. And, please sir, no more Vorlons).

And apparently, by the end of the pilot, Kirk fights it out with another alien to get the mysterious city of the ancients.... what? no ripped shirts?


Then he goes on to talk about a galactic "Da Vinci Code" conspiracy in the DNA of all kinds of races --- wait he said "Artist's signature"... that sounds like a soft-sell on Intelligent Design! Bah! Leave religion to Galactica! I know JMS is an athiest, but the man dumps far too much religious material into his work for my tastes.

That's not to say JJ Abrams deserves any better. I feel what he's doing will amount to a reboot of the frandchise much like JMS has been planning.

I'm personally a fan of the Susstrem (spelling?) Romulan War Trilogy and I think a good movie triliogy might serve the series good a few years down the road, but it's just too soon. Plus that trilogy would indicate that James T Kirk was named for a relative of his from that period, Capt. Tiberius Chase and not the roman emperor

[Renegade 13]

While I'm a huge fan of Star Trek (in general), I think they should just let it go for a while. It's simply been done too many times; take the time to come up with something truly original, or at least something that hasn't been done to death several times over.

Give it 5 years, or 10, or 15 for that matter. If they continue as they have been going recently, Star Trek will be dead in most people's eyes before very long.

[dogscoff]

It's just part of a very sad trend in Hollywood at the moment. Have you noticed that every other film that comes out is a remake of an old film or a book? Omen 666. Superman. Poseidon (like it wasn't bad enough the first time). Kong. Star Trek 'Rebooted'. You get the idea.

Hollywood has finally lost what little imagination it ever had. What's sadder is that no-one seems to care...

[Strategia_In_Ultima]

Paramount Studios Official Press Release

Paramount Studios is pleased to announce that it has hired a new writer/co-director, who will inject the planned new Star Trek movie with a generous dosage of life and emotion, and who will contribute many new ideas; George Lucas. We hope he will stay with us to make at least two follow-up films.

[Black_Knyght]

Strategia_In_Ultima said:

R O T F L M A O !!!


Man, wouldn't THAT cause AT to have a serious stroke !!!