


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Review &#8211; Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/</link>
	<description>the source for Star Trek news and information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:06:09 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Moby-Dick goes Ceti Alpha V &#171; Moby-Dick 2.0</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-88078</link>
		<dc:creator>Moby-Dick goes Ceti Alpha V &#171; Moby-Dick 2.0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Apr 2007 11:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-88078</guid>
		<description>[...] Das Thema der besessenen Rache wird wiederholt sowohl in der Star Trek-Fernsehserie als auch in den Kinofilmen aufgegriffen. Der Bezug auf Captain Ahab ist im zweiten Kinofilm Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan von 1982, noch in der historischen Besetzung mit William Shatner und Leonard Nimoy, am offensten: Während der rachsüchtige Khan die Enterprise durchs All verfolgt, zitiert er ganze Passagen aus Moby-Dick. Am Anfang des Films sieht man das Buch in seinem Regal stehen. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Das Thema der besessenen Rache wird wiederholt sowohl in der Star Trek-Fernsehserie als auch in den Kinofilmen aufgegriffen. Der Bezug auf Captain Ahab ist im zweiten Kinofilm Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan von 1982, noch in der historischen Besetzung mit William Shatner und Leonard Nimoy, am offensten: Während der rachsüchtige Khan die Enterprise durchs All verfolgt, zitiert er ganze Passagen aus Moby-Dick. Am Anfang des Films sieht man das Buch in seinem Regal stehen. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dom</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14546</link>
		<dc:creator>Dom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2007 13:25:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14546</guid>
		<description>And, by the sounds of it, we will!! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And, by the sounds of it, we will!! :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam Belil</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14451</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam Belil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2007 02:14:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14451</guid>
		<description>Hello again Dom --

Don&#039;t get me wrong, I LOVED season 2 of TOS, the action packed episodes (&quot;Friday&#039;s Child&quot;, &quot;Prive Little War, &quot;Omega Glory&quot;) and the comedic episodes (&quot;A Piece of the Action&quot;, &quot;I Mudd&quot;, &quot;The Trouble With Troubles&quot;) were very classic and entertaining!!!!!  IHowever, if you take close hard look at Season 1 versus season 2 almost all the character&#039;s change.  Kirk (my ALL TIME favorite ST Captain, becomes the the character that everyone parodies).

I feel that in season 1 Shatner brought more of a serious (almost Pike like) character to the table (&quot;Court Martial&quot;, &quot;Balance of Terror&quot;, &quot;Where No Man Has Gone Before&quot;, &quot;City of the Edge of Forever&quot; and I really miss that.  
THAT is the Kirk that I want to see in this movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello again Dom &#8211;</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong, I LOVED season 2 of TOS, the action packed episodes (&#8221;Friday&#8217;s Child&#8221;, &#8220;Prive Little War, &#8220;Omega Glory&#8221;) and the comedic episodes (&#8221;A Piece of the Action&#8221;, &#8220;I Mudd&#8221;, &#8220;The Trouble With Troubles&#8221;) were very classic and entertaining!!!!!  IHowever, if you take close hard look at Season 1 versus season 2 almost all the character&#8217;s change.  Kirk (my ALL TIME favorite ST Captain, becomes the the character that everyone parodies).</p>
<p>I feel that in season 1 Shatner brought more of a serious (almost Pike like) character to the table (&#8221;Court Martial&#8221;, &#8220;Balance of Terror&#8221;, &#8220;Where No Man Has Gone Before&#8221;, &#8220;City of the Edge of Forever&#8221; and I really miss that.<br />
THAT is the Kirk that I want to see in this movie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim J</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14314</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 16:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14314</guid>
		<description>This review hits the nail on the head:  Star Trek 2 and Star Trek 11 seem to have a lot of things in common, so far.  I just hope in the end, it&#039;ll be 11 that kinda saves the franchise, so to speak, just like 2 did.  

I think, in a small sense, Paramount had the right idea in hiring a new director that had nothing to do with Trek previously (for Nemesis)...the problem was that the rest of the team was basically the same old, same old...especially in the production end of things (and the choice of the director was just poorly done).  Star Trek 2 was a breakaway from TMP...Sta Trek 11 WILL BE a breakaway from 10.  Maybe everything will be just fine.  Let&#039;s hope so!!!  Here&#039;s to 2007 &amp; 2008 and all things Trek!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This review hits the nail on the head:  Star Trek 2 and Star Trek 11 seem to have a lot of things in common, so far.  I just hope in the end, it&#8217;ll be 11 that kinda saves the franchise, so to speak, just like 2 did.  </p>
<p>I think, in a small sense, Paramount had the right idea in hiring a new director that had nothing to do with Trek previously (for Nemesis)&#8230;the problem was that the rest of the team was basically the same old, same old&#8230;especially in the production end of things (and the choice of the director was just poorly done).  Star Trek 2 was a breakaway from TMP&#8230;Sta Trek 11 WILL BE a breakaway from 10.  Maybe everything will be just fine.  Let&#8217;s hope so!!!  Here&#8217;s to 2007 &amp; 2008 and all things Trek!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dom</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14281</link>
		<dc:creator>Dom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 13:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14281</guid>
		<description>Hi Stephen.

Jeff Abrams is yet to say anything much at all about what he&#039;s doing with the Trek movie. He certainly won&#039;t be making a 60s pastiche, but I&#039;ve seen no evidence whatsoever that he&#039;s changing the fundamentals of Star Trek.

If anything, in hiring Shatner and Nimoy,  he&#039;s demonstrating a desire to return to the source material, stripping it back to basics to make it more faithful to what Star Trek originally was. Surely that&#039;s the best way, in a beleagured franchise, to get it back on the rails.

TOS episodes stood comfortably on their own without shaking the &#039;continuity&#039; to the ground and a movie set in that period should be able to as well!

And &#039;Gene&#039;s Vision&#039; is a myth. Lots of people made the original Star Trek series great, meaning &#039;Gene&#039;s Vision&#039; was compromised from the start! TV shows and studio films are always made through compromise and Star Trek was no different. &#039;Gene&#039;s Vision&#039; was the screenplay for &#039;The Cage.&#039; After that it was Desilu&#039;s, Paramount&#039;s, Justman&#039;s, Coon&#039;s, Lucas&#039;s, Freiberger&#039;s, Roddenberry&#039;s and many others&#039; &#039;visions&#039;.

I don&#039;t feel I&#039;m being thrown on the scrapheap by the new team. I feel that my standing by TOS down the years has been vindicated! My favourite science fiction series is coming back and I&#039;m really excited about it!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Stephen.</p>
<p>Jeff Abrams is yet to say anything much at all about what he&#8217;s doing with the Trek movie. He certainly won&#8217;t be making a 60s pastiche, but I&#8217;ve seen no evidence whatsoever that he&#8217;s changing the fundamentals of Star Trek.</p>
<p>If anything, in hiring Shatner and Nimoy,  he&#8217;s demonstrating a desire to return to the source material, stripping it back to basics to make it more faithful to what Star Trek originally was. Surely that&#8217;s the best way, in a beleagured franchise, to get it back on the rails.</p>
<p>TOS episodes stood comfortably on their own without shaking the &#8216;continuity&#8217; to the ground and a movie set in that period should be able to as well!</p>
<p>And &#8216;Gene&#8217;s Vision&#8217; is a myth. Lots of people made the original Star Trek series great, meaning &#8216;Gene&#8217;s Vision&#8217; was compromised from the start! TV shows and studio films are always made through compromise and Star Trek was no different. &#8216;Gene&#8217;s Vision&#8217; was the screenplay for &#8216;The Cage.&#8217; After that it was Desilu&#8217;s, Paramount&#8217;s, Justman&#8217;s, Coon&#8217;s, Lucas&#8217;s, Freiberger&#8217;s, Roddenberry&#8217;s and many others&#8217; &#8216;visions&#8217;.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t feel I&#8217;m being thrown on the scrapheap by the new team. I feel that my standing by TOS down the years has been vindicated! My favourite science fiction series is coming back and I&#8217;m really excited about it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: senya cartel</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14229</link>
		<dc:creator>senya cartel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 07:12:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14229</guid>
		<description>#123

Regarding your political comment, I couldn&#039;t agree more; especially since I&#039;m the one usually targeted by that kind of twisting in that particular debate.  I don&#039;t believe that was what I did here.  Rather than rehash it again, what I was referring to in #18 is clearly not a fan-friendly comment (not that you yourself made it).  I included your name in reference to post # 29 as well as a general comment regarding the balance of the site -- I was especially sore about the Berman-bashing thread that turned largely into a general TNG bashing thread.

I don&#039;t view my expectations as narrow or restraining of creativity.  But look, I&#039;m not trying to make it an acid argument.  I stopped visiting political blogs because they&#039;re so depressing and nasty -- in that discourse, often times the opposing viewpoint is difficult to accept at all....and while Trek is important to all of us reading here, it is just entertainment and I will only be a little (relatively speaking) annoyed if the next film is more mainstream than I prefer it to be.

Sorry to have raised Dom&#039;s and perhaps your own Ire.  Despite my disagreements, I&#039;ve recommended your site to 10-20 people since I began reading a month ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#123</p>
<p>Regarding your political comment, I couldn&#8217;t agree more; especially since I&#8217;m the one usually targeted by that kind of twisting in that particular debate.  I don&#8217;t believe that was what I did here.  Rather than rehash it again, what I was referring to in #18 is clearly not a fan-friendly comment (not that you yourself made it).  I included your name in reference to post # 29 as well as a general comment regarding the balance of the site &#8212; I was especially sore about the Berman-bashing thread that turned largely into a general TNG bashing thread.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t view my expectations as narrow or restraining of creativity.  But look, I&#8217;m not trying to make it an acid argument.  I stopped visiting political blogs because they&#8217;re so depressing and nasty &#8212; in that discourse, often times the opposing viewpoint is difficult to accept at all&#8230;.and while Trek is important to all of us reading here, it is just entertainment and I will only be a little (relatively speaking) annoyed if the next film is more mainstream than I prefer it to be.</p>
<p>Sorry to have raised Dom&#8217;s and perhaps your own Ire.  Despite my disagreements, I&#8217;ve recommended your site to 10-20 people since I began reading a month ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Pascale</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14209</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Pascale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 05:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14209</guid>
		<description>Senya

you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts...especially about my opinion and the opinion of this site

first of all this site doesnt have a single opinion...one of the goals was a diversity of opinion. I do not agree with everything in the reviews and editorials, but I respect the authors very much

as for my opinions, I hate to use a political comment, but your comments about me and this site &#039;attacks the fans and is anti fan&#039; is the same kind of stuff that says those who are critical of a policy are &#039;anti troops&#039; or &#039;anti american&#039;. I will not stand for you to twist my comments around and present them as fact...it is not

I have stated many many times that I love the fans...and by the way...it should be somewhat obvious that  I am a fan..why on earth would I make this site if I werent. In fact I made this site in order to spread the news that trek was &#039;back&#039;...and set the record straight on various rumors and such...as much as I could.

I have never ever ever said that Paramount should throw away all canon or ignore all the fans...I have just said what is painfully obvious to me and everyone in the industry...there arent enough &#039;trekkie&#039; level fans to support the franchise as a major film franchise...that is just a fact. It is also my opinion that those who have very specific and narrow &#039;demands&#039; on the owners of the franchise are not doing it or themselves any favors

if there is one message I want this site to convey it is that people should be positive and have a very open mind about the future of Star Trek</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Senya</p>
<p>you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts&#8230;especially about my opinion and the opinion of this site</p>
<p>first of all this site doesnt have a single opinion&#8230;one of the goals was a diversity of opinion. I do not agree with everything in the reviews and editorials, but I respect the authors very much</p>
<p>as for my opinions, I hate to use a political comment, but your comments about me and this site &#8216;attacks the fans and is anti fan&#8217; is the same kind of stuff that says those who are critical of a policy are &#8216;anti troops&#8217; or &#8216;anti american&#8217;. I will not stand for you to twist my comments around and present them as fact&#8230;it is not</p>
<p>I have stated many many times that I love the fans&#8230;and by the way&#8230;it should be somewhat obvious that  I am a fan..why on earth would I make this site if I werent. In fact I made this site in order to spread the news that trek was &#8216;back&#8217;&#8230;and set the record straight on various rumors and such&#8230;as much as I could.</p>
<p>I have never ever ever said that Paramount should throw away all canon or ignore all the fans&#8230;I have just said what is painfully obvious to me and everyone in the industry&#8230;there arent enough &#8216;trekkie&#8217; level fans to support the franchise as a major film franchise&#8230;that is just a fact. It is also my opinion that those who have very specific and narrow &#8216;demands&#8217; on the owners of the franchise are not doing it or themselves any favors</p>
<p>if there is one message I want this site to convey it is that people should be positive and have a very open mind about the future of Star Trek</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: StephenMartin</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14206</link>
		<dc:creator>StephenMartin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 05:20:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14206</guid>
		<description>114. senya cartel
It appears to me that there is a movement to jettison just about everything Trek, except for the characters, and pretty much build from there. For quite some time there has been talk about this. It seems the agenda is to bring Trek up to date. What I&#039;m hearing and reading outside this board, as well inside it, is that many want a darker, grittier Trek. A Trek that reflects the trends of this time period. In order to do that, of course, much of Gene&#039;s vision will have to be dumped. It also appears that a new generation has taken over, and the old is being thrown out with the trash. Sad...but probably true. Old trekkers like me, and I&#039;m guessing here, you, are not going to be heard any longer, so we might as well sit back and enjoy the ride.

Happy New Year everyone!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>114. senya cartel<br />
It appears to me that there is a movement to jettison just about everything Trek, except for the characters, and pretty much build from there. For quite some time there has been talk about this. It seems the agenda is to bring Trek up to date. What I&#8217;m hearing and reading outside this board, as well inside it, is that many want a darker, grittier Trek. A Trek that reflects the trends of this time period. In order to do that, of course, much of Gene&#8217;s vision will have to be dumped. It also appears that a new generation has taken over, and the old is being thrown out with the trash. Sad&#8230;but probably true. Old trekkers like me, and I&#8217;m guessing here, you, are not going to be heard any longer, so we might as well sit back and enjoy the ride.</p>
<p>Happy New Year everyone!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: senya cartel</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14203</link>
		<dc:creator>senya cartel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 05:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14203</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re getting a little hot about this.  My statement about the tone was my opinion.  Regarding Mr. Pascale, I didn&#039;t attack him, I stated a contrary opinion.  There&#039;s a difference between attacking and stating a contrary opinion.  I have no agenda.

Good night to you, Dom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re getting a little hot about this.  My statement about the tone was my opinion.  Regarding Mr. Pascale, I didn&#8217;t attack him, I stated a contrary opinion.  There&#8217;s a difference between attacking and stating a contrary opinion.  I have no agenda.</p>
<p>Good night to you, Dom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dom</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/comment-page-3/#comment-14197</link>
		<dc:creator>Dom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2007 04:34:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2006/12/29/review-star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan/#comment-14197</guid>
		<description>senya.

One thing we do need to clear up before I log off (it&#039;s 4am over here so I need to get some sleep!) is that when I said I liked &#039;the tone&#039; of the site, I meant the atmosphere, the worldly friendliness, although I didn&#039;t feel any need to specify that - it&#039;s fairly obvious on a site that acknowledges there&#039;s a world beyond Star Trek!

You, on the other hand, defined my expression &#039;the tone&#039; narrowly and differently according to your own prejudices ***after*** I had posted in order to suit your purposes. Doing that is fucking evil! It&#039;s an attempt to smear me and other people here.

End of the day, Anthony runs this site and if he wants to pass a comment, he&#039;s the guy who pays the bills. Anthony, as far as I can see is totally level-headed and utterly fair in anything he says, so I can&#039;t see where your coming from attacking him!

As for people who &#039;dominate&#039; the discussions, I presume you&#039;re talking about some of us who&#039;ve supported this site from the start and therefore know each other a bit better and some more recent additions to the trekmovie family.

I&#039;m sorry you have a problem with us enthusiastically discussing something we like, but I&#039;m pretty sure we&#039;re damned if we&#039;re going to stop because you have a different agenda!! End of the day, rather than criticising the site and the way all of us talk, throw yourself into the discussion and make your points about the subject at hand.

Everyone else: good night and God bless!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>senya.</p>
<p>One thing we do need to clear up before I log off (it&#8217;s 4am over here so I need to get some sleep!) is that when I said I liked &#8216;the tone&#8217; of the site, I meant the atmosphere, the worldly friendliness, although I didn&#8217;t feel any need to specify that &#8211; it&#8217;s fairly obvious on a site that acknowledges there&#8217;s a world beyond Star Trek!</p>
<p>You, on the other hand, defined my expression &#8216;the tone&#8217; narrowly and differently according to your own prejudices ***after*** I had posted in order to suit your purposes. Doing that is fucking evil! It&#8217;s an attempt to smear me and other people here.</p>
<p>End of the day, Anthony runs this site and if he wants to pass a comment, he&#8217;s the guy who pays the bills. Anthony, as far as I can see is totally level-headed and utterly fair in anything he says, so I can&#8217;t see where your coming from attacking him!</p>
<p>As for people who &#8216;dominate&#8217; the discussions, I presume you&#8217;re talking about some of us who&#8217;ve supported this site from the start and therefore know each other a bit better and some more recent additions to the trekmovie family.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sorry you have a problem with us enthusiastically discussing something we like, but I&#8217;m pretty sure we&#8217;re damned if we&#8217;re going to stop because you have a different agenda!! End of the day, rather than criticising the site and the way all of us talk, throw yourself into the discussion and make your points about the subject at hand.</p>
<p>Everyone else: good night and God bless!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
