Comments on: ‘Star Trek’ Writers Talk Shatner, Kirk, Spock & Terrorism

By: Robert Brown

Robert Brown — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 01:52:39 +0000

Let us be basic about this. The next movie should not even exist. This is not Star Wars, we don’t do prequels!

By: Cervantes

Cervantes — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 12:01:55 +0000

Terrorism?…by Klingon(s) perhaps?

Let’s hope not. I’m Klingoned out still…

By: Major Joe Ely Carrales, CAP

Major Joe Ely Carrales, CAP — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 03:23:16 +0000

79. RandyYeoman – June 30, 2007

Nice to meet you…I look forward to other debate in the near future.

Major Carrales

By: Gavin Harris

Gavin Harris — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 01:33:13 +0000

Major Joe Ely Carrales is a strong name. I prefer Major Joe Ely Carrales to John Gill. It speaks volumes of you as a person. Im Gavin Harris.

By: Major Joe Ely Carrales, CAP

Major Joe Ely Carrales, CAP — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:00:45 +0000

53. Buckaroohawk – June 29, 2007

No apology necessary. On the contrary, it is I that should make myself humble. I was breaking one of my own conventions by “assuming an assumed name.”

I stand by everything I said as “John Gill.” As I said the name was selected for an allegorical purpose.

At least now I can stnad by what I maintained. Also, a google search on me would not be too shabby a day’s read. However, now…any attacks of an ad hominem nature will be personal.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:22:53 +0000

No offense to anyone, but Ewan McGregor and the last three SW movies sucked. And Alec Guiness couldn’t be in two of them because he was dead. I don’t know if it was a health issue, age, whatever, regarding the first – maybe none of those. Lucas or Guiness may have commented, don’t know, don’t care. Those movies sucked so bad, I’m sure ole Alec was glad he wasn’t in the fourth (first) one.

All us old fans love Shatner – in or out of Trek movies – and there’s nothing wrong with seeing him again in any role in one more movie. Bring back Shat – in the words of Sarek: “while we still have time.”

By: Buckaroohawk

Buckaroohawk — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 01:46:46 +0000

#47,

Everybody is on Google. What does that have to do with anything? Maybe I would be surprised with what I found about you, but I don’t particularly care to.

John Gill (Major Caralles),

I’m sorry that I dragged this ridiculous situation out. Please accept my humble apologies.

By: Xai

Xai — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 22:17:44 +0000

#44 Stankish, HeLLLLLLLLOOOoooooo. Wah, wah, waaaaaa….
That was for you, buddy.
“Fake” was on the mind and apparently I had water on the brain, too (Venice).

But glad you enjoyed.

#47 Gavin Harris…
It would be perceived as an attack because of the way you wrote it. I can see where Major Carrales would get peeved. I would.
And as for your name being on Google, does it matter? It doesn’t lend weight to your words. My real name is out there too. So?

By: MiguelSan

MiguelSan — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 20:16:56 +0000

Ugh. More terrorism-like stories.

By: Craig P

Craig P — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:17:13 +0000

The terrorist angle sounds great so long as they portray it TOS style… that there are indeed some bad terrorists Kirk has to flying drop kick while at the same time offering some lesson and hope that in the future the terrorists will learn to work with the Federation….. after of course Kirk overloads his phaser in their ammo dump, takes their leader hostage and of course unites with some locals to take them out.

The TNG take on terrorism of course would be to negotate, allow them to board the Enterprise and kidnap some key offers, with the morale of the story being some sort of morale equivalence – that peace is the way in the nice 24th century. (as was previously done in a rather good episode of TNG)