Comments on: Paramount Updates Star Trek Credits & Official Synopsis + Adds Production Partner

By: spock

spock — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:54:46 +0000

They put so much work into changing it from Man to One.

It doesn’t look good for the new movie – if they don’t care about Cannon. Star Trek is different from Superman were they seem to re-imagine it every time. I could only enjoy a story that has good continuity in it.

By: Anthony Pascale

Anthony Pascale — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:22:21 +0000

Fanbois,

warning for trolling, and pick a new name
comments to http://trekmovie.com/about/feedback

By: DesiluTrek

DesiluTrek — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:43:19 +0000

If Trek is about humans more evolved than us 250-300 years from now, it’s fair to assume they would not be offended by the use of either “man” or “one.” However, other sentient aliens could rightfully say “man” is rather human-centric, so “one” would be used as a respectful courtesy in mixed company. Universal translators would interpret “man” as such.

“Where no man has gone before” is fine in the 23rd century for the same reasons as, for instance, many female crew wear miniskirts — because, being more accepting/tolarant of others’ differences, we are more comfortable with ourselves.

(Of course, the previous is an attempt to Trek-fit what can be seen as 1966 and 1987 anachronisms.)

By: Fanbois are lame

Fanbois are lame — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:31:09 +0000

Dude- you just told me to lighten up and then referenced Zefram Cochrane like he was a real guy.

Again- TV shows and movies. Not real. F-I-C-T-I-O-N.

Here is how fiction works: someone thinks up some good stuff for a story. Later on, perhaps someone thinks up more to that story. Sometimes, the new story dovetails perfectly with the old version. Sometimes, the new version is different. Either way is OK because unlike non-fiction, continuity in a fiction franchise takes a back-seat to entertainment value.

I mean really- would it be so band if Trek took the same approach as James Bond or most super-hero franchise and just freshened itself up now and again without freaking out over continuity?

By: IrishTrekkie

IrishTrekkie — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 14:40:15 +0000

# 101 cut back on the coffee , and ligthen up a bit .

yes where “no man ” makes sense it give it the classic feel , and as someone already said it’s established within the Trek universe that Zefram Cochrane coined the phrase , so it would be used in the 23th century,

go trek !

By: Fanbois are lame

Fanbois are lame — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 14:12:10 +0000

I don’t know what is more pathetic- some of the things people in this thread are arguing passionatly over even though this is JUST A FREAKIN’ SHOW or the fact that I just read the whole thread.

Let’s all move out of Mom’s basement, take a shower, and spend a little time in the sunlight talking to real, live people about things non-Geek for oh, say, 30 minutes and see if we feel more sane.

By: trektacular

trektacular — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:04:15 +0000

98. I totally agree, Trek has been dead to me for at least 10 years might as well just enjoy the postmortem thrashing.

By: Charles Trotter

Charles Trotter — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:44:09 +0000

#97 The Vulcanista,

I’m not entirely sure, actually. I think they are listed in order of who has more authority on the project, or who contributed the most to the project. In this case, however, the exec producers appear to be listed in ABC order until they get to the three guys from Level 1. Since Todman is apparently the head of Level 1, he gets top-billing above his partners.

The final exec producer credits will likely separate the first four from the last three, so one credit will read “Executive Producers: Bryan Burk, Jeffrey Chernov, Alex Kurtzman, Orberto Orci”, which will be followed by the credit “Executive Producers: Bill Todman, Jr., Edward Milstein, Paul Schwake.”

By: mike aka the alchemical dragon

mike aka the alchemical dragon — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 08:01:58 +0000

Five Things:
1. The phrase, where no man has gone before was always appropriate because trek was the story of hu-MAN-ity or MAN-kind stepping out onto a larger stage.
2. Didn’t we have enough of this prequal nonsense with Enterprise. They didn’t even have the decency or good sense to call it star trek: enterprise until their butts were in a sling because of bad ratings. Ent left a bad taste in everyones mouth because of their disregard for established trek history, and their desecration of much the star trek continuum, and this “new vision” seems like a fancy way of saying throw the classic story out the window .
3. No one, ever, in any time, in any reality will ever come close to William Shatner as James Tiberius Kirk, Period. End of story, do not pass go, do not collect $200. The Same goes for Nimoy, Kelly, Doohan, Nichols, Koenig, and Takei.
4. When is everyone going to realize that JJ Abrams is a whack job who can’t right the end of a TV series. Anyone remember how pointless, confused and painfully drawn out the last three seasons of Alias were. They had a great start, but they had no idea what the h@!! the were doing by the end, because they never thought it through. The same is rapidly becoming apparent with Lost. Also, why isn’t Abrams doing hard time for the greatest travesty of all TV: Felicity.
5. Maybe the next one will be called what STXII was called on the Simpsons, So Very Tired. Don’t get me wrong, I love Star Trek, I’ve watched all the movies, even Nemesis and Final Frontier, multiple times, as well as having seen every episode of every series, even the animated one, at least once, but there is one thing I realized by the end of Enterprise: Their current production team is out of ideas. They said “These are the Voyages” was a love letter to the fans, I would call it a drunk dial at best. They reduced what was supposed to be the culmination of all of enteprise into an aged and decrepit Riker and Troi watching a movie. They need to forget about Star Treks established and hallowed past and engage in the true final frontier, that nebulous entity called the future.

By: The Vulcanista

The Vulcanista — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 07:57:25 +0000

#95, Charles,

As I’m totally ignorant about how such things work and just curious: So Exec VP credits are listed in order of whose company invested the most moola in the production?

TIA.

Peace. Live long and prosper.
The Vulcanista }:-|