The only thing that worries me is justifying the entire TOS crew being in the film if it is set prior to Kirk’s command. Then again, perhaps at least a portion of it is not. I am trying to keep my mind open.

I am, however, glad to see that Nimoy is lending his presence to the project. He is an artist, and I am sure his opinions about the characters merit their due attention on the set.

Batman was crap? Really? It’s one of the biggest money-makers of all time, and brought Batman to an entirely new generation of fans. He may have played it fast-and-loose with comic book lore, but that film made possible the various cartoons & films that followed it (some of which were good – Returns – and some of which are best forgotten – anything after) including Begins. No need for us to retroactively label it a dud.

I’ll agree Planet of the Apes was a tragic misstep, but otherwise Burton delivers stellar films (Big Fish, Sleepy Hollow, Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood).

Agreed. As in the case of Dick Tracy, Sky Captain and many of Tim Burton’s films (Batman, Planet of the Apes, etc.) all were said to be ambitious, but in the end, they were crap.

“I hope we go in the right direction with it! ”

Only time will tell.

C.G. responding:

1. All one can expect from NewTrek’s efx is the hope for state of the art work. This says nothing about the APPEARANCE of the ships in the new film, which will be open for debate.

2. For a fan-film with the alleged “shoe-string” budget, the efx seen in ST:NV’s last couple of episodes are still superior to the work seen on CBS’s Remastered project, with the latter’s shiny, video game ship.

“How are the New Voyages any more Star Trek than the new movie?”

Because ST:NV actually takes place in the same universe as TOS, and unlike “Enterprie” and what NewTrek appears to be, is not a reboot, reimagining, or any other cannibalized version.

I had always believed that TNG had drained the action and adventure from TOS, and had made the critical error in deciding to get up on the platform and preach to the general audience. I think it was Sam Goldwyn who remarked that if you wanted to preach to people, you needed to get a soapbox.

What I think they are doing is getting back to the action and adventure, and remaining true to the original spirit of the script idea that gave birth to “The Cage” and “Where No Man Has Gone Before”.

I believe that it is in those early eps from the pilot and the First Season that will give you an idea of where JJ and Orci are going. I truly believe that people will be surprised at the level of devotion to the spirit of the First Season that people will see in the Movie.

No, the Big E will not be exactly the same, but she will be close enough. No, the uniforms won’t be the same (after all, we’d have to sit through the first third of the movie taking over and under bets on how many Redshirts would by the farm by intermission, now wouldn’t we?). No, Uhura probably won’t have a beehive. But the Trek is in the story, the script, and the acting, and the devotion to the general outline of the Trek Universe.

I don’t think they will throw the baby out with the bathwater.

James Kirk, meet James Bond.

How exactly do you leap to that? These people have done nothing but wax nostalgic about TOS and the characters. Just because they’re updating a few things doesn’t mean they don’t have respect for Gene Roddenberry or the show itself. They just recognize that a big screen version of the original show isn’t going to fly. This thing needs to be big and different from what’s come before for Trek to survive. Lest we all forget, Nick Meyer & Herve Bennett weren’t ‘fans’ of Trek, and they played pretty fast-and-loose with GR’s ‘vision’.