Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Buddy-L returns with a follow-up WONDERCON report!!! STAR TREK movie talk! Lotsa comic news, including a GROO movie?!?

first? by yoaish	Mar 8th, 2007 03:16:16 AM
wow, thats a first...
I want another TNG movie by Smashing	Mar 8th, 2007 03:41:22 AM
Directed by someone under 100 and written by a sci fi fan, no more trying to appeal to people who ditched Trek in there minds 20 years ago, play to the fans and maybe then a hit?
Chris Farley as Groo would have been epic by Boondock Devil	Mar 8th, 2007 04:10:22 AM
Thankfully they said hell no as far as Wil Ferrell being involved.
what the fuck by The hoff	Mar 8th, 2007 04:13:58 AM
so berman and co got rid of a script by the writers of band of brothers. OK that explains so much about the diminishing returns of trek i really don't need to comment further, except to say how fucking awesome would a BofB style trek series be. A full on trek war series (and don't say DS9 because that was as much about the horrors and truth of war as those early propaganda films by the British).
DAMMIT, JJ by brattain	Mar 8th, 2007 04:28:37 AM
I'm into the idea of what they are trying to do with XI and I like JJ Abrams' work just as much as the next guy, but that he has never seen DS9 yet watched almost all the other Treks is cause for concern. It isn't about the need to see everything, it is about the judgment in which Treks he chose to watch. He couldn't have picked more wrong. I have to wonder about someone who would avoid the one damn Trek since 1987 that actually broke new ground. By today's standards, with BSG (produced by ex-DS9 writer Ron Moore), Lost (see, I like JJ), 24, and others raising the bar since the late 90's, perhaps DS9 doesn't compare in the intensity department, but when one looks at the massive restrictions Ira Behr and company had to deal with, it is a miracle DS9 is as fantastic as it is. For someone as creative as JJ to have actively avoided it, at least compared to the other shows, is the first reason I have for some concern about the next Star Trek movie. I can't suggest strongly enough to JJ that he watch DS9, at least starting from season 2.
DS9 by radjac33	Mar 8th, 2007 04:36:47 AM
The Cool Uncle of the Star Trek universe.
Enterprise by Boondock Devil	Mar 8th, 2007 04:39:06 AM
The Slightly Odd 'gloid of the Star Trek universe.
Is roddenberry rolling in his grave?? by theonecalledshoe	Mar 8th, 2007 05:02:35 AM
Seriously, Paramount has milked the 60s show to a max. Just let the books run wild. Kinda like what happened with Star Wars.
Roddenberry's grave is actually doing the camera shake by Boondock Devil	Mar 8th, 2007 05:06:02 AM
Personally I'm looking forward to seeing how JJ's movie will turn out. This is coming from a just a very casual Trek fan.
Indeed, DS9 was awesome, and the last good Trek to date by raw_bean	Mar 8th, 2007 05:11:56 AM
Still wasn't as good as Babylon 5 though. One awesome thing there regarding the film: the suggestion of Gary Sinise as young McCoy. That's absolute brilliance! I'm ambivalent on Matt Damon as Kirk, I'd have to see it before I'd judge, but Sinise is McCoy.
Star Trek films by dws1972	Mar 8th, 2007 06:11:14 AM
Note to producers of new star trek film, give us a dencent storyline e.g Wrath of Khan, Search for spock , give us the people we care about , spock, kirk & bones. Dont destroy the thing we love like Lucus did . The reason starwars failed when it was rehashed nobody bevelived in the caracters , when liam neeson died in tpm I didnt care , why because it was badly written . Dont do the same with Startrek. The 2nd 3rd & 4th straktrek movies where fantastic because the had good scrips and a continuing storyline WITH PEOPLE THE CARE ABOUT DONT FUCK THIS UP JJ.
haven't seen MI:3, was it any good? better than MI:1? by Amy Chasing	Mar 8th, 2007 06:14:21 AM
I thought MI:2 was just awful. As for Voyager having a better premise than DS9.. well I guess that shows just how much premise matters. (if Voyager was MI:2, then DS9 was the recent Casino Royale)!
Amy Chasing by Boondock Devil	Mar 8th, 2007 06:19:21 AM
If you enjoyed the first one you'd probably like this one. Of the three I'd rate it a little bit better than the first one if only because Phillip Seymour Hoffman is pretty decent in it.
Why a DS9 movie is a bad idea by ricster	Mar 8th, 2007 06:50:44 AM
There are something like 150 hours of DS9 out there for us to watch. What exactly could they possibly DO in 2 hours that would complement the multiple episode/season overarching storylines? nothing. exactly. go watch those 150 hours and feel glad that they ever existed. This incidentally is why the TNG movies were kinda sucky. there were already several "feature length" TNG episodes and the movies just felt like more of these, especially Nemesis, which would probably have been declared fine for an inter-season double ep but as a movie it's just more-of-the-same. plus you've got to remember that the budget (that doesnt go on salaries multipled by time) would not have been as massively different between the series and the movies as they were when ST:TMP came to light. similar rules apply to the Xfiles movie. oh fuck it, i'm a geek like the rest of you, i'd love an XF2 anyway. ric
-Nemesis +Insurrection by ricster	Mar 8th, 2007 06:52:16 AM
(correction)
nemesis + insurrection = bad Trek by just pillow talk	Mar 8th, 2007 07:24:35 AM
I wasn't into the "re-imagining" of the original Star Trek, but the more I see the better I like it. So I am officially won over by that, but not with the new Trek movie. I would have wanted them to make a movie 100 yrs after TNG with a brand new crew or something. I know they wouldn't want that since they are not established, and as was mentioned, the Trek brand name ain't what it used to be. I guess I'll just have to see how it comes together. When all is said and done, I'll probably be all jazzed up by a new Trek movie...It just can't be worse than what was done to Star Wars, right?
Why did Berman & Co. last so long? by Abin Sur	Mar 8th, 2007 08:58:56 AM
If Paramount was so keen to erase the memory of Berman, Braga and all those others involved with the "Star Dreck" part of Star Trek, why did it take until 2006 to start a fresh Trek? Berman must be some kind of svengali...
Daren Dochterman by Chindogu	Mar 8th, 2007 09:00:47 AM
Daren Dochterman does not work on the new Remastered CGI'ed Original Series. I'm sure he wishes he does, but he doesn't. The Doomsday Machine clip they showed was probably just the one he's been working on for a very long time. It's online somewhere and, personally speaking, isn't nearly as good as how the real R-TOS DDM turned out.
and Abrams... by Chindogu	Mar 8th, 2007 09:05:57 AM
...watch DS9 for god sakes. It's the proto-typical sci-fi serial we see on TV a lot now days.
This is the dorkiest article ever. by Zarles	Mar 8th, 2007 09:23:33 AM
Seriously. This article couldn't get laid in a women's prison with a carton of cigarettes. Good info, though.
Next convention, someone PLEASE corner Abrams... by Head In A Box	Mar 8th, 2007 09:35:12 AM
...and make sure that he knows that Spock was already serving in Starfleet for several years while Kirk was still at the academy and DID. NOT. MEET. until he took command of the Enterprise. They keep talking that the movie will be about young Kirk and Spock's adventures during their Academy days and it pisses me right the hell off. They weren't college buddies who managed to get posted to the same ship after graduation. The Cage takes place approximately one year before Where No Man Has Gone Before and at this point during The Cage, Spock had served with Pike for (ok I don't remember the exact number) 5-10 years or so. In "Where No Man..." Kirk had only recently taken command of the Enterprise. And it's well established that he was the youngest officer to get command of a starship so quickly. Please, someone? anyone? make sure he knows that?...'kay? Yes, I'm a huge dork, I know that, but I loves me some 'Trek long time and I want it treated properly.
They wanted Will Ferrell. I HATE Will Ferrell by Mr_X	Mar 8th, 2007 09:41:21 AM
im seeing the grro movie just because of the above statement. enjoyed teh comics as a kid, this could be on the level of shrek. star trek. i loved teh franchise, but berman and braga just killed it, they weild too much power and ended up raping the series. tng, ds9 and voy were good.. in that order. ent on the otherhand you could tell had merely rehashed plots from each of the series and mashed it together into something that was terrible. never watched ent, and i really didnt feel like i missed anything. JJ well you had best not fark up. i relly cant see how you're going to reenginner the sereis unless you completely reboot like casino royale (btw word on teh street is that he wouldnt mind being on a trek show) and the ship and gadgets will have to look modern, theres no way around it, we have better looking stuff now, and it'd break the 4th wall if you see dials and switches on the bridge. fark the continiutiy geeks, it just needs to be done, so do it. trek is dead without it.
Head In A Box by Mr_X	Mar 8th, 2007 09:45:02 AM
kirk and spock at the academy.. really who cares. . the continituty is messed up anyway..let them make a movie without geeking out over the little detials. you think joe blogs trekker cares about that? we want a great film, a great story and star trek back on our screens, not to cry about teh fact that kirk and spock weren't buddies at the academy.
Voyager better than DS9? by CTU Mole	Mar 8th, 2007 10:32:40 AM
That blows that guy's credibility right there.
CGI Groo? by TimBenzedrine	Mar 8th, 2007 11:13:19 AM
I heard about this earlier, but I didn't know it was actually going to happen. Still, I wish it was going to be done in clay, just to keep the crudeness of the original art. I hope to God they don't over render everything like they did with Over the Hedge.
DC's Dan Didio is an idiot. by riskebiz	Mar 8th, 2007 11:49:24 AM
That jerk is too full of his roll at DC and is the brainiac with the terrible idea of killing Dick Grayson. He is hellbent on killing the character. Every editorial he writes in the back of every DC comic points to a man who just doesn't get what it is that people love about comics. He comes off as one of those idiots out to please himself and figures everyone buys the comics not by who is the writer or the artist … but who edits them. Jerk.
i can maybe by sober voice of reason	Mar 8th, 2007 12:56:21 PM
get along with damon as kirk, but if ben affleck is spock i'm going to set everything on fire. i love star trek, but the last two movies (and voyager) have been terrible at best.
Link... by Blueballs333	Mar 8th, 2007 02:18:24 PM
http://films.thelot.com/films/ 30017
How can Damon be Kirk by CTU Mole	Mar 8th, 2007 02:31:57 PM
He's older than Shatner was when he started. So it can't very well be about a young Kirk now can it? The whole idea is fucked. It's interesting to see how James Bond became a cold blooded killer. It's interesting to see how Bruce Wayne came to dress as a bat and beat up bad guys. I don't care how James Kirk became a fairly competent starship captain. The Star Trek universe is too big to just go back to the beginning.
Gary Sinese by cornponious	Mar 8th, 2007 04:39:22 PM
YES YES YES. This is perfect thinking. This is what I have thought for some time now since hearing about the new Trek film...
Head In A Box is ALL WRONG by Geekgasm	Mar 8th, 2007 05:03:53 PM
"The Cage takes place approximately one year before Where No Man Has Gone Before and at this point during The Cage, Spock had served with Pike for (ok I don't remember the exact number) 5-10 years or so." This is all wrong. In "The Menagerie", the two-part episode made out of "The Cage", Spock says that the events they're watching from "The Cage" footage happened 11 years ago. If you assume "The Menagerie" took place in the first or second year of the 5 years (either the same year or the year after "Where No Man Has Gone Before"), then there is no way in hell that "The Cage" took place approximately one year before "Where No Man Has Gone Before". And Spock very plainly says in "The Menagerie" that he served with Pike for 13 years and change. GO WATCH THE SHOW. "...and make sure that he knows that Spock was already serving in Starfleet for several years while Kirk was still at the academy and DID. NOT. MEET. until he took command of the Enterprise." WRONG. AGAIN. Its entirely plausible that Kirk was a couple of years behind Spock at the academy, and it goes a little something like this - Assume the first season of the show takes place in 2266, the second season in 2267. In the first season "The Menagerie", Spock says the events of "The Cage" took place 11 years ago, i.e. 2255. Assuming "Where No Man Has Gone Before" was set the year before "The Menagerie" and in the first year of the five year mission, it happens in 2265, and if Spock served under Pike for 13 years, then he must have begun serving with Pike in 2253. Assuming Pike was Spock's first commander out of the Academy, then Spock would have been a freshman 4 years earlier in 2249. In "The Deadly Years" from the second season in 2267, Kirk says he is 34 years old, and therefore 33 in 2266, when Spock said that "The Cage" happened 11 years before, whuch means Kirk was 22 years old in 2255, and 20 years old in 2253 when Spock started serving under Pike right out of the Academy. Assuming Kirk started the Academy when he was 18, then his Freshman year would have been 2251, which would mean he and Spock were at the Academy together for 2 whole years. So its not impossible. Nyah.
re: the hoff by SilentP	Mar 8th, 2007 06:25:47 PM
I don't think he said that Berman and co. tossed out the band of brothers guy's script. I think he said the BoB guy's script was tossed out at the same time as Berman and co. were. Like, they were all ousted together, lol.
Matt Damon would be good as Kirk,but he'd be expensive by Chris38	Mar 8th, 2007 06:37:42 PM
Matt Damon would be pretty good as Kirk, but he'd be expensive (he'd want at least $US 25 mill). I believe Daniel Craig is a Trek fan and wants a role in the new film. It'd be great seeing Patrick Stewart play Picard again, but he's also too expensive. He'd want probably $US 15 mill.
I don't mind a break from canon with Star Trek... by I Hope You Die	Mar 8th, 2007 08:30:13 PM
...which seems to be what they're planning, but it'll inevitably be about making it "more edgy" and having more action - i.e., more like absolutely everything else out there. What was genuinely edgy about Star Trek and remains edgy to this day is that it had the balls to be utopian. These days you need massive steely balls to do utopian science fiction; or even to do a television series where the characters still consider torture abhorrent. Voyager and Enterprise already went down the route of redoing the starship interiors in the same drab metallics as every other science fiction show and throwing out morality; it didn't work, it made the whole thing generic and boring.
Don't do anything that conflicts with the Trek canon. by kabong	Mar 8th, 2007 09:53:50 PM
But move on. New captain, new crew, new ship, new mission. Action, intrigue, conflict, more action, some SF concepts, aliens, more action. Maybe it would be a good idea to move to the 25th century. Don't carry baggage from all previous Treks, but don't deliberately jettison continuity just because JJ and the writers (of "The Island" oh shit) are too busy pitching studio executive freaks on teen boys that they can't watch the series. Why did I waste my typing? They are going to screw it up. They should just make a movie called "Space Quest" about the Space Fleet Academy and I would probably enjoy it more than I will their inevitable Trek mess.
STOP... BITCHING... by TheFutureDirector	Mar 8th, 2007 10:17:47 PM
Trek was DEAD. Very, very dead after the one-two knockout of Nemesis and Enterprise (and some Voyager peppered in there for good measure). Going back, starting from the beginning and plowing the road, starting with a fresh slate not only makes sense, it's been proven to work (i.e. Batman, Casino Royale), so of course the studios notice this. Redoing a universe does not take away the original one; that's what DVD's for. And one cannot be mad about paving over a continuity that is considerably screwed up.
Action? by readingwriter	Mar 8th, 2007 11:21:24 PM
The original show wasn't much of an action show, it was about stories of conflict. The movies became something else, something made in a more action-oriented time. The old show had stories with tension, conflict, but very rarely lots of action. They didn't need it--it was a genuine science fiction show, though it could have been "harder" SF. That's why this new one should just be its own thing. The casting suggestions could be taken but they should be about a different bunch of characters. Damon as Kirk is kinda silly, but as a new captain, fine; Sinise is a great suggestion because he's just a damned interesting actor. I'd love this to me more about science fiction concepts instead of the PC politics of the Next Generation and other boring, talky followups I hardly watched, but I don't see much real SF out there, and little audience for it--fake SF, SF lite (i.e. action movies with ray guns), explosions in space, sure, but no real SF. The old series actually attempted this with enough action to keep the kiddies interested and did a good balancing act.
IN THE EVENT OF A WATER LANDING by triple-	Mar 9th, 2007 12:05:01 AM
haha insurrection was great. f*ck the haters.
Thank you Judd Fucking Winick... by Sledge Hammer	Mar 9th, 2007 12:13:34 AM
...For driving Green Arrow right into the fucking ground. As if it's not bad enough that GA fans have had to put up with your "Im bored, so I'll start making idiotic sweeping changes to the character, going down my predictable break him so I can remake him path once again" style bullshit, now you've actually managed to bury the title completely. Thanks so much asshole.
re: Geekgasm by MasterShake	Mar 9th, 2007 01:49:36 AM
I find your logic flawless.
Damon=no $$$ from me... by ComputerGuy68	Mar 9th, 2007 07:50:53 AM
do that and Trek will be dead to me forever.
Cool by knightstalker-666	May 31st, 2007 10:06:28 AM
I am excited that the new movie is returning to Star Trek the way it was ment to be. Sure The Next Generation was good. But The Original Series is the best...best uniforms...best Starship designs...best characters!!! I am looking forward to seeing the TRUE Enterprise on the BIG screen. Screw the next generation...lets get back to what the made the show so popular...the classics. Just remember...if it wasn't for the Original series there would be no Next Generation. I think too many "fans" forget that. I've said it before...suck it up or shut up.

Talkbacks

Buddy-L returns with a follow-up WONDERCON report!!! STAR TREK movie talk! Lotsa comic news, including a GROO movie?!?

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks