One highly anticipated science fiction movie to be directed by J.J. Abrams and scheduled for release December 25, 2008 is Star Trek with Matt Damon lined up to be Captain James Tiberius Kirk. I have a feeling that a new "original" generation of Star Trekkers will accept this prequel and will add to the franchise.

I'm looking forward to the development of this movie. As one of the audience members who grew up with the original television series, if this movie can follow in the footsteps of the spin-off series and movies, Christmas '08 will be quite a starry night.

Hmm. This is the first I've heard of this. I like Abrams and Damon, but the original Star Trek is so campy. J.J.'s got his work cut out for him. Subsequent Star Trek series (i.e. The Next Generation), Firefly/Serenity, and the recent Battlestar Galactica have rendered the original Star Trek pretty lame as far as science fiction goes.

quote:

ericg75
Jedi
Posted 29 May 2007 06:00 AM Hide Post
Hmm. This is the first I've heard of this. I like Abrams and Damon, but the original Star Trek is so campy. J.J.'s got his work cut out for him. Subsequent Star Trek series (i.e. The Next Generation), Firefly/Serenity, and the recent Battlestar Galactica have rendered the original Star Trek pretty lame as far as science fiction goes.

Like with music, I suspect personal preferences can become frozen by generation (time periods). For example, I still enjoy the music I grew up with as a teenager (actually in my twenties) so the music from the sixties and seventies. So too with Star Trek, even with its campy style and poor (compared to today's standards) special effects and cheap set designs, I came to enjoy the original characters and some of the plots have resonated deeply then and even now. If one experienced this series when they were new and the series was enjoyed and brought pleasurable satisfaction, even today to see reruns brings back the same emotional buttons even though most people viewing this series now would likely find it pretty lame.

quote:

Originally posted by ericg75:
Hmm. This is the first I've heard of this. I like Abrams and Damon, but the original Star Trek is so campy. J.J.'s got his work cut out for him. Subsequent Star Trek series (i.e. The Next Generation), Firefly/Serenity, and the recent Battlestar Galactica have rendered the original Star Trek pretty lame as far as science fiction goes.

???

The foundation of all science fiction television has been rendered 'lame,' eh? O k a y . . .

I think it should definitely be interesting to see what Abrams does with it. The franchise as a whole needed a break from the continuing sagas, so I can see how a "reboot" could work for the better similar to the way Nolan re-energized the Batman series.

As far as "lame", well, in comparison I would tend to agree TOS suffers next to Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, or even The Next Generation. But tabuno's point is valid as well - it's entirely possible to acknowledge the shortcomings of a favorite while still recognizing its value or place in history. Some seem to forget TOS had some established SF authors contributing stories - Theodore Sturgeon, Norman Spinrad, and Harlan Ellison, to name just a few. For all its camp and negligible effects budget, it managed to create a lasting franchise that has thrived over forty years and many incarnations.

quote:

Originally posted by Ed D.:
As far as "lame", well, in comparison I would tend to agree TOS suffers next to Battlestar Galactica, Firefly, or even The Next Generation.

It's a cultural difference, though, and that's nothing really substantive when the analogy is drawn. What TOS means to folks is -- in most respects -- predicated on when it aired. It stood for something entirely different than anything that's come before. TNG, on the other hand, was a mild reboot of TOS based on culturally significant norms for the mid-80's to mid-90's. FIREFLY? I still don't understand why that show means so much to folks. nuBSG? I'm indifferent b/c the show, in some respects, feels like a retread of SPACE:ABOVE & BEYOND or even STARSHIP TROOPERS. That's not to say that I don't enjoy it. There are times when it feels entirely derrivative (sp?) of other sci fi shows. I never felt that way with TOS.

The Next Big Star Trek news ?!?!

Found this on Comingsoon.net this afternoon ...

Quinto Confirmed for Spock in Star Trek?
Source: E! Online July 24, 2007


E! Online is reporting that "Heroes" star Zachary Quinto (he plays Sylar) is close to being confirmed for the role of Spock in the J.J. Abrams-directed Star Trek:

Zachary Quinto's chances of being Spock in the upcoming Star Trek film are looking extremely good. I hear the deal is about to close. Best. Casting. Ever.

Update: Jen here. Following up on K.G.'s brilliant scoop, I checked with a source who confirms that the Zachary Quinto-as-Spock contract is with the business affairs team at Paramount. Business affairs is generally considered the last stop on the deal-negotiation train. The deal only awaits sign-off from outside counsel. Squee.

Leonard Nimoy originated the role in the 1966 series. Star Trek hits theaters Christmas Day 2008.

USA Today is reporting that Leonard Nimoy has agreed to be in the new 2008 movie as Spock while Zachary Quinto is slated to play a younger Spock.

Great news, but I hope JJ doesn't go thru all of the original cast and have stand alone young/old flicks for each.

There was some mention that William Shatner was interested in signing on.

Actually, Shatner passed after a meeting with JJ, from what I recall.

As huge of a Star Trek fan as I have been for all of my life, (I am 44)and through all of it's incarnations. I am going to have to say that a reboot is totaly ludicris. and as much as it pains me to say...if they can't make it work in the present continuem...enough is enough and allow James T Kirk to rest in peace.

The trailers for this movie scheduled to be released May 8 looks dazzling and edgy. I really forward to seeing the movie even more.

I love star trek in general and I like how it transformed the society in all those years, opening peoples minds to new ideas some of which are even being used, new technologies etc. But the only disturbing thing in ST series was the whole concept of USS, and nearly all on-Earth events taking place in America. I mean we watch stuff just like that without questioning, ST somehow tried to inject the idea of the whole world just consisting of one country ? I dont remember seeing any other nationalities ? fill me up if Im mistaken on this matter

quote:

Ogan
Slacker
Posted 25 March 2009 12:06 AM Hide Post
I love star trek in general and I like how it transformed the society in all those years, opening peoples minds to new ideas some of which are even being used, new technologies etc. But the only disturbing thing in ST series was the whole concept of USS, and nearly all on-Earth events taking place in America. I mean we watch stuff just like that without questioning, ST somehow tried to inject the idea of the whole world just consisting of one country ? I dont remember seeing any other nationalities ? fill me up if Im mistaken on this matter

I'm going to go from memory without notes, so don't quote me. I believe that what Star Trek represents is the United Federation of Planets and that the original television series included a Russian, an Asian, and an African American in addition to a Vulcan. You can also include a Irishman I believe. So it seems to me that you had a fairly culturally diverse crew that formed the basis of the Star Trek franchise.

I dont know I recently finished the whole Next Generation series and now halved the Enterprise episodes, I couldnt see many peoples from different nationalities. If you are referring to the actualy 60-70's series you may be right I have vague memories on that one, I must watch the whole original series over. But yeah you may be right the actual series that converted the whole concepts were the originals not the follow up's.

Star Trek was one of my favorite Sci-Fi tv series. I liked season 1 very much.

FYI, here's a list of the Star Trek movies, not counting the new one:

• 1. Star Trek--The Motion Picture (1979)
• 2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)
• 3. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984)
• 4. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
• 5. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)
• 6. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)
• 7. Star Trek Generations (1994)
• 8. Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
• 9. Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)
• 10. Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)

To this list I would add two unofficial entries: Forbidden Planet (1956) which essentially laid down the groundwork and served as a template for the TV show, and Galaxy Quest (1999), a funny, recursive Star Trek in all but name.

If you can, can somebody explain Uhura's behavior in this this movie? It just didn't seem consistent with the original television or movie versions. Or am I wrong? [A decent response might require some spoiler warning or not].

Uhura is the least defined of the regular characters in the original cast of "Star Trek." As the new movie winkingly points out, Uhura could have been a first name or last--that's how much we know about her. So pretty much anything in the way of expansion can stick and not violate continuity. She demonstrated no previous pdas--public displays of affection--toward Spock except for maybe an instance in one of the early episodes in which she sang a tune to the accompaniment of the first officer on a stringed musical instrument--and got playful and flirty. But there's an underlying reason why Uhura couldn't be more intimate. "Star Trek" is historic in showcasing the first interracial kiss--a forced kiss between Kirk and Uhura--on the airwaves which indicates the touchy state of race relations of the late Sixties, and even now since no TV show to my knowledge, and I admit I haven't been watching a lot of TV lately, has followed up on though mixed casts are no longer a big deal. (The NBC network didn't even want female crewmembers because it would give viewers the idea that hanky panky was going on in space. Gene Roddenberry had to deal with crap like this.) The most Uhura had to do on the show, besides opening hailing frequencies, was the episode in which Kirk and company was accidentally transported to an alternate universe--a mirror universe with a back-stabbing Federation and an evil starship Enterprise. A scene had Uhura--pretending to be the bad Uhura--distract the bad Sulu from his monitoring board so the good Scotty could tap into some circuitry without detection. With the help of a skimpy uniform she was able to do this and, when things went too far, fiercely rebuffed the advances of the scar-faced helmsman. It's not Shakespeare but it is, to my mind, Uhura's most indelible moment in the series and her sexiest. She looked great. But nothing after that was quite as impressive. By the time the movies came along, the alluring bits went to younger people or just plain neglected altogether. The movies provided more opportunity for character development, but it was never really capitalized on. Perhaps the new, better defined Uhura in the new movie could have acted with a greater sense of decorum and professionalism, but then we wouldn't have gotten a glimpse of Spock's simmering sensuality beneath his tightly-wound repression.