Star Trek: Enterprise Forums

UPN (ended 2005)

NEW TREK MOVIE!! What the?!

  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [21]Jul 11, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249
    i change my mind...for the life of me i dont want a prequel movie! epsically when there is a rumer doing around that matt damon might play kirk...WHAT AN INSULT!!!!

    i'd rather see startrek 11: not again, TNG! directed by "them" than a watery kirk/spock combo with no talents like matt damon.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [22]Jul 11, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    Don't be surprised if Ben Stiller is who Paramount wants, either. Him or Luke Wilson. Might need to make a list of who we DON'T want to see.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [23]Jul 12, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249

    WHAT!? BEN STILLER?! this a joke? dont tell me as spock, right? gezze...what an insult to the franchise and the fans...isent ben afflack also in the running to further embarrass us?

    almost like Paramount doesn't want ppl to see the movie...

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [24]Jul 13, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    Yes, "Meet The Trekkers" -- baaaarrrfff...
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [25]Jul 13, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249
    all of us are probably going to have to go into hiding when the movie comes out because no one wants to be associated with the ben stiller/matt damon, kirk/spock movie...i sure don't.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [26]Jul 13, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    I keep wondering/dreading just how this movie is going to be marketed. I think the thrill-ride approach is out, so that leaves us with the "must see drama" approach. Whatever. Just as long as this is NOT shown as a "grand romance."
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [27]Jul 13, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249
    lol..kirk/spock romance! the new brokeback mountain---*puke* knowing paramount, they might try it. brokeback warpthrusters!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of heeroyuy2006

    heeroyuy2006

    [28]Jul 14, 2006
    • member since: 06/06/06
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 464
    *Trying desperately to get that abominable thought out of my head* If they're going to do a prequel with Kirk and Spock, they need unknown actors who know the parts well to play them. Big time actors are just too well known. They'd unintentionally parody the parts instead of play them. Also, having big time actors play the parts would be the final nail in the coffin of the Star Trek franchise. If it is confirmed that big time actors are going to play Kirk and Spock, we, fans, must do everything we can to make Paramount fire them or kill the movie to save the franchise we love.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [29]Jul 14, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    I definitely do not want to see "La Cage Au Trek." That is a freaky thought, that they would try to explain away as a Vulcan ritual -- the "behind-meld."
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [30]Jul 14, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249
    i agree with what heroguy just said. trek is better with unknowns since we dont know them yet, and dont have opinions about them yet [good or bad]. the thought of matt d., ben s. or afflick playing our beloved hero is just sicking. it's bad enough being told off or laughed at when ppl know your a trek fan...the sterotypical stigma that we're all nerds or a bunch a no-life losers. this movie could have changed that opinion, but using big names isent going to save trek, only solid writing, smooth acting, and competant producers can. paramount is using the new movie as a marketing ploy to attract non-fans to a show they know nothing about. by using big names in hopes of more money for a movie probably many fans wont see. i wont...i dont want to give the "evil empire" any more of my money then they already have. i bet if big names are used, your going to see the big name "fans" flock in herds to see thier actor stink up our movie with thier big butts.
    i know someone who would go see it because "ben stiller is funny" and then ask "who or what is spock?", "i dident get it...it was a wierd movie...". all sorts of nonsense i dont want to have to explain to her because she is a half wit plain and simple.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [31]Jul 14, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    Sadly, it may be the half-wits out there that they will try to appeal to, following Berman's footsteps. We'll probably have a rap soundtrack, with plenty of product placement -- never mind they have done away with corporations by then -- if the idiots that condoned Berman for so long have any say about it.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [32]Jul 14, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249

    i can see it now. all the shallow ppl waiting in a line that never even heard of kirk and spock and are only there because "matt damon is a good actor" or as my friend would say, "because he is cute." gross...very gross. knowing paramount they'll include popular culture references with thosw jerks from vh1's best week ever and like you said, product placement for tide, swifter, chevy, dodge, tonka, etc. not to mention overly done cliches with the "pretty boy", "party boy", "geek", "hormonal girl" images totally shattering trek forever. totally catering to shallow, half-wits willing to watch their fav. big name "actor" helping to destroy our movie.

     

    it was nice knowing you trek. maybe in the year 5017 will we meet again.

    Edited on 07/14/2006 9:24pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of heeroyuy2006

    heeroyuy2006

    [33]Jul 15, 2006
    • member since: 06/06/06
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 464
    The Trek franchise doesn't have to be doomed. As I wrote in my last post. We, who love Trek, can stop the money-crazed madmen running the franchise from driving it to an early grave. We need to start a massive campaign that's so huge even the brain dead bosses running the franchise will get the message that we will not accept any big name actors who would ruin the characters we love and if they don't listen to us not will we boycott the film, but we will protest in front of their offices. Those who go to conventions should make a point to bring the subject up and if such points aren't allowed there, we should protest in front of the conventions, too. It's time we take Trek back from those who are killing it!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [34]Jul 16, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    Well, we all saw where the campaign to save Enterprise went, even with people offering to chip in up to $10 million to keep it going -- if they won't respond to money, not much hope on a petition.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [35]Jul 16, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    Actually Deanna, I could see them having contests for free tickets, and we will be treated to what the media loves, really pathetically out of shape people in uniforms, and things like I saw at a convention, a fat guy that looked like the Dunkin' Donuts man as a Borg. They might even go the Rocky Horror route, encouraging people to bring their own props, blech.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of heeroyuy2006

    heeroyuy2006

    [36]Jul 17, 2006
    • member since: 06/06/06
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 464
    lobomensch wrote:
    Well, we all saw where the campaign to save Enterprise went, even with people offering to chip in up to $10 million to keep it going -- if they won't respond to money, not much hope on a petition.


    Well then, if they won't listen to us, we'll just have to take stronger measures. We can picket Paramount everyday, turn every Trek convention into a "Give us back our Trek" rally, and find people on the inside of Paramount who will join our cause. Even though the higher ups may be using Trek only as a money making machine, there has to be some medium and lower level people who agree with us and would be willing to do everything in their power to help us. Eventually, one of those medium-level supporters of our cause could come into power at Paramount. Also, as much as I hate to suggest it, if worse comes to worst, we could have a full scale boycott of all things Star Trek. If that doesn't work, we can escalate it to all things Paramount and Viacom. Eventually, they'd have to cave in or watch the company die which they wouldn't do.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [37]Jul 17, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249
    heeroyuy...that's extreme. the problem with boycotting is that paramount will still cash in on their other franchises and not all ppl might agree with your ideas. also, ppl will continue to watch and buy trek things as long as long their is a way to do it [internet, comicbook stores, yard sales, etc]. trek will also continue to gain fans as long as they watch decent to good reruns of any of the shows or catch the movies on tnt, showtime, sci-fi, rent, borrow, etc. or the "casual" fans who sometimes watch the movies or any of the shows and show some interest in the movie dispite the fact big names may be used. i do agree that us fans really need to step in & try to stop them...but when trek: 11 horribly crashs and burns and all panamondium breaks lose outside of paramount, that's when the fat pigs will the get the idea. maybe not maybe so...and i also agree with mid-level paramount workers should get involved with the ever mounting tensions over a prequel. they prolly know the fans better then the pigs and yeah...someone should try to get in contant with them or wht happens if they are working on that now? just a guess. feels like paramount is sticking the finger to the fans...a big flaming finger w/devil horns to the fans. or if we get lucky, someone in paramount will finally wakeup and realize a prequel movie with big names is bound to a huge waste/loss of money and the movie is not even realeased or a drastic change of script & cast happens...but that is a long shot. snowballs chance in heck.

    yet again...if i was in charge, we'd have a titan movie, titan miniseries, and rikers in space...now would y'all really want that? or "kiss me deady, why dont you, tripp" memorars by the 'lonely' t'pol...a trek opera in black and white. lol!

    would i really do these things? no...that's insane..but i'm half joking about a titan and miniseries. hahahha.

    oh...i had trek, there would no old fat guys...just terrably good looking tall guys.

    lol...trek jihad!
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Deanna_T

    Deanna_T

    [38]Jul 17, 2006
    • member since: 09/26/05
    • level: 28
    • rank: Disco Stu
    • posts: 1,249
    lobo: i meant paramount trying to attract "beatiful ppl" to the movie with those kinds of sterotypes. not...the overweight ppl who watch trek allday eating nachcos.... i can imagine all the cruel trek jokes & about the fans by shockrock dj's poking fun of everything trek. heck..they might interview random ppl in uniforms and alien "attachments" at conventions and all the late nite talk show hosts poking fun of everything trek with skits and short tv clips.

    i once went to a late nite viewing of the rockey horror picture show movie where these extreme cult fans [small troup of local "actors" at a particpating movie theater]poke fun of the movie with skits under the screen complete with jokes and jeers from fans. the fans also dress up in wierd costumes and the "actors" act of scenes of the movie...pretty pathic...i dont want trek to end up like that...latenite viewings where local "actors" dress up as tng ppl and crack jokes at first contant and fans get to jeer at the screen and at the "actors." that very well could be the next step from here...better not.

    if i ever went to a convention, think i'd dress as "orion slave girl troi"...the way they made her dress in first seasons, almost made her resemble a slave girl.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of heeroyuy2006

    heeroyuy2006

    [39]Jul 17, 2006
    • member since: 06/06/06
    • level: 8
    • rank: Super-Friend
    • posts: 464
    Deanna_T wrote:
    heeroyuy...that's extreme. the problem with boycotting is that paramount will still cash in on their other franchises and not all ppl might agree with your ideas. also, ppl will continue to watch and buy trek things as long as long their is a way to do it [internet, comicbook stores, yard sales, etc]. trek will also continue to gain fans as long as they watch decent to good reruns of any of the shows or catch the movies on tnt, showtime, sci-fi, rent, borrow, etc. or the "casual" fans who sometimes watch the movies or any of the shows and show some interest in the movie dispite the fact big names may be used. i do agree that us fans really need to step in & try to stop them...but when trek: 11 horribly crashs and burns and all panamondium breaks lose outside of paramount, that's when the fat pigs will the get the idea. maybe not maybe so...and i also agree with mid-level paramount workers should get involved with the ever mounting tensions over a prequel. they prolly know the fans better then the pigs and yeah...someone should try to get in contant with them or wht happens if they are working on that now? just a guess. feels like paramount is sticking the finger to the fans...a big flaming finger w/devil horns to the fans. or if we get lucky, someone in paramount will finally wakeup and realize a prequel movie with big names is bound to a huge waste/loss of money and the movie is not even realeased or a drastic change of script & cast happens...but that is a long shot. snowballs chance in heck.

    yet again...if i was in charge, we'd have a titan movie, titan miniseries, and rikers in space...now would y'all really want that? or "kiss me deady, why dont you, tripp" memorars by the 'lonely' t'pol...a trek opera in black and white. lol!

    would i really do these things? no...that's insane..but i'm half joking about a titan and miniseries. hahahha.

    oh...i had trek, there would no old fat guys...just terrably good looking tall guys.

    lol...trek jihad!


    I realise I was being extreme. However, if the fatcats wouldn't take money to save Enterprise, then extreme measures are probably necessary to get them to listen. Also, the boycott I suggested was a last resort. I realise not everyone would boycott Trek but if a majority of fans did, the fatcats might listen. If not, we could as I suggested up the ante to boycotting all Paramount and Viacom properties. Even if only a small number of fans boycott, if done right it could create enough bad publicity for Paramount to listen to us. Of course, we'd have to be very careful not to become too radical and create a backlash against our views. As far as when Trek XI fails, I'd predict that if the fatcats haven't listened so far, there's a good chance they wouldn't then. I realise that you understand this. I also understand that the fatcats may not listen to anyone and that trying to save Trek is a lost cause, but I think it's worth the fight because we just don't know if they'd listen when we used some of the tactics I suggested earlier. Please don't get me wrong I'm not one of the people that go to the conventions or anything like that (not that there's anything wrong with going to Trek conventions). I'm not a fanatical Trekie. However, like everyone else on this thread, I don't want to see the Trek I know and love destroyed because of corporate fatcats' greed.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of lobomensch

    lobomensch

    [40]Jul 19, 2006
    • member since: 08/08/05
    • level: 51
    • rank: I Broke TV.com (Shatterdaymorn)
    • posts: 2,064
    Boycotts hardly ever accomplish anything, other than drawing more attention to the object of scorn as was with "The DaVinci Code" -- stealth is the best way to work, not as in publically crying out but through word of mouth, and not buying merchandise etc. Believe me, if there's one thing that scares execs now it is bad word of mouth -- whole advertising campaigns are being done around that now, having reps visit nightclubs, coffeeshops, bookstores etc. to hawk their product. They know how fast something can tank if bad word of mouth gets around. Let them know that will be the route if things don't shape up and you will see a turn-around.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.