Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11?
Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248929] Fr, 21 April 2006 13:42
sabtino  
I was wondering what people's thoughts are on Paramount signing on
Mission Impossible 3 director Jeff Abrams to make the 11th Star Trek
film, which will be a prequel focusing on a younger Kirk and Spock.

Most Trek fans can't complain, if Paramount's entirely new management
have shafted Rick Berman from being involved and it'll be interesting
to see what actors get cast as a younger Kirk and Spock, but I wish
what's being planned was the basis for a Star Trek 12, with the 11th
film featuring William Shatner (provided he lost some weight and got in
shape) and Leonard Nimoy and properly resolving the issue of the Nexus.

Star Trek 11's script by writers Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci has yet
to be written, but the Mission Impossible 3 script Kurtzman & Orci have
apparently written for Mission Impossible 3 (with very heavy input by
Lost and Alias series creator Jeff Abrams) is sposed to be excellent
and looks like it's the best of the 3 Mission films so far, but
Kurtzman & Orci's writing track record isn't that great. They
wrote the script for the abysmal film The Island, that was a disastrous
megaflop last year.

They're writing the script for a live action Transformers film and
also wrote for the Alias, Xena and Hercules TV shows. The April 21
Variety story is below.

Trekkies have a new leader. 'Star' treatment for J.J.
By DAVE MCNARY.

J.J. Abrams is becoming the next Gene Roddenberry.
Paramount is breathing life into its Star Trek franchise by setting
Mission : Impossible III helmer J.J. Abrams to produce and direct the
11th 'Trek' feature, aiming for a 2008 release.

Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk, Abrams' producing team from Lost, also
will produce the yet-to-be-titled feature. Project to be penned by
Abrams and MI3 scribes Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, will center on
the early days of seminal Trek characters James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock,
including their first meeting at Starfleet Academy and first outer
space mission.
Deal reflects ParPar's bullishness on MI3, which launches worldwide
next weekend and underlines the goal of Paramount chief Brad Grey and
prexyprexy Gail Berman to re-energize the pipeline via high-profile
tentpoles while revitalizing the Par brand with top-tier talent such as
Abrams.

MI3 is the first pic to be released that's been greenlit by Grey.
Star Trek has been Hollywood's most durable performer other than James
Bond, spawning 10 features that have grossed more than $1 billion and
726 TV episodes from six series.
Decision to relaunch Star Trek comes less than a year after UPN pulled
the plug on Star Trek: Enterprise amid dismal ratings following a
four-season run and four years after Star Trek: Nemesis turned in the
worst performance of the 10 films with $43 million domestic.
Original series created by Roddenberry launched in 1966 on NBC and
ended in 1969.

During the following decade, the original 78 episodes of Trek became
staples in syndication and helped mobilize the fan base along with
conventions, books and merchandise. Paramount released Star Trek : The
Motion Picture in 1979 and saw domestic grosses hit $82 million. The
next three films grossed a combined $263 million domestically, so
Paramount started the second TV series, The Next Generation, in 1987,
with Rick Berman and Roddenberry co-exec producing.

Under Sherry Lansing's tenure, Rick Berman had been teamed several
years ago with Jordan Kernerand Kerry McCluggage to develop an 11th
feature set in the early days of Starfleet Academy.

Date in print: Fri., Apr. 21, 2006, Los Angeles.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248930 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 16:03
Notifier Deamon  
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248931 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 16:42
Marshall Karp  
My first reaction, well, it's worth a try. Anything is better than the
depths the franchise has sunk to. We'll see.

However, these guys are action adventure guys, not science fiction guys.
Berman was an action adventure guy. As you recall, Roddenberry was friends
with Asimov and used top flight science fiction writers in some of the best
episodes. You either understand science fiction writing or you don't. In
some ways, I think it is something you are born with or not. So again,
we'll see.

My main rant is that Nicholas Meyer was the obvious choice to revitalize the
franchise, but they will go with a big name everytime to make the almighty
dollar. Who cares what the faithful fans want? Really they need to make
Star Trek, conceptually pure and with canon. Interesting stories and
interesting characters. Seems like they go with explosions, babes, and
special effects to establish an audience, yeah that's what people want. Why
don't they call it: STAR TREK XI: NUDE GIRLS AND SPECIAL EFFECTS. I'm sure
that would be a box office winner. Just like that dreadful Spock's Brain
episode. Seriously, if they just make a good Star Trek movie, the real fans
will see it and see it again. They need to stop trying to swing things over
to get the new convert's dollars. You are either into Star Trek or you are
not. It is a polarizing issue.

Lastly, if they go after the money and who cares about the hardcore fans,
watch who they get to play Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. It will just be boy band
models who can't act. Anyway, we'll see.

"Stan Jensen" <spam [at] wonderful.spam> wrote in message
news:tfph42haup1i7d6m4u7qnae9ivee7ise5a [at] 4ax.com...
> Berman killed Trek. Paramount didn't do a thing wrong in getting rid
> of that asshole.
>
> On 21 Apr 2006 04:42:08 -0700, "Sab" <sabtino [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Most Trek fans can't complain, if Paramount's entirely new management
>>have shafted Rick Berman from being involved
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248932 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 17:34
Kweeg  
"Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0b62g.13$0z.7 [at] trnddc01...
<snip>
> My main rant is that Nicholas Meyer was the obvious choice to revitalize
the
> franchise,
<snip>

He's also the same guy that said in his directors comments in TWOK, he
didn't know anything about Star Trek he just made a high seas adventure and
set it in space. A self admitted fan like Manny Coto, the man that turned a
stinker like Enterprise right around to be in the highly entertaining "now
*that's* Star Trek" category, would be a far better choice.
--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248933 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 17:42
Marshall Karp  
"Kweeg" <kweeg [at] nospam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:WX62g.55846$WI1.28462 [at] pd7tw2no...
> "Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0b62g.13$0z.7 [at] trnddc01...
> <snip>
>> My main rant is that Nicholas Meyer was the obvious choice to revitalize
> the
>> franchise,
> <snip>
>
> He's also the same guy that said in his directors comments in TWOK, he
> didn't know anything about Star Trek he just made a high seas adventure
> and
> set it in space.

He is an excellent writer, director, and story teller. As for science
fiction, Time After Time was well done.

Really lost interest in Enterprise by then, but I have read on here that Mr.
Cota did a good job.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248934 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 19:13
Kweeg  
"Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:s372g.8$BO2.6 [at] trnddc02...
>
> "Kweeg" <kweeg [at] nospam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:WX62g.55846$WI1.28462 [at] pd7tw2no...
> > "Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:0b62g.13$0z.7 [at] trnddc01...
> > <snip>
> >> My main rant is that Nicholas Meyer was the obvious choice to
revitalize
> > the
> >> franchise,
> > <snip>
> >
> > He's also the same guy that said in his directors comments in TWOK, he
> > didn't know anything about Star Trek he just made a high seas adventure
> > and
> > set it in space.
>
> He is an excellent writer, director, and story teller. As for science
> fiction, Time After Time was well done.

Sure but it was quasi-SF, more of a clasic love story really


> Really lost interest in Enterprise by then, but I have read on here that
Mr.
> Cota did a good job.

Go out and rent season 4! Except for the last episode and a weak one in the
middle it's the best Trek (IMO) since DS9 (which was the best since TOS) if
ENT had been done like this from the beginning it would still be on.

--
Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248935 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 19:37
Jaxtraw  
Sab wrote:
> I was wondering what people's thoughts are on Paramount signing on
> Mission Impossible 3 director Jeff Abrams to make the 11th Star Trek
> film, which will be a prequel focusing on a younger Kirk and Spock.
>

What's that sound? Is it the sound of a film sucking balls? Why yes, I do
believe it is.

I really think they should leave the whole franchise a bit longer to settle.
I really do.

Ian

--
www.jaxtrawstudios.com
science fiction comics with shagging in
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248936 ] Fr, 21 April 2006 23:44
allemannster  
I'm glad we're getting somebody new to breathe life into the franchise
again. God, please let it be good.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248937 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 00:19
Al Smith  
> I was wondering what people's thoughts are on Paramount signing on
> Mission Impossible 3 director Jeff Abrams to make the 11th Star Trek
> film, which will be a prequel focusing on a younger Kirk and Spock.

As long as Tom Cruise doen't get a bit part as a Klingon, I can
live with it.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248938 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 00:25
Godzilla1171  
Are they going to finally reveal the Kirk and Spock affair that took
place around this time???
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248941 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 02:25
Skytech  
> Berman killed Trek. Paramount didn't do a thing wrong in getting rid
> of that asshole.
>

I'd say Paramount was totally to blame for anything wrong. They seemed
more interested in slapping out something quick and cheap just to keep
the franchise going never bothering to make sure it was what people
wanted. Getting rid of Berman? If he was so bad, they should have know
better before hiring him. They aimed for the largest consumer
demographics and that always leads to a bland, watered down product.
They lost and we lost; us mostly because I'm sure there was a tax
break involved for the PTB.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248944 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 05:13
ToolPackinMama  
Godzilla1171 [at] aol.com wrote:

> Are they going to finally reveal the Kirk and Spock affair that took
> place around this time???

Gee, I always thought they got together a lot later. There was nothing
in TOS about Kirk and Spock knowing each other from academy days. Kirk's
boyfriend since academy days was Gary Mitchell.

http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/wnm.htm

Spock doesn't reveal that he harbors shameful feelings for Kirk until
Naked Time.

http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/naked.htm
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248945 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 07:24
John Doe II  
B&B were a disaster
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248947 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 07:34
RonWhite  
On 21 Apr 2006 04:42:08 -0700, "Sab" <sabtino [at] hotmail.com> wrote:

>I was wondering what people's thoughts are on Paramount signing on
>Mission Impossible 3 director Jeff Abrams to make the 11th Star Trek
>film, which will be a prequel focusing on a younger Kirk and Spock.
>
>Most Trek fans can't complain, if Paramount's entirely new management
>have shafted Rick Berman from being involved and it'll be interesting
>to see what actors get cast as a younger Kirk and Spock, but I wish
>what's being planned was the basis for a Star Trek 12, with the 11th
>film featuring William Shatner (provided he lost some weight and got in
>shape) and Leonard Nimoy and properly resolving the issue of the Nexus.
>
>Star Trek 11's script by writers Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci has yet
>to be written, but the Mission Impossible 3 script Kurtzman & Orci have
>apparently written for Mission Impossible 3 (with very heavy input by
>Lost and Alias series creator Jeff Abrams) is sposed to be excellent
>and looks like it's the best of the 3 Mission films so far, but
>Kurtzman & Orci's writing track record isn't that great. They
>wrote the script for the abysmal film The Island, that was a disastrous
>megaflop last year.
>
>They're writing the script for a live action Transformers film and
>also wrote for the Alias, Xena and Hercules TV shows. The April 21
>Variety story is below.
>
>Trekkies have a new leader. 'Star' treatment for J.J.
>By DAVE MCNARY.
>
>J.J. Abrams is becoming the next Gene Roddenberry.
>Paramount is breathing life into its Star Trek franchise by setting
>Mission : Impossible III helmer J.J. Abrams to produce and direct the
>11th 'Trek' feature, aiming for a 2008 release.
>
>Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk, Abrams' producing team from Lost, also
>will produce the yet-to-be-titled feature. Project to be penned by
>Abrams and MI3 scribes Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, will center on
>the early days of seminal Trek characters James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock,
>including their first meeting at Starfleet Academy and first outer
>space mission.
>Deal reflects ParPar's bullishness on MI3, which launches worldwide
>next weekend and underlines the goal of Paramount chief Brad Grey and
>prexyprexy Gail Berman to re-energize the pipeline via high-profile
>tentpoles while revitalizing the Par brand with top-tier talent such as
>Abrams.
>
>MI3 is the first pic to be released that's been greenlit by Grey.
>Star Trek has been Hollywood's most durable performer other than James
>Bond, spawning 10 features that have grossed more than $1 billion and
>726 TV episodes from six series.
>Decision to relaunch Star Trek comes less than a year after UPN pulled
>the plug on Star Trek: Enterprise amid dismal ratings following a
>four-season run and four years after Star Trek: Nemesis turned in the
>worst performance of the 10 films with $43 million domestic.
>Original series created by Roddenberry launched in 1966 on NBC and
>ended in 1969.
>
>During the following decade, the original 78 episodes of Trek became
>staples in syndication and helped mobilize the fan base along with
>conventions, books and merchandise. Paramount released Star Trek : The
>Motion Picture in 1979 and saw domestic grosses hit $82 million. The
>next three films grossed a combined $263 million domestically, so
>Paramount started the second TV series, The Next Generation, in 1987,
>with Rick Berman and Roddenberry co-exec producing.
>
>Under Sherry Lansing's tenure, Rick Berman had been teamed several
>years ago with Jordan Kernerand Kerry McCluggage to develop an 11th
>feature set in the early days of Starfleet Academy.
>
>Date in print: Fri., Apr. 21, 2006, Los Angeles.


Well, if they do Trek the way they fucked over Mission Impossible,
Kirk will also be a traitor. I hope Tom Cruise gets cancer for
destroying the Jim Phelps hero character just to show the Gay Cruiser
has the biggest gay dick on the screen.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248948 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 07:36
RonWhite  
On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 23:13:35 -0400, ToolPackinMama
<laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote:

>Godzilla1171 [at] aol.com wrote:
>
>> Are they going to finally reveal the Kirk and Spock affair that took
>> place around this time???
>
>Gee, I always thought they got together a lot later. There was nothing
>in TOS about Kirk and Spock knowing each other from academy days. Kirk's
>boyfriend since academy days was Gary Mitchell.
>
>http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/wnm.htm
>
>Spock doesn't reveal that he harbors shameful feelings for Kirk until
>Naked Time.
>
>http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/naked.htm
>

To be as fucked up as you obviously are about normal heterosexual sex,
did your father rape you as a child? Or was it your idea?
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248951 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 15:48
corealpha001  
Why oh why are Star Trek producers DETERMINED to have a series/film set
in the past eras?

You think they would have learnt their lesson with Enterprise, the fact
that fans told them before it was even produced that it would be
difficult thing to get right, but nope they went ahead anyway.

The francise is now in its death throws because of Enterprise, and
rather than do a story after DS9/Voyager with the established crew of
TNG that most fans seem to like, they decide to do another Prequel!
Sound judgement there guys.

This is not Star Wars, and just because it worked (somewhat) with that
franchise doesn't necessarily mean it will work for Star Trek.

I hope the rumours about it being Kirk meeting Spock is unfounded, or
if it is true that they actually take the time to study the canon of
trek this time (unlike Enterprise with its, "Lets go meet the Ferengi,
Borg and Romulan and really screw around with the series" theme)

Rant over.... lol
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248952 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 15:50
starshadow  
No, silly, that happened after Amok Time.

I think this is going to suck. I hope I'm wrong, but it's got so many
levels to be very
bad on. And all it takes is one of them. ParaBorg has a bad track
record since Gene
died.

Thank the gods for good fanfic.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer!)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248953 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 15:53
Godzilla1171  
> The francise is now in its death throws because of Enterprise, and
> rather than do a story after DS9/Voyager with the established crew of
> TNG that most fans seem to like, they decide to do another Prequel!
> Sound judgement there guys.

The franchise is in death row because Nemesis bombed at the box office,
not because of Enterprise.


> This is not Star Wars, and just because it worked (somewhat) with that
> franchise doesn't necessarily mean it will work for Star Trek.

Star Wars is more popular than Trek. The only way this new movie would
work would be if its truly a great film.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248954 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 15:54
starshadow  
Exactly.

Mitchell was a jealous boyfriend--that's why Jim and he broke it off
together.

Which is when Mitchell aimed that "little blonde technician" at him.
Carol Marcus, maybe?

Besides, Spock was even more of a workaholic as a cadet. Not the first
Vulcan in StarFleet,
but the most prominant one, from the most important house and clan on
Vulcan, he had to succeed. I can't see him hanging around Kirk for
long, not the guy who cheated on his final.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248955 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 15:56
starshadow  
To be as fucked up as you are about emotionally satisfying
relationships, did someone
squick your skull as a child?

Because you're obviously dealing with cum-for-brains.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248956 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 19:13
George Peatty  
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 00:34:23 -0500, RonWhite [at] ridesagain.nul wrote:

>Well, if they do Trek the way they fucked over Mission Impossible,
>Kirk will also be a traitor. I hope Tom Cruise gets cancer for
>destroying the Jim Phelps hero character just to show the Gay Cruiser
>has the biggest gay dick on the screen.

I am .. astonished. You would wish cancer on a person because a movie
didn't turn out the way you wanted? Even extending the license for
hyperbole to its maximum .. and beyond, this is demented ..











__

This space left blank
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248957 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 20:13
ToolPackinMama  
Starshadow wrote:
> Exactly.
>
> Mitchell was a jealous boyfriend--that's why Jim and he broke it off
> together.

Mitchell was a CHEATING boyfriend. Finney was the jealous one. He
named his daughter after Kirk, then Kirk threw him over for scumbag
Mitchell. Finney stewed in his juice over it for years, and finally
found a way to punish Jim in Court Martial.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248958 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 20:15
ToolPackinMama  
Starshadow wrote:

> Spock was even more of a workaholic as a cadet. Not the first
> Vulcan in StarFleet,
> but the most prominant one, from the most important house and clan on
> Vulcan, he had to succeed. I can't see him hanging around Kirk for
> long, not the guy who cheated on his final.

Acually, it's not obvious what Jim and Spock see in each other. Talk
about an odd couple. I guess what goes on in the bedroom pretty much
makes up for everything.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248959 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 20:17
allemannster  
I'm actually quite surprised to see that a movie was announced now that
I think about it some more. Since Nemesis, it was assumed that if we
saw Trek ever again, it would be on the small screen.

About continuity: If they're going back to the 23rd century, the
writers had better study everything about TOS. I want to see reasons
why there were lasers and not phasers, Gary Mitchell, Captain Pike, and
all the required reading at the Academy. The construction of the
Enterprise would be nifty to see too.
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248960 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 20:43
Kweeg  
<Godzilla1171 [at] aol.com> wrote in message
news:1145714007.011523.117480 [at] z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > The francise is now in its death throws because of Enterprise, and
> > rather than do a story after DS9/Voyager with the established crew of
> > TNG that most fans seem to like, they decide to do another Prequel!
> > Sound judgement there guys.
>
> The franchise is in death row because Nemesis bombed at the box office,
> not because of Enterprise.

Don't forget it was Voyager that took the franchise down to near death.

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248962 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 22:08
starshadow  
I think it's obvious--once Spock is abord a starship, he's starting to
learn about himself as a sexual being. Still very young, very
adolescent. He experiments on Enterprise with showing bits of
emotion--smiling, shouting--then figures out what that he wants to
project as the perfect Vulcan. He's brainy. He's got the equivilant of
several degrees before he hits the Academy, even. And he's convinced
Surakian logic is the only way to approach a problem.
Then here comes James Kirk--all sunlight and golden to Spock's
saturnine. He's brainy too. Gary says he was a "stack of books with
legs" and it's obvious he's well read. And he smiles and flirts with
everyone. He doesn't see Spock as a Vulcan, but as one more challenge,
one more being to win over, one more person to charm. That's at first.
Then they play some chess games. Spock is astounded. He's a Grand
Champion. Never loses. And Kirk manages to beat the pants off him by
intuitive leaps at least a third of the time. He's curious, is Spock.
No Vulcan can resist being curious, by nature. And finally despite
himself, drawn into Kirk's charm. They both like classical music. They
both read the classics. They workout together. They're both attracted
to one another. Kirk's shadow, they call Spock behind their backs.
And while I see Kirk as definately bisexual with a healthy if kinky
drive, Spock is so obviously s'kandrie-h'tath, a "male attracted to
males". No wonder T'Pring wanted a divorce. I don't see her as a
villain. By the time she and Spock are drawn to the "appointed place"
he's already formed a link to Kirk, even if he's too naive to realize
it's a marriage bond. But T'Pring knows. How could she not? She didn't
get her education interrupted to go live among humans.

So we have strong, silent, somewhat dominant sexually but submissive
appearing in public Vulcan male, raised by a human woman, and somewhat
culturally conditioned to like humans. And Kirk, who has to win all the
time, but likes being dominated when command gets too much for him, but
it has to be private with only the one person he trusts knowing this
side of him.

Very obvious to me. They're perfectly compatible in all ways, actually.
Starshadow
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248963 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 22:14
starshadow  
You think Kirk and Ben Finney had something going? Could be, but I
dunno. I don't think Kirk would have been much into exclusivity before
a certain tall dark and silent type came into his life.
I had a feeling the bad blood between him and Finney was a tad deeper
than the reprimand, but not
over that kind of jealousy. Maybe, though.
I don't quite get jealousy as a concept, myself, so that may be why it
doesn't make sense to me.

I think Jim broke up with Gary over Gary's obsessiveness. Jim wouldn't
want to be tied down. And with Gary, it wouldn't even be a "let's be
exclusive" obsessive, it'd be a "I collected you" obsessive. If that
makes sense. That's just the undercurrent I picked up.

Starshadow
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248965 ] Sa, 22 April 2006 23:56
Kweeg  
"Starshadow" <starshadow [at] starshadow.net> wrote in message
news:1145736854.831121.316940 [at] t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> You think Kirk and Ben Finney had something going? Could be, but I
> dunno. I don't think Kirk would have been much into exclusivity before
> a certain tall dark and silent type came into his life.
> I had a feeling the bad blood between him and Finney was a tad deeper
> than the reprimand, but not
> over that kind of jealousy. Maybe, though.
> I don't quite get jealousy as a concept, myself, so that may be why it
> doesn't make sense to me.
>
> I think Jim broke up with Gary over Gary's obsessiveness. Jim wouldn't
> want to be tied down. And with Gary, it wouldn't even be a "let's be
> exclusive" obsessive, it'd be a "I collected you" obsessive. If that
> makes sense. That's just the undercurrent I picked up.

Which prescription pills mixed with gin allowed you to pick up that
undercurrent?

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248967 ] So, 23 April 2006 00:35
Jaxtraw  
Starshadow wrote:
> I think it's obvious--once Spock is abord a starship, he's starting to
> learn about himself as a sexual being. Still very young, very
> adolescent. He experiments on Enterprise with showing bits of
> emotion--smiling, shouting--then figures out what that he wants to
> project as the perfect Vulcan. He's brainy. He's got the equivilant of
> several degrees before he hits the Academy, even. And he's convinced
> Surakian logic is the only way to approach a problem.
> Then here comes James Kirk--all sunlight and golden to Spock's
> saturnine. He's brainy too. Gary says he was a "stack of books with
> legs" and it's obvious he's well read. And he smiles and flirts with
> everyone. He doesn't see Spock as a Vulcan, but as one more challenge,
> one more being to win over, one more person to charm. That's at first.
> Then they play some chess games. Spock is astounded. He's a Grand
> Champion. Never loses. And Kirk manages to beat the pants off him by
> intuitive leaps at least a third of the time. He's curious, is Spock.
> No Vulcan can resist being curious, by nature. And finally despite
> himself, drawn into Kirk's charm. They both like classical music. They
> both read the classics. They workout together. They're both attracted
> to one another. Kirk's shadow, they call Spock behind their backs.
> And while I see Kirk as definately bisexual with a healthy if kinky
> drive, Spock is so obviously s'kandrie-h'tath, a "male attracted to
> males". No wonder T'Pring wanted a divorce. I don't see her as a
> villain. By the time she and Spock are drawn to the "appointed place"
> he's already formed a link to Kirk, even if he's too naive to realize
> it's a marriage bond. But T'Pring knows. How could she not? She didn't
> get her education interrupted to go live among humans.
>
> So we have strong, silent, somewhat dominant sexually but submissive
> appearing in public Vulcan male, raised by a human woman, and somewhat
> culturally conditioned to like humans. And Kirk, who has to win all
> the time, but likes being dominated when command gets too much for
> him, but it has to be private with only the one person he trusts
> knowing this side of him.
>
> Very obvious to me. They're perfectly compatible in all ways,
> actually. Starshadow

I hate to piss on your bonfire here, but can we just remember for a moment
that there two indications of Spock being attracted to somebody in TOS were
both women? That's Zarabeth and the Romulan Commander. Also, possibly that
snooty bimbo in the Cloudminders.

Poor old Dorothy Fontana wrote her heart out being as explicit as she could
be in those days to tell us "something happened" with the Romulan Commander,
but you guys have to ignore that lovely bit of writing because it doesn't
fit your gay rape BDSM fantasy world.

I really have no objection to slash if it floats your boat (or lubes your
tube, whatever) but please bear in mind that it's only in your mind before
declaring all these ideas of yours as (in-story) "fact".

Ian



--
www.jaxtrawstudios.com
science fiction comics with shagging in
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248968 ] So, 23 April 2006 01:51
Benjamin Pavsner  
I like the move, but the official story I'm hearing is that the story hasn't
been panned out yet, so don't believe a WORD about this young Kirk and Spock
until you actually see it
"Sab" <sabtino [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1145619728.674122.37580 [at] v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> I was wondering what people's thoughts are on Paramount signing on
> Mission Impossible 3 director Jeff Abrams to make the 11th Star Trek
> film, which will be a prequel focusing on a younger Kirk and Spock.
>
> Most Trek fans can't complain, if Paramount's entirely new management
> have shafted Rick Berman from being involved and it'll be interesting
> to see what actors get cast as a younger Kirk and Spock, but I wish
> what's being planned was the basis for a Star Trek 12, with the 11th
> film featuring William Shatner (provided he lost some weight and got in
> shape) and Leonard Nimoy and properly resolving the issue of the Nexus.
>
> Star Trek 11's script by writers Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci has yet
> to be written, but the Mission Impossible 3 script Kurtzman & Orci have
> apparently written for Mission Impossible 3 (with very heavy input by
> Lost and Alias series creator Jeff Abrams) is sposed to be excellent
> and looks like it's the best of the 3 Mission films so far, but
> Kurtzman & Orci's writing track record isn't that great. They
> wrote the script for the abysmal film The Island, that was a disastrous
> megaflop last year.
>
> They're writing the script for a live action Transformers film and
> also wrote for the Alias, Xena and Hercules TV shows. The April 21
> Variety story is below.
>
> Trekkies have a new leader. 'Star' treatment for J.J.
> By DAVE MCNARY.
>
> J.J. Abrams is becoming the next Gene Roddenberry.
> Paramount is breathing life into its Star Trek franchise by setting
> Mission : Impossible III helmer J.J. Abrams to produce and direct the
> 11th 'Trek' feature, aiming for a 2008 release.
>
> Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk, Abrams' producing team from Lost, also
> will produce the yet-to-be-titled feature. Project to be penned by
> Abrams and MI3 scribes Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, will center on
> the early days of seminal Trek characters James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock,
> including their first meeting at Starfleet Academy and first outer
> space mission.
> Deal reflects ParPar's bullishness on MI3, which launches worldwide
> next weekend and underlines the goal of Paramount chief Brad Grey and
> prexyprexy Gail Berman to re-energize the pipeline via high-profile
> tentpoles while revitalizing the Par brand with top-tier talent such as
> Abrams.
>
> MI3 is the first pic to be released that's been greenlit by Grey.
> Star Trek has been Hollywood's most durable performer other than James
> Bond, spawning 10 features that have grossed more than $1 billion and
> 726 TV episodes from six series.
> Decision to relaunch Star Trek comes less than a year after UPN pulled
> the plug on Star Trek: Enterprise amid dismal ratings following a
> four-season run and four years after Star Trek: Nemesis turned in the
> worst performance of the 10 films with $43 million domestic.
> Original series created by Roddenberry launched in 1966 on NBC and
> ended in 1969.
>
> During the following decade, the original 78 episodes of Trek became
> staples in syndication and helped mobilize the fan base along with
> conventions, books and merchandise. Paramount released Star Trek : The
> Motion Picture in 1979 and saw domestic grosses hit $82 million. The
> next three films grossed a combined $263 million domestically, so
> Paramount started the second TV series, The Next Generation, in 1987,
> with Rick Berman and Roddenberry co-exec producing.
>
> Under Sherry Lansing's tenure, Rick Berman had been teamed several
> years ago with Jordan Kernerand Kerry McCluggage to develop an 11th
> feature set in the early days of Starfleet Academy.
>
> Date in print: Fri., Apr. 21, 2006, Los Angeles.
>
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248969 ] So, 23 April 2006 01:59
starshadow  
So quoth the man who pretends to be Klingon, and is obviously a
homophobic fanatic.

And who puts drink references in his sig line.

It's not *I* who ingests mind altering substances. If you're an idiot,
that's a personal problem.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248970 ] So, 23 April 2006 02:02
starshadow  
Mmm, yeah. Look, fool, I'm a lesbian, and I had two children. Not by
artificial insemination, either.

Didn't make me less of a lesbian.

Plenty of GLBT people marry and even have children.

Just because you're a homophobe, doesn't mean Gene was. Nor Ted
Sturgeon, whom I knew personally, and I can tell you that he wrote the
Spock and Kirk go off arm in arm scene very specifically.

So if you "have no objection to slash" you're not proving it by your
protest.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248972 ] So, 23 April 2006 02:34
Kweeg  
"Starshadow" <starshadow [at] starshadow.net> wrote in message
news:1145750360.279821.300050 [at] j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> So quoth the man who pretends to be Klingon, and is obviously a
> homophobic fanatic.

Look who is the first to star huring insults and assumptions, so much for
tolerace. Why would I be "obviously a homophobic fanatic" because I fail to
see the nonexistant homosexulal relationships of Kirk in ST?


> And who puts drink references in his sig line.

ohhh drink referances said by Scotty ohh I must be an alchoholic....


> It's not *I* who ingests mind altering substances. If you're an idiot,
> that's a personal problem.

It's people like you that give the gay and lesbian community a bad name.
Give your fucking head a shake, or is it too far up your self-centred, self
righteous, hypocritical ass to do so?

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248973 ] So, 23 April 2006 02:48
Kweeg  
"Starshadow" <starshadow [at] starshadow.net> wrote in message
news:1145750564.498649.314230 [at] i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Mmm, yeah. Look, fool, I'm a lesbian, and I had two children. Not by
> artificial insemination, either.
>
> Didn't make me less of a lesbian.
>
> Plenty of GLBT people marry and even have children.
>
> Just because you're a homophobe, doesn't mean Gene was. Nor Ted
> Sturgeon, whom I knew personally, and I can tell you that he wrote the
> Spock and Kirk go off arm in arm scene very specifically.
>
> So if you "have no objection to slash" you're not proving it by your
> protest.

Huummm....
Gene Roddenberry's novelization of STTMP:
I was never aware of this 'lovers' rumour, although I have been told that
Spock encountered it several times. Apparently, he had always dismissed it
with his characteristic lifting of his right eyebrow, which usually connoted
some combination of surprise, disbelief, and/or annoyance. As for myself...
I have always found my best gratification in that creature called woman.
Also, I would not like to be thought of as being so foolish that I would
select a love partner who came into sexual heat only once every seven years.

Gene Roddenberry on K/S:
"Yes, there's certainly some of that-certainly with love overtones. Deep
love. The only difference being, the Greek ideal-we never suggested in the
series-physical love between the two. But it's the-we certainly had the
feeling that the affection was sufficient for that, if that were the
particular style of the 23rd century." (Shatner, William, et al. Where No
Man... The Authorized Biography of William Shatner, Ace Books, 1979, pp.
147-8)

Sounds like more reasons that K/S is non-canon interpretation of Star Trek.
I don't really care if people want to write / read / believe slash, it is
afterall, only a bit of fun. What I do mind is idiots and feminazi's that
declare it as actual canon fact, though no basis in fact but rather their
own highly imaginative interpitations.

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248974 ] So, 23 April 2006 03:30
Jaxtraw  
Starshadow wrote:
> Mmm, yeah. Look, fool, I'm a lesbian, and I had two children. Not by
> artificial insemination, either.
>
> Didn't make me less of a lesbian.
>
> Plenty of GLBT people marry and even have children.
>
> Just because you're a homophobe, doesn't mean Gene was. Nor Ted
> Sturgeon, whom I knew personally, and I can tell you that he wrote the
> Spock and Kirk go off arm in arm scene very specifically.
>
> So if you "have no objection to slash" you're not proving it by your
> protest.
>
> Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer)

Well. I'm sorry, dear "award winning fanfic writer", but I don't really care
if you're a lesbian or anything else. Good for you. Please don't use the
absurd knee-jerk of calling anyone who disagrees with you a homophobe. To
disagree with your silly belief about the imaginary gay affair of two
imaginary characters is not homophobia.

Should I defend myself here? Will anything I say prove otherwise? Should I
say I worked in theater for years, which is full of gays and lesbians, and
enjoyed their company and friendship? That I drank in gay bars? That after
that I worked as a contractor for and with one of London's major gay pub
chains, and my colleagues used to consider me "honorary gay" and I felt
quite proud of that, that I've happily socialied all my life with gays and
lesbians, that one of my closest friends in those days was a lesbian, that
I've happily stood having a pint on Pride night while somebody was being
anally fisted just a couple of meters away, or is that not enough? Was I
secretly harboring some revulsion and hatred, unknown even to myself?
Because I don't think Captain Kirk is gay? And should I mention that my ex's
sister was (and presumably still is) a slash writer, and somehow we managed
to get on just fine? That I've even been known to defend Laura on this very
newsgroup? Should I just say that I loathe homophobia just as much as I
imagine you do?

Maybe. If I don't defend myself, I'm homophobic; if I do, I'm protesting too
much so I'm homophobic. Can't win, can I? Just take it that I'm personally
offended, mm'kay?

Maybe just get your head around the idea that I think slash is a bit of
harmless fun but trying to twist everything else to fit it is, well, fucking
stupid.

But what do I know? I just draw sex positive sci-fi porn comics for a
living, so I'll just keep looking up out of the gutter up at the award
winning fanfic writers shining down on me from the firmament above for now,
I guess.

Ian
--
www.jaxtrawstudios.com
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248975 ] So, 23 April 2006 04:57
starshadow  
Look, you limpwitted fool, I don't give a rat's ass what you think of
me nor of the "gay and lesbian community". I'm not a spokesperson for
them, I am my own person, but you wouldn't know that because you're a
hypocrite who plays at being Klingon while running down anything that
doesn't fit inside your narrow little skull.
Again, that's a personal problem.
As for you trying to cast the "hyprocrite" stone, how do I know what
you are? By your posts, in which your first line is attacking the very
"idea" as if it's some kind of gospel truth to you that these FICTIONAL
CHARACTERS cannot fit outside your little tiny headed worldview.
That buddy, is a personal problem, and again, not mine.

By the way, wipe your drool. It looks even more stupid with your
idiotic Klingon sig.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic author and castrating dyke--though
don't worry, castrating you would be redundant.)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248976 ] So, 23 April 2006 04:59
starshadow  
Oh, and by the way, the FIRST to throw insults would have been you,
with your "gin and pills" post.

So you can add liar to limpwit.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic writer)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248977 ] So, 23 April 2006 05:05
starshadow  
So you apparently don't even read what you post as reference. What part
of"But it's the-we certainly had the feeling that the affection was
sufficient for that, if that were the
particular style of the 23rd century." did you not understand,
Qapla-for-brains?

As to the former, that's akin to a woman saying "What kind of girl do
you think I am?" and is by no means a flat out denial as you seem to
think it is.

Not that I would expect a person who in one word declares someone an
idiot and in the next doesn't appear to know the difference between a
plural and a possessive.
It certainly makes you look particularly stupid.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic author)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248978 ] So, 23 April 2006 05:07
starshadow  
Did someone rattle your cage, dear?

So you do it for a living, cool. So what. You're still acting like an
asshole. I'm not impressed, if I'm supposed to be.

Starshadow (award winning fanfic author)
Re: Your thoughts on JJ Abrams signing on to direct Star Trek 11? [message #248979 ] So, 23 April 2006 05:17
ToolPackinMama  
allemannster [at] gmail.com wrote:

> About continuity: If they're going back to the 23rd century, the
> writers had better study everything about TOS.

DITTO.
Vorheriges Thema:Re: The Holy Shroud
Nächstes Thema:OT: A Bitchy Review of Superman Returns
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 19 16:45:07 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,08683 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered