On Jul 19, 9:08 am, SLWatson
gmail.com> wrote:> On Jul 19, 11:47 am, "Kweeg" wrote:
>
>
>
>> "Anim8rFSK"
cox.net> wrote in message>
>
>>> In article
giganews.com>,
>>> "80 Knight" please.com> wrote:>
>>>> "Anim8rFSK"
cox.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:ANIM8Rfsk-543972.22391518072008@news.west.cox.net...>>>>> In article
giganews.com>,
>>>>> "80 Knight" please.com> wrote:>
>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 1:15 pm, "Kweeg" wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Brenda" wrote in message
>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Kweeg, I gotta somewhat disagree with you on this. Seeing the
>>>>>>>>>>> care
>>>>>>>>>>> TPTB
>>>>>>>>>>> have NOT taken
>>>>>>>>>>> in the past with trek canon, I'm not hopeful. It seems to me
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>> management wants
>>>>>>>>>>> to write new scifi but give it the trek name so it'll pull in
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> fans.
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, season 4 of ENT
>>>>>>>>>>> rocked and perhaps the series might have succeeded had Coto
>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> board from the get go,
>>>>>>>>>>> but he wasn't.
>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm skeptical. I fear this will simply be another enterprise
>>>>>>>>>>> debacle.
>
>>>>>>>>>> .. like Roddenberry believing everything people were saying
>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>> him
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> screwing up Trek canon with his "New Trek" TNG. Season 1 & 2,
>>>>>>>>>> now
>>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>>> are painful to watch.
>>>>>>>>>> Don't confuse canon with FANon. {{;-/>
>>>>>>>>>> Point is Brenda when there is someone who cares and understands
>>>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>>>> makes it "Trek" (like Coto / Moore / Bennet) we usually get good
>>>>>>>>>> Trek.
>>>>>>>>>> While not a big of fan as Coto is, I hold out some hope JJ will
>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>> justice, and I will not condemn it *before* I've even seen it.
>
>>>>>>>>> Kweeg, you should know me better. I'm a fan, not a fangirl. I'm
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> confusing canon with fandom.
>>>>>>>>> When something is presented on screen and then the new powers
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> choose to completely IGNORE
>>>>>>>>> that history they ignore canon..better thought of as continuity.
>>>>>>>>> Voicing
>>>>>>>>> skepticism isn't condemning. It's
>>>>>>>>> being skeptical.
>
>>>>>>>> Of course the worst offender for "canon violations" was TOS.
>
>>>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>>> Qapla'
>>>>>>>> Kweeg
>>>>>>>> Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
>>>>>>>> "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!"
>
>>>>>>> All canon violations aside (which was more the cause of inconsistent
>>>>>>> writing than blatant 'rebooting'), TOS was still and is still hugely
>>>>>>> popular as it is. It doesn't need remained.
>
>>>>>> But how is re-imaging TOS going to hurt you? You can still watch TOS
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> TV,
>>>>>> and in DVD form, you can still buy books, games, poster's, and
>>>>>> everything
>>>>>> else. Choose not to watch the new movie if you are so against it, but
>>>>>> let
>>>>>> others give it a chance.
>
>>>>> No.
>
>>>> Sorry, the movie is already being made...
>
>>> So what? Doesn't mean the smart people need to give it a chance.
>
>> LMFAO! The "smart people" that have based their opinions on speculation and
>> hearsay. Burn the witch!
>> --
>
>> Qapla'
>> Kweeg
>> Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
>> "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!"
>
> And everyone else has blindly chirped like baby birds for whatever the
> studio hands them. "Please, suh, can I have some more?"
Not even close to being true. Check the receipts of the last few Trek
films, the success of the last series.
