> In article <0Iadnd_mrrNCqx_VnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> "80 Knight" please.com> wrote:
>

>> "Anim8rFSK" cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:ANIM8Rfsk-698C1B.03585319072008@news.west.cox.net...

>>> 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:
>>>>>

>>>>>> "SLWatson" gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:ce7dedcd-fcb1-4c58-9101-baf6b2cb90b6@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com..
>>>>>> .

>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 1:15 pm, "Kweeg" wrote:

>>>>>>>> "Brenda" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> news:g5oiv5.2ec.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>> 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.

>>
>> How mature. "If you don't agree with me, your aren't smart".

>
> Thank you for proving my point so eloquently.