Marcus, when you veritably boast of not being familiar with a genre, then yes, I do believe that renders your opinion of that genre suspect at best. Particularly when you have preceded it by conceding that you have little exposure to the current state of that genre - it then becomes a bit like those who defend Batman killing in these movies by pointing out that "he killed people in the early days", said days being 1939.
We're not talking genre, but the TV/film industry, which, as I have mentioned (on numerous occasions) I have qualifications in... I understand that things change, but I reiterate, there are plenty of 'free shows' available... Of course, one might argue that any service one uses, is a subscription, be it a Sky subscription, Netflix, BBC (funded bia the license fee) etc, but the point remains that (in the UK at least) BBC2 and Sky, have been broadcasting Star Trek since the mid-1990s. That CBS are now creating their own subscription service (and on the one hand, good for them) is irrelevant, but the idea that they would make the latest incarnation of Trek CBS subscription-only, rather than BBC2/Sky, IMHO, is nothing more than greed, and crowd-gouging.
Now, if you want to talk genre, then my viewing habits are irrelevent. As I said, I know good production values when I see them, and the same for bad production values. However, (and I appreciate that this will likely come across as snotty, but it's honestly not intended thus) I have other things and priorities to occupy my time, beyond simply sitting watching TV and movies, so I am selective about what I watch... I don't sit and watch everything which comes on 'just because'. I don't go to the cinema for a very simple reason: There're people there... So I wait for a film to be released on DVD, or Sky/NowTV etc... The last two new (to me) films I watched, were Harlem Nights, and Interstellar.
When I read reviews slamming Harlem Nights, I was surprized, dare I say shocked, by not only how critically it was received, but by how harsh the critiques were, how utterly off-target the issues raised were, and how easily they could be dismissed. I attribute much of the hostility, ultimately, to prejudice, and a 'vanity project' being an easy target for scorn. However, I'd also say that Harlem Nights is a movie which I can watch over and over, find enjoyable each time, and which in terms of production values and scripting, I would hold above Star Trek 09...
Oh, and Deadpool is sick, filthy, and hilarious. You're shortchanging yourself by not watching it. (It is, of course, enhanced by knowledge of the character, who is depicted in-story as completely insane - to the point that he believes he's in a comic book, and will knowingly break the fourth wall to the puzzlement of anyone he's with at the time.)
It may well be that I'm selling myself short, but to address the second boldened point, that is not a style of work which I find enjoyable -- I'm not going to do something, which is highly likely that I will dislike... For example, I don't like marzipan. No matter how awesome a cake may be, if it has marzipan in it, I won't eat it, because I know that I dislike marzipan, and that will almost certainly spoil my enjoyment of the rest of the cake...
So, as I said above, how much I do or don't watch subscription TV, has no bearing on my opinion on Star Trek series, and their broadcast history... My dislike for reboots, equally has no bearing on my ability to hold an opinion on the industry. Just to be contradictory to myself, I really enjoyed the reimagined Hawaii 5-0, but, I would also have to state, that I never saw an episode of the original series before I saw the reimagined version...
Deadpool was awesome, 100 percent true to the character, and easily the best film Fox has ever mustered from their X- Men franchise.
And the main reason being, that FOX pretty much left the creators alone to do as they wish cause they felt it was going to be a niche film that would probably just about make back it's budget plus a little...
Sometimes doing the unorthodox thing actually pays off.
Same way Lucas got his little "space-fantasy" film made..., a big-wig at 20th Century Fox was willing to take a chance and the rest is history.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Deadpool was awesome, 100 percent true to the character, and easily the best film Fox has ever mustered from their X- Men franchise.
I'm sure it was, the reviews, both professional and personal that I've seen, attest to that. But as mentioned, I also know what I don't like, and the concept behind Deadpool as a character, is something I don't personally find entertaining, so it doesn't interest me to watch it (and that's discounting my psychological aversion to anything I percieve as people 'jumping on the bandwagon' and raving over...) I'm not going to say that it's bad because I don't want to watch it, or that I don't want to watch it because I believe it is bad (which is why I don't intend to watch BvS or Suicide Squad) but I know that it's just not my cup of tea entertainment-wise
I can respect that marcus, and I understand, I too know what I like. However I happen to have mostly liked BvS, especially the extended version, which is about how I felt about Man of Steel. With both films I wish the color had been brighter, as a long time comic book reader I would have done several things differently with the story. Which probably would have gotten a negative critical reaction too tbh.
I would have waited to unveil Doomsday until the last moments of the film and let him be the reason for the Justice League to come together and keeping Superman's death for that film. I would have changed how Lex was forcing the fight, but Lex himself didn't bother me. Then again I have comics where Lex is flying around is a green and purple leotard.
My main concerns about BvS, as mentioned before, was how the vast majority of the complaints, were about the same thing (mostly plotting and pacing) I'd had reservations anyway, but when folks were all saying that they didn't like the same things, that was enough for me to decide to definitely give it a miss...
Equally, I don't always agree with critics... The complaints about Harlem Nights, for example, such as no references to poverty which drove interest in gangsters etc, were all actually addressed several times... The guy rolling the dice was clearly desperate for the money, the homeless kid living on the fringe and being taken in, the dirty cop who resented criminals having more money than him, the boxing champ who not only had a chronic stammer, but was also exposed as being iliterate, when he spelled 'Phil' with an 'F', showing the only way he could legitimately make money was through fighting... How a reviewer could miss that, I don't understand, so I'd have to say that the critics simply didn't get it... I'm not normally a fan of Richard Pryor, but the way he played the character in a very subdued and understated way (apparently because of a recent diagnosis of multiple sclerosis ) I felt made the character perfect, and a real stand apart role from his usual ones. That it was written, produced and directed by Eddie Murphy, is no different to what JJ Abrams does, and his role, although prominent, was still very much part of an ensemble, so I think the label of 'vanity project' is an unfair one...
It was a Deadpool movie. It really wasn't an X-men movie. As it was his origin story, with some help from the X-men. Even at the end he didn't want to be part of them.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
"say X-men: Apocalypse was actually worse then BvS" wtf are you for real, it was the best X-Men movie ever (Deadpool doesn't count as an X-Men movie to me ,otherwise it would take top spot). I didn't like Bat vs. Superman, and I think Daddario would have made a way better Wonder Woman, Gal Gadot would have made a better Xena.
I do agree we in a new golden age of sci fi, or starting to be in movies first ,but now tv too. But even golden ages have sewers. I couldn't watch Jessica Jones, I still think of that actress as the B from whatever that show was called. And I actually like Ben Aflecks Daredevil better.
But Dark Matter is a great show. I like shield and arrow. Like all the marvel movies that have come out. I liked the Dark Knight Rises, except Christian Bale's Batman voice. Beyond is my favourite Star Trek Movie and I was luke warm on Luke Warm on the JJverse at best.
I loved Hemlock Grove, and Lost Girl (dispite it being filled with sexist, Mysangist double standards).
I really do love Ralph McQuarrie work in Star Wars, and BSG (the 1987 one, not the cheap soap opera remake). But honestly this ship looks like CBS couldn't be bothered putting the effort in designing their own version (not some great canon plot). I am just glad I don't have to be like the other poor sods that will have to pay CBS for their subscription channel, thankfully I can watch it on Netflix with no extra cost. If the CGI final product is cheap, then the only thing holding this up will be the story and cast. It's still good to see that it's coming to TV again.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
If the new series is set after Star Trek: Enterprise and before Star Trek: The Original Series, do you think there will be a chance that Enterprise NX-01 and crew will make an appearance? I hope so and still hoping they bring back Star Trek: Enterprise and have another season or two. People around the internet are still posting for it to come back.
Look at all the posts that do not relate to the topic. How about we get back on topic please.
It is interesting that a lot of people, including myself, have thought that the design of the U.S.S Discovery is due to a possible joint crew of Federation and Klingons because of the Khitomer Accords (First Khitomer Accords) but the Khitomer Accords signing took place in or after Star Trek: Undiscovered Country (Star Trek 6). I also noticed someone has a signature showing how the U.S.S Discovery is a joint Federation and Klingon crew due to the Khitomer Accords but that happened in or after Star Trek 6.
Yes, it is interesting that a lot of people think the Klingons have a trademark on bronze, and apparently believe that this is more reliable data than the executive producer's bald statement that this show does not take place after TUC.
Yes, it is interesting that a lot of people think the Klingons have a trademark on bronze, and apparently believe that this is more reliable data than the executive producer's bald statement that this show does not take place after TUC.
The thing which I find more 'interesting/funny', is the straw folks are keep grasping at that the shape of the secondary hull points to Klingon participation in the design, rather than simply accepting that the design is clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art... If the registry number is any reliable clue, then this is a slightly-pre TOS era, where Klingons and Feds would not have been amicably sitting down to anything, let alone building a ship together...
Just because the Khitmor Accords weren't signed yet, doesn't mean the Federation and Klingon Empire couldn't a joint operation for a specific mutual goal, it was a cold war, not an open one.
Alternately it might be a section 31 ship with stolen Klingon tech. We don't know.
It could be anything, we just don't have the intel, so its all just guess work.
Yes, it is interesting that a lot of people think the Klingons have a trademark on bronze, and apparently believe that this is more reliable data than the executive producer's bald statement that this show does not take place after TUC.
I wonder where they get the idea of Klingons and Bronze goes together. Most of their ships are in Green. At least the majority that was on screen. Even my KDF ships on the game is green.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I don't care for the bogus canon explanation CBS manages to conjure up to explain the design of the ship. The real explanation is because it's McQuarrie's work. Do you think it's mere coincidence that X-Wing resembles a Viper? Come on.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
The thing which I find more 'interesting/funny', is the straw folks are keep grasping at that the shape of the secondary hull points to Klingon participation in the design, rather than simply accepting that the design is clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art...
When I brought the observation here from other boards I frequent it wasn't entirely about the shape of the hull. We can already see the new ship has details not present in the McQuarrie version including a clear delineation between the secondary hull and wide D7-like wing/pylons when seen from the bottom where the McQuarrie design has the entire wedge as the secondary hull with tiny pylons at the tips elevating the engines above the slab.
Anyway, that straw was made chiefly out of listening to the music, which has distinctly Klingon cues to it and frankly seemed more finished/polished than the video track.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. And it's bizarre to me that anyone would need to have strong feelings one way or the other about it (unless maybe they are the near mythical STO fans that love Klingons and really do hope to see them get a greater percentage of the spotlight on this outing). But I thought the observation about the music and its possible meaning was interesting.
All my posts about the ship were complete speculation based simply on what my minds-eye saw.
It does have some semblance of Klingon shipwright architecture to it and since we had very little to go on, I was merely throwing out there, one of many speculative possibilities.
So sue me...
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Just because the Khitmor Accords weren't signed yet, doesn't mean the Federation and Klingon Empire couldn't a joint operation for a specific mutual goal, it was a cold war, not an open one.
Alternately it might be a section 31 ship with stolen Klingon tech. We don't know.
It could be anything, we just don't have the intel, so its all just guess work.
Very true, I also completely agree with everything you have said. Nikkei also did point out the music playing when the ship is leaving the spacedock, which many of us thought was interesting as well, may have an indication of who or what type of ship it could be. Sometimes the music does relate to the crew and ship, for example Star Trek: Search for Spock, Commander Kruge, the crew and his Bird of Prey.
Just because the Khitmor Accords weren't signed yet, doesn't mean the Federation and Klingon Empire couldn't a joint operation for a specific mutual goal, it was a cold war, not an open one.
Alternately it might be a section 31 ship with stolen Klingon tech. We don't know.
It could be anything, we just don't have the intel, so its all just guess work.
If that show features Section 31 TRIBBLE of any kind I'll TRIBBLE on somebodies doorstep for sure. I hope Star Trek outlived that nonsense after the last desasters featuring it.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
The thing which I find more 'interesting/funny', is the straw folks are keep grasping at that the shape of the secondary hull points to Klingon participation in the design, rather than simply accepting that the design is clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art...
When I brought the observation here from other boards I frequent it wasn't entirely about the shape of the hull. We can already see the new ship has details not present in the McQuarrie version including a clear delineation between the secondary hull and wide D7-like wing/pylons when seen from the bottom where the McQuarrie design has the entire wedge as the secondary hull with tiny pylons at the tips elevating the engines above the slab.
Anyway, that straw was made chiefly out of listening to the music, which has distinctly Klingon cues to it and frankly seemed more finished/polished than the video track.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. And it's bizarre to me that anyone would need to have strong feelings one way or the other about it (unless maybe they are the near mythical STO fans that love Klingons and really do hope to see them get a greater percentage of the spotlight on this outing). But I thought the observation about the music and its possible meaning was interesting.
As I said 'clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art', as in they took the concept and expanded upon the theme. I don't view that as signifying Klingon involvement.
Now, with regards the music, I actually haven't heard it (I keep my speakers off so as to not disturb the folks around me) I have read the description, as well as the observation folks have made about a cloaking device sound being heard. But as I said, if a just-before TOS era is being focussed on (as the registry is alleged to be suggesting) then the Empire and the Federation were not on good terms, there would be no colaborations or joint ventures. To be honest, all these 'half-fact releases' which are being made, and then sometimes contradicted (ie The Undiscovered Country, then to be told it's not set after TUC) is utterly boring me, and making me completely lose interest in the series at all. I understand that social media makes things very different compared to when Voyager, or even Enterprise were released, but all this 'boy who cried wolf-esque' shenanigans is just tedious, and makes me lose interest. The producers're dangling bait to get responses, rather than releasing a few authentic pre-release images or facts to actually cement interest and generate engagement with the characters...
To be honest, I don't even see the need for a new Star Trek series. At all. The franchise will remain alive all the time people enjoy and appreciate the original work, and go to the conventions and pay for autographs from the existing actors. It doesn't need to be 'active' to be appreciated... (IMHO)
If that show features Section 31 **** of any kind I'll **** on somebodies doorstep for sure. I hope Star Trek outlived that nonsense after the last desasters featuring it.
"Great men are not peacemakers, Great men are conquerors!" - Captain Archer" "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway #Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
The thing which I find more 'interesting/funny', is the straw folks are keep grasping at that the shape of the secondary hull points to Klingon participation in the design, rather than simply accepting that the design is clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art...
When I brought the observation here from other boards I frequent it wasn't entirely about the shape of the hull. We can already see the new ship has details not present in the McQuarrie version including a clear delineation between the secondary hull and wide D7-like wing/pylons when seen from the bottom where the McQuarrie design has the entire wedge as the secondary hull with tiny pylons at the tips elevating the engines above the slab.
Anyway, that straw was made chiefly out of listening to the music, which has distinctly Klingon cues to it and frankly seemed more finished/polished than the video track.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. And it's bizarre to me that anyone would need to have strong feelings one way or the other about it (unless maybe they are the near mythical STO fans that love Klingons and really do hope to see them get a greater percentage of the spotlight on this outing). But I thought the observation about the music and its possible meaning was interesting.
As I said 'clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art', as in they took the concept and expanded upon the theme. I don't view that as signifying Klingon involvement.
Now, with regards the music, I actually haven't heard it (I keep my speakers off so as to not disturb the folks around me) I have read the description, as well as the observation folks have made about a cloaking device sound being heard. But as I said, if a just-before TOS era is being focussed on (as the registry is alleged to be suggesting) then the Empire and the Federation were not on good terms, there would be no colaborations or joint ventures. To be honest, all these 'half-fact releases' which are being made, and then sometimes contradicted (ie The Undiscovered Country, then to be told it's not set after TUC) is utterly boring me, and making me completely lose interest in the series at all. I understand that social media makes things very different compared to when Voyager, or even Enterprise were released, but all this 'boy who cried wolf-esque' shenanigans is just tedious, and makes me lose interest. The producers're dangling bait to get responses, rather than releasing a few authentic pre-release images or facts to actually cement interest and generate engagement with the characters...
To be honest, I don't even see the need for a new Star Trek series. At all. The franchise will remain alive all the time people enjoy and appreciate the original work, and go to the conventions and pay for autographs from the existing actors. It doesn't need to be 'active' to be appreciated... (IMHO)
Nobody official said it took place between TUC and TNG. That was fans' wishful thinking.
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
The thing which I find more 'interesting/funny', is the straw folks are keep grasping at that the shape of the secondary hull points to Klingon participation in the design, rather than simply accepting that the design is clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art...
When I brought the observation here from other boards I frequent it wasn't entirely about the shape of the hull. We can already see the new ship has details not present in the McQuarrie version including a clear delineation between the secondary hull and wide D7-like wing/pylons when seen from the bottom where the McQuarrie design has the entire wedge as the secondary hull with tiny pylons at the tips elevating the engines above the slab.
Anyway, that straw was made chiefly out of listening to the music, which has distinctly Klingon cues to it and frankly seemed more finished/polished than the video track.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. And it's bizarre to me that anyone would need to have strong feelings one way or the other about it (unless maybe they are the near mythical STO fans that love Klingons and really do hope to see them get a greater percentage of the spotlight on this outing). But I thought the observation about the music and its possible meaning was interesting.
As I said 'clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art', as in they took the concept and expanded upon the theme. I don't view that as signifying Klingon involvement.
Now, with regards the music, I actually haven't heard it (I keep my speakers off so as to not disturb the folks around me) I have read the description, as well as the observation folks have made about a cloaking device sound being heard. But as I said, if a just-before TOS era is being focussed on (as the registry is alleged to be suggesting) then the Empire and the Federation were not on good terms, there would be no colaborations or joint ventures. To be honest, all these 'half-fact releases' which are being made, and then sometimes contradicted (ie The Undiscovered Country, then to be told it's not set after TUC) is utterly boring me, and making me completely lose interest in the series at all. I understand that social media makes things very different compared to when Voyager, or even Enterprise were released, but all this 'boy who cried wolf-esque' shenanigans is just tedious, and makes me lose interest. The producers're dangling bait to get responses, rather than releasing a few authentic pre-release images or facts to actually cement interest and generate engagement with the characters...
To be honest, I don't even see the need for a new Star Trek series. At all. The franchise will remain alive all the time people enjoy and appreciate the original work, and go to the conventions and pay for autographs from the existing actors. It doesn't need to be 'active' to be appreciated... (IMHO)
Nobody official said it took place between TUC and TNG. That was fans' wishful thinking.
Wasn't something said about the trailer showing the 'exploded planets' accompanied by an official statement hinting that there was some kind of clue to the series in the imagery? I'm sure there was also an official comment where TUC was mentioned... I may just be confusing that with other discussions of the topic though
Either way, my 'interest' in the series has now got to the point of wanting to see some official releases which start to give some real foundations which can be properly digested, rather than just ambiguous teasers... I'm sure that comparably close to its release date, Stargate:Universe had released some concept ideas for the characters and the show... perhaps Suicide Squad's just making me scheptical and nervous...
Yes, there was an official statement that mentioned TUC. That was the statement from Bryan Fuller, stating plainly that the new series does not take place between TUC and TNG.
That has been the only official statement mentioning that movie (or any other movie, for that matter).
As for casting, we have been officially informed that the producers have been consulting with Dr. Mae Jemison, first African-American woman in space and one-time transporter operator on an episode of TNG, concerning the captain of the Discovery. That's all we've heard, of course, and it may not have any particular meaning other than consulting with an astronaut...
Yes, there was an official statement that mentioned TUC. That was the statement from Bryan Fuller, stating plainly that the new series does not take place between TUC and TNG.
That has been the only official statement mentioning that movie (or any other movie, for that matter).
As for casting, we have been officially informed that the producers have been consulting with Dr. Mae Jemison, first African-American woman in space and one-time transporter operator on an episode of TNG, concerning the captain of the Discovery. That's all we've heard, of course, and it may not have any particular meaning other than consulting with an astronaut...
But wasn't that in response to a comment made by Nicholas Meyer about 'revisiting TUC' (in some manner?)
With regard the second point, I thought the article read that they(I forget who they were interviewing) had been inspired by Mae Jemison and Nichelle Nichols with regards the character (opening the suggestion that they were looking to have a female African-American captain...)
Again, I may be mis-remembering and confusing discussion with actual articles, but it just feels (to me) as if they're being deliberately evasive about things, while trying to engage as much interest as possible with their vagueries, which is why I'm hitting the point of "wake me up when you have something concrete to tell me, not just more teasers..."
Comments
Now, if you want to talk genre, then my viewing habits are irrelevent. As I said, I know good production values when I see them, and the same for bad production values. However, (and I appreciate that this will likely come across as snotty, but it's honestly not intended thus) I have other things and priorities to occupy my time, beyond simply sitting watching TV and movies, so I am selective about what I watch... I don't sit and watch everything which comes on 'just because'. I don't go to the cinema for a very simple reason: There're people there... So I wait for a film to be released on DVD, or Sky/NowTV etc... The last two new (to me) films I watched, were Harlem Nights, and Interstellar.
When I read reviews slamming Harlem Nights, I was surprized, dare I say shocked, by not only how critically it was received, but by how harsh the critiques were, how utterly off-target the issues raised were, and how easily they could be dismissed. I attribute much of the hostility, ultimately, to prejudice, and a 'vanity project' being an easy target for scorn. However, I'd also say that Harlem Nights is a movie which I can watch over and over, find enjoyable each time, and which in terms of production values and scripting, I would hold above Star Trek 09...
It may well be that I'm selling myself short, but to address the second boldened point, that is not a style of work which I find enjoyable -- I'm not going to do something, which is highly likely that I will dislike... For example, I don't like marzipan. No matter how awesome a cake may be, if it has marzipan in it, I won't eat it, because I know that I dislike marzipan, and that will almost certainly spoil my enjoyment of the rest of the cake...
So, as I said above, how much I do or don't watch subscription TV, has no bearing on my opinion on Star Trek series, and their broadcast history... My dislike for reboots, equally has no bearing on my ability to hold an opinion on the industry. Just to be contradictory to myself, I really enjoyed the reimagined Hawaii 5-0, but, I would also have to state, that I never saw an episode of the original series before I saw the reimagined version...
And the main reason being, that FOX pretty much left the creators alone to do as they wish cause they felt it was going to be a niche film that would probably just about make back it's budget plus a little...
Sometimes doing the unorthodox thing actually pays off.
Same way Lucas got his little "space-fantasy" film made..., a big-wig at 20th Century Fox was willing to take a chance and the rest is history.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Equally, I don't always agree with critics... The complaints about Harlem Nights, for example, such as no references to poverty which drove interest in gangsters etc, were all actually addressed several times... The guy rolling the dice was clearly desperate for the money, the homeless kid living on the fringe and being taken in, the dirty cop who resented criminals having more money than him, the boxing champ who not only had a chronic stammer, but was also exposed as being iliterate, when he spelled 'Phil' with an 'F', showing the only way he could legitimately make money was through fighting... How a reviewer could miss that, I don't understand, so I'd have to say that the critics simply didn't get it... I'm not normally a fan of Richard Pryor, but the way he played the character in a very subdued and understated way (apparently because of a recent diagnosis of multiple sclerosis ) I felt made the character perfect, and a real stand apart role from his usual ones. That it was written, produced and directed by Eddie Murphy, is no different to what JJ Abrams does, and his role, although prominent, was still very much part of an ensemble, so I think the label of 'vanity project' is an unfair one...
I laughed so hard I briefly lost consciousness was kind scared I might die. I'm not kidding, I laughed that hard.
I don't think of Deadpool as an X-Men movie, they were cameos, this was a deadpool movie.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I do agree we in a new golden age of sci fi, or starting to be in movies first ,but now tv too. But even golden ages have sewers. I couldn't watch Jessica Jones, I still think of that actress as the B from whatever that show was called. And I actually like Ben Aflecks Daredevil better.
But Dark Matter is a great show. I like shield and arrow. Like all the marvel movies that have come out. I liked the Dark Knight Rises, except Christian Bale's Batman voice. Beyond is my favourite Star Trek Movie and I was luke warm on Luke Warm on the JJverse at best.
I loved Hemlock Grove, and Lost Girl (dispite it being filled with sexist, Mysangist double standards).
Stargate Alantis was great show.
And more is coming down the pike.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Look at all the posts that do not relate to the topic. How about we get back on topic please.
It is interesting that a lot of people, including myself, have thought that the design of the U.S.S Discovery is due to a possible joint crew of Federation and Klingons because of the Khitomer Accords (First Khitomer Accords) but the Khitomer Accords signing took place in or after Star Trek: Undiscovered Country (Star Trek 6). I also noticed someone has a signature showing how the U.S.S Discovery is a joint Federation and Klingon crew due to the Khitomer Accords but that happened in or after Star Trek 6.
Alternately it might be a section 31 ship with stolen Klingon tech. We don't know.
It could be anything, we just don't have the intel, so its all just guess work.
I wonder where they get the idea of Klingons and Bronze goes together. Most of their ships are in Green. At least the majority that was on screen. Even my KDF ships on the game is green.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
When I brought the observation here from other boards I frequent it wasn't entirely about the shape of the hull. We can already see the new ship has details not present in the McQuarrie version including a clear delineation between the secondary hull and wide D7-like wing/pylons when seen from the bottom where the McQuarrie design has the entire wedge as the secondary hull with tiny pylons at the tips elevating the engines above the slab.
Anyway, that straw was made chiefly out of listening to the music, which has distinctly Klingon cues to it and frankly seemed more finished/polished than the video track.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. And it's bizarre to me that anyone would need to have strong feelings one way or the other about it (unless maybe they are the near mythical STO fans that love Klingons and really do hope to see them get a greater percentage of the spotlight on this outing). But I thought the observation about the music and its possible meaning was interesting.
It does have some semblance of Klingon shipwright architecture to it and since we had very little to go on, I was merely throwing out there, one of many speculative possibilities.
So sue me...
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Very true, I also completely agree with everything you have said. Nikkei also did point out the music playing when the ship is leaving the spacedock, which many of us thought was interesting as well, may have an indication of who or what type of ship it could be. Sometimes the music does relate to the crew and ship, for example Star Trek: Search for Spock, Commander Kruge, the crew and his Bird of Prey.
If that show features Section 31 TRIBBLE of any kind I'll TRIBBLE on somebodies doorstep for sure. I hope Star Trek outlived that nonsense after the last desasters featuring it.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
As I said 'clearly based on McQuarrie's concept art', as in they took the concept and expanded upon the theme. I don't view that as signifying Klingon involvement.
Now, with regards the music, I actually haven't heard it (I keep my speakers off so as to not disturb the folks around me) I have read the description, as well as the observation folks have made about a cloaking device sound being heard. But as I said, if a just-before TOS era is being focussed on (as the registry is alleged to be suggesting) then the Empire and the Federation were not on good terms, there would be no colaborations or joint ventures. To be honest, all these 'half-fact releases' which are being made, and then sometimes contradicted (ie The Undiscovered Country, then to be told it's not set after TUC) is utterly boring me, and making me completely lose interest in the series at all. I understand that social media makes things very different compared to when Voyager, or even Enterprise were released, but all this 'boy who cried wolf-esque' shenanigans is just tedious, and makes me lose interest. The producers're dangling bait to get responses, rather than releasing a few authentic pre-release images or facts to actually cement interest and generate engagement with the characters...
To be honest, I don't even see the need for a new Star Trek series. At all. The franchise will remain alive all the time people enjoy and appreciate the original work, and go to the conventions and pay for autographs from the existing actors. It doesn't need to be 'active' to be appreciated... (IMHO)
"When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." - Captain Janeway
#Support Mirror Universe I.S.S. Prefixes
Nobody official said it took place between TUC and TNG. That was fans' wishful thinking.
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
Either way, my 'interest' in the series has now got to the point of wanting to see some official releases which start to give some real foundations which can be properly digested, rather than just ambiguous teasers... I'm sure that comparably close to its release date, Stargate:Universe had released some concept ideas for the characters and the show... perhaps Suicide Squad's just making me scheptical and nervous...
That has been the only official statement mentioning that movie (or any other movie, for that matter).
As for casting, we have been officially informed that the producers have been consulting with Dr. Mae Jemison, first African-American woman in space and one-time transporter operator on an episode of TNG, concerning the captain of the Discovery. That's all we've heard, of course, and it may not have any particular meaning other than consulting with an astronaut...
With regard the second point, I thought the article read that they(I forget who they were interviewing) had been inspired by Mae Jemison and Nichelle Nichols with regards the character (opening the suggestion that they were looking to have a female African-American captain...)
Again, I may be mis-remembering and confusing discussion with actual articles, but it just feels (to me) as if they're being deliberately evasive about things, while trying to engage as much interest as possible with their vagueries, which is why I'm hitting the point of "wake me up when you have something concrete to tell me, not just more teasers..."