|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:20 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:39 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:36 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:55 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:47 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:23 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:23 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:23 pm
|
|
|
|
Steel Sterling In other words, "Ok, we accept that 'Enterprise' failed because it alienated its core audience by treating the continuity the same way a dog treats a fireplug. Rick Berman is not allowed to touch this one. We'll try not to do that again." That's bull. He did several other series. Like Deep Space Nine. I'd have to blame the script writers for "enterprise's" failure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:39 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:42 pm
|
|
|
|
Lindira Honestly, I'm a little scared of J.J. Abrams taking control of the newest Star Trek movie. I don't think Lost is as compelling as it once was, and certainly lacks character development. I'm afraid that if he uses existing characters, he'll bastardize them somehow. Or, if he creates all new Star Trek characters, they won't be true to the spirit of Star Trek. I like it when movies try to tell a story rather than try to be blockbuster hits. And Abrams is certainly a "Let's make a blockbuster" guy. I heard that Berman was cool for a while, but went cuckoo towards the end of DS9. ninja Didn't Avery Brooks say he refused to work with Berman ever again? And that's why they've never even considered a DS9-centric movie? I thought I read that somewhere...
That's what I heard, too.
And when Enterprise was in development, different people had different sound-bytes on the process. Rick Berman came right out and said that he did not consider continuity important for this series. Now, for costumes and special effects, that's understandable and forgiveable-the original series was limited to a small budget and the special effects of their time. For history and events, it's a HUGE deal because there's an entire saga in place already. I heard old-school fans announce they weren't touching this one with a 10-foot pole as a result of the ignored continuity. And the early episode scripts suffered for it, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:04 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:23 pm
|
|
|
|
MagnusHansen Quote: Matt Damon is rumored to be playing the young James Kirk. WTF?!?!?! On top of the fact that makes me puke (and I hope to God that Gene Rodenburry spins in his grave if so) But I'm so sick and so ******** tired of these damn prequils! I want post Nemesis stuff damnit! Hell, I'd even settle for pre-Nemesis stuff. Aka, post Voyager stuff... what happened to Voyager right after its return. Damn it!
So do I, but as Phil Farrand pointed out, there's "short script syndrome." The technology is so advanced, a lot of problems can be solved fast, and not fill an episode. Doyle had the same problem with writing full Sherlock Holmes novels-Holmes solved ANYTHING in a short-story space.
Example: A Galaxy-class ship is invaded by attempted pirates. "Seal off all decks, and begin filling the corridors with anaesthezine gas."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 9:20 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|