Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
James, I applaud your taste in women. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Justine is just the tip of the iceberg. Don't get me started on my Judge Hatchett... Yeah, the time travel plot device was overused and predictible. I did enjoy the Enterprise T'Pol/Archer short-term memory problem episode. That was an outstanding exception. __ James Landrith [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: 703-593-2065 * fax: 760-875-8547 AIM: jlnales * ICQ: 148600159 MSN and Yahoo! Messenger: jlandrith Taking the Gloves Off - http://www.jameslandrith.com The Multiracial Activist - http://www.multiracial.com The Abolitionist Examiner - http://www.multiracial.com/abolitionist/ __ You're the first person I've heard of crushing on Justine Bateman! :) One reason I got so sick of Enterprise and aspects of Voyager was perhaps the main plot device BB overused--time travel! Man, I've literally lost count of how often they used time travel in all the series to tell a story, then reverse everything. Some were really good--Yesterday's Enterprise (TNG), Trials and Tribbleations (DS9), the Enterprise where Archer lost his memory and had to be told by T'Pol each day how Earth was destroyed. But in the main time travel was so overused it became sickening. -- Original message -- From: James Landrith [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thoroughly enjoyed DS9 in syndication. I was on active duty when it began its run and hardly watched TV then. It was nice to see an ST series that didn't have the obligatory holodeck scene every episode or an undisciplined, out of control crew lost in space, or a desperate problem routinely solved through reversing the polarity. Couldn't stand the damned v-word show. Liked TNG. Loved DS9. Great casting. Lots of new characters and familiar faces. Hawk from Spenser - running a space station? Awesome! Rene Auberjonis as a shape-shifting security officer? Plus, Terry Farrell reminded me of Justine Bateman - who I used crush on back in the day. :) That was some damn fine television. ___ James A. Landrith, Jr. 703-593-2065 cell 760-875-8547 fax http://www.jameslandrith.com . Original Message ... On Wed, 16 May 2007 19:51:26 + wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
Justine is just the tip of the iceberg. Don't get me started on my Judge Hatchett... Yeah, the time travel plot device was overused and predictible. I did enjoy the Enterprise T'Pol/Archer short-term memory problem episode. That was an outstanding exception. __ James Landrith [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: 703-593-2065 * fax: 760-875-8547 AIM: jlnales * ICQ: 148600159 MSN and Yahoo! Messenger: jlandrith Taking the Gloves Off - http://www.jameslandrith.com The Multiracial Activist - http://www.multiracial.com The Abolitionist Examiner - http://www.multiracial.com/abolitionist/ __ You're the first person I've heard of crushing on Justine Bateman! :) One reason I got so sick of Enterprise and aspects of Voyager was perhaps the main plot device BB overused--time travel! Man, I've literally lost count of how often they used time travel in all the series to tell a story, then reverse everything. Some were really good--Yesterday's Enterprise (TNG), Trials and Tribbleations (DS9), the Enterprise where Archer lost his memory and had to be told by T'Pol each day how Earth was destroyed. But in the main time travel was so overused it became sickening. -- Original message -- From: James Landrith [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thoroughly enjoyed DS9 in syndication. I was on active duty when it began its run and hardly watched TV then. It was nice to see an ST series that didn't have the obligatory holodeck scene every episode or an undisciplined, out of control crew lost in space, or a desperate problem routinely solved through reversing the polarity. Couldn't stand the damned v-word show. Liked TNG. Loved DS9. Great casting. Lots of new characters and familiar faces. Hawk from Spenser - running a space station? Awesome! Rene Auberjonis as a shape-shifting security officer? Plus, Terry Farrell reminded me of Justine Bateman - who I used crush on back in the day. :) That was some damn fine television. ___ James A. Landrith, Jr. 703-593-2065 cell 760-875-8547 fax http://www.jameslandrith.com . Original Message ... On Wed, 16 May 2007 19:51:26 + wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon
Of course not...unless they really want to lose us by having him come back as his own son...Sorry, got carried away... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, that resolution rankled me no end. On one hand, it's cool they made a Brother a higher-level being. But my wife and I looked at each other and said Great! Another Black man not taking care of his family!. What was that corny line Sisko said Maybe I'll see you tomorrow, maybe yesterday. or something to that effect? I didn't like the casual way they had him leave his pregnant wife behind. I'm not a big reader of Trek books, despite my being a huge Trekkie. I did read one two-part post DS9 story, but it was only a few months later, and Sisko was still gone, Cassidy still pregnant and alone. Really ticked me off. Anyone know if the official Trek literature ever really deals with Sisko and reunites him with his family?? -- Original message -- From: Astromancer You should have gotten that hint when 'the black guy got it in the end'...they ensured he wasn't coming back for a movie...not easily at least... Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) wrote: Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked. Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock's Starfleet Academy days â unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant Trek movie idea â have yet to be addressed directly. While Kurtzman and Orci were reluctant to reveal much about the top-secret film, they did offer some hints. There will be more action in this movie than any 'Trek' that's preceded it, Kurtzman promised. Orci, without discussing a specific budget, added, It'll be the biggest one. The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon
You should have gotten that hint when 'the black guy got it in the end'...they ensured he wasn't coming back for a movie...not easily at least... Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked. Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock's Starfleet Academy days â unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant Trek movie idea â have yet to be addressed directly. While Kurtzman and Orci were reluctant to reveal much about the top-secret film, they did offer some hints. There will be more action in this movie than any 'Trek' that's preceded it, Kurtzman promised. Orci, without discussing a specific budget, added, It'll be the biggest one. The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their purchasing power. With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into 'Trek' for the first time. Indeed, broadening the Trek base seems to be foremost on the filmmakers' minds. The challenge of the movie is to be 100 percent true to the fanbase but also to bring in a whole new group of people who've never seen 'Trek' before, Kurtzman said. Casting has not yet officially begun on the flick, which is scheduled to film in the fall. The writers won't even confirm which characters appear. (We never said Bones was in it, Orci seemed to joke.) As for recent rumors that Matt Damon, Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise were being considered to play the storied Kirk, Spock and McCoy trio, the duo were reluctant to spill the beans. Asked if they would be happy if Kirk were played by Damon, a long pause followed. Finally Kurtzman allowed, I'm the hugest Matt Damon fan ever. If he became [Kirk],
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon
Yeah, that resolution rankled me no end. On one hand, it's cool they made a Brother a higher-level being. But my wife and I looked at each other and said Great! Another Black man not taking care of his family!. What was that corny line Sisko said Maybe I'll see you tomorrow, maybe yesterday. or something to that effect? I didn't like the casual way they had him leave his pregnant wife behind. I'm not a big reader of Trek books, despite my being a huge Trekkie. I did read one two-part post DS9 story, but it was only a few months later, and Sisko was still gone, Cassidy still pregnant and alone. Really ticked me off. Anyone know if the official Trek literature ever really deals with Sisko and reunites him with his family?? -- Original message -- From: Astromancer [EMAIL PROTECTED] You should have gotten that hint when 'the black guy got it in the end'...they ensured he wasn't coming back for a movie...not easily at least... Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked. Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock's Starfleet Academy days â unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant Trek movie idea â have yet to be addressed directly. While Kurtzman and Orci were reluctant to reveal much about the top-secret film, they did offer some hints. There will be more action in this movie than any 'Trek' that's preceded it, Kurtzman promised. Orci, without discussing a specific budget, added, It'll be the biggest one. The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their purchasing power. With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into 'Trek' for the first
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon
Aside from the odds bits you mentioned, nothing specific. Honestly, I never thought a lick about Ben leaving Cassidy alone and pregnant. My immediate anger stemmed from his leaving Jake without a goodbye. How many times had we seen him risk everything for his son? And to end things with him not even making an attempt to contact Jake, leaving the poor kid staringout at the wormhole as it opened and closed to traffic? I brand that a mortal sin. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, that resolution rankled me no end. On one hand, it's cool they made a Brother a higher-level being. But my wife and I looked at each other and said Great! Another Black man not taking care of his family!. What was that corny line Sisko said Maybe I'll see you tomorrow, maybe yesterday. or something to that effect? I didn't like the casual way they had him leave his pregnant wife behind. I'm not a big reader of Trek books, despite my being a huge Trekkie. I did read one two-part post DS9 story, but it was only a few months later, and Sisko was still gone, Cassidy still pregnant and alone. Really ticked me off. Anyone know if the official Trek literature ever really deals with Sisko and reunites him with his family?? -- Original message -- From: Astromancer You should have gotten that hint when 'the black guy got it in the end'...they ensured he wasn't coming back for a movie...not easily at least... Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) wrote: Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked. Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock's Starfleet Academy days â unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant Trek movie idea â have yet to be addressed directly. While Kurtzman and Orci were reluctant to reveal much
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
Reversing the polarity was swiped from Doctor Who. As for the V-word show, I made myself sit through Endgame yesterday. Renewed my disgust altogether. Everyone involved in that show was on autopilot. James Landrith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thoroughly enjoyed DS9 in syndication. I was on active duty when it began its run and hardly watched TV then. It was nice to see an ST series that didn't have the obligatory holodeck scene every episode or an undisciplined, out of control crew lost in space, or a desperate problem routinely solved through reversing the polarity. Couldn't stand the damned v-word show. Liked TNG. Loved DS9. Great casting. Lots of new characters and familiar faces. Hawk from Spenser - running a space station? Awesome! Rene Auberjonis as a shape-shifting security officer? Plus, Terry Farrell reminded me of Justine Bateman - who I used crush on back in the day. :) That was some damn fine television. ___ James A. Landrith, Jr. 703-593-2065 cell 760-875-8547 fax http://www.jameslandrith.com . Original Message ... On Wed, 16 May 2007 19:51:26 + wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively
[scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble � But Not Matt Damon
Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked. Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock's Starfleet Academy days unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant Trek movie idea have yet to be addressed directly. While Kurtzman and Orci were reluctant to reveal much about the top-secret film, they did offer some hints. There will be more action in this movie than any 'Trek' that's preceded it, Kurtzman promised. Orci, without discussing a specific budget, added, It'll be the biggest one. The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their purchasing power. With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into 'Trek' for the first time. Indeed, broadening the Trek base seems to be foremost on the filmmakers' minds. The challenge of the movie is to be 100 percent true to the fanbase but also to bring in a whole new group of people who've never seen 'Trek' before, Kurtzman said. Casting has not yet officially begun on the flick, which is scheduled to film in the fall. The writers won't even confirm which characters appear. (We never said Bones was in it, Orci seemed to joke.) As for recent rumors that Matt Damon, Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise were being considered to play the storied Kirk, Spock and McCoy trio, the duo were reluctant to spill the beans. Asked if they would be happy if Kirk were played by Damon, a long pause followed. Finally Kurtzman allowed, I'm the hugest Matt Damon fan ever. If he became [Kirk], great. The mantra of Who can say? became Kurtzman and Orci's standard deflection. Will William Shatner or Leonard Nimoy appear? Really, who can say? Is the film, as rumors suggest, focused on Kirk and Spock, with supporting characters relegated to the background? Really, who can say? Is the old Trek plot device of time travel involved? You can guess the answer: Really, who can say? What they will say, however, is that the film will be a starship-based adventure. I don't know how you make 'Star Trek' without a
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon
Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project — and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III — spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked. Rumors that the film would center on an early adventure of the crew or even on Kirk and Spock's Starfleet Academy days — unlikely, though no doubt provoked by a long-dormant Trek movie idea — have yet to be addressed directly. While Kurtzman and Orci were reluctant to reveal much about the top-secret film, they did offer some hints. There will be more action in this movie than any 'Trek' that's preceded it, Kurtzman promised. Orci, without discussing a specific budget, added, It'll be the biggest one. The economic models of the other [films] were very much based on the fans out there and their purchasing power. With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into 'Trek' for the first time. Indeed, broadening the Trek base seems to be foremost on the filmmakers' minds. The challenge of the movie is to be 100 percent true to the fanbase but also to bring in a whole new group of people who've never seen 'Trek' before, Kurtzman said. Casting has not yet officially begun on the flick, which is scheduled to film in the fall. The writers won't even confirm which characters appear. (We never said Bones was in it, Orci seemed to joke.) As for recent rumors that Matt Damon, Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise were being considered to play the storied Kirk, Spock and McCoy trio, the duo were reluctant to spill the beans. Asked if they would be happy if Kirk were played by Damon, a long pause followed. Finally Kurtzman allowed, I'm the hugest Matt Damon fan ever. If he became [Kirk], great. The mantra of Who can say? became Kurtzman and Orci's standard deflection. Will William Shatner or Leonard Nimoy appear? Really, who can say? Is the film, as rumors suggest, focused on Kirk and Spock, with
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company starred in the much-maligned 2002 flick Star Trek: Nemesis. In addition to the 2008 release date Paramount recently announced, it has been confirmed that Lost co-creator and M:i:III director J.J. Abrams will direct. Orci says he was relieved that Abrams agreed to helm the project after reading the very first draft (recent rumors indicated he would only produce). When we finally turned in the script I started lining up other directors, and that really got [Abrams] going, Orci joked.
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
Keith, re Sisko coming in a commander... Some executive at Paramount- A Black person simply *can't* command! Executive assisitant- Sir, Paul Winfield played Captain Terrell in 'Wrath of Khan'. Exec- An aberration. He's the only one. Exec assistant- Sir, there was also a Black female captain in TNG, the youngest captain in Starfleet history. Exec (after staring balnkly)- Blahblahblahblahblahblah! Wikki-wikki-WICKET!! Point- makes sense only to the insane... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far between on the film, the first since Picard and company
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
Funny!! -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Keith, re Sisko coming in a commander... Some executive at Paramount- A Black person simply *can't* command! Executive assisitant- Sir, Paul Winfield played Captain Terrell in 'Wrath of Khan'. Exec- An aberration. He's the only one. Exec assistant- Sir, there was also a Black female captain in TNG, the youngest captain in Starfleet history. Exec (after staring balnkly)- Blahblahblahblahblahblah! Wikki-wikki-WICKET!! Point- makes sense only to the insane... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project â and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III â spoke exclusively to MTV about the film Trekkies and Trekkers alike are salivating for any information on (see An Open Letter To 'Star Trek' Director J.J. Abrams). First things first: From the sound of it, fans can rest assured that subtitles about undiscovered countries and insurrections are a thing of the past. Kurtzman and Orci told MTV that their film is titled, quite simply, Star Trek. That's the intended title. I don't think we want to put any colons or anything on it, Orci said. Thus far details have been few and far
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
I thoroughly enjoyed DS9 in syndication. I was on active duty when it began its run and hardly watched TV then. It was nice to see an ST series that didn't have the obligatory holodeck scene every episode or an undisciplined, out of control crew lost in space, or a desperate problem routinely solved through reversing the polarity. Couldn't stand the damned v-word show. Liked TNG. Loved DS9. Great casting. Lots of new characters and familiar faces. Hawk from Spenser - running a space station? Awesome! Rene Auberjonis as a shape-shifting security officer? Plus, Terry Farrell reminded me of Justine Bateman - who I used crush on back in the day. :) That was some damn fine television. ___ James A. Landrith, Jr. 703-593-2065 cell 760-875-8547 fax http://www.jameslandrith.com . Original Message ... On Wed, 16 May 2007 19:51:26 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble — But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman can be reborn, why not Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock? On Christmas Day 2008, the storied Star Trek franchise will begin anew on the big screen, and its creators are almost as ecstatic as the series' famously obsessive fans. We just got the green light! We have a release date and everything, said Alex Kurtzman, co-screenwriter of the eagerly anticipated new Trek adventure. Kurtzman and collaborator Roberto Orci, who are also executive producers of the project — and veterans of Transformers and Mission: Impossible III — spoke exclusively to Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings
Re: [scifinoir2] 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble But Not Matt Damon
You're the first person I've heard of crushing on Justine Bateman! :) One reason I got so sick of Enterprise and aspects of Voyager was perhaps the main plot device BB overused--time travel! Man, I've literally lost count of how often they used time travel in all the series to tell a story, then reverse everything. Some were really good--Yesterday's Enterprise (TNG), Trials and Tribbleations (DS9), the Enterprise where Archer lost his memory and had to be told by T'Pol each day how Earth was destroyed. But in the main time travel was so overused it became sickening. -- Original message -- From: James Landrith [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thoroughly enjoyed DS9 in syndication. I was on active duty when it began its run and hardly watched TV then. It was nice to see an ST series that didn't have the obligatory holodeck scene every episode or an undisciplined, out of control crew lost in space, or a desperate problem routinely solved through reversing the polarity. Couldn't stand the damned v-word show. Liked TNG. Loved DS9. Great casting. Lots of new characters and familiar faces. Hawk from Spenser - running a space station? Awesome! Rene Auberjonis as a shape-shifting security officer? Plus, Terry Farrell reminded me of Justine Bateman - who I used crush on back in the day. :) That was some damn fine television. ___ James A. Landrith, Jr. 703-593-2065 cell 760-875-8547 fax http://www.jameslandrith.com . Original Message ... On Wed, 16 May 2007 19:51:26 + wrote: Yeah, as evidenced by the fact which bothered me from day one of DS9: Sisko was the *only* star of any Trek series who didn't come in as a captain. What was that about? I hear you and agree. I know from stuff I've read on the Net and even conversations in comic shops, DS9 isn't really appreciated. What's really sad, Tracey? DS9 had the best balance of all the things that made Trek what it was: aliens, futuristic tech, action, drama, fully realized characters, and humour. I loved TNG--still do--but it was lacking in humorous, light-hearted shows. Between Quark, Bashir, and O'Brien, DS9 had a goodly number of funny shows, especially during the Dominion War, when the humour broke up the heavy drama. Voyager had lots of aliens, and the Doctor was funny, but the characters weren't really realized. Janeway and Seven ultimately got all the best scripts, with B'Lana Torres and the Doctor getting the leftovers. DS9 managed to develop everyone in that cast over seven years--even people like Jake and Rom--so that all had grown. Enterprise had the tension of the Xindi thing, but the Dominion War trumps it easily. And everywhere I turn now, people pat themselves on the back by saying the new Battlestar Galactica is the best scifi series ever on American TV. I love BSG, but I have to say that overall DS9 is better due to its more balanced flow. Great shows both--along with B5--but when it comes to thinking about what series I could watch over and over again decades in the future without getting tired of it, DS9 beats BSG. And again, it seems so few of those people realize that Ronald Moore worked on DS9 before BSG... -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor) Let me just say it. Most of America never wanted and never liked a Black captain staring in the Star Trek universe. From day one Deep Space nine has been the step-child of the Franchise. Tracey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure if this particular piece on the next Trek film was already posted. I find it interesting they say it won't be a prequel, but a reimaging. (Lord--the last reimaged movie I saw was Tim Burton's laughable Planet of the Apes! Gotta be better than that!). I also note that just about every writer, director, and producer I read references The Next Generation as the standard Trek of the modern era. I get it that TNG had lots of action, a starship as base, and great characters. It's probably overall the most easily accessible Trek show to casual fans and non-fans. Still, it bothers me that the best overall *written* show is almost never discussed: Deep Space Nine. How many people realize that the much-heralded new Battlestar Galactica series' Ronald Moore found his footing on DS9 with the stories of the Prophets and the Dominon War? the more I see how DS9 is almost always overlooked, the more I realize a dream of a movie based on the best of the Trek series is a long shot at best... * http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1554046/story.jhtml 'Star Trek' Writers Talk Direction, Technobabble â But Not Matt Damon 'With this one we're going for the broad audience to bring people into Trek for the first time,' Roberto Orci says. By Josh Horowitz If Batman and Superman
