Oh thank you! :mad: now fruitlessly trying to get techno-twang theme music to leave skull. 
LOL… Yep… Thank god… cause my dad has the job takeing the nuclear waste to the moon!
you know what I was afraid of don’t ya…
The year 1994: From out of space comes a runaway
planet, hurtling between the Earth and the Moon,
unleashing cosmic destruction. Man’s civilization is
cast in ruin.
Two thousand years later, Earth is reborn…
A strange new world rises from the old: a world of
savagery, super science, and sorcery. But one man
bursts his bonds to fight for justice! With his companions
Ookla the Mok and Princess Ariel, he pits his strength,
his courage, and his fabulous Sunsword against the
forces of evil.
He is Thundarr, the Barbarian!
But alas… it was all jsut a pack of lies!!!
I know I’m late to the party on this, but thot I’d follow up anyway.
Vitriol aside, Kirk himself made the change at the end of Trek VI, saying “one.” So technically he’s the first to do so within the TOS/TNG timeline, making him the progenitor of the phrase.
Adjusting terminology which has changed in common use over the last 40 years <> calling writers bigots. Discussing Uhura’s role in the movie <> suggesting the movie has something to prove. Whether or not to use “man” or “one” in a prequel, for example, makes for an interesting discussion. Should they look to represent the time when TOS originated or look forward to our potential future? If you feel “man” makes more sense in the context of the new move, why not make an argument as to why – besides “it doesn’t matter” or “you’re a hippy!” (Though I fully agree that “one” has replaced “man” in common usage today, I could see valid arguments for using “man” here, like the assumption that in the mid-2200s Starfleet is still a bit over-the-top paternal. You get the idea.)
Suggesting that “no one’s seen TNG” is, well, just incorrect. Consider the impact BSG had in the last few years, then consider the fact that TNG won 18 Emmys, a Peabody, and has spent 20 years in cable and local syndication. Hell, in the late 1990s you pretty much couldn’t turn on a broadcast UPN station without seeing three TNG-era Trek episodes a night (plus a late-night B5).
But does this mean your opinion about TNG is wrong? Hell, no!
You don’t like TNG. There’s nothing wrong with that, regardless of the fact that I do like TNG (and TOS, and “New Trek” as well). As I’ve said before, I’m not really the world’s largest B5 fan. It happens. Don’t sweat it! Just don’t bash those who do enjoy TNG or call them names. That’s as foolish as suggesting that you should enjoy something you clearly don’t.
I’ll respond.
Not necessarily, but I’d have been disappointed if we didn’t. I really enjoyed the role-expansion that every TOS character saw, especially Chekow. (Awesome, BTW.) As we discussed in the podcast, he has a special place now. Good stuff, IMHO.
How 'bout just plain crazy? I haven’t read the comics yet – I plan to fix that soon – but I saw him as just a rather simple miner that got drug back into the past and decided to do something jackass. I bought supposed-supergenius Khan forsaking everyone for his own revenge, too, though, so maybe it’s me.
They had to TECH to TECH the TECH. The bit I caught in my one viewing was that the TECH that was going to cause the sun to go nova would’ve been destroyed/stopped by the “red matter/black hole” TECH as opposed to the sun.
I had the same thought watching the trailer, so I looked for it in the film. When it came up, I assumed that he was bracing himself since the planet was falling apart. It’d be kinda foolish to stand military straight then fall over the minute he re-materialized.
I respect your opinion but disagree. We’ve been trained to see Spock as his more-Vulcan-than-human post-Kohlinar self. Watching TOS episodes recently reminded me of how the young Spock was a lot closer to Kirk than his father. I suspect if there’d been more than one available woman on the TOS Enterprise, Spock might’ve, um, hooked up.
The final OK for this in my mind is the fact that Sarek married a woman and procreated. Seems to me it runs in the family.
I suck. I’ve seen exactly two episodes of Enterprise – a problem I’ve promised to correct. So I can’t address this except to say that it was super cool to see a hot green chick in the movie. And I’d like to know more about her. Did anyone catch what she was studying?
I love the switch-katana. Assuming that in the future they could pull this off practically – hell, it seemed to work fine for him in the flick – this would be a great idea: perfect for avoiding the mistake of rolling over and cutting your bits off. </Izzard>
I think I saw lots of discussion about this already so I won’t belabor.
He’s a Vulcan/human. (It’s easy to forget.) But I could see even a pure Vulcan wanting to train humans to deal with their feelings in a difficult situation. I see Spock as the perfect KM programmer: he gets the need to control one’s feelings, but he’ll go about programming in a logical fashion.
Because the Trek universe is always full of aliens (except when budget forces everyone to appear human)?
Me, too. It’s chasing the moving thing. It can always come back for the other (dead) one.
No. I suspect that a mind-meld with his young self would turn his young self into him – not his goal. Since Spock Prime intended to stick around, I figure he wants his young self to follow a totally different path.
As to the view, agreed. I didn’t quite get that, but it didn’t worry me too much. As to leaving him on Delta Vega instead of keeping him on the ship, my take is that a) Spock on the ship is dangerous to the plan, and b) the desire was for Spock to live in and see the universe without Vulcan as opposed to just seeing the explosion.
Doesn’t this argument apply to every single time this has been done – all zillion of 'em? Plus the argument was that they couldn’t possibly outrun the phenomenon, so slowing it was the only chance. (I think. In the end I sorta just aceepted the “standard throw the warp core at it” solution, so maybe I’m out of line here.)
And everyone elses, too, I’m sure, at least as soon as they get over the fact that he saved all their asses. I’m guessing it’s going to be pure hell for everyone else involved – which strikes me as very true to TOS and entertaining.
Why would you want it to? It the most awesomest theme song EVAH!
Baa Naa Naa Naa Naa Naa NAA!
I don’t have a problem with the “one” used in the movie at all. First off, they didn’t even say “man” anyway. I can see why the purist’s are pissed ( but not enough fort them to burn calories on it). I have a problem with the people who have a problem with “man”. Does it realy belittle Uhura, Sally Ride and Kathryn Janeway if someone uses the OTHER MEANING OF THE WORD MAN instead of saying “one”. Sure it doesnt… unless if YOU decide that you want it to belittle them. Otherwise, there is no way that you are going to convinve me that it is an organized plot to offend women to say “where no man has gone before”. And furthermore… I believe in being sensitive to others feelings, but not when that offesnse is something that they (or the “new wave” scholoars) have invented to create offense where it wasn’t already. I am SURE super hippy, military HATEING, comunist Gene Roddenbery did not mean to offend women with that line he wrote in the 60’s. I am also sure that the women watching it back then who now show up at cons dressed as klingons don’t burn a lot of calories trying to get PO’d about it. Like chuck said … that was 20 years ago anyway.
That’s where I think people are just attributeing too much importantace to a damn TV show or movie. I am just defending that saying man doens’t mean that somehow women are 'dissed. It’s been used in language for years and don’t people have more things to gripe about than weather or not he said “one” or “man”? I think that it is that uber sensitivity that led to “wuss” trek… and eventualy killed it.
And as for the TNG ranting… I am jsut giveing back. TNG fans have talked A LOT of crap for years about TOS. I watched TNG, and ds9 ( my favorite new trek) and the 7 of 9 show, and Enterprise. I eventualy liked it… but it never had the good old punch, shoot, and screw factor that BUILT trek.
TNG sure did win technical emmys, and a peabody award ( and rateings for syndicated shows are different than prime time programming… they won their non-prime time slot in your local market= which is good… but it doesn’t mean that a good sized chunk of americans EVER watched it. But for a syndicated show… it was HUGE!)… but half your class in High school didn’t watch it… they did watch kirk and his movies ( if your old enough- mid 30’s). So I use the new movie as proof of the better prodcut being TOS… cause when Trek was dead…they didn’t reboot an old bald guy… they rebooted Jim Kirk!
Ariel = Hot
…just sayin
She’s playing SCarlett in GI Joe.
Wpuld it be herecy to come in here and say the movie was meh. I have seen very little of TOs, but enough to get quite a few of the classic lines.
The story just didnt go anywhere, and I was kinda bored. It just had no true drive or motivation. I understand why Nero was pissed, and I liked the historical refrence in his name, but couldnt he have saved his planet with the stuff he stole form Kirk? The action was beautifully rendered, but still kinda boring. The shooting scenes were generally to hectic to understand but the ship-to-ship scenes were very good.
Also the acting was underwhelming. Young Spok was good Scotty was excelent, but I didn’t much like any of the others (except Tyler Perry). Captian Kirk was pretty shallow and lame. While I am jelious that he could contend with Jamie Bamber in a towel-secne-off, and i will never be able to, he still wasnt that great of an actor.
Also that chick was mega boring. They commited way too much time to her if they had no intentions of developing her. A buddy movie would have been much better.
Even if this movie brings more new trek with it, if its the same kind of trek, I dont want it.
and Uhura: not that hot
Also one of my good friends thinks Spok is very attractive. I dont get this. The actor himself is sorta creepy in the child-molester way. and add those ears and eyebrows…or maby thats just me
Also what Sulu was doing was not fencing. At all. And that fold out sword, pardon my French, was $%@#ing stupid.
Im mostly upset that the movie seemed so hollow to me. Boxy dissapointed 
I’m sort of with you on Spock, not so much about Uhura. Although, Spock being dangerous-looking worked in this movie. We’ll see in the next one.
It looked like movie/saber fencing to me, but I’m with you on the sword. Really bad idea.
I kinda lol’d on the inside when Spok got all mad. He was kinda goofy looking, but still creapy
At least in star wars there is a certain method to the fighting. The over the top actions make sense in context of the battle, and they do have the force to let them do those things. Sulu should have just said he was a trained swordsman.
Just to clarify for those that are doubting: Spock is hot, because he’s Spock 
He looks nice (very nice), but his brains are what make him sexy.
Carry on 
Just to clarify for those that are doubting: Spock is creepy, because he’s Spock.:eek: He looks creepy (big black windowless truck creepy), but its the ears/eyebrows/nose/general shape of Zachary Quinto’s face
It’s too bad you didn’t like it, but to each their own (I do have to admit though, I think we must have opposite tastes, besides BSG lol)
If anything I would say that vengeance was the drive of the story on all sides - Nero’s (somewhat insane, in my view) drive to avenge the destruction of his world and his wife’s death (though seriously, blaming one Vulcan for a supernova? He must be off his rocker), Spock’s drive to avenge the destruction of his world and his mother’s death.
I’m not sure what you mean with the stuff he stole from Kirk ? Insofar as I know all he stole was from Leonard Nimoy’s Spock’s ship.
I disagree - I think that the actors hit the characters straight on, and that is what makes the movie great and transcend it’s admittedly somewhat strained plot. While they all did good jobs, Karl Urban in particular was excellent - now, Bones in my head is an amalgam of him and DeForrest Kelley.
? I assume you mean Uhura, as she’s (lamentably) basically the only woman we know. I agree she should have been more developed (and preferably away from the romantic-interest angle), but I loved that (and this was much clearer on a second viewing) it is her knowledge and expertise that convinces everyone that what Kirk says about the Romulan ship (Nero’s) was correct.
Everyone has their own view of what is attractive. As you know, I think Spock is just lovely Uhura’s beautiful, in my mind.
Just because he’s trained in fencing doesn’t mean that he is limited to it. at least that was my read on the situation. And to be honest, the sword didn’t bother me - it got the job done, which is what mattered.
I don’t know if this was brought up. But it came to me while I was watching Star Trek for the 3rd time.
When young Kirk is driving that car, he waves at a young kid walking by the side of the road, and he yells out “Hey Johnny!”
Now, I was wondering. Who is Johnny? My first thought was Pickard? Idontknow.
Either way, just a thought.
Oh. And BTW. I’m new.
Long long long time listener, maybe since day 1. Called like 3 or 4 times. And first time in the forum. HELLO
Hello, and Welcome!
I was wondering too, but I don’t think we have a way of knowing.
Thank you