Oh, as long as Shatner did it, it'd be okay. When he gestures, their critical faculties fall to about the same level as if Pam Anderson had walked up to them, dropped to her knees and started undoing their belts.
God, was that a tortured analogy.
ENT in XI
- Thread starter Chris_Moderato
- Start date
Oh, as long as Shatner did it, it'd be okay. When he gestures, their critical faculties fall to about the same level as if Pam Anderson had walked up to them, dropped to her knees and started undoing their belts.
God, was that a tortured analogy.
I doubt the success or failure of Star Trek 2008 will come down to whether it has a reference to Enterprise in it or not. Similarly, having Janeway in Nemesis was the least of that film's problems.
As someone who has invested much of my life in Trek, I'd love to see the traditional passing of the baton continue. Since Quinto and Nimoy are playing the same character, it should really be somebody from the immediate predecessor to this Trek... both in terms of production and timeline.
As someone who has invested much of my life in Trek, I'd love to see the traditional passing of the baton continue. Since Quinto and Nimoy are playing the same character, it should really be somebody from the immediate predecessor to this Trek... both in terms of production and timeline.
If it's the NCC-1701's first voyage, then they could simply mention that it's the first ship named Enterprise in however many years or since the founding of the Federation.
That's not why they use it.
And a little over-the-top.
Then again, since we're talking about Shatner, I guess we can let it slide.
Yeah, but otherwise what fun is it? Lincoln/Douglas this place is not.
I'd be happier if they mentioned that it was the first starship named Enterprise ever.
No... unless of course you are applying this same thinking to anyone who ever worked on a Star Trek production and or tie-in work as also being "lazy"... ugh!
Sharr
That would at least have the salutory effect of finally causing the entire concept of Trek "canon" to vanish up its own ass.
If anything it should be as simple as this isn't the first ship named Enterprise. It would satisfy naysayers and yaysayers alike because it really isn't the first ship named E whether or not you like ENT or consider it part of that damned canon thing.
There's a very high probability of that.
Well, no. But it's a good one-liner to keep the pot boiling.
UWC Defiance said:
Well, no. But it's a good one-liner to keep the pot boiling.
Shoo.
I'm in character.
Because it's kind of cheesy?
(talk about stirring the pot)
(talk about stirring the pot)
I agree!
Sharr
Similar threads
