Who is John Harrison?

[Jim G.]

If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...

--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Relax. It's North Korea, the nation-state equivalent of the short bus." -- Sterling Archer, ARCHER

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
>fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
>Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...

CBA. Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.

--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ You can't spell 'disgust' without
/ / 'SGU' - Anim8rFSK

[Murdoc]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400, Merrick Baldelli wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
>>fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
>>Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>
> CBA. Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.

Goddamn TLAs. Can't you just spell out what you mean?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBA

CBA may refer to:

Organisations
Academic

Center for Bits and Atoms, a research institution at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology
Christian Brothers Academy, schools run by the Institute of the
Brothers of the Christian Schools, including:
Christian Brothers Academy (New Jersey), in Lincroft, New Jersey
Christian Brothers Academy (Albany, New York)
Christian Brothers Academy (Syracuse, New York)
College of Business Administration (CBA), private college in Saudi
Arabia
Corby Business Academy, an academy in Corby, England

Banks

Central Bank of Armenia
Centrale Bank van Aruba, the central bank of Aruba
Commercial Bank of Africa, headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya
Commercial Bank of Australia (1866-1982), merged into the Wales bank to
form Westpac
Commonwealth Bank of Australia

Professional and interest

California Bluegrass Association
Cambridge Buddhist Association
Canadian Bankers Association
Canadian Bar Association
Chicago Bar Association
Chinese Benevolent Association
Commonwealth Broadcasting Association
Consumer Bankers Association, lobbying voice on retail banking issues
in the United States
Council for British Archaeology

Sports

Chinese Badminton Association, the national badminton association of
China
Chinese Baseball Association, the national baseball association of
China
Chinese Basketball Alliance, a defunct professional men's basketball
league that existed from 1994 to 1999 in Taiwan
Chinese Basketball Association, the pre-eminent professional men's
basketball league in China
Chinese Basketball Association (organisation), the national basketball
association of China
Continental Basketball Association, a defunct professional men's
basketball minor league in the United States

Other

CBA (food retail), a Hungarian food-retail network
Companhia Brasileira de Aluminio, the largest aluminium producer in
Brazil
CBA (AM), the former CBC Radio One AM station in Moncton, New
Brunswick, now known as CBAM-FM
CBA-FM, the CBC Radio Two station in Moncton
Central Anticorruption Bureau of Poland
Commonwealth Broadcasting Association
Luis A. Ferr� Performing Arts Center (Centro de Bellas Artes Luis A.
Ferre), a multi-use performance centre in San Juan, Puerto Rico

Maths and science

Casei Bifidus Acidophilus, a bacterium
Colicin B activity protein
Complete Boolean algebra, a concept from mathematics
Cytometric Bead Array, a bead-based immunoassay

Other uses

Collective bargaining agreement
NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement
NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement
Consensus based assessment
C�rdoba, Argentina, a city in Argentina
Cost-benefit analysis


Of that humongous list, only this might apply to TV/movies:

Organisations

Professional and interest

Commonwealth Broadcasting Association

But that one doesn't make much sense in context.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <lg9um8hfu6mn05qdh...@4ax.com>,

Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>
> CBA. Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.

Well ... the last page of the comic is art labeled LONDON, then
STARFLEET DATA ARCHIVE, then the back of a guy's head as he sticks his
poorly drawn left hand onto a scanner which lights up to say
ACCESS GRANTED HARRISON, JOHN

I'm not sure what that's supposed to tell us.

--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."

[Wiseguy]

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote in
news:1c3um8pnr9t0atsah...@4ax.com:

> If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
> fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
> Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>

Not knowing is fine with me.

[Dimensional Traveler]

And why should I care?

--
The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,
hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with
methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate
wouldn't tolerate.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:43:41 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

Well besides Orci being fucking retarded?

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 19:05:00 -0400, Murdoc
<murd...@tweedledum.tweedledee.invalid> wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
>>>fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
>>>Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>>
>> CBA. Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
>> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
>
>Goddamn TLAs. Can't you just spell out what you mean?

*chuckling*

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cba


1. cba
CBA = Can't Be Arsed.

CBA is a severe form of laziness.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <pcs2n8plh0r7c4ddc...@4ax.com>,

Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:43:41 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <lg9um8hfu6mn05qdh...@4ax.com>,
> > Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
> >> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
> >> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
> >>
> >> CBA. Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
> >> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
> >
> >Well ... the last page of the comic is art labeled LONDON, then
> >STARFLEET DATA ARCHIVE, then the back of a guy's head as he sticks his
> >poorly drawn left hand onto a scanner which lights up to say
> >ACCESS GRANTED HARRISON, JOHN
> >
> >I'm not sure what that's supposed to tell us.
>
> Well besides Orci being fucking retarded?

There's that. And that's exactly what I came away from his comic
prequel to the first "Flare Trek" with.

[Jim G.]

anim8rFSK sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:43:41 -0700:

Unless the writers are breaking all kinds of conventions, it tells us
that this guy had legitimate access to Starfleet archives at the same
time that NewKirk et al are finishing up a mission during their early
days together. So it would seem to rule out Harrison being a product of
a time jump, or any such thing, which also (on two fronts) removes the
possibility of him being Khan, or of Harrison just being a fake name
being used until the movie's release. In short, Harrison appears to
really be Harrison, a Starfleet employee in the same timeline as the
reboot, and to have some tie-in with the comics story that had just
ended--a story that had a lot to do with the Prime Directive and with
someone who had cavalierly violated it in a big way.

--
Jim G. | A fan of good writers and good directors
"The length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder." -- Alfred Hitchcock

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400:

> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>
> CBA.

CBA?

> Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.

Harrison appears to be legit and not Khan.

--

[Jim G.]

Dimensional Traveler sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:36:35
-0700:

> And why should I care?

I don't know why you should, but you do--at least enough to ask. :)

[anim8rFSK]

In article <ikq0n8h1he2sem6nk...@4ax.com>,

So you're saying the writing is terrible.

[Your Name]

> Who is John Harrison?

George's brother and the long lost 8th Beatle. ;-)

[Wiseguy]

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote in

news:0st2n8533slcin03s...@4ax.com:

> Dimensional Traveler sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:36:35
> -0700:
>> And why should I care?
>
> I don't know why you should, but you do--at least enough to ask. :)
>

He's not asking to find the answer to the question, but to find out why the
question was asked.

There's a difference.

[Jim G.]

anim8rFSK sent the following on Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:34:55 -0700:

Heh. Well, I've read worse. And, on the TV front, I've *watched* worse,
and just this week.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:38:34 -0500, Jim G.

<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400:
>> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
>> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
>> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>>
>> CBA.
>
>CBA?

Can't Be Arsed.

>> Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
>> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
>
>Harrison appears to be legit and not Khan.

This is Abrams and his ass-sucking monkeys we're talking
about. It seems that the lot of them are going to be making the same
mistakes they always seems to make whenever they start adding "secret
agent" bullshit to their stories.

Personally I can't wait to see how many sharks they jump in
this lens-flare extrrrrrrravaganza.

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:03:46 -0400:

> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:38:34 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400:
> >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
> >> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
> >> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
> >>
> >> CBA.
> >
> >CBA?
>
>
> Can't Be Arsed.

This is one of those time when it doesn't makes much more sense to me
when it's spelled out. :)

> >> Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
> >> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
> >
> >Harrison appears to be legit and not Khan.
>
> This is Abrams and his ass-sucking monkeys we're talking
> about. It seems that the lot of them are going to be making the same
> mistakes they always seems to make whenever they start adding "secret
> agent" bullshit to their stories.
>
> Personally I can't wait to see how many sharks they jump in
> this lens-flare extrrrrrrravaganza.

I'll definitely give the eventual DVD a look. As a rental from the
library, of course.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 14:55:58 -0500, Jim G.

<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:03:46 -0400:
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:38:34 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400:
>> >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
>> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
>> >> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
>> >> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>> >>
>> >> CBA.
>> >
>> >CBA?
>>
>>
>> Can't Be Arsed.
>
>This is one of those time when it doesn't makes much more sense to me
>when it's spelled out. :)

Depending on where I'm coming from at the time of my
responses, will determine whether I spell everything out or whether
I'm going to acronym something to death. In this case I was coming
out of dealing with petulant 20-somethings in desperate need of
spankings. Which ends up more the latter and not the former.

>> >> Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
>> >> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
>> >
>> >Harrison appears to be legit and not Khan.
>>
>> This is Abrams and his ass-sucking monkeys we're talking
>> about. It seems that the lot of them are going to be making the same
>> mistakes they always seems to make whenever they start adding "secret
>> agent" bullshit to their stories.
>>
>> Personally I can't wait to see how many sharks they jump in
>> this lens-flare extrrrrrrravaganza.
>
>I'll definitely give the eventual DVD a look. As a rental from the
>library, of course.

http://thepiratebay.se for me. Nothing says "fuck you" quite
the way as doing it illegitimately to the MPAA...

[William December Starr]

In article <a9s2n81c6fb2pbeq7...@4ax.com>,
Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> said:

> Murdoc <murd...@tweedledum.tweedledee.invalid> wrote:

>> Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>>
>>> CBA. Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
>>> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
>>
>> Goddamn TLAs. Can't you just spell out what you mean?
>
> *chuckling*
>
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cba
>
>1. cba
> CBA = Can't Be Arsed.
>
> CBA is a severe form of laziness.

http://www.acronymfinder.com/ is useful too. Feed it "CBA" and it
lists 149 results, but when you click on "Slang, Chat & Pop culture"
that gets cut down to just six and the first one's the winner:

Rank Abbr. Meaning
**** CBA Can't Be Arsed
*** CBA Coffee Break Arcade (gaming site)
*** CBA Can't Be Asked
** CBA Collectif Bled'Art (French band)
* CBA Crates Before Attack (online gaming rule)
* CBA Celebrity Best Advice (book series)

-- wds

[William December Starr]

In article <XnsA1A5CD9CAE14...@69.16.185.252>,
Wiseguy <epw...@yahoo.com> said:

> Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote

>
>> If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out
>> the fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star
>> Trek: Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
>
> Not knowing is fine with me.

And now we know what the _other_ half of the battle is.

-- wds

[William December Starr]

In article <ikq0n8h1he2sem6nk...@4ax.com>,

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:

>>> Well ... the last page of the comic is art labeled LONDON, then
>>> STARFLEET DATA ARCHIVE, then the back of a guy's head as he
>>> sticks his poorly drawn left hand onto a scanner which lights up
>>> to say ACCESS GRANTED HARRISON, JOHN
>>
>> I'm not sure what that's supposed to tell us.
>
> Unless the writers are breaking all kinds of conventions, it tells
> us that this guy had legitimate access to Starfleet archives at
> the same time that NewKirk et al are finishing up a mission during
> their early days together.

Knowing absolutely nothing about the story machinations that you're
talking about, I'll just ask why you assume that access necessarily
means _legitimate_ access,

-- wds

[Jim G.]

William December Starr sent the following on 25 Apr 2013 00:18:04 -0400:

It's a combination of the aforementioned conventions and the fact that
JJ et al have said that Cumberbatch plays a character named John
Harrison, as opposed to saying that he was impersonating John Harrison,
or some such thing. And the comic provided no funny business leading up
to Harrison gaining access to the archives, so while absence of evidence
is not evidence of absence, it would break the conventions if we were to
subsequently learn that he's broken in somehow.

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:33:07 -0400:

> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 14:55:58 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:03:46 -0400:
> >> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:38:34 -0500, Jim G.
> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:45:54 -0400:
> >> >> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:03:22 -0500, Jim G.
> >> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >If not knowing is just killing you, you might want to check out the
> >> >> >fourth and final issue of the official prequel comic, Star Trek:
> >> >> >Countdown to Darkness. In particular, that last page...
> >> >>
> >> >> CBA.
> >> >
> >> >CBA?
> >>
> >>
> >> Can't Be Arsed.
> >
> >This is one of those time when it doesn't makes much more sense to me
> >when it's spelled out. :)
>
> Depending on where I'm coming from at the time of my
> responses, will determine whether I spell everything out or whether
> I'm going to acronym something to death. In this case I was coming
> out of dealing with petulant 20-somethings in desperate need of
> spankings.

I had no idea that you worked for Apple.

> Which ends up more the latter and not the former.
>
> >> >> Tell me the ending and I'll be satisfied to know that
> >> >> it's a steaming pile of shit without having to endure the pain.
> >> >
> >> >Harrison appears to be legit and not Khan.
> >>
> >> This is Abrams and his ass-sucking monkeys we're talking
> >> about. It seems that the lot of them are going to be making the same
> >> mistakes they always seems to make whenever they start adding "secret
> >> agent" bullshit to their stories.
> >>
> >> Personally I can't wait to see how many sharks they jump in
> >> this lens-flare extrrrrrrravaganza.
> >
> >I'll definitely give the eventual DVD a look. As a rental from the
> >library, of course.
>
> http://thepiratebay.se for me. Nothing says "fuck you" quite
> the way as doing it illegitimately to the MPAA...

As long as we speak with our wallets...

[William December Starr]

In article <nmcln81n1cm1rf2rr...@4ax.com>,

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:

> William December Starr sent the following on 25 Apr 2013 00:18:04 -0400:
>

>> Knowing absolutely nothing about the story machinations that
>> you're talking about, I'll just ask why you assume that access
>> necessarily means _legitimate_ access,
>
> It's a combination of the aforementioned conventions and the fact
> that JJ et al have said that Cumberbatch plays a character named
> John Harrison, as opposed to saying that he was impersonating John
> Harrison, or some such thing. And the comic provided no funny
> business leading up to Harrison gaining access to the archives, so
> while absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, it would
> break the conventions if we were to subsequently learn that he's
> broken in somehow.

I didn't mean that he'd broken in with leet haxor skilz, just
that there doesn't seem to be reason why he couldn't be, say, a
time traveler from 29th century, or a Gary Seven-alike or similar
complete outsider who set up a phony identity -- or had one set
up for him -- that's more than solid enough to fool everybody in
the primitive culture he's operating in.

That is, I don't see any conventions violated if (1) he really
is the John Harrison that Starfleet gave archive access to, but
"John Harrison" is not at all what Starfleet thinks he is.

-- wds

[Harold Groot]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:51:00 -0500, Jim G.
<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>William December Starr sent the following on 25 Apr 2013 00:18:04 -0400:
>> In article <ikq0n8h1he2sem6nk...@4ax.com>,
>> Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:
>>
>> >>> Well ... the last page of the comic is art labeled LONDON, then
>> >>> STARFLEET DATA ARCHIVE, then the back of a guy's head as he
>> >>> sticks his poorly drawn left hand onto a scanner which lights up
>> >>> to say ACCESS GRANTED HARRISON, JOHN
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure what that's supposed to tell us.
>> >
>> > Unless the writers are breaking all kinds of conventions, it tells
>> > us that this guy had legitimate access to Starfleet archives at
>> > the same time that NewKirk et al are finishing up a mission during
>> > their early days together.
>>
>> Knowing absolutely nothing about the story machinations that you're
>> talking about, I'll just ask why you assume that access necessarily
>> means _legitimate_ access,
>
>It's a combination of the aforementioned conventions and the fact that
>JJ et al have said that Cumberbatch plays a character named John
>Harrison, as opposed to saying that he was impersonating John Harrison,
>or some such thing. And the comic provided no funny business leading up
>to Harrison gaining access to the archives, so while absence of evidence
>is not evidence of absence, it would break the conventions if we were to
>subsequently learn that he's broken in somehow.

>Jim G.

Hmmmm... if memory serves, the pilot of Babylon 5 had a similar
(though very hard to see) thing. A villian used some sort of security
card to access a room, and there was a flash of a sign saying
something like "Laural Takashima - authorized entrance". Without a
VCR that could do high quality Freeframe, you'd never get it. Laurel
was the executive officer on B5, and it was originally planned for
that character to be the plant by Psi-Corps. Even if you COULD read
that brief flash, it wasn't known at that time if the credentials had
be forged, stolen - or freely given. With the pilot episode featuring
a shapeshifter, that left even more doubt about identities.

(Then when the series actually went to production, Laurel was replaced
by Susan Ivonova, and the Psi-Corps Plant was shifted to being a
different character.)

[Jerry Brown]

On 26 Apr 2013 20:58:49 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December

This being Bad Robot there may be a clue in the name, reminiscent of
their naming Lost's philosophical character after the seventeenth
century philosopher John Locke,

The original John Harrison was a eighteenth century clockmaker who
invented the marine chronometer, so maybe STiD's one has something to
do with time.

BTW, I used to have a manager called John Harrison, but somehow I
doubt that it's him that they're referencing.

--
Jerry Brown

A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:51:00 -0500, Jim G.
<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>> Depending on where I'm coming from at the time of my
>> responses, will determine whether I spell everything out or whether
>> I'm going to acronym something to death. In this case I was coming
>> out of dealing with petulant 20-somethings in desperate need of
>> spankings.
>
>I had no idea that you worked for Apple.

I would need serious mind-altering chemicals for such a job.
That and I could go on a killing spree being around all that many
fucking hipsters.

>> http://thepiratebay.se for me. Nothing says "fuck you" quite
>> the way as doing it illegitimately to the MPAA...
>
>As long as we speak with our wallets...

I am... My wallet will be nowhere the options of seeing this
abomination.

[Jim G.]

William December Starr sent the following on 26 Apr 2013 20:58:49 -0400:

> In article <nmcln81n1cm1rf2rr...@4ax.com>,
> Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:
>
> > William December Starr sent the following on 25 Apr 2013 00:18:04 -0400:
> >
> >> Knowing absolutely nothing about the story machinations that
> >> you're talking about, I'll just ask why you assume that access
> >> necessarily means _legitimate_ access,
> >
> > It's a combination of the aforementioned conventions and the fact
> > that JJ et al have said that Cumberbatch plays a character named
> > John Harrison, as opposed to saying that he was impersonating John
> > Harrison, or some such thing. And the comic provided no funny
> > business leading up to Harrison gaining access to the archives, so
> > while absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, it would
> > break the conventions if we were to subsequently learn that he's
> > broken in somehow.
>
> I didn't mean that he'd broken in with leet haxor skilz, just
> that there doesn't seem to be reason why he couldn't be, say, a
> time traveler from 29th century,

If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
convention.

> or a Gary Seven-alike

Time travel again.

> or similar
> complete outsider who set up a phony identity -- or had one set
> up for him -- that's more than solid enough to fool everybody in
> the primitive culture he's operating in.

Haven't you just gone the leet haxor skilz route?

> That is, I don't see any conventions violated if (1) he really
> is the John Harrison that Starfleet gave archive access to, but
> "John Harrison" is not at all what Starfleet thinks he is.

Well, it would seem to take time travel to make him Khan and leet haxor
skilz to make him someone other than who he is.

[Jim G.]

Jerry Brown sent the following on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 09:02:46 +0100:

If they go the time travel route with both movies, it will tell us a lot
about their ability to come up with a creative and original plot device.

> BTW, I used to have a manager called John Harrison, but somehow I
> doubt that it's him that they're referencing.

My guess is that this will be like LOST in the sense that countless
people will have overanalyzed the John Harrison name, only to find out
later that it was really all just about the relationships between the
various characters. And I'm not quite sure whether to follow that up
with a smiley or a frown.

[Jim G.]

Harold Groot sent the following on Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:59:57 GMT:

Well, this is certainly more than a fuzzy screen capture from a VCR
tape.

My guess at this point is that Harrison really is an archivist/historian
and that, through the course of his work, he discovers something that
puts his path and the path of those on the Enterprise on a collision
course, and perhaps in a literal sense. My further guess is that Kirk
will continue to struggle with some of the Prime Directive realities in
the aftermath of his experiences with Capt. April from the comics and
will have his faith in Starfleet even further tested via Harrison and
Harrison's pursuit of whatever it is *exactly* that he is pursuing.

In short, the first movie was the Magic Reset Button� for the series and
this second one will revolve around a Prime Directive theme, with Kirk
violating all sorts of regulations in the process that will lead to
various lens flares and destruction, and to Kirk getting rewarded for it
all in the end. Because he's just that awesome.

Or I could be completely wrong. :)

[William December Starr]

In article <eobtn8h6rgsqih2ae...@4ax.com>,

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:

> William December Starr sent the following
>

>> or a Gary Seven-alike
>
> Time travel again.

Maybe. Seven and Kirk verbally sparring in 1968:

"I am a human being from the 20th century."

"Humans of the 20th century
do not go beaming around the galaxy, Mr. Seven."

"I've been living on another planet far more advanced.
I was beaming to Earth when you intercepted me."

"The location of that planet?"

"They wish their existence kept secret.
Even in your time, it will remain unknown."

"It's impossible to hide a whole planet."

"Impossible for you. Not for them.
I am of this time period. You are not.
You interfere with me with what I have to do there,
and you'll change history."

He seems to have solid knowledge of the future, out to Kirk's time
in the 22nd century, but he also claims that himself is a native of
1968. Some kind of time travel is strongly implied, but it might be
"only" data that can be transferred, not matter.

>> or similar complete outsider who set up a phony identity -- or
>> had one set up for him -- that's more than solid enough to fool
>> everybody in the primitive culture he's operating in.
>
> Haven't you just gone the leet haxor skilz route?

I was think more along the lines of him being an agent/mastermind of
a conspiracy that, among other things, planted some people in
Starfleet some time ago, one of whom has worked their way up to a
position from which they can create ghost accounts on starfleet.com.

-- wds

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
>convention.

Wait... Which convention is that? Berman & Braga did it so
much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <8bjvn89p0o7m3uii6...@4ax.com>,

Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
> >convention.
>
> Wait... Which convention is that? Berman & Braga did it so
> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.

I thought Voyager was Voyagers! gone wrong?

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:56:08 -0400:

> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
> >convention.
>
> Wait... Which convention is that?

Skiffy movie and book series (the ones that don't center around time
travel) don't go to the time travel well twice in a row.

> Berman & Braga did it so
> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.

Sadly, there's no convention against hiring writers who suck. Otherwise,
none of us would likely know who B&B are.

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:13:30 -0400:

> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:51:00 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> Depending on where I'm coming from at the time of my
> >> responses, will determine whether I spell everything out or whether
> >> I'm going to acronym something to death. In this case I was coming
> >> out of dealing with petulant 20-somethings in desperate need of
> >> spankings.
> >
> >I had no idea that you worked for Apple.
>
> I would need serious mind-altering chemicals for such a job.

Homegrown (right there in the Cupertino cult compound) iPot.

Or iCrack, iCoke or iMeth if you're more hardcore.

> That and I could go on a killing spree being around all that many
> fucking hipsters.
>
> >> http://thepiratebay.se for me. Nothing says "fuck you" quite
> >> the way as doing it illegitimately to the MPAA...
> >
> >As long as we speak with our wallets...
>
> I am... My wallet will be nowhere the options of seeing this
> abomination.

That makes two of us, but for me it's more of a stand against reboots,
rather than any sincere belief that the last movie or this one is an
abomination. I just don't like the entire concept of an uncreative
production team profiting off of someone else's IP, even when it's
perfectly legal as it is in this case. If they had come up with their
own new space franchise, then I would have been happy to cough up money
to support a quality effort.

--

Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre

"Can you and your stupid hair let us in?" -- Carlton Lassiter, PSYCH

[Jim G.]

William December Starr sent the following on 29 Apr 2013 23:22:57 -0400:

> In article <eobtn8h6rgsqih2ae...@4ax.com>,
> Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:
>
> > William December Starr sent the following
> >
> >> or a Gary Seven-alike
> >
> > Time travel again.
>
> Maybe. Seven and Kirk verbally sparring in 1968:
>
> "I am a human being from the 20th century."
>
> "Humans of the 20th century
> do not go beaming around the galaxy, Mr. Seven."
>
> "I've been living on another planet far more advanced.
> I was beaming to Earth when you intercepted me."
>
> "The location of that planet?"
>
> "They wish their existence kept secret.
> Even in your time, it will remain unknown."
>
> "It's impossible to hide a whole planet."
>
> "Impossible for you. Not for them.
> I am of this time period. You are not.
> You interfere with me with what I have to do there,
> and you'll change history."
>
> He seems to have solid knowledge of the future, out to Kirk's time
> in the 22nd century, but he also claims that himself is a native of
> 1968. Some kind of time travel is strongly implied, but it might be
> "only" data that can be transferred, not matter.

Well, if there's no time travel, then it's an agency/entity that has had
a really, really long life span. :)

> >> or similar complete outsider who set up a phony identity -- or
> >> had one set up for him -- that's more than solid enough to fool
> >> everybody in the primitive culture he's operating in.
> >
> > Haven't you just gone the leet haxor skilz route?
>
> I was think more along the lines of him being an agent/mastermind of
> a conspiracy that, among other things, planted some people in
> Starfleet some time ago, one of whom has worked their way up to a
> position from which they can create ghost accounts on starfleet.com.

Again, though, wouldn't the creation of said ghost accounts (that allow
access to various things that would otherwise not be accessible) require
the hacker business? I mean, if just anyone can bypass security, then
why have the security in the first place?

[anim8rFSK]

In article <4dvvn8pb414mv7pa6...@4ax.com>,

I don't have a problem with reboots; I have a problem with *bad*
reboots, and anything that hack Orci craps out. I think they could have
done a brilliant 'new cast' spin off from Debt of Honor, for instance.

[William December Starr]

In article <1h20o897dhlvt4aae...@4ax.com>,

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> said:

> William December Starr sent the following
>

>> I was think more along the lines of him being an agent/mastermind
>> of a conspiracy that, among other things, planted some people in
>> Starfleet some time ago, one of whom has worked their way up to a
>> position from which they can create ghost accounts on
>> starfleet.com.
>
> Again, though, wouldn't the creation of said ghost accounts (that
> allow access to various things that would otherwise not be
> accessible) require the hacker business? I mean, if just anyone
> can bypass security, then why have the security in the first
> place?

Not "just anyone," but someone who's trusted. Spy agencies try to
plant sleepers/moles in enemy nations' military/intelligence
agencies; why shouldn't someone have done it to Starfleet, starting
say twenty years before the movie's 'now'?

The security is there; it just doesn't defend as well against
someone who's already on the inside.

-- wds

[Jim G.]

William December Starr sent the following on 30 Apr 2013 22:45:55 -0400:

Fair enough. I suppose a mole can't be completely discounted, but I'll
be surprised if they go that route. Again, for whatever reason, I get
the sense that he's gonna be a good/neutral (at first) contemporary of
Kirk's who gets pushed too far for whatever reasons, and it's at that
point that he goes off the rails and leaves the good/neutral zone,
perhaps in a "road to Hell" and "good intentions" sort of way.

[Jim G.]

anim8rFSK sent the following on Tue, 30 Apr 2013 19:23:58 -0700:

I just think that a good writer can create a good and interesting new
universe of his or her own which can then be populated by new
characters, rather than trying to make an easy buck by taking someone
*else's* characters and, as often as not, forcing them into situations
and roles that have little to do with their original incarnations.

I guess I just prefer originality and earning your *own* keep.

> I think they could have
> done a brilliant 'new cast' spin off from Debt of Honor, for instance.

DoH as in the Clancy book, or something else?

--

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:04:27 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

>In article <8bjvn89p0o7m3uii6...@4ax.com>,
> Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
>> >convention.
>>
>> Wait... Which convention is that? Berman & Braga did it so
>> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.
>
>I thought Voyager was Voyagers! gone wrong?

Voyager was Gilligan's Island gone wrong.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:49:25 -0500, Jim G.

<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:56:08 -0400:
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
>> >convention.
>>
>> Wait... Which convention is that?
>
>Skiffy movie and book series (the ones that don't center around time
>travel) don't go to the time travel well twice in a row.

Eh? Well that's news to me. Though it does have its problems
when you have shows like Voyagers! and Time Tunnel.

>> Berman & Braga did it so
>> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.
>
>Sadly, there's no convention against hiring writers who suck. Otherwise,
>none of us would likely know who B&B are.

Can we go back in time and make sure this happens? Please?
I'll even pay Dr. Emmett Brown to work on it for us.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:49:25 -0500, Jim G.

<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:13:30 -0400:
>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:51:00 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >> Depending on where I'm coming from at the time of my
>> >> responses, will determine whether I spell everything out or whether
>> >> I'm going to acronym something to death. In this case I was coming
>> >> out of dealing with petulant 20-somethings in desperate need of
>> >> spankings.
>> >
>> >I had no idea that you worked for Apple.
>>
>> I would need serious mind-altering chemicals for such a job.
>
>Homegrown (right there in the Cupertino cult compound) iPot.
>
>Or iCrack, iCoke or iMeth if you're more hardcore.

<Dr. Evil> How about noooo! </Dr. Evil>

Jeez, the thought of me on drugs is frightening given the only
chemical I do is caffeine.

>> That and I could go on a killing spree being around all that many
>> fucking hipsters.
>>
>> >> http://thepiratebay.se for me. Nothing says "fuck you" quite
>> >> the way as doing it illegitimately to the MPAA...
>> >
>> >As long as we speak with our wallets...
>>
>> I am... My wallet will be nowhere the options of seeing this
>> abomination.
>
>That makes two of us, but for me it's more of a stand against reboots,
>rather than any sincere belief that the last movie or this one is an
>abomination. I just don't like the entire concept of an uncreative
>production team profiting off of someone else's IP, even when it's
>perfectly legal as it is in this case. If they had come up with their
>own new space franchise, then I would have been happy to cough up money
>to support a quality effort.

And look at this... this is a first when I "me too" this
sentiment.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <7423o817h1920vn8m...@4ax.com>,

http://www.goodreads.com/book/photo/399550.Star_Trek

[anim8rFSK]

In article <6593o89t6s9r1k6os...@4ax.com>,

Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:04:27 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <8bjvn89p0o7m3uii6...@4ax.com>,
> > Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
> >> >convention.
> >>
> >> Wait... Which convention is that? Berman & Braga did it so
> >> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.
> >
> >I thought Voyager was Voyagers! gone wrong?
>
> Voyager was Gilligan's Island gone wrong.

Voyager was Gilligan's Planet gone wrong.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Wed, 01 May 2013 18:52:08 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>

wrote:

>In article <6593o89t6s9r1k6os...@4ax.com>,
> Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:04:27 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <8bjvn89p0o7m3uii6...@4ax.com>,
>> > Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
>> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
>> >> >convention.
>> >>
>> >> Wait... Which convention is that? Berman & Braga did it so
>> >> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.
>> >
>> >I thought Voyager was Voyagers! gone wrong?
>>
>> Voyager was Gilligan's Island gone wrong.
>
>Voyager was Gilligan's Planet gone wrong.

I try not to mutate the titles too much. You and I both know
how easy it is to confuse people here.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <8de4o8tguk10cra1j...@4ax.com>,

Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 01 May 2013 18:52:08 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <6593o89t6s9r1k6os...@4ax.com>,
> > Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:04:27 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <8bjvn89p0o7m3uii6...@4ax.com>,
> >> > Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
> >> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
> >> >> >convention.
> >> >>
> >> >> Wait... Which convention is that? Berman & Braga did it so
> >> >> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.
> >> >
> >> >I thought Voyager was Voyagers! gone wrong?
> >>
> >> Voyager was Gilligan's Island gone wrong.
> >
> >Voyager was Gilligan's Planet gone wrong.
>
> I try not to mutate the titles too much. You and I both know
> how easy it is to confuse people here.

No, I'm serious; there really *was* a GILLGAN'S PLANET

http://www.antoniogenna.net/doppiaggio/anim/ilpianetadelle1000avventure.j
pg

http://i2.listal.com/image/32489/600full-gilligan's-planet-photo.jpg

[Dimensional Traveler]

My problem with Crap Trek 2009 was that the whole thing stank of "Hey,
wouldn't it be cool if Kirk wasn't Kirk? And Spock wasn't the Spock we
know? And Sulu... and Checkov... And McCoy, etc. etc. etc." It doesn't
take very long before it boils down to "What if Star Trek wasn't Star
Trek?" And they went about five times that far past that point. I
wouldn't have cared if they had just taken that final step and admitted
it wasn't Star Trek by not slapping ST names on their characters and
background. Then it would have risen to being just a really bad movie.

--
The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,
hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with
methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate
wouldn't tolerate.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <51832a1b$0$52797$742e...@news.sonic.net>,

I think it would have been a much better movie if they just hadn't
called it Star Trek at all, yes.

[David Johnston]

Except of course that then it would not exist.

[Adam H. Kerman]

In a world in which Star Trek wasn't rebooted... What's wrong with that?

[David Johnston]

Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 01 May 2013 19:39:48 -0400:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:49:25 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:56:08 -0400:
> >> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:29:11 -0500, Jim G.
> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >If they go to the time travel well twice in a row, that breaks with the
> >> >convention.
> >>
> >> Wait... Which convention is that?
> >
> >Skiffy movie and book series (the ones that don't center around time
> >travel) don't go to the time travel well twice in a row.
>
> Eh? Well that's news to me. Though it does have its problems
> when you have shows like Voyagers! and Time Tunnel.

That's why I included the parenthetical.

> >> Berman & Braga did it so
> >> much (with Enterprise) you'd think it was Voyagers! gone wrong.
> >
> >Sadly, there's no convention against hiring writers who suck. Otherwise,
> >none of us would likely know who B&B are.
>
> Can we go back in time and make sure this happens? Please?
> I'll even pay Dr. Emmett Brown to work on it for us.

We should probably play it safe and go back even further and ensure that
their respective parents never meet in the first place.

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 01 May 2013 19:39:48 -0400:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:49:25 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >That makes two of us, but for me it's more of a stand against reboots,
> >rather than any sincere belief that the last movie or this one is an
> >abomination. I just don't like the entire concept of an uncreative
> >production team profiting off of someone else's IP, even when it's
> >perfectly legal as it is in this case. If they had come up with their
> >own new space franchise, then I would have been happy to cough up money
> >to support a quality effort.
>
> And look at this... this is a first when I "me too" this
> sentiment.

Just don't reboot my comments.

--

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Thu, 02 May 2013 12:10:24 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>

And to think that I actually drove that out of my head.
Dammit, now I need to drown it out again...

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Thu, 02 May 2013 20:08:12 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:

>My problem with Crap Trek 2009 was that the whole thing stank of "Hey,
>wouldn't it be cool if Kirk wasn't Kirk? And Spock wasn't the Spock we
>know? And Sulu... and Checkov... And McCoy, etc. etc. etc." It doesn't
>take very long before it boils down to "What if Star Trek wasn't Star
>Trek?" And they went about five times that far past that point. I
>wouldn't have cared if they had just taken that final step and admitted
>it wasn't Star Trek by not slapping ST names on their characters and
>background. Then it would have risen to being just a really bad movie.

The thing is that CBS and Paramount have all sorts of insane
copyrights in place for anything that remotely looks like Star Trek.
So Abrams and his ass-monkeys needed to kiss ass to do this movie this
particular way... And apparently will be doing it again too soon for
my taste.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 03 May 2013 09:32:19 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
wrote:

I'm not seeing anything wrong with this. Really?

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 03 May 2013 10:26:42 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
wrote:

>Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
>have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
>prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.

It would be good to see fresh meat -- like Ender's Game, for
example... rather than Hollywood trotting out the old whore one more
time.

[David Johnston]

On 5/3/2013 4:33 PM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> On Fri, 03 May 2013 10:26:42 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
>> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
>> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.
>
> It would be good to see fresh meat -- like Ender's Game,

Why would anyone make a TV series out of Ender's Game even if there was
a market for it?

[Dimensional Traveler]

Even better.

>> In a world in which Star Trek wasn't rebooted... What's wrong with that?
>>
>
> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.

But raping the corpse of Star Trek isn't the only way to do that.

[Dimensional Traveler]

Because they are already making the movie?

[David Johnston]

On 5/3/2013 7:35 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 5:58 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>> On 5/3/2013 4:33 PM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>>> On Fri, 03 May 2013 10:26:42 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
>>>> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I
>>>> would
>>>> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.
>>>
>>> It would be good to see fresh meat -- like Ender's Game,
>>
>> Why would anyone make a TV series out of Ender's Game even if there was
>> a market for it?
>>
> Because they are already making the movie?
>

A movie, sure but you'd have to massively mess with the premise of Ender
to turn it into a TV series.

[David Johnston]

On 5/3/2013 7:35 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

>>> In a world in which Star Trek wasn't rebooted... What's wrong with that?
>>>
>>
>> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
>> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
>> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.
>
> But raping the corpse of Star Trek isn't the only way to do that.
>

<Snort> Oh yes, the market for new space science fiction is so very,
very large these days.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Dude: Benedict Cumberbatch is in this one, a sure-fire career ender.
He'll never get another interesting script after.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 03 May 2013 18:58:26 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>

wrote:

>On 5/3/2013 4:33 PM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>> On Fri, 03 May 2013 10:26:42 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
>>> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
>>> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.
>>
>> It would be good to see fresh meat -- like Ender's Game,
>
>Why would anyone make a TV series out of Ender's Game even if there was
>a market for it?

Like... Like... Like.. I didn't say do it... I said
like...

Jeez, and people say I'm the most literal one they've ever
met.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 03 May 2013 19:46:52 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
wrote:

>A movie, sure but you'd have to massively mess with the premise of Ender
>to turn it into a TV series.

That's never stopped them before.. I mean let's look at 9 to
5... Working Girl...

...

Oh wait.. Nevermind.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 03 May 2013 14:50:26 -0500, Jim G.

<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 01 May 2013 19:39:48 -0400:
>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:49:25 -0500, Jim G.
>> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >That makes two of us, but for me it's more of a stand against reboots,
>> >rather than any sincere belief that the last movie or this one is an
>> >abomination. I just don't like the entire concept of an uncreative
>> >production team profiting off of someone else's IP, even when it's
>> >perfectly legal as it is in this case. If they had come up with their
>> >own new space franchise, then I would have been happy to cough up money
>> >to support a quality effort.
>>
>> And look at this... this is a first when I "me too" this
>> sentiment.
>
>Just don't reboot my comments.

Why not? I can see it now... More lens flair... Red
Matter... Characters with the same name but are so bloody different
they might have come from another world... Nonsensical plots,
insanely stupid premises...

And yes.. More lens flare!

[anim8rFSK]

In article <907ao8hj70s1heukt...@4ax.com>,

Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 03 May 2013 18:58:26 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On 5/3/2013 4:33 PM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> >> On Fri, 03 May 2013 10:26:42 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
> >>> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I would
> >>> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.
> >>
> >> It would be good to see fresh meat -- like Ender's Game,
> >
> >Why would anyone make a TV series out of Ender's Game even if there was
> >a market for it?
>
> Like... Like... Like.. I didn't say do it... I said
> like...
>
> Jeez, and people say I'm the most literal one they've ever
> met.

Cite?

[Dimensional Traveler]

Have you watched TV at any time in the last decade? :P

[Dimensional Traveler]

He's also going to be Smaug in the next Hobbit movies.

[Adam H. Kerman]

So no more Christopher Tietjens, no more Sherlock, he'll just
take parts for buckets full of cash.

[David Johnston]

On 5/4/2013 9:41 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 5/3/2013 6:46 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>> On 5/3/2013 7:35 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>> On 5/3/2013 5:58 PM, David Johnston wrote:
>>>> On 5/3/2013 4:33 PM, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 03 May 2013 10:26:42 -0600, David Johnston <Da...@block.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I have no objection to Star Trek being rebooted any more than I
>>>>>> have objections to Robin Hood or Snow White being rebooted, yes, I
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> prefer to have some space action adventure on the screen.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be good to see fresh meat -- like Ender's Game,
>>>>
>>>> Why would anyone make a TV series out of Ender's Game even if there was
>>>> a market for it?
>>>>
>>> Because they are already making the movie?
>>>
>>
>> A movie, sure but you'd have to massively mess with the premise of Ender
>> to turn it into a TV series.
>
> Have you watched TV at any time in the last decade? :P
>

I have.


Stargate to Stargate SGU kept the premise pretty much intact.
Clone Wars kept the premise, improved on the characterization.
Friday Night Lights was still about a small town and it's football team.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Sat, 04 May 2013 11:21:18 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

Your mom...

Seriously it's hard to cite, given that Google Groups isn't
what it used to be when they had bought up Deja News.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <pt7do8tthe2d8qv4t...@4ax.com>,

See, humor, you say people say you're too literal, I ask for a cite ...

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Sun, 05 May 2013 16:24:56 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

>> >Cite?
>>
>> Your mom...
>>
>> Seriously it's hard to cite, given that Google Groups isn't
>> what it used to be when they had bought up Deja News.
>
>See, humor, you say people say you're too literal, I ask for a cite ...

Well, I've had to gain a sense of humor, given some of the
denizens around here.

[Jim G.]

David Johnston sent the following on Fri, 03 May 2013 09:32:19 -0600:

Yes, just like Star Wars never existed, and countless others.

The bottom line is that there is and probably always will be a market
for space stories. The only question is whether it's gonna be another
unoriginal cop-out of a "reboot" or a "reimagining" or if it's gonna be
something new.

My guess is that if people who want this didn't have the option of
another boring reboot, then they'd be spending their cash on the
"something new" option, assuming that the studios would offer it to
them.

Heck, getting back to Star Wars, imagine if everyone back then felt the
way you (and too many studio types) do here. "Sorry, this is just too
darn original and risky. I don't suppose we could get you to do it as a
reboot of Star Trek, could we?"

Instead, someone took a chance, and now we have *two* pretty cool
franchises. But we could have had three by now if someone had taken a
chance on a third. Or a fourth. Or a fifth. Or a tenth. Instead, we're
back to reboot reboot reboot reboot...

--
Jim G. | A fan of good writers and good directors
"The length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder." -- Alfred Hitchcock

[Jim G.]

anim8rFSK sent the following on Sat, 04 May 2013 11:21:18 -0700:

Well played. :)

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Sat, 04 May 2013 10:36:38 -0400:

> On Fri, 03 May 2013 14:50:26 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >Merrick Baldelli sent the following on Wed, 01 May 2013 19:39:48 -0400:
> >> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:49:25 -0500, Jim G.
> >> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >That makes two of us, but for me it's more of a stand against reboots,
> >> >rather than any sincere belief that the last movie or this one is an
> >> >abomination. I just don't like the entire concept of an uncreative
> >> >production team profiting off of someone else's IP, even when it's
> >> >perfectly legal as it is in this case. If they had come up with their
> >> >own new space franchise, then I would have been happy to cough up money
> >> >to support a quality effort.
> >>
> >> And look at this... this is a first when I "me too" this
> >> sentiment.
> >
> >Just don't reboot my comments.
>
> Why not? I can see it now... More lens flair...

That's a good thing in my case. Lens flare is a *really* good thing. So
is a soft focus lens.

> Red
> Matter...

Well, I have gray matter (supposedly), and given my caffeine and coffee
consumption, I'm probably halfway to red already. (If I were watching
DESTINY and REVOLUTION, it would probably be a guarantee at this point.)

> Characters with the same name but are so bloody different
> they might have come from another world...

On a more serious matter, this I agree with 100%. Of course, the Big Red
Reset Button� protects J.J. et al from any criticism on this front, but
it just leads back to the question of why they didn't just kickstart a
new franchise with new characters for these new personalities, rather
than inject those personalities into old and established characters.

> Nonsensical plots,
> insanely stupid premises...

Neither of these would have bothered me to the point of not enjoying
things if things had been presented as a new franchise. After all,
there's almost always *some* nonsense and insanity in almost any script
geared towards (let's face it) adolescent males.

> And yes.. More lens flare!

You left out Daddy issues. Gotta have Daddy issues.

[anim8rFSK]

In article <33rfo8d63su7b9d82...@4ax.com>,

Um, how deep of a cave would they have had to have been living in to
think any element of STAR WARS was original?

>
> Instead, someone took a chance, and now we have *two* pretty cool
> franchises. But we could have had three by now if someone had taken a
> chance on a third. Or a fourth. Or a fifth. Or a tenth. Instead, we're
> back to reboot reboot reboot reboot...

--

[Jim G.]

anim8rFSK sent the following on Mon, 06 May 2013 14:37:56 -0700:

Well, if we're gonna get technical about it, *nothing* has been original
since 100 years or so after the Greeks started to write plays. And
probably a lot earlier than that. Nothing new under the sun, and all
that. But in relative terms, an entirely new universe with entirely new
characters is vastly more original than what we would have had if,
instead of making Star Wars, they had just gone with a Trek reboot.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:37:56 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:

>> Heck, getting back to Star Wars, imagine if everyone back then felt the
>> way you (and too many studio types) do here. "Sorry, this is just too
>> darn original and risky. I don't suppose we could get you to do it as a
>> reboot of Star Trek, could we?"
>
>Um, how deep of a cave would they have had to have been living in to
>think any element of STAR WARS was original?

Wait... This is a trick question right? Particularly when
you consider how many caves Trek Fans have seen in their viewing
lives.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:52:58 -0500, Jim G.
<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>> Why not? I can see it now... More lens flair...
>
>That's a good thing in my case. Lens flare is a *really* good thing. So
>is a soft focus lens.

Not when it's done to the level that Abrams has done it.
You'll end up blinded and seeing spots and that soft focus will make
you look blobby.... Not at all complimentary.

>> Red
>> Matter...
>
>Well, I have gray matter (supposedly), and given my caffeine and coffee
>consumption, I'm probably halfway to red already. (If I were watching
>DESTINY and REVOLUTION, it would probably be a guarantee at this point.)

No no no no no. RED Matter.. As in Alias and MI:III. Extra
points when you start bleeding from your cuticles.

>> Characters with the same name but are so bloody different
>> they might have come from another world...
>
>On a more serious matter, this I agree with 100%. Of course, the Big Red
>Reset Button� protects J.J. et al from any criticism on this front, but
>it just leads back to the question of why they didn't just kickstart a
>new franchise with new characters for these new personalities, rather
>than inject those personalities into old and established characters.

Denial isn't a river in Egypt... And the only thing that can
protect Abrams at this point would be the Steve Jobs Reality
Distortion Field�.

>> Nonsensical plots,
>> insanely stupid premises...
>
>Neither of these would have bothered me to the point of not enjoying
>things if things had been presented as a new franchise. After all,
>there's almost always *some* nonsense and insanity in almost any script
>geared towards (let's face it) adolescent males.

I fear I'm of the camp of "no excuses"... You want your
children to be smart, you give them smarter things to work out. If
you want sheep... Then have at it and approach this as you're saying.

>> And yes.. More lens flare!
>
>You left out Daddy issues. Gotta have Daddy issues.

Oh damn, I forgot about that. Then again, I also left out the
part where if it's a smart and capable (and independent) woman that
when she gets a boyfriend, she suddenly becomes useless. But we're
talking about you and copying you, no?

[David Johnston]

I can easily count them.

>
> The bottom line is that there is and probably always will be a market
> for space stories.

WHy no. There isn't. What was the last space adventure blockbuster hit?

[Jim G.]

Merrick Baldelli sent the following on 5/9/2013 7:09 AM:

> On Mon, 06 May 2013 14:52:58 -0500, Jim G.
> <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Why not? I can see it now... More lens flair...
>>
>> That's a good thing in my case. Lens flare is a *really* good thing. So
>> is a soft focus lens.
>
> Not when it's done to the level that Abrams has done it.
> You'll end up blinded and seeing spots

Just another day...

> and that soft focus will make
> you look blobby.... Not at all complimentary.

Just another day...

>>> Red
>>> Matter...
>>
>> Well, I have gray matter (supposedly), and given my caffeine and coffee
>> consumption, I'm probably halfway to red already. (If I were watching
>> DESTINY and REVOLUTION, it would probably be a guarantee at this point.)
>
> No no no no no. RED Matter.. As in Alias and MI:III. Extra
> points when you start bleeding from your cuticles.

Do I get credit for various forks in the eye?

>>> Characters with the same name but are so bloody different
>>> they might have come from another world...
>>
>> On a more serious matter, this I agree with 100%. Of course, the Big Red

>> Reset Button� protects J.J. et al from any criticism on this front, but

>> it just leads back to the question of why they didn't just kickstart a
>> new franchise with new characters for these new personalities, rather
>> than inject those personalities into old and established characters.
>
> Denial isn't a river in Egypt... And the only thing that can
> protect Abrams at this point would be the Steve Jobs Reality

> Distortion Field�.

>
>>> Nonsensical plots,
>>> insanely stupid premises...
>>
>> Neither of these would have bothered me to the point of not enjoying
>> things if things had been presented as a new franchise. After all,
>> there's almost always *some* nonsense and insanity in almost any script
>> geared towards (let's face it) adolescent males.
>
> I fear I'm of the camp of "no excuses"... You want your
> children to be smart, you give them smarter things to work out. If
> you want sheep... Then have at it and approach this as you're saying.

Sadly, half of the children out there are of below average intelligence.

>>> And yes.. More lens flare!
>>
>> You left out Daddy issues. Gotta have Daddy issues.
>
> Oh damn, I forgot about that. Then again, I also left out the
> part where if it's a smart and capable (and independent) woman that
> when she gets a boyfriend, she suddenly becomes useless. But we're
> talking about you and copying you, no?

Yeah, but to be fair, J.J. hardly has a copyright on that one.

--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
"Can you and your stupid hair let us in?" -- Carlton Lassiter, PSYCH

[Jim G.]

David Johnston sent the following on 5/9/2013 11:04 PM:

It's a good thing it's a subjective term.

>> The bottom line is that there is and probably always will be a market
>> for space stories.
>
> WHy no. There isn't. What was the last space adventure blockbuster hit?

Oddly enough, I can't recall having said "blockbuster hit" in this thread.

--

[David Johnston]

Given the budgetary requirements of making a movie like that, "potential
blockbuster" is mandatory if you are going to get it made.

[Jim G.]

David Johnston sent the following on 5/11/2013 4:43 PM:

Once again you make up convenient limitations/requirements in order to
bolster your argument. But back in the real world, the "budgetary
requirements" can fall along quite an extensive range of possibilities.
You insist on something along the lines of a breaking-the-bank option
because that's the convenient one for the point that you're trying to
make, but the only real requirement of space stories is that they need
to be set in space. Period. They don't need massive battles and massive
special effects efforts and massive numbers of explosions and whatnot.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that some of the fondest memories that
most fans have of *both* the Trek and Wars franchises have little or
nothing to do with special effects or things blowing up. Rather, they're
things that revolve around the characters the fans grew to love.
Characters who happened to be doing stuff in space.

[David Johnston]

On 5/13/2013 10:14 AM, Jim G. wrote:
> David Johnston sent the following on 5/11/2013 4:43 PM:
>> On 5/10/2013 3:47 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>> David Johnston sent the following on 5/9/2013 11:04 PM:
>>>> On 5/6/2013 1:52 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The bottom line is that there is and probably always will be a market
>>>>> for space stories.
>>>>
>>>> WHy no. There isn't. What was the last space adventure blockbuster
>>>> hit?
>>>
>>> Oddly enough, I can't recall having said "blockbuster hit" in this
>>> thread.
>>>
>>
>> Given the budgetary requirements of making a movie like that, "potential
>> blockbuster" is mandatory if you are going to get it made.
>
> Once again you make up convenient limitations/requirements in order to
> bolster your argument. But back in the real world, the "budgetary
> requirements" can fall along quite an extensive range of possibilities.
> You insist on something along the lines of a breaking-the-bank option
> because that's the convenient one for the point that you're trying to
> make, but the only real requirement of space stories is that they need
> to be set in space.

Well first of all, we got here via the claim that the _same_ movie would
be better if it wasn't called Star Trek. You can't make something
approximating the same movie on a budget a fraction the size. But even
more generally, the number of movies being made that are set in space is
a minuscule figure anyway. It's not like they're popular. The few that
are made are almost all horror movies.

[Jim G.]

David Johnston sent the following on 5/13/2013 3:09 PM:

> On 5/13/2013 10:14 AM, Jim G. wrote:
>> David Johnston sent the following on 5/11/2013 4:43 PM:
>>> On 5/10/2013 3:47 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>> David Johnston sent the following on 5/9/2013 11:04 PM:
>>>>> On 5/6/2013 1:52 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> The bottom line is that there is and probably always will be a market
>>>>>> for space stories.
>>>>>
>>>>> WHy no. There isn't. What was the last space adventure blockbuster
>>>>> hit?
>>>>
>>>> Oddly enough, I can't recall having said "blockbuster hit" in this
>>>> thread.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Given the budgetary requirements of making a movie like that, "potential
>>> blockbuster" is mandatory if you are going to get it made.
>>
>> Once again you make up convenient limitations/requirements in order to
>> bolster your argument. But back in the real world, the "budgetary
>> requirements" can fall along quite an extensive range of possibilities.
>> You insist on something along the lines of a breaking-the-bank option
>> because that's the convenient one for the point that you're trying to
>> make, but the only real requirement of space stories is that they need
>> to be set in space.
>
> Well first of all, we got here via the claim that the _same_ movie would
> be better if it wasn't called Star Trek.

Not by me. So you should probably have *that* conversation with the
person who actually said that.

> You can't make something
> approximating the same movie on a budget a fraction the size. But even
> more generally, the number of movies being made that are set in space is
> a minuscule figure anyway. It's not like they're popular.

They weren't any more popular when Star Wars started out, either. But
having said that, I'd be curious as to your source for this claim that
they're not popular.

[Merrick Baldelli]

On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:45:11 -0500, "Jim G."
<jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>> Not when it's done to the level that Abrams has done it.
>> You'll end up blinded and seeing spots
>
>Just another day...

Nice!

>> and that soft focus will make
>> you look blobby.... Not at all complimentary.
>
>Just another day...

Double Plus Good!

>>>> Red
>>>> Matter...
>>>
>>> Well, I have gray matter (supposedly), and given my caffeine and coffee
>>> consumption, I'm probably halfway to red already. (If I were watching
>>> DESTINY and REVOLUTION, it would probably be a guarantee at this point.)
>>
>> No no no no no. RED Matter.. As in Alias and MI:III. Extra
>> points when you start bleeding from your cuticles.
>
>Do I get credit for various forks in the eye?

Some people might give you the credit... I wouldn't however,
given this is an Abrams' "production" (read: abomination). Sporking
out your eyes would be par for the course.

>>> You left out Daddy issues. Gotta have Daddy issues.
>>
>> Oh damn, I forgot about that. Then again, I also left out the
>> part where if it's a smart and capable (and independent) woman that
>> when she gets a boyfriend, she suddenly becomes useless. But we're
>> talking about you and copying you, no?
>
>Yeah, but to be fair, J.J. hardly has a copyright on that one.

True, but you have to admit, that he brings that up to almost
an art form, no?