I think Shatner is great, a larger-than-life personality, but he's way off-base on his reasoning here, that it's only about effects with Star Wars, and that's what makes Trek better. And his point about JJ Abrams is just totally disconnected from reality, there doesn't seem to be any growing interest in Trek that I've seen as a lifelong Trekkie, that movie came and went, people liked it and then mainly forgot about it. There is a kernel of truth running through his points though, that Trek's stories are more human, more about humanity, and on that basis I think he's right, that Trek with its infinite potential of who we are now makes it a better storytelling medium. Star Wars has a few great stories under its belt, but they use humanity as a backdrop for storytelling, using classic archetypes as a shortcut to telling a story, rather than telling a story about the people - that's ok, but it's what makes Star Wars a few great movies.
After watching that.... I wonder if it's William Shatner who needs to "Get A Life".
And other than taking place in space, I don't get what he means by SW being derivative of ST.
Plus I'd put Princess Leia over any of the women on Star Trek. She was feminine, but also an arse kicker.
Outside of a couple scenes in the Star Trek movies, when did Uhura get to really kick some butt?
Princess Leia grabs the blaster rifle and starts mowing down Stormtroopers along with the guys. Sheesh.
Where did light speed originate? Is it derivative of warp speed?I don't think he's got a clue about special effects, he's just grabbing statements out of the air (or somewhere else) and doesn't know the process.The irony of what he says about special effects is that from the first Star Trek movie to the last JJ Abrams one is that ILM, Lucas owned did them. They wouldn't have been as good without them.Maybe right about the human element of Star Trek, but he's trying to compare apples to oranges here, and we get a discombobulated interview. Sure the stud of the universe would like to hook up with Princess Leia, I can understand that though.
Faster Than Light travel originates long before Star Wars or Star Trek.
And we've all seen Star Trek V. So of course he doesn't have a clue about Special Effects.
why is this 80 year old man dressed like a 15 year old boy?
2-1B.... his size Small Affliction shirt is the new XXL button-down!
I love both Star Wars and Star Trek.
They can be apples and oranges next to each other, but the Star Wars prequels added a more complicated story to SW that asked questions about republican governments and political corruption which appealed to me, but not a lot of other SW fans who just like cool tech (AT-AT walkers), unexplained super powers (The Force, without biological details to it like midichlorians), and simple plots, (i.e. blow up the Death Stars.) That bores me after a while and I like material that explores humanity's dark psyche, more politics and history, etc. - with good measures taken to appease my desire for vengeful violence (with reason behind it, and Saving-Private-Ryan-brutality in implementing it).
So no - I didn't want to post a soundbyte, one-sentence answer. I don't limit the expression of my intellect, or if you find it lacking, I also don't hamper it further developing by posting something simplified. So don't read further, drink something to kill your brain cells instead.
Meanwhile, Major Kira (Star Trek Deep Space Nine) was a flawed and tragic character better representing any lady character in either franchise (though she's not "hotter" than Slave Leia or Arena Padme in a ripped shirt (and I liked her deleted scene outfit from Naboo), and she's not as "perfect, intellectually" as starship commander Captain Janeway either. Complete Trek fans are familiar with Deep Space Nine and may know what i'm talking about - Major (Colonel) Kira was the best lady character. Perhaps Star Trek's sexiest, was B'llana Torres, the half-Klingon gal from Voyager, if only because I'm attracted to women I constantly fight with - as if nothing else, (well, besides the requisite good looks) they have a personality.
That was totally staged.
I was thinking about heading to Frank and Sons this FCBD since there's an animation show and it's close to my mom's place. Not sure if I'll make it,
But the text and descriptions were only okay, not as strong as the first volume (I didn't learn as much as in the previous). I wonder how the third ROJ
It must be because there are no comic book films out this year to tie into.
I'm considering attending although I'd like to make it into a Disney World visit as well which would up the expenses greatly.
That carbon fiber bucket is an interesting idea (though don't wear it, that stuff can be cancerous), but that join in the back is hideous. I can forgive
I might have tossed him out the window if he did that to one of my props.
This year's FCBD offerings are abysmal, I'm avoiding altogether.
The Tower (1985) - a Canadian ultra-lazy tv movie, sci-fi in premise but not execution. This was gruelingly slow, boring, and badly produced.
I haven't seen it in years and came across it last night just before it aired while channel surfing. I hadn't put this together