trek film in three years ( Dammit these people don't learn )

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2005-05-31 09:32am

Some Trekkies are so addicted to Trek that they actually like the crap B&B make

They're very, very rare though. Just try and take a look at a random Trek messageboard; you won't find much B&B love there.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-05-31 01:53pm

JET wrote:

This is what they said Voyager would be, and Enterprise. One of their problems is that they never have the courage to carry through with their premises; they always must return to the TOS/TNG "planet of the week" formula. Or the "villainous threat of the year" formula for movies.

What does he expect to gain by saying that? He's basically admitting that he and Braga have nearly twice as much money as, say, Ron D. Moore, and still produce shit. And I wouldn't be bragging about "actors" like Scott Bakula...
What kinda movie would you write then? No baddies or aliens? maybe they could all just sit there and look pretty (if Picard was there )

Clarified.

EDIT: fixed tags.

Junghalli · Post by **Junghalli** » 2005-05-31 02:48pm

Bounty wrote:
Some Trekkies are so addicted to Trek that they actually like the crap B&B make
They're very, very rare though. Just try and take a look at a random Trek messageboard; you won't find much B&B love there.

Yeah, most Star Trek fans are demanding B&B's heads on poles.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-05-31 03:18pm

Yet still there are fans who seemed to want Trek on TV no matter what. Any Trek is better than no Trek at all, they seemed to be saying. Aparently it never crossed their heads to demand GOOD Trek for once in twenty years...

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2005-06-12 09:16am

When do B&B’s contracts run out?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-06-12 09:24am

Ah, looks like somebody isn't aware of the ~1 week thread necromancy rule...

Gordonfrost · Post by **Gordonfrost** » 2005-06-12 11:28am

Only one week. That's pretty short.

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2005-06-12 03:21pm

Gordonfrost wrote:Only one week. That's pretty short.

It's also proportional to how relevant or useful the new post is. Adding something profound or new to a month-old thread is tolerable, but silly questions or vapid comments after more than a week is just asinine.

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2005-06-12 03:27pm

Sorry, i didnt think to check the last post date since it was still halfway up the front page