Latest gossip about Star Trek VII- Generations!!!
Okay, the walls of Paramount have been succesfully bugged!  Here's the
lowdown..... As the story opens, we find James T. Kirk and crew returning home
after t the  last movie's conclusion.....whereupon we come upon some sort of
wormhole in space space where all time stands still and one can live for
eternity.  Kirk gets into a battle with the evil Malcolm McDowell and ends up
trapped in thewormhole Meanwhile, 75 years in the future, the next generation
crew comes upon the same worm wormhole, and thus Kirk and McDowell end up in
the current time frame.  The Kil Klingons, led by the Duras sisters, of course
go crazy at the thought of Kirk being still a being still alive and declare war
on the Federation when they dont turn Kirk over as an escaped prisoner (see the
last movie)......Anyway, theres  a bunch s a chase se scene as McDowell wants
to kill Kirk to protect the secret of the Wormhole and Kirk wants Kirk wantsto
get backto his own time.   The whole thing boils down to Kirk and   Picard
figure out a Picard figure out a way to destroy the wormhole and save time, but
Kirk is kille Killed by McDowell and Picard has to go after him alone.  Theres 
a subplot about Data about Data gettingg an emotion chip and how he has to
learn to control and use e his emotions.     Patrick Stewart, Brent Spiner, and
Michael Dorn get most of the action the action in this flick.......Scotty,
Chekhov, and Kirk show up from the old  crew......Nimoy is being saved for the
next film......"In Search of Kirk"?

49 responses total.

I've been following the talk about "Star Trek:  Generations" (Note that it's
*not* Star Trek VII) on rec.arts.startrek.* over on usenet, and one of
the persistant rumors was that Originally the *entire* original Enterprise
crew was supposed to be involved; but DeForrest Kelly declined due to his
rheumatism, and Nimoy was bitter about something (not enough lines; not being
asked to direct; something like that), so they decided not to pursue George
Takei or Nichelle Nichols, but they had already signed Koenig and Doohan.

Anyway, I'll admit it, I read the script posted to Usenet (which, if not the
real item, is sufficiently close to all the rumors and other stuff out there
...and if it's fake, someone went to an awful lot of trouble to fake us out,
and did it quite skillfullly).  I think it sounds good, but I was really
impressed with the preview I saw during "Clearn And Present Danger."  This
could break the trend of odd-numbered Trek movies being lame.  There's more
about this over in the sci-fi conference.

Sounds like a mediocre ST:TNG episode.

Re:  Mediocre TNG episodes:
Both Patrick Stewart and Marina Sirtis were quoted early on (i.e. when
they first started working on the movie) that they thought "Generations"
was pretty lame compared to some of the stuff they'd done  in the series
(Stewart said he thought the series finale was better than the movie; Sirtis
said that they hadn't done many episodes worse than the movie script).
But, after seeing the final version, Sirtis changed her tone and thought
the movie was actually pretty good.

"This movie will be awful."

"You're a peripheral character, and we don't have to cast you in the sequel."

"The movie came out wonderfully!"

Well, I haven't heard what the movie is about or anything, but all I know is
that trekkies from all over will flock to see the first ST:TNG movie - even if
the old cast members are still kicking. I'm sure it will be a hit - lame or
not.

Star Trek: Voyager....the new voyages
Word is that Linda "Terminator" Hamilton will be the new captain/star, and her
first officer will be openly gay so as to kill sexual tension.....
"."

Re #3: Most movies are better in the final version.  All the stupid,
irrelevent, and mediocre stuff is (theoretically) taken out in the final
editing.  That's why I've never been a big fan of video versions of movies
that are described as the "director's cut" or (worse) having "never before
seen footage".

(With a lot of movies, if you took out all the stupid and mediocre stuff,
you'd have about 3 minutes of film left.)

(linked to sf)

Ok, I read the script that weas posted to usenet. There was alot of debate
about whether it was The-real-thing. I believe it is, because it contains some
pretty good writing. Fakes are never written as well as this thing was.
OTOH, I think paramount made some major blunders in the script. They are
re-using some ideas from previous movies. The biggest gripe is that this
movie's climax involves yet-another battle with the enterprise vs an out
of date klingon warbird, and the warbird gets the better of the Enterprise
*again*. Give me a break. It's been done. TWICE.

Re: Star Trek- Voyagers. I've heard that first it would be Kirsty Allie
as the Captain, then Linda Hamilton, but the lastest I've heard comes from
an official announcement from paramount that appeared on Compuserve. 
Apparently, they've tapped Genevieve Bujold as the captain. I hope this
is true. She's a very good actress.

The rumor I have put most stock in is that in the new "Generations"
movie, all of the next generation crew will learn that they are direct
descendants of Capt. James T. Kirk.  Also, Kirk will end up being killed
by a jealous husband of a woman with paisley skin.

Hey, how about a spoiler warning on these things?  I had to close my eyes
quick not to read it.  <:-&

most interesting rumor I've heard is that Picard suffers a personal tragedy 
during the movie.  I guess if Kirk dies, then Picard has to suffer as well
Maybe some member of the crew also dies?????  Actually, I heard Whoppie
Godlberg has a major unbilled role as Guinan, ,

Who will actually have met Kirk at some point during the past
M
"Somebody" close to Picard gets it, in addition to Kirk.........who is the
question.......

If anyone is interested, take a look in /u/gregc/script.[1234]. That
should answer most of your questions. I've heard that paramount admitted
that this script is the genuine article. However, I wouldn't be
surprised if they decided to edit the film together differently now
that the script is out. It's also not uncommon for the final film to be
alot different from the original script. Creative decisions are always being
made during shooting and editing and the final product rearely looks like
the original design.

Hi, I'm an incompetent newuser and I don't know how to start a new topic, so
I'll ask my question here:

How come on Star Trek, when the Captain (be it Kirk, Picard, or whoever),
says:  "Set phasers on stun" they all reach down and adjust their phasers?
What are they set on normally, if not stun?  They can't be set on kill --
first, it would be stupid, and second, when the captain says "Set phasers
on kill" they adjust them too.  maybe they're just normally OFF, not set
on anything -- but that seems wrong, because when something unexpected
happens and someone needs to grab for their phaser, they just grab it and
fire.  (The real explanation is probably:  it's just a mistake.  But can
we come up with a better explanation on their behalf?)

The phasers are obviously set on "sautee" for normal
use.  Well, someone has to do the cooking around there!

        When your commander tells you to set your weapon a certain way, it is
natural (probably mandatory) to check it to make sure that's how it's
set.

You start a new Item with the command     enter    . Actually, this is
a problem, because too many "incompetent newuser"s issue the command
enter, when they can't think of what else to do, so conferences get
seeded with lots of silly Items, where grexers play. In regard to phasers -
they are checking to make sure they are charged.

Fact is, they're checking 'em because the director thinks it looks cool.

Well, sure, but you're supposed to *play the game*.

 
I bet the phasers are normaly set on "melancholy"

*ZAP* "man... I gotta get off this planet..."

There's a very simple explanation.  The arms have a multiple position
select-fire switch.  Just like current technology select-fire arms.

The position they're switching *from* is called SAFE.  This is the place
the arms are normally set.

They then set to Stun, Kill, Sautee, or Rotiserie.

Current select-fire technology switch from SAFE to semi-auto, burst,
or full-auto.  Some models don't have burst modes.

I can recall some episodes where adjustments were not made and weapons
came out shooting in the stun mode (ie no safety and normally on stun).
I would think they all check the phasers because their commander just
gave them an order and they had better make sure they are in compliance
(a la #17 above).

The episode I am thinking of is when Riker did a short stunt as XO on
a Klingon cruiser.  When the Klingon captain was inadvertently beamed
to the Enterprise, Warf shot him (as best as I can recall) without
touching his phaser settings.  He drew his weapon when the Klingon 
captain materialized, and proceeded to shoot when the captain began to
draw his weapon

Speaking of TNG stuff, I saw a rerun from this season(?) where a crew
member committed suicide by leaping into the engine's plasma stream
because of the old memory traces there from a similar event, etc...
WHY didn't Warf shoot him with his phaser to prevent the guy from
leaping?  That was the logical thing to do, instead of having Riker
try to talk him down.  (BTW, I mean stun setting, not barbecue).

Warf, as Security Chief, would have his phaser armed at all times. 

rrrespond

Worf probably didn't fire because he didn't want to blow up the ship,...

I doubt firing on stun setting would harm the ship.  Even if so, it was
not exactly a difficult shot.

Kirk Lives!
Latest word is that due to Trekkie uproar, they are re-shooting the final
sequences of the movie so that Kirk doesnt die but is given some other yet to
be be revealed fate.  Shatner, Patrick  Stewart and th other principals were
called back to the studio a couple of weeks ago for re-shooting.  Not sure of
whether this is a good sign or not.  You  usually dont re-shoot finished films
unless they are major turkeys.  Last Trek


on a klingon warbird was a little too er.........original?
"."

Last message got a little garbled......I was going  to o say that I think 
they are also editing a keysequence involving the crash landing of the
enterprise  and the escape of the crew on a klingon warbird......awfully
original as I said Last Trek film they editied like this at the last minute was
ST: The MOtion Picture Enough said there....

I had heard quite a while ago (last summer, to be exact) that on Shatner's
insistence, they had changed the ending so Kirk got to live.  But then in
TV Guide a week or so ago there was an interview with Shatner, and although
he was coy about whether Kirk was going to live or die, the clear implica-
tion of what he said was that Kirk was going to die.  But Shatner might
have been lying to make the ending a surprise.  Also, although the interview
was *published* recently, I'm not sure how long ago it was *taped.*  So
we have conflicting evidence ....  My money says Kirk lives, though.
Although I was kind of hoping he'd die -- I liked him in the original
series, but I've gotten sick of him in the movies.

Actually, though, this whole debate may be pointless.  Even if Kirk *does*
die -- hey, this is science fiction, they could always figure out a way
of bringing him back.  Remember Spock, remember Superman?

Additional note:  in the episode in TNG where Picard first meets Sarek, he
says:  "I met your son on the occasion of his wedding."  Yet no subsequent
mention of said wedding, or the wife's whereabouts, in the later episode
where Picard meets Spock, who is living, apparently wifeless, in the
Romulan underground.  Are they ever going to follow this up?  Will the new
movie mention it?  (Hopefully not, since so far the movies have not done
well at continuity with TNG.  Consider STVI -- purple Klingin blood, although
Worf's is red;  Klingon/Fed peace during time of Enterprise-A, although
TNG says not until Enterprise-C;  warbirds that can fire when cloaked,
although the Romulans in TNG seem to have forgotten this improvement.
As clever Trekkers we can resolve all these inconsistencies -- but still,
it bodes ill.)

Oaky, [D[D[D
Heres the real lowdown, courstey of rec.arts.startrek.......apparently the 
ending was re-fiolmed because test audiences tididnt think Kirks death was
dramatic enough or relevant enough to the film.  So the seen of kirk dying 
in Picards arms after being shot buy Malcolm McDowell was cut and
the new scene has Kirk falling off a cliff as a consequence of preventing bad
guy McDowell from getting what he wants......no final words from Kirk
in this cut, just a ne w more dramatic sequence.
Film still ends or still shows rather Picard burying Kirk and placing 
Kirk's captain ensignia on top of the grave, so dont think he'll be back any
time soon.......
        And the film still shows the Duras sisters blowing up the Entriprise D
so sthe ship wasnmt saved at the last minute either........
Still it sounds like a good movie, surely better than V or VI and if Marinka
Sirtis really has anude scenme, so much the btetter!

I still think the idea of having the Enterprise get defeated *again*, by
a klingon ship is getting really tired and overused. They already did
this in the third movie.

This is coming out a day before my birthday.  Too damn bad I have to work.  :(

what? No one organizing a grexpedition to see it on Thursday night?

        Pattie

Nope, because my parents will take me to see it for free on
my birthday.  >8)

Well, ok I saw the "Generations" movie finally on Saturday.  I thought it had
some flaws but on the whole was a godod movie wiorthy of the STark Trek name My
one beef is they took out the skydiving scene that orignially was to have been
at the Start of the movie. Aklso I wish some of the characters had more to do
than just stand around.
        aL IN ALL, A GOOD MOVIE THOUGH....star rtrejk lives!

It was absolutely above average Star Trek. Thank goodness they stopped
looking for God.  :-)

I finally saw it. Loved it.

I've seen the damn movie already,they killed the ship.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss