Forum Overview :: Peter Molyneux's The Movies :: Re: What would a good Star Trek movie look like, anyway?

[quote name="Souffle of Pain"][quote]Here's a great quote: "Not that Star Trek: Insurrection or First Contact aren't good titles," he [some guy named Lindelof] said, "it's just that everything that people are turned off about when it comes to Trek is represented by the colon." They don't want a colon in the title, because that's what's wrong with Star Trek. I'm surprised they know the names of other Star Trek movies. If they don't want to make a Star Trek movie, THAT'S OKAY. MAKE SOME OTHER MOVIE, THEN. Call it "Luke Starwars and the Events or Happenings" (and pay Ryan North some royalties). [/quote] This is like when Scott Miller said that they would NEVER and HAVE NEVER done a title with a number in it. (Someone mentioned Duke Nukem 2.) "Except Duke Nukem II :)" he replied. That was in 1998. The next game they were involved with was Max Payne II: The Fall of Max Payne. On one hand, if this is just some asshole speaking at a con, then I can forgive his quote. It's stupid and wrong and laughable and way too dorky and awkward and so forth. I think there's way too much analysis of people speaking off the cuff. On the other hand, who would fucking say that? "Represented by the colon." Insurrection wasn't particularly exciting or memorable and Nemesis was fucking retarded and tried to ape a better movie. (Tom Hardy was good though.) The Star Trek TV shows have also been terrible about developing actors who might possibly carry a movie on their own. FWIW, The COLON usually means that if you haven't watched what came before, you'd never understand the movie you're seeing now. Nemsis actually makes more sense if that's the first time you ever saw Star Trek. [/quote]