Re: Abrams Talks About Trek XI Movie

"ToolPackinMama" <philnblanc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> I must disagree.  I am a rabid, die-hard life-long Trekkie, and I was 
> bitterly disappointed with the first Star Trek film.  The Motionless 
> Picture was lacking in smash/bang qualities, and worst of all, my 
> precious bouncy irrepressible Tiggerlike Captain Kirk was transformed 
> into some pouty, self-doubting sourpuss.  That wasn't what I wanted in a

> Star Trek movie.

Isn't that pretty much what you got in all the TOS movies...?
 
> Wrath of Khan was hugely popular with fans, ~because~ it had more
action.
> 
> A Star Trek movie needs to be action-filled and a real adventure.  TOS 
> was action-filled.  Captain Kirk was/is an action hero.
> 
> There's never been a Star Trek show or movie that had no explosions. 
> Even in the hippy trippy ST4 they crash landed their stolen Klingon ****p

> into San Francisco Bay!

Yes, but those films had action sup****ting actual plots (well, 
most of them).  The MI films were basically all explosions
pieced together with just enough dialog to make you wonder
what they were going to blow up next.

GeneK