morningsong said:

Okay that does it, I'mma start reading some these books. Starting with the ones by William Shatner, just gotta love the fact he just wrote his character back into the series hanging out with Spock and Picard, he's too much.

I read an overall synopsis a long while ago that was suppose to sum up the ST timeline using all the books (or most), series and movies, from what I saw it was suppose to go so far as the human race becoming part of the Q Continuum and a couple of steps beyond. I don't know if I could get that deep but I would think it would be kind of trippy.

Whoa. I don't know where that happened, but it sounds interesting. I bet the timeline was taking into account ALL the books, which is something I could never do.

The Shattner books were all written with Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens. You can check out who they are at that link and get a short non-spoilery synopsis for each of the Shattner books. I never read any of Shattner's Tek books (which were also produced with a co-author), so I don't really know how much of his "voice" is coming through in the writing of these books. But the ideas, as you clearly understood, are definitely coming from his ego. Regardless, if they sound interesting to you I would definitely recommend picking them up. They were really fun reads and going over synopsis actually made me want to read them again.

They should be relatively easy to find used for a good price (try Bargain Book Mole).

RenHoek said:

Cerebus said:

Yep. Me too. I even have a bunch of them on my shelves that I've picked up at garage sales, thrift stores and book fairs. But for whatever reason I've never taken the dive.

y'all both need to get started then... they're crackin' good fun... full of puns that are very cleverly explained...

example: Pumpkin - a gourd that inflates things...

there's loads of good stuff there!!

That is exactly why I first started buying them. I'm a big fan of Asprin's "Myth" books and Stasheff's "A Wizard In Rhyme" series. I can get down with the humor in my fantasy literature. I don't know if I was overwhelmed by how many books he's written, or if maybe I was trying to fill in some more holes before I started, all I know is I've got at least ten of them and I've never turned a single page.

PurpleJedi said:

Cerebus said:

Yep. The tone was all wrong. Destroying Vulcan was idiotic. Spock meeting himself. Really? How does that work exactly. New backstories for Kirk and Spock (they're TOTALLY different). Pike being a mentor for Kirk (umm, no). The actors either not acting anything like the characters they were portraying or trying way to hard to be like them (one or the other, but not both). Scottie in the tubes (siiiigh) and just generally being comic relief. And wait, here's the winner, why would Nero travel back in time to kill Spock instead of just travelling back in time to save his wife? Complete clusterfuck of a movie.

I liked it.

IMO - it allowed a new take on the characters without messing up the timeline (it's an alternate reality after all).

Nero did not "travel back in time to kill Spock" - he and Spock were accidentally flung back in time when they passed through the anomally.

And I thought that Chris Pine did a magnificent job at "being Kirk" without becoming a caricature of William Shatner. Spock was Spock. The others...well it's difficult to judge because no one really paid attention to the mannerisms of the original actors very closely (or at least as much as with Kirk and Spock).

There definitely WERE flaws in the movie. The BIGGEST one I see is this; Vulcan is supposed to be such an advanced society. A mining vessel appears. The planet doesn't have a single starfighter that can knock that laser contraption out of the sky?

Well, I'm not exactly sure that's what happened, but I've tried my best to forget it, so you're probably right. Regardless, he still should have gone and saved his wife. Because, like, wasn't he killing Spock to stop him from causing her death? Whatever. I hate that movie.

And we're going to disagree about a lot of that other stuff. Like, I HATE Pinto as Spock. Absolutely LOATH. Honestly, Carl Urban's McCoy was the only one I didn't have serious issues with.

Cerebus said:

PurpleJedi said:

I liked it.

IMO - it allowed a new take on the characters without messing up the timeline (it's an alternate reality after all).

Nero did not "travel back in time to kill Spock" - he and Spock were accidentally flung back in time when they passed through the anomally.

And I thought that Chris Pine did a magnificent job at "being Kirk" without becoming a caricature of William Shatner. Spock was Spock. The others...well it's difficult to judge because no one really paid attention to the mannerisms of the original actors very closely (or at least as much as with Kirk and Spock).

There definitely WERE flaws in the movie. The BIGGEST one I see is this; Vulcan is supposed to be such an advanced society. A mining vessel appears. The planet doesn't have a single starfighter that can knock that laser contraption out of the sky?

Well, I'm not exactly sure that's what happened, but I've tried my best to forget it, so you're probably right. Regardless, he still should have gone and saved his wife. Because, like, wasn't he killing Spock to stop him from causing her death? Whatever. I hate that movie.

And we're going to disagree about a lot of that other stuff. Like, I HATE Pinto as Spock. Absolutely LOATH. Honestly, Carl Urban's McCoy was the only one I didn't have serious issues with.

No, no, no!!!

He was trying to kill Spock as REVENGE for the death of Romulus (and his wife)!!!

He was flung back into the far past (20-something years before Spock arrived from the other side of the anomally) and it was so far back that his wife probably hadn't even been born (in that alternate reality). In fact, he destroys Vulcan and then goes after Earth in order to ensure that Romulus thrives (or something like that).

Let go of the hate son. Hate leads to the darkside.

PurpleJedi said:

Cerebus said:

Well, I'm not exactly sure that's what happened, but I've tried my best to forget it, so you're probably right. Regardless, he still should have gone and saved his wife. Because, like, wasn't he killing Spock to stop him from causing her death? Whatever. I hate that movie.

And we're going to disagree about a lot of that other stuff. Like, I HATE Pinto as Spock. Absolutely LOATH. Honestly, Carl Urban's McCoy was the only one I didn't have serious issues with.

No, no, no!!!

He was trying to kill Spock as REVENGE for the death of Romulus (and his wife)!!!

He was flung back into the far past (20-something years before Spock arrived from the other side of the anomally) and it was so far back that his wife probably hadn't even been born (in that alternate reality). In fact, he destroys Vulcan and then goes after Earth in order to ensure that Romulus thrives (or something like that).

Let go of the hate son. Hate leads to the darkside.

Shiiiiit. I fully embraced the darkside a LONG ass time ago. I'm glad there's a group of us here that have some love of Trek in common, mad respect to everyone for that. But this movie, no. Never. I've been very vocal about my hate for this pile from the day the project was announced and that's never going to change. It shits on the Trek that already existed for 40 years by trying to make it cool and hip. Most of the changes they made are completely unforgiveable and the movie just isn't very good when you really break it down. If you ever get into reading the books you'll see just how wrong it really is.

Cerebus said:

PurpleJedi said:

No, no, no!!!

He was trying to kill Spock as REVENGE for the death of Romulus (and his wife)!!!

He was flung back into the far past (20-something years before Spock arrived from the other side of the anomally) and it was so far back that his wife probably hadn't even been born (in that alternate reality). In fact, he destroys Vulcan and then goes after Earth in order to ensure that Romulus thrives (or something like that).

Let go of the hate son. Hate leads to the darkside.

Shiiiiit. I fully embraced the darkside a LONG ass time ago. I'm glad there's a group of us here that have some love of Trek in common, mad respect to everyone for that. But this movie, no. Never. I've been very vocal about my hate for this pile from the day the project was announced and that's never going to change. It shits on the Trek that already existed for 40 years by trying to make it cool and hip. Most of the changes they made are completely unforgiveable and the movie just isn't very good when you really break it down. If you ever get into reading the books you'll see just how wrong it really is.

I guess that's what I need.

PurpleJedi said:

Cerebus said:

Shiiiiit. I fully embraced the darkside a LONG ass time ago. I'm glad there's a group of us here that have some love of Trek in common, mad respect to everyone for that. But this movie, no. Never. I've been very vocal about my hate for this pile from the day the project was announced and that's never going to change. It shits on the Trek that already existed for 40 years by trying to make it cool and hip. Most of the changes they made are completely unforgiveable and the movie just isn't very good when you really break it down. If you ever get into reading the books you'll see just how wrong it really is.

I guess that's what I need.

I will admit that some of my hatred stems from JJ Abrams being involved. Alias SERIOUSLY let me down. Lost had already sent me WAY over the edge multiple times. His version of Star Trek was just too much for me to handle. He's a great idea man, but he writes/creates terrible stories riddled with HUGE, GAPING plot holes.

SUPRMAN said:

JoeTyler said:

the first time I've seen a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek

I personally think ST is unwatchable...I mean, I liked the Patrick Stewart era, but that's all...

WHAT?!

Star Trek is very watchable. Every iteration through Star Trek:Voyager.

Deep Space Nine, I couldn't get into.

I like them both. I've never met anyone who liked one and not the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w...2009_film)

I am reading 2060 right now, and really enjoyed 2001 and 2010. 2001 in particular was a great read, even after having seen the movie multiple times. It is a perfect companion to the movie, which has so few words. Some may say it explains too much, but I thought it was great. It is odd that the book was written specifically for the movie when they are so different. It really shows the vision of Kubrick, as he did not stray from the story, but found a unique way to tell it.

NDRU said:

I am reading 2060 right now, and really enjoyed 2001 and 2010. 2001 in particular was a great read, even after having seen the movie multiple times. It is a perfect companion to the movie, which has so few words. Some may say it explains too much, but I thought it was great. It is odd that the book was written specifically for the movie when they are so different. It really shows the vision of Kubrick, as he did not stray from the story, but found a unique way to tell it.

what the fuck was that monolith?

and what's up with that flying fetus at the end of the movie?

please, I wanna know, but I refuse to read the book

tell me

Cerebus said:

My aforementioned brother-in-law is a complete GEEK about all of Salvatore's Drizzt books. He keeps telling me I have to read them and I keep telling him no.

I lost interest in the Wheel of Time books WAY early in the series. TOO. DAMN. LONG. I mean, really, there is a point when a single book is too big, when too much is happening, too slowly, and for me those books were it. Grand scope can be very rewarding (like with Tolkien, or even GRR Martin), but Jordan's books lacked focus for me. I would find myself drifting off to other thoughts as I read, then realize that I had no clue what happened over the last twenty pages.

The Drizzt books were my first introduction to the world of D & D novels. There are many rabid Drizzt fans. So many that I am afraid to name myself a fan After the first three books, the series gets a little too formulaic. I moved onto some of the newer Dragonlance books next. I still need to pick up the original Dragonlance books. I have heard good things about them.

JoeTyler said:

NDRU said:

I am reading 2060 right now, and really enjoyed 2001 and 2010. 2001 in particular was a great read, even after having seen the movie multiple times. It is a perfect companion to the movie, which has so few words. Some may say it explains too much, but I thought it was great. It is odd that the book was written specifically for the movie when they are so different. It really shows the vision of Kubrick, as he did not stray from the story, but found a unique way to tell it.

what the fuck was that monolith?

and what's up with that flying fetus at the end of the movie?

please, I wanna know, but I refuse to read the book

tell me

IF I understood...the monolith was a few things things, and they were not clearly explained (to an idiot like me) in the movie.

It was a device that messed with the proto-human mind that encouraged their cognitive evolution.

There was also a monolith buried on the moon which, when uncovered, sent a signal to the aliens that we had achieved the ability to travel there and that we had made this discovery

But it was also a transportation device on the moon of Jupiter which sent Dave Bowman to their world, where he was transformed into the flying fetus. I believe the flying fetus was more of a metaphor, as Dave seemed to exist more as a spiritual being, not a physical one

[Edited 7/28/11 15:46pm]

ZombieKitten said:

davetherave6767 said:

So many robots....like the old type robots from when we were kiddies...there cool.

I love them so colourful

this one is my best one

I remember going robot hunting with you when you were here. I miss you!

NDRU said:

JoeTyler said:

what the fuck was that monolith?

and what's up with that flying fetus at the end of the movie?

please, I wanna know, but I refuse to read the book

tell me

IF I understood...the monolith was a few things things, and they were not clearly explained (to an idiot like me) in the movie.

It was a device that messed with the proto-human mind that encouraged their cognitive evolution.

There was also a monolith buried on the moon which, when uncovered, sent a signal to the aliens that we had achieved the ability to travel there and that we had made this discovery

But it was also a transportation device on the moon of Jupiter which sent Dave Bowman to their world, where he was transformed into the flying fetus. I believe the flying fetus was more of a metaphor, as Dave seemed to exist more as a spiritual being, not a physical one

[Edited 7/28/11 15:46pm]

yeah, I suspected that much.Thanks for the info

that whole story was BS

I can't see its appeal

JoeTyler said:

NDRU said:

IF I understood...the monolith was a few things things, and they were not clearly explained (to an idiot like me) in the movie.

It was a device that messed with the proto-human mind that encouraged their cognitive evolution.

There was also a monolith buried on the moon which, when uncovered, sent a signal to the aliens that we had achieved the ability to travel there and that we had made this discovery

But it was also a transportation device on the moon of Jupiter which sent Dave Bowman to their world, where he was transformed into the flying fetus. I believe the flying fetus was more of a metaphor, as Dave seemed to exist more as a spiritual being, not a physical one

[Edited 7/28/11 15:46pm]

yeah, I suspected that much.Thanks for the info

that whole story was BS

I can't see its appeal

I wish I could un-type all that and have left you wondering

NDRU said:

JoeTyler said:

yeah, I suspected that much.Thanks for the info

that whole story was BS

I can't see its appeal

I wish I could un-type all that and have left you wondering

hey, at least I liked the first part with the homo erectus/neardenthal/sapiens/whatever the hell that was...

JoeTyler said:

NDRU said:

I wish I could un-type all that and have left you wondering

hey, at least I liked the first part with the homo erectus/neardenthal/sapiens/whatever the hell that was...

Yeah I like that part of the movie a lot more, too.

But the book makes it all pretty interesting. It explains things and describes them rather than leave so much empty space like the film does.

Shawnt27 said:

Cerebus said:

My aforementioned brother-in-law is a complete GEEK about all of Salvatore's Drizzt books. He keeps telling me I have to read them and I keep telling him no.

I lost interest in the Wheel of Time books WAY early in the series. TOO. DAMN. LONG. I mean, really, there is a point when a single book is too big, when too much is happening, too slowly, and for me those books were it. Grand scope can be very rewarding (like with Tolkien, or even GRR Martin), but Jordan's books lacked focus for me. I would find myself drifting off to other thoughts as I read, then realize that I had no clue what happened over the last twenty pages.

The Drizzt books were my first introduction to the world of D & D novels. There are many rabid Drizzt fans. So many that I am afraid to name myself a fan After the first three books, the series gets a little too formulaic. I moved onto some of the newer Dragonlance books next. I still need to pick up the original Dragonlance books. I have heard good things about them.

Wait now. What?! What do you mean by "pick up the original Dragonlance books"? Which ones have you read?

The following is all just my opinion, others will likely disagree...

The Chronicles Trilogy (Dragons Of Autumn Twilight, Winter Night and Spring Dawning) is one of the very best fantasy trilogies ever written. Its not even the writing itself so much, as the overall tone of the storytelling. Those books contain that special "magic" that just makes you fall in love with characters and settings. Margaret and Tracy did an outstanding job of world and character building (I actually have feelings for the "companions" ) with these books, creating a place that people (clearly) wanted to return to over and over. Highly, like, as much as I can, recommend reading these if you haven't.

The Legends Trilogy (Time, Test and War of the Twins), which follows right after Chronicles in the Dragonlance timeline didn't hold quite as much of the "magic", but were still damn fine books and are highly recommended.

I didn't love The Second Generation, but it introduces important characters that fit into the flow of these books, so its necessary.

Dragons Of Summer Flame, which contains characters from The Second Generation was a bit "fat", but overall avery enjoyable read.

The Raistlin Chronicles (two books so far, said to eventually be three) tell the story of the brothers Majere prior to their adventures in the orginal Chronicles trilogy and these books kick ass. Margaret wrote these by herself (she created the characters) and I think they're great.

The War Of Souls Trilogy (Dragons of a Fallen Sun, Lost Star and Vanished Moon) get a bit too religious and philosophycal for my Dragonlance tastes, but they did a fine job of continuing the overal story that Margaret and Tracy had been telling.

The Dark Disciple Trilogy, also written by Margeret, continues the story of Mina from the War Of The Souls Trilogy. I liked these books quite a lot, but they made me long for the days when Krynn was filled with magic and mystery. Still very well written, though.

The Lost Chronicles Trilogy (Dragons of the Dwarven Depths, Highlord Skies & Hourglass Mage) tell stories of the companions in between the books in the original Chronicles Trilogy. I love these, probably my favorite of the Weis/Hickman books other than the first Chronicles and The Raistlin Chronicles.

Now, to me, that is Dragonlance. I don't think its necessary to read any of the other books. But who cares about necessary? IMO there's been some really bad Dragonlance books written in the open universe, and some really great ones as well. Jean Rabe, Douglas Niles and Dan Parkinson have all written books or series that I really loved. There's a few others that fall into that category as well, and theres a good number of them that I haven't read yet (and may never read). But since the very beginning of them opening the doors to the world of Krynn there has been books I was never able to get into, going all the way back to the Meetings Sextet and the Preludes Trilogies.

Cerebus said:

Shawnt27 said:

The Drizzt books were my first introduction to the world of D & D novels. There are many rabid Drizzt fans. So many that I am afraid to name myself a fan After the first three books, the series gets a little too formulaic. I moved onto some of the newer Dragonlance books next. I still need to pick up the original Dragonlance books. I have heard good things about them.

The War Of Souls Trilogy (Dragons of a Fallen Sun, Lost Star and Vanished Moon) get a bit too religious and philosophycal for my Dragonlance tastes, but they did a fine job of continuing the overal story that Margaret and Tracy had been telling.

These are the books I read. I actually only read the first two books of the trilogy. I thought these were stand alone books written in the Dragonlance universe, but I felt I missed out on a lot of back history so I stopped reading them. Also, Tasslehof Burfoot annoyed me I will have to pick up those other books you mentioned. Thanks for the recommendations.

[Edited 7/28/11 17:07pm]

NDRU said:

JoeTyler said:

what the fuck was that monolith?

and what's up with that flying fetus at the end of the movie?

please, I wanna know, but I refuse to read the book

tell me

IF I understood...the monolith was a few things things, and they were not clearly explained (to an idiot like me) in the movie.

It was a device that messed with the proto-human mind that encouraged their cognitive evolution.

There was also a monolith buried on the moon which, when uncovered, sent a signal to the aliens that we had achieved the ability to travel there and that we had made this discovery

But it was also a transportation device on the moon of Jupiter which sent Dave Bowman to their world, where he was transformed into the flying fetus. I believe the flying fetus was more of a metaphor, as Dave seemed to exist more as a spiritual being, not a physical one

[Edited 7/28/11 15:46pm]

I saw the fetus as a step forward for mankind. On the edge of a 'new birth.' I didn't see it as Dave. Not sure what happened to Dave.

SUPRMAN said:

NDRU said:

IF I understood...the monolith was a few things things, and they were not clearly explained (to an idiot like me) in the movie.

It was a device that messed with the proto-human mind that encouraged their cognitive evolution.

There was also a monolith buried on the moon which, when uncovered, sent a signal to the aliens that we had achieved the ability to travel there and that we had made this discovery

But it was also a transportation device on the moon of Jupiter which sent Dave Bowman to their world, where he was transformed into the flying fetus. I believe the flying fetus was more of a metaphor, as Dave seemed to exist more as a spiritual being, not a physical one

[Edited 7/28/11 15:46pm]

I saw the fetus as a step forward for mankind. On the edge of a 'new birth.' I didn't see it as Dave. Not sure what happened to Dave.

Well, generally I think you are right, and especially within the context of the story going from cave men to space men to star children.

But specifically, Dave does survive (he re-appears in 2010, the book at least, I don't remember the movie), and I believe he is the star child. For whatever reason he was the one chosen to be the first to take that step forward for mankind

NDRU said:

SUPRMAN said:

I saw the fetus as a step forward for mankind. On the edge of a 'new birth.' I didn't see it as Dave. Not sure what happened to Dave.

Well, generally I think you are right, and especially within the context of the story going from cave men to space men to star children.

But specifically, Dave does survive (he re-appears in 2010, the book at least, I don't remember the movie), and I believe he is the star child. For whatever reason he was the one chosen to be the first to take that step forward for mankind

In 2010, it wasn't clear 'what' Dave was. He seemed to be a projection, that we would be comfortable with.

Not that I care, but for those of you who do...

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/50594

Fresh STAR TREK Still Years Away??

Published at: Jul 28, 2011 5:15:39 PM CDT

Paramount still has a new “Star Trek” movie on its calendar set to premiere June 29, 2012, but it’s starting to look like Paramount is about to knock that back another year, maybe to June 28, 2013.

At Saturday’s Comic Con premiere of “Cowboys and Aliens” in San Diego, screenwriter-producer Roberto Orci told Cinepremiere that the next “Trek” would begin shooting “hopefullyyyyyy” in January.

A January 2012 start would not only make a June 2012 premiere nigh impossible, it would mean Bad Robot would have less than a year to get an effects-heavy spaceship action movie into cinemas by Christmas 2012.

Finishing a Star Trek movie in 11 months seems highly unlikely – but not impossible. I seem to remember that Fox managed to get “X-Men: First Class” – another big sci-fi movie swimming in effects – from greenlight to cinemas in the space of a year.

Still, “First Class” was more an exception than a rule and this is why summer 2013 seems by far the more likely release window.

This means of course that four years will have transpired between Kirk/Spock adventures, but do we want it fast or do we want it good? I’m guessing most fans are happy to give the film more time if it means dodging another shitty “Trek” sequel.

The delay would also mean more waiting for another “Trek” TV series. The general thinking is no new TV Trek (presumably set in the new Bad Robot universe) will be contemplated until the next feature is squared away. The last episode of “Star Trek: Enterprise” aired May 13, 2005.

Find all of Cinepremiere’s story on the matter here.

Teacher said:

ZombieKitten said:

I love them so colourful

this one is my best one

I remember going robot hunting with you when you were here. I miss you!

I'll be back!!!

"Daniel Craig is my wookie bitch, now!"

Has anyone read "The White Mountain Trilogy?'

The White Mountains, The City of Gold and Lead, and The Pool of Fire?

The Tripods and Masters?

[Edited 7/28/11 20:03pm]

SUPRMAN said:

NDRU said:

Well, generally I think you are right, and especially within the context of the story going from cave men to space men to star children.

But specifically, Dave does survive (he re-appears in 2010, the book at least, I don't remember the movie), and I believe he is the star child. For whatever reason he was the one chosen to be the first to take that step forward for mankind

In 2010, it wasn't clear 'what' Dave was. He seemed to be a projection, that we would be comfortable with.

Just curious, are you referring to the film or the book? Like I said I don't remember the movie very well. Was there literally a projection in the movie? I seem to have a vague recollection of that...

I am sure there are a lot of interpretations of what happened

The INDB synopsis says dave is transformed into the starchild

http://www.imdb.com/title...2/synopsis

Wiki discusses it too, but mentions inconsistencies in the character between books

http://en.wikipedia.org/w...Odyssey%29

NDRU said:

SUPRMAN said:

In 2010, it wasn't clear 'what' Dave was. He seemed to be a projection, that we would be comfortable with.

Just curious, are you referring to the film or the book? Like I said I don't remember the movie very well. Was there literally a projection in the movie? I seem to have a vague recollection of that...

I am sure there are a lot of interpretations of what happened

The INDB synopsis says dave is transformed into the starchild

http://www.imdb.com/title...2/synopsis

Wiki discusses it too, but mentions inconsistencies in the character between books

http://en.wikipedia.org/w...Odyssey%29

The film. I haven't read the books.

SUPRMAN said:

NDRU said:

Just curious, are you referring to the film or the book? Like I said I don't remember the movie very well. Was there literally a projection in the movie? I seem to have a vague recollection of that...

I am sure there are a lot of interpretations of what happened

The INDB synopsis says dave is transformed into the starchild

http://www.imdb.com/title...2/synopsis

Wiki discusses it too, but mentions inconsistencies in the character between books

http://en.wikipedia.org/w...Odyssey%29

The film. I haven't read the books.

gotcha, I think the books spell things out a lot more clearly. Some might say too clearly, removing much of the mystery

^^^^

I don't love the movie, so I've really been enjoying this conversation.