QUOTE(thehsbr @ Mar 10 2007, 10:37 AM)
To all those that complained when Voyager and Enterprise were on the air, saying that they did not follow contiunuity or did not live up to the "Star Trek ideal" thank you because you essentially sealed the deal on any new Star Trek.
Not to be contrarian, but I totally reject that, if only for one very simple reason. Those fans of which you speak are a very, very small number of people. You know what? The dirty little secret that most of those fans won't tell you is that the ones who stick by their pledge to boycot the movie/show are even a minority of those people...that they went to go see those movies anyway!
First Contact, widely regarded as the best "TNG" Movie, flies in the face of existing continuity by even having a Borg Queen. Best of Both Worlds, widely regarded as one of the best episodes, flies in the face of Q Who, where the Borg were introduced. Remember Q's explanation of them?
"...the Borg is the ultimate user. They're not interested in political conquest, wealth, or power as you know it. They're interested in your ship, its technology. They've identified it as something they can consume." When we see them again, they don't want technology, they want people!
The only way that continuity could have killed trek is if the creative staff decided that keeping continuity was more important than telling a good story, and unfortunately not knowing the stories they never told, we'll never definitively know the answer to that.
What killed "TNG era" Star Trek isn't continuity, it was creative burnout coupled with the general public simply moving on, and the public DOES move on. If they don't then why isn't Phil Collins or "Genesis" making hit after hit? All their songs sounded the same! Not bad, but the SAME!) I'm sure there are plenty of other examples that my puny brain just can't think of, but you get the point.
Just take Nemesis, for example. Forget continuity, let's just look at the story:
#1 - TWOK already did this story and did it better. Plotwise, it was a blatant rip-off.
#2 - Shinzon is a great military leader during the Dominion war. He commands a huge ship with who knows how many weapons and shields. It should wipe the floor with Enterprise. Why does this movie even happen the way it does? He could've just beamed Picard off, blew up Enterprise, and cointinued onto Earth. He was planning to conquer the Federation anyway, so why not eliminate them? It would have saved him from his "disease" much faster, but if he really wanted to, he could have toyed with Picard all he wanted to on the way to Earth.
#3 - taking your point of exploring humanity, what questions were discussed? Nature vs. Nurture? Wid it have anything significant to say about the debate? I didn't find it, but is there even a debate about it? Cloning? It was mrely a means to create Shinzon - an opportunity to say something meaningful about it wss wasted.
#4 - Unclear storytelling (or at least people not paying attention to the movie). It took me 2 viewings of the movie to finally figure out why Shinzon wanted to destroy Earth. I heard this on many other internet sites to the effect of "if Shinzon was tortured by Romulans, why does he want to blow up Earth?!" The simple answer is that he didn't really care about Earth much one way or the other. He promised the Romulans who supported him that he would conquer the Federation and deploying the weapon on Earth was the way he could do that. He wanted to conquer the Romulans, which he did, but to keep that power he had to uphold his end of the deal. The upshot is, this could have been conveyed much more effectively than it was.
This new reboot may be exactly what the franchise needs, and it may be great or it may be horrible. We'll know in a couple of years, but I don't begrudge them trying. No matter what, it will not be "Star Trek" as I knew/know it. I intend to consider it apart from the rest of the Star Trek timeline, but for all I know, it may be BETTER than what came before. We simply don't know.