93 replies to this topic

[Destructor!!!]

I'm not sure who you're addressing, HSBR, but to nail my colours to the mast:

TNG==DS9
TOS==Voyager
JjTrek
>big gulf<
Enterprise

I'd also like to apologise for my ramblings yesterday. This sunburn has entered the maddeningly itchy phase, and it is seriously compromising my concentration.

[Jay K]

Abrams gave us a movie and looks to be giving us a sequel that is really very pleasing to watch and to see an audience enjoy these movies when they may have not really followed Star Trek before is on it's own worth angering a few short-sighted fans.

Got to be honest, don't agree with your generalisation here dude. :/ Otherwise, good post.

You do have a very valid reason for loving the new stuff, though. Star Trek has saw me through some really difficult times (as I'm sure it has for all of us), and especially when I was young, it really helped me put things in perspective - a unique thing to Star Trek, I feel.

Thanks for all contributions so far guys (even if you didn't mention your favourite series!). Found an image on Reddit just now which I suppose is for me, a great way to sign off on this thread - http://imgur.com/839AxaH

[Jay K]

Well the only reason I haven't really answered that is because it would require a big post, and once I start, I'll be here typing it up and then reducing it for 2-3 hours. Bad for me, and no one really likes a huge wall of text. lol

Regardless, I feel Destructor captured pretty much what I feel. It's been interesting to me to see that - if this group is anything to go by - fans are mostly welcoming towards the new stuff. I'd prefer more of the old stuff, and maybe one day they'll return to that, but either way, I'm not unhappy really. I might not like the new stuff, but they are getting a hell of a lot of people into Star Trek again, and that's amazing. A few years ago, back when the Art Asylum's forum was still up, I NEVER thought I'd get an Enterprise-D, let alone a Defiant (and let's be honest, it's probably one of the next two). Interest in the franchise was at an all time low, and I remember for a while that BOTH my local sci-fi/comic shops had NO Star Trek items whatsoever. Needless to say, that has completely changed, and that is thanks to the new films, so I do 'like' them for that reason.

[Destructor!!!]

Every time I put the 2009 film on, I'm taken aback by how good it is.

I focus on all the problems it has while I'm not watching it, but when I do put it on, usually to check some specific part, I find myself swept up in it - and usually watch to the end.

It's a well made movie, it's captivating.

But that doesn't excuse all of the problems.

When Quinto Spock says "Steal back the black hole device", I have to wonder "How did he know it was stolen?" (The writer's strike probably explains that - a failure of logic in the script that would otherwise have been revised out).

I don't buy the argument that JjTrek is as different to regular Star Trek as DS9 is to TOS, 1701, sorry.

JjTrek marks a deliberate distancing from the old, a rejection of what Star Trek was - which is an implicit statement of disdain. It might be very mild disdain, but it's there.
Star Trek was undeniably, and indisputably, about lofty ideals, from the beginning. Those ideals seem peppered into 2009 as window dressing, but the vast bulk of the film's message is no different from your average event movie.

Yes, I want Star Trek to be an event movie. But I want Star Trek to feel to new fans like the same educational, aspirational experience that it was for me, growing up. I learned a sh*tload from TNG. Vocabulary, science, philosophy... TNG made me the nerd I am today, for better or worse.

The reason I was educated is because I hung on every word and action in the show, and I did that because it felt real, and it felt plausible.

For all it's awesome cinematography and spirited performances, JjTrek is a succession of plot contrivances and plot holes, with abhorrent science, dumbed-down dialogue, and very odd character development. I can't see anyone believing in that Star Trek, let alone aspiring to it, or being educated by it... except perhaps as a gateway drug to the older canon of work...

Star Trek sure as hell needed a kick in the pants. The tail end of Voyager, and most of Enterprise were appalling. But I think the kicker targeted the wrong testicle when aiming at Star Trek's pants. In a time when the film Idiocracy is looking ever more likely as a vision of our future, an erudite, intelligent Star Trek with the bravery to buck the trend and make smart sexy is what we need more than ever. JjTrek takes the safe route of slotting in nicely with the Iron Mans of the modern film landscape - that's weak criticism, though - Iron Man is awesome.

I lost my Dad to cancer in 2010. I know how it can imbue events and circumstances with significance sometimes beyond their worth. If JJ Abrams' Star Trek helped you through that grief, then it must have had more soul than I gave it credit for.

I could write a lot more, but this is too long already. Despite my reams of text, I guess the take-away from this is that I didn't hate the last film, and I will be seeing the next one more than once, in all likelihood. I see the flaws, but, like on a DST ship, I can still love it in spite of them.

[Wildcard]

My two cents:

I appreciate the desire to breathe new and "fresh" [God I hate that word] ideas into an aging franchise. And while I feel like there were many aspects that were handled very gingerly with the last movie, I will say that I 100% reject the notion that you have to curtail everything to the lowest common "fart joke" and Michael Bay-esque "boobs and explosions" formula that most movies seem to be forced to adhere to these days.

I say make a movie that has a decent script: one that entices the viewer to engage and DIGEST aspects of what is happening on screen (as opposed to spoon feeding like most do these days). Add in cutting edge but believable FX (and FX's that will age well). Throw in trained and disciplined actors and cover it with intellectually composed musical scores and you will have a winner.

To cite precedence I say look at Downton Abbey. Granted it's a tv series, but the same formulaic success can be transferred to the big screen.

I eagerly await "into darkness" to see if they can redeem some of Trek's soul and mind that IMHO was missing from the last film.

[Daysleeper]

We all have our favourite Star Trek's but to dismiss this version because to you it's not what you'd expect from Star Trek is discriminatory

Well, I simply didn't like it. That's not discriminatory, it's a matter of taste, that's all. I really loved Enterprise, for example, which has been criticized by numerous fans. There is no "this is right" or "this is wrong" when it comes to taste.

[Daysleeper]

But to me, JJ-Trek isn't Star Trek, at least not the Star Trek I like. And I totally believe that it was pretty disrespectful to GR's idea. But that's just my opinion. Sometimes I ask myself who is more intolerant, the people who don't like JJ-Trek or the people who like it and can't understand why someone wouldn't like it.

[TheHSBR]

Lets be honest Gene was interested in making money. I think maybe his "vision" has been idealized over the years through the fanbase but anyone's first goal in Hollywood is money. Everything else is secondary.

[FHC]

If anyone doesn't know that, they need to read more about Roddenberry. For example, the invention of the IDIC by Gene Roddenberry caused friction between him and Leonard Nimoy, who saw it as a cheap ploy to sell replica merchandise to fans. He told great stories and shared great ideals, but his motivations were the same as anyone else. I have no problems believing that if he was here and had the budget that JJ has, with younger actors, he would have made movies like this.

[Daysleeper]

I've gotta be honest and there's no disrespect but I don't really understand your opinion.

Sorry, sometimes it's hard to convey a message or a meaning, especially when you're not talking in your own language... I guess what I meant was: Yes, there are people who didn't like the new movie. I'm one of them. Just accept that. That's all I'm saying. I always have the feeling that when I'm saying that I didn't like JJ-Trek, people who loved it don't understand why and cannot accept my opinion. Not every Star Trek fan has to like every Star Trek show or film, right?

Just out of interest, exactly what do you think JJ Abrams disrespected and why wasn't this Star Trek and without saying "Star Trek is to me..." what do you think Star Trek is?

The characters. I've said that many times before and will say it again: The characters were portrayed as mere caricatures of the originals, especially Chekov and Scotty. Also, Star Trek usually is about great stories, this movie was just a progression of action scenes. Even good action movies usually take their time to tell a story in between the action sequences, which makes those stand out more. So - in my opinion - JJ-Trek sucked as a movie in general. Star Trek also used to present the sci-fi-elements in a plausible manner, something this film lacked. But this is all my opinion, and this is exactly the point I was trying to make. I cannot claim to know what Star Trek is without saying "for me", no one can.

There was the argument that DS9 was so much different compared to TOS, but why were they able to blend both shows together so well (Trials and Tribbleations) without disrespecting what either show had to look like and be about? Same goes for every other show, in my opinion.

I have a hunch... Star Trek could have been done any number of ways and there would have been those who would have declared that this isn't Star Trek or that it's disrespectful when actually I think perhaps the truth is more akin to the fact that some didn't want things to change when really they needed to.

Funny, but a lot of people didn't like Enterprise because it differed too much from what they wanted Star Trek to be.
I guess I'm not much of a fan of movies that don't take their time to tell a decent story. There's nothing wrong with the way the old Trek-movies were told. They never were the mainstream popcorn action summer blockbuster movies. JJ-Trek wanted to be one. It just looked too much like Star Wars Ep. 1-3. And now show me one Star Wars fan who prefers 1-3 to the original albeit kind of outdated trilogy.

[Commodore Kor'Tar]

My love of all things Trek dates back to around 1992 or so when I started watching season 5 of TNG. From that time on I watched (or at least tried to watch)each new episode when they were first run. We as Trek fans have explored the Alpha, and Beta quadrants as well as the Gamma and Delta quadrants. Sure, not every episode is going to be City on the Edge of Forever, Yesterday's Enterprise, etc. There is good and bad with all series and films.

I finally got around to watching all of TOS several years ago and I enjoyed it for what it was.

When I heard that Star Trek was coming back to the big screen and doing an origins story, I was one of the first to protest (being raised in the TNG era) but as more and more info trickled in the more accepting I became til I was looking forward to that film.

To everyone who dislikes JJ's Star Trek that's your right. Just please don't ruin things for those of us who happen to enjoy it.

[Destructor!!!]

It's an unfortunate failing in human beings that when a piece of entertainment offends us on some level (as Enterprise offended my sense of continuity and respect for established history, or JJ Trek offended my sense of ... sense), that we feel the need to enlighten people who haven't noticed the offending aspects.

If it were an event in real life, there might be very good reason to do so - to warn people that this golden investment opportunity is actually a pyramid scheme, for example - but for entertainment... we just end up being buzz kills.

Different people like Star Trek for very different reasons. Star Trek is many things to many people. Some people are going to be less discerning about the parts that matter to me, and I'll find that galling... but I need to get over it.

Similarly, people like me discussing what galls us about the film is something that those whose priorities lie elsewhere in the fandom need to accept. We're all allowed to air our opinion.
Nothing short of a re-shot directors (a different director, preferably) cut will make me change my opinion of the film. Nothing short of a mind-meld will change 1701's.

Let's just amicably leave it at that, shall we?

[Daysleeper]

Let's just amicably leave it at that, shall we?

Hear hear!

[Jay K]

No one's trying to make you change your mind, dude, and Kor'Tar, I don't see anyone trying to ruin things for those of you who do like the new stuff. I made this thread out of pure curiosity as, like I've said, I've never spoken to fellow trekkies about it before. The only opinions I'd seen up to now, where those of the people who reply to the articles at Trek Movie, so I was keen to see what I felt were more neutral opinions about it.

HSBR, FHC, bit of an easy answer if you don't mind me saying guys. You're both absolutely right in that Roddenberry created a franchise, it's just that it's US lot who're still making his family rich!

As I said, I wasn't looking to question anyone on their opinions, I just wanted to know what those opinions were. Discussion has been good up until the point where people suddenly seemed to go on the defensive. I don't understand why as with me at least, there's nothing to defend! Some trekkies even like Star Wars, and I don't hate them - much! Everyone needs to loosen their collars, or perhaps more aptly, their 'jackets,' as it where.