Wheaton On 'Reinventing Star Trek'

TrekToday · May 9 2008, 01:54 AM

Like other Star Trek fans, Wil Wheaton is following the news about Star Trek XI and wondering just what "reinventing" Star Trek really means.

As reported by Wil Wheaton's blog, reinventing doesn't necessarily mean that the finished product will be better, for the movie-going public as well as for established Star Trek fans.

"If [Abrams is] just talking about bringing modern special effects to Star Trek, which totally would make it more thrilling to watch, this is great news," said Wheaton. "However, if this 'reinventing' extends to some of the fundamentals of the Star Trek mythos, and if he wants to make Star Trek more like Star Wars, we could be looking at the biggest geekriot in history."

Wheaton agreed that it was better to make the movie appeal to more than just hard-core fans. "Making it for fans of movies instead of exclusively for Trekkies is something I can completely agree with, and shows that he [Abrams] understands the massive challenge that making a movie like this brings. That's real good news, as long as he doesn't go turning 'Star Trek' into 'Attack of The Four Toed Statues' or something."

But the term "reinventing" when coupled with Star Trek makes Wheaton a bit uneasy. "Speaking as a lifelong geek, my knee-jerk reaction when I hear someone talking about 'reinventing' something like Trek is that it will be a tower of suck, built out of an endless supply of Jar-Jars and midichlorians," said Wheaton. He went on to say that "..most of the Star Trek movies are absolute garbage. There have been ten Trek movies, and I'd say that two of them are accessible to mainstream audiences, another two are great, and the remaining six are nearly unwatchable. If J.J. Abrams wants to make his new Trek movie unlike the 80\% of Trek movies that aren't that good, that's just fine with me."

To read more, head to the blog entry located here.

donners22 · May 9 2008, 02:23 AM

...we could be looking at the biggest geekriot in history

I've got to use that line again in the near future.

T'Bonz · May 9 2008, 04:35 AM

Yeah, I'd like to meet Wil. I love his sense of humor.

Lindley · May 9 2008, 05:41 AM

Heh, even got a Lost reference in there.

Star Treks · May 9 2008, 06:54 AM

Two accessible to mainstream audiences, another two are great...

Trying to figure out which one's he's thinking of. For "Accessible" I'm sure The Voyage Home is what he has in mind. My guess is he's putting TWOK and probably FC in one of these slots. What do you think he has in mind her?

Pioneer · May 9 2008, 07:48 AM

TrekToday wrote:

...tower of suck... ...absolute garbage...

Hey Will, don't hold back, tell us what you really think.

I must agree that I have some trepidation too. This whole total secrecy thing just reeks of a whitewash of what could be a total suckfest. J.J. doesn't want the hardcore Trek fans to trash his movie before it even comes out. Bad for business. Me? I'm a glutton for spoilers and blooper reels. But that's just me.

Still in all, I'm really looking forward to this movie. If ST-XI is even half as good as Ironman, it'll be a great flick. Ironman totally rocked!

Tyson · May 9 2008, 09:55 AM

Iron Man is awesome in it's own right, but no Star Trek movie should ever be like that film.

Perhaps this is why Trek can't work with larger audiences, it has to become something it's not in order to be accepted.

Dukhat · May 9 2008, 05:36 PM

There have been ten Trek movies, and I'd say that two of them are accessible to mainstream audiences

I know exactly which two movies he's talking about: The Wrath of Khan, and The Voyage Home. In the former, a new director and staff were chosen to remake Star Trek (ironic, huh?), and in the latter, they didn't take themselves so seriously and just make a fun movie.

Seems like two recipes for success to me, and J.J. seems to be doing to former (and perhaps will do the latter in the sequels). So I'm confident that everything's going to be just fine.

DorkBoy [TM] · May 9 2008, 05:52 PM

Yep. Those are probably the two. I'd actually put three of them in the "great" category. First Contact, Star Trek III and Star Trek VI. (He probably excludes III?)

Really, though, I think all 3 of those had mainstream appeal too. Star Trek was very popular during the ST II - ST IV run of movies, in particular. That is when even my mom went with us to see them in the theater (and LIKED them).

Especially "Star Trek IV: The One Even Your Mom Liked"

A lot of the hardcore TOSers don't like it, but the Bennett / Meyers / Nimoy era was my favorite period of Trek. That is when I really started getting into it. I suspect the new movie might be the same way - turn off some percentage of the hardest of core fans but help them build a broad audience again.

That is, if it is successful. I have high hopes!

Nimoy's "thumbs up" of the project and involvement is the main reason I am optimistic.

M'Sharak · May 9 2008, 05:57 PM

TrekToday wrote:

...said Wheaton... "If J.J. Abrams wants to make his new Trek movie unlike the 80% of Trek movies that aren't that good, that's just fine with me."

cardinal biggles · May 9 2008, 06:11 PM

donners22 wrote:

...we could be looking at the biggest geekriot in history

I've got to use that line again in the near future.

This one was good, too:

...it will be a tower of suck, built out of an endless supply of Jar-Jars and midichlorians

cubbie · May 9 2008, 09:09 PM

I have a whole new respect for Wil! Great article!

ancient · May 9 2008, 09:53 PM

Hard not to like the guy.

TJinPgh · May 10 2008, 04:50 AM

TrekToday wrote:

There have been ten Trek movies, and I'd say that two of them are accessible to mainstream audiences, another two are great, and the remaining six are nearly unwatchable.

Obviously, the four movies he's talking about here are 2, 4, 6 & 8.

I'm not entirely sure if the two "mainstream" movies he's referring to were 2 & 4 or 4 & 8, as the Borg in First Contact were updated with an entirely new look and a ton of special effects that made it appealing to a wider audience.

While I wouldn't go so far as to say the other 6 were "unwatchable," I think it's important to note that, with the exception of IV, the ones that are good all had something in common that the other six did not.

With the exception of 4, 2, 6 and 8 ALL relate back to something that had happened previously in Trek lore. None of them tried to reinvent the wheel, but rather follow up on a pre-existing story.

Every attempt to create Trek from scratch has been the "tower of suck" that he worries this movie could be.

1, 5, 7, 9 & 10 all tried to tell stand alone stories that the casual observer could follow without really knowing a whole lot about Trek history.

Abrams is trying to buck this trend and create a from scratch story that makes Trek "better" than it's been previously and more accepting to mainstream fans and general audiences.

Sorry, but I simply don't see it working.

Further, as a Star Wars fan, I wonder if Abrams would be one of the first to stand up and cheer or jeer anybody but Lucas who'd come along and try to do with that franchise what he's attempting to do with this one.

Pioneer · May 10 2008, 01:41 PM

DorkBoy [TM] wrote:

Especially "Star Trek IV: The One Even Your Mom Liked"