View Single Post
Old January 7 2013, 06:45 PM   #587
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

mos6507 wrote: View Post
I agree with you that the TNG era went off the rails. At best, it was watchable, not must-watch TV. I don't agree with you that the nu-Trek approach was the right solution. I think it's possible to hate how Berman and Braga slowly ground the franchise to dust while not welcoming JJ Abrams and his lens-flare with open arms. All they really needed to do was find a better steward of the franchise without having to pass the ball to someone who saw Trek itself as something that was broken and needed a hip-hop ADD do-over.
The problem with what your saying is that J.J. Abrams didn't have twenty-six, or even thirteen, episodes to hook the audience on Star Trek 2009. He had two hours and likely a laundry list of things that had to be accomplished in that time frame...
  • Reset the universe.
  • Do origins for Kirk and Spock.
  • Introduce the minor characters.
  • Introduce the Enterprise.
  • Have Kirk as the Captain by the end of the film.
  • Plus introduce a villain and give us a reason for the events to unfold.

Are there things I'd do differently? Sure! I loathe the Academy section of the film for a bunch of reasons I won't go into. But I thought both the Kelvin and Enterprise sections of the film were well done with a couple of nitpicks. I thought Abrams did a competent job directing and thought only Pegg and Saldana felt wrong for the roles they were given.

When they were actually making this film there was no guarantee of a sequel, so they had to make it count. And I think for the most part they did.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote