Nerys Myk wrote:
A science-fiction film aimed at people that would never appreciate science-fiction. How wonderfully pointless.
"You realise that when people think science fiction they think of things that are too dense to understand and are dismissed. Or too wordy or too talky. That's why I had the perception that the ultimate version of science fiction is Star Trek.
"Of all these projects that I'm mentioning, the least science fiction is Star Trek. Star Trek isn't science fiction at all. It's science fact. It's our future."
This. Doesn't. Mean. Anything.
Star Trek is a very approachable form of science fiction. Always has been. The "science" was always secondary to the "fiction"
This is true, but there's still something off-putting or even condenscending, and even a little fanwank too, in the way Burk is saying it. "Star Trek" isn't "science fact" no matter how many times he wants to bring up the cell phone story. About it being our
future compared to "Star Wars" being a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, that comparison's been made before, and I've never been sure of its relevance.
As far as people thinking science fiction is too dense, too wordy, or too talky for a general audience, has Burk ever seen "Alien", the Terminator movies, "Avatar", "The Hunger Games", "Jurassic Park", "Independence Day", "Back to the Future", "Planet of the Apes", "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", the Matrix movies, "Blade Runner", or any of a dozen other science fiction movies that have had broad appeal, including "Star Wars"?
I'm very happy with ST09 and eagerly look forward to STID, but I think Burk would be better served if he dropped this spiel.
His sentiment can be better said in two sentences: Over the years, the perception many people formed of "Star Trek" was you had to become really invested in it in order to enjoy it or "get" it. It carried a lot of baggage. So, we wanted to trim it back to its 1966 roots and make it fun and accessible for all, again.