View Single Post
Old May 17 2013, 01:35 PM   #43
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Let's get back to Roddenberry's trek

Christopher wrote: View Post
LancerKind wrote: View Post
What makes Roddenberry's vision unique beyond other fiction was something heavily discussed in Why Trekkies hated the 2009 movie.
A title which is a blatant lie. As a Trekkie who liked the movie, I deeply resent it when people who didn't like it claim that their personal opinion represents the consensus of all fandom. It's cowardly and dishonest to hide behind that pretense rather than just saying "This is my own personal view," and it's dismissive and insulting to those of us who have our own diverse opinions.
Amen. I keep vowing I won't get sucked into this same old debate again, but then somebody plays the "all real Trekkies hate the reboot" card again and my hackles ride.

Just the other day, I was contacted by a reporter who wanted to gin up controversy by pitting old-school Trekkies against the new movie . . . and who seemed genuinely surprised and frustrated when I refused to play along! (At one point, he actually asked me to recommend a Trek author who would be willing to state that the new movies weren't "real" Trek, but I declined to cooperate.)

And, as usual, he seemed to have bought into the myth that TOS was a "non-violent" series that never stooped to cheap thrills or action. I admit my jaw dropped to hear this from a professional journalist whom you'd think would have actually done a little research on the original series.

Jesus Christ, I pointed out, barely an episode went by that Kirk didn't get into fistfight, Federation colonies and outposts were wiped out on a regular basis, and all those redshirts didn't exactly die of natural causes. "Non-violent" indeed!

Where do people get this stuff?
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote