View Single Post
Old October 21 2013, 10:25 PM   #398
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
Timewalker's Avatar
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BillJ wrote: View Post
David.Blue wrote: View Post
But this does not preclude accepting the events of TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT as canon. Just that we want a new storytelling style.
I think that you have to simply let all that go. I want the next show-runner to have total freedom to place the show in the 28th century with the Eugenics Wars happening in the 23rd and the first warp flight happening in the 25th, if he/she so desires.

Carrying over continuity from the old series would just shackle the new creative team to something that has nothing more to offer creatively.
In that case, why bother to call it Star Trek?

grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
Everyone who is here is a Star Trek fan, interested in discussing Star Trek. That doesn't come with any kind of obligation to always be positive or to just never discuss the things you didn't like. This 'beating a dead horse' argument (which I've seen used several times now) mainly comes across to me as saying 'I think you're wrong, so shut up'.
Agreed. I happen to really enjoy the Voyager series, specifically the episodes dealing with time travel and the seasons with Seven of Nine. There are many instances where people have come to the Voyager forum and spat all over the show, and specifically cite time travel and Seven of Nine as two of the reasons they can't stand the show.

I obviously wish they felt differently, but I don't tell them that if they don't like it they should shut up.

BillJ wrote: View Post
grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
Unfortunately, what doesn't logically follow from that is the film's continued implication that Kirk is a command prodigy who clearly deserves to be in command of the enterprise, despite his apparent disrespect for the basic chain of command.
Kirk always had a bit of disrespect for those in positions of power over him. What we see in "Into Darkness" isn't anything new. What he lacks is the seasoning that the Prime Universe version of the character has, so he is a bit more "in your face" about how he feels and reacts to those above him.
I always had the impression that it's necessary to have "seasoning" BEFORE being given the captaincy of a starship. And I disagree that Kirk "always had a bit of disrespect for those in positions of power over him." He had disrespect for those in power when they made stupid decisions (ie. bureaucratic decisions) that resulted in more harm being done than if the decisions had been different (or at least had come faster). That doesn't mean he had disrespect for his superiors all the time. And it's entirely possible to feel no respect for an individual, while still respecting the position that individual holds.

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
So does anyone else remember when this thread was about whether or not it was a good idea to bring back the Prime Universe and NOT about complaining about either or both Star Trek (2009) or Star Trek Into Darkness?
Last time I looked at the poll numbers, it was 66 in favor of bringing back the Prime Universe and 68 total for all other options combined. Note that this doesn't necessarily mean those 68 people are against bringing back the Prime Universe, as some of those votes are in the "don't know/don't care" categories. Therefore, I conclude that at this point, the ones who voted unambiguously in favor of the Prime Universe are winning the poll.

BillJ wrote: View Post
grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
Yep, so many of those running around, I guess we'd better just start giving them Starships. Because I would want the morons I see wandering around the neighborhood in charge of one of the most powerful weapons in existance.
Well, you're deliberately ignoring what the film tells us about Jim Kirk. A man who is considered a genius and completed the Academy in three years. Plus, we have no idea of what type of experience he gained from ages 18-22 before joining the Academy.

But none of those facts fit with your gripe...
Just because someone is book-smart, that doesn't mean they have the necessary skills to command a starship. And based on what I recall of nuKirk's personality in the 2009 movie, any experience he gained from ages 18-22 didn't include self-discipline and basic social skills when dealing with people higher up in rank.

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Star Trek II ignored I, and VI ignored V.
How did Star Trek II ignore TMP? Some years had passed in-universe, so it was plausible that there would be different uniforms, the ship would have been altered, and V'Ger would have been old news.

If TWOK had truly ignored TMP, there wouldn't have been anything about Kirk's depression over his birthday, and his admiral's rank would have either been a new issue for him or it wouldn't have happened at all.

As for Star Trek V, that piece of nonsense should be ignored.
"Let's give it to Riker. He'll eat anything!"

For some great Original Series fanfic, check out the Valjiir Continuum!
Timewalker is offline   Reply With Quote