why is star trek original series disliked

It's equally weird that every time he or anyone else states their opinion on JJtrek that 3 or 4 people have to get on his or their case for it like clockwork. It's the internet. If someone says something that someone else disagrees with, it's not an obligation to start an argument about it. But it happens every time anyway. Like I said, it's the internet.

 

It's also a matter of exaggeration. I hold my tongue a lot on this issue, but that doesn't stop some from going ape over any smallest word of dissent on something they like. If I had a dime for every instance of someone pissing on TOS I'd be super rich. And, yeah, over the years a lot of people have pissed on TOS.

JJtrek is the darling of the moment and its fans and advocates will not tolerate one smidgen of expressed discontent over it. They might have something of a case if I actually went into the nuTrek forum (or even the General forum) and attacked anything and everything in there. But the fact is I don't, but they trot JJtrek here into the TOS forum and expect unbridled luv for it here as well. I'm in here to talk about TOS and as much as they resent my dislike of Abrams' stuff I resent them trotting it in here.

 

If he keeps receiving this response from you, you'll be guilty of trolling instead of just being annoying and abusive.

Folks who have issues with AbramsTrek are usually quite articulate at length about their problems with it (it is pretty easy, since just about every decision they've made seems an odd one that requires an eye roll plus a 'what were they thinking?') If you don't think that is the case, why don't you look in most threads in the Abramsforum and see that there are occasional, usually long and well-written posts against ID that pop up in between the stream of gushes. Why would you be looking for some detailed critique of it here, or complaining when somebody doesn't supply it?

The whole issue of bringing new fans in that Abramsfolk seem to always glom onto is utterly irrelevant too. New fans don't change the content of the original programming (unless they contribute to the awfulness that is TOS-R), and THAT original programming is what this subforum is about.

 

Would you make the same claim about the SW prequels? That it is just a polished shiny version of the OT?


What I see with the Abrams films is a painful-on-the-eyes and schizophrenic design non-sensibility, with the plain floors of the brewery visible like you'd expect in a zero budget flick, and then the incomprehensible lighting in working environments, where you can't even look at a display without getting practicals shining right in your eyes. Very useful for easy reading in combat conditions, I'm sure.

To me GALAXY QUEST is far closer to TOS in spirit and style than Abrams (and tons better as well.)

And yeah, I'm doing what I said above doesn't need doing, posting a defense in this forum, but since your view is so specific, it really begs for a response in kind.

 

I can't see what isn't there.

 

^^^
Agee with all the above. I'm 50 and was one of the folks kind of wondering just what TNG would be when it debuted (and was VERY disappointed with the premiere "Encounter At Farpoint", and that the second TNG episode they aired out of the gate was a remake) -- and as TNG Season one continued felt GR had gone senile as TNG wasn't anything like TOS overall.

In my market they started sandwichiong new TNG episodes between TOS episodes (IE they'd air a TOS episode before and after a TNG episode -- sop yeah, if any die hard TNG fans think TNG was a 'smash hit' out of the gate, you couldn't be more wrong.)

IMO - the JJ Abrams reboot does bring back the sense of adventure and fun that TOS had (and again sorry, but TOS wasn't only about making a big 'social comment' -- yes it did do episodes like that from time to time -- but it wasn't every single episode. Some were just good old fashioned adventure, and I never had an issue with that then, or now.

 

Well, TNG was a huge hit right off the bat. It was renewed for a second season only six weeks after it premiered. Actually, the first two seasons and the fourth season of Enterprise are the only seasons of Modern Trek that I have any real affection for.

 

People want to dislike TOS...ok, whatever. People bag on Shatner??? They aren't allowed to have opinions. I'm taking their opinion privileges away. Early career Shatner is awesome.

 

Some don't like Star Trek.

Others don't like sex or joy.

Some people are weird.

 

No need to justify or be in anyway defensive reference your response to my view, specific or not, trevanian. I don't agree, but I truly don't have any problem with it.

This is an internet forum, and it is all about opinion. I'm not necessarily referring to any poster in this thread, but IMHO, there have been occasions when highly disparaging commentary on JJ Trek has been passed for the most tenuous reasons.

 

Honestly, what some of the people who don't like the last two movies can't see is that it's possible that their opinions are just that.

 

I have no real problem with the nu-Trek. I enjoyed the first, haven't seen the second, but I'm sure I'll enjoy it. No, my REAL problem is now people are wanting EVERYTHING rebooted. I saw just the other day something on 'fans demand X-Files reboot!'

Good God people! Duchovney and Anderson still look great! They're not Grandpa and Grandma Moses. Besides,....Abrams is a fairly smart guy.

The odds of an X-Files reboot looking like the last POS Night Stalker show are much greater than being remotely as good as the Trek reboot. Besides,....is Duchovney going to go back in time and confront himself (As played by Jesse Eisenberg) at the FBI Academy? Gag.

 

I love TOS because of the characters. I know why some people hate Bones, but he's awesome IMO. I don't really see himas the "heart" of the group. And being emotional isn't always positive. One reason I love Bones is that he is a bit of a grumpy ass, but he's a good guy in the end. Besides. I always found him and Spock fighting funny. The trio would be lame without Dr.Grumpy and Mr. Logical fighting.

 

I'm in the midst of an X-Files rewatch (I'm just starting Season 7) and up to this point the series is awesome. The characters of Mulder and Scully are fantastic and the chemistry between is cool. That chemistry is part of why the series was so good and it would be very hard to recreate with new casting.

I love their monster-of-the-week type stories and in many ways they do stuff I'd love to see in a space adventure series.

 

I think more people like Bones than dislike him. In character polls he tends be in the top 10 of all Trek characters (even top 5). Perhaps not on the same level of Spock love, but Bones is definitely a well liked character. Not hurt by the fact that De Kelley is considered one of the nicest actors of the original cast.

But there are definitely a group of people who just do not understand his character at all or are obsessed with Spock to the point that they see Spock as a perfect saint and Bones is just getting on his case because he is an evil racist.

Funny thing is these same people don't understand Spock either. I have read quotes from Nimoy, Kelley, and even Roddenberry claiming Spock and Bones were friends despite their differences.

In fact Nimoy compared Spock/Bones to Burns and Allen (you know an old married couple) & Abbott and Costello. He said he saw Spock/Bones banter as very similar to the "Who's On First" comedy routine.

Okay rant over

 

^^ Very true. In real life two friends can get away with saying some of the nastiest stuff to each other that they'd never think of saying to a stranger, or tolerate edgy banter that they'd never accept from anyone else.

Another example: check out the banter between Clint Eastwood and the barber in Gran Torino.

 

The three of them are such close friends, they spend all their free time together, as pointed out by McCoy in TFF.

And then there's this:

 

Star Wars revolutionized sf movies. Every movie that came after had to have a certain set of characteristics in order to even be recognizable as a space movie. That is common knowledge, of course.

TOS came before, so it does not follow all the tropes SW made, that's it's problem. Not really a problem, but a reason. I love TOS.

 

Sorry missed these quotes but I want to respond. No being emotional is definitely not always positive, but either is being logical. That is the point of Spock and Bones. Neither logic or emotion by themselves is enough you need both.

As for being the "heart" of the trio well I will stick with that.

Kirk is the man of action, the one who ultimately makes the decisions, or the body and soul of the group.

Spock is the mind. He helps Kirk with his decisions by giving him the logical, rational, and intelligent advice. McCoy is the heart by giving Kirk the humanistic and emotional advice. But again Kirk needed both sides.

Or you can just say they are Ethos, Pathos and Logos