RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,741
Posts: 5,215,597
Members: 24,212
Currently online: 829
Newest member: pusykattdoll

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 27 2013, 08:36 PM   #31
yousirname
Commander
 
yousirname's Avatar
 
Re: Has star trek changed

DalekJim wrote: View Post
The only one of those I'd consider to be true science-fiction would be the time travel episodes of Lost and he had zero influence on them. They were conceived of/written by Damon Lindelof and Calrton Cuse

He is from the Spielberg/Lucas school of thought regarding the genre which is PERFECT for Star Wars Episode VII but entirely wrong for Star Trek. My two pence.
I dunno, man, once we get into qualifiers like 'true' then I don't think you're really saying anything beyond that you're not fond of his work.
yousirname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 08:55 PM   #32
edshrinker
Ensign
 
Location: Pinehurst, NC
Re: Has star trek changed

I am thoroughly enjoying this BBS. Ii certainly don't agree with everyone's ideas of what JJ brings to the Star Trek universe (what fun would that be!) but I think the thing that is overlooked is that we are talking about Star Trek! Because after Insurrection and a failed attempt at TV with Enterprise it was dead. I like JJ Abrams. Most everything he was involved in (with the exception of Undercovers) had at least a passing interest to me. Fringe is in my top 5 favorite TV of all time as is Lost. So we have our favorite characters in a new incarnation and I, for one, am thrilled. These TOS characters were a huge part of my childhood. To have them back is surreal and so much fun.

I loved Regarding Henry and I believe JJ w co-wrote the pilot episode of Lost, so I like his writing, directing and production style. That being said, I am more of a fan of Bad Robot and the talent involved in the company. It would be a dream to work in a creative environment like that. And I think the next Treks will be turned over to Bob Orci and Lindelof and other maybe new, unearthed talent at Bad Robot. I think it is in great hands and will end up being done by huge fans of the Trek Universe (as Orci is) while JJ works with Star Wars indefinitely. That is absolutely fine by me. I like the changes, but a consistent voice from here on out (at least for another movie or 2) would be preferred.
edshrinker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 09:15 PM   #33
lurok
Commodore
 
lurok's Avatar
 
Location: Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
Re: Has star trek changed

yousirname wrote: View Post
As far as I'm concerned, the question of whether or not this or that is in line with "Gene's vision" is akin to wondering if Colonel Sanders 'would have approved' of the Zinger Tower or the Boneless Banquet.
. Quote-of-the-thread so far.
__________________
"Don't torture yourself, Gomez. That's my job"
lurok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 09:20 PM   #34
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Has star trek changed

yousirname wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
I don't see how you can expect to not hear the phrase "Gene's vision" in a Trek BBS. Should we just erect JJ-specific Trek hangouts so people like you can avoid Trek purists?
A) We have just such a hangout, it's this forum and you seem quite fond of hanging out here.

B) My view is that Star Trek isn't a religion with Gene Roddenberry as Moses. Neither we as fans nor Abrams nor anyone else as creators are beholden to "Gene's vision" in any way. As far as I'm concerned, the question of whether or not this or that is in line with "Gene's vision" is akin to wondering if Colonel Sanders 'would have approved' of the Zinger Tower or the Boneless Banquet. No-one cares if he would or not.

Likewise, Roddenberry's been dead for over twenty years. More Star Trek has been made without his involvement than with it. His 'vision' is sweet and all, but it's restrictive of the kind of stories you can tell and the kind of characters you can tell them about. There's just no real reason to keep mindlessly deferring to it, in my view.
You mean you are not of the body?

BillJ wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
yousirname wrote: View Post
I could happily go the rest of my life without ever hearing the phrase "Gene's vision" again.
I don't see how you can expect to not hear the phrase "Gene's vision" in a Trek BBS. Should we just erect JJ-specific Trek hangouts so people like you can avoid Trek purists?
No.

But let's be honest, Gene adjusted his "vision" according to whatever best stuffed his pockets with cash and his couch with starlets.
So basically, to live Gene's vision is to be a hedonist. Better than religion, I'd say.

Roddenberry wanted to create a TV show in the 1960s that would sell. Period. I will say that to his credit, he did want it to be at least a moderately intelligent and moderately progressive show. But it wasn't the only intelligent or progressive show on TV in the 1960s. Further, most of its staying power over time hasn't come from one "vision," but from its versatile format. Unlike "Gunsmoke" which was always a western stuck in a time and place, Trek could be many things.

But Gene's "vision" and crap like that came later. It's revisionist history. It's all part of the "cult" of Trek and the self-importance it used to market itself. We've all read that stuff at some time during our fandom. Some dismiss it. Some are absorbed.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 09:28 PM   #35
Squiggy
LORD SHIT SUPREME
 
Squiggy's Avatar
 
Location: Not on your life, my Hindu friend.
View Squiggy's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Squiggy
Re: Has star trek changed

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
Yes, it's changed. So has music, the climate, public sexual behavior and the color of my hair.
And just what is the public sexual behavior of your hair?
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY!
Squiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 09:31 PM   #36
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Which hair?
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 09:31 PM   #37
KirkusOveractus
Captain
 
KirkusOveractus's Avatar
 
Location: Ambler, PA
Send a message via AIM to KirkusOveractus
Re: Has star trek changed

DalekJim wrote: View Post
The only thing that seperates them is that Gene Roddenberry had a genuine interest in science-fiction so we got something like The Motion Picture, whereas I honestly don't think Abrams understands what science-fiction is beyond "an action film with some aliens in it".
Regarding this, you really should go back and study the history of TMP. Virtually everything Roddenberry pitched for the movie was viewed as pretty much incoherent. It wasn't until more of what Foster, Livingston, et al. wrote and started to show in the script that TMP got greenlit.

Roddenberry did have a genuine interest in sci-fi, but I also think Abrams does as well. And if he hits something he doesn't know, he's smart enough to have surrounded himself with folks who do know.

Much like Roddenberry did when starting TOS, he was smart enough to bring in Coon, Fontana and so on.

What would you say to the highly-respected science fiction people who viewed TOS in 1966 as an adventure show with some aliens in it? I can't recall the names now, but that was the general idea from some science fiction people at the time.

Back to topic, we have people mourning the changing of Star Trek, who are probably the same people who would slam the Abrams movies for revisiting the TOS characters and not going into the 25th or 3025th Century and changing into something more "modern".

Last edited by KirkusOveractus; March 27 2013 at 09:32 PM. Reason: Spelling
KirkusOveractus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 09:33 PM   #38
yousirname
Commander
 
yousirname's Avatar
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Franklin wrote: View Post
You mean you are not of the body?
Uh... of course I am! Peace, brother...

But Gene's "vision" and crap like that came later. It's revisionist history. It's all part of the "cult" of Trek and the self-importance it used to market itself. We've all read that stuff at some time during our fandom. Some dismiss it. Some are absorbed.
Amen.

Don't want to bloat the thread too much, but the talk ITT gave me an idea:

yousirname is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 10:20 PM   #39
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Has star trek changed

yousirname wrote:
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 10:54 PM   #40
SchwEnt
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Scout101 wrote: View Post
I don't mind where it's been going, but would love for the next one to NOT be focused so much on having a big villian to overcome. Would like to see a little more science in my science fiction, and have story more around Enterprise versus a mystery, phenomenon, or ancient race type situation.

I think the last time we got a Trek movie without a big villian was ST:IV, with the Probe being closer to a force of nature rather than something to fight.

I knew, fewer phasers pew-pewing and capital ships in dogfights, but would be a nice change of pace. Of all our favorite Trek episodes, how many really had a big villian the crew was fighting?
Everything said here ^^^
SchwEnt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 11:07 PM   #41
newtontomato539
Commander
 
Re: Has star trek changed

Abrams isn't leaving Star Trek. Yay!

Time Travel is great unless Abrams does it!?

Morality plays were done with TMP and Insurrection. They are boring.

Star Trek as a long history of action.

Should Bad Robot Star Trek do 10-15 minutes of morality and 10-15 minutes on science?

What about technobabble?

Did TOS explain in detail the science?
newtontomato539 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 27 2013, 11:18 PM   #42
Gojira
Commodore
 
Gojira's Avatar
 
Location: Stompin' on Tokyo
Re: Has star trek changed

mos6507 wrote: View Post
yousirname wrote: View Post
I could happily go the rest of my life without ever hearing the phrase "Gene's vision" again.
I don't see how you can expect to not hear the phrase "Gene's vision" in a Trek BBS. Should we just erect JJ-specific Trek hangouts so people like you can avoid Trek purists?
I think the term "Gene's Vision" has reached mythical proportions at this time to the point where it really isn't true. I think Gene's true vision was making money.

I do not mean to sound cynical because I do not think I am being cynical. I just think that the whole "Gene's vision" overrated. Plus Star Trek was made into what it became through the vision of many, not just one man.
__________________
My Science Fiction-Fantasy movie review Blog: http://foleyfunfilmfacts.wordpress.com/
Gojira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 01:03 AM   #43
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Tennessee
Re: Has star trek changed

Gojira wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
yousirname wrote: View Post
I could happily go the rest of my life without ever hearing the phrase "Gene's vision" again.
I don't see how you can expect to not hear the phrase "Gene's vision" in a Trek BBS. Should we just erect JJ-specific Trek hangouts so people like you can avoid Trek purists?
I think the term "Gene's Vision" has reached mythical proportions at this time to the point where it really isn't true. I think Gene's true vision was making money.

I do not mean to sound cynical because I do not think I am being cynical. I just think that the whole "Gene's vision" overrated. Plus Star Trek was made into what it became through the vision of many, not just one man.
I know it's been denied, but Zephram Cochrane in First Contact screamed "commentary on Gene Roddenberry" the minute he gave that speech in the cockpit of the Phoenix.

He was a man of his times, he had some good ideals and a knack for getting some of the best and brightest to work for him,but he got turned into a hero and idol long after the fact by fans that only know the PR version of Gene.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
Good men don't need rules, The Doctor (A Good Man Goes To War)
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 01:14 AM   #44
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: Has star trek changed

Bring Back Captain Winter!
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 01:25 AM   #45
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Has star trek changed

OphaClyde wrote: View Post
Bring Back Captain Winter!
Only if Commander Autumn is his first officer!
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.