RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 147,046
Posts: 5,803,179
Members: 26,061
Currently online: 510
Newest member: Ulvirfaust

TrekToday headlines

TrekToday http://www.trektoday.com/content Daily Star Trek news Sun, 02 Aug 2015 16:53:37 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3 Retro Review: Learning Curve http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/retro-review-learning-curve/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/retro-review-learning-curve/#comments Fri, 31 Jul 2015 21:16:02 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41256 Tuvok attempts to train four Maquis crewmembers who are having difficulty following Starfleet protocols.

Plot Summary: Lieutenant Dalby discovers a malfunctioning bio-neural gel pack and replaces it without getting authorization, which causes several systems ship-wide to stop working. Tuvok expresses concern to Janeway that Dalby and some other Maquis crewmembers are not trained or disciplined enough to work on a Starfleet vessel. Though Janeway is more worried about the possibility of multiple gel pack failures disabling Voyager’s systems, she recommends an on-the-job training course for the crewmembers having the greatest difficulties. Chakotay gives onetime Starfleet Academy instructor Tuvok a list of possible candidates, from which Tuvok selects four junior officers – impulsive Dalby, belligerent Henley, unfocused Chell, and bitter Gerron – who deeply resent being singled out for extra attention. The group complains when Tuvok insists that they remove all traces of their personal style from their professional demeanor and marches out after what they consider to be an unfair physical exercise. Neelix offers Tuvok some wisdom about plant stalks needing to be flexible, which Tuvok at first takes to mean that the young crewmembers are too rigid, then discovers that Neelix means to criticize himself and his teaching methods. He tries to get to know Dalby and realizes that some of the Maquis crewmembers suffered traumas that make it impossible for them to become contented, well-adjusted Starfleet officers overnight. Meanwhile, the Doctor discovers that Neelix’s attempt to make cheese has cultivated a bacteria that now infects the gel packs. The Doctor proposes raising the temperature to help the gel packs fight off the infection, but although the gel packs are saved, Tuvok and his unhappy team become trapped in a cargo bay where Gerron is injured. Dalby becomes irate when Tuvok orders him to get to safety with Henley and Chell, but when Tuvok himself violates procedure, risking his life to save Gerron, the Maquis officers are impressed and promise to work harder to obey the rules.

Analysis: I didn’t like “Learning Curve” when it first aired for its obnoxious attitude toward Maquis dissidents and indeed toward anyone who refused to assimilate entirely into Starfleet’s arbitrary regulations, which I thought at the time might just reflect my lack of understanding of how military protocols worked. But it rubs me the wrong way even more so now that we’ve seen some of the history of Vulcan intolerance in Enterprise, and now that we know the Maquis will be asked to give up their sense of belonging to their own cultures as well as their identities as members of an organization in conflict with Starfleet (the latter a demand that’s completely justified on a mission like Voyager’s, though I note that Worf was allowed to wear the accoutrements of a Klingon warrior on duty even when the Klingons were at war with the Federation). Of course it’s a problem that many of the Maquis have not had Starfleet training in teamwork, physical fitness, even self-protection, though I might note that Neelix and Kes haven’t either. It would seem both reasonable and fair for Tuvok to include them in a course to get underprepared crewmembers ready for life traveling through the Delta Quadrant, particularly since Kes had never left her village, let alone her homeworld, until just before Voyager arrived. The cheese incident that almost destroys the bio-neural gel packs is a far more heinous betrayal of safety protocols than the replacement of one of those gel packs, even if Dalby is rude when reprimanded while Neelix only stammers in embarrassment. And surely there are Starfleet crewmembers as well as Maquis who were unprepared to have a brief mission into the Badlands turn into a potentially lifelong journey? Couldn’t many of the junior officers use a refresher course in focus and teamwork? If Janeway and Chakotay’s goal is to get their two crews functioning as a single unit with the same ease with which Torres now works with Carey, they’d be well advised to include some Starfleet officers in the remedial class even just for show. Not so long ago, Tom Paris was a criminal and Torres was punching fellow officers, while now they’re fourth and fifth in the command chain; seems like a lot of people on that ship could use a bit of extra attention.

And although Tuvok may have been an Academy instructor for more than a decade, he seems like the wrong person to be leading an exercise in new-to-Starfleet teamwork. These angry, demoralized Maquis crewmembers need a counselor, not a disciplinarian; the morale officer might do them more good, and indeed does them more good when he lectures Tuvok, than a stern Vulcan whom they consider a traitor to their cause. I think it’s a mistake that we see the senior officers’ point of view rather than that of the recruits, since we don’t get to learn the positive independent-minded aspects of what Chakotay dismisses as “the Maquis way.” A strong left hook may get someone hauled before a disciplinary committee in Starfleet, but we’ve had such behavior by the Klingons rammed down our throats for years now as something we should admire, so it just doesn’t look particularly outrageous when a Maquis crewmember does precisely what a Klingon would do in a similar situation of being singled out for his temper. Apart from Dalby, who joined the Maquis because Cardassians brutalized his girlfriend, we never get to know the Maquis crewmembers, and the more Tuvok talks, the more arrogant he seems, like the obnoxious Vulcans of “Take Me Out to the Holosuite” rather than thoughtful, nuanced individuals like Spock and Sarek. Now that the US military and other such organizations have relaxed their rules about whether and when soldiers can wear yarmulkes, hijabs, and other items directly related to the practice of religion, I feel even more justified in my fury against Tuvok when he orders Gerron to take off his Bajoran earring – an accessory quite different from the headband that Tuvok forbids Henley to wear. The Bajoran earring is a symbol of faith. It’s also a mark of one’s family and social caste, two things that the young Gerron has lost being stranded 70,000 light years from home. Whether he had lost those already in a traumatic incident that led him to join the Maquis, as Dalby seems to believe, or whether he joined the Maquis out of sympathy for the settlers’ desire to protect their homes, like Kasidy Yates, Gerron is clearly clinging to this one meaningful relic of his former life, which Tuvok orders him to put away without any care for its significance.

Clearly, Tuvok is obsessed with the letter of the law rather than its spirit – he’s closer to being Javert from Les Miserables than was Sisko when Eddington mocked him with that sobriquet – but given the pettiness of the Vulcans we saw in many TNG and DS9 episodes, I gather we’re supposed to assume that it’s because Tuvok’s a Vulcan, for whom logic demands holding even to the most trivial of regulations. But I can’t understand why Chakotay agrees to let someone whom he thought served his own cause, then turned out to have been working behind his back all along, serve as corrections officer for other Maquis crewmembers. Chakotay’s facial tattoo would not be permitted even in the current US military, and I’d love to hear his response if Tuvok ordered him to remove it or cover it up. He’s usually a champion of diversity and broadmindedness, yet he seems amused at the thought of having four shipmates for whom he was once responsible, who are as troubled as they are troubling, put under Tuvok’s yoke. Of course ship-wide discipline is important in a crisis, as we see when it takes much of the crew working together to solve the problem with the gel packs, but a rigid dress code for people who will be working together for many years can hardly be the element that makes them see themselves as a team. It will be acknowledging, understanding, accepting, and taking advantage of their differences which will accomplish that. If the Starfleet uniform serves to bond Voyager’s crew in early days, it later serves to homogenize them; no wonder Sisko preferred spending his off-duty hours in African dress and Kira never stopped wearing her Bajoran earring even when in Starfleet uniform. “Learning Curve” fails in its effort to be “Lower Decks” because it fears to let us get to know and admire the quirks of the individual Maquis, erasing their distinct histories and grievances even as Janeway’s off playing traditional British governess in a traditional British novel knockoff. She needs to spend more time thinking about exactly which aspects of the Federation she plans to keep thriving on her ship as it creeps toward home.

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/retro-review-learning-curve/feed/ 5
Star Trek: The Exhibition In Washington State http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/star-trek-the-exhibition-in-washington-state/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/star-trek-the-exhibition-in-washington-state/#comments Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:00:37 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41252 Star Trek: The Exhibition will be arriving at the Washington State Fair in September.

The Washington State Fair will take place September 11-27 in Puyallup.

Star Trek: The Exhibition, under license by CBS Consumer Products, will run for seventeen days and gives visitors the opportunity to enjoy an interactive, museum-style experience of one of the largest collections of authentic Star Trek artifacts and information ever put on public display. This is a separate ticketed exhibit, and requires Fair admission. Exhibit tickets can be purchased in advance for $6.50 until Sept 10 here, or $8 at the State Fair. Children five years and under are free in the exhibit with a paid adult. Online orders are subject to standard processing fees.

The Exhibition brings visitors into the Star Trek universe and allows them to connect with iconic Star Trek moments. Throughout this experience, visitors, especially younger visitors and youth, will be inspired and motivated to seek out more education, and perhaps ignite a passion for lifelong learning and careers in science and technology.

Star Trek fans and novices alike will have a first-hand interactive experience to explore the worlds, wisdom, science, stories, cultures, characters, fashions and fantasies of the Star Trek universe. In the States, and around the world, Star Trek has become a sub-culture for many, supported by countless fan conventions and fan gatherings where many regularly gather and role-play in their favorite Star Trek characters.

“Among the main attractions of The Exhibition is the opportunity to sit in the legendary Captain’s chair where Captain Kirk and subsequently Captain Picard took command of the U.S.S. Enterprise; the opportunity to pose in front of a replica of the U.S.S. Enterprise; and one-of-a-kind displays, interactive kiosks and rare photo opportunities.”

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/star-trek-the-exhibition-in-washington-state/feed/ 0
August-September 2015 Trek Conventions And Appearances http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/august-september-2015-trek-conventions-and-appearances/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/august-september-2015-trek-conventions-and-appearances/#comments Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:53:51 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41248 There will be nineteen conventions, shows or appearances in August and September that will feature actors of interest to Star Trek fans.

This listing of conventions and shows features actors from all of the televised series and several of the Star Trek movies.

August begins with The Official Star Trek Convention will be held Aug. 6-9 at the Rio Suites Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada. In attendance at The Official Star Trek Convention will be Marc Alaimo, Vaughn Armstrong, Richard Arnold, Rene Auberjonois, Robert Beltran, Casey Biggs, John Billingsley, Brannon Braga, Bobby Clark, Joan Collins, Jeffrey Combs, Denise Crosby, Olivia d’Abo, Michael Dante, James Darren, Roxanne Dawson, Nicole de Boer, John de Lancie, Elizabeth Dennehy (Commander Shelby), Chris Doohan, Michael Dorn, Doug Drexler, Aron Eisenberg, Terry Farrell, Jonathan Frakes, Bryan Fuller, Joseph Gatt, Max Grodenchik, Richard Herd, J.G. Hertzler, Jennifer Hetrick (Vash), Manu Intiraymi, Sherry Jackson, Salome Jens, Dominic Keating, Walter Koenig, Alice Krige, Cirroc Lofton, Don Marshall, Chase Masterson, Robert Duncan McNeill, Anthony Montgomery, Ronald B. Moore, Kate Mulgrew, Larry Nemecek, Adam Nimoy, Denise Okuda, Mike Okuda, Robert O’Reilly, Linda Park, Ethan Phillips, Robert Picardo, Andrew Robinson, Rod Roddenberry, David L. Ross (Lt. Galloway and Lt. Johnson), Saul Rubinek, Tim Russ, Jeri Ryan, Judson Scott (Joachim from The Wrath of Khan), William Shatner, Mark Allen Shepherd (Morn), William Morgan Sheppard, Armin Shimerman, Alexander Siddig, Marina Sirtis, Rick Sternbach, Sir Patrick Stewart, Kitty Swink, George Takei, Connor Trinneer, Karl Urban, Nana Visitor, Garrett Wang, and Michael Westmore.

Next up is Shore Leave, to be held Aug. 7-9 at the Baltimore Hunt Valley Inn in Hunt Valley, Maryland. In attendance at Shore Leave will be Daniel Davis (Professor James Moriarty).

The Steel City Con will be held Aug. 7-9 at the Monroeville Convention Center in Monroeville, Pennsylvania. In attendance at Steel City Con will be Nichelle Nichols.

The Dublin Comic Con will be held Aug. 8-9 at the Convention Centre Dublin in Dublin, Ireland. In attendance at Dublin Comic Con will be Gates McFadden.

The Windsor ComiCon will be held Aug. 15-16 at the Caesars Windsor in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. In attendance at Windsor ComiCon will be Marina Sirtis.

Crypticon Kansas City will take place Aug. 21-23 at the Howard Johnson Plaza in Kansas City, Missouri. In attendance at Crypticon Kansas City will be Sid Haig, Chris Sarandon, and Tony Todd.

Walker Stalker Con will be held Aug. 22-23 at the Westin Waterfront in Boston, Massachusetts. In attendance at Walker Stalker Con will be Denise Crosby.

The Central Coast Comic Con will take place Aug. 28-30 at the Ventura County Fairgrounds in Ventura, California. In attendance at Central Coast Comic Con will be Sid Haig (Lawgiver in Return of the Archons) and Deep Roy.

Wrapping up August will be the Bournemouth Film & Comic Con, to be held Aug. 29-30 at the Bournemouth International Centre in Bournemouth, England. In attendance at the Bournemouth Film & Comic Con will be Max Grodenchik.

September begins with Fan Expo Canada, which will be held Sept. 3-6 at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. In attendance at Fan Expo Canada will be Jeffrey Combs, Malcolm McDowell, Jennifer Morrison, Kate Mulgrew, Ethan Phillips, Robert Picardo, and Jeri Ryan.

Dragon*Con will take place Sept. 4-7 at several hotels in Atlanta, Georgia. In attendance at Dragon*Con will be Terry Farrell, Jonathan Frakes, Gary Lockwood, and Paul McGillion.

Wizard World Comic Con San Jose will be held Sept. 4-6 at the San Jose Convention Center in San Jose, California. In attendance at Wizard World Comic Con San Jose will be Adrienne Barbeau.

The Alamo City Comic Con will be held Sept. 11-13 at the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in San Antonio, Texas. In attendance at Alamo City Comic Con will be Olivia d’Abo and Ron Perlman.

The Wizard World Comic Con Pittsburgh will be held Sept. 11-13 at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Appearing at Wizard World Comic Con Pittsburgh will be Colm Meaney and William Shatner.

RocCon will be held Sept. 11-13 at the Kodak Event Center in Rochester, New York. In attendance at RocCon will be Nichelle Nichols and Marina Sirtis.

Wizard World Comic Con Columbus will be held Sept. 18-20 at the Greater Columbus Convention Center in Columbus, Ohio. Appearing at Wizard World Comic Con Columbus will be Brent Spiner.

The Rose City Comic Con will be held Sept. 19-20 at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland, Oregon. In attendance at Rose City Comic Con will be Walter Koenig, Nichelle Nichols, and Wil Wheaton.

The Salt Lake Comic Con will be held Sept. 24-26 at the Salt Palace in Salt Lake City, Utah. Walter Koenig will be appearing at the Salt Lake Comic Con.

September wraps up with the London Comic Con, to be held Sept. 25-27 at the Western Fair District in London, Ontario, Canada. In attendance at the London Comic Con will be Nicole de Boer and Ron Perlman.

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/august-september-2015-trek-conventions-and-appearances/feed/ 0
Shatner To Pen Book On Nimoy http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/shatner-to-pen-book-on-nimoy/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/shatner-to-pen-book-on-nimoy/#comments Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:45:58 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41245 William Shatner is planning on writing a book about his friend Leonard Nimoy.

Shatner considered Nimoy to be a brother to him.

“I’m writing a book about Leonard,” said Shatner. “I had a brother, whose life arc was so much like mine that we understood each other completely. Our age, our birth, the same types of problems in our marriages – our careers arced in the same manner.

“We had a great deal in common, Leonard and I. And thusly we were able to understand each other. I’ve lost a dear friend.”

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/shatner-to-pen-book-on-nimoy/feed/ 5
Star Trek Beyond Building Continues http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/star-trek-beyond-building-continues/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/star-trek-beyond-building-continues/#comments Fri, 31 Jul 2015 18:42:43 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41236 More photographs from the Star Trek Beyond set have emerged.

Five new photos show the progress made in building the set which began back in May.

STB-1

The first photo shows the bare bones of the set back in May.

STB-2

The second photo shows what appeared to be a building with some broken trees on it.

STB-3

In the third photo, it becomes clear that the second photo was not a building, but hills with broken trees. The plywood of the second photo has been covered with dirt.

STB-4

STB-5

In the last two photos, the “hills” set is being expanded.

Larger-sized photos are available at the referring site.

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/star-trek-beyond-building-continues/feed/ 0
Trinneer In Western Horror http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/trinneer-in-western-horror/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/trinneer-in-western-horror/#comments Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:14:05 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41232 Fans of Connor Trinneer will be able to see the actor in a western horror movie set to release on DVD and VOD beginning August 4.

The movie is called A Good Day To Die.

In A Good Day To Die, “Baron Emerson uses his vast wealth to travel the world and hunt. He does not hunt animals, he hunts warriors. The Baron arrives at the American frontier and is looking for his next prey. An outlaw gunslinger named Chamberlin who is in jail and set to be hanged. The Baron arranges for Chamberlin to be freed so that he can hunt him like an animal in a bloody game of life and death in the Wild West.”

Trinneer portrays the hunted Chamberlin, while Robert Koroluck is the hunter Baron Emerson. Others included in A Good Day To Die include Nadia Lanfranconi, Jay Kown, and Leia Perez.

A Good Day To Die was written and directed by Rene Perez.

The movie has already made its European debut, where it was released under the title Prey For Death.

For US fans, to pre-order A Good Day To Die, which sells for $8.46, head to the link located here.

 

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/trinneer-in-western-horror/feed/ 8
Beam Me Up Scotty Figurines http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/beam-me-up-scotty-figurines/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/beam-me-up-scotty-figurines/#comments Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:10:46 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41229 Two new original series figures feature Kirk and Spock in the process of “beaming up.”

The figures will be available from Funko beginning next month.

Each poseable figure is 3 3/4″ in height and features a beaming effect (the bottom part of each character shows this effect). “Captain James T. Kirk [and Spock have five] points of articulation and features unique accessories and the 1980s style card back design.”

The Beaming Kirk and Spock ReAction figures will ship next month. Each sells for $12.99 and can be pre-ordered here for Kirk, and here for Spock.

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/beam-me-up-scotty-figurines/feed/ 3
UK Auction To Feature Spock Costume http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/uk-auction-to-feature-spock-costume/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/uk-auction-to-feature-spock-costume/#comments Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:08:35 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41226 TrekUKAuction073015

An auction to be held in the UK this autumn will feature a costume worn by Leonard Nimoy.

The Prop Store and Odeon Entertainment Memorabilia Live Auction will take place September 23.

The catalog for the auction isn’t available yet, but at least two Star Trek items will be auctioned.

A costume worn by Nimoy during the second season (blue shirt and black trousers) will be up for auction, and is expected to fetch up to £70,000.

Also in the auction will be a model starship used in The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine.

Other non-Trek items of interest include a Star Wars stormtrooper helmet, Arnold Schwarzenegger‘s jacket from Terminator 3, a Lord of the Rings Witch King’s dagger, and a set of claws worn by Hugh Jackman in X2:X-Men United.

In all, four-hundred-and-fifty items will be auctioned.

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/uk-auction-to-feature-spock-costume/feed/ 1
Pine To Star In Wonder Woman http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/pine-to-star-in-wonder-woman/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/pine-to-star-in-wonder-woman/#comments Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:57:20 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41222 PineWonderWoman052815

Back in May, TrekToday reported that Chris Pine was in negotiations to star in Warner Bros. Wonder Woman; today comes word that Pine has signed on for the role.

Pine will be playing Steve Trevor, Diana Prince’s love interest.

In the Wonder Woman comics, Trevor “was an intelligence officer in the United States Army during World War II whose plane crashed on Paradise Island, the isolated homeland of the Amazons. He was nursed back to health by the Amazon princess Diana, who fell in love with him and followed him when he returned to the outside world. There she became Wonder Woman (and also his co-worker, Diana Prince).”

Pine’s deal reportedly includes sequel options.

Written by Jason Fuchs, Wonder Woman will be directed by Patty Jenkins. Pine will be starring with Gal Gadot, who will take on the role of Diana Prince.

Wonder Woman will be released June 23, 2017.

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/pine-to-star-in-wonder-woman/feed/ 0
Pegg Teases Elba Character http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/pegg-teases-elba-character/ http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/pegg-teases-elba-character/#comments Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:54:46 +0000 http://www.trektoday.com/content/?p=41218 Elba072915

Simon Pegg spoke briefly about the character that Idris Elba will be playing in Star Trek Beyond.

The character that Elba will be playing will be unique, Pegg promised.

“It’s a really interesting, complex character,” said Pegg. “We shouldn’t expect to see anything like Benedict Cumberbatch‘s creepy genius Khan from Star Trek Into Darkness in Elba’s performance, however. His performance is all his own.”

There’s a good reason that Elba’s villain is different than Cumberbatch’s. “Only because it would be a retread,” said Pegg. “What we don’t want to do is have the same kind of villain with the same motivation.”

]]>
http://www.trektoday.com/content/2015/07/pegg-teases-elba-character/feed/ 20


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 May 26 2013, 09:25 PM   #16
SonicRanger
Rear Admiral
 
SonicRanger's Avatar
 
Location: Sheffield, England
Re: Why did they bother...

I watch two different TV shows about Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Different actors, different settings, different portrayals, even different sexes for some characters. I don't want to watch, say, Jonny Lee Miller doing a Benedict Cumberbatch impression. Liking both doesn't make me any less a fan of Sherlock Holmes stories.
__________________
"STAR TREK is... Action - Adventure - Science Fiction."
-- Gene Roddenberry, 1964, top of the first page of his original pitch and outline for Star Trek
SonicRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 09:27 PM   #17
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

Mr. B wrote: View Post
Captain Nebula wrote: View Post
Why did they bother with the original Trek crew in these new movies?
Kirk, Spock and "Beam me up, Scotty" is about all the unwashed masses know about Star Trek, and that's who these movies are for. If you don't play into that, there's no need to even call these new movies "Star Trek."
Right, it is an exploitable franchise, a way to make money.

The center of mass for maximum possible ticket sales is comprised of an audience holding a vague pop-cultural memory of Star Trek. The pop-cultural memory, vague as it is, still makes a Trek film more recognizable than a generic "space movie."

For the intended audience, nuTrek has everything their pop-cultural memory tells it a Trek film should have (green women, tribbles, certain prominent villains like the great "John Harrison," McCoy saying "Dammit," Kirk womanizing, and Spock talking about "Logic").

Our pop cultural memory of, say, "piracy" doesn't give us an accurate historical picture of the past, but rather how we played as kids. The caricature is embarrassing when we mistake it for actual history. Consider, this example. Our pop cultural memory is a sort of iconic reduction which is often satiric and exaggerated. Our image of John Travolta converting popping and locking into pointing like a retriever in a white disco suit is our iconic image of 70's night clubbing. The 1960's, that's hippies, right?

Star Trek is lucky to have made any sort of imprint on pop cultural memory, but the Trek that remains is only sustained by that memory. It's a faded image.

Wiping away Vulcan in the first film was an implicit announcement that all the trifling details under the surface of that image no longer matter. This is a new Star Trek that will simply inhabit the iconography of the original Star Trek.

What we're waiting to find out is if they will eventually show the courage to tell a story of their own, by boldly going out into the imaginative frontier of literature and creating their own iconic moments and characters.

Don't bet on it though. Star Trek was assimilated to make money, not to tell original stories, and this is why the most likely villain in the next film will be the Borg.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 09:31 PM   #18
marksound
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Planet Carcazed
Re: Why did they bother...

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Carcazoid wrote: View Post
It is my considered opinion that casting actors according to their ethnicity is the worst part of Affirmative Action. Not casting the best actor for a role because he is not the right race is the definition of racism.

Disagree if you like, but it won't change my opinion.
Um okay, but if the character you're casting is supposed to be black or Asian or whatever, then wouldn't someone who is black or Asian or whatever be the best actor for a role?

Look, in some cases, yes, race is trivial to a character and anyone of any ethnicity can be cast. Others, race is essential. If you were doing a Martin Luther King biopic, you wouldn't cast a white guy as Martin Luther King, would you?
Yeah, it's the 23rd or 24th century, take your pick. People of different ethic backgrounds intermarry (or interbreed if you prefer) and the differences in race become less apparent over time. I know "black" people who are light skinned with light colored eyes. I know Native Americans with blond hair and blue eyes.

Don't believe me? Look around.

To restrict casting to ethnic stereotypes for a color blind future is not only narrowminded, it's ridiculous.
marksound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 10:04 PM   #19
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why did they bother...

YARN wrote: View Post
Don't bet on it though. Star Trek was assimilated to make money...
Because Roddenberry, Desilu and NBC were making Trek out of the goodness of their heart. It seems folks are whipping out their ros-tinted nostalgia glasses again and forget how much Roddenberry borrowed from other TV and films at the time.
__________________
"Just give me two seconds, alright, you mad bastard!" - Montgomery Scott, Star Trek Into Darkness
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 11:36 PM   #20
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

BillJ wrote: View Post
YARN wrote: View Post
Don't bet on it though. Star Trek was assimilated to make money...
Because Roddenberry, Desilu and NBC were making Trek out of the goodness of their heart. It seems folks are whipping out their ros-tinted nostalgia glasses again and forget how much Roddenberry borrowed from other TV and films at the time.
Even if we assume that this is my "motivation," it does nothing to repudiate the claims I make in that post. The Tu Quoque argument does not deny an accusation, it just asserts that the accuser is also guilty of said accusation.
Old Trek might be exactly like NuTrek, but this would not repudiate my claim.

The only way in which my reasoning would not gain traction would be if the Eco-Darwinistic warrant were true of any and all artworks. That is, if it were a universal truism that artworks are simply made to make money, that that is their purpose, then there would be no room for alternatives. It would make no sense to accuse nuTrek of something of which all artistic producers are guilty (by necessity).

When we globalize this to an argument making a universal statement about artistic production, however, it falls under the weight of it's lazy Machiavellian assumptions:

Premise: Artistic products that don't make money do not survive.

Premise: Star Trek is an artistic product (a commodity).

Conclusion: Money is the only relevant motive in the production of Star Trek.


The conclusion simply does not follow from the premises. The conclusion fails to note that artistic products can be made with additional motives and that, therefore, there is a difference between an artwork with a message that is designed to make money and a (nominal) artwork which only exists to make money.

Even if this were a valid syllogism, the premises are questionable, at best. It assumes that "survival" (e.g., the endless regurgitation of franchises and toys and books and games) is the only relevant, or the paramount, motive for an artwork. If professional life was "all about the money" and only about money, only a fool would teach. Considering the average pay of any creative artist (musicians, actors, writers, etc.), only a fool would go into the creative expression business if it were because, first and foremost, they wanted to make money.

Writers, generally, want to tell good stories. They want to do something meaningful. They want to be paid for it, but they're aren't just randomly associating pounding keys on their keyboard with paychecks.

Art tends to suffers when profit is the only motive in sight. You tend to play it safe. You rely on hacks and play doctors to regurgitate what has already been done. Hollywood's case of sequelitus and rebootitus is evidence of this.

Everyone in the business is looking to get paid. But art isn't just a business. It's culture, it's philosophy, it's personal expression, it's human experience. Reducing art to business under the Darwinistic warrant (i.e., that which survives earns profits) does violence to the substance of art.

TOS Star Trek, on occasion, took risks. It featured an interracial kiss (this episode was not shown in some markets). It featured a Russian crew member. It snuck culturally relevant moral lessons past the censors. It was goofy, but it was also meaningful. And even when they failed (and they failed on several occasions), they were at least trying to do more than simply collect a check. Sure, there were meaningless hack episodes and creative choices made purely in the pursuit of profit. But what cheesey old Star Trek proves (TNG is a better example of old Star Trek since it was not cancelled after three seasons due to low ratings) is that Star Trek can have a message and still survive (i.e., make money).

I don't think that nuTrek has any such ambitions. It is entertaining and fun and it has cool action sequences. It plays dress-up with mom and dad's old clothes, but it's only playing with the form, not the substance. They're content to pick the low hanging fruit of pop cultural memory and package it as retro-action adventure. They're doing a pretty good job of it too! Some us simply lament that nuTrek has a lot more "empty calories" than the old.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26 2013, 11:59 PM   #21
sj4iy
Commander
 
sj4iy's Avatar
 
Location: US
Re: Why did they bother...

YARN wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
YARN wrote: View Post
Don't bet on it though. Star Trek was assimilated to make money...
Because Roddenberry, Desilu and NBC were making Trek out of the goodness of their heart. It seems folks are whipping out their ros-tinted nostalgia glasses again and forget how much Roddenberry borrowed from other TV and films at the time.
Even if we assume that this is my "motivation," it does nothing to repudiate the claims I make in that post. The Tu Quoque argument does not deny an accusation, it just asserts that the accuser is also guilty of said accusation.
Old Trek might be exactly like NuTrek, but this would not repudiate my claim.

The only way in which my reasoning would not gain traction would be if the Eco-Darwinistic warrant were true of any and all artworks. That is, if it were a universal truism that artworks are simply made to make money, that that is their purpose, then there would be no room for alternatives. It would make no sense to accuse nuTrek of something of which all artistic producers are guilty (by necessity).

When we globalize this to an argument making a universal statement about artistic production, however, it falls under the weight of it's lazy Machiavellian assumptions:

Premise: Artistic products that don't make money do not survive.

Premise: Star Trek is an artistic product (a commodity).

Conclusion: Money is the only relevant motive in the production of Star Trek.


The conclusion simply does not follow from the premises. The conclusion fails to note that artistic products can be made with additional motives and that, therefore, there is a difference between an artwork with a message that is designed to make money and a (nominal) artwork which only exists to make money.

Even if this were a valid syllogism, the premises are questionable, at best. It assumes that "survival" (e.g., the endless regurgitation of franchises and toys and books and games) is the only relevant, or the paramount, motive for an artwork. If professional life was "all about the money" and only about money, only a fool would teach. Considering the average pay of any creative artist (musicians, actors, writers, etc.), only a fool would go into the creative expression business if it were because, first and foremost, they wanted to make money.

Writers, generally, want to tell good stories. They want to do something meaningful. They want to be paid for it, but they're aren't just randomly associating pounding keys on their keyboard with paychecks.

Art tends to suffers when profit is the only motive in sight. You tend to play it safe. You rely on hacks and play doctors to regurgitate what has already been done. Hollywood's case of sequelitus and rebootitus is evidence of this.

Everyone in the business is looking to get paid. But art isn't just a business. It's culture, it's philosophy, it's personal expression, it's human experience. Reducing art to business under the Darwinistic warrant (i.e., that which survives earns profits) does violence to the substance of art.

TOS Star Trek, on occasion, took risks. It featured an interracial kiss (this episode was not shown in some markets). It featured a Russian crew member. It snuck culturally relevant moral lessons past the censors. It was goofy, but it was also meaningful. And even when they failed (and they failed on several occasions), they were at least trying to do more than simply collect a check. Sure, there were meaningless hack episodes and creative choices made purely in the pursuit of profit. But what cheesey old Star Trek proves (TNG is a better example of old Star Trek since it was not cancelled after three seasons due to low ratings) is that Star Trek can have a message and still survive (i.e., make money).

I don't think that nuTrek has any such ambitions. It is entertaining and fun and it has cool action sequences. It plays dress-up with mom and dad's old clothes, but it's only playing with the form, not the substance. They're content to pick the low hanging fruit of pop cultural memory and package it as retro-action adventure. They're doing a pretty good job of it too! Some us simply lament that nuTrek has a lot more "empty calories" than the old.
Oh please, even TOS was far from artistic. It was a western set in space. And every subsequent movie and series only wanted to milk it more.

Making this show was never altruistic. Roddenberry may have genuinely liked his work...but he didn't do it for free. Artists want to make a living from their work. Just because these movies fit our time period (just like all of the other movies and series fit theirs) doesn't make them inferior or only out to "sucker the newbies into liking it because they don't know any better". New fans are just as important as old fans, and making a movie that will have mass appeal doesn't diminish it or the people who enjoy it.
sj4iy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:32 AM   #22
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Why did they bother...

Captain Nebula wrote: View Post
Why did they bother with the original Trek crew in these new movies? They could have easily created a new crew. There are only a couple of characters that act like their original counterpart from the original TV series. Spock stayed away from Christine Chapel in the original because he thought it was inappropriate. But this new Spock is all over Uhura. Kirk is promoted from "Cadet who is about to get expelled" to First Officer - completely bypassing Kirk ever serving on the Farragut. Karl Urban's got the McCoy-isms down pretty good. But Scotty is just a guy with an accent - even though Simon Pegg is pretty funny. So is Chekov - just an accent. And it's almost racist that they got a Chinese actor to play the part that a Japanese actor played on the TV show. Did I miss anybody?

They could have at least had Pine do a Shatner imitation.

I guess if it brings in the big bucks at the theater...

/rant

Any thoughts?
Haven't we been over this a thousand times? This Star trek is not for you. I rarely have seen anybody get it this wrong...

RAMA
__________________
LONG LIVE THE FIGHTERS!
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:35 AM   #23
eskyliz
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Why did they bother...

Well, keep in mind it is an alternate reality. I don't know. I guess people thought having the same old crew would make it more appealing even though they did change it a bit. Besides, Gene Roddenberry actually wanted there to someday be a movie or a show about them before they were... them. I honestly don't think they did a horrible job. The only thing wrong for me is that it's lost most of it's "Star Trek". It's kind of just a big action movie with the idea of Star Trek tossed in the background. But I'm not complaining too much because I'm just happy Star Trek is back at all. I mean who knows when it'll all be over. Obviously the legacy will always live on but it's great to have Star Trek happening now. Especially for me who never got to watch any of the series as they came out.
eskyliz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:35 AM   #24
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Angmar
Re: Why did they bother...

I have to say I was underwhelmed by Pine's version of "these are the voyages". There's a reason you have to go to the gag reel to hear it on the '09 film...
__________________
Just walk away, and there will be an end to the horror.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:44 AM   #25
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Why did they bother...

Set Harth wrote: View Post
I have to say I was underwhelmed by Pine's version of "these are the voyages". There's a reason you have to go to the gag reel to hear it on the '09 film...
I looked around during the speech, the larger audience I saw it with was in rapt attention...I think it was very successful, especially in te context it was given.
__________________
LONG LIVE THE FIGHTERS!
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:46 AM   #26
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why did they bother...

Set Harth wrote: View Post
I have to say I was underwhelmed by Pine's version of "these are the voyages". There's a reason you have to go to the gag reel to hear it on the '09 film...
It definitely isn't as good as Shatner or Stewart's versions.
__________________
"Just give me two seconds, alright, you mad bastard!" - Montgomery Scott, Star Trek Into Darkness
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:47 AM   #27
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

sj4iy wrote: View Post
Oh please, even TOS was far from artistic. It was a western set in space.
Since when is the "western" genre not a category of art?

Were there a lot of Russians and Asians and Blacks as featured ensemble characters in Bonanza?

Did Gunsmoke feature an interracial kiss?

Did the Rifleman offer consistent subversive allegories about U.S. race relations and foreign policy?

Is the only way to defend the new to smear the old?

Did you even read the bit about the Tu Quoque? I could grant (although I don't) that Old Trek was pure hackery and my claims would still stand.

sj4iy wrote: View Post
And every subsequent movie and series only wanted to milk it more.
Who only wanted to milk it more? The studio certainly wanted to make money and that was their primary aim, but TMP was rather cerebral in it's ambitions.

I think it's sad that the ONLY motive you can attribute to story tellers is the desire "milk it."

sj4iy wrote: View Post
Making this show was never altruistic. Roddenberry may have genuinely liked his work...but he didn't do it for free. Artists want to make a living from their work.
Did you even read my post? I've already noted that artists want to get paid. That writers want to put food on the table is not exclusive to a motive to express, critique, philosophize, jest, subvert, reframe, etc. Is it such a scandal for you to think that artists also have artistic motivations? Are you that jaded?

sj4iy wrote: View Post
Just because these movies fit our time period
What does this even mean? Sunshine, Gattaca, Children of Men, District 9, Moon, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - these are all films "of our time period." That Transformers is also of our time does not mean that the horizon of expectation for science fiction films reduces to the ambition of noisy actioners.

sj4iy wrote: View Post
doesn't make them inferior or only out to "sucker the newbies into liking it because they don't know any better".
They're not suckering the newbies; they are pandering to them. They are giving them Star Trek (im)precisely as they (vaguely) remember it.

sj4iy wrote: View Post
New fans are just as important as old fans,
Are they? In what sense? Not a lot of Glenn Miller fans these days, but would we be doing Glenn Miller's music any favors by converting into dubstep?

How far can you alter the original before it is no longer substantively what it was (Ship of Theseus)? How far can you push things before you lose the soul of the original?

If the only goal is to keep the brand name alive, then who cares? Suppose, for example, America became a country where there was no free speech, no voting for officials, no prosperity, and which oppressed the rest of the world a la Germany in the early 20th century. Would "America" still be something worth fighting for? Would it matter that we kept the name alive if we lost all the substance? Or is there something that matters more than profit, market share, and brand recognition?

sj4iy wrote: View Post
and making a movie that will have mass appeal doesn't diminish it or the people who enjoy it.
But this does not mean that mass-appeal is all we can aspire to.

Some of us feel like Pike in Trek '09. We would simply like to encourage nuTrek to aspire to be a little more.

Your predecessors commanded the franchise for four decades. They inspired people and promoted dialogue on sensitive issues. They dare you to do better.
YARN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 12:55 AM   #28
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Why did they bother...

Your predecessors commanded the franchise for four decades. They inspired people and promoted dialogue on sensitive issues. They dare you to do better.


The funniest thing about Modern Trek was that they were suppose to have had a free hand and ended up being more tepid on social issues than TOS.

Star Trek Into Darkness had the balls to take unpopular positions on U.S. actions and all people can do is scream it isn't enough.

I'm fairly convinced at this point that to a certain group of fans there is simply nothing Abrams can do right, short of leaving the franchise.
__________________
"Just give me two seconds, alright, you mad bastard!" - Montgomery Scott, Star Trek Into Darkness
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 01:16 AM   #29
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
Re: Why did they bother...

BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm fairly convinced at this point that to a certain group of fans there is simply nothing Abrams can do right, short of leaving the franchise.
And even then you can be sure the same people will be making posts whining about his cruel betrayal because he was never a true fan.
__________________

SalvorHardin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 01:17 AM   #30
YARN
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Why did they bother...

BillJ wrote: View Post
Star Trek Into Darkness had the balls to take unpopular positions on U.S. actions and all people can do is scream it isn't enough.
Unpopular position?

Everyone supports the troops; fewer and fewer people support the wars. Now that the U.S. has been at war for 12 years and we know that there were no WMDs, it's pretty easy to look back with hindsight and say that preemptive war is not such a good idea. The message would have been courageous in 2002 when everyone in America was spoiling for the fight, not in 2013 when we've already had a belly full.

It doesn't take "balls" to take the stand eleven years too late.

The position taken on U.S. foreign policy in the film is muddled. Admiral Marcus is a renegade military man, so this does not really criticize legitimate foreign policy of the United States. That admirals should not take it upon themselves to start their own wars is a no-brainer even in a post 9-11 world. John Harrison is a terrorist which only plays into the "War on Terror" angle.

Plenty of other films have cashed in on 9-11 iconography (e.g., Cloverfield, War of the Worlds), so this isn't new ground either.

BillJ wrote: View Post
I'm fairly convinced at this point that to a certain group of fans there is simply nothing Abrams can do right, short of leaving the franchise.
And I am fairly convinced that to a certain group there is no criticism of the new films, no matter how patiently reasoned it may be, which will be tolerated.
YARN 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 09:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.