RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,774
Posts: 5,216,904
Members: 24,218
Currently online: 655
Newest member: momogila

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 > Misc. Star Trek > Future of Trek

Future of Trek Discussion of future Trek projects.

View Poll Results: Do fans want the prime timeline back?
I'm a fan and I want the Prime timeline back. 160 55.36%
I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back. 52 17.99%
I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back. 32 11.07%
I don't care, just give me Trek! 39 13.49%
I don't know. 6 2.08%
Voters: 289. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 24 2013, 10:46 PM   #466
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker wrote: View Post
The TV series changes a few things - adds characters and other SF elements. However, the essential core of the series is similar to the movie and true to the spirit of the original novel, so I would count that as a "reimagining" that works. I still prefer the original, mind you. But I love the movie and don't hate the TV series.
Um... okay. Then you don't have any inherent problem with reboots? I guess we agree then. If that's the case, how does that square up with your previous point (unless I was reading it wrong) that if a Star Trek writer wants to use Kirk and Spock, then he should just create his own characters and his own universe -- a point I'm still not grasping.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24 2013, 10:56 PM   #467
Timewalker
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.

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
The TV series changes a few things - adds characters and other SF elements. However, the essential core of the series is similar to the movie and true to the spirit of the original novel, so I would count that as a "reimagining" that works. I still prefer the original, mind you. But I love the movie and don't hate the TV series.
Um... okay. Then you don't have any inherent problem with reboots? I guess we agree then. If that's the case, how does that square up with your previous point (unless I was reading it wrong) that if a Star Trek writer wants to use Kirk and Spock, then he should just create his own characters and his own universe -- a point I'm still not grasping.
The difference is that Logan's Run did an excellent job with their characters.

The Abrams movie actors did the opposite.
__________________
"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
Old October 24 2013, 11:25 PM   #468
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

GoRe Star wrote: View Post
Between three seasons of TOS, two of TAS, six movies and two reboot movies and counting, Kirk and company have gotten as much screen time as any of the other series that lasted a full seven seasons.
Let's do the math, shall we ?

TOS, counting episodes and movies: 84.4 hours. Add TAS to that, if you want.

TNG, same count: 142.1 hours

ENT, Idem: 70.4 hours

So TOS has more hours than Enterprise, and that's it.

Dammit, BillJ beat me to it. By two days !

BillJ wrote: View Post
Star Trek Into Darkness is the most fun I've had with Trek since seeing The Undiscovered Country in theaters in 1991.
Into Darkness is the most fun I've had with Trek since the last movie.

I'm sure plenty of people roll their eyes because I keep going on about how Trek should be fun. But if I'm not having a good time, what's the point of watching?
Exactly.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24 2013, 11:52 PM   #469
bbjeg
Rear Admiral
 
bbjeg's Avatar
 
Location: ˙ɐlnqǝu sıɥʇ uı ʞɔnʇS
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Give TOS the credit it deserves, it continued in the later series. Spock, Scotty, and Bones are alive and well in Next Gen, Voyager touched on Captain Sulu, DS9 sported that TOS time traveling episode and other TOS based episodes and characters like Kor, and Enterprise filled in the pieces before and after TOS.
__________________
-Star Trek Rock Opera-
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 01:01 AM   #470
David.Blue
Lieutenant Commander
 
David.Blue's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Enterprise is Great wrote: View Post
Teenage Samurai Vampires sounds awesome!
Actually, that kinda does!
__________________
David.Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 01:24 AM   #471
BigJake
Commodore
 
BigJake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker wrote: View Post
The difference is that Logan's Run did an excellent job with their characters.

The Abrams movie actors did the opposite.
I dunno, I wouldn't harsh on the actors: they very clearly dig their characters and want to do a good job and sell the heck of what they're working with. I'd actually love to see Pine's Kirk in something less pulpy; inhabiting the role of Kirk without doing a Shatner impression but still making the character recognizable is no mean feat, and he largely pulls it off. For me it's more a question how the characters are written.
__________________
“Let them eat static.”

(Recruiting for a Where No Man Has Gone Before play-by-post RP. Check it out!)
BigJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 01:27 AM   #472
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker, I guess here's why I'm confused. This--
Timewalker wrote: View Post
The difference is that Logan's Run did an excellent job with their characters.
--makes it sound like you'd have no problem with a reboot if done right. But this--
Timewalker wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
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?
--makes it sound like no reboot would be acceptable to you.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 03:23 AM   #473
Timewalker
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.

BigJake wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
The difference is that Logan's Run did an excellent job with their characters.

The Abrams movie actors did the opposite.
I dunno, I wouldn't harsh on the actors: they very clearly dig their characters and want to do a good job and sell the heck of what they're working with. I'd actually love to see Pine's Kirk in something less pulpy; inhabiting the role of Kirk without doing a Shatner impression but still making the character recognizable is no mean feat, and he largely pulls it off. For me it's more a question how the characters are written.
Some actors can rise above badly-written material. Some can't.

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Timewalker, I guess here's why I'm confused. This--
Timewalker wrote: View Post
The difference is that Logan's Run did an excellent job with their characters.
--makes it sound like you'd have no problem with a reboot if done right. But this--
Timewalker wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
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?
--makes it sound like no reboot would be acceptable to you.
You seem to be trying to pin me down into 100% one or the other.

I don't mind a good reboot. The Logan's Run TV series was close enough to the book and movie and the actors were good enough as Logan and Jessica to make it work.

Or take Shakespeare. Some people thought Kenneth Branagh was godawful arrogant to even dream of doing Henry V, considering that Laurence Olivier had already done it. But Branagh did it right. It's an excellent period movie, and so enjoyable that even my grandmother loved it - and she had never seen any Shakespeare before in her life.

Or consider First Knight (starring Sean Connery, Julia Ormond, and Richard Gere). This is a movie about King Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot... and there's not a hint of Merlin, Mordred, Morgan, or any magic whatsoever. The knights are there, the round table is indeed round, everyone's concerned with honor and chivalry... but there's no supernatural stuff. It's quite refreshing to me, although I'm sure there are people who hate it for the exact reasons I love it.

Now take Abrams' version of Star Trek. It doesn't work for me. It's some combination of the writing, the acting, the actors themselves, the overabundance of telling instead of showing, along with reliance on special effects and explosions to move the story forward... A good story is more than having people recite lines and hit the plot points. For me this stuff just doesn't add up to a good story. It certainly doesn't add up to what I'd expect of something calling itself Star Trek.
__________________
"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
Old October 25 2013, 03:24 AM   #474
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker wrote:
As for Robin Hood... it's like Shakespeare. I prefer it to be as authentic as possible - as in period settings, costumes, speech, etc. I will admit to liking a few exceptions; I loved the Robin of Sherwood TV show and the musical West Side Story is a terrific adaptation of Romeo and Juliet.
IIRC, Shakespeare's historical plays were originally performed in contemporary clothes. So no togas in the 1599 production.

Of course the familiar legend of Robin Hood is something that was built over time. Elements like Friar Tuck and Maid Marian being added after the first stories appeared. Even the time period varies in some tellings. (Sorta like TOS ) King Arthur has similar "problems".
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 04:24 AM   #475
BigJake
Commodore
 
BigJake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Some actors can rise above badly-written material. Some can't.
Meh. I don't think even Meryl Streep could have made Uhura's "time-for-me-to-be-the-bitchy-girlfriend-on-the-commando-mission" scene sing any better than Zoe Saldana did, personally. If the writing is in a register or genre that I can't really stand, it can be a pretty steep order to make it entertaining.

A lot also boils down to expectations. If I'm expecting pure-pulp camp, I can forgive a lot -- not everything, but a lot -- that would irritate me in a different genre. James Earl Jones' Thulsa Doom from Conan would be inexcusably corny horseshit in a historical drama, but in pulp he can work... precisely because I've been set up to expect it. Likewise if a kung fu movie has a barely serviceable plot, who cares? I'm there for the kung fu. If some kind of plot happens that isn't visibly a retread of Enter the Dragon, it just gets added points.

So I can agree with this:

It certainly doesn't add up to what I'd expect of something calling itself Star Trek.
... because what partially harshes my buzz on JJTrek is precisely that it's pretty much pure-pulp science fantasy. The JJTrek films, had they been sold as Star Wars films, would actually have really impressed me. Or not, but at least would not have hit any glaring false notes. Sure they would still have had flubber-physics and absurdly compressed relationships and flimsy plots... but with Star Wars that was already part of the deal. It's pure pulp, for all the Joseph Campbell horseshit they later tried to wrap it in; it was always in the same register as Doc Smith's Lensmen.

Whereas with Trek, while we've seen Trek be everything from outright goofy to comedic to compelling and dramatic to action-oriented to one-bad-attempt-at-imitating-Kubrick... we've never seen it just being pure pulp. Some people can make the leap to just straight enjoying it as such -- and most especially general audiences can, which is what has always made SW a license to print money no matter how shitty it got (and no wonder the brand's owners wanted their slice of all that sweet, sweet money). Others, not so much.
__________________
“Let them eat static.”

(Recruiting for a Where No Man Has Gone Before play-by-post RP. Check it out!)
BigJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 04:38 AM   #476
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Trek's always been a pulpy. Even at its most "cerebral" ( The Cage ) it oozes pulp.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 04:41 AM   #477
BigJake
Commodore
 
BigJake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Geoff Peterson wrote: View Post
Trek's always been a pulpy. Even at its most "cerebral" ( The Cage ) it oozes pulp.
Absolutely true dat. Pulp has just never been its whole DNA before.

(I wonder... does "The Cage" really qualify as Trek at its most "cerebral"? To what extent is "cerebral" desirable, and can it also be fun?)
__________________
“Let them eat static.”

(Recruiting for a Where No Man Has Gone Before play-by-post RP. Check it out!)

Last edited by BigJake; October 25 2013 at 05:01 AM.
BigJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 05:02 AM   #478
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

It's probably 75% pulp. Roddenberry's idea of what constitutes SF seems to come more from the pulps than the more "sophisticated" branches of the genre.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 05:13 AM   #479
BigJake
Commodore
 
BigJake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Geoff Peterson wrote: View Post
It's probably 75% pulp. Roddenberry's idea of what constitutes SF seems to come more from the pulps than the more "sophisticated" branches of the genre.
Could be. A few of Roddenberry's ideas were great, many were goofy, many were truly awful, I'd question how many of them were that indebted to pulp.

Or at least to strictly sci-fi pulp. Mixtures of different grades and types of pulp are also definitely in there; he was open about wanting to basically do Gunsmoke and/or Naked City and/or Wagon Train in an SF setting, all of which arguably had their own particular admixtures of different brands of pulp. Indeed even when he was doing call-outs to the "classics" or to Shakespeare... when you really think about it, Shakespeare was the pulp of his day, it was only the craftsmanship of his poetry that ultimately elevated him above his peers. So you could maybe say that Trek was 75% mongrel pulp.
__________________
“Let them eat static.”

(Recruiting for a Where No Man Has Gone Before play-by-post RP. Check it out!)
BigJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25 2013, 06:44 AM   #480
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

I always thought The Cage gets called "cerebral" because the aliens heads were so big.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
prime timeline, prime trek

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 01:14 PM.

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