Details of 9 Minute Preview Revealed *SPOILERS*

[BillJ]

The Mirrorball Man wrote:

---

I'd say that the general expectation is that Star Trek fans should be enthusiastic about Star Trek from time to time.

I'm always enthusiastic about Star Trek, I'll be at the opening show of Star Trek Into Darkness. Just because I'm enthusiastic doesn't mean I should be blind to the flaws in the material I'm watching.

For almost forty years, the lax security on Jim Kirk's Enterprise has driven me crazy.

[teacake]

BillJ wrote:

---

For almost forty years, the lax security on Jim Kirk's Enterprise has driven me crazy.

They'll stick that on your gravestone if you're not careful.

THE STRESS.. it killed Bill.

[Sky]

The Mirrorball Man wrote:

---

I'd say that the general expectation is that Star Trek fans should be enthusiastic about Star Trek from time to time.

*Shrug*. I was way enthusiastic about XI. Travelled a few hundred km to the European premiere and all that. It just wasn't very good. I don't see why that should offend anyone.

[Devon]

BillJ wrote:

---

What utter horse shit.

He said "some of the fans." Are you implying that EVERY fan has been absolutely open minded about the new take on the films?

It seems those that loved the film take offense at every person who didn't have a gooey orgasm while sitting watching the film and every time they thought about it afterward.

Not true. However we have ENJOYED such lines as "Ahur Jar Jar Abrahams is raping Gene Goddenberry's vision" and "TRUE Trek fans would not accept such tripe" and "The ONLY people who like this film are short-attention spanned, MTV Generation loving teenagers who have no brain." This was said by some people, even on this forum (or any) even before the first frame of the film was seen. Mostly out of bitterness that there would be no more TNG films. And please, don't deny this. I'm not saying that you have said it, but don't act as though there is absolutely no reason that from time to time someone might get a little jumpy. K?

[mos6507]

DarthTom wrote:

---

Personally, I'll take Abrams retool of Star Trek any day over that abortion of film Star Trek Nemesis where the antagonist in the film was about as foreboding as a french runway model.

Oh and I'll also take Abrams redux of Trek over ST Insurrection as well.

Just because someone doesn't like JJ Trek doesn't mean they embrace everything that was done in the prime continuity. As far as I'm concerned, First Contact was the last good Trek film and I was only really lukewarm about TNG in general and not a big fan of the other shows. I mean, there's a reason the franchise died, but it doesn't mean that anyone else who steps forward to pick up the pieces should be celebrated. Trek became popular again by appealing to the lowest common denominator and I don't like that.

[mos6507]

The Mirrorball Man wrote:

---

I'd say that the general expectation is that Star Trek fans should be enthusiastic about Star Trek from time to time.

The Trek franchise has (historically) had a perpetual anxiety complex about being shut down, starting with the cancellation notice back in the 1960s, and it seemed like every production faced some sort of uphill battle. And I think this led to Trek fans, while griping privately within their cliques, sending the wrong signals to the stewards of the franchise by tuning in and buying tickets to anything and everything with the Trek banner on it.

The best thing a Trek fan can do to insure quality Trek is to be willing to pick it apart for flaws. Gene and most of the others who defined Trek are dead. Trek will now go in the direction that the public wants. And JJ Trek indicates that people want it to go in a Transformers-2-style popcorn direction, which is not historically how Trek fans saw the property. So you are going to have a block of fans revolt and I say, more power to them.

But to cry foul over it is just to try to stifle free expression. I've seen this on any forum. The argument ultimately shifts to whether people have a right not to like something or whether this or that venue is an appropriate one in order to criticize. Now, granted, this is a JJ Trek thread, so maybe it breaks netiquette to bash JJ Trek here, since you're going to have a concentration of JJ Trek fans, but in general, certainly Trek fans have a right to dislike any piece of the 40+ year franchise.

[BillJ]

teacake wrote:

---

They'll stick that on your gravestone if you're not careful.

THE STRESS.. it killed Bill.

You're absolutely right. Been wound way too tight for years. But I guess if something's gotta kill me, might as well be stress.

[Set Harth]

teacake wrote:

---

They'll stick that on your gravestone if you're not careful.

THE STRESS.. it killed Bill.

I thought that was the Five Point Palm Exploding Heart technique.

[M'Sharak]

Devon wrote:

---

He said "some of the fans." Are you implying that EVERY fan has been absolutely open minded about the new take on the films?

Not true. However we have ENJOYED such lines as "Ahur Jar Jar Abrahams is raping Gene Goddenberry's vision" and "TRUE Trek fans would not accept such tripe" and "The ONLY people who like this film are short-attention spanned, MTV Generation loving teenagers who have no brain." This was said by some people, even on this forum (or any) even before the first frame of the film was seen. Mostly out of bitterness that there would be no more TNG films. And please, don't deny this. I'm not saying that you have said it, but don't act as though there is absolutely no reason that from time to time someone might get a little jumpy. K?

mos6507 wrote:

---

...

And JJ Trek indicates that people want it to go in a Transformers-2-style popcorn direction, which is not historically how Trek fans saw the property. So you are going to have a block of fans revolt and I say, more power to them.

But to cry foul over it is just to try to stifle free expression. I've seen this on any forum. The argument ultimately shifts to whether people have a right not to like something or whether this or that venue is an appropriate one in order to criticize. Now, granted, this is a JJ Trek thread, so maybe it breaks netiquette to bash JJ Trek here, since you're going to have a concentration of JJ Trek fans, but in general, certainly Trek fans have a right to dislike any piece of the 40+ year franchise.

Anyone is entitled to express an opinion about the last movie, the one coming up, or about JJ-Trek generally.

As I said earlier in this thread, though, I'd prefer that we limited discussion to subjects pertinent to the movies, to articles and media about the movies, and to the ideas and opinions about those movies which have been expressed by those participating in these discussions. I'd very much prefer that we stay away from criticisms of any particular fan group, whether pro- or anti- Abrams Trek; those very often tend not to go in productive directions, and if someone at any point raises such a criticism of a particular fan group, I'd suggest the best thing one could do would be to let it pass without a response. The ideal discussion of that sort is the one which never gets started.

BillJ, you should have noted that I'd already addressed Matt S's poke at "some fans" and instead left it be without further response.

Devon, same message concerning BillJ's response - that didn't need stirring up again and it would have been better simply let go.

mos6507, I'd really appreciate it if you didn't keep prodding nuTrek fans, trying to provoke a reaction; we get that it's not your favorite, but it's still possible to have some sort of discussion about the movie without resorting to cheap and obvious ploys such as:

mos6507 wrote:

---

...

In other words--a sellout.

or

mos6507 wrote:

---

...

If you don't like fans with strong opinions, you've picked the wrong place to hang out. Deal with it.

or

mos6507 wrote:

---

...
Trek became popular again by appealing to the lowest common denominator and I don't like that.

Those only make you look like you're here to start something. It's not a problem if you disagree, but I'd much rather you came to discuss than disparage, and and I'd much rather you came to talk about reasons you liked or disliked specific aspects than to take broad swipes at groups of fans for not holding opinions identical to yours. If you must set a chip on your shoulder or take cheap shots at other fans, please do it elsewhere, because I don't wish to have to put up with it here.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't "take offense..." I'm not even sure what that means.

It's true that if I like a bit of entertainment and you don't I have really no interest whatever in why you don't like it.

[DalekJim]

This 9 minute preview sounds like it resembles the type of Star Trek I know and love more than anything in the last movie did. Exciting.

[donners22]

mos6507 wrote:

---

Just because someone doesn't like JJ Trek doesn't mean they embrace everything that was done in the prime continuity. As far as I'm concerned, First Contact was the last good Trek film and I was only really lukewarm about TNG in general and not a big fan of the other shows. I mean, there's a reason the franchise died, but it doesn't mean that anyone else who steps forward to pick up the pieces should be celebrated. Trek became popular again by appealing to the lowest common denominator and I don't like that.

Well, it didn't really make Trek as a whole popular again, did it? A film with the name Star Trek made lots of money, but as far as I know, the other series, movies, novels etc did not see a significant surge in popularity as a result.


Incidentally, I'd take Insurrection or Nemesis over XI any day. IDIC.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

Actually, I've read here a few times that was a surge across sales for all Trek DVD sets when the last film was released.

So yes, nuTrek did boost popularity of the old