RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,386
Posts: 5,358,001
Members: 24,626
Currently online: 680
Newest member: suryaprabu02

TrekToday headlines

The Gene Roddenberry Project Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Moore: No Deep Space Nine Regrets
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Pegg Star Wars Rumor
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28


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 > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 23 2013, 05:09 PM   #31
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Belz... wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
I think what is meant is that he/she prefers Trek that offers something to think about and maybe doesn't have to spell everything out.
Well in that respect Into Darkness did something right, I think, because there's a lot of non-spoken plot points that we keep debating because they were either cut from the movie or left out because it was deemed it wasn't necessary to do exposition on them.
No, I think they're referring to something more than that. I think they mean something with a message or asks questions.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:11 PM   #32
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
No, I think they're referring to something more than that. I think they mean something with a message or asks questions.
Bah. I hate it when Star Trek does that. If I want social commentaries I'll watch the Daily Show. I watch fiction to be entertained. YMMV.
__________________
And that's my opinion.

The Onmyouza Theatre: an unofficial international fanclub dedicated to the Japanese heavy metal band Onmyo-Za.
Belz... is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:12 PM   #33
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Belz... wrote: View Post
RXTT wrote: View Post
What I want from Star Trek is to be forced to THINK. I can get entertainment from the Hangover franchise, or Star Wars
When's the last time Star Trek forced you to THINK ?

Really ? Not much of that in TOS or the previous movies. And the other series were mostly entertainment. Did you mean that you want smart or well-made science-fiction ? Then sure.

But force you to think ? I don't remember Star Trek doing that for me.
Do we always have to keep going down the same rhetorical path? We're going to start deconstructing classic Trek yet again to bring it down to JJ Trek's level?

Trek may not be THE most cerebral entertainment, but it's hard to argue that JJ Trek has any cerebral qualities whatsoever.
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook
mos6507 is offline  
Old May 23 2013, 05:13 PM   #34
bbailey861
Admiral
 
bbailey861's Avatar
 
Location: Kingston, ON
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Saved...that's a really big word, but he undoubtedly brought Star Trek back to the forefront to where a younger audience is beginning to take notice again. And I, as part of the older audience, have been really happy with what he's done - with both stories.
bbailey861 is offline  
Old May 23 2013, 05:14 PM   #35
mos6507
Captain
 
mos6507's Avatar
 
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Obviously Star Trek Into Darkness did something right as it has some conservative bloggers in an uproar over its message.
Considering how easy it is for conservatives to feel outrage, that's not saying much.
__________________
Fem Trekz on Facebook
mos6507 is offline  
Old May 23 2013, 05:15 PM   #36
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Belz... wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
No, I think they're referring to something more than that. I think they mean something with a message or asks questions.
Bah. I hate it when Star Trek does that. If I want social commentaries I'll watch the Daily Show. I watch fiction to be entertained. YMMV.
Entertainment and social commentary are not mutually exclusive. You can have both and enjoy it. It can be done in drama/adventure as easily as comedy.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:15 PM   #37
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

mos6507 wrote: View Post

Do we always have to keep going down the same rhetorical path? We're going to start deconstructing classic Trek yet again to bring it down to JJ Trek's level?
How is acknowledging what Trek has always been "bringing it down"? Honestly, if people didn't keep trying to compare Abrams movies to the rest of the franchise (with the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses on), the comparisons would likely stop.
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:18 PM   #38
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

BillJ wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post

Do we always have to keep going down the same rhetorical path? We're going to start deconstructing classic Trek yet again to bring it down to JJ Trek's level?
How is acknowledging what Trek has always been "bringing it down"? Honestly, if people didn't keep trying to compare Abrams movies to the rest of the franchise (with the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses on), the comparisons would likely stop.
In fairness when you label something with a familiar name then comparisons are inevitable.

Every time there's a new version of 007 or Superman (or whatever) it's always compared with previous versions.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:22 PM   #39
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post

Do we always have to keep going down the same rhetorical path? We're going to start deconstructing classic Trek yet again to bring it down to JJ Trek's level?
How is acknowledging what Trek has always been "bringing it down"? Honestly, if people didn't keep trying to compare Abrams movies to the rest of the franchise (with the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses on), the comparisons would likely stop.
In fairness when you label something with a familiar name then comparisons are inevitable.

Every time there's a new version of 007 or Superman (or whatever) it's always compared with previous versions.
Of course. But before you make those comparisons, take off the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses. I don't know how many times I've watched someone scream about how something Abrams did "wasn't Star Trek", yet had been done multiple times before in other Trek series including TOS.
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:24 PM   #40
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

In the sense that now Trek has a future in the movies, whereas before Abrams it was dead, the answer is yes.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline  
Old May 23 2013, 05:26 PM   #41
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

How is acknowledging what Trek has always been "bringing it down"? Honestly, if people didn't keep trying to compare Abrams movies to the rest of the franchise (with the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses on), the comparisons would likely stop.
In fairness when you label something with a familiar name then comparisons are inevitable.

Every time there's a new version of 007 or Superman (or whatever) it's always compared with previous versions.
Of course. But before you make those comparisons, take off the rose-tinted nostalgia glasses. I don't know how many times I've watched someone scream about how something Abrams did "wasn't Star Trek", yet had been done multiple times before in other Trek series including TOS.
When it comes to entertainment today the "rose tinted glasses" argument doesn't have the weight it once had for the simple reason is that today you can see the earlier versions right away in the here-and-now right alongside the new and not have to rely solely on memory.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:27 PM   #42
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

mos6507 wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post
RXTT wrote: View Post
What I want from Star Trek is to be forced to THINK. I can get entertainment from the Hangover franchise, or Star Wars
When's the last time Star Trek forced you to THINK ?

Really ? Not much of that in TOS or the previous movies. And the other series were mostly entertainment. Did you mean that you want smart or well-made science-fiction ? Then sure.

But force you to think ? I don't remember Star Trek doing that for me.
Do we always have to keep going down the same rhetorical path? We're going to start deconstructing classic Trek yet again to bring it down to JJ Trek's level?

Trek may not be THE most cerebral entertainment, but it's hard to argue that JJ Trek has any cerebral qualities whatsoever.
That's because people keep making these sweeping statements that invariably compare the new movies to some pure, platonic ideal of STAR TREK that never really existed.

"Star Trek was about real science!"

"Star Trek was non-violent!"

"Star Trek never catered to general audiences!"

"Star Trek never stooped to sex and titillation!"

Such grandiose overstatements invariably cry out for a reality check . . . .
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:30 PM   #43
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

One of the strengths of Star Trek was that it could be many things and work on multiple levels simultaneously and not rely on being solely one thing. The best stories often worked on multiple levels.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is online now  
Old May 23 2013, 05:33 PM   #44
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
In the sense that now Trek has a future in the movies, whereas before Abrams it was dead, the answer is yes.
And really, that's the only answer. That was the sole reason Paramount went after and hired Abrams. Paramount couldn't care less about any other aspect of the franchise (TV, merchandising, etc.,) because they're not involved in that.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline  
Old May 23 2013, 05:34 PM   #45
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Did Abrams really save the franchise?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
One of the strengths of Star Trek was that it could be many things and work on multiple levels simultaneously and not rely on being solely one thing. The best stories often worked on multiple levels.
And I happen to think that Star Trek Into Darkness works on those same levels. It is the most Trek-like thing I've watched since Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.
__________________
"I had no idea you were so... formidable. " - Anan 7 to James T. Kirk, A Taste of Armageddon
BillJ is online now  
Closed Thread

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 09:02 PM.

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