RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,769
Posts: 5,216,815
Members: 24,218
Currently online: 751
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 > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 27 2013, 01:55 PM   #16
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
Lulz. Have you ever seen Star Trek?
If CrazyMatt comes under fire for asking a rethorical question (an invitation to weigh in, nothing more or less), then yours is most definitely not that much better.

Of course, you may feel free to educate me where in TOS I overlooked endless action, circus stunts (like driving cars over cliffs etc.), vengeance and one goofy moment that is worse than a character being flushed down a toxic fuel pipe and coming out of it unharmed. Well, that wasn't the only thing being flushed down in this flick, metaphorically speaking.

Just because you stick the label of a franchise on a product doesn't mean the content is automatically the same.

And I'd really like to know what made the new BSG "so much better than the original". Characters that do not seem to think and reflect what may be the consequences of their actions?

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:00 PM   #17
TOSalltheway
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

Too many changes.
I was looking forward t seeing the original sets and props done "big screen". The news sets look like every other bland overly bright sci-fi set. The new phasers look like toys.

Casting is great, but Abrams does not understand Trek.

And the Enterprise as a submarine ? C'mon......

BSG proved that a remake can be better than the original. Trek movies will hopefully generate more fans for the original.
TOSalltheway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:04 PM   #18
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

TOSalltheway wrote: View Post
And the Enterprise as a submarine ? C'mon......
Makes absolutely no sense, but it is one of the "coolest" things I've ever seen in Star Trek.

It was a unique way to introduce a starship.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:29 PM   #19
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

CrazyMatt wrote: View Post
in fact, I ignore the new movies period
That statement is false.

Anyone who starts a thread about them isn't ignoring them.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:30 PM   #20
stj
Rear Admiral
 
stj's Avatar
 
Location: the real world
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Nope. Bring on the new versions. And, with all due respect to Shatner, no actor is irreplaceable.
The people who reject the very idea of a remake are outnumbered by the people who believe the remakes cannot be criticized.

As I've mentioned before, I've lived through umpteen James Bonds, Supermans, Batmans, Draculas, and Sherlock Holmes in my lifetime. What's one more Kirk or Spock?
George Lazenby, Brandon Routh, George Clooney, Duncan Regehr and Bill Pullman. You are deceiving yourself if you really think that this is about the mere existence of a remake.

Heck, if we can have multiple portrayals of Hamlet, for Pete's sake, I think Kirk should be open to new interpretations as well.
But we're allowed to criticize a new Hamlet!

And the new Battlestar Galactica was soooo much better than the original, making it practically the poster child for revamping old series and characters. (Along, perhaps, with Hammer Films, who revitalized Dracula And Frankenstein back in the sixties.)
I barely remember any Hammer Dracula and Frankenstein films now that you mention it. But I remember James Whale and Tod Browing movies. I think that says something, if not what you thought.

And it's long past time to put aside 9/11 politics and admit the the new BattleStar Galactica was crap.
__________________
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:39 PM   #21
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
...vengeance...
The Conscience of the King
Obsession

Friday's Child wrote:
KIRK: There's just one thing I want.
SPOCK: The Klingon?
KIRK: One of us must get him.
SPOCK: Revenge, Captain?
KIRK: Why not?

stj wrote: View Post

But we're allowed to criticize a new Hamlet!
The only criticisms of the new movies that bother me are the ones that revolve around things Star Trek has always done.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:57 PM   #22
Myko
Commander
 
Myko's Avatar
 
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

BillJ wrote: View Post
The only criticisms of the new movies that bother me are the ones that revolve around things Star Trek has always done.
Why? If there are things Star Trek always have done bad, why do they get off the hook now?
__________________
Myko
Myko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 02:59 PM   #23
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

Myko wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
The only criticisms of the new movies that bother me are the ones that revolve around things Star Trek has always done.
Why? If there are things Star Trek always have done bad, why do they get off the hook now?
Because they are things that people usually don't criticize the other series for. Plot holes, bad science, inconsistent warp speeds.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 03:11 PM   #24
Admiral Buzzkill
The Legend
 
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

CrazyMatt wrote: View Post
Am I the only one who feels this way? Am I just too closed minded?
No and yes.

Pine and Quinto are just as much Kirk and Spock as the old guys were, as far as I'm concerned. There's really no one in the current cast who's letting down the team, and they're all more skillful as actors than the TV crew - but then, probably all of them brought more movie experience to the films than the old actors had; even Shatner's resume in that department was limited to supporting roles in a few films.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 03:13 PM   #25
Myko
Commander
 
Myko's Avatar
 
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Because they are things that people usually don't criticize the other series for. Plot holes, bad science, inconsistent warp speeds.
I disagree, people complain about this constantly, in all incarnations.
__________________
Myko
Myko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 03:17 PM   #26
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

Myko wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Because they are things that people usually don't criticize the other series for. Plot holes, bad science, inconsistent warp speeds.
I disagree, people complain about this constantly, in all incarnations.
All you have to do is take a gander in the Trek XI+ forum to see how quickly people compare Abrams Trek to the old series/movies on those parameters.

Older Trek can do no wrong when compared to Abrams version.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 03:43 PM   #27
Robert D. Robot
Captain
 
Location: Pre-Warp Civilization of New England
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
And I'd really like to know what made the new BSG "so much better than the original". Characters that do not seem to think and reflect what may be the consequences of their actions?

Bob
"Saga of a Star World, Part 3":
Immediately following the horrific destruction of the Twelve Colonies, the crew of the Galactica and other survivors of the massacres relax and party down on a Casino Planet.

----

I enjoyed the Original Series when I was an adolescent and I still enjoy it to some degree for nostalgic reasons. The new series is admittedly darker, but the characters DID just survive a holocaust, after all. The special effects are great and the acting is better than in the original series, while the original series had more live-action-cartoonish feel to it. As an adult, I prefer and appreciate the new series.
Robert D. Robot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 04:12 PM   #28
1001001
Putting the F-U Back in FUN!
 
1001001's Avatar
 
Location: People's Gaypublic of Drugafornia
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

We rewatched ST09 last night, in anticipation of seeing Into Darkness this afternoon.

So no, I do not ignore new Trek.

And please, do NOT post spoilers for the movie in here!



Thanks.

__________________
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'.” - Isaac Asimov
1001001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 04:18 PM   #29
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

^Uhura gives birth to the Salt Vampire! Kirk and Spock marry!
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27 2013, 05:32 PM   #30
T'Bonz
Romulan Curmudgeon
 
T'Bonz's Avatar
 
Location: Across the Neutral Zone
Re: Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

This is a borderline thread anyhow, as discussion of the new movie, even by old school fans, is better suited for the Star Trek XI+ forum, not the TOS forum.
__________________
Live long and suffer! - Ancient Romulan greeting.

Romulans aren't paranoid. We're merely proactively cautious.
T'Bonz 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 08:09 AM.

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