RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,957
Posts: 5,480,181
Members: 25,057
Currently online: 469
Newest member: Ghost_of_Bubba

TrekToday headlines

USS Enterprise Press-Out And Build Manual
By: T'Bonz on Nov 28

New QMx USS Reliant Model
By: T'Bonz on Nov 28

Star Trek Thirty-Five Years On 35MM: A Retrospective
By: T'Bonz on Nov 28

Trek Shirt And Hoodie
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

A Klingon Christmas Carol’s Last Season
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

Attack Wing Wave 10 Expansion Pack
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25


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. 211 56.87%
I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back. 61 16.44%
I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back. 39 10.51%
I don't care, just give me Trek! 53 14.29%
I don't know. 7 1.89%
Voters: 371. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 29 2014, 09:21 PM   #1261
wulfio
Captain
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BillJ wrote: View Post
wulfio wrote: View Post
People are not dumb. People have taste. The era doesn't demand that movies are mindless popcorn flicks. That's just something film hipsters say.
Personally, I don't think the Abrams films are mindless popcorn flicks. But that's neither here nor there.

I think you're transposing what you want from a movie onto general audiences. It's been proven that, sometimes, people go to movies to just watch things blow-up and have a good time. You seem to completely disregard the escapism part of the movie going experience. For most people, Star Trek isn't a way of life, it is a way to escape the real world for a few hours.
Actually, I'm not transposing anything. If you read the discussion, you would understand that people are saying a cerebral trek flick could never, and would never be successful in this era. And that the contemporary audience doesn't have the ability to appreciate a cerebral trek flick in the 2010's. Basically that the trek films are as they are, because they could not be anything else.

And then you would also understand that my argument is if it's done well, you can absolutely make a cerebral, slower paced film, and it be successful.

This discussion has absolutely nothing to do with star trek tng or nutrek. It's about the conceptual ideas of what a film is allowed to be in this era vs. era's past, and how mediums affect the finished product.
wulfio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:24 PM   #1262
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
wulfio wrote: View Post
I think you guys are giving directors and the audience, far too little credit.

If you give each give berman and abrams 200 mill, give them the script to STID, and strict guidelines scene by scene, those will be 2 entirely different movies.
But who's going to do that (give them the 200 mil) now?
Nobody. You're saying they're different because it's 2010. I'm saying they're different because it's the artistic direction. and then you argued with me...

Try reading the rest of my post because it deals with stylistic decisions as well.
Nobody, exactly. We agree on that.

Berman got hired to produce and story four Trek films back in the day. He won't have that opportunity again, because people have moved on from the sort of entertainment he can make. Which means that anybody who today made the same artistic choices he would, would yield similar results of non-success.

Where we might have agreement is that more than one style might work in each era. But I never said that only one style could work at each given time. I never said it was necessary for the films in the present era to be the very nuTrek films we've gotten (successful though they are). Never said that. Other films made today might have been reasonably successful, too. All I said is that change is inevitable, and that what worked decades ago won't work today.

wulfio wrote: View Post
If you read the discussion, you would understand that people are saying a cerebral trek flick could never, and would never be successful in this era. And that the contemporary audience doesn't have the ability to appreciate a cerebral trek flick in the 2010's. Basically that the trek films are as they are, because they could not be anything else.
No, if you think I said that (whatever "cerebral" means), you're putting words in my mouth.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:29 PM   #1263
wulfio
Captain
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

I'm conceptualizing here, nothing to do with specific names or properties, you can't get side tracked on examples. They're used to highlight my point since regular adjectives aren't working.

Seems we agree mostly.

Someone said contemporary trek couldn't be slow paced and cerebral, and that it had to be like Abrams trek.
wulfio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:31 PM   #1264
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
I never said it was necessary for the films in the present era to be the very nuTrek films we've gotten (successful though they are).
I think it actually was necessary for Star Trek (2009) to be exactly the film we got. It needed to be brash and bold with larger-than-life characters. It needed to be those things. It needed to be accessible to general audiences. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, Star Trek was a tarnished brand with no real future when Abrams pulled it out of mothballs.

It had to escape the "perfect humans sitting around a table talking gibberish to solve a problem" stigma the franchise had gained during the Berman years.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:36 PM   #1265
wulfio
Captain
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

So you're saying people are too stupid to enjoy a movie that makes them think?
wulfio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:43 PM   #1266
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
Someone said contemporary trek couldn't be slow paced and cerebral, and that it had to be like Abrams trek.
I never said that specifically that.

BillJ wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
I never said it was necessary for the films in the present era to be the very nuTrek films we've gotten (successful though they are).
I think it actually was necessary for Star Trek (2009) to be exactly the film we got. It needed to be brash and bold with larger-than-life characters. It needed to be those things. It needed to be accessible to general audiences. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, Star Trek was a tarnished brand with no real future when Abrams pulled it out of mothballs.

It had to escape the "perfect humans sitting around a table talking gibberish to solve a problem" stigma the franchise had gained during the Berman years.
That may be, but reasoning that out was a step further than I actually went, is what I'm saying. I did say that there was a sweet spot. Clearly, nuTrek was aiming for that. Whether they hit it is, well, up for discussion I suppose.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:48 PM   #1267
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
So you're saying people are too stupid to enjoy a movie that makes them think?
One, I don't have the same negative feelings towards the Abrams films that you do. Two, Star Trek was never this incredibly intelligent franchise you seem to think it is. Many of us starting watching before we started going to school. It can't be that intelligent if pre-schoolers can grasp much of it. TNG premiered when I was sixteen. Once again, it didn't throw anything at me I couldn't understand. What Star Trek gave me was a life long love of Science Fiction. When I revisit Star Trek, I revisit it to see those big brash characters I grew up with.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture is my favorite of the Star Trek movies. Do I think that general audiences would be satisfied with a similar film today? No. Why would I? General audiences weren't satisfied it thirty-five years ago.

Not everything work for everyone. But disparaging a film because it doesn't live up to your personal standards is non-sense. There's lots of stuff out there to watch, simply find something more to your taste.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 09:55 PM   #1268
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Avatar probably made a lot of people think.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 10:01 PM   #1269
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Avatar probably made a lot of people think.
It made more than a billion dollars and is an incredibly simple story. It made me think two things: "how long is this thing?" and "what is the big deal?" It was primarily Dances with Wolves in space. I don't think it was anymore intelligent than the Abrams films. Just slower and more plodding.

But a heck of a lot of people love those films. Which is great. I don't have a need to go and criticize those films non-stop because they don't work for me. This is probably the first time I've even thought about Avatar since I commented on the film after seeing it several years ago.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 29 2014, 11:40 PM   #1270
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
So you're saying people are too stupid to enjoy a movie that makes them think?
This really really isn't about that at all. It's about pure money making mathematics.

No studio in this day and age would allow Berman/Braga to make an Insurrection or a Generations (probably not even a Nemesis given how that tried to be a generic action flick and gained the lowest Trek movie coin ever). We just don't live in that world anymore. The studio ultimately gets the say. If Abrams had come in and said 'okay, I want to make The Conscience of the King into a two hour movie', they'd have laughed, slapped him upside the head, and told him to add some space battles, action heroics & explosions or 'we're replacing you with Zack Snyder'.

It's naive to think we live in a world where artistic freedom outweighs profit margins, especially in such a lucrative franchise such as Star Trek.
VST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 12:19 AM   #1271
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

So, I'm curious: What do people mean when they say they want something more "cerebral"? Something more like "The Cage"? Or TMP? Or TNG? Or DS9?

Are we talking more hard science? More politics? More "utopian" inspiration or more moral ambiguity? Deeper, more complicated characterization or chewier time-travel paradoxes? Morality plays? Thinly-disguised allegories about current events?

I'm not being facetious here, but I suspect we're talking past each other to some degree, and that if you asked ten different fans what "cerebral" meant to them, you would get at least eight different answers . . ..
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 12:40 AM   #1272
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BillJ wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Avatar probably made a lot of people think.
It made more than a billion dollars and is an incredibly simple story. It made me think two things: "how long is this thing?" and "what is the big deal?" It was primarily Dances with Wolves in space. I don't think it was anymore intelligent than the Abrams films. Just slower and more plodding.
It reminded me of a Stargate SG-1 episode only the humans being bigger dicks and there not being a diplomatic solution in the end.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 01:09 AM   #1273
CorporalCaptain
Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
So, I'm curious: What do people mean when they say they want something more "cerebral"? Something more like "The Cage"? Or TMP? Or TNG? Or DS9?

Are we talking more hard science? More politics? More "utopian" inspiration or more moral ambiguity? Deeper, more complicated characterization or chewier time-travel paradoxes? Morality plays? Thinly-disguised allegories about current events?

I'm not being facetious here, but I suspect we're talking past each other to some degree, and that if you asked ten different fans what "cerebral" meant to them, you would get at least eight different answers . . ..
It occurs to me that one of the oft-repeated legends about "The Cage" is that it was rejected for being "too cerebral". From Wiki's article on "The Cage":

NBC reportedly called the pilot "too cerebral," "too intellectual," and "too slow" with "not enough action."[2]
[...]
2. ^ Shatner, William (2008). Up Till Now: The Autobiography. New York: Thomas Dunne Books. p. 119. ISBN 0-312-37265-5.
Maybe that's how this word is getting injected into the conversation about Star Trek.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 04:23 AM   #1274
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
So, I'm curious: What do people mean when they say they want something more "cerebral"? Something more like "The Cage"? Or TMP? Or TNG? Or DS9?

Are we talking more hard science? More politics? More "utopian" inspiration or more moral ambiguity? Deeper, more complicated characterization or chewier time-travel paradoxes? Morality plays? Thinly-disguised allegories about current events?

I'm not being facetious here, but I suspect we're talking past each other to some degree, and that if you asked ten different fans what "cerebral" meant to them, you would get at least eight different answers . . ..
It occurs to me that one of the oft-repeated legends about "The Cage" is that it was rejected for being "too cerebral". From Wiki's article on "The Cage":

NBC reportedly called the pilot "too cerebral," "too intellectual," and "too slow" with "not enough action."[2]
[...]
2. ^ Shatner, William (2008). Up Till Now: The Autobiography. New York: Thomas Dunne Books. p. 119. ISBN 0-312-37265-5.
Maybe that's how this word is getting injected into the conversation about Star Trek.
I read somewhere that it actually had to do with "The Cage" being too expensive and not wanting to pay the amount needed to make it per episode.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 07:31 AM   #1275
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
So, I'm curious: What do people mean when they say they want something more "cerebral"? Something more like "The Cage"? Or TMP? Or TNG? Or DS9?

Are we talking more hard science? More politics? More "utopian" inspiration or more moral ambiguity? Deeper, more complicated characterization or chewier time-travel paradoxes? Morality plays? Thinly-disguised allegories about current events?

I'm not being facetious here, but I suspect we're talking past each other to some degree, and that if you asked ten different fans what "cerebral" meant to them, you would get at least eight different answers . . ..
You're probably right about the many different answers to that one, because Trek seems to be different things to different people.

Watching TOS lately has made me see how it's one big myth that Trek was always a very scientific, careful, issue-heavy show. Originally it was a big, colourful romp that just happened to have shows that touched on 'ideas'. It's only TNG that brought in more of the science & established technobabble, and I sense quite a lot of people think Trek 'cerebral' in those terms. DS9 eschewed a great deal of that and flew whereas VOY drowned in it, so it applies in different ways.

Personally the best Trek is a show that's telling a compelling character story, because that'll always leave you with an issue to contemplate alongside.
VST 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 09:37 AM.

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