RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,588
Posts: 5,424,139
Members: 24,809
Currently online: 549
Newest member: Super Scout

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Takei Has Growth Removed
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Coto Drama Sold To Fox
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Braga Inks Deal
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Remastered Original Series Re-release
By: T'Bonz on Sep 11

UK Trek Ships Calendar Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Sep 10


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. 196 56.32%
I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back. 57 16.38%
I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back. 38 10.92%
I don't care, just give me Trek! 51 14.66%
I don't know. 6 1.72%
Voters: 348. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 30 2014, 10:21 PM   #1291
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

But everything you've just said (I think, because I don't really understand all of it), come right back *to* story in the end. No creative sets out to write a cerebral message, they are trying to explore character, emotion, and by default making the audience *feel* along the way. Successful or not, 'unintelligent' or not, STID was trying to do just that, as has all Trek.
VST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:32 PM   #1292
wulfio
Commander
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BillJ wrote: View Post

Being a novelist and editor, I'm sure Greg Cox is well aware of the definition of cerebral. What he is trying to narrow down is what exactly is it that fans are wanting. And he is correct, if you asked ten fans, you would get eight different answers.
Not to insinuate anything about Mr. Cox here, because I haven't read his work.

But being a novelist and editor does not necessarily denote intellect and acumen. So your argument is flawed. Novelists wrote Twilight, 50 shades of grey, Da Vinci Code, Kane and Abel, etc.
wulfio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:39 PM   #1293
Gov Kodos
Admiral
 
Gov Kodos's Avatar
 
Location: Gov Kodos Regretably far from Boston
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

Being a novelist and editor, I'm sure Greg Cox is well aware of the definition of cerebral. What he is trying to narrow down is what exactly is it that fans are wanting. And he is correct, if you asked ten fans, you would get eight different answers.
Not to insinuate anything about Mr. Cox here, because I haven't read his work.

But being a novelist and editor does not necessarily denote intellect and acumen. So your argument is flawed. Novelists wrote Twilight, 50 shades of grey, Da Vinci Code, Kane and Abel, etc.
No.
__________________
We are quicksilver, a fleeting shadow, a distant sound... our home has no boundaries beyond which we cannot pass. We live in music, in a flash of color... we live on the wind and in the sparkle of a star! Endora, Bewitched
Gov Kodos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:40 PM   #1294
wulfio
Commander
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

VST wrote: View Post
But everything you've just said (I think, because I don't really understand all of it), come right back *to* story in the end. No creative sets out to write a cerebral message, they are trying to explore character, emotion, and by default making the audience *feel* along the way. Successful or not, 'unintelligent' or not, STID was trying to do just that, as has all Trek.
Yes people most certainly start out intending to write a cerebral film if that's their goal. Abrams certainly did not set out to make a cerebral film. However, those points are irrelevant to the discussion...

Ok I'll explain a different way. people are saying if you made a slow paced, political thriller star trek(like TUC for example), that it would bomb, because the audience wouldn't sit for it. And that it could only be this fast paced popcorn adventure. That's the only way star trek could be successful today. And that the reason that star trek today is a mindless popcorn flick, is because it's movies being produced in the 2010's. That because it's in movies, it dictates that star trek be mindless fun.

The other people are saying, that you can make it intelligent, and you can give the general audience a little more credit than that. And that just because it's a movie being made in 2010's, doesn't mean it HAS to be mindless to be successful. And that you can make an intelligent movie, and the contemporary audience would accept it.

This discussion isn't nutrek vs. berman trek. We're not talking about what is, or what could have been. We're talking about the medium(movies or tv), and the era, dictating the tone and artistic direction of the property; and whether or not the general audience would accept intelligent movies.
wulfio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:41 PM   #1295
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
Since you know the definition, I have no idea why you ask the question. There's more than 1 way to make an intelligent piece of literature, or film. I know the internet deals in absolutes, and black and white, but real life isn't like that. The only thing that is absolute, is to avoid being contrived and derivative.
Much of Star Trek is "contrived" and anything with the name "Star Trek" on it is going to be derivative in some sense. There's over seven-hundred hours of this stuff, intentional or not, they are going to hit the same notes over and over.

I think Greg Cox is asking a fair question. What is it that someone like you wants that is lacking in the Abrams films? Beyond the generic "I want it more intelligent".

I went on record earlier in this thread that there was no other way to bring Star Trek back other than in the form that Abrams did:

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.
The way you talk about Star Trek reeks of elitism. I also tend to think you're trying to hold the Abrams films to a standard that Trek has very rarely achieved before.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:49 PM   #1296
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
VST wrote: View Post
But everything you've just said (I think, because I don't really understand all of it), come right back *to* story in the end. No creative sets out to write a cerebral message, they are trying to explore character, emotion, and by default making the audience *feel* along the way. Successful or not, 'unintelligent' or not, STID was trying to do just that, as has all Trek.
Ok I'll explain a different way. people are saying if you made a slow paced, political thriller star trek(like TUC for example), that it would bomb, because the audience wouldn't sit for it. And that it could only be this fast paced popcorn adventure. That's the only way star trek could be successful today. And that the reason that star trek today is a mindless popcorn flick, is because it's movies being produced in the 2010's. That because it's in movies, it dictates that star trek be mindless fun.

The other people are saying, that you can make it intelligent, and you can give the general audience a little more credit than that. And that just because it's a movie being made in 2010's, doesn't mean it HAS to be mindless to be successful. And that you can make an intelligent movie, and the contemporary audience would accept it.

This discussion isn't nutrek vs. berman trek. We're not talking about what is, or what could have been. We're talking about the medium(movies or tv), and the era, dictating the tone and artistic direction of the property; and whether or not the general audience would accept intelligent movies.
I really do think you're putting words in people's mouths a bit here, to be completely honest.

No one directly said a 'slower-paced' Trek would bomb - that's not the point. You use TUC as an example; that film reflected not just the era (the end of the Cold War), but also the *end* of an era with an ageing crew on their final adventure. Now try doing that film with Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto et al… think about it, that kind of story doesn't work for them. I'm being specific with that example but it goes back to the point - if you choose to reboot TOS, the way Abrams did it very much is in tune with the way Roddenberry started the franchise. Infact, had Gene made a TOS movie with today's effects, I'd put money on him doing something really quite similar.

What denotes an intelligent film is subjective, like most art. You'll get just as many people sniff at, say, Dark Knight Rises as people who champion it. Trek is no different.
VST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:52 PM   #1297
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
Abrams certainly did not set out to make a cerebral film.
I think you've taken the position that the Abrams films aren't intelligent without really knowing how the audiences that went and saw them feel about them. I think you also tend to discount that sometimes people go to the cinema to be entertained, first and foremost.

No one is holding a gun to your head making you watch them. I just wonder why you wasted your money and time with Into Darkness when you obviously were disenchanted with Star Trek (2009)?

Doesn't seem like a very intelligent thing to do?
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:53 PM   #1298
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
But being a novelist and editor does not necessarily denote intellect and acumen. So your argument is flawed. Novelists wrote Twilight, 50 shades of grey, Da Vinci Code, Kane and Abel, etc.
Meyer, Brown, and James are all undoubtedly very intelligent people. And seeing as how they've made shit-loads of money off their craft, I'd say their acumen is just fine.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:54 PM   #1299
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.

VST wrote: View Post
You'll get just as many people sniff at, say, Dark Knight Rises as people who champion it. Trek is no different.
I still haven't seen The Dark Knight Rises because The Dark Knight put me to sleep. Though the Missus loves the Nolan films.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:55 PM   #1300
wulfio
Commander
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

VST wrote: View Post

I really do think you're putting words in people's mouths a bit here, to be completely honest.

No one directly said a 'slower-paced' Trek would bomb - that's not the point. You use TUC as an example; that film reflected not just the era (the end of the Cold War), but also the *end* of an era with an ageing crew on their final adventure. Now try doing that film with Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto et al… think about it, that kind of story doesn't work for them. I'm being specific with that example but it goes back to the point - if you choose to reboot TOS, the way Abrams did it very much is in tune with the way Roddenberry started the franchise. Infact, had Gene made a TOS movie with today's effects, I'd put money on him doing something really quite similar.

What denotes an intelligent film is subjective, like most art. You'll get just as many people sniff at, say, Dark Knight Rises as people who champion it. Trek is no different.
You're not really following lol.

It was an example dude. I don't get how people can look at an example and completely lose focus of the topic. And no, I didn't put words in peoples mouths, reread the discussion, people most certainly claimed that TUC would bomb today. I don't need to quote it because I know it for a fact, but you should go back and read it because you're making assumptions.

And yes, I don't know how else to explain it to you. This is basically a debate about the medium is the message. This has absolutely nothing to do with specifics, or tastes.
wulfio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:56 PM   #1301
BigJake
Rear Admiral
 
BigJake's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there you are.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

VST wrote:
No creative sets out to write a cerebral message, they are trying to explore character, emotion, and by default making the audience *feel* along the way.
Well, that's actually just straight-up false. Character and emotion are important but have never precluded having something to say about the wider world, or engaging with big ideas. SF in general and Trek in particular are full of stories that manage both. (NuTrek not so much, wulfio is right about that, but that has nothing to do with the general rules of writing or creating. It's a specific choice.)

wulfio wrote: View Post
But being a novelist and editor does not necessarily denote intellect and acumen.
While I get that you're irritated by the fallacy of being asked to choose from a Menu of Cerebral Things, basically what BillJ is trying to tell you is that disagree with him or not, Greg is a good and smart guy and you're getting needlessly personal about it.
__________________
It's got electrolytes!
"I wanna read more" - Dennis "I . . . agree with everything you said" - SPCTRE "I blame Cracked" - J. Allen "Take me off" - The Stig
BigJake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:56 PM   #1302
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BillJ wrote: View Post
VST wrote: View Post
You'll get just as many people sniff at, say, Dark Knight Rises as people who champion it. Trek is no different.
I still haven't seen The Dark Knight Rises because The Dark Knight put me to sleep. Though the Missus loves the Nolan films.
Ah mate, it's worth watching IMO. I love all three of those, but TDKR is my favourite - gets a lot of unnecessary flak for me.
VST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 10:59 PM   #1303
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BigJake wrote: View Post
VST wrote:
No creative sets out to write a cerebral message, they are trying to explore character, emotion, and by default making the audience *feel* along the way.
Well, that's actually just straight-up false. Character and emotion are important but have never precluded having something to say about the wider world, or engaging with big ideas. SF in general and Trek in particular are full of stories that manage both.
They come hand in hand though, was my point. A writer doesn't tend to sit at his desk in my experience and say solely 'right, my next story is going to be about overpopulation' - that kind of comes jointly with a sense of character & a personal element they want to explore.

Like I said, the best Trek stories are certainly ones that manage both. I entirely agree there.
VST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 11:00 PM   #1304
VST
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Earth Spacedock
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

wulfio wrote: View Post
VST wrote: View Post

I really do think you're putting words in people's mouths a bit here, to be completely honest.

No one directly said a 'slower-paced' Trek would bomb - that's not the point. You use TUC as an example; that film reflected not just the era (the end of the Cold War), but also the *end* of an era with an ageing crew on their final adventure. Now try doing that film with Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto et al… think about it, that kind of story doesn't work for them. I'm being specific with that example but it goes back to the point - if you choose to reboot TOS, the way Abrams did it very much is in tune with the way Roddenberry started the franchise. Infact, had Gene made a TOS movie with today's effects, I'd put money on him doing something really quite similar.

What denotes an intelligent film is subjective, like most art. You'll get just as many people sniff at, say, Dark Knight Rises as people who champion it. Trek is no different.
You're not really following lol.

It was an example dude. I don't get how people can look at an example and completely lose focus of the topic. And no, I didn't put words in peoples mouths, reread the discussion, people most certainly claimed that TUC would bomb today. I don't need to quote it because I know it for a fact, but you should go back and read it because you're making assumptions.

And yes, I don't know how else to explain it to you. This is basically a debate about the medium is the message. This has absolutely nothing to do with specifics, or tastes.
*sigh*

Cool. My point was made. Happy trails.
VST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2014, 11:00 PM   #1305
wulfio
Commander
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Bill, I think you have a really hard time discerning between a debate, and making assertions about personal tastes. This discussion has absolutely nothing to do with preferences, and is purely a sociological debate.

It's about the medium, and the message.

wulfio wrote: View Post


The contention was that you can indeed make an intelligent slow paced movie, and if done properly, today's audience would accept it. We are talking about conceptual ideas, not specifics. Again, people not following the discussion are focusing on the wrong things. This has absolutely nothing to do with a specific story, or wanting a specific story. This discussion is about what message is being said on what medium, whether or not there is a choice, and if the medium dictates the message.
I reek of elitism, you reek of presumption. If you can't wrap your head around that, you're int he wrong discussion.
wulfio 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 08:33 PM.

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