Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by bbjeg, Sep 6, 2013.

?

Do fans want the prime timeline back?

  1. I'm a fan and I want the Prime timeline back.

    56.0%
  2. I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back.

    16.4%
  3. I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back.

    11.1%
  4. I don't care, just give me Trek!

    14.6%
  5. I don't know.

    1.9%
  1. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    Wait, Vengeance has much, much more internal volume than the Enterprise-D does.

    And back on the earlier topic, TNG's formula was stretched to it's absolute limit under the Berman administration (or whatever you want to call it)in the 18 years between TNG's start and the end of ENT. They got an awful lot out of it, but as we saw in ENT's first two seasons, they'd taken it as far as it could go. I don't want more stories in that style.

    And going back even further, Wrath of Khan is about revenge. Into Darkness is about how far people will go to protect those they care about.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2013
  2. doubleohfive

    doubleohfive Fleet Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    Only 18 years passed between the beginning of TNG (1987) and Enterprise's finale (2005).

    If you're going to make broadstroke generalizations, at least get the math right.
     
  3. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    Silly you, assuming I can count.

    (fixed. I think I meant 20:))
     
  4. BillJ

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    It was eighteen years, but twenty-five seasons. :p
     
  5. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    I disagree the formula is the problem, and I disagree that it was always formulaic. I believe that there was a lack of creativity with Enterprise and Voyager. They didn't develop characters beyond the original 5 or 6 episodes, and even then, it was hokey and contrived as if a 10-year-old was watching the show. A small example: Fight or Flight is a very interesting concept. Yet, the symbolism of "sluggo," is explained by the Doctor questioning Hoshi. I think someone who is a little bookish and not fully prepared for space travel, but loves languages, was a good starting point and a story that only Enterprise could tell. But the episode is rather blunt and lacks realism.

    Kirk isn't thinking about protecting anyone. He is mad that Pike is dead and he wants to "take the bastard out." He doesn't care that he's violating his rights until Khan tells his story. He beats Khan until he collapses "in the name of Captain Pike." Not exactly about defending the world.

    Further, Spock yells "KHHHHAAAAAAAANNN!" and proceeds to try and beat the living pulp out of him. Not because of what he has done to the Federation, but to make him pay for killing Kirk.

    Only at the end of the movie, with Starfleet and the Enterprise re-built, does Kirk say "Oh, sorry. We shouldn't try to seek revenge."

    Revenge is a theme in STID. Khan, Kirk, and Spock all have a grudge and they try to kill someone because of it.
     
  6. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Of course you can answer! The more the merrier!

    I agree, Star Trek is entertainment. I can read to get information. I can have a discussion with a knowledgeable person. I don't feel Star Trek needs to be preachy, it just needs to be good. And good fiction is learned fiction, using all the tools and not talking down to an audience. Fun for me, is still intellectually stimulating. It needs to have a theme, symbolism.

    I enjoyed the Greek gods episode because I'm an atheist and it gave me an alternative understanding of why the Greek gods died out. I thought it was imaginative, even if how they find the god is a little unorthodox. It's about the imagination of what we would find in deep space.

    I don't like the violence of the last two films. A LOT of people died. All of vulcan. The heart of Starfleet. A man's head is crushed. Pike is shown being shot and dying. That's not fun for me, and, quite frankly, I can get that in other entertainment if I wanted it.

    I started watching TNG in 1990, so I'm a little late to the party. But you still had to find something wrong with Original Star Trek to think it needed the re-boot treatment. And that was my point.
     
  7. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    Everything Khan does in ID is to free his people, and the only times he's out for revenge is when he thinks Marcus and later Spock has killed them. Ditto Spock when Kirk dies. It's certainly not the Moby Dick theme that completely dominates Wrath of Khan.

    At the start of the film we see what that the father of the little girl will kill for her. Khan kills for his people throughout. We see Kirk die for his crew. That's the dominant, recurring theme of the movie - "Is there anything you would not do for your family?"
     
  8. Coloratura

    Coloratura Snuggle Princess Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    No, I love the original series, and I love the rebooted movies. You can love both without having to think either needs the other, because they don't. Also, I'm a vintage 1984 Trekkie. I was 4 years old when I started watching the original series. :D
     
  9. BillJ

    BillJ Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    That's simply non-sense. I'm actually watching Star Trek right this very moment and have seen the Original Series dozens of times.

    Needed the reboot treatment? No. Was it welcomed? Yes. It's fun to see old favorites updated as society and technology evolve. But I can't imagine there is anything that will ever top TOS as my favorite TV series ever.

    Five here. :techman:
     
  10. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Six here. ;)
     
  11. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    I was seven when STAR TREK debuted in 1966. And, yes, the Salt Vampire scared the heck out of me!
     
  12. Coloratura

    Coloratura Snuggle Princess Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    I always closed one eye and squinted with the other when the Salt Vampire would appear in its true form.
     
  13. Hober Mallow

    Hober Mallow Commodore Commodore

    I didn't like the movies either, but damn, that's taking it too far. :)
    The reason it needs to be rebooted is not because there's something wrong with it, but because there's something right with it. Otherwise it wouldn't be rebooted.

    What's the other option? Yet another spinoff series about Captain Nobody on the U.S.S. Noonegivesaf*ck?
     
  14. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Oxford, PA
    That's a good point--that extends beyond just STAR TREK.

    Too many people seem to think that a remake or reboot somehow constitutes a rejection or criticism of the previous version, when that's not really the case. Accepting a new version doesn't mean you think the old version wasn't good enough. It's perfectly reasonable to appreciate both on their own terms--and accept that the new version is doing things differently. Not necessarily better, nor worse, but differently.

    Doing a new version of Star Trek, and tweaking the formula, doesn't mean you have to insist that every previous version was somehow flawed. It just means you're having fun with an old standard, like doing a new jazz interpretation of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" or whatever.

    Again, that doesn't mean the classic Judy Garland version isn't still great, but there's always room for another variation on the theme. Nothing is sacred, nothing is set in stone. Everything is grist for the mill.
     
  15. Timewalker

    Timewalker Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Location:
    In many different universes, simultaneously.
    I'm not sure who you were addressing here... :confused:

    I just didn't really care much for Worf and was annoyed when he pretty much took over huge amounts of time from other characters. I thought he was more interesting in the first season when we learned things about him gradually, rather than having episode after episode be about Worf's family, Worf's dishonor, Klingon homeworld politics, Picard's involvement, etc. and so on. I get that there are people who really enjoyed these aspects of TNG; I just happen to have enjoyed different things about the series.

    I became a Star Trek fan in 1975, at age 12. As to why... well, things would have turned out much differently if my grandfather had let me change the channel that night. He wouldn't, and basically told me to either shut up or leave the room because he wanted to see what this "Star Trek" show was about (it was his first time watching it, too). So I watched it, enjoyed it, and noticed it was on 5 days a week on two different channels. I decided to see if other episodes were as entertaining, and two weeks later had to admit I was hooked (especially after discovering the Blish books).

    I wasn't really into science fiction before Star Trek. I was into science, but preferred to read mysteries. Nowadays, the vast majority of the books I own are science fiction and the only mysteries I read are the Roman historical ones by Lindsay Davis (the Didius Falco series). I started reading science fiction soon after getting into Star Trek, and discovered I'd been missing some really good stuff - Clarke, Asimov, Heinlein, and so many others.

    It's hard to put it all into words in just a single forum post. The reasons I liked it then are not exactly the same reasons I like it now, 38 years later.

    BTW, I just realized... today is the 38th anniversary of the first time I ever bought the Blish books - Star Trek 4 and 6, at Woolco. :p


    I have a filk tape that has a song about the Salt Vampire. It's actually a really beautiful song that had me feeling sorry for the Salt Vampire.
     
  16. borgboy

    borgboy Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    The salt vampire is pretty tragic. It is kind of touching how much it needed to be loved. It was much more interesting than if it had been a more two dimensional monster.
     
  17. Timewalker

    Timewalker Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Location:
    In many different universes, simultaneously.
    My old music teacher would have a fit if she knew you'd said this. I was taking the Western Board of Music exams in spinet organ, and the syllabus was heavy on Bach. As in play it as written, with no extraneous frills or settings. Since I play by ear much better than by reading the notes, I had to memorize that stuff to the point where I could replay it in my mind and be note and time-perfect, and drill my fingers into automatically being in the right place at the right time. It was mentally exhausting, really frustrating... but the high I got when I finally got it right and knew I had finally made that crucial breakthrough is indescribable.

    After the exams, I liked to take those Bach pieces and play around with them, different styles and settings... and the teacher looked at me in horror, that I'd do that to a piece of music I'd worked so hard on for months.

    "Many different faces is a part of what I am...
    ........ ........ ........ the shifting desert sands."

    I wish I could remember more of the song; it's really beautiful and makes me cry every single time I listen to it (I'm tearing up just thinking about it). My tapes are packed away, though, and this one isn't on the filk CDs I have. I remember part of another verse, though, and that's a crucial bit of insight into this "monster":

    "I didn't want to kill... I didn't want to die."
     
  18. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    I suggest re-reading through this thread. Everyone was complaining about old Star Trek before I put a point on it. "Star Trek wasn't fun anymore," "Star Trek was formulaic," "You want Rick Berman back?!"

    It is possible to appreciate both, but that's not what is happening here. They are such vastly different interpretations that to appreciate one, and defend it, you have to tear down the other.

    The prime universe had good and bad in it, like anything. But to reduce Star Trek to "warp to a planet, get in trouble, get out of trouble, and nothing matters..." is complaining about old Trek. I can be as equally reductive about the movies, both old and esp. new. "Put the Enterprise, a crew member, and/or Earth in peril. Make sure everyone's on the bridge at the end of the movie, the end."

    My point to all of this is that your statement is logically sound, but that's not what's going on in here.
     
  19. borgboy

    borgboy Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    I wish we were getting more movies/tv with the classic universe. I'd LOVE a new movie with characters from VOY, DS9 and TNG. At least we have the novels to carry those characters forward.
    And I've really liked the new movies and am looking forward to the next one.
    When I say I miss the classic universe, that doesn't mean my ideal is to keep Berman in charge. I don't see the two as being the same thing.
     
  20. Hober Mallow

    Hober Mallow Commodore Commodore

    Rick Berman is "old Star Trek?"

    Rick Berman created and produced Star Trek spinoffs, which were based on Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek. They have as much to do with original Star Trek as JJ Abrams' movies, and are no more or less valid.

    Sounds to me like you're more of a Rick Berman Trek fan than a Star Trek fan. There's nothing wrong with that, and I mean no offense by saying it; a lot of people grew up watching Trek spinoffs. But I see those shows related to Star Trek the same way Basil Rathbone's Sherlock Holmes movies are related to Conan Doyle's original stories. The Rathbone films were a legitimate vision of the character, but eventually you have to move on from them to keep the character alive in other equally valid interpretations. Nick Meyer, Rick Berman, and JJ Abrams have all produced their own interpretations of Star Trek, and if there's going to be a future for Star Trek, that needs to continue.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2013