Is the movie respectful to the franchise? (No spoilers)

[joe40001]

I have not been to the BBS in a long time, you guys were always really cool and I respected most opinions here. So I'm wondering from what you guys know is the movie at least respectful to the franchise?

I don't really want it spoiled but I just want to make sure that it is respectful to the franchise in that it's not changing up things like "Vulcans and Klingons come from the same planet" or "There's no warp drive just giant rockets" or even stuff like ships cloaking all over the place because we shouldn't have observed that yet.

So from what you all have gathered is it respectful to the franchise?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Evidently a big "yes" on respectful where stuff like giant rockets and cohabiting Klingon/Vulcans are concerned. On more detailed matters - not necessarily "ships cloaking when they shouldn't" but matters of that, uh, granularity, there will probably be a good deal more disagreement (and already has been).

 

[joe40001]

"I think the key was not having insane reverence for the original material." - J.J. Abrams

Oh god, he didn't actually say that did he? Why don't people understand that such reverence is what in many ways makes Star Trek popular.

Well I need to know how bad it's going to be. Will there be any way to marriage the the movie to the franchise? Because if not I don't think I should really support it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

"I think the key was not having insane reverence for the original material." - J.J. Abrams

Oh god, he didn't actually say that did he? Why don't people understand that such reverence is what in many ways makes Star Trek popular.

I would say that the modifier "insane" is key there. Excessive reverence for every established aspect of the Franchise has IMAO destroyed its potential as an ongoing series.

 

[urbandk]

Saw the movie. Lifelong Star Trek fan. Loved it.

 

[joe40001]

I just think that somebody who makes a point that they really aren't about pleasing fans are probably going to be fairly disrespectful to the fans.

Also I don't understand why he couldn't have made the movie completely in the franchise's universe. There's nothing about the universe that prevents that, and it's not like the filming style is part of the canon. (Because I know JJ loves the shaky cam)

 

[joe40001]

Saw the movie. Lifelong Star Trek fan. Loved it.

So you're saying that it isn't disrespectful?

 

[urbandk]

Saw the movie. Lifelong Star Trek fan. Loved it.

So you're saying that it isn't disrespectful?

It tries very hard to integrate the established Trek lore into a new universe. You can look at it two ways. They took everything and changed it. OR Within this new context, they kept a lot of what made Star Trek great.

The optimism, the sense of adventure, the personal journeys of the characters are all crucial for this film. Spock played by both Leonard Nimoy and Quinto offers a sense of continuity.

Aesthetically, however, this film is quite different. It's as different from TOS as TMP was. There are homages to the original TV series, the sounds on the bridge, that weird liquor bottle with the bent neck.

Most reviews I've seen have loved the film. OTOH, I did read a review by a French guy who thought the film destroyed everything that Star Trek stood for. He said that all the episodes and movies were better than this one.

Anyhow, I think you can safely spend $8 to see the film for yourself and make up your own mind. Whether you want to support it or tell others to see it is up to you.

 

[Jax]

Why don't people understand that such reverence is what in many ways makes Star Trek popular.

DID make Trek popular now it just hampers it...TREK has loss so many of its own fanbase and gained virtually none new ones so TREK is not popular anymore. J.J will keep Trek as Trek but this is not Gene's vision which while groundbreaking at the time was deeply flawed.

 

[joe40001]

Why don't people understand that such reverence is what in many ways makes Star Trek popular.

DID make Trek popular now it just hampers it...TREK has loss so many of its own fanbase and gained virtually none new ones so TREK is not popular anymore. J.J will keep Trek as Trek but this is not Gene's vision which while groundbreaking at the time was deeply flawed.

It lost it's fan base because it lost it's creativity and new ideas. Not because it kept track of the past of the show.

I mean our earth has continuity and it's not like we are running out of interesting factual stories that happen in reality.

 

[Jax]

It lost it's fan base because it lost it's creativity and new ideas. Not because it kept track of the past of the show.

The longer the past gets the harder it will be to attract new viewers and any franchise needs new fans to live on. Past gets TREK into trouble with a huge cannon making it harder for writers and easier for us to slam them...

Not too mention the fans are fickle and cannon past becomes a fantical religion almost doing nothing but hurting the shows cause. I think the basics of cannon and the franchise's past should be honoured and remembered but I can overlook the smaller stuff.

As for people saying the message and spirit of Trek is being changed by a reboot, I will say that messages get changed all the time because well time does that and you can never get rid of the spirit of Trek no matter what. We need a 21st century TREK not a 1960's TREK and J.J may well have it

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Catering to the minutiae-obsessed in "fandom" has utterly ruined the real entertainment value of Star Trek.

I mean our earth has continuity and it's not like we are running out of interesting factual stories that happen in reality.

Well, that's one difference between reality and commercial filmmaking.

There are many others.

God, or whathaveyou, has a substantially larger budget - and certainly a great deal more imagination - than anyone who has ever worked in the movies.

 

[joe40001]

It lost it's fan base because it lost it's creativity and new ideas. Not because it kept track of the past of the show.

The longer the past gets the harder it will be to attract new viewers and any franchise needs new fans to live on. Past gets TREK into trouble with a huge cannon making it harder for writers and easier for us to slam them...

Not too mention the fans are fickle and cannon past becomes a fantical religion almost doing nothing but hurting the shows cause. I think the basics of cannon and the franchise's past should be honoured and remembered but I can overlook the smaller stuff.

As for people saying the message and spirit of Trek is being changed by a reboot, I will say that messages get changed all the time because well time does that and you can never get rid of the spirit of Trek no matter what. We need a 21st century TREK not a 1960's TREK and J.J may well have it

I have my doubts, JJ's early success makes me worry he isn't modest enough to not think he always knows best and that Star Trek fans are idiots.

 

[joe40001]

Catering to the minutiae-obsessed in "fandom" has utterly ruined the real entertainment value of Star Trek.

I mean our earth has continuity and it's not like we are running out of interesting factual stories that happen in reality.

Well, that's one difference between reality and commercial filmmaking.

There are many others.

God, or whathaveyou, has a substantially larger budget - and certainly a great deal more imagination - than anyone who has ever worked in the movies.

A large developed universe is one of the strengths of the franchise, not one of the weaknesses IMO.

 

[Aragorn]

Oh god, he didn't actually say that did he? Why don't people understand that such reverence is what in many ways makes Star Trek popular.

Even if this movie is great, one poster on this board says it'll all be for nothing if Gary Mitchell isn't in it for even a minute. What does that tell you?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

A large developed universe is one of the strengths of the franchise, not one of the weaknesses IMO.

The Star Trek universe is endlessly repetitious, crammed with trivia and about a quarter inch deep. Most people don't watch Star Trek because they can't even imagine caring about all that nonsense - among other reasons.

 

[joe40001]

Oh god, he didn't actually say that did he? Why don't people understand that such reverence is what in many ways makes Star Trek popular.

Even if this movie is great, one poster on this board says it'll all be for nothing if Gary Mitchell isn't in it for even a minute. What does that tell you?

It is possible to be over the top, but JJ isn't a perfect enough human being to just "not care" about continuity and not respecting old Star Trek. I'm not saying that's what he is necessarily doing. But continuity is more than just something for fanboys to argue about it sets up more elaborate story-lines than one could do if they changed the whole universe week to week.

So my opinion, evolving the universe: fine. Scrapping it because we think we know best because we've had moderate success in our limited career: bad.

In conclusion conclusion: don't spit in the face of Star Trek, it's been alive as long as you have been.

 

[joe40001]

A large developed universe is one of the strengths of the franchise, not one of the weaknesses IMO.

The Star Trek universe is endlessly repetitious, crammed with trivia and about a quarter inch deep. Most people don't watch Star Trek because they can't even imagine caring about all that nonsense - among other reasons.

You don't have to care about "that nonsense" to appreciate quality story-lines the robust universe just provides a good stage.

It's not like people are like "well this episode of TNG was thought provoking and exciting, but I still hate the show because there are subtleties to the plot that I missed that others did not."

Good continuity is the hint of lemon in your drink, it doesn't ruin your drink when you fail to notice it, but when you do notice it, it makes it even better.

 

[Sector 7]

God, or whathaveyou, has a substantially larger budget - and certainly a great deal more imagination - than anyone who has ever worked in the movies.

I think I found a new signature line... I love it. Can I steal it?

 

[urbandk]

Oh well, this movie has continuity... just in a new way... in the TNG episode "Parallels" kind of way.