My View Of New Star Trek

[therealfoxbat]

There has been a lot of flak flying back and forth about the new Star Trek movie. Some of it seems to be caused by old-timers who say the movie is not the same Star Trek they remember (and think they're justified in putting down anyone who likes the new version). The rest seems to come from younger fans who love the new movie and are blasting anyone who likes the original stuff (bear in mind that these younger fans have probably never had the chance to see TOS outside of the sliced-and-diced-for-lots-of-extra-commercials version on syndication these days)...

I happen to be an old-timer, one of the fans old enough to have watched Star Trek from its earliest beginnings.

I agree with the other old-timers. This is not the Star Trek I grew up with...

Any more than Sci-Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica is the same Battlestar Galactica I watched when I was in high school.

That DON'T mean the new version sucks...

I happen to like the new Star Trek. I think it has real potential. I think it could save the franchise. I look forward to seeing what they do with it in the future...

I also feel a little bit sad that they seem to be closing the door on anything Star Trek that has gone before.

But I accept the movie for what it is...

A new version of Star Trek. With an almost completely unexplored background and timeline...

If you happen to get frustrated with all the flak travelling between the Love-Series-Hate-New-Movie People and their arch-enemies the Love-New-Movie-Hate-Series People, just remember...

SOME OF US LIKE BOTH

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I really didn't think it was all that different from "my father's Star Trek" (of course I am my father, ::titters:: )

Other than a massively bigger budget so stuff no longer looks like it is made out of cardboard it was overwhelmingly TOS to me. I was surprised by this.

 

[Jeri]

I thought it was TOS, too. This was the movie I was wanting when TMP came out.

 

[Doghead]

I really didn't think it was all that different from "my father's Star Trek" (of course I am my father, ::titters:: )

Other than a massively bigger budget so stuff no longer looks like it is made out of cardboard it was overwhelmingly TOS to me. I was surprised by this.

Me too. All through the film there were little shoutouts and resonances. Even to the point that Kirk is queueing up for his first commission on the Farragut (as a cadet, just like old "canon" had it) when he is diverted. That tiny snippet stands for me as the whole approach of the film. Ghosts of other parallels fade in the sunlight of the reestablished timeline. The same heroes, in situations shifting like sand- so their personalities are much the same but the excitement and shiny newness is there instead of the endless self referentiality that Trek had fallen into.

 

[Jeri]

Doghead, that was poetry.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Doghead, that was very very nice. Indeed those are "ghosts of other parallels". Beautifully put.

 

[Theonethatis]

There has been a lot of flak flying back and forth about the new Star Trek movie. Some of it seems to be caused by old-timers who say the movie is not the same Star Trek they remember (and think they're justified in putting down anyone who likes the new version). The rest seems to come from younger fans who love the new movie and are blasting anyone who likes the original stuff (bear in mind that these younger fans have probably never had the chance to see TOS outside of the sliced-and-diced-for-lots-of-extra-commercials version on syndication these days)...

I happen to be an old-timer, one of the fans old enough to have watched Star Trek from its earliest beginnings.

I agree with the other old-timers. This is not the Star Trek I grew up with...

Any more than Sci-Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica is the same Battlestar Galactica I watched when I was in high school.

That DON'T mean the new version sucks...

I happen to like the new Star Trek. I think it has real potential. I think it could save the franchise. I look forward to seeing what they do with it in the future...

I also feel a little bit sad that they seem to be closing the door on anything Star Trek that has gone before.

But I accept the movie for what it is...

A new version of Star Trek. With an almost completely unexplored background and timeline...

If you happen to get frustrated with all the flak travelling between the Love-Series-Hate-New-Movie People and their arch-enemies the Love-New-Movie-Hate-Series People, just remember...

SOME OF US LIKE BOTH

I feel very similar. I have been raised with trek since
I was 4, I am 36 now. I am very pleased how it worked out. I saw it for the third time today and cant wait for the sequel. I want to know what the hell is going on in the Laurentian system.

However more important is this. This Star Trek is my daughters and my sons Enterprise. I took my stepdaughter to see the movie And you know what she loved it. She is 9 years old and finally understands what her step dad has been talking about. We even sat down and watched Shore Leave together. And if this new crew can get my kids to enjoy Star Trek. Then I got to hand it to the producers. We've had 40 years of our Trek. Its time for the children to inherit the earth.

I happen to love this movie. It takes everything I loved about original Trek and distills it into 2 hours. Original Trek was wild and woolly with bar fights, women in revealing outfits and plenty of action. Sometimes the plots were totally nonsensical ( Spocks Brain anyone?) But even amidst all that craziness the humanity of the characters always shone through.

This Movie had all the same elements and I think was much closer to TOS then what we have gotten in a while. Sure the window dressing is different. The Camera movements are much more modern and exciting. The look in some ways is more gritty. But the soul and essence of the original 60's T.V. series is intact. And thats whats important isn't it???

 

[stonester1]

I'm an old-ish timer and I LOVED the film as well as most Trek that has gone before. I also LOVE the new Battlestar Galactica and still like (though not love) the original BSG.

Actually, the most rancor I've seen generated here are from a few, very few, bitter old timers who resent the new kid. I've seen no young fans blasting the old timers, at least not unprovoked.

 

[Greg Cox]

Count me in as another old-timer who thinks the new movie really captures the spirits of TOS. Perhaps even more so than, say, VOYAGER.

I almost wonder if, in fact, it's the "middle generation" of Trekkies, the ones who grew on TNG/DS9/VOY, who are most aggrieved over the new movie, not us old coots.

 

[stonester1]

I'm thinking the same thing.

And Mr. Cox, I LOVE your work, man.

 

[FailedLurker]

Actually, I think in a lot of ways, this IS your father's Star Trek. This is the first TOS-era TOS story made since 1969. In fact, I can say literally that this is my mother's Star Trek. After she saw it (for the third time!) her comment was "This is the movie I've been waiting for since 1970."

 

[Greg Cox]

I'm thinking the same thing.

And Mr. Cox, I LOVE your work, man.

Thanks!

 

[Talosian]

All these useless new critical posts on Star Trek, when there's a perfectly decent grading discussion thread prominently placed above, remind me how a minority of loud, incorrigible dissenters can drown out the silent majority. The naysayers on here are the abortion clinic bombers and Free Mumia pamphleteers of Trek fandom.

 

[Bobatiel]

Count me in as another old-timer who thinks the new movie really captures the spirits of TOS...

Yup, me too!

I almost wonder if, in fact, it's the "middle generation" of Trekkies, the ones who grew on TNG/DS9/VOY, who are most aggrieved over the new movie, not us old coots.

Hmmm...fascinating.

 

[KingOfPop]

here is the thing about the people who do not like the new movie, they claim that it is a "star wars" movie because it lacks a "deep, underlying theme" that "real star trek" has/had, yet if you look at the history of star trek, it has always been a mixed bag of action adventure and deep stories.

TOS had episodes where everything centered on action, TOS had episodes where everything centered on a deep theme.

star trek the motion picture attempted to tell the story of a deep theme.
TWOK was an action film, don't try and kid yourself.

TNG, DS9, Voyager, were all the same.

So whats wrong with this film being PRIMARILY action? I say primarily because there were deep themes, it just appears so people are too pompous to see them.

Should Paramount paid JJ Abrams and Co. big bucks to make another Insurrection?

Some people just need to relax and enjoy the movie.

Hell I used to build ships, read books, study the diagrams of the ships, but at some point watching an Enterprise episode that was a copy of a Voyager episode, that was a copy of a DS9 episode, that was a copy of a TNG episode, that was a copy of a TOS episode got boring for me. That doesn't make me simple-minded, or an action-adventure only brute, it simply made me like a lot of others, bored.

This movie brought some freshness to the franchise. Forget about cannon. ITS ALL FAKE ANYWAY PEOPLE. Just enjoy the entertainment. Go outside, go for a walk, whatever it takes, but relax if you are one of the people having a nervous breakdown/mid-life crisis over this MOVIE, SHOT WITH A CAMERA, ON A STUDIO IN CALIFORNIA.

 

[CorporalClegg]

There has been a lot of flak flying back and forth about the new Star Trek movie. Some of it seems to be caused by old-timers who say the movie is not the same Star Trek they remember (and think they're justified in putting down anyone who likes the new version). The rest seems to come from younger fans who love the new movie and are blasting anyone who likes the original stuff (bear in mind that these younger fans have probably never had the chance to see TOS outside of the sliced-and-diced-for-lots-of-extra-commercials version on syndication these days)...

I happen to be an old-timer, one of the fans old enough to have watched Star Trek from its earliest beginnings.

I agree with the other old-timers. This is not the Star Trek I grew up with...

Any more than Sci-Fi Channel's Battlestar Galactica is the same Battlestar Galactica I watched when I was in high school.

That DON'T mean the new version sucks...

I happen to like the new Star Trek. I think it has real potential. I think it could save the franchise. I look forward to seeing what they do with it in the future...

I also feel a little bit sad that they seem to be closing the door on anything Star Trek that has gone before.

But I accept the movie for what it is...

A new version of Star Trek. With an almost completely unexplored background and timeline...

If you happen to get frustrated with all the flak travelling between the Love-Series-Hate-New-Movie People and their arch-enemies the Love-New-Movie-Hate-Series People, just remember...

SOME OF US LIKE BOTH

I agree with a lot of what you say.

I was one of those people who complained about it "Not being Star Trek..." and I would have preferred they went in a different direction. But in the end, it's just a movie and all that matters is did I feel like I got my $8 ($24?) worth. The answer would be a wholehearted "yes!"

And ultimately, (as suggested by others in various threads) hopefully the success of this film will give them license to do a "Boldly Go" story in a subsequent film.

 

[karenjeane]

I thought it was very much like TOS, with all its high and low points.

The opportunity on which they missed out, I think, was making a really, really good movie. Excellent writing, no stupidity. Casino Royale is such a movie, if we're considering franchise reboots. I don't think The Dark Knight is, but it tried to be.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture is almost-great. I wish they had tried again.

 

[Joby]

Trek was suffocating in it's own mythology. After over 40 years of the same stuff, it was time to start new. I'm soooo happy that we didn't have ANOTHER Trek movie with a Jerry Goldsmith score, Hermann Zimmerman sets and Michael Westmore aliens. All immensly talented people no doubt, but man it was getting so damn tiring.

 

[perigee]

Adding one thing that's not an echo here...

I think the whole "Old Timers" thing is being stretched beyond the truth; generally, what I've seen here is the small percentage of true "Old Dogs" that are vitrolic about the film are FAR outweighed by small percentage of TNGeners that somehow think they have a better understanding of the Holy Trek Canon than the guys who have been on the train since it left the station.

With only 3 seasons to work with, us white muzzles depended on the lack of canon to keep the show alive for ten years. I reference this - something that most people who missed the time should read to understand how Star Trek was kept alive and viable during the big empty.

There was no continuity - no canon - between one story and the next in these, beyond the existence of the main characters. Some were extremely well-written; of those, a precious few were eventually anthologized and published as The New Voyages series of books. Others were... less than spectacular. What they all had in common was a need for more than we had at the time.

For this Truly Hard Core group of fans, 'canon' is, at very best, a luxury we're familiar with not having... or needing, to appreciate a new story. There's a tolerance for conflicting storylines having had the necessity to keep our suspension of disbelief alive as we amused each other.

I do not believe that this is a case of old men screaming "Get off my lawn" so much as it is a case of the middle-aged putting up fences and wanting to "own" something that belongs to everyone.

 

[CaptainStoner]

Count me in as another old-timer who thinks the new movie really captures the spirits of TOS. Perhaps even more so than, say, VOYAGER.

I almost wonder if, in fact, it's the "middle generation" of Trekkies, the ones who grew on TNG/DS9/VOY, who are most aggrieved over the new movie, not us old coots.

It seems to be more the already-existing purists, not sure which generation. But there were a few that were so biased they were trashing the movie without even having seen it.
There's plenty to nitpick, it's not particularly strong science fiction per se. The monsters on the ice planet were a pretty stupid waste of CGI. That whole sequence of meeting Old Spock was about as lame as picking up B4's positronic signature. Couldn't they have come up with anything feasible to explain how they met? I am able to forgive it, though, since there seems to be an underlying theme of fate to STXI. From a quantum reality standpoint, it's not stupid or strange that seemingly random events would actually be in a kind of "sympathetic vibration" with other realities.
Overall its a fun film. Lacking in emotional impact (except for the fantastic opening), light on the sci-fi, but fun.