Any other TOSers give up post-Abrams?

[Brutal Strudel]

Really - does anyone expect Trek to win a major Academy Award? Anything that it qualifies for is going to be snapped up by the likes of Avatar, which is far superior to any other fantasy or science fiction movie of 2009.

Only as a technical exercise. Sure, the immersive 3-D experience was awesome but I'd never sit through this bloated, simplistic Dances with Wolves retelling in 2-D, let alone on DVD. Moon, District 9 and, yes, Star Trek, however, all deserve repeated looks and, though any SF film benefits from the big screen, I can still enjoy them on my relatively tiny Phillips.

Watching Avatar, I felt the way discerning SF fans felt when they watched Star Wars back in '77: a groundbreaking leap if VFX in support of a thin, cliched and poorly scripted story. Of course, I was all of seven in 1977 so Star Wars will always have a place in my heart. Avatar will not, no matter how much weed I may or may not have smoked before seeing it.

It was refreshing, however, to see so many anti-corporate, anti-imperialist sentiments in a mega-budget movie, especially from a film-maker whose previous films sometimes stank of the reactionary.

 

[Orcus]

Really - does anyone expect Trek to win a major Academy Award? Anything that it qualifies for is going to be snapped up by the likes of Avatar, which is far superior to any other fantasy or science fiction movie of 2009.

Only as a technical exercise. Sure, the immersive 3-D experience was awesome but I'd never sit through this bloated, simplistic Dances with Wolves retelling in 2-D, let alone on DVD. Moon, District 9 and, yes, Star Trek, however, all deserve repeated looks and, though any SF film benefits from the big screen, I can still enjoy them on my relatively tiny Phillips.

Watching Avatar, I felt the way discerning SF fans felt when they watched Star Wars back in '77: a groundbreaking leap if VFX in support of a thin, cliched and poorly scripted story. Of course, I was all of seven in 1977 so Star Wars will always have a place in my heart. Avatar will not, no matter how much weed I may or may not have smoked before seeing it.

It was refreshing, however, to see so many anti-corporate, anti-imperialist sentiments in a mega-budget movie, especially from a film-maker whose previous films sometimes stank of the reactionary.

Yes, I was going to mention District 9 and Moon - both far superior to either Avatar or Star Trek...

...in fact I'd go as far as to say that District 9 and Moon are two of the finest examples of true SF films we've seen for decades...

 

[Warped9]

^ That it required the viewer to actually think about what they were seeing, whereas the second you start thinking about what's going on in the new movie, the whole thing falls apart.

Once the best piece of advice regarding a Star Trek film is "check your brain at the door," you've got a problem.

(I was going to say "then Star Trek is truly dead," but so long as they are fans willing to pick up the baton and make more Star Trek on their own, Star Trek will never die. But this movie is definitely a dead end.)

It doesn't bother me that people like the new film because it doesn't take away from what I like about TOS, but it does affirm what I've long known that how many John and Jane Doe's perceive Star Trek and how I and other like minded folks perceive it is quite different. And this film was aimed mostly at the general audience and their cliched expectations of what Star Trek is. It's sad because they could easily have had all the run-and-jump and energy and familiar smiley moments while still having some intelligence in the thing. But they chose not to do that for whatever their reasons.

And there are a number of films that that have had a lot of fun and energy and also been smart. This wasn't one of them by far.

 

[trevanian]

I've seen that movie! Here are some screen caps!

Nice try, really - but unfortunately, there's something called STORY behind these caps... so, thanks for supporting my point.

And there was something called STORY behind the three scenes from the movie you saw between naps. I'll go as far to say the open sequence of ST09 alone, told a better story than "Charlie X", "Plato's Stepchildren" or "The Enterprise Incident".

Besides the weird notion of comparing a cheapie TV ep with a movie that has more than double spent on it than any previous trek feature, the idea that you don't have love for CHARLIE X is amazing.

Along with ERRAND OF MERCY, CHARLIE is THE episode I show people who don't know the show that seems to get them hooked, because it engages regardless of the SF/fantasy angle, and probably because it is one of the only times when Shatner doesn't go wildly overboard at least a couple times.

Outside of presenting an ethically challenged viewpoint and some presumed out of character 'romance' stuff, ENTERPRISE I is decent entertainment as well.

The opening part of the Abrams thing -- with respect to the rest of it -- repeats the first major flaw of GEN as well; you deliver an opening that is more interesting than anything that follows it, which puts it squarely in the RogerMooreBondMovie category of 'go for the pretitle sequence and then sneak into another theater' category. Personally, I didn't even enjoy that part (lens flares really got in the way of my becoming engaged), but my wife thought it at least showed that if they had just done a trek movie without trying to wrap KidKirk&Co into it, they might have had a chance at winning her over (not that she is the target audience either, since we only like TOS and DS9.)

 

[startrekrcks]

Well TOS is the motherland, the prime, do you think without TOS there wouldn't have been any renditions, I mean other Star Trek series and movies and off course there wouldn't be alternate universes so I think Star Trek 09 is like a homage, a child paying love and respect to it's mother universe and I think that is great and it didn't erase anything you have known from the Prime universe, the mother universe. They have wiped the slate clean in Star Trek 09. What do you think of that aspect and my post.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It was refreshing, however, to see so many anti-corporate, anti-imperialist sentiments in a mega-budget movie, especially from a film-maker whose previous films sometimes stank of the reactionary.

Absolutely. Of course, a strain of anti-corporate sentiment - or is it just the casual utility of wealthy business people as bad guys? - has run through Cameron's stories since (to be cautious) Aliens. You can see it in Terminator 2 and to some extent, I think, in Titanic.

I was 22 when I saw Star Wars, and my reaction to that was very much the way some folks have reacted to Avatar as you sum it up. In the long run I came to like SW quite a bit, as well as The Empire Strikes Back. I'm just thrilled with Avatar in almost every respect.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Besides the weird notion of comparing a cheapie TV ep with a movie that has more than double spent on it than any previous trek feature, the idea that you don't have love for CHARLIE X is amazing.

Where did I say I didn't love "Charlie X"? I like it fine. And I'm comparing the story told in those few opening minutes to the stories told in those particular episodes. The emotional impact and the performances. Not the SFX.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

It was refreshing, however, to see so many anti-corporate, anti-imperialist sentiments in a mega-budget movie, especially from a film-maker whose previous films sometimes stank of the reactionary.

Absolutely. Of course, a strain of anti-corporate sentiment - or is it just the casual utility of wealthy business people as bad guys? - has run through Cameron's stories since (to be cautious) Aliens. You can see it in Terminator 2 and to some extent, I think, in Titanic.

I was 22 when I saw Star Wars, and my reaction to that was very much the way some folks have reacted to Avatar as you sum it up. In the long run I came to like SW quite a bit, as well as The Empire Strikes Back. I'm just thrilled with Avatar in almost every respect.

I would not presume to debate you.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

^ That it required the viewer to actually think about what they were seeing, whereas the second you start thinking about what's going on in the new movie, the whole thing falls apart.

Once the best piece of advice regarding a Star Trek film is "check your brain at the door," you've got a problem.

The same could be said for many episodes and Trek Movies of the past. TWOK alone has many moments in it that if you think about it too much doesn't make any sense (ie The crew of the Reliant can't count planets? Genesis, established as a tool for redesigning the ecosystem of a planet, can make a planet out of a nebula? The Enterprise is the only ship in the quadrant?). Moments like this happen. Over analysis can destroy even the best work.

And what did I always love about TOS? It was fun and entertaining. And that's exactly what this movie was, fun and entertaining.

 

[Amaris]

^ That it required the viewer to actually think about what they were seeing, whereas the second you start thinking about what's going on in the new movie, the whole thing falls apart.

Once the best piece of advice regarding a Star Trek film is "check your brain at the door," you've got a problem.

(I was going to say "then Star Trek is truly dead," but so long as they are fans willing to pick up the baton and make more Star Trek on their own, Star Trek will never die. But this movie is definitely a dead end.)

It doesn't bother me that people like the new film because it doesn't take away from what I like about TOS, but it does affirm what I've long known that how many John and Jane Doe's perceive Star Trek and how I and other like minded folks perceive it is quite different. And this film was aimed mostly at the general audience and their cliched expectations of what Star Trek is. It's sad because they could easily have had all the run-and-jump and energy and familiar smiley moments while still having some intelligence in the thing. But they chose not to do that for whatever their reasons.

And there are a number of films that that have had a lot of fun and energy and also been smart. This wasn't one of them by far.

The thing is, a fan can like many (or all) types of Star Trek. I love the Star Trek '09 movie. I have worn out my Blu-ray copy (well, not literally but you get the idea). However, over time, I have come to really appreciate The Motion Picture. Before Trek XI came out, I rewatched the first ten movies, and TMP went up several notches in my book. Whether that's because I have grown older and can really appreciate the themes behind the movie, or because I have simply taken it in a different perspective and that has given me a new appreciation for the film, either way, I can like TMP and still have fun and enjoy ST09. It doesn't require greater mental capacity, it doesn't require hours of studied lore in the Trek universe, it just requires a willingness to enjoy these movies. I'm glad you gave the movie a chance, and that you want to offer them constructive criticism. It's certainly better than fans who go on demanding specific changes without being flexible. I just feel there's no reason why fans who enjoy Trek in different ways can't come together and celebrate it all, one Trek fan to another.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I'm a weird beastie in that regard. TMP is my all-time favorite, and I love it for rather than in spite of its ponderousness and pretensions--The Spock Walk scene is one of the most iconic SF scenes of all time, imao. Following very closely on that is TWoK, which was awesome along an entirely different axis. But Trek '09, far from being diminished as I re-watch the DVD my brother gave me for Christmas (he fully expected to hate it--he's pretty much been indifferent-to-hostile to all Trek post TOS--and instead he loved it almost as much--maybe more--than I did), has crept up to solidly snag the third slot.

For me, each movie captures a different aspect of Trek. TMP is the self-serious SF of the best first season episodes where TWoK captured the prickly camaraderie of the characters from the best second season episodes and really hammered home the Hornblower-in-Space vibe. Trek '09 managed to do something I wasn't expecting: in Abrams rush to make it more like Star Wars, he stumbled across a formula that was reminiscent of the cheesy serials that inspired SW and that, for better or worse, inspired Star Trek as well. I used to say Trek was one part Shakespeare and two parts Buster Crabbe. Trek '09 was so full of Crabbe you'd think it was the Chesapeake Bay.

Now, if someone could manage to to make the perfect synthesis of the three while layering on a solidly Mad Men-ish vibe? That would be a Star Trek worthy of an Oscar. I'd probably need to bring a change of underwear with me to the theater.

 

[Warped9]

^^ Generally speaking, we reach.

 

[Jim Kirk]

Understand the frustration. I liked the movie even though many things seemed "Un-Trekish". I understand the reason for the "Re-Boot". However I do think they could have went about it another way. I cannot lie that I really enjoyed the movie. As with many Trek fans I nit-picked it to death. I not entirely sure that the new fan-base is here to stay. It seems as if the new fans see it as a fad, Not a following. We will have to wait long term to see the true effects. I'm with you though. I loved the original and the other incarnations. I quit watching Enterprise during its run. I started watching the re-runs on Sci-Fi and have really enjoyed some of the episodes. I'll continue to be an "Original" Trekker for life.

Jim Kirk

 

[Amaris]

Understand the frustration. I liked the movie even though many things seemed "Un-Trekish". I understand the reason for the "Re-Boot". However I do think they could have went about it another way. I cannot lie that I really enjoyed the movie. As with many Trek fans I nit-picked it to death. I not entirely sure that the new fan-base is here to stay. It seems as if the new fans see it as a fad, Not a following. We will have to wait long term to see the true effects. I'm with you though. I loved the original and the other incarnations. I quit watching Enterprise during its run. I started watching the re-runs on Sci-Fi and have really enjoyed some of the episodes. I'll continue to be an "Original" Trekker for life.

Jim Kirk

A Trek fan is a Trek fan is a Trek fan.

 

[Jim Kirk]

Sure.........?

 

[Amaris]

Sure.........?

What I'm saying is that no Trek fan is different from another. You may like a particular incarnation, but it doesn't make you any greater or any lesser of a fan.

 

[Wynterhawk]

Nope, haven't given up. It's just getting juicy. I'm looking forward to the next film.

 

[Chrisisall]

Nope, haven't given up. It's just getting juicy. I'm looking forward to the next film.

Abrams film is good. The next one might be great. I'm there.
But TOS is king.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Exactly. We can never have TOS again--Pine isn't Shatner, Quinto isn't Nimoy and 2009 isn't 1967. We were lucky--damned lucky--to get TOS in the first place, and luckier still to get two really good TOS movies and a couple of passably enjoyable ones. As the titular character says in Jesus Christ Superstar, it was nice but now it's gone. But I liked this new Trek just fine.

 

[Amaris]

Exactly. We can never have TOS again--Pine isn't Shatner, Quinto isn't Nimoy and 2009 isn't 1967. We were lucky--damned lucky--to get TOS in the first place, and luckier still to get two really good TOS movies and a couple of passably enjoyable ones. As the titular character says in Jesus Christ Superstar, it was nice but now it's gone. But I liked this new Trek just fine.

That's true. I do believe that Trek should always move forward, even when it's looking backward. The original series was fantastic, and is unforgettable in it's influence of the day. It's lasting power is so strong that the new movie focused on it's core characters, and it did very well in theaters, building a bigger fandom and reviving it's spirit for today's audiences. That's a powerful and lasting impression, and TOS should be honored for it.