Any other TOSers give up post-Abrams?

[Chris3123]

I actually rather enjoyed the movie, but I have to agree with Warped9 here.

Except for the reuse of familiar names and references I could find nothing in the film that resonated with the Star Trek I knew.

...

I found it rather sad and discouraging that they couldn't capture anything of the Star Trek I've admired and loved for so long.

While enjoyable and entertaining, it wasn't Star Trek. At least not in the sense of capturing the original show's spirit. While there was plenty of action and heroics, it lacked, as Warped9 said, the intelligence of the original show.

Now, I'm not a hardcore TOSer, but I respect the original show, and I believe that all Trek should strive to capture its spirit in some fashion.

 

[Warped9]

Absolutely not. Star Trek TOS is alive and well and known as Star Trek Phase II. Being involved in its production keeps it fresh, since there are new stories, and we have kept both the form and the essence of the original.

Sorry, but Phase II was an aborted TV series that eventually morphed into TMP. The closest Phase II got to being a series was elements of it being integrated into TNG.

 

[BillJ]

Are you saying that you will go and see Trek XII if you thought Star Trek XI was a mess

Of course.

To me Trek at this point is more akin to a sports franchise than an entertainment entity. Part of the fun is to compare and contrast the current edition with what has come before.

I still support my favorite teams through good years and bad and Trek is no different.

 

[Vonstadt]

Are you saying that you will go and see Trek XII if you thought Star Trek XI was a mess

Of course.

To me Trek at this point is more akin to a sports franchise than an entertainment entity. Part of the fun is to compare and contrast the current edition with what has come before.

I still support my favorite teams through good years and bad and Trek is no different.

Wow this just hit me as incredibly on target for me at this point.

As a NY Ranger fan you really had to hang in there for 94 to truly matter. You always stand by your colors, you may be mad at them, disagree with them but you always find yourself talking, comparing and yes even arguing with your friends over what year had the better team, who could've done better...and the endless what if's...

None of us ever truly agrees but its so much fun none the less.

Kinda like we do here.

Vons

 

[Captain Robert April]

While enjoyable and entertaining, it wasn't Star Trek. At least not in the sense of capturing the original show's spirit. While there was plenty of action and heroics, it lacked, as Warped9 said, the intelligence of the original show.

Now, I'm not a hardcore TOSer, but I respect the original show, and I believe that all Trek should strive to capture its spirit in some fashion.

WE HAVE A WINNAH!!

 

[Nerys Myk]

While enjoyable and entertaining, it wasn't Star Trek. At least not in the sense of capturing the original show's spirit. While there was plenty of action and heroics, it lacked, as Warped9 said, the intelligence of the original show.

Now, I'm not a hardcore TOSer, but I respect the original show, and I believe that all Trek should strive to capture its spirit in some fashion.

WE HAVE A WINNAH!!

TOS's spirit" can mean different things to different people. I'm not sure there is a right answer to what its spirit was. As for its "intelligence" that kinda wavered from episode to epiodes. And not just "Spocks Brain", "Plato's Step Children" or [INSERT EPISODE YOU HATE], but even the "good" ones. Over all it was probably on par with its contempories. Which I think was Gene's goal.

Is this film "dumber" than TOS? It doesn't seem to be from my persective. Its certainly more entertaining than most Star Trek films, though.

 

[Warped9]

While I disliked the film it had an energy to it. I will also say that overall I never cared for any of the TNG films even though they had a moment now and then.

This film was inevitable and the debate around it inevitable as well. One has to accept that the original cast are no longer in the game--they're just too old to get back to the TOS era. And like Batman and periodically 007 and The Hulk and (from what we're hearing) Superman as well there's no reason down the road someone else doesn't do another Star Trek in the TOS era, and something more to the liking of certain fans who didn't embrace the Abrams' version.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

It was hardly an isolated item. The film is riddled with pointless references like that.

That's not being respectful of the source material, it's pandering to the gullible.

Reading comments like that makes it quite easy to believe that you genuinely don't know the definition of "respect."

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Reading comments like that makes it quite easy to believe that you genuinely don't know the definition of "respect."

Among other things.

Hey, about seven percent of TOS fans didn't like Abrams's movie. That's a pretty fucking successful relaunch.

 

[Mrs_Whatsit]

Reading comments like that makes it quite easy to believe that you genuinely don't know the definition of "respect."

Agreed, EliyahuQueoni. You know, reading this thread has made me realize that, even though I thought I'd been been a Star Trek fan from the very first broadcast of the very first TOS episode—and through all the incarnations and movies that came after—I can't possibly be a true Star Trek fan because I love the JJ Abrams reboot! How dumb was I not to see it? <forehead slap>

I've now seen the light and realize that, since I believe STXI has breathed life into a moribund franchise, albeit one I still love, I'm gullible and nowhere near as intelligent, discerning, intellectual, etc. as the true ST fans (oh, wait, I'm stupid so I don't have to use big words any more—sorry, it takes a little bit of time for those neurons to stop firing completely). I've always joked that I want to be stupid when I grow up, because it's so much easier not to have to take responsibility for your actions. Now I have official confirmation that I can do that! Yippee!

Ahh, stupidity…I can feel the pressure falling from my shoulders already…

 

[Warped9]

Instead emulatimg TOS' best episodes Abrams chose to emulate the worst. Kinda like "The Mark Of Gideon" writ large.

 

[Amaris]

^ I actually liked that episode.

 

[Kegg]

Now, I'm not a hardcore TOSer,

The wrist strain can be a little much.

Reading comments like that makes it quite easy to believe that you genuinely don't know the definition of "respect."

Among other things.

Oh quite. To dislike the film is one thing, but the level of reverence it occasionally plays is something that was so obvious it tickled my geekiness thoroughly even if I felt a little overgeeked. Making speaking Uhura's first name for the first time a big dramatic reveal (and have that name be the one that's been the fan favourite and apparently the Roddenberry/Nicholls one also) is nothing but respectful, more or less by definition.

Argue whether ot not the film snatched Star Trek's katra and reinvigorated it from Leonard Nimoy to Zach Quinto, but I think one would have to rather carefully warp the argument to suggest there's no respect for the material.

 

[number6]

And so the argument has indeed been seriously warped, by the same people who would refuse to accept any new Trek no matter what it was.

 

[Withers]

Here's a question posed to anyone who answered "yes" to the original question posed by this thread;

Were you satisfied with Nemesis and Enterprise as the direction the Trek universe was heading or were those excusable when compared with the new film?


-Withers-​

 

[Nerys Myk]

Withers, some of these folks gave up in 1979!

 

[A beaker full of death]

To dislike the film is one thing, but the level of reverence it occasionally plays is something that was so obvious it tickled my geekiness thoroughly even if I felt a little overgeeked. Making speaking Uhura's first name for the first time a big dramatic reveal (and have that name be the one that's been the fan favourite and apparently the Roddenberry/Nicholls one also) is nothing but respectful, more or less by definition.

Argue whether ot not the film snatched Star Trek's katra and reinvigorated it from Leonard Nimoy to Zach Quinto, but I think one would have to rather carefully warp the argument to suggest there's no respect for the material.

There's a difference between respect and pandering.

 

[ToddPence]

Instead emulatimg TOS' best episodes Abrams chose to emulate the worst. Kinda like "The Mark Of Gideon" writ large.

Hell, Abrams' movie makes "The Mark of Gideon" look like "City on the Edge of Forever".

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Which is why it's the most successful Trek movie ever and over nine out of ten Trek fans who express an opinion like it - not to mention the tens of millions of perfectly bright normal people who never bothered with Trek before.

What Abrams "emulated" were the elements that have actual entertainment value and have sustained interest in Star Trek for decades. These don't happen to be the things that matter to a small minority - about seven percent - of hardcore fans, and that is why serious, determined negativity toward the film is limited to a very small number of self-identified TOS fans.

He did the right thing.

 

[Shazam!]

Which is why it's the most successful Trek movie ever and over nine out of ten Trek fans who express an opinion like it - not to mention the tens of millions of perfectly bright normal people who never bothered with Trek before.

What Abrams "emulated" were the elements that have actual entertainment value and have sustained interest in Star Trek for decades. These don't happen to be the things that matter to a small minority - about seven percent - of hardcore fans, and that is why serious, determined negativity toward the film is limited to a very small number of self-identified TOS fans.

Where do these figures come from?