Disclaimer: I'm not a huge fan of Star Trek XI. I admit it was well-produced, but I didn't really like it — which isn't too bad considering that I never liked *any* of the movies very much: I prefer my Star Trek in episodic TV format.
But I admit that the movie was probably a good thing for Trek by reinvigorating things and, more importantly, infusing the franchise with both cash and cachet.
Now here's my question: as with many long-time Trek fans, especially those of the TNG era shows, I was saddened that the reboot essentially erased 24th century Trek as we know it. But did it *have* to be that way? Couldn't there have been an origin story produced by JJ Abrams that, while perhaps contradicting/erasing certain continuity portions of Kirk & Co.'s start in Star Fleet but *without* taking such drastic measures that ensures all 24th century Trek is erased?
I would think JJ could've *still* made the movie just as appealing to the general public, "reboot" the origins of how the Enterprise crew came together, but *without* doing irreparable damage to the timeline by, eg, destroying Vulcan. I can't imagine that radically changing the future and destroying Vulcan were consequential to the film's commercial success, and I highly doubt casual fans would have liked it less if Vulcan *hadn't* been destroyed — but that certainly saddened hard-core Trek fans like me who want to preserve the TNG era events.
I guess I just don't understand why Abrams couldn't have had all the fun with rebooting how Kirk et al. grew up and wound up on the Enterprise while still preserving the future. He could have approached as: "this is really how Kirk and Spock joined SF and the Enterptise."
So why risk alienating certain long-time fans by not only rebooting Kirk's origin story but also making it clear that nothing in the TNG era happened? I just can't believe it would matter to the non-Trekkie/Trekker movie-goers. They probably don't even know what Vulcan is, so why not blow up a new, made-up, non-Federation planet that just happens to be where Spock's mother is visiting — and that way keep his emotional outbursts just as plausible?
Please let me apologize twice in advance: first to the fans of the film, and second if this has already been discussed and concluded. If the latter's the case, could someone direct me to the appropriate thread? I'm using a mobile device — hence the undoubtedly typo-laden post — and it's difficult to conduct thorough searches.
Thanks for taking the time to read this as well as for your consideration. I very much hope to get answers to my questions. Thanks!
But I admit that the movie was probably a good thing for Trek by reinvigorating things and, more importantly, infusing the franchise with both cash and cachet.
Now here's my question: as with many long-time Trek fans, especially those of the TNG era shows, I was saddened that the reboot essentially erased 24th century Trek as we know it. But did it *have* to be that way? Couldn't there have been an origin story produced by JJ Abrams that, while perhaps contradicting/erasing certain continuity portions of Kirk & Co.'s start in Star Fleet but *without* taking such drastic measures that ensures all 24th century Trek is erased?
I would think JJ could've *still* made the movie just as appealing to the general public, "reboot" the origins of how the Enterprise crew came together, but *without* doing irreparable damage to the timeline by, eg, destroying Vulcan. I can't imagine that radically changing the future and destroying Vulcan were consequential to the film's commercial success, and I highly doubt casual fans would have liked it less if Vulcan *hadn't* been destroyed — but that certainly saddened hard-core Trek fans like me who want to preserve the TNG era events.
I guess I just don't understand why Abrams couldn't have had all the fun with rebooting how Kirk et al. grew up and wound up on the Enterprise while still preserving the future. He could have approached as: "this is really how Kirk and Spock joined SF and the Enterptise."
So why risk alienating certain long-time fans by not only rebooting Kirk's origin story but also making it clear that nothing in the TNG era happened? I just can't believe it would matter to the non-Trekkie/Trekker movie-goers. They probably don't even know what Vulcan is, so why not blow up a new, made-up, non-Federation planet that just happens to be where Spock's mother is visiting — and that way keep his emotional outbursts just as plausible?
Please let me apologize twice in advance: first to the fans of the film, and second if this has already been discussed and concluded. If the latter's the case, could someone direct me to the appropriate thread? I'm using a mobile device — hence the undoubtedly typo-laden post — and it's difficult to conduct thorough searches.
Thanks for taking the time to read this as well as for your consideration. I very much hope to get answers to my questions. Thanks!
