There's always a rift in fandom. Always will be.
Is the great rift repairable?
- Thread starter CDR6
- Start date
No there isn't, you lie, it's perfectly fine.... I oppose such a concept..... I find that offensive
This place doesn't work like that.
Yeah, it's gotta be rough when people don't agree with you.
I keep reading this topic title and for whatever reason, wondering if there's something wrong with the Galactic Barrier.
I didn't expect people to agree with me, that wasn't the the reason I brought this topic up. Rather I was hoping for good discussion on the subject of what could be happening in the "trek" world. Instead I got what you see here. After some reading I found that the number of folks who don't like what JJ did to Star Trek is much bigger than I expected. Also the venom between the two groups is quite strong on both sides, as again evidenced here.
I had assumed this board to be a collection of better thinkers on Star Trek in general and thought this would be a perfect place to get a feel for things. But thus far I am pretty let down by the way things went. Hence I have given up on the subject...lesson learned as it were.
-Chuck
"There can be no peace while [J.J.] lives!"
And it hasn't mattered. Never will.
Cue violins.
No, there never was much to this. The OP started from two false premises - that there are an enormous number of traditional fans who rejected the movie, and that this must (therefore) be of concern to the filmmakers. Things developed rather predictably from there.
I'm not super entirely sure, but my gut tells me this might be a thinly veiled insult. Oh,well. Time for bed.
Ar-r-r-rgh! This is beyond dumb. I'm outta here, you have the controls. I have other things more demanding things in my life right now.
My best to all...
-Chuck
Chuck, I hate to break it to you, but you got as good as you gave. Now, it's kind of traditional around here to avoid going into depth on any given subject because the ducks will peck you to snarky death on accumulated minutia, but there are still plenty of long-winded, thoughtful types who haven't learned their lesson yet and manage to respond in kind to thoughtful posts.
I'm dragged, kicking and screaming, into agreeing with Dennis; that you started with false premises and seem more miffed that you weren't proven right than coaxing the dialog and learning more about prevalent views around here. If you want to stomp off in a huff, you're welcomed to do it, but that technique has been done to death in these parts and it usually results in embarrassing, derisive snickering from the very people against whom you were arguing.
Do I agree with you that the latest film had serious shortcomings? Absolutely. So do a number of people around here. Is Paramount worried? Absolutely not. If all of us who had issues with the last movie packed our bags and left fandom, the execs in charge of the franchise wouldn't bat an eye because the last movie made a ton of money. To them, you and I are dead wrong because they're more interested in the bigger audience; the people Harry Plinkett painted as morbidly obese trailer park denizens feeding each other popcorn and Skittles in the cinema. There's a lot of them and, for a variety of reasons, they're interested in one thing: being entertained. And frankly, as much as I disliked parts of Trek2009, it was highly entertaining.
It wasn't intellectually challenging. It didn't have the audience talking about it for weeks after release like Inception did. It had Kirk and Spock and Enterprise-like things up on the screen with lots of very pretty effects and people liked it.
So Paramount thinks they've found the formula for Star Trek movie success. And this is what Trek in the theaters is going to look like until crowds and critics say, "Oh God, they're doing this again, when will they stop?!" With luck, the next film will be a bit smarter and have a tighter script. Maybe they'll take ol' Harlan up on his offer (I doubt it). Then, in 2012, we'll be able to look past the weaknesses of Trek2009 and enjoy a re-invigorated franchise that has the best of both worlds. And if not, so what? It's just a dumb movie. Personally, I can always go back to my model of the original 1701 and stroke its ample nacelles until I get over my bitter disappointment.
I couldn't agree more. The first post was pretty vehement. I can't remember everything that was said, but I seem to remember something about JJ reaching into rectal regions to pull out something good. The interesting thing is that, if you look at the thread, there were some thoughtful posts in response to the OP. Maybe I'm wrong, but it really seemed to me that he was looking for validation of his opinion more so than looking for a different viewpoint or an insightful discussion, but he just didn't want to admit it. Were there snarky posts here? Sure; a couple of them were even mine. But for the OP to dismiss the entire thread, suggest the thread be deleted, and imply that those who have posted in disagreement aren't the "better thinkers" he was looking for, probably isn't the best way to foster a meaningful discussion, if that is, in fact, what he was looking for.
Oh, and I also agree with pretty much everything else Psion said.
Did you crack double digits?
I was actually surprised at the number of Trek fans who liked the film. Like most fans, I'd heard about Trek XI for a while before it was released. Based on what was swirling around the internet, I honestly thought I was going to hate it. On opening day, I went to a local Barnes & Noble and read the entire comic prequel to the book. After that, I was even more convinced I probably wasn't gonna like it, but I was determined to keep an open mind. Needless to say, by the time I left the theater, I had been pleasantly surprised. I enjoyed it for the imperfect, but pretty damn fun, entertainment it was.
But I think it's safe to say that, on several levels, it's quite a departure from the Trek we all know and love. Given that, I thought there would be considerably more backlash towards it than there has been. Once again, I have been pleasantly surprised. It has reaffirmed my belief that not all of us are of the exceedingly-difficult-to-please variety that spend our time pontificating on how bouncing the graviton particle beam off the main deflector dish just couldn't possibly have worked in episode whatever.
As if my ego wasn't over-sized already. But be careful, that might be a warnable offense.
Thanks!
Star Trek hasn't been a monolithic entity that's remained unchanged over the past 44 years and a day. It's evolved numerous times. Some good, some bad.
Enterprise was different from TNG. One attempted to appeal to the interests of viewers of the 2000s while another attempted to appeal to the intrests of viewers of the 1980s.
DS9 was different from TOS. TAS was different from Voyager. Each series had their share of crap episodes.
Even the movies are different. There isn't one over reaching theme that spans from The Cage to These Are the Voyages. It's entertainment. Some of it sucked. Some of it was good. Trying to elevate it to a religious experience is disingenuous.
Presuming that the fan base are all mindless drones who loved everything about the previous 40 odd years of Trek isn't wise. Personally, I never cared for TOS. I repect it for what it was...but meh...it's all campy if you ask me. It's more Batman than Gunsmoke. I was raised on TNG and that's what I prefer. Movie wise? TMP sucked. Didn't like it. In fact, I'm not a fan of Roddenberry at all. I think everything he had a direct hand in making failed on several levels. Do I think you're a fool, and idiot, or a sucker for liking his work? No! Of course not.
In the end, the franchise needed a change. Repeating what we all "knew and loved" would have been a laughable disaster and we wouldn't be worrying about a Trek XII.
Personally, I doubt it would be possible to repair the "rift". Unless, the new film is completely ignored, and/or referred to as "non-canon." The studio, time and time again, forgets that Star Trek is not exactly like all the other shows. It has a passionate fan base that defends the shows long history on the air (perhaps more so than any other fan base in history).
The new movie, aside for providing the "Easter Egg Hunt" as you put it, ignored that history and rebooted the franchise. Supposedly for the "new" fans. So, some old fans decided that the movie was not for them an walked away. Good enough. Vote with your feet.
We will see if Trek can survive without the old fans who walked away. My thought is that judging from the box office returns Trek can indeed survive. It will be a different show, however. On the other hand, it may not because its not on the air, and the film versions have very little to offer that is not already being offered by every other action film. In other words, by ignoring the themes and history which attracted the original Star Trek audience, the franchise will loose the passionate fan base which brought Star Trek to such heights of science fiction success. The fan base which fed of the tradition and history of the franchise. And without the dedicated and passionate fans JJ Trek will fade away.
At least that's the two theories.
Time will tell.
Last edited: