Anachronistic Views May Kill New Trek Series From The Start

[Hartzilla2007]

Just see Gundam as the example. When their prime universe, The Universal century has become old,

Not so much since they have a currently running OVA set in it and have plans to do an adaption of a manga retelling of the original show.

Exactly. They simply have several parallel universes to allow for more artistic freedom, but the original universe hasn't been abandoned. It's just not used that much anymore since there's already so much stuff built on top they'd have to take into account.

Yeah but they are kind of rebooting it.

 

[Santa Kang]

I find the statement that anachronistic views may kill the next attempt curious. Star Trek 2009 was a big success, and its characters are modelled after the issues of the 60s. It can't get any more anachronistic than that.

The link to the 60s has been severed. Nobody thinks anything about a black woman or a Russian serving in Starfleet. Uhura is now part of a forbidden romance template, and Chekov is the Greenhorn. The fish-out-of-water character type that Spock represents is evergreen. Kirk was an interesting departure from the space-opera-hero template of the time, but the new Kirk is a different type entirely, the cocky kid.

And then we have McCoy, still the loveable curmudgeon, and Scotty, unrecognizable as goofy comic relief. The characters are all mapping to popular types in fiction generally, but not anything to do with the 60s in particular.

Like I said, JJTrek was based on public misconceptions of Star Trek, not the reality of what Star Trek actually was.

It was blend of various takes on Star Trek. Mainly TOS and the TOS Movies. The Kirk in ST09 owes more the TOS movie Kirk than TOS Kirk. Uhura has been almost totally reinvented.(Needed to make her a lead) Sulu, Chekov and McCoy are close to their TOS selves. Scotty seems to be based on the more comedic take seen in episodes like By Any Other Name. Doohans comic flair was sadly underutilized in TOS. Heck, my wife just used the "Hello computer" gag about an hour ago!

 

[Captain Robert April]

JJ's Chekov owes far more to Wesley Crusher than anything Walter Koenig ever did.

And Quinto's Spock was little more than Sylar with pointed ears.

 

[Kemaiku]

^It's been over two years dude, stop acting like JJ killed your dog and get over it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It was blend of various takes on Star Trek. Mainly TOS and the TOS Movies. The Kirk in ST09 owes more the TOS movie Kirk than TOS Kirk. Uhura has been almost totally reinvented.(Needed to make her a lead) Sulu, Chekov and McCoy are close to their TOS selves. Scotty seems to be based on the more comedic take seen in episodes like By Any Other Name. Doohans comic flair was sadly underutilized in TOS. Heck, my wife just used the "Hello computer" gag about an hour ago!

Exactly. No one is interested in backing Trek up forty years and duplicating the original TV series - even a revival of that milieu is necessarily a reinvention that has to take into account the popular aspects of what came later.

 

[Santa Kang]

JJ's Chekov owes far more to Wesley Crusher than anything Walter Koenig ever did.

And Quinto's Spock was little more than Sylar with pointed ears.

Other both being "Wonder kids" I see nothing of Wes Crusher in Chekov. The Wonder kid was need to explain Chekov's presence on the Enterprise. ( Gangs all here!)

I don't see any Sylar in Spock either. That Quinto managed to pull that off surprised me. I thought for sure I would see Sylar or just Quinto, but I saw Spock.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

JJ's Chekov owes far more to Wesley Crusher than anything Walter Koenig ever did.

And Quinto's Spock was little more than Sylar with pointed ears.

Other both being "Wonder kids" I see nothing of Wes Crusher in Chekov. The Wonder kid was need to explain Chekov's presence on the Enterprise. ( Gangs all here!)

I don't see any Sylar in Spock either. That Quinto managed to pull that off surprised me. I thought for sure I would see Sylar or just Quinto, but I saw Spock.

Critiques of the movie and characters which consist of nothing more than superficial comparisons to other Trek characters are pretty much free of meaningful content - pretty much like an extended in-joke. Come to think of it, hardcore fandom is distinguished by fondness for in-jokes of all kinds - they're not really at all funny, but they help to define who's "in the club" and who isn't.

Chekov in Trek 2009 is a young character defined pretty much in ways that are useful and interesting for purposes of the movie. He's really something of an improvement, since in TOS Chekov was not really a character at all - simply a one-note national stereotype that served as the butt of jokes.

 

[JarodRussell]

Chekov in Trek 2009 is a young character defined pretty much in ways that are useful and interesting for purposes of the movie. He's really something of an improvement, since in TOS Chekov was not really a character at all - simply a one-note national stereotype that served as the butt of jokes.

And nuChekov wasn't?

 

[Captaindemotion]

JJ's Chekov owes far more to Wesley Crusher than anything Walter Koenig ever did.

And Quinto's Spock was little more than Sylar with pointed ears.

Other both being "Wonder kids" I see nothing of Wes Crusher in Chekov. The Wonder kid was need to explain Chekov's presence on the Enterprise. ( Gangs all here!)

I don't see any Sylar in Spock either. That Quinto managed to pull that off surprised me. I thought for sure I would see Sylar or just Quinto, but I saw Spock.

Critiques of the movie and characters which consist of nothing more than superficial comparisons to other Trek characters are pretty much free of meaningful content - pretty much like an extended in-joke. Come to think of it, hardcore fandom is distinguished by fondness for in-jokes of all kinds - they're not really at all funny, but they help to define who's "in the club" and who isn't.

Chekov in Trek 2009 is a young character defined pretty much in ways that are useful and interesting for purposes of the movie. He's really something of an improvement, since in TOS Chekov was not really a character at all - simply a one-note national stereotype that served as the butt of jokes.

Agreed totally. I much preferred Yelchin's take. And let's face it, Yelchin's a much better actor than dear old Walt.

 

[xortex]

Other both being "Wonder kids" I see nothing of Wes Crusher in Chekov. The Wonder kid was need to explain Chekov's presence on the Enterprise. ( Gangs all here!)

I don't see any Sylar in Spock either. That Quinto managed to pull that off surprised me. I thought for sure I would see Sylar or just Quinto, but I saw Spock.

Critiques of the movie and characters which consist of nothing more than superficial comparisons to other Trek characters are pretty much free of meaningful content - pretty much like an extended in-joke. Come to think of it, hardcore fandom is distinguished by fondness for in-jokes of all kinds - they're not really at all funny, but they help to define who's "in the club" and who isn't.

Chekov in Trek 2009 is a young character defined pretty much in ways that are useful and interesting for purposes of the movie. He's really something of an improvement, since in TOS Chekov was not really a character at all - simply a one-note national stereotype that served as the butt of jokes.

Agreed totally. I much preferred Yelchin's take. And let's face it, Yelchin's a much better actor than dear old Walt.

So that's why I don't want to see it.

 

[Christopher]

And let's face it, Yelchin's a much better actor than dear old Walt.

I'm not sure of that. I think the heavy accent tended to obscure Koenig's acting ability, since when I've seen him in other roles -- like a guest turn on Perry Mason and his much later role as Bester on Babylon 5 -- he's been a much more impressive actor than he ever seemed to be as Chekov.

Which is not to disparage Anton Yelchin's talent in the least. I agree he's a really good actor, and the greatest strength of the Abrams film was its casting.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Critiques of the movie and characters which consist of nothing more than superficial comparisons to other Trek characters are pretty much free of meaningful content - pretty much like an extended in-joke. Come to think of it, hardcore fandom is distinguished by fondness for in-jokes of all kinds - they're not really at all funny, but they help to define who's "in the club" and who isn't.

Chekov in Trek 2009 is a young character defined pretty much in ways that are useful and interesting for purposes of the movie. He's really something of an improvement, since in TOS Chekov was not really a character at all - simply a one-note national stereotype that served as the butt of jokes.

Agreed totally. I much preferred Yelchin's take. And let's face it, Yelchin's a much better actor than dear old Walt.

So that's why I don't want to see it.

You don't want to see it because it might in some ways be better than the original?

 

[xortex]

Not even close.

 

[Santa Kang]

Not even close.

Won't know till your actually seen it.

 

[xortex]

I tried to see it at a free showing but had to walk out due to the stupid story, emo mawkishness and strained nostalgia and schmaltzy music.

 

[Kemaiku]

You mean Nemesis? yeah that was pretty bad.

 

[xortex]

I thought you liked stupid stories?

 

[Kemaiku]

I thought you liked stupid stories?

Since I've never said anything of the sort I don't see how.

 

[Santa Kang]

I tried to see it at a free showing but had to walk out due to the stupid story, emo mawkishness and strained nostalgia and schmaltzy music.

Well those last two are new complaints. The first one strikes me as odd. The opening with George and Winona Kirk is one of the best written, performed and filmed sequences in Trek history. "Emo Mawkisness"? Perhaps those words don't mean what you think they do. ( wouldn't be the first time.) Though TOS could be a bit mawkish at times. Kirk and Spock were emo, before there was emo. "Strained nostalgia"? Usually folks complain that it was too "modern" and strayed away from what they think of as Star Trek. What did you find "nostalgic"?. The films music is also praised in most quarters. Giacchino has won several awards including Grammys, Emmys and Oscars. Hell, he's won awards for video game soundtracks! Perhaps "schmaltzy" is the word you mean, either?

 

[JarodRussell]

The opening with George and Winona Kirk is one of the best written, performed and filmed sequences in Trek history.

Hm... I don't consider having George Kirk die because the autopilot fails good writing. That's on par with Nemesis "Auto destruct offline", "transporters offline" and "only one single fucking personal transporter thingy left" just so you have to force Data to die.

Spock's death in TWOK on the other hand, that was well done. The Enterprise's warp drive was destroyed during Khan's first attack, and Scotty never got around repairing it in the short time they had. So Spock's death wasn't the result of a lame and shoved in malfunction plot device.