Do you ignore the "new" Star Trek?

[EnsignRicky]

I don't ignore it, I look at it like this: If I were a huge Brady Bunch fan, these things would be A Very Brady Sequel. Did Carol Brady marry the Professor from Gilligan's Island? Of course not, Did some crazy Romulan from the future come blasting back to destroy Kirk's dad, Spock's mom and the entire planet of Vulcan? Doubtful. Does Khan have magical Genesis blood? Please!!

But it is all in good fun.

 

[Nerys Myk]

My best friend came over the other night and asked me why I wouldn't go and see the movie.
He accused me of being biased because of my preference for the original TOS.

I told him that while this is correct and would definitely weigh in watching this "Darkness" flick, I would nevertheless be able to enjoy a good science fiction film regardless and switch off the "TOS mode" in my brain.

Therefore I asked him whether it's a good science fiction film to watch, regardless of the "Star Trek" letters on the package or not.

His reply: "No"

Apparently, that was the wrong answer to attract me to this movie.

Bob

I'm curious, do you similarly ignore the TOS episodes that are bad science fiction?

What would be left?

 

[Hambone]

Just treat all the various Star Treks like a huge galactic buffet. Pick out what you like and leave the rest. There's plenty for all and something there for everyone. TOS is my "meat and potatoes", while the new movies are "pizza and beer."

Who doesn't enjoy a little junk food now and then?

And remember, today's meal that doesn't agree with you doesn't necessarily ruin last week's sumptuous feast.

 

[DaleC76]

I would've answered this question differently two months ago. I didn't like ST09 very much, but Into Darkness won me over. It has its flaws, but it has that Star Trek feel. I would encourage anyone to check it out. You might be surprised.

 

[shapeshifter]

Just treat all the various Star Treks like a huge galactic buffet. Pick out what you like and leave the rest. There's plenty for all and something there for everyone. TOS is my "meat and potatoes", while the new movies are "pizza and beer."

Who doesn't enjoy a little junk food now and then?

And remember, today's meal that doesn't agree with you doesn't necessarily ruin last week's sumptuous feast.

Nicely stated. Totally agree.

 

[bbailey861]

Just treat all the various Star Treks like a huge galactic buffet. Pick out what you like and leave the rest. There's plenty for all and something there for everyone. TOS is my "meat and potatoes", while the new movies are "pizza and beer."

Who doesn't enjoy a little junk food now and then?

And remember, today's meal that doesn't agree with you doesn't necessarily ruin last week's sumptuous feast.

Nicely stated. Totally agree.

Yeah, it was nicely stated. I agree, too.

 

[ralfy]

For whatever reason, I just can't get into this "re-imagined" or "re-imaged" business, so I simply ignore all of the hype surrounding the new Star Trek movies... in fact, I ignore the new movies period. I can't make myself believe that any actor besides Shatner could ever be Kirk, etc...

I felt the same way about the updated Battlestar Galactica when it aired, even though I love Ron Moore.

Am I the only one who feels this way? Am I just too closed minded?

I agree with you. TOS was fine, and they did well with some of the movies.

TNG was OK, but it looked so bland compared to the original. The same goes for the other television shows, but the last two movies appear to make things worse.

 

[Dukhat]

For whatever reason, I just can't get into this "re-imagined" or "re-imaged" business, so I simply ignore all of the hype surrounding the new Star Trek movies... in fact, I ignore the new movies period. I can't make myself believe that any actor besides Shatner could ever be Kirk, etc...

I felt the same way about the updated Battlestar Galactica when it aired, even though I love Ron Moore.

Am I the only one who feels this way? Am I just too closed minded?

You know, I don't really mind when someone posts stuff like this. What I do mind is when the OP initially speaks his mind, then never bothers to return to his own post to debate other people's responses to him. It makes me wonder why I should even bother replying to him.

The same goes for the other television shows, but the last two movies appear to make things worse.

You keep saying this, but you never actually back up your statements, other than telling us to go find someone else's quotes. Why do you think the last two movies made things worse?

 

[ralfy]

You keep saying this, but you never actually back up your statements, other than telling us to go find someone else's quotes. Why do you think the last two movies made things worse?

Obvious attempts at capturing a teen audience obsessed with bad Hollywood script writing and special effects, and at the same time trying to appease older fans by creating weakly constructed story lines involving allusions to past movies (as seen in the latest).

The latter point is most difficult: why a reboot? Why not start afresh? Or has the franchise run its course?

 

[F. King Daniel]

^You say that like TOS was aimed exclusively at adults. You must be assuming they were the intended audience for items like this?

 

[TheSubCommander]

However, if you've seen the other Star Trek series and enjoyed them, but won't dare view the 2009 or 2013 JJ Abrams versions of Star Trek, then you're a hypocrite. Really. This is just another incarnation of Star Trek. Yes, it reuses the original TOS characters but it is clearly a "reboot", a modern day version. It is not invalidating TOS, but simply telling an alternate story. Is it perfect? No. Heck no. But it has plenty of good qualities.

Needless to say I don't fall into the category of ignoring the JJ Trek films myself, but I totally understand the sentiment of not wanting to accept other actors taking over hte roles of the TOS actors, or just not wanting to see a reboot, period. Very rarely do remakes meet or exceed the original, and yes that DOES include Star Trek 2009 and ID, at least in my opinion!

The new films, to me, are good, and I enjoy them. But have I embraced them like I have with TOS, TNG, and the other shows? Heck no! Sure we may be two films deep into a new Trek franchise, but when you have 2 new films VS not just TOS, but Star Treks 1-6, TAS, and the entire SUBCULTURE that sprung up around them, I can totally see WHY someone may be inclined to not see the JJ Trek films as any more legit than online fan films\series, and not want to accept them as canon. For example, to me, William Shatner IS Kirk, Nimoy IS Spock, and to me, the new films (and actors in them), despite being as good as they are, have yet to reach the iconic status of the original, and probably never will.

Again, not saying I am in that "anti-NuTrek" camp, but I do get the mentality.

You know, I don't really mind when someone posts stuff like this. What I do mind is when the OP initially speaks his mind, then never bothers to return to his own post to debate other people's responses to him. It makes me wonder why I should even bother replying to him.

I agree with you, and I don't like people who "drop a bomb" then leave either, but is it any wonder the guy never came back? Immediately after he\she posted, this thread was mobbed with the "How dare you not accept JJ Abrams as your new lord and savior" crowd. Ironic how those who criticize Star Trek fans who do not accept the new JJ films as canon, and call them close minded, reveal themselves to be just as dogmatic and close-minded about their position.

 

[Hober Mallow]

The latter point is most difficult: why a reboot? Why not start afresh?

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

That's like asking why the creators of the British SHERLOCK series insist on using Sherlock Holmes instead of making up some new character, maybe Holmes' great-great grandson. Or why the filmmakers behind "Clash of the Titans" just used the same old Greek gods Homer used; why didn't they make up brand new gods?

 

[JarodRussell]

The latter point is most difficult: why a reboot? Why not start afresh?

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

That's like asking why the creators of the British SHERLOCK series insist on using Sherlock Holmes instead of making up some new character, maybe Holmes' great-great grandson. Or why the filmmakers behind "Clash of the Titans" just used the same old Greek gods Homer used; why didn't they make up brand new gods?

And why did they? It's not a rhetorical question.

 

[Yeoman Basha]

Just treat all the various Star Treks like a huge galactic buffet. Pick out what you like and leave the rest.

This. I happen to love the new films, but I can sympathize with those who don't. Enjoy what you like in the Star Trek universe, ignore what you don't -- and don't worry about it. Life is too short to waste time agonizing over this kind of thing.

 

[Praetor Baldric]

Just treat all the various Star Treks like a huge galactic buffet. Pick out what you like and leave the rest.

This. I happen to love the new films, but I can sympathize with those who don't. Enjoy what you like in the Star Trek universe, ignore what you don't -- and don't worry about it. Life is too short to waste time agonizing over this kind of thing.

I agree with you both, but it is difficult for many to do because it requires them relinquishing their sense of co-ownership in the series and its universe. This is a feeling that runs very deep.

 

[Mr Pointy Ears]

no u are not alone-I don't care for this so called new star trek,people talk about bringing Abrams's star trek to the small screen but I don't think the way it is it wont work as a tv show.

 

[Gary7]

Just treat all the various Star Treks like a huge galactic buffet. Pick out what you like and leave the rest. There's plenty for all and something there for everyone. TOS is my "meat and potatoes", while the new movies are "pizza and beer."

Who doesn't enjoy a little junk food now and then?

And remember, today's meal that doesn't agree with you doesn't necessarily ruin last week's sumptuous feast.

Not to mention a nice big juicy ham hock.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm curious, do you similarly ignore the TOS episodes that are bad science fiction?

What would be left?

About half a dozen episodes.

 

[ralfy]

^You say that like TOS was aimed exclusively at adults. You must be assuming they were the intended audience for items like this?

There are teens who can recognize bad writing and aren't entranced by special effects. There are also adults who are the opposite.

 

[ralfy]

The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

That's like asking why the creators of the British SHERLOCK series insist on using Sherlock Holmes instead of making up some new character, maybe Holmes' great-great grandson. Or why the filmmakers behind "Clash of the Titans" just used the same old Greek gods Homer used; why didn't they make up brand new gods?

The two are mutually exclusive, as one can create new stories.