A safe place for those among us...

[Therin of Andor]

The idea that Star Trek fans are more likely to go see a new Trek movie than others seems plausible enough. Almost by definition it must be true. But does that make them less discerning? I don't think most Trek fans had any difficulty recognizing that Nemesis was a poor film.

Even if a ST film had no redeeming qualities at all, I'd still go (on opening night) just to satisfy myself that I'd given it a chance. I was terribly disillusioned by ST V, but watching it (and lampooning the hell out of it) with friends was one of the best nights at the cinema. Shatner tried to give me a very different type of experience, but we went for incredulous hilarity instead. We still got our money's worth.

So, one can be discerning - as in knowing a movie is a bit of a dud - but still actually going to see the movie. When ST V first came out on VHS, I made a point of buying an ex-rental, a few weeks after its release, rather than getting one in pristine shape. I did the same or the DS9 pilot episode, "Emissary", because that series left me rather cold until about "Blood Oath".

As disappointing as ST V, GEN and NEM may have been for me, they each had moments that were well worth seeing, often several times.

I still find it hard to believe so many US fans actively boycotted NEM in its opening weekend. Funnily enough, when NEM came out on DVD, it won its release weekend in the US. So..., presumably, US fans who didn't want to be seen coming out of the cinema still caught up with the movie - in private - as soon as they were able.

 

[flemm]

Therin of Andor, all of what you said there seems perfectly plausible. My point was more that I don't disqualify the importance of widespread popularity as a measure of success, but I don't think it is the ultimate barometer either. Also, I don't think being a Star Trek fan implies that one's judgement of a Star Trek movie is necessarily going to be flawed or tainted in some way

 

[jstimson]

If canon does not matter, then.....

Kirk sighed, waiting for the long escalator ride down to the bridge. The moment gave him time to reflect though, as he brushed a lock of his long red hair out of his eyes, on the success and completion of the recent mission with the Thalosian allies. His reverie was broken upon reaching the bridge. Striding to his bar stool at the back of the bridge, he gave a wink to Uhura as he passed her. Still a lovely sight at 80, and even more so for being the mother of his twins.


Dudes, that's a quick and extreme example, but canon has to matter at some level. Don't create a universe and then ignore or change parts of it, especially if doing that does not even serve a purpose in the story.

Now, many changes in canon can be rationalized after the fact. Was Checkov too young in this movie? Yes. But what if the destruction of the Kelvin changed relationships such that his parents ended up having him later in life?

I'm more for adhering to canon because it makes the world more real. Just as I would not expect to go outside my front door and find the sky coloured lime green, "just for artistic effect", I would expect to see the sky on Vulcan to be red (and not blue "because it changes with the seasons" as is the reason given by the producers for the movie).

If none of it really matters, then we might as well ride the escalator down to the bridge.

 

[Amaris]

The idea that Star Trek fans are more likely to go see a new Trek movie than others seems plausible enough. Almost by definition it must be true. But does that make them less discerning? I don't think most Trek fans had any difficulty recognizing that Nemesis was a poor film.

Even if a ST film had no redeeming qualities at all, I'd still go (on opening night) just to satisfy myself that I'd given it a chance. I was terribly disillusioned by ST V, but watching it (and lampooning the hell out of it) with friends was one of the best nights at the cinema. Shatner tried to give me a very different type of experience, but we went for incredulous hilarity instead. We still got our money's worth.

So, one can be discerning - as in knowing a movie is a bit of a dud - but still actually going to see the movie. When ST V first came out on VHS, I made a point of buying an ex-rental, a few weeks after its release, rather than getting one in pristine shape. I did the same or the DS9 pilot episode, "Emissary", because that series left me rather cold until about "Blood Oath".

As disappointing as ST V, GEN and NEM may have been for me, they each had moments that were well worth seeing, often several times.

I still find it hard to believe so many US fans actively boycotted NEM in its opening weekend. Funnily enough, when NEM came out on DVD, it won its release weekend in the US. So..., presumably, US fans who didn't want to be seen coming out of the cinema still caught up with the movie - in private - as soon as they were able.

That made no sense to me either. I went and saw NEM opening weekend. First time, it was fun to watch even though I cringed often. Second time, I noticed all the flaws. I still bought it on DVD, and I have watched it all of twice since then.

J.

 

[Aragorn]

When I think of canon, I wonder where the hell Data's emotion chip is in Nemesis since it was such a big part of his character growth and used quite well in First Contact.

When I think of canon fruitcakes I'm glad I don't know, I point to the poster here who said if Gary Mitchell wasn't in Star Trek XI, the entire movie would be ruined for him.

 

[Franklin]

I had the same problem when I was in college and trying to tell a friend of mine at the movie theatre where I worked summers why Shakespeare was superior to Marvel Comics. He wasn't compelled, either.

He's probably the kind of guy who'll try to convince you that The Olive Garden serves authentic Italian food.

It's too bad some folks have to try to rationalize what they like as far more important than it is. The Olive Garden is to Italian food what Marvel Comics is to Shakespeare. And that's as far as the comparisons should go. The dangerous thing is probably being allowed to be drawn deeper into the comparison in the first place.

Star Trek is a commercial product for a mass audience, pure and simple. It adapts to remain commercially viable, and this time a big adjustment was needed to revive the moribund franchise.

Hell, even religions adapt, cutting and reinterpretting canon.

 

[SalvorHardin]

I was never really obsessed with canon and the strict adherence to every little unimportant detail....
And whatever little I may have had, I got over completely by the age of 15-16.

I don't care if the Kelvin looks too advanced for a pre-TOS era ship, I don't give a crap that the Enterprise was redesigned and looks different for a 2009 movie and I certainly don't need on screen explanations for it etc etc etc