Abrams: Expect To Cry

[Dale Sams]

Yeah, but we know that Kirk and Spock etc are running around doing just fine in the Prime Universe...

No, they're not.

They got old, fat, and dull. Stuffy and boring. Kirk fell off a rickety bridge before delivering one of his bizarre line readings ("It was...fun") and croaking. Spock was last seen shuffling through a kind of aimless story about Romulus with a bunch of old guys and Denise Crosby wearing bumpy foam rubber heads. McCoy was wearing a garotte-like ascot for vanity's sake to hide his wattle, Scotty and Uhura were fumbling around with various unappealing menepausal sexual hijinks, Chekov had evolved from Bad Accent/Haircut to Bad Accent/Toupee and Sulu...who gives a fuck about Sulu?

They're not "running around," "doing fine," or being at all interesting. These new guys are a lot more fun now.

Uhm...what about "Oh my."???? Actually, I'm sure you know the story behind that line.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I don't know about anybody else, but I was stirred by the 'signing off' at the end of The Undiscovered Country.

I didn't believe for a second that it was really the end. And indeed, most of the characters popped up again here and there in TNG and others. Chekov and Uhura were back as recently as a few years ago in the fan film Of Gods and Men!

At that very moment though, I assumed that there would be no more ensemble movies and/or cameo appearances by a cast of people I grew to know. So I was saddened to see Star Trek; as I knew it, end.

That is true. It took me ages to realize why, but I always felt there was something amiss about Kirk in Generations. I eventually realized it was the complete absence of Spock. Kirk without Spock there is just... half the punch.

 

[DalekJim]

I love Star Trek.

Star Trek fandom, I can take or leave.

Being one of the most regular posters on a Star Trek forum seems like a kinda baffling decision then?

That is true. It took me ages to realize why, but I always felt there was something amiss about Kirk in Generations. I eventually realized it was the complete absence of Spock. Kirk without Spock there is just... half the punch.

There's something amiss about Kirk in Generations because he's written like William Shatner, not Kirk, and is given minimal screentime before being abruptly killed by a bridge.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I agree that it may be difficult to see these actors as 'our' Star Trek characters and feel the same emotions that we did with Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley etc. That being said, a good movie can still evoke emotion about a character. It just won't be as personal. IMO

This is where I differ. I see Kirk/Spock/McCoy are characters -- characters who have a well-established set of character traits. In my mind, Kirk, Spock, et al. are NOT just TOS character they are characters that exist outside of TOS and belong to the greater agglomeration of simply "Star Trek" (of which AbramsTrek also belongs). Sure -- Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley portrayed those characters, but so do Pine/Quinto/Urban.

It's the character whom I feel emotionally connected to -- albeit the original actors did help shape that emotional connection somewhat. If an AbramsTrek character is written and portrayed with that proper set of character traits (an I mean the character traits that go beyond the TOS actor portrayals), then I can see that AbramsTrek character as being the same character, albeit a different version...

Therefore, that AbramsTrek character should still be able to evoke an emotional feeling. I'm not saying they automatically WILL did so -- the writers and actors need to deliver on their end. However, what I'm saying is that these characters have the same potential to evoke those emotions.

 

[JarodRussell]

I love Star Trek.

Star Trek fandom, I can take or leave.

Being one of the most regular posters on a Star Trek forum seems like a kinda baffling decision then?

That is true. It took me ages to realize why, but I always felt there was something amiss about Kirk in Generations. I eventually realized it was the complete absence of Spock. Kirk without Spock there is just... half the punch.

There's something amiss about Kirk in Generations because he's written like William Shatner, not Kirk, and is given minimal screentime before being abruptly killed by a bridge.

It's never a good idea to put a former main character on the sidelines. None of the various episodes with cameos were ever satisfying.
Nimoy Spock wasn't Spock in Trek 2009 either. Had he been killed off there as well, there'd be even greater bitching.

 

[DalekJim]

Nimoy Spock wasn't Spock in Trek 2009 either. Had he been killed off there as well, there'd be even greater bitching.

I find that even Star Trek 2009 defenders agree older Spock's inclusion was confused and pointless.

"This aint your daddy's Star Trek! Except uh, here's your daddy's Spock. Isn't he awesome in comparison to the new guy?"

WHAT.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I enjoyed his cameo very much

 

[JarodRussell]

Old Spock didn't do anything (which could have been changed easily with a short rewrite), and he didn't have an arc. He started the problem, but he didn't solve it, and he was never active in the film, and he didn't grow even the slightest bit.

 

[F. King Daniel]

That's because it was a 2-scene cameo!

Besides, wasn't getting Kirk back to the Enterprise and into command to stop Nero "solving it"? And after his epic faliure to save Romulus and Vulcan, isn't leading the new Vulcan colony his starting a path to redemption?

 

[EnsignRicky]

I don't want destiny to be earned, heroes and villains to be born, innocents to die, and I sure as shit don't want to shed any tears.

I just want to watch Star Trek.

Why has that suddenly become so difficult this century?

 

[Jeyl]

Why has that suddenly become so difficult this century?

Movie fans man. Movie fans.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I just want to watch Star Trek.

Why has that suddenly become so difficult this century?

Because so few people feel that way.

 

[Jeyl]

Because so few people feel that way.

Based on what? Last I checked, CBS hasn't cancelled their TNG BluRay sets which requires a crap ton of money to restore, remaster and re-edit, the last movie was a success both critically and commercially, Star Trek Online is still around, STID is still one of the most anticipated films of the year AND we're still getting a slew of new Star Trek merchandise from various series.

Personally, I think fans and movie goers are tired of Star Trek being limited to just one movie ever two to three years. There are a lot of stories that branch out a lot of the characters, and there are stories that don't depend solely on "Bad guy of the week" or "SAVE THE EARTH AGAIN!". These new movies may be breathing Star Trek new life, but it's very limited.

 

[Grup]

I agree that it may be difficult to see these actors as 'our' Star Trek characters and feel the same emotions that we did with Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley etc. That being said, a good movie can still evoke emotion about a character. It just won't be as personal. IMO

This is where I differ. I see Kirk/Spock/McCoy are characters -- characters who have a well-established set of character traits. In my mind, Kirk, Spock, et al. are NOT just TOS character they are characters that exist outside of TOS and belong to the greater agglomeration of simply "Star Trek" (of which AbramsTrek also belongs). Sure -- Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley portrayed those characters, but so do Pine/Quinto/Urban.

It's the character whom I feel emotionally connected to -- albeit the original actors did help shape that emotional connection somewhat. If an AbramsTrek character is written and portrayed with that proper set of character traits (an I mean the character traits that go beyond the TOS actor portrayals), then I can see that AbramsTrek character as being the same character, albeit a different version...

Therefore, that AbramsTrek character should still be able to evoke an emotional feeling. I'm not saying they automatically WILL did so -- the writers and actors need to deliver on their end. However, what I'm saying is that these characters have the same potential to evoke those emotions.

True. But there are different traits that these actors bring to well established characters. While I thoroughly enjoy the new Trek, for me anyways, it may take a while before I seem them as Kirk & company and not just actors 'playing' them. I do think that the Kirk/Spock/McCoy/Scotty characters are well on their way. Uhura/Chekov/Sulu not so much yet.

 

[Jeyl]

This guy can't even uphold his outspoken loyalty to Star Trek and he wants me to cry?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Because so few people feel that way.

Based on what?

The simple ability to pay attention to the world around me, do a little research when necessary and form reasonable conclusions based on evidence.

What do you base your posts on?

This guy can't even uphold his outspoken loyalty to Star Trek and he wants me to cry?

I very much doubt that J.J. Abrams wants anything from you.

 

[Zardoza]

This guy can't even uphold his outspoken loyalty to Star Trek and he wants me to cry?

If it's well done with the right emotional impact people will cry.