Are we forgetting why Spock is a great character?

[BigJake]

When they're saying the exact same things they sure are.

I am not confident in your ability to evaluate what actually constitutes "the exact same things" in this context, sorry. (If you can't tell the difference between the perspective of someone like me and that of the author of "Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting" back in '82, then you are trafficking in false equivalence.)

 

[Therin of Andor]

This business of "you're saying what people thirty years ago were saying" is basically an attempt to obscure the actual particulars of context and the content of the films involved; it is a silly game of false equivalence and it needs to go.

No, every Trek film and series has had its angry, loud minority of detractors. For those of us who were around when TAS was unleashed, we've heard the arguments against change before.

 

[BigJake]

For those of us who were around when TAS was unleashed, we've heard the arguments against change before.

I'm sure. But all of those arguments are not equivalent just because they happened. There were and are good reasons why some of the series and movies have detractors, and why some more detractors than others. Trying to ignore that will not do.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Then have a read yourself. You know the links. Step back from your own opinion, and objectively compare and contrast the complaints made against each movie. Mischaracterization, claims that TPTB have no love for or understanding of Trek, that the films are shallow Star Wars shoot-em-ups...

 

[BigJake]

Step back from your own opinion, and objectively compare and contrast the complaints made against each movie.

Believe it or not, I did this a long time ago. I know this may shock you to learn, but people can in fact arrive at different opinions than yours by perfectly rational processes. That's a thing that can happen.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I'm sure. But all of those arguments are not equivalent just because they happened. There were and are good reasons why some of the series and movies have detractors, and why some more detractors than others. Trying to ignore that will not do.

But it's the same argument for each incarnation: "You didn't make this movie the way I would have made it."

Yes, sometimes the movies had more detractors than others, but these - coincidentally? - tally well with profitablilty. "The Final Frontier", "Insurrection" and "Nemesis" all underperformed at the box office, and seemed, to me, to have the most detractors, and probably the least number of repeat visits to view on the big screen.

 

[BigJake]

Yes, sometimes the movies had more detractors than others, but these - coincidentally? - tally well with profitablilty. "The Final Frontier", "Insurrection" and "Nemesis" all underperformed at the box office, and seemed, to me, to have the most detractors, and probably the least number of repeat visits to view on the big screen.

Although there are times when moving units is not a guarantee of future respectability. Adjusted for inflation, the highest-grossing Trek film of all time was actually The Motion Picture (yes, it beats out both NuTrek films); it's largely rated an underwhelming bore today, an opinion that caught hold early on and for some good reasons.

 

[Therin of Andor]

it's largely rated an underwhelming bore today, an opinion that caught hold early on and for some good reasons.

And I would argue that many people who always called it an underwhelming bore have changed their minds over time. When TMP came out, there were people calling for it to be shunted into "an alternate universe" (see "The Best of Trek"). The "Director's Edition" seem to bring about some reevaluated opinions, but also opened up a whole new war: which version of TMP was best.

For me, it's never been boring, and yet TOS fans gleefully told me in 1980 that I'd never last in fandom because I hadn't been there in the 60s and therefore didn't know what "true Star Trek" was. As I said earlier, its the exact same argument with each new incarnation. Some people simply don't want their favourite/first version of Trek to change.

 

[BigJake]

it's largely rated an underwhelming bore today, an opinion that caught hold early on and for some good reasons.

And I would argue that many people who always called it an underwhelming bore have changed their minds over time.

But many haven't. AFAICT it remains the most widespread opinion about that film.

This doesn't mean you or I can't like it, of course. It does mean that we can't fob the criticism off as being "just like every other incarnation" -- there is probably something genuinely specific to that film that is producing the kinds of reactions it has, for good and ill.

 

[Therin of Andor]

there is probably something genuinely specific to that film that is producing the kinds of reactions it has, for good and ill.

Is that not your "false equivalence"?

 

[BigJake]

Is that not your "false equivalence"?

??? No, positing that people may be perceiving something real when they critique a film is not "false equivalence." Whatever are you talking about? The false equivalence I was talking about is the attempt to pretend that all criticisms of Trek product must be irrational and off-base because some of them were.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The false equivalence I was talking about is the attempt to pretend that all criticisms of Trek product must be irrational and off-base because some of them were.

And what the rest of us was saying is that every Trek incarnation polarizes sections of the fan base. Often because it's new, it's different. The criticisms will always appear "irrational and off-base" to those who love the incarnation being pilloried.

 

[BigJake]

And what the rest of us was saying is that every Trek incarnation polarizes sections of the fan base.

Unfortunately there's a stark limit to how interesting that is as concerns actually evaluating opinions (criticisms, praise or what-have-you). And actually evaluating what people say interests me a lot more than trying to plug it into some meta-narrative of fandom, an exercise which as I said above seems mostly to have the function of avoiding and obscuring specifics.

 

[Set Harth]

When TMP came out, there were people calling for it to be shunted into "an alternate universe" (see "The Best of Trek").

Well, it's a good thing nothing like that ever happened again!

 

[Crazy Eddie]

there is probably something genuinely specific to that film that is producing the kinds of reactions it has, for good and ill.

You're over-thinking this. The "undewhelming" complaint is really just a gut reaction to STID's paucity of space battles.

Think about that for a minute. Vengeance's shootdown of Enterprise happens with all the ceremony of a brick to the face. No dramatic "daaa da da daaaaa!" battle music, no dazzling return fire from the Enterprise, no exchange of Macross Missile Massacre and Vengeance using beam spam to render Enterprise's attack utterly ineffective. No twisting and barreling or dogfighting or chasing.

IOW, when fans saw Vengeance they were expecting the climax from Nemesis. Instead, they got Training Day.

 

[Dale Sams]

^^

Just more of the same starting from Day One of ST: TNG. Our heroes aren't allowed to shoot their way out of a situation and usually* when they encounter an enemy ship, they will be hopelessly overmatched.

*Usually.

 

[TheSubCommander]

They've likely already reached that limit, but who says they have to keep mining classic Trek?

Really, that seems to be all they're aiming to do. With two movies, latest one borrows quite a lot from Trek lore and even recreates an entire scene from one of the movies. Even the tie-in material is just mining classic Trek. Half the ongoing comic series are just adaptations of TOS episodes and even the video game is just about the Gorn.

Sure, the Trek universe is limitless, but given the rather limited ambitions displayed in the Abramsverse so far, it can't last beyond a third movie.

^^This!

Originally, I was hoping that ideally we would see 7 movies, keeping in tradition with the 7 seasons of TNG/DS9/VOY. I was hoping we would see a movie arc that, shows the crew as cadets in the first movie (which we got), transitioning to their 5 year mission (1 movie for each year), then a final movie that concludes their stories (IE winding down their term on Enterprise where everyone moves on to something bigger andbetter in the way TUC did for the original cast, but not necessarily the "end of the road" for their careers).

The third movie will really decide for me if I want to see more of the Abramsverse Trek movies. I loved ST 2009, but thought STID was such a stinker. Seriously, I haven't been so let down by a sci fi-fantasy sequel, since The Phantom Menace or Matrix Reloaded\Revolutions. If they can get their mojo back, and actually do something original for the third movie, I am back in for more. If it sucks, or is just as derivative as STID, I am totally out for good.

 

[BillJ]

^^

Just more of the same starting from Day One of ST: TNG. Our heroes aren't allowed to shoot their way out of a situation and usually* when they encounter an enemy ship, they will be hopelessly overmatched.

*Usually.

I enjoyed watching an outgunned starship actually being outgunned. The Enterprise was outclassed by the Vengeance and it clearly showed on screen. It took an act of sabotage to give the Enterprise any breathing room at all.

 

[BigJake]

You're over-thinking this. The "undewhelming" complaint is really just a gut reaction to STID's paucity of space battles.

Well, I was actually talking about TMP, but I would just like to say:

IOW, when fans saw Vengeance they were expecting the climax from Nemesis. Instead, they got Training Day.

I would kill to see a character as awesome as Alonzo Harris in a Trek movie.

 

[shapeshifter]

I haven't forgotten why Spock is a great character, he still is one. I don't see anything wrong about turning the tables with nuSpock, mixing it up a little. I've seen emotionless Spock before, I don't need to get another ten years of the character acting like he did before.

Who knows, someday Quintos Spock may be as endearing to everyone for this portrayal as Nimoy is for his portrayal of primeSpock. We haven't seen the character but in two films, give him some time to grow into this and never forget, Quintos Spock SHOULD BE CONSTANTLY SHOUTING.