Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

[2takesfrakes]

Mister Cox ... I disagree with you completely on the DS9 thing! Completely disagree with you. However, I did purchase one of your Khan books, where you go into detail over Khan's life on Ceti Alpha V. We will see how it holds up to the 2takesfrakes White Glove Test, as I peruse this yarn of yours ... spun for our entertainment ...

 

[HaventGotALife]

Edit: And I would argue that WoK wasn't about "war" at all. It was about revenge and the past coming back to haunt you and regrets and sacrifices and so on. Yeah, presumably Khan would have caused trouble with the Genesis Device once he got his revenge, but the movie really wasn't about saving the Federation from Khan or any upcoming war with the Federation. It was more of a personal drama.

STiD, on the other hand, is very much about war and terrorism and conspiracies--and not at all about Kirk confronting his own past.

"Teaming up with me for bridge after dinner?"
"Maybe."
"What is it?"
"Every time I have dealings with Starfleet, I get nervous. We are dealing with something...that...could be perverted into a dreadful weapon."

Like Khan himself, another creation of our genius that out-paced morality, genesis is the perfect weapon in this movie. The next movie highlights the theme even more by getting the Klingons involved.

It doesn't matter if it's cast-iron weapons or drones, scientific discoveries become used for military purposes.

No, sorry.

The drone strike plot in STID is specifically allegorical to the present day real world, in the context of the War on Terror. The STID torpedoes were intended to target a single man in something analogous to a surgical strike. Kirk's comments about how Harrison deserved a trial comprised a direct commentary, specifically on today's world.

On the other hand, the Genesis torpedo was much more analogous to indiscriminate apocalyptic weapons of mass destruction, laced with Biblical overtones of both Revelations and Genesis, as all but explicitly voiced by McCoy prior to Khan's attack. In no way is TWOK's Genesis torpedo allegorical of the War on Terror.

If this is the standard for one thing ripping off another, you may as well scream "Plagiarism!" every time the ship fires photon torpedoes.

Khan is used to create a weapon. That is a little different, but he still has his revenge and then steals said weapon to continue his mission. Khan, in II, is going to get revenge and then do the exact same thing with Genesis.

I'm not saying that there isn't any departure, that it isn't a imaginative re-make, but a re-make it remains. It remains a piece of music that is given a different tone, but uses the same arrangement and lyrics. The message of the story is about Kirk and Spock's relationship. The details of what gets them there, is not all that important to this debate.

I say again: Kirk believes that the rules do not apply to him. Spock is all about "the needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few" and he follows the rules. Because they contrast each other does not mean that the movie with Khan in it has to deal with death. Both Kirk and Spock face death in II, III, and STID. Their reactions are predictable. Did you think, for an instant, that Kirk would leave Spock to die? Did you care that Kirk had a reason for it? That the makers of the film have stated that they wanted to make Spock experience the type of friendship Kirk feels for Spock.

They didn't focus on making Kirk and Spock's relationship different than it is in the Original Series MOVIES, when they have been around each other for 20 years. They shoe-horned their relationship in 6 months because fans expect them to be friends. This is my same complaint with the UPN series of Star Trek: They stopped taking risks in storytelling.

So an example from Batman: Alfred was a doting buffoon in the original movies, a pun machine. In Nolan's version, he has a conflict with Bruce about becoming Batman and disobeying the rules to get done what he needs to do to save lives. They bond because Bruce had Alfred growing up, not his father and mother. There's a reason for the relationship. When Alfred says goodbye to Bruce, it stunned me because I watched the other 2 films. There's a genuine bond there, and looking through Alfred's eyes, before he said a word, I sobbed when he was standing over Bruce's grave in the Dark Knight Rises. It genuinely touched me that Alfred felt like a failure.

I rolled my eyes when Kirk died. The "nods," not saying anything about the relationship that was not established in II and III, made me feel like I had wasted my time. I knew an augment was going to save Kirk before he took his last breath.

 

[Greg Cox]

Mister Cox ... I disagree with you completely on the DS9 thing! Completely disagree with you. However, I did purchase one of your Khan books, where you go into detail over Khan's life on Ceti Alpha V. We will see how it holds up to the 2takesfrakes White Glove Test, as I peruse this yarn of yours ... spun for our entertainment ...

Thanks! Hope you like the book. I'm particularly proud of that one.

 

[2takesfrakes]

... You go, boy!

 

[Greg Cox]

Okay, here's what I would consider a NuTrek retread of WoK. Young Captain Kirk and the crew of Enterprise are assigned to assist a brilliant young scientist, Dr. Carol Marcus, on her top-secret Genesis Project. Sparks flare between Kirk and Carol, but then the crew stumbles onto the hibernating form of a mysterious superman named Khan, who uses his mind-warping Ceti eels to steal the Genesis Device in order to launch a genocidal attack on Earth. Bonus points if you can work in Capt. Terrell and the U.S.S. Reliant.

Nothing about Klingons, Section 31, or a top-secret Federation warship.

Now that would be a retread/remake/rehash/whatever.

Reinventing Khan for a new story about terrorism and espionage in the 23rd century? Not so much . . . .

 

[HaventGotALife]

Okay, here's what I would consider a NuTrek retread of WoK. Young Captain Kirk and the crew of Enterprise are assigned to assist a brilliant young scientist, Dr. Carol Marcus, on her top-secret Genesis Project. Sparks flare between Kirk and Carol, but then the crew stumbles onto the hibernating form of a mysterious superman named Khan, who uses his mind-warping Ceti eels to steal the Genesis Device in order to launch a genocidal attack on Earth. Bonus points if you can work in Capt. Terrell and the U.S.S. Reliant.

Nothing about Klingons, Section 31, or a top-secret Federation warship.

Now that would be a retread/remake/rehash/whatever.

Reinventing Khan for a new story about terrorism and espionage in the 23rd century? Not so much . . . .

God, I wish Star Trek would've just stayed dead. Star Trek Nemesis, the fourth season of Enterprise, the end. Fan Fiction and books after that. What they have done with these two movies makes me long for Rick Berman.

 

[Greg Cox]

God, I wish Star Trek would've just stayed dead. Star Trek Nemesis, the fourth season of Enterprise, the end. Fan Fiction and books after that. What they have done with these two movies makes me long for Rick Berman.

Honestly, that seems a tad melodramatic. If STAR TREK can survive "Turnabout Intruder," the fifth movie, and pretty much the entire first season of TNG, it can survive a reboot or two.

STAR TREK deserves better than to sit on a shelf, gathering dust like some sacred relic. And ending on NEMESIS? God forbid. Would you really prefer that Trek died not with a bang but a whimper . . . ?

 

[doubleohfive]

The Prime universe didn't go anywhere. It's still there. There are still novels and comics. You can still buy the DVDs and Blu-Rays. Thanks to La-La Land Records, Intrada, GNP Crescendo and Varese Sarabande, you can get the soundtracks (and in many delightful cases, remastered, updated and even core inclusive expanded sets.) The fan films exist, and some of them are desperately and viciously advocate for the Prime universe.

This whole dead-horse-beating of bringing the Prime Universe back is dumb. Not as dumb as the rage over lens flares or the fan erection over how allegedly badass Robau was, but still... dumb.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Okay, here's what I would consider a NuTrek retread of WoK. Young Captain Kirk and the crew of Enterprise are assigned to assist a brilliant young scientist, Dr. Carol Marcus, on her top-secret Genesis Project. Sparks flare between Kirk and Carol, but then the crew stumbles onto the hibernating form of a mysterious superman named Khan, who uses his mind-warping Ceti eels to steal the Genesis Device in order to launch a genocidal attack on Earth. Bonus points if you can work in Capt. Terrell and the U.S.S. Reliant.

Nothing about Klingons, Section 31, or a top-secret Federation warship.

Now that would be a retread/remake/rehash/whatever.

Reinventing Khan for a new story about terrorism and espionage in the 23rd century? Not so much . . . .

God, I wish Star Trek would've just stayed dead. Star Trek Nemesis, the fourth season of Enterprise, the end. Fan Fiction and books after that. What they have done with these two movies makes me long for Rick Berman.

How does that relate to Greg's post?

 

[2takesfrakes]

HaventGotALife isn't alone in his dislike of Khan's reboot. I, personally, was looking forward to something original, wild and unpredictable. But these new movies are all about being commercial and Wrath of Khan has always been viewed as one of, if not the, best STAR TREK movies. Nonfans might've heard of Khan, probably, but for sure they would know the word Klingon and Tribble. In fact, if they don't put whales in the next movie, I will be very surprised.

What surprises me is that there are many actors who don't want the risk of being in an original feature. They want the security of franchises/remakes/reboots, because the chances of the project totally bombing are low. Nobody wants to be associated with box office poison. STAR TREK: Into Darkness certainly didn't fail at the box office and it was no retread of Wrath of Khan or Space Seed. But artistically, it was a flawed picture and seeing Khan again wasn't any great shakes. It made a fortune, though, just like it was supposed to.

 

[HaventGotALife]

God, I wish Star Trek would've just stayed dead. Star Trek Nemesis, the fourth season of Enterprise, the end. Fan Fiction and books after that. What they have done with these two movies makes me long for Rick Berman.

Honestly, that seems a tad melodramatic. If STAR TREK can survive "Turnabout Intruder," the fifth movie, and pretty much the entire first season of TNG, it can survive a reboot or two.

STAR TREK deserves better than to sit on a shelf, gathering dust like some sacred relic. And ending on NEMESIS? God forbid. Would you really prefer that Trek died not with a bang but a whimper . . . ?

It was. I came to the realization last night and I'm not a robot. Someone gave me an internet connection and I love Trek and hate these movies. For the emotional outburst in written form, I apologize.

I would argue Star Trek deserves to be creatively viable, and this fan is not happy if it's not doing that, more is not more, and therefore, I would rather it respect what has come before it and stay on a shelf. This fan does not feel that Star Trek is like every other fan boy series. Comics and James Bond it is not. It's been a mosaic of stories told, nothing re-told, and at its best, it gave us hope for the future. We could see adults reacting to situations we find today and how we would deal with that in the 24th century. Many people--Ira Steven Behr and JJ Abrams come to mind--called that campy and naive. Star Trek needs to open the story telling format and to not re-tread over the same material from previous incarnations. I have said that I don't want a "greatest hits." That's essentially what this movie was, and I suggest reading up-thread to see some of my reasons for why I feel that way.

There are ways of tackling international terrorism and our response to it other than making Starfleet the bad guy. The Maquis was the most underdeveloped idea on DS9, but the worst invention, in my opinion, was Section 31. I hated it in 1998, and I hate it now. Not necessarily because of the organization, but because the organization has been around since the first days of the Federation. If it were a reaction to the existential threats posed by the Borg and the Dominion, it would seem to me to be one more layer of the onion peeled away. The 24th century is too dangerous not to have the CIA of the Federation. It would open up debate about why they needed it, and make the idea a little more sound than an agent just appearing out of thin air and going into his mind to get a secret out of him.

They took something I despise and put it front-and-center as if it has always been a part of the Federation, people talk about it openly. Now, there are a few directions that they could take the next movie, like weeding out Section 31 altogether, passing legislation and new regulations against what happened in STID, but no one is going to want to sit through that. And their formula is to NEED the Vengeance and prove the Admiral right. So, I don't think I will see this one in the theater. I don't want them to tout in 20 years that this was commercially viable and it's not worth my time. That's just how I feel right now.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I can only assume that your version of "creatively viable" and mine differ. TMP was a rehash of "The Changeling". TNG remade a TOS story as early as episode 2. They basically kept the same formula they started with in 1987 with TNG throughout all that, all of Voyager and seasons 1 and 2 of Enterprise. Forehead alien planet of the week, beam down, get into trouble, get out of trouble and go home - and none of it really mattered because everything was back to how it started by the episode's end.

 

[HaventGotALife]

I can only assume that your version of "creatively viable" and mine differ. TMP was a rehash of "The Changeling". TNG remade a TOS story as early as episode 2. They basically kept the same formula they started with in 1987 with TNG throughout all that, all of Voyager and seasons 1 and 2 of Enterprise. Forehead alien planet of the week, beam down, get into trouble, get out of trouble and go home - and none of it really mattered because everything was back to how it started by the episode's end.

I find that extremely reductive. "First Contact" from TNG looks nothing like "The Apple" in TOS. Yes, they are exploring planets that have other lifeforms like us on it. But there's a host of episodes, to be as equally reductive, where they have to learn to communicate with something that doesn't have a mouth and bumpy foreheads. They just aren't talked about like the Borg episodes.

Voyager, by the end of its run, had done nothing to further the Maquis, got rid of Kes, neutered Neelix, had become a host of guest star appearances (Jonathan Frakes, Marina Sirtis, John De lancie, and Dwight Schultz) from TNG (esp. Sirtis and Schultz), and every two-parter, most especially the series finale, included the Borg. It didn't stand on its own two feet. It tried for 2 seasons and then mailed it in as a continuation of TNG, a bad season of TNG. That's bankrupt.

DS9, by the end of its run, had added layers to the Cardassians, Bajorans, Trills, and Klingons. They did whole character pieces about each of their characters and how they act in their society. They had a host of guest stars that were added during the run of the show, and only Marc Alamo had been a guest on TNG, although as a different character (but same race). The central themes were consistent throughout the show. They added the Dominion to the Star Trek vernacular. It was creative. That's what I want. And they managed to be creative in adding familiar elements. They abandoned the type of guest appearances that ruined Voyager (Q-Less comes to mind).

I figured the definition might need an example.

 

[T'Girl]

The "Big Evil Bad Guy" will have a ship which in many times the size of the hero ship.

By a factor of 2. The Enterprise D is 6 times bigger than Voyager, that must make her the antichrist.

Ahhh, but they're both "hero ships."

 

[Kemaiku]

The "Big Evil Bad Guy" will have a ship which in many times the size of the hero ship.

By a factor of 2. The Enterprise D is 6 times bigger than Voyager, that must make her the antichrist.

Ahhh, but they're both "hero ships."

So only the fact that it's evil matters, gotcha. As the Enterprise D also has greater volume than the Vengeance, making her still the only the second biggest Federation ship.

 

[Timewalker]

I can only assume that your version of "creatively viable" and mine differ. TMP was a rehash of "The Changeling". TNG remade a TOS story as early as episode 2. They basically kept the same formula they started with in 1987 with TNG throughout all that, all of Voyager and seasons 1 and 2 of Enterprise. Forehead alien planet of the week, beam down, get into trouble, get out of trouble and go home - and none of it really mattered because everything was back to how it started by the episode's end.

I find that extremely reductive. "First Contact" from TNG looks nothing like "The Apple" in TOS. Yes, they are exploring planets that have other lifeforms like us on it. But there's a host of episodes, to be as equally reductive, where they have to learn to communicate with something that doesn't have a mouth and bumpy foreheads. They just aren't talked about like the Borg episodes.

Voyager, by the end of its run, had done nothing to further the Maquis, got rid of Kes, neutered Neelix, had become a host of guest star appearances (Jonathan Frakes, Marina Sirtis, John De lancie, and Dwight Schultz) from TNG (esp. Sirtis and Schultz), and every two-parter, most especially the series finale, included the Borg. It didn't stand on its own two feet. It tried for 2 seasons and then mailed it in as a continuation of TNG, a bad season of TNG. That's bankrupt.

DS9, by the end of its run, had added layers to the Cardassians, Bajorans, Trills, and Klingons. They did whole character pieces about each of their characters and how they act in their society. They had a host of guest stars that were added during the run of the show, and only Marc Alamo had been a guest on TNG, although as a different character (but same race). The central themes were consistent throughout the show. They added the Dominion to the Star Trek vernacular. It was creative. That's what I want. And they managed to be creative in adding familiar elements. They abandoned the type of guest appearances that ruined Voyager (Q-Less comes to mind).

I figured the definition might need an example.

Yeah, DS9 was so creative that it imported a TNG character who had already turned TNG into a Klingon soap opera. DS9 was already bad enough with Smug, Perfect Jadzia Who Knows Everybody And Has Done Everything, but adding Worf to that... just made it worse, in my opinion. I was honestly dreading the day when they'd find a way to get Worf onto Voyager.

 

[HaventGotALife]

I can only assume that your version of "creatively viable" and mine differ. TMP was a rehash of "The Changeling". TNG remade a TOS story as early as episode 2. They basically kept the same formula they started with in 1987 with TNG throughout all that, all of Voyager and seasons 1 and 2 of Enterprise. Forehead alien planet of the week, beam down, get into trouble, get out of trouble and go home - and none of it really mattered because everything was back to how it started by the episode's end.

I find that extremely reductive. "First Contact" from TNG looks nothing like "The Apple" in TOS. Yes, they are exploring planets that have other lifeforms like us on it. But there's a host of episodes, to be as equally reductive, where they have to learn to communicate with something that doesn't have a mouth and bumpy foreheads. They just aren't talked about like the Borg episodes.

Voyager, by the end of its run, had done nothing to further the Maquis, got rid of Kes, neutered Neelix, had become a host of guest star appearances (Jonathan Frakes, Marina Sirtis, John De lancie, and Dwight Schultz) from TNG (esp. Sirtis and Schultz), and every two-parter, most especially the series finale, included the Borg. It didn't stand on its own two feet. It tried for 2 seasons and then mailed it in as a continuation of TNG, a bad season of TNG. That's bankrupt.

DS9, by the end of its run, had added layers to the Cardassians, Bajorans, Trills, and Klingons. They did whole character pieces about each of their characters and how they act in their society. They had a host of guest stars that were added during the run of the show, and only Marc Alamo had been a guest on TNG, although as a different character (but same race). The central themes were consistent throughout the show. They added the Dominion to the Star Trek vernacular. It was creative. That's what I want. And they managed to be creative in adding familiar elements. They abandoned the type of guest appearances that ruined Voyager (Q-Less comes to mind).

I figured the definition might need an example.

Yeah, DS9 was so creative that it imported a TNG character who had already turned TNG into a Klingon soap opera. DS9 was already bad enough with Smug, Perfect Jadzia Who Knows Everybody And Has Done Everything, but adding Worf to that... just made it worse, in my opinion. I was honestly dreading the day when they'd find a way to get Worf onto Voyager.

I know it's two different people, but complaining that TNG was a "soap opera" while complaining "nothing matters because they warped away" is being attacked from both sides.

I addressed Worf, although indirectly. Because you have to trash previous Star Trek to prove this was needed while seeing the world in black-and-white terms to not see the distinction. Why were you a fan of Star Trek? Did you start with '09?

And they managed to be creative in adding familiar elements. They abandoned the type of guest appearances that ruined Voyager (Q-Less comes to mind).

That was about Worf. And I will go into further detail now because I have been challenged on it. DS9 managed to oppress the Cardassians into the arms of the Dominion. It was logical to make it the Klingons that invaded (or the Bajorans who couldn't do it because they didn't have the muscle). It furthered the theme of oppression. "Violence breeds violence, oppression breeds retaliation." Worf, while added for ratings, had a story arc that saw him finally accept both aspects of his life so that when someone said "Do you hear the cry of the warrior?" he could say "Yeah, but I also like prune juice. Want me to prove it to you?" He was more comfortable with himself AROUND Klingons. If you don't care for him, I guess that doesn't matter.

They didn't make it into "The Worf Show." The show was strong enough that it could make him a part of the ensemble (that's about Seven of Nine).

 

[T'Girl]

So only the fact that it's evil matters, gotcha. As the Enterprise D also has greater volume than the Vengeance, making her still the only the second biggest Federation ship.

Not quite, if the Veng' was facing off with the Enterprise Dee it would (as the villian ship) have to be considerably larger then the Dee.

It's the way of things.

 

[Kemaiku]

But since we're talking about ships that actually have been presented in the movies and shows, not hypothetical ones that will never be, the point still stands.

 

[BillJ]

Why were you a fan of Star Trek?

Why am I a fan of Star Trek is an interesting question (though not pointed at me, I figure I'm allowed to answer)? I am a fan of Star Trek because it use to be fun to watch before the TNG gang started to believe they were self-important and changing the world. Which bled into the rest of the spin-offs and the TNG movies.

Star Trek is entertainment. I watch it to be entertained. Abrams brought much of the fun back to the franchise. Do I still wish I got way out, weird stuff like Greek gods trying to capture the Enterprise? Sure. But I also know that modern audiences may not be as appreciative of such an approach.

Did you start with '09?

I started watching TOS in 1975.