Good points about the necessity of new writers and new stories. I'd also add to that new ideas and concepts would be necessary too. Though, there does have to be some balance in a new tv series between a series and/or seasonal arc and standalone episodes as well as a balance between "seeking new life and new civilizations" and seeing familiar species such as Romulans and Klingons. Exploring new directions for 25th century Romulans, Klingons, etc. to take could be just as interesting to viewers as exploring whole new alien civilizations so a good variety of different types and styles of episodes would be essential. Also, there's the danger of just becoming Star Trek: The Next Next Generation to be avoided, but despite some similarities being unavoidable the general trope is avoidable.
Do fans want the prime timeline back?
- Thread starter Beyerstein
- Start date
Good points about the necessity of new writers and new stories. I'd also add to that new ideas and concepts would be necessary too. Though, there does have to be some balance in a new tv series between a series and/or seasonal arc and standalone episodes as well as a balance between "seeking new life and new civilizations" and seeing familiar species such as Romulans and Klingons. Exploring new directions for 25th century Romulans, Klingons, etc. to take could be just as interesting to viewers as exploring whole new alien civilizations so a good variety of different types and styles of episodes would be essential. Also, there's the danger of just becoming Star Trek: The Next Next Generation to be avoided, but despite some similarities being unavoidable the general trope is avoidable.
You want me to explain the absense of something ? I'm not sure how I'd do that. Rather, why don't you explain why you think I'm wrong ?
Same comment: if you want to show that I'm wrong, you're going to have to put some effort into it. As fas as I know, the discovery of Khan and the bit with Spock and Kirk in the engine core are the only portions of the story that are similar in any way. There's nothing else in the story that's lifted from any other Trek story.
That's not what you said. You said Trek is ABOUT a story, not that it has one.
In any timeline. What's special about the old one ? Bear in mind that they already made retcons about the old timeline in TNG and First Contact, Enterprise, etc.
Well in that case we have nothing to argue about. We simply disagree on that question.
Beaming torpedoes into a enemy ship and then exploding them inside is lifted from a Voyager episode, except the Voyager epiosde just used one.
This is almost a parody post.
Rubbish.
Belz is correct, the warp core scene is about the only clear remake / tribute of previous Trek movie, the rest of it is about as original as it gets.
Any similarities are unintentional and purely co-incidental etc
You were the one who challenged my comment in the first place so surely it's you that has to put in the effort to prove me wrong? Not just say I'm wrong by saying its about a younger Kirk and Spock etc.
Wow, So as far as you know SECTION 31 has never been mentioned in any other trek story? Thats just one example, there are many many more. The whole KHHHAAANNN line was certainly lifted... Badly.
I don't particularly come on here for an argument.
I liked Into Darkness. I took it as a homage movie for seasoned trekkies and a catch up for newbies. With that said, you say it has almost NONE of the story of any Trek movies, as if NuKirk wasn't following TOS Kirk's style, or that Klingon/Human relations weren't shaky, or that section 31 didn't exist, or that Carol wasn't standing up there, or that Starfleet Headquarters wasn't in San Fransisco, or that the Admirals weren't using the same Admiral outfits we've seen before, or that Spock didn't do a mind meld, or that they didn't quickly bring up Harcourt Mudd and that Mudd incident (I caught that in theaters, me and another.). I can go on but hopefully you get the point.
Last edited:
When Tuvok was young he was going to abandon the ways of logic because he fell in love with a girl in his class
Hang on. Using a pre-established piece of the Star Trek universe doesn't mean you're just rehashing an old story. By that reasoning, Trek is merely repeating itself every time it brings in the Klingons or the Romulans or the Prime Directive . . . .
No I was simply replying to the comment that Into Darkness hasn't Lifted ANYTHING other than Khan or the Core scene.
My whole point was about it being lazy. They could still have paid homage to older trek fans but not by recreating those scenes and recreating Khan. They did it well in 2009 at least. It could have been a completely different Villian and it would have felt better to me at least. That's what I was getting at in the first place.
Last edited:
A dangerous statement for the survival of Star Trek Franchise. If the majority of Star Trek Hardcore fans want that way, then it is the time for Star Trek to move on.
That silly Vegas poll by no means represented the majority of fans. It was a hundred people at the convention attended by thousands. (Just to put things in perspective, there are currently over five hundred fans online at this very board.)
And the "Hardcore Fans" are only a tiny segment of the movie-going audience to begin with . . .
And the "Hardcore Fans" are only a tiny segment of the movie-going audience to begin with . . .
You can't dismiss two huge examples of 'lifted' elements by saying "yeah, but apart from that..." and expect your point to be taken seriously in any way.
Some fans will likely hang themselves when the day comes that an episode or movie is actually remade based on the responses some have had to Into Darkness.
I, for one, can't wait for the day that we get a modern interpretation with modern effects of something like The Cage or Where No Man Has Gone Before.
J
James
Guest
Return to the original timeline and continue exploring new worlds and civilizations. That's gotta be better than reliving previous encounters like TWOK. Even Star Wars didn't retread over already established incidents. I don't 100% agree with STID being the worst Star Trek movie but it definitely isn't the best. It had to be more than 100 fans were polled in that worst Star Trek movie poll or else it wouldn't have been news. Most Star Trek fans don't like the reboot franchise, like it or not. The merchandise market reflects that as well, there are very few reboot related items. Most current Star Trek merchandise is based on the prime universe. Playmates did make toys for the first movie and they did not sell at all, in fact if you visit toys r us you can still find various items from the movie on the shelves that have been rotting for 2+ years. The reboot franchise is on the decline, it will probably be dead in a couple of years.
No, as I understand it, it was only about a hundred fans. The media made too much of it because "Fans Hate New Movie!" is a much better headline that "Fans Have Wide Ranges of Opinions Regarding New Movie." (A similar poll, held at a Seattle convention a few weeks later, yielded very different results.)
And can we please drive a stake through this stubborn myth that "most" Trek fans don't like the reboot? Hell, the endless debates on this very board prove that isn't the case.
The "fans" have never spoken with one voice and they never will. And the people who adamantly reject the reboot are a vocal minority at best. Like it or not.
J
James
Guest
It's not a myth, I see people bash the reboot all of the time. I've personally seen countless people bashing this version of Trek. Too many to count.
Similar threads
