"Where's my check?"
Somewhere out there is a quote by Roddenberry saying other people will take over Star Trek one day and do things different than he did. And he was okay with that.
Hated it
- Thread starter KSoldier
- Start date
Somewhere out there is a quote by Roddenberry saying other people will take over Star Trek one day and do things different than he did. And he was okay with that.
Really? Then what are those shiny silver discs over on my media center?
Witchcraft!!!
I wasn't being insulting. Based on your comments before and after my post, I don't think you understand the concept of a "reboot" like you think you do. But that's not my problem.
And in my opinion, you're incorrect.
Yep, that's your opinion, all right.
I apologize for my negative reaction towards what I feel is blasphemy against the book of Roddenberry.
No need to apologize for having a negative reaction about something that doesn't exist.
Thanks for your opinion.
That might be but tastes change over time, and surely in order for it to thrive and continue for decades to come it has to appeal to new audiances not live totally in the past if it wishes to survive for decades to come, because like myself and everyone else you aren't getting any younger sooner or later we all die, and what about the shows longevity after that? Will those that follow us share the same sentiments that you or any of us? We can't really answer that can we?
Sure the films might be a bit more fast paced but there can be a difference between a TV series and a 2 hour movie when it comes to storytelling.
But... it doesn't do that. All of that stuff is still in continuity. In fact, it's Spock Prime's past. He lived through it. How can his experiences be destroyed?
Yeah, I don't think I said anything like that.Then you'll presumably be quite happy with the Abrams films - when you actually get around to watching them, that is - because they did no such thing.
They didn't change anything about the history.
Then you don't understand alternate timelines.
It all still happened. Spock Classic went back in time. His timeline still exists where all the stuff we watched happened. We just don't get to see it anymore because we were bad and wanted too much of it until we just didn't want it at all any more.
If you've seen it with your eyes...then it's happened. All of it. Space Hippies. V'Ger. Kirk shouting Kahn. Deck 78. Picard not being really French. Space salamanders. Spock shouting Kahn. All. Off. It.
I apologize for my negative reaction towards what I feel is blasphemy against the book of Roddenberry.
Blaspheming against the book of a drug- and drink-addled, misogynistic, philandering, conniving and scheming asshole isn't the worst thing in the world.
Forgive him! Forgive him oh Great Bird of the Galaxy! He knows not what he says. I beg you to not smite this board or your truly loyal disciples thereon! Save us, Great Bird! Save us from this blasphemer!
Damn! I've never seen it all written down in just one sentence like that, before. That's truly a full, rich life.
Oh, there is much to say in this thread, but I'll start with this from BillJ 
Yep, this is one of my biggest point. Trek 09 and ID both had as much social commentary as many episodes of other Trek series, as well as some good action and adventure sequences. I mean, Trek 09 has some heart wrenching scenes with regards to the importance of a father figure.
Yes, it had a more modern flavor, and that is a personal taste thing, but I like the new look. It gives a modern feel to a series that has become a bit dated in terms of look and feel.
As for Gene's vision, that has changed over the years, so it is difficult to know exactly what part of Abrams Trek he would disagree with, especially given his view of the future. I've read a variety of quotes, including the linked ones by SeerSGB, but the one that always stuck out to me was the idea that someone would come along with new ideas for Trek, and a new way to reach an audience and he would welcome that idea.
I don't enjoy every aspect of Star Trek, but there is room for all the variations out there in the franchise. I understand that it seems like Abrams overwrote all of the previous history when Trek has repeatedly demonstrated that alternate timelines exist in conjunction with the other, from TOS onward. So, I understand your opinion about reboots, but there precedence for what Abrams did.
Yep, this is one of my biggest point. Trek 09 and ID both had as much social commentary as many episodes of other Trek series, as well as some good action and adventure sequences. I mean, Trek 09 has some heart wrenching scenes with regards to the importance of a father figure.
Yes, it had a more modern flavor, and that is a personal taste thing, but I like the new look. It gives a modern feel to a series that has become a bit dated in terms of look and feel.
As for Gene's vision, that has changed over the years, so it is difficult to know exactly what part of Abrams Trek he would disagree with, especially given his view of the future. I've read a variety of quotes, including the linked ones by SeerSGB, but the one that always stuck out to me was the idea that someone would come along with new ideas for Trek, and a new way to reach an audience and he would welcome that idea.
I don't enjoy every aspect of Star Trek, but there is room for all the variations out there in the franchise. I understand that it seems like Abrams overwrote all of the previous history when Trek has repeatedly demonstrated that alternate timelines exist in conjunction with the other, from TOS onward. So, I understand your opinion about reboots, but there precedence for what Abrams did.
To the OP: I agree that the new films are shlock created to bring in dollars as opposed to being crafted from passion. I see Star Wars-esque action movies with astoundingly poor scripts referencing classic Star Trek as opposed to continuing from it. The direction of the films and actors is rather top notch and while I do not agree with the path the production designers took I cannot fault their quality (save for "engineering"), nor can I deny that I thought the first film to be fun. Aside from those few qualities they are completely vacuous when it comes to the relevant thematics that we all loved about many of the episodes and films, and have little concern being true to the characters, instead developing them in to stereotypes to cash-in on nostalgia that has little to offer but temporary cynical thrills of a generic nature.
Thank god TOS, TNG, DS9, and films 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 will always be around.
Thank god TOS, TNG, DS9, and films 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 will always be around.
"Temporary cynical thrills of a generic nature." That's how I feel every time I ride a roller coaster or have sex. Then again, I'm getting old.
No themes in STID? Really? It was some of the most thematic Trek ever. And if ST09 was fun, then what's the problem?
Abrams two films capture the essence of TOS better than any successor series or movie before them. To see Kirk, Spock and McCoy at their prime is a delight.
TOS is a 20th century fairy tale. By that I mean, Kirk, Spock, et al, are now of the same type of character as Peter Pan, Dorthy, or Robin Hood. So there is no longer a single "right" or "wrong" way to use the characters, each generation gets to re-imagine and retell their stories in a way that's relevant to that generation.
Don't pay any attention to what you hate. Find something you love and run with it.
Where's Doc Brown and his chalkboard when you need him?
Last edited by a moderator:
I can see where KSoldier is coming from. And assuming his username and Ft. Bragg location indicate a serviceman, he has every right to his opinion, especially seeing as how it's guys like him who fight to protect our right to express ourselves. 
Suggesting that KSoldier 'won't last long here' for stating a dislike of a couple of movies sounds a bit...conformist, for lack of a better word. He didn't post in an existing thread, disrupting a positive conversation about the movies. He started his own, clearly stating where he's coming from and if anything, his was "invaded" by "naysayers". He asked a simple question. We have tons of threads here both pro and con regarding the other series'. I'm mystified why the new films should be treated any differently.
As to the subject at hand, I don't like the new movies, but I don't hate them, either. I'm glad so many people do enjoy them, though. they're just not for me. I can't stand milk, and you couldn't pay me a thousand dollars to drink a glass, but that isn't going to stop anyone else from drinking it, and that's how it should be. Variety is the spice of life, and all that.
I'm not trying to knock anybody here, and the last thing on Earth I want to do is start a fight. I just felt the need to add.
Suggesting that KSoldier 'won't last long here' for stating a dislike of a couple of movies sounds a bit...conformist, for lack of a better word. He didn't post in an existing thread, disrupting a positive conversation about the movies. He started his own, clearly stating where he's coming from and if anything, his was "invaded" by "naysayers". He asked a simple question. We have tons of threads here both pro and con regarding the other series'. I'm mystified why the new films should be treated any differently.
As to the subject at hand, I don't like the new movies, but I don't hate them, either. I'm glad so many people do enjoy them, though. they're just not for me. I can't stand milk, and you couldn't pay me a thousand dollars to drink a glass, but that isn't going to stop anyone else from drinking it, and that's how it should be. Variety is the spice of life, and all that.
I'm not trying to knock anybody here, and the last thing on Earth I want to do is start a fight.
I just felt the need to add.Similar threads
