Help me look forward to this movie.

[Tyson]

Hey guys.

I'm not a "trukk not munky" fanatic. I thought ENT sucked, but I could have ignored the crappy continuity in the first three seasons if they had been written well. I understand what artistic license is and I understand it's usage. I'm not against remakes on principal, but I think certain things should be left the hell alone too.

I'm having a hard time looking forward to this movie. I desperately want to, because I haven't really enjoyed any Trek since DS9 ended. I want to be able to have a new series of movies of Trek to look forward to. I just... I'm just really skeptical about this being watchable. I mean, Nimoy seems pretty excited about all this and he never seemed the type to talk up a project if it wasn't any good. There are positives I'm seeing, but there are also negatives- I don't want to see more of John Eave's "flying knives" on the screen as the Enterprise or anything else. I also heard something about "alternate timelines" and that just made me shake my head.

I guess what I'm asking for is for you guys to "sell" me this movie. I'm not looking to start a big "lol this will suk" argument thread, so if I'm coming off as a douche I apologize. Help me out guys, I want to be excited, instead of uncomfortably hesitant when I think about Trek XI.

 

[NCC621]

Here's what I'm afraid of. Not that I think they'll really use Wesley Crusher or Jean-Luc Picard, but sometimes I do sense a very cavalier attitude from Abrams in the interviews.

http://www.galacticast.com/2007/10/15/starfleet-academy/

 

[Kegek]

Two words:

Michael Giacchino.

You just know that whatever happens, it'll be the best Star Trek score since Cliff Eidelmann and TUC.

I'm afraid I can't help you with the rest, I'm as worried as you are.

 

[ChristopherPike]

I'm afraid I won't be of much help either... especially since I was more invested in Enterprise, when they went and pulled the plug.

There's only one way to look at it for you really. For good or bad, you're getting another two hours of Star Trek, which wouldn't have got made without J.J. Abrams' insistence and apparent persuasiveness over the suits otherwise tired of having this franchise around.

 

[Dale]

I'll give it a shot, but you're going to have to overcome your basic dislike for me, too.

Here's what I see: We're going back to the TOS era, which is what made Trek great in the first place, but with the presence of Nimoy's Spock (and the possibility of Shatner's Kirk) we've got a through-line that spans all of Trek both within the Trek timeline and in reality thereby legitimizing everything we've ever seen except Enterprise. We're going back to the original trio of classic characters, the original peripheral characters, and the original ship. The men in charge of the production seem to have an understanding of and respect for the material, and their every statement thus far has assured us that everything will be recognizable, so whether it's Eaves alone or as part of a team re-thinking the Enterprise, she's still going to be the recognizable rounded white beauty she has always been.

The plot promises some closure for Spock, left hanging in the 24th century, and offers the possibility that Kirk's empty death in Generations will be resolved. If the only thing changed by Spock's travel to the past is the death of Kirk, I don't think that represents an alternate timeline, in a myth-shattering way, as much as a correction to the existing one. We'll likely see a reunion of Shatner and Nimoy and one last bit of fellowship between these icons of our youth (I'm not sure how old you are, but they're icons of my youth, anyway).

The new cast will indeed take some getting used to, but this is not going to be some lumpen fan-fic recasting... these people have been chosen both for their passing resemblance (in most cases) to the original actors and for their acting chops. The story apparently includes a time travel facet, but in the form of a single visitor (Spock) returning to a familiar, static era... not some convoluted temporal-looping mess of repeating events where everything is in potential flux.

This is not just another sequel and not just another prequel. It's an attempt to refresh and renew Star Trek for another generation that fully intends to respect and honor what has come before. It's a sincere and heartfelt effort to evoke the greatest of Trek's greatness, an effort to pass a great legacy on to another generation... not to update it TNG style but to reinvent our vision of the future without tainting or destroying it.

I know how you feel about religion, but consider this: it's like a bunch of people are getting together to create a new translation of the bible, but instead of just going through a moldy old King James version and taking out the "thees and thous," they are going back to the original scrolls in the original languages and creating something entirely new and fresh to inspire a new generation of believers.

Imagine the day you go to see the movie... the deep black fluid starfield, the grand, chill-making fanfare as we embark on a new journey into the final frontier, your first glimpse of the Enterprise in all her glowing white (and familiar - I promise) glory. Our new Kirk setting his jaw and taking charge. Our new Scotty proclaiming the impossibility of some engineering feat, our new McCoy being gruff and cantankerous but at the same time filled with the remarkable humanist empathy that is his trademark, our new Spock raising his eyebrow in mild consternation for the first time.

Everything old will be new again, everything great will be refreshed. We will receive new glimpses into new moments in the lives of our oldest friends... and Star Trek, which has indeed lived long, will once again prosper.

I promise you, to whatever degree you can manage to leave your doubts behind and forget the way the last era of Trek let you down and disappointed you, that is the degree to which you will become a kid again.

 

[Franklin]

^^^^^^
Longest post ever.

Well, first, it's all that's out there right now. Second, the casting seems solid. No clunkers. Third, as others have noted as well, time travel and alternate timelines are less common in Trek than you'd think (especially TOS). It's certainly not cliche. Could be we remember so many of them because they comprise more than their share of the best Trek episodes. No one will care if this is time travel if it's of the quality of "City on the Edge of Forever", "Tomorrow is Yesterday", "Yesterday's Enterprise", or "All Good Things".

I've always thought I'll give the film the first five or ten minutes. If after that time I'm not thinking mostly about differences I'm seeing and saying to myself, "That's not how Shatner would've said it," but I'm into the story instead, then it's a success in my book. Anything after that (a ripping story) is gravy.

 

[seigezunt]

You just are going to have to have faith. ;-)

Seriously, I'm being cautiously optimistic.

And there's something to be said about having low expectations. If the movie is good, then you will have a great time. and it if sucks, you won't be disappointed.

That, and what dale said.

 

[Cyrus]

The only thing I have seen from Abrams is MI3, which was good but not great. Nimoy's endorsement is definitely interesting, as he walked away from a big paycheck on Generations because he didn't like the script.

So my suggestion is don't set your expectations too high, just look at it as a space adventure movie with some interesting characters. There are very competent people in charge of this movie. It's also the first Trek movie since TMP to have a decent budget. So it should look damn good and be very entertaining.

And of course there is that Archer/T'Pol wedding scene to look forward to.

 

[davejames]

I'm excited because I've always been curious to see TOS reinterpreted and modernized. As much as I LOVE the original actors and the retro, 1960s feel of the original, I'm also dying to see what a big screen, mega-budget, 21st century interpretation of TOS might look like.

Instead of some random captain from the Enterprise-K setting foot on a strange alien world, I want to see Captain Kirk and Spock from the ORIGINAL Enterprise setting foot on a strange alien world. Spinoffs are great, but the real heart and soul of Star Trek will always be TOS and those iconic, legendary characters. They're the only ones I really care to see on the big screen.

Now whether Abrams will be able to pull this off, I don't know. It's certainly risky and the entire thing could fall completely flat. And while Abrams is a great producer, I'm not sure he's really the best choice for director. But if he CAN pull if off, I think it would be cool as hell. It's too cool an idea not to at least try once, at least.

 

[Balthier the Great]

They'll be selling popcorn in the concession stand. That always makes a movie better!

 

[CaptainDonovin]

^ That's something my wife would have said!

 

[Tyson]

Argh, I lost my entire post.

 

[Barbados Slim]

Why sell you on it? You like Trek. By the time the trailer hits and the TV spots are on, you'll be there on opening day with the rest of us.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

No help here. More and more, I fear this movie will suck more than Little Oral Annie.

 

[Tyson]

davejames said:
I'm excited because I've always been curious to see TOS reinterpreted and modernized. As much as I LOVE the original actors and the retro, 1960s feel of the original, I'm also dying to see what a big screen, mega-budget, 21st century interpretation of TOS might look like."

On principle I think that's cool too, but I don't see any reason why it won't look as lame as any other generic "futuristic" sci-fi movie released recently. These guys are moviemakers first and storytellers second, because that's what the big money dictates. If they can sell more tickets by making the Enterprise look like that twisted monstrosity from the recent "Ships of the Line" calendar, that's what they'll make her.

"Instead of some random captain from the Enterprise-K setting foot on a strange alien world, I want to see Captain Kirk and Spock from the ORIGINAL Enterprise setting foot on a strange alien world."

At what point does it cease to be TOS if they change it? How do I know they won't change it too much?

"Spinoffs are great, but the real heart and soul of Star Trek will always be TOS and those iconic, legendary characters. They're the only ones I really care to see on the big screen."

We've already had 6 adventures with these guys on the big screen; I love TOS and I can get behind more of it, but can it even be done in today's Hollywood?

"Now whether Abrams will be able to pull this off, I don't know. It's certainly risky and the entire thing could fall completely flat. And while Abrams is a great producer, I'm not sure he's really the best choice for director. But if he CAN pull if off, I think it would be cool as hell. It's too cool an idea not to at least try once, at least.

Well, argh. That doesn't help me feel better at all!

 

[Dale]

Tyson said:
Argh, I lost my entire post.

Was it one of those "form is no longer valid" things because you took too much time? When that happens to me (it happened with my long post above) I just go back a page, copy my text, start a new reply and paste it in, finish writing, and post.

Probably telling you something you already know... but I've lost posts too and it's very frustrating.

 

[Tyson]

"Why sell you on it? You like Trek. By the time the trailer hits and the TV spots are on, you'll be there on opening day with the rest of us."

Just because I like Star Trek doesn't mean I'm a lemming that will come when I'm called. I didn't see Nemesis because I thought it looked silly and I'm ultimately glad I didn't pay to watch the DVD. (Yes I have seen it.)

I don't understand why this attitude is so common.

 

[cynical dreamer]

I feel like I should put the "I want to believe" poster from the x-files in to my post.

I'm going to make two giant assumptions about the film here at the beginning and be up front about that at the start.

Assumption #1: That the basics of what we've heard about the plot are true (time travel, romulans, prequel, re-imagining)

Assumption #2: That the budget really will be in the 150 million range.

Now, I love Star Trek. Heart and soul, it means the world to me (I'm so blind I even love Enterprise, Voyager and Nemesis).

But, if the rumours about the film are to be believed, I have to question how they can think this is the best way to go in bringing back Star Trek.

The last film was a so-called "Romulan" film. It was, at last count, the lowest grossing film of the lot, poorly reviewed, and was nearly the death of the film franchise.

The last series was a prequel. It was cancelled, and we can sugar coat that any way we like but it was cancelled. And that was almost the end of the whole thing.

And time-travel... again??? Haven't we already had 2 'go back in time to save the future' movies already? Not to mention the endless stream of time travel stories in the various series'. Somewhere Brannon Braga is smiling...

And the fact that if the budget is to be believed, in light of the fact that no Trek film has made the kind of money needed to make a return on that size of budget, you just have to ask, "Have they gone nuts?!?"

And this time we don't have Berman/Braga to pin it on.

This film will be relying on 2 main factors to get butts in the seats: fan nostalgia and the name brand "J.J. Abrams".

But even with that, is that enough?

It's been said that Trek needs to break out beyond it's core fanbase, and I agree. And you can't make a film that only caters to the core audience (we've already seen that fall on its face). But at the same time, you're never going to be profitable without that core group. You need the 40-50 million that the main fanbase will bring in. You can't make the film for just them, but all the same, you can't do it without them either.

To that end, a reimagining (which I have to say I think it may be the only direction they can go at this point and still be fresh) is going to piss off fans of the various spinoffs who will be turned off by the fact that "their" Star Trek is being tossed out the proverbial airlock. Once again, if the plotline rumours are found to be true.

I want the film to succeed. I believe in the concept of Trek and have since I first discovered it some 25 years ago. But the concept and the money being spent just feel ill conceived to me. You're coming off of a cancelled prequel series and a box office dissapointment Romulan movie and your first instinct for a new film is a prequel Romulan movie?? It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy...

Please bear in mind, my post is making some giant assumptions regarding the rumours about the film to date. And I am very prepared (and hoping) I have to eat crow on all of it.

My worry is, with this concept, at this budget, if it fails, trek is heading for a very long slumber. And that would be a bit of a shame in my books.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Tyson said:

"Why sell you on it? You like Trek. By the time the trailer hits and the TV spots are on, you'll be there on opening day with the rest of us."

Just because I like Star Trek doesn't mean I'm a lemming that will come when I'm called. I didn't see Nemesis because I thought it looked silly and I'm ultimately glad I didn't pay to watch the DVD. (Yes I have seen it.)

I don't understand why this attitude is so common.

:thumbsup: It's really rather nauseating.

 

[davejames]

Tyson said:
On principle I think that's cool too, but I don't see any reason why it won't look as lame as any other generic "futuristic" sci-fi movie released recently. These guys are moviemakers first and storytellers second, because that's what the big money dictates. If they can sell more tickets by making the Enterprise look like that twisted monstrosity from the recent "Ships of the Line" calendar, that's what they'll make her.

Well frankly, as a fan of Abrams' other work, I think he's proven that he's not just another hack director and can bring something new and fresh to Star Trek. If this was Stephen Sommers remaking TOS, you're right there would be PLENTY of reason to worry. But I'm confident Abrams isn't just cashing a paycheck and has a real vision for this movie. And I can't wait to see it.

At what point does it cease to be TOS if they change it? How do I know they won't change it too much?

Well again, I'm sure Abrams wouldn't have chosen to remake TOS if he wasn't a huge fan of TOS and everythign that made it great. I don't think he'd go through all this trouble just to take a few familiar names and slap them on something COMLETELY different and foreign and then go off on a completely different tangent.

We've already had 6 adventures with these guys on the big screen; I love TOS and I can get behind more of it, but can it even be done in today's Hollywood?

I loved seeing the original actors in those movies, but wouldn't it be awesome to see these characters again when they're young and vibrant and full of energy? I mean, as cool as that incarnation of TOS was, it still wasn't as cool as the TOS of the 60s.