I don't quite like Abrams' attitude

[shadowedgalaxy]

Hey, there's a "Rick Berman's an asshole" thread.
I was watching one of the documentary thingies on the two-disc DVD, and J.J.'s always saying that Star Trek was "a geeky talkfest", and "Star Trek is classical music, while Star Wars is rock n' roll. Star Trek needed some of that", as well as "Empire Strikes Back had a fast pace. Star Trek needed that too."

Um... excuse me? Yes ESB has action scenes, but it's pretty slow-paced IMO.
Also, if Rick Berman said such things about THE TREK, he'd be dead.

Discuss.

Actually, JJ did NOT say Star Wars was Rock and Roll, one of the writers said that.

Also, he did NOT say that ESB had a fast pace. He said he LIKED the pace of the star wars trilogy.

I realize you think he should begin and end every sentence with an apology, but there's really no need to flat out put words in his mouth.

Get a fucking grip.

 

[Vigilance]

Hey, there's a "Rick Berman's an asshole" thread.
I was watching one of the documentary thingies on the two-disc DVD, and J.J.'s always saying that Star Trek was "a geeky talkfest", and "Star Trek is classical music, while Star Wars is rock n' roll. Star Trek needed some of that", as well as "Empire Strikes Back had a fast pace. Star Trek needed that too."

Um... excuse me? Yes ESB has action scenes, but it's pretty slow-paced IMO.
Also, if Rick Berman said such things about THE TREK, he'd be dead.

Discuss.

Actually, JJ did NOT say Star Wars was Rock and Roll, one of the writers said that.

Also, he did NOT say that ESB had a fast pace. He said he LIKED the pace of the star wars trilogy.

I realize you think he should begin and end every sentence with an apology, but there's really no need to flat out put words in his mouth.

Get a fucking grip.

So, you make a post about Abrams attitude, and one of the quotes you use was made by his writer while the other was a misquote, and I need to get a grip?

 

[I am not Spock]

If I want to listen to rock and roll, I will listen to a rock and roll band, not a classical quartet doing a tribute CD to Metallica or AC/DC or whatever.

Same deal. If I want to see Star Wars, I will watch that. I expect a more cerebral experience from Star Trek.

 

[M'Sharak]

Actually, JJ did NOT say Star Wars was Rock and Roll, one of the writers said that.

Also, he did NOT say that ESB had a fast pace. He said he LIKED the pace of the star wars trilogy.

I realize you think he should begin and end every sentence with an apology, but there's really no need to flat out put words in his mouth.

Get a fucking grip.

So, you make a post about Abrams attitude, and one of the quotes you use was made by his writer while the other was a misquote, and I need to get a grip?

No, but I think your earlier post would have gotten all of your important points across without including "I realize you think he should begin and end every sentence with an apology" -- that wasn't really necessary. Even so, I think shadowedgalaxy may have overreacted just a bit and could stand to dial it back a notch or two.

 

[Sci]

If I want to listen to rock and roll, I will listen to a rock and roll band, not a classical quartet doing a tribute CD to Metallica or AC/DC or whatever.

Same deal. If I want to see Star Wars, I will watch that. I expect a more cerebral experience from Star Trek.

The supposed cerebrality of Star Trek has been vastly over-stated.

Star Trek is just such a large franchise that it runs the gauntlet -- some Trek stories are very cerebral, and others are very mindless. To claim that Trek tends to be one or the other is, frankly, inaccurate.

ST09 was neither cerebral nor brainless. It was an action film first and foremost, but it also had moments of very intelligent characterization and a fairly complex time travel plot. It was no more brainless than, for instance, Star Trek: First Contact; the only real difference there is that it is more overtly action-oriented and fast-paced.

 

[Devon]

Well.. yes.

I dont get it, are you being sarcastic, wheres the argument here? How is Kirk the same as Kirk?

I enjoyed the movie, but it wasnt a Star Trek movie, or at least not a TOS movie.

It is a Star Trek movie.

 

[3D Master]

ST09 was neither cerebral nor brainless. It was an action film first and foremost, but it also had moments of very intelligent characterization and a fairly complex time travel plot. It was no more brainless than, for instance, Star Trek: First Contact; the only real difference there is that it is more overtly action-oriented and fast-paced.

 

[stonester1]

No, but Kirk does describe himself as "positively grim." Of course, that Kirk grew up with a father and in a stable household (but for the incident on Tarsus IV) so he's bound to be different. (That Shatner's Kirk was not engineered to snare bad boy loving teeny boppers might have something to do with it, too, but that's out-of-universe.)

The "positively grim" guy who cheated on the Kobyashi Maru test?

Again, I have to ask, why is it that EVERY novelist, LONG before this movie came along or was even thought of, has written young Kirk as a young handful? Not necessarily happy go lucky. In fact, in "Best Destiny", he IS grim. But he has flip moments, and pretty much is just like in AbramsTrek. Defiant of authority, flip, irreverant, drifting...

 

[barnaclelapse]

If I want to listen to rock and roll, I will listen to a rock and roll band, not a classical quartet doing a tribute CD to Metallica or AC/DC or whatever.

Same deal. If I want to see Star Wars, I will watch that. I expect a more cerebral experience from Star Trek.

The supposed cerebrality of Star Trek has been vastly over-stated.

Star Trek is just such a large franchise that it runs the gauntlet -- some Trek stories are very cerebral, and others are very mindless. To claim that Trek tends to be one or the other is, frankly, inaccurate.

ST09 was neither cerebral nor brainless. It was an action film first and foremost, but it also had moments of very intelligent characterization and a fairly complex time travel plot. It was no more brainless than, for instance, Star Trek: First Contact; the only real difference there is that it is more overtly action-oriented and fast-paced.

Yeah, but it's easier for the general consumer if you just slap one distinct label on the whole thing.

Abrams' has always struck me as an ass. My perception of that is probably not going to change, and I've never been a huge fan of his work. That still didn't get in the way of my enjoying the hell out of STIX.

 

[Char Aznable]

Wow, what a brilliant, well thought out counter argument!

I love how people call the new movie mindless, when people offer several examples on depth in XI, they are either ignored or declared as anti-intellectual. It is frustrating to engage in discussion when one side has its fingers in its ears going, "la la la, can't hear you!" Granted I know a lot of XI bashers aren't always like that, but enough are to grate at me.

People who look at Star Trek as this so severely deep and complex franchise are looking at it through rose tinted glasses. Let us look at two TOS episodes that are typically at the top of fan polls and favorites in general (granted, they may not be everyones favs, but this is just for an example).

1) City on the Edge of Forever: Brilliant episode, but what message did it have? I mean really? I guess you could find one if you fish around enough (IE: One person can make a difference, or whatever), but that is really reaching and the episode makes no effort to offer any sort of real message. At its heart, it is a simple love story involving time travel as the plot device.

2) The Trouble with Tribbles: Funny ep (Though I prefer I, Mudd personally), but what is its message? I know some people will come in and try and claim its about what happens when you move an animal to another land where it'd have no predators. However, that is a load of crap since the tribbles are nothing more than, again, a device for the comedy to ensue. The episode had no greater motive than to make people laugh.

Now, isn't it interesting that the TOS episodes that were the most message heavy tend to be regarded as the weaker episodes? For instance:

1) The Omega Glory: Now, I actually like this one in all its hammy glory (it doesn't grate on my nerves until the end, but it still has a charm, albeit not a serious one), but the episode is typically not a popular one because its message is so ham-fisted and pretentious that it comes across as impossible to take seriously.

2) Let That Be Your Last Battlefield: The infamous black on one side, white on the other ep. I don't have to remind anyone of how hard it is to take this one seriously, what with the cheezy make up, overdone acting, and ridiculous direction. The only thing I like about the episode is the self destruct sequence and the fact that the Riddler's in it.

So, yeah. I really question people who insist that the success of Star Trek always lied with its, "suffisticated, intelligent, messages," when the reality couldn't be further from the truth. While Trek DID have some rather good episodes that reflected society or whatever, really, the heart of Star Trek has always been the characters interacting and working together to get out of a jam. It never mattered what the show was saying so long as it was being said in the swash buckling adventures of Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock.

 

[stonester1]

Agreed. There is all kinds of good stories that come out of a genre as varied as science fiction. Star Trek played in just about all of them, often very well.

I don't think Trek would have been nearly as successful if it tried being "cerebral" EVERY episode.

 

[startrekrcks]

Well said I think this NuTrek is just a fun thrill exciting adventure but isn't it the characters that matter more?

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Depending on your rock music it can be cerebral too, ever heard of the metal band Sabaton or the folk metal group Eluveitie, those bands produce very cerebral music, what about Metalica when it is backed up by an orchestra, then there is music that blends orchestra and rock elements such as when Ennio Morricone would put together music.

The point is - is that Star Trek needed to get out of its preachy, obvious messages, get away from the talk fest and cheep milk the fans for all there worth approach which was shamless. Star Trek had been stagnating and needed to evolve and grow and how can it do that if it doesn't take in new elements that could potentially improve it. This new movie is not Star Wars thought it clearly has learned some things from Lucas but it still Star Trek, still the genre that Lucas could have learned a thing or two about before he had put out his new prequels which were so terrible.

Most importantly story is the most important thing in this new movie, where characters who are flawed can grow and change going through a story arc where in they become better people. This is something that Star Trek had forgotten in the show Enterprise, and Lucas doesn't seem to know how to do at all anymore. I am glad that JJ saw ways to help and improve Star Trek and his analogy about the rock and classical music is just that an analogy it doesn't mean that JJ is trying to dum-down Star Trek for a wider audience he was just trying to make it more fun and I think he did a great job.

Wait until XII he will add even more depth to these characters in that story, you'll be much happier than you think you will.

 

[Shazam!]

It was no more brainless than, for instance, Star Trek: First Contact; the only real difference there is that it is more overtly action-oriented and fast-paced.

I guess it was no more brainless than 2001 as well. After all, the only real difference was that it was more action-oriented and fast-paced and had a different plot and had different characters and had a different story and had a different script and was a different film.

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Actually there are similarities other than action, Picard in First Contact is, and this is rare in any TNG, depicted as a flawed character who goes through a story arc where he changes and grows. This is very much like XI.

 

[Shazam!]

Actually there are similarities other than action, Picard in First Contact is, and this is rare in any TNG, depicted as a flawed character who goes through a story arc where he changes and grows. This is very much like XI.

And literally thousands of other films.

The things that make them similar are the similarities and the things that make them different are the differences.

I am not sure what your point is.

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Actually there are similarities other than action, Picard in First Contact is, and this is rare in any TNG, depicted as a flawed character who goes through a story arc where he changes and grows. This is very much like XI.

And literally thousands of other films.

The things that make them similar are the similarities and the things that make them different are the differences.

I am not sure what your point is.

The point is that this is rare for the TNG era where its characters are always perfect and almost never flawed (same for Enterprise), which some Trekkies complained about XI that it had flawed characters who got into bar fights, ETC.

 

[stonester1]

Bar fights.

And Kirk is a playboy...*shudders!*

Did any of you even watch the original show?

I've seen laughable, LAUGHABLE attempts at some Trekkies trying to rationalize that Kirk WASN'T a ladies man. It's embarrassing how squeamish some fans seem to get around sexually oriented conduct/content.

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Yeah, this Kirk was very true to TOS Kirk in many ways.

 

[Char Aznable]

Bar fights.

And Kirk is a playboy...*shudders!*

Did any of you even watch the original show?

I've seen laughable, LAUGHABLE attempts at some Trekkies trying to rationalize that Kirk WASN'T a ladies man. It's embarrassing how squeamish some fans seem to get around sexually oriented conduct/content.

This is a very good point. People like to mention that TOS Kirk only had sex 3 times throughout the series. Now, its a true enough fact (as far as we know anyway), but what people are forgetting is that TOS was 60's television! If Kirk was constantly banging every woman he saw in every episode, the show would have been canned faster than you can say, "He's dead, Jim!" All you have to do is watch the series. Don't just focus on the women he banged or kissed, look at how he interacts with women who come on for, say, one line or so with Kirk. Look at the once over he gives her and the smirk that totally says, "I could hit that whenever I want!" that we all love him for.