startrekrcks
Fleet Captain
why were you disappointed with a TOS reboot just be glad that it wasn't made by someone who can't make a good movie.
i wish abrams had made a post ds9/voy movie isntead!
- Thread starter dHunter333
- Start date
Star Trek as a stigma?! It really is unfortunate when Star Trek fans can't muster up any enthusiasm for something that has survived 40+ years with 10 movies and 5 TV series. At least I was enthused by the idea of Trek XI even if I was massively disappointed by the final product.
It's almost like now there's this new shiny film, the old stuff is all of a sudden something to be looked down on and anything relating to this rich tapestry of history and storytelling is a guaranteed failure by association.
It's almost like now there's this new shiny film, the old stuff is all of a sudden something to be looked down on and anything relating to this rich tapestry of history and storytelling is a guaranteed failure by association.
Lameness doesn't quite describe it. Tom Hardy pretty much had a nervous breakdown over the collateral damage to his career.
that had happened well before the movie was made.
Things we know of prime universe Spock as far as what his life was like in the late 24th century: he was fairly old, had fond memories of his long, deep friendship with James Kirk, he had been working on Romulus toward peace, etc... All of these things are true of Nimoy-Spock as seen in STXI as well. The default would be for Nimoy-Spcok to be from the prime universe. The movie would need to "show, not tell", as you say, that Nimoy-Spock WASN'T prime Spock, if that's what the producers wanted. Without such evidence, it seems to me the assumption is that he is.
Quality of a movie is subjective. The action-packed popcorn flick isn't always good, but unless you're talking about a movie SO unbelievably, ridiculously horrid that it almost begins to be objectively bad (live-action Street Fighter, Dungeons and Dragons), it's up to the individual to decide "how good it is."
This was no more an "action flick" than almost any of the previous ten Trek films, if you ask me. Only a couple of them REALLY tried to achieve any kind of level of depth beyond that which STXI has (and the success rate of such ventures is... spotty, at best).
No, we got Spock. Younger, different due to some of the events around him flowing differently, but it was Spock.
I agree. They are the most well-known, the most beloved, the most recognizable of all Trek crews. Frankly, that's been a tough thing to get my head around as a Trek fan, since - while I have a great deal of respect for TOS - the fact that so many people consider it to still be the best Trek, "true" Trek, or whatever, is a constant head-scratcher for me, since I found TNG and DS9 to be vastly better in every way. That said, I may not like it, but TOS' status as the most beloved part of the franchise is reality, and is why this movie would not have been nearly as successful if it had been about any other era of Trek.
Yeah. If you're going to do something totally new, then just do it, don't even bother calling it Star Trek. If, however, you are trying to do new Trek, specifically, then you need to be mindful of what will and won't work within that context. And at the time this movie was made, the sub-section of Trek that people were the least tired of was TOS.
I agree about the point made in your second paragraph, and am quite irritated by the attitude that I see often that basically amounts to "STXI was great BECAUSE it ignored all that old Trek stuff, which all SUCKED and needed to die anyway!" That said... I don't think you're interpreting Thingol's "stigma" point quite right. He wasn't saying that HE views the Trek name as carrying a stigma, or that Trek fans do, or that they should, but that the general populous of non-Trek fans see a stigma. And on that point, he's correct; they very much do (or at least did, before STXI). Thingol did call the stigma "unfair", after all.
And I have some sympathy for him, given how full of problems Nemesis was, though I have to point out that I felt his own acting was one of those problems.
As for Jarod's question, I think it was the lameness of the last couple of movies, coupled with the lameness people saw in Voyager (which I found to be overflowing with problems, but still good on the whole, barely) and Enterprise (which I thought just sucked). I don't think most people who were "tired of Trek" would, if asked, have anything negative to say about Picard or the TNG crew, but they are associated with the so-called "modern Trek", which many see as being responsible for running Trek into the ground.
As to weather I, personally, would have wanted to see a post-TNG era movie instead of what we got... I dunno. While I generally have a lot more interest in that era than in the TOS era, I do think that STXI was a good movie, and one of the better Trek films, and I don't think the chances of the franchise as a whole being revived would be as good with anything other than what we got. Also:
Agreed 100% on the relaunch novels! I'm loving the continuity they're building.I love DS9, but it would not have worked. Kirk and Spock are icons. Viewers would have been all, who's the chick with the spots?
Besides, it would have likely contradicted the relaunch novels. So screw that!
So overall, I guess I'd say no, I don't think they should have done a TNG-era film instead. What we got was a lot of fun, and got me interested in those characters in a way I hadn't been before. Besides, since TNG/DS9 era Trek is the part of the franchise I hold most dear, part of me would want them to not mess with it.
Wag the finger at the hater, warning to the responder. It is business as usual on TrekBBS. Since this will not change any time soon, I shall take my leave of you.The previous post (quoted here by Shazam!) could be considered marginally on-topic, but this part you've got backward; it's "post, not poster", remember?
This, however:
...is completely out of line, and I'm sure you knew it when you posted it. You don't actually use the words "Go fuck yourself", but it's quite clear to anyone acquainted with the movie that that was the message you wished to send, and it is that which earns you a warning for flaming. Comments to PM."Live long and prosper." -Spock (The way he said it to the council.)
number6
Vice Admiral
^This.Your point has been to come into every forum with snide remarks about how you hate the movie. You have insulted the intelligence of anyone who likes the movie. Logic has been irrelevant to your cause. Therefore, my statement stands as valid.
"Live long and prosper." -Spock (The way he said it to the council.)
I put my faith in Blast Hardcheese!!
number6
Vice Admiral
Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm always enthused by any new filmed Trek be it TV or theatrical. I still love the old stuff too. Some incarnations more than others, though.
I still get my TOS and ENT fix through my DVDs and books. Dont follow TNG, DS9 or VOY in book form (okay I read the Titan books),but watch when they pop up on TV. So that rich tapestry is part of my entertainment choice.
Would I have gone to see a TNG STXI or one that featured a new cast set in that continuity? Yes, in a heartbeat. But on the other hand TOS is "my Star Trek". So seeing those characters back on the big screen is better.
Try Reef Blastbody or Smoke Manmuscle.
Dunno, I wish ENT and VOY had been in alternate universes too.
Can't speak for VOY ( bailed halfway) but ENT fits better with the "Prime Universe" than TOS does. Heck it fits in with TOS better than TOS does most of the time.
How about: Captain_Libido, Mega_Butch, Lumberjack, or Prissy_Skirt?
"...I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK..."
"...I'm a lumberjack and I'm OK..."
Disillusioned
Commander
That's a straw man argument. No one here is saying that anymore than people who wanted the designs to stay closer to TOS wanted everything to look like it was being made in the 1960s (which is ironic considering the 1950s retro future feel of the new movie)
And there's nothing to say that wouldn't have been possible with either a TOS movie that was truer to the source or a movie set post-NEM with a different crew and ship.
And they'd probably wonder who she was because she's hot?
Honestly, why would someone like that even care? They were probably wondering where Darth Vader was. That's not a bad thing in my book.Besides, it would have likely contradicted the relaunch novels. So screw that!
Which is what makes it jumping on the bandwagon. Whenever someone does something remotely successful, there are soon a lot of shows which try to replicate that success. Remember all the prequels after Star Wars started making them? This time it was BSG and "Batman Begins" that caused everyone to think a reboot was a really cool idea. There have been remakes for a while, but recently there have been a lot of them.
No, there is nothing about the franchise or its established continuity that good writing wouldn't have made better. That's like everyone claiming not that long ago that "franchise fatigue" was the big problem. No, it was bad writing and bad decisions made by the producers, and probably executive meddling from UPN. For some reason they got it in their heads that Star Trek fans are morons, and their product reflected that. From what I've seen, the new movie seems to reflect that same attitude.
The same in that it is yet another dime a dozen remake.
It was. Everyone seems to worship JJ Abrams, but really I can't say I've cared for any of his work, and this movie is no exception.
There is evidence though, in that nothing we see ever really matches up with the "prime" universe. And we've seen parallel universes being pretty similar before.
I'd say this movie fits in the "unbelievably, ridiculously horrid" category because of all the contrivances and cliches it uses, not to mention things like product placement, lens flare in every shot, shaky cam, and everything else that will date this movie in probably less than a decade. It's not "Zardoz" bad, but that isn't saying much.
Uh, no, I'd say there was a lot more focus on action than pretty much all of the previous movies. Even when there was action in the previous movies, it tended to be toned down from what this did. I'm not saying it was all bad, and some of the shots were actually pretty cool, but there was also a lot that was over the top.
No, we got a guy trying to channel Nimoy. I'm not even opposed to recasting, but really that's going to be a problem no matter who you get to play the part. That's actually kind of why just moving things to a different era would probably have been a better idea.
Actually one could probably say that about reboots, for that matter. But really, with that attitude, we never would've gotten TNG, DS9, or the other spin-offs. Starting something with a new (to us) crew would have been the same as what they did in making TNG, which was actually fairly popular with mainstream audiences back in the early '90s when it was on.
And this movie pretty much failed at that. The whole reboot thing was basically a way to get around the context of what had been established. Time travel itself is already a tired old plot device.
And you know this how?
Aside from just sucking as a movie, what made this movie suck as a Star Trek was that it ignored what was good about it and repeated a lot of what sucked about it. In other words, they did a lot of the same, tired, old cliched crap, added cliches from action movies, and changed basically everything they could about Star Trek. The one thing they didn't change all that much was the uniforms, and they somehow managed to make that even worse by not only retaining the miniskirts, but eliminating the sleeves on the female uniforms and the rank along with them. Stripperific space clothes for the female characters has always been a horrible cliche, and this movie is no different in driving home the fact that the female characters are only there to be eye candy. After all, rank doesn't matter when they're just eye candy.
I'm a Star Trek fan in general, and I liked it.
Why shouldn't we?
I have truth bomb for you: every bit of Star Trek ever produced from TOS to ENT, from toys to novel tie-ins were set out to "make fat businessmen as much money as possible." The new movie is no different.
Similar threads
