Is the great rift repairable?

[CDR6]

IMHO, I think much of the "bruha-ha" from the fans comes from the Paramount publicity folk's program of we don't want the old fans anymore, "...this isn't your father's Star Trek..." Then to make matters worse they even bought Nimoy, and did the schtick about the old fans not knowing what the "f__k" they were talking about.

Then JJ's crew irreverently tossed as much of the "old trek" in the trash as they felt they could get away with and still sell popcorn in the summer.

Somewhere down the path somebody spotted the error in this philosophy and muted the whole thing, hopefully, before it could do any real damage. Seeing the error of their ways (not to mention the potential loss of bucks) let it slip that they had included a bunch of "Easter Eggs" for the old trekkies.

However, it was to little and to late and a good chunk of the fan base was affronted. Hence the hate-fest that followed, and continues to this day. So I guess the question is...can the suits recover from their fopah and figure out they need both the old, and the new fans to be a success.... Can JJ and company reach far enough up their rectal regions to come up with a decent film that will bring the old trekkies back into the fold...or is Star Trek to be consigned to the trash heap of history?

 

[Psion]

I don't think things went down quite in the order you imagine, CDR6. I think Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman had all the nods to original Trek written in from the start. I also think they wanted to tell their own story from the start, distinct from the original, yet with enough in common that the movie would still appeal to original fans. Certainly, the script isn't too far off the original -- at least until Vulcan dies.

I think the biggest changes came during pre-production art direction. When Abrams and Church, et al came up with a look for the show that conflicted significantly from the original and that alienated a lot of fans. So rather than characterize the movie as one that started vastly different from the original premise and then got shoved in places so that it looked better to the original fans, I think Orci and Kurtzman wrote a story that was much closer to what original fans wanted, and then Abrams made changes in tone and art direction that made it more distinct.

I continue to look at the bridge, for example, and see an amazing set under all the extra junk added in (the desk lamps and bar code scanners and lights pointed into the eyes of console operators). I'm wondering if the original set was much cleaner and Abrams or somebody came in later and demanded more stuff to make it busier.

Ultimately, I think it's best if we just shrug at the differences and move on. You're dead wrong if you think anyone at Paramount is concerned that a small handful of fans didn't like the changes. That movie, deserved or not, made boatloads of money and this is the new look and feel of Trek. The next movie might well be more Trekkish, but still have a lot of action, now that the origin story is out of the way. There isn't much we can do about the art direction, but I keep hoping minor changes work their way in, like cleaning up the bridge and straightening out those goofy-looking nacelle pylons.

It's pretty clear this isn't the same timeline as the original show, so any number of things can be different. Kirk might never rescue Khan, for example, and the Doomsday Machine might become someone else's problem. New adventures will surface, especially if a new series is spun off from the movies, although I doubt the current cast will follow the show to TV.

I'm hopeful that this sets the stage eventually for another reboot. I'd love to see Star Trek completely re-invented from the ground up with modern ideas in science and technology. Get a group of the best science fiction authors out there to re-examine the premise of Trek and revise everything to bring it up to date, but leaving an optimistic view of the future, and the crew camaraderie.

 

[Shatnertage]

Hate fest? The movie was a critical and commercial success. And people involved with the original series, from Nimoy on down, have embraced the film. I don't see a "great rift" at all.

 

[Dukhat]

IMHO, I think much of the "bruha-ha" from the fans comes from the Paramount publicity folk's program of we don't want the old fans anymore, "...this isn't your father's Star Trek..." Then to make matters worse they even bought Nimoy, and did the schtick about the old fans not knowing what the "f__k" they were talking about.

Then JJ's crew irreverently tossed as much of the "old trek" in the trash as they felt they could get away with and still sell popcorn in the summer.

Somewhere down the path somebody spotted the error in this philosophy and muted the whole thing, hopefully, before it could do any real damage. Seeing the error of their ways (not to mention the potential loss of bucks) let it slip that they had included a bunch of "Easter Eggs" for the old trekkies.

However, it was to little and to late and a good chunk of the fan base was affronted. Hence the hate-fest that followed, and continues to this day. So I guess the question is...can the suits recover from their fopah and figure out they need both the old, and the new fans to be a success.... Can JJ and company reach far enough up their rectal regions to come up with a decent film that will bring the old trekkies back into the fold...or is Star Trek to be consigned to the trash heap of history?

This sounds much less like an unbiased discussion of a future Trek series, and much more like just a JJ Abrams bash-fest troll-starter.

And as much as I truly hate when people correct other people's English and grammar, because of the nature of this post I have no problem saying that it's "faux-pas," not "fopah." If you're going to troll, at least don't look like an idiot when you do it.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The "rift" started long before Star Trek XI. IMO, it widens with every new Star Trek series or movie that comes along. It will continue to do so in the future because every new Trek is somebody's first or new favorite, and it's a Trekkie custom to trash both new and old productions alike...

 

[kkozoriz1]

That's true but I can't recall a previous Trek production that deliberatly said that it was not intended for the existing fanbase. "Not your father's Star Trek" indeed.

 

[C.E. Evans]

That's true but I can't recall a previous Trek production that deliberatly said that it was not intended for the existing fanbase.

I don't recall any Trek production that deliberately said that either.

"Not your father's Star Trek" indeed.

Now I do recall people saying that about TNG in 1987...and DS9 in 1993...and VOY in 1995...and ENT in 2001. It seems to be a ritual to brand a new Trek production as being "Not your father's Star Trek," so I guess Star Trek XI is carrying on that tradition.

 

[Kelso]

So... the film's marketing campaign offended four guys on the internet? Big whoop.

There is no great rift that needs to be repaired.

 

[Shatnertage]

If the Internet was around then, I sure you would have found people posting bitter denunciations of the show when "it lost its edge" because Spock stopped SHOUTING early in the first season.

I could understand the idea of a "great rift" if everyone involved in the original productions distanced themselves from the film; if a tearful Majel Roddenberry had implored fans not to see the movie because it desecrated her husband's legacy; if there was any evidence at all that the producers deliberately sought to "toss the old Trek in the trash."

But that's not what happened. A) I personally heard Leonard Nimoy offer his totally unsolicited praise of the 2009 movie, and say that he's proud Zachary Quinto will be continuing the character he created. Shatner said "I loved the movie" at the same convention (Vegas 2010). B) Majel Roddenberry did the computer's voice in the 2009; I believe it was her last professional work. C) The movie was dedicated to the memory of Gene and Majel Roddenberry. I don't know how that translates into tossing the old Trek into the trash, or any kind of rift between old and new (or nu) Trek.

Also, what C.E.Evans and Kelso said.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

So... the film's marketing campaign offended four guys on the internet? Big whoop.

There is no great rift that needs to be repaired.

Bing and go.

 

[USS Lancelot]

I really don't get where this whole big-possibly-unrepairable-rift thing is coming from either. I could actually make an argument that the exact opposite has happened. I've been a fan of Trek since the late 70s. Just today I was talking to my 15 year old cousin who, prior to the Abrams movie, wanted nothing to do with Star Trek. He loved Abrams' movie, thinks Star Trek is cool, and has gone on to check out some of the series and older movies. In that sense, if anything, Abrams' movie has actually bridged a gap.

Let's face it, by the time ENT finished its run, Trek wasn't very popular with many people except for the hardcore fans. Most of the people who watched TNG every week during its run, or who went to see The Voyage Home in the theater, had moved on. And young people weren't exactly beating down the door to enter the Trek world.

Abrams' movie has changed that. I see Trek t-shirts in Hot Topic and Pac Sun. Star Trek has become cool to a whole new generation. That's a good thing.

By the way, most of the long-time Trek fans I personally know (and I know quite a few), liked the new movie. Like me, they feel it wasn't perfect, and maybe there were some things that should've been done differently, but honestly, what Trek series or movie can't you say that about?

Lest we forget, for those of us old enough to remember when TNG debuted in '87, many Trek fans were convinced that was the end of Trek as we knew it. A ship's counselor? What the hell was that? A Klingon on the bridge?? With a turtle shell for a forehead??? Many fans were convinced that Gene had lost his mind. Now look at how we feel.

I really think the Abrams haters are a small, pissy, but very vocal minority. It's really a squeaky-wheel-getting-the-grease situation more than an actual reality.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

So I guess the question is...can the suits recover from their fopah and figure out they need both the old, and the new fans to be a success...

No...because they don't have to. They don't need the haters. Personally, I don't care whether a few a few fans virulently dislike the movie or not.

Oh, and most of what USS Lancelot said..except that no one's gonna get greased.

 

[Praxius]

IMHO, I think much of the "bruha-ha" from the fans comes from the Paramount publicity folk's program of we don't want the old fans anymore, "...this isn't your father's Star Trek..." Then to make matters worse they even bought Nimoy, and did the schtick about the old fans not knowing what the "f__k" they were talking about.

Then JJ's crew irreverently tossed as much of the "old trek" in the trash as they felt they could get away with and still sell popcorn in the summer.

Somewhere down the path somebody spotted the error in this philosophy and muted the whole thing, hopefully, before it could do any real damage. Seeing the error of their ways (not to mention the potential loss of bucks) let it slip that they had included a bunch of "Easter Eggs" for the old trekkies.

However, it was to little and to late and a good chunk of the fan base was affronted. Hence the hate-fest that followed, and continues to this day. So I guess the question is...can the suits recover from their fopah and figure out they need both the old, and the new fans to be a success.... Can JJ and company reach far enough up their rectal regions to come up with a decent film that will bring the old trekkies back into the fold...or is Star Trek to be consigned to the trash heap of history?

1st off, I don't care what anybody else says..... You're NOT THE MAMA! *Clang with a frying pan*

2nd, what are you going on about? That last Star Trek movie?

Sorry to say, but I enjoyed the movie..... I didn't like the whole timeline screwing around thing, but they did a good job overall.

My mom who grew up watching TOS in black and white and never watched any of the other ST shows like it as well and bought the DVD.

The new movie even brought my wife into Star Trek and I even got her to watch three series all the way though so far..... and she was one of those people who grew up thinking Star Trek was for "loser nerds".... now she's one of them, just like the rest of us.

So regardless of what you say, I think that alone shows they did something right..... and considering everybody I talked to personally who saw the new movie liked it.... perhaps you should look beyond just your personal gripes and stop with the attitude that what you think goes for everybody, because it doesn't.

If you hated it so much, well I guess that's your loss.

And let's not forget, like how you can not judge all the ST series by their first 1 or 2 seasons, you can't judge the reboot with just the one movie.

 

[CDR6]

IMHO, I think much of the "bruha-ha" from the fans comes from the Paramount publicity folk's program of we don't want the old fans anymore, "...this isn't your father's Star Trek..." Then to make matters worse they even bought Nimoy, and did the schtick about the old fans not knowing what the "f__k" they were talking about.

Then JJ's crew irreverently tossed as much of the "old trek" in the trash as they felt they could get away with and still sell popcorn in the summer.

Somewhere down the path somebody spotted the error in this philosophy and muted the whole thing, hopefully, before it could do any real damage. Seeing the error of their ways (not to mention the potential loss of bucks) let it slip that they had included a bunch of "Easter Eggs" for the old trekkies.

However, it was to little and to late and a good chunk of the fan base was affronted. Hence the hate-fest that followed, and continues to this day. So I guess the question is...can the suits recover from their fopah and figure out they need both the old, and the new fans to be a success.... Can JJ and company reach far enough up their rectal regions to come up with a decent film that will bring the old trekkies back into the fold...or is Star Trek to be consigned to the trash heap of history?

Sorry boys, no troll intended... This was a much condensed version of a "lunch room" conversation at work. Which I thought I'd throw out here for all to "ring in" on...pro and con... The reason I did such, is that we were pretty evenly split on the subject.

Overall I am not in the pro JJ camp, however there are some things in the film which I did like (being a Star Trek fan and all).

However, the thing that surprised me was that there is quite a number of folks who are not enamored with JJ's version of things. Some of them, even claim to work at Paramont's offices. (The internet being what it is, apply grain of salt here.) For the longest time I though I was just being an old crumidgon, who needed to get over it. However, I can see there is still a lot of unspent venom out there.

Oh, and for the record, I do claim to be the worst speller west of the Mississippi.

Regards,
Chuck

 

[USS Lancelot]

Some of them, even claim to work at Paramont's offices.

And this is supposed to make it, what? More extraordinary that some random internet dude didn't like the movie? The fact that random-dude claims to work for the same studio that happened to release a movie that random-dude didn't like? Ooooh, that must really mean there is something to the whining of the other 48 random-dudes on the internet that didn't like it. I'm not really sure where you're finding all this "unspent venom" you refer to, 'cause I sure ain't seen much of it.

 

[MANT!]

I remember when TMP came out..(Roddenberry's Ultimate Trek) Some hated the refit of the Enterprise...and the storyline etc..they wanted to see a movie totally like the TV show... but amazingly, they WATCHED the film..and the General Public did too...so the refit stayed..

But the bitching by a LOUD minority of fans stayed too...

Then ..changes made from TMP to WOK..(Bennett Trek) and the same thing again "too militaristic"
"plot too simplistic" etc. from a LOUD minority of fans..
But again J.Q. Public came in droves and that look and feel stayed all the way through TUC

then TNG rewrote the book yet again (Berman Trek)..and another LOUD minority of fans bellowed and howled about the changes...yet again "The Great Unwashed" watched the show and many stayed on to watch the shows (movies) that followed..until that look and feel died out with Nemesis and ENT...now we have a new look and feel yet again. And another bitch session by a LOUD minority of fans yet again...

The more things change...

 

[CDR6]

Too bad, so sad... Maybe one of the "mods" will do us the honor of deleting this thread.

Regards,
-Chuck

 

[Psion]

One thing that got me excited last winter was an announcement that Harlan Ellison wanted to help write the next movie. He mentioned on his blog that he had some ideas to take Trek in a completely new direction and I really wanted to see what he could bring to the table. With someone like him involved with the screenplay, I'd expect the story to be of higher quality with fewer ham-handed coincidences holding the story together. Then, as long as the second movie continued to do well in the box office, we'd possibly get smarter Star Trek even after a shaky start. Not much could be done about the art direction, but I'd be happy with good effects, good acting, and a great story.

 

[USS Lancelot]

One thing that got me excited last winter was an announcement that Harlan Ellison wanted to help write the next movie.

That would be awesome. I most definitely wouldn't be opposed to the second go 'round being a bit more cerebral -- I'm sure Ellison would help in that respect. Although, considering the first one made a bazillion dollars, I don't know how keen the studio honchos would be about messing with the formula. And while I did enjoy the movie, I do agree with you that some of the coincidences were rather ham-handed

 

[thumbtack]

Well, there is a great rift between a tiny subset of the fan base and reality.