J J Abrams New Star Trek and VOY (spoilers)

[Lynx]

Yeah, I have to chime in because I've never really been bugged by Kirk's death either. Could one argue that it was unnecessary to really go there in real-world terms? Sure. But in-universe, the man died for a principle, not for any one specific person or people. I can think of worse reasons to die.

Would I have preferred they just left well enough alone and left his death to my imagination? Sure. But I can live with what they did. I think the measure of how effective what they did in that area could be gauged by the fact that it's still being talked about 15 years later.

Similarly, I'd have preferred Janeway not been killed in the books, but realistically, let's face it: the character will almost certainly never appear in a live-action production again anyway. The books have to do what they feel is appropriate and dramatically interesting for their universe. If you dislike their choice, I'd simply ignore it.

I thought that it was unnecessary to dig up Kirk just to kill him off in a TNG movie. Why can't they let TNG rest in peace? It was a good series with some good movies too and it had great actors. Let us remember it this way and for those who still want to live in a TOS world, I guess there are loads of books where Kirk is still alive, well and active in the TOS timeline.

As for the others, we're aware of the fact that none of the characters from TNG, DS9 and VOY will appear in any movie but it don't give certain writers the right just to waste them to get some silly "effect". By doing that, they ruin what could have been exciting, entertaining and fun for many readers.

I see no point in reading a TNG book where Data isn't alive.

I see no point in reading a Voyager book where Janeway is killed off, Kes is destroyed and absent and Neelix is missing as well.

 

[JB2005]

Yeah, I have to chime in because I've never really been bugged by Kirk's death either. Could one argue that it was unnecessary to really go there in real-world terms? Sure. But in-universe, the man died for a principle, not for any one specific person or people. I can think of worse reasons to die.

Would I have preferred they just left well enough alone and left his death to my imagination? Sure. But I can live with what they did. I think the measure of how effective what they did in that area could be gauged by the fact that it's still being talked about 15 years later.

Similarly, I'd have preferred Janeway not been killed in the books, but realistically, let's face it: the character will almost certainly never appear in a live-action production again anyway. The books have to do what they feel is appropriate and dramatically interesting for their universe. If you dislike their choice, I'd simply ignore it.

I thought that it was unnecessary to dig up Kirk just to kill him off in a TNG movie. Why can't they let TNG rest in peace? It was a good series with some good movies too and it had great actors. Let us remember it this way and for those who still want to live in a TOS world, I guess there are loads of books where Kirk is still alive, well and active in the TOS timeline.

As for the others, we're aware of the fact that none of the characters from TNG, DS9 and VOY will appear in any movie but it don't give certain writers the right just to waste them to get some silly "effect". By doing that, they ruin what could have been exciting, entertaining and fun for many readers.

I see no point in reading a TNG book where Data isn't alive.

I see no point in reading a Voyager book where Janeway is killed off, Kes is destroyed and absent and Neelix is missing as well.

Don't then

 

[kimc]

I can understand it. I know a lot of people that can't stand anything short of a full happy ending "and they lived happily ever after". Character death is an important part of fiction. Hamlet dies. Romeo and Juliet die. There are good deaths and bad deaths, but personally I don't have problems with the notion.

I don't think it's that as much as fans of Kes, Janeway et alwould like to see more stories featuring them. With Romeo and Juliet there's no other way a tragic love story can end. In "Casablanca" sure it would be interesting to know what happens to Rick and Louis in the Foreign Legion and whether they survive the war but at the end of the film you know you've been told the story that the movie set out to tell about the ill-fated love story between Rick and Ilsa.

Perhaps though it's unfair to compare a Trek series to movie. With a movie you don't assume a sequal (although many do happen) while with Trek you know there's always the books, films and other tie-ins. Sure, one can say the story of Voyager ended with the return to the Alpha quadrant but then you can also say that was just the end to a Trek chapter.

Just as any idiot with a gun can destroy any idiot with a pen can kill off a character. However, it takes great imagination and creativity to keep Trek characters fresh and interesting given the followings most of them have. Killing them off after you've written them into a corner seems the easy way out, imo.

 

[JustKate]

^ Somebody could still write Kirk stories, though - he died late in life (the character's life, I mean) and in fact during TNG's time, not his own. So if someone wanted to write stories that included him and were set during his l-o-o-o-o-n-g career, they still could.

Janeway, not so much. That's what I meant when I said she died before her time, and that's why I differentiated between her situation and Kirk's.

 

[exodus]

As far as Kes, she wasn't killed off.
Writing the character out was the best thing, if they had no future plans for her.

Look what keeping a non-used character around did for Chakotay.
Why waste an actors time or talents that way?

 

[iguana_tonante]

I don't think it's that as much as fans of Kes, Janeway et alwould like to see more stories featuring them.

Sure. But even if the character were killed at some point in the timeline, it doesn't prevent writers to stack other stories in the timeframe when they were alive. TOS writers have been doing that for years. Beside, let's face, all characters will be dead at some point. It's just a matter of when and how.

Just as any idiot with a gun can destroy any idiot with a pen can kill off a character. However, it takes great imagination and creativity to keep Trek characters fresh and interesting given the followings most of them have. Killing them off after you've written them into a corner seems the easy way out, imo.

I'm just not sure that having them "written in a corner" was the reason for killing them off. For many I read it as an artistic choice (debatable, for sure), or in some case for live shows, disagreement with the actor/actress.

 

[kimc]

I don't think it's that as much as fans of Kes, Janeway et alwould like to see more stories featuring them.

Sure. But even if the character were killed at some point in the timeline, it doesn't prevent writers to stack other stories in the timeframe when they were alive. TOS writers have been doing that for years. Beside, let's face, all characters will be dead at some point. It's just a matter of when and how.

That's not quite the same especially given the compressed timeframe in some cases like in Janeway's.

 

[Lynx]

^ Somebody could still write Kirk stories, though - he died late in life (the character's life, I mean) and in fact during TNG's time, not his own. So if someone wanted to write stories that included him and were set during his l-o-o-o-o-n-g career, they still could.

Janeway, not so much. That's what I meant when I said she died before her time, and that's why I differentiated between her situation and Kirk's.

You did hit the nail on the head there. When it comes to Kirk, there is a lot of space to cram in lots of stories about him. Add to that that the crew were almost the same for many years, you have Spock, McCoy, Scotty and Uhura around most of the time and there's always a possibility to sneak in Sulu and Chekov too. In other words, lot of "free space" to come up with good Kirk stories.

It's worse with characters like Janeway and Kes because the timeline for writing stories about those characters (if we do stick to stupid official "canon") is very small. Such a story could be very restrictive, you have to plan exactly where and when in Voyager's short journey the events should take place, will Kes and neelix be together, are Seska still on the ship and what about Jonas? Or The Doctor's emitter? Not to mention the time and space for those events, you just have to study the timeline on my website to see what I mean.

I see no point in reading a TNG book where Data isn't alive.

I see no point in reading a Voyager book where Janeway is killed off, Kes is destroyed and absent and Neelix is missing as well.

JB2005 wrote:

Don't then

I won't. But that means that if I want to read a new good story with those characters involved, then I have to write it myself.

 

[JB2005]

I won't. But that means that if I want to read a new good story with those characters involved, then I have to write it myself.

In general terms a story which a person writes is always going to be preferable to that person, because that person won't write something which they wouldn't want to read. However one person's interpretation could not be up to the standard or preference of another person. Such is life

You did hit the nail on the head there. When it comes to Kirk, there is a lot of space to cram in lots of stories about him. Add to that that the crew were almost the same for many years, you have Spock, McCoy, Scotty and Uhura around most of the time and there's always a possibility to sneak in Sulu and Chekov too. In other words, lot of "free space" to come up with good Kirk stories.

It's worse with characters like Janeway and Kes because the timeline for writing stories about those characters (if we do stick to stupid official "canon") is very small. Such a story could be very restrictive, you have to plan exactly where and when in Voyager's short journey the events should take place, will Kes and neelix be together, are Seska still on the ship and what about Jonas? Or The Doctor's emitter? Not to mention the time and space for those events, you just have to study the timeline on my website to see what I mean.

Then you have a challenge

Or Lynx, one could argue we have told all the stories about Janeway it is possible to tell

 

[Lynx]

^^
No, not if Janeway is still alive and the Voyager story continues. Then there will be plenty of room for new stories about Janeway and the crew.

 

[JB2005]

^^Ah but she isn't...and Janeway wasn't Voyager, she was just a character (obviously a fairly major character) but a character nonetheless...

In the Abramsverse she may have survived

In Harold on the other hand she is dearly departed.

 

[Praetor]

I haven't seen any complaints about The Sisko's fate.