Just a television show...

[Shatnertage]

That it dispensed with such expectations, that vary wildly from person to person and are thus impossible to ever meet, is probably the reason why it did as well as it did.

Possibly. It's hard to imagine Paramount greenlighting a movie based on the kind of script and characters that purists seem to prefer, much less giving it any kind of budget.

The thing is, from this board, I don't really have any idea of what kind of story would go over well with purists. I just get that they're everywhere from disappointed to disgusted with what we did get last year. I'm guessing it would be more faithful to the original continuity and characterizations, but I'd be curious to hear how it would be different.

 

[xortex]

Didn't see the movie but from what I gather it's about a giant space drill and a mustache twirling villian who is out for revenge. It has to be a joke along with a Picard clone, right? It has to be.

 

[Myko]

For me I wanted a more "realistic" and believable film, I don't care much if it respected canon as long as it was good. I would've preferred a complete reboot without the connection to Spock Prime. It didn't feel realistic that all the characters from the original series would meet on this very first mission after the academy, or that Kirk would be promoted to captain so fast. I wouldn't have put everyone in the movie, but I guess from a studio point of view you have to. Also, no time travel, I can't stand anymore time travel!

 

[Warped9]

For me I wanted a more "realistic" and believable film, I don't care much if it respected canon as long as it was good. I would've preferred a complete reboot without the connection to Spock Prime. It didn't feel realistic that all the characters from the original series would meet on this very first mission after the academy, or that Kirk would be promoted to captain so fast. I wouldn't have put everyone in the movie, but I guess from a studio point of view you have to. Also, no time travel, I can't stand anymore time travel!

All the above is a good start towards a better movie.

 

[xortex]

Politics, power/priveledge and greed are the three titans that will absolutely prevent Star Trek from being done again...

 

[Warped9]

Trek will be done again in some form or other. But Star Trek I'm not so sure. I liken ST09 to the last two or three previous Batmans before Chris Nolan. Nolan rebooted the property in a good way. Bond was rebooted in a good way with Casino Royale (unfortunately it stumbled with Quantum Of Solace, but hopefully they'll recover).

ST09's resemblance to TOS was extremely superficial. It certainly had none of the substance or multilayering that TOS had. Instead of using the best episodes as a template, even for a reboot, they seemed to have used episodes like "Mudd's Women" and "And The Children Shall Lead" and "Whom Gods Destroy" and "Wink Of An Eye." In other words they emulated TOS' weakest and then dumbed it done even further than that.

And THEN they flavoured it more like Star Wars. They admit it right on the DVD.

Chris Nolan understood the essence of Batman and he got that across. Sam Raimi understood the essence of Spider-Man and he got that across. Abrams didn't understand a fucking thing about TOS and it's all over his stinking film.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Didn't see the movie but from what I gather it's about a giant space drill and a mustache twirling villian who is out for revenge. It has to be a joke along with a Picard clone, right? It has to be.

If only the villian had been played in mustache twirling fashion. It might have helped that element.

 

[Orcus]

For me I wanted a more "realistic" and believable film, I don't care much if it respected canon as long as it was good. I would've preferred a complete reboot without the connection to Spock Prime. It didn't feel realistic that all the characters from the original series would meet on this very first mission after the academy, or that Kirk would be promoted to captain so fast. I wouldn't have put everyone in the movie, but I guess from a studio point of view you have to. Also, no time travel, I can't stand anymore time travel!

Agreed. If I want time-travel I'll watch "Dr Who"...

 

[plynch]

The thing is, from this board, I don't really have any idea of what kind of story would go over well with purists. I just get that they're everywhere from disappointed to disgusted with what we did get last year. I'm guessing it would be more faithful to the original continuity and characterizations, but I'd be curious to hear how it would be different.

OK . . .

Exploration, rather than reacting to a hip/casual "bad guy."

Positivity.

A movie made by a person who felt driven to make it (cf. GR and the series, Kubrick & 2001, Lucas & SW); rather than one made by a current hot producer hired by the corporation to restart a franchise, to make dough.

Some morality or tie in with a contemporary issue. I KNEW Kirk was somehow going to avoid killing the widower villain at the end of Trek XI. I was wrong.

Hope that helps.

EDIT: Of all the movies, I think Insurrection -- though it does have a mustache-twirling villain -- got the spirit of Star Trek the best.

 

[Nerys Myk]

For me I wanted a more "realistic" and believable film, I don't care much if it respected canon as long as it was good. I would've preferred a complete reboot without the connection to Spock Prime. It didn't feel realistic that all the characters from the original series would meet on this very first mission after the academy, or that Kirk would be promoted to captain so fast. I wouldn't have put everyone in the movie, but I guess from a studio point of view you have to. Also, no time travel, I can't stand anymore time travel!

Agreed. If I want time-travel I'll watch "Dr Who"...

Trek and time travel have a long relationship.

 

[Chrisisall]

EDIT: Of all the movies, I think Insurrection -- though it does have a mustache-twirling villain -- got the spirit of Star Trek the best.

We REACH!

 

[Warped9]

Trek and time travel have a long relationship.

Yeah, but now it's as overdone as bumpy headed Klingons going on and on about honour.

 

[Captain Robert April]

They only did, what four or five time travel stories during TOS? Hardly a long tradition.

Something else we can blame on the Bragaberman, I s'pose....

 

[Warped9]

They only did, what four or five time travel stories during TOS? Hardly a long tradition.

Something else we can blame on the Bragaberman, I s'pose....

"The Naked Time"
"Tomorrow Is Yesterday"
"The City On The Edge Of Forever"
"Assignment: Earth"
"All Our Yesterdays"

 

[jefferiestubes8]

I hate that Star Trek is a "franchise" now. Drives me crazy. Like it's a McDonald's or something.

Star Trek is probably #2 in the science fiction/fantasy franchises behind Star Wars as overall size of media properties & merchandise licensed.

Star Trek is still a very powerful property that just so happens to be owned by Paramount Pictures (under the Viacom umbrella).

 

[Nerys Myk]

Trek and time travel have a long relationship.

Yeah, but now it's as overdone as bumpy headed Klingons going on and on about honour.

Is it? Or is it that when it been done the results haven't always been good.

 

[Nerys Myk]

They only did, what four or five time travel stories during TOS? Hardly a long tradition.

Something else we can blame on the Bragaberman, I s'pose....

I dunno, out of the four series and four movies they did how many episodes or films involved time travel?

 

[Noname Given]

They only did, what four or five time travel stories during TOS? Hardly a long tradition.

Something else we can blame on the Bragaberman, I s'pose....

"The Naked Time"
"Tomorrow Is Yesterday"
"The City On The Edge Of Forever"
"Assignment: Earth"
"All Our Yesterdays"

(5/80) * 100 = 6.25% of TOS stories had time travel.

 

[Chrisisall]

"The Naked Time"
"Tomorrow Is Yesterday"
"The City On The Edge Of Forever"
"Assignment: Earth"
"All Our Yesterdays"

(5/80) * 100 = 6.25% of TOS stories had time travel.

Well done, No.

 

[plynch]

Trek and time travel have a long relationship.

I would add, "unfortunately."

EDIT: I would make a ruling that Naked Time really isn't a time travel story. It's just there at the end as a side effect to the slingshot effect, right? I miss Reilly. Fun character. Was having an Irishman too confusing, with a Mr. Scott also aboard?