Note: I wrote this as a response to the thread "Am I the only one who doesn't like the new trailer?" but after I finished it I realize that I raise a lot of different issues, so I am going to start a new thread for it. I apologize in advance if I am assessing the situation incorrectly. I hope my comments will add to the discussion in a positive way.
The short answer: Obviously not.
Just had to add my two cents. It is always amazing to me that the powers that be don't seem to understand what makes Trek work.
(This is not a SW vs. ST rant, by the way.) Star Wars is space fantasy. Star Trek is science fiction. Despite all of the negative comments about Gene Roddenberry (most of which are spot on) one of the things he always insisted on was 'believability'. In other words, did this (whatever was on the screen) make sense?, because if it didn't then the audience wouldn't believe that they were tagging along on a space ship three or four hundred years into the future, and the whole thing wouldn't work. Of course there were errors in continuity, and all kinds of details which nerdy people like to argue about, but for the bulk of the real fans of Star Trek, those issues are unimportant.
Part of the big attraction of Star Trek for normal, creative, thinking and intelligent people is (I think) that it always had to follow a set of rules that it created and built upon as it went along. This is important because it helped everything make sense, or (dare I say it) be logical.
Why are the rules so important? Because the believability is so important in order for fans to actually care about the characters and the stories, because the fans are constantly playing over in their minds 'I would love to be THERE' or 'How would I react in that situation if it was me?'. If the believability is not there, then the fans detach themselves and it doesn't become a personal issue for them. Trek clearly is a personal issue for a lot of people because (I believe) it encapsulates their own dreams. (More about this later.)
As the rules developed, it became more of a challenge to develop new story lines that fit within the construct, and a big part of the appeal of Star Trek was watching how new ideas, new characters, and new stories could be presented, as long as they fit within the construct. If they don't, then they just aren't Star Trek, which is why the 'Canon' that you all argue about is so important.
The suits at Paramount may not get it, but the rules in Star Trek, and any great science fiction, do matter. This is the fundamental difference between Star Wars and Star Trek. In a Star Wars story, if you need something to happen, you can just make it up - it is the way it is because the author created it - this alien can do this, that ship can do that - why? Who cares, they just do - its great entertainment. It’s Space Fantasty.
In Star Trek, everything is supposed to follow a certain set of rules - everything is the way it is for a reason, and it had better be a good one, or the believability factor is lost. It has to be scientific, and handled in a scientific way, to be Science Fiction. We don’t have to understand the science, if we did, it wouldn’t be fiction, but it does have to make sense and follow the rules of its own construct. Part of the reason that this is so important is that we all have rules that we live with daily - our world actually functions in a fairly reliable pattern, despite its seeming chaos, and we can’t personally relate to situations which do not.
Star Wars is highly entertaining, but I don’t really believe that anyone besides eight year old boys dream of being Han Solo or Darth Vader. Star Trek, on the other hand, inspires! It causes people to dream of what could be. They identify with people struggling in a situation that seems, just a little bit, possible. Star Trek fans turn their passion about Star Trek into working at Nasa, or computer science, or humanitarian work, or anything that can help us get just a bit close to THAT. Star Trek becomes a goal to which people who give a damn can aspire to. These inteligent fans recognize Star Trek is entertainment and it is a business, and they put up with the mistakes or weaknesses that it demonstrates along the way, because they like entertainment too, but it is the EXTRA that makes Star Trek special for them.
The EXTRA of Star Trek is totally dependent upon the believability factor - and the believability factor depends upon consistency in the Canon, even with its flaws, not whether the Star Dates actually line up in order. Those who poo-poo on those people who are upset by obvious huge flaws being introduced in the Star Trek universe don’t understand that everyone who is frustrated by a lack of understanding of Trek are not geek-head nerds who are overly hung-up on trivial details.
The characters of Star Trek are important, because they are always heroic people who make the right decisions - people who are prepared, and do, lay themselves on the line for what is right. They aren’t perfect people, they are troubled and conflicted, but they have fundamentally strong moral compasses. If we want to see seriously flawed people, we don’t need to watch a movie or a television show - we see it everyday in our own lives.
Star Trek has always been based upon heroic people who display characters and traits that most people hope to aspire to. Showing them as flawed people who are basically no better than the rest of us 20th century losers destroys a fundamental part of what Star Trek’s appeal is all about. This is why so many people are so upset to see a suggestion that Kirk is fooling around with a member of his crew. Truthfully, one can’t comment on this without seeing the movie and understanding the entire circumstance, but for the record, Star Trek originally was highly sexual, and Kirk would boink any pretty alien that came along, but NEVER a member of the crew, because no responsible captain of anything would ever do that.
So...
Having discussed the believability factor - to see a ship the size of the Enterprise being constructed on earth doesn’t make any sense at all. It’s not a stupid rocket. How in the $%^&* do they expect to get it out into space? With a tow truck? YES, this matters - it is simply too stupid to be Star Trek.
The enterprise looks, both inside and out, to be far more advanced than the ship from the original series. Stupid, stupid, stupid... On the other hand, the uniforms look like they pre-date the show, so BIG BIG kudos to the costume designer. This is someone who at first glance seems to GET it.
This trailer reminds me of a Jerry Bruckheimer movie. If it is more intelligent than the idea of Bruce Willis blowing apart an asteroid the size of Texas by drilling an 800 foot deep hole, I will be really shocked, because it sure doesn’t look like it is. If it is that stupid, then god help the producers, because what are they going to do with a Star Trek movie that Star Trek fans hate? Do they really think they can attract a ‘new’ legion of fans? The non-Trek fans are going to look to Trekkers/Trekkies (whatever and who cares...) as to whether or not its a good movie before they plunk down their money; “I wouldn’t go see that Star Trek movie because John really hates it and he LOVES Star Trek, so it must be REALLY bad!”
Batman is open to reintrepretation, so is James Bond - lots of things are. This is mostly because they are being set in a different time period. 2008 James Bond is different from 1960's James Bond. That works. Star Trek isn’t open to significant reintrepretation, because it defines its own universe and the time period it takes place in is not changing. If it breaks its own rules, it stops being Star Trek. Yes, update things, use modern technology to make better movies, improve our view of the Star Trek universe; make it bigger, badder, faster, bolder than ever before. But make it Star Trek, not a mindless action movie filled with non Star-Trek like characters, which unfortunately is an awful lot like what this trailer looks like.
In my experience, if it looks like %^& and smells like @#$%, you can bet that 99.9% of the time it actually is @#$%. This is why this trailer is so frightening for so many people. It doesn’t look like Star Trek at all, it looks like just another stupid action movie in Star Trek clothing.
Now, it is a trailer folks, and much remains to be seen, but I don’t really believe that the movie is going to come out with such huge flaws repaired (Scene 2: Young kirk flies up on his space-motorcyle and gazes upon the enterprise under construction in Space Dock... NOT), so I will wait to see it to make a final judgment, but so far, they have totally, totally lost me.
When, oh when, will the people in charge actually ‘get’ it?
The short answer: Obviously not.
Just had to add my two cents. It is always amazing to me that the powers that be don't seem to understand what makes Trek work.
(This is not a SW vs. ST rant, by the way.) Star Wars is space fantasy. Star Trek is science fiction. Despite all of the negative comments about Gene Roddenberry (most of which are spot on) one of the things he always insisted on was 'believability'. In other words, did this (whatever was on the screen) make sense?, because if it didn't then the audience wouldn't believe that they were tagging along on a space ship three or four hundred years into the future, and the whole thing wouldn't work. Of course there were errors in continuity, and all kinds of details which nerdy people like to argue about, but for the bulk of the real fans of Star Trek, those issues are unimportant.
Part of the big attraction of Star Trek for normal, creative, thinking and intelligent people is (I think) that it always had to follow a set of rules that it created and built upon as it went along. This is important because it helped everything make sense, or (dare I say it) be logical.
Why are the rules so important? Because the believability is so important in order for fans to actually care about the characters and the stories, because the fans are constantly playing over in their minds 'I would love to be THERE' or 'How would I react in that situation if it was me?'. If the believability is not there, then the fans detach themselves and it doesn't become a personal issue for them. Trek clearly is a personal issue for a lot of people because (I believe) it encapsulates their own dreams. (More about this later.)
As the rules developed, it became more of a challenge to develop new story lines that fit within the construct, and a big part of the appeal of Star Trek was watching how new ideas, new characters, and new stories could be presented, as long as they fit within the construct. If they don't, then they just aren't Star Trek, which is why the 'Canon' that you all argue about is so important.
The suits at Paramount may not get it, but the rules in Star Trek, and any great science fiction, do matter. This is the fundamental difference between Star Wars and Star Trek. In a Star Wars story, if you need something to happen, you can just make it up - it is the way it is because the author created it - this alien can do this, that ship can do that - why? Who cares, they just do - its great entertainment. It’s Space Fantasty.
In Star Trek, everything is supposed to follow a certain set of rules - everything is the way it is for a reason, and it had better be a good one, or the believability factor is lost. It has to be scientific, and handled in a scientific way, to be Science Fiction. We don’t have to understand the science, if we did, it wouldn’t be fiction, but it does have to make sense and follow the rules of its own construct. Part of the reason that this is so important is that we all have rules that we live with daily - our world actually functions in a fairly reliable pattern, despite its seeming chaos, and we can’t personally relate to situations which do not.
Star Wars is highly entertaining, but I don’t really believe that anyone besides eight year old boys dream of being Han Solo or Darth Vader. Star Trek, on the other hand, inspires! It causes people to dream of what could be. They identify with people struggling in a situation that seems, just a little bit, possible. Star Trek fans turn their passion about Star Trek into working at Nasa, or computer science, or humanitarian work, or anything that can help us get just a bit close to THAT. Star Trek becomes a goal to which people who give a damn can aspire to. These inteligent fans recognize Star Trek is entertainment and it is a business, and they put up with the mistakes or weaknesses that it demonstrates along the way, because they like entertainment too, but it is the EXTRA that makes Star Trek special for them.
The EXTRA of Star Trek is totally dependent upon the believability factor - and the believability factor depends upon consistency in the Canon, even with its flaws, not whether the Star Dates actually line up in order. Those who poo-poo on those people who are upset by obvious huge flaws being introduced in the Star Trek universe don’t understand that everyone who is frustrated by a lack of understanding of Trek are not geek-head nerds who are overly hung-up on trivial details.
The characters of Star Trek are important, because they are always heroic people who make the right decisions - people who are prepared, and do, lay themselves on the line for what is right. They aren’t perfect people, they are troubled and conflicted, but they have fundamentally strong moral compasses. If we want to see seriously flawed people, we don’t need to watch a movie or a television show - we see it everyday in our own lives.
Star Trek has always been based upon heroic people who display characters and traits that most people hope to aspire to. Showing them as flawed people who are basically no better than the rest of us 20th century losers destroys a fundamental part of what Star Trek’s appeal is all about. This is why so many people are so upset to see a suggestion that Kirk is fooling around with a member of his crew. Truthfully, one can’t comment on this without seeing the movie and understanding the entire circumstance, but for the record, Star Trek originally was highly sexual, and Kirk would boink any pretty alien that came along, but NEVER a member of the crew, because no responsible captain of anything would ever do that.
So...
Having discussed the believability factor - to see a ship the size of the Enterprise being constructed on earth doesn’t make any sense at all. It’s not a stupid rocket. How in the $%^&* do they expect to get it out into space? With a tow truck? YES, this matters - it is simply too stupid to be Star Trek.
The enterprise looks, both inside and out, to be far more advanced than the ship from the original series. Stupid, stupid, stupid... On the other hand, the uniforms look like they pre-date the show, so BIG BIG kudos to the costume designer. This is someone who at first glance seems to GET it.
This trailer reminds me of a Jerry Bruckheimer movie. If it is more intelligent than the idea of Bruce Willis blowing apart an asteroid the size of Texas by drilling an 800 foot deep hole, I will be really shocked, because it sure doesn’t look like it is. If it is that stupid, then god help the producers, because what are they going to do with a Star Trek movie that Star Trek fans hate? Do they really think they can attract a ‘new’ legion of fans? The non-Trek fans are going to look to Trekkers/Trekkies (whatever and who cares...) as to whether or not its a good movie before they plunk down their money; “I wouldn’t go see that Star Trek movie because John really hates it and he LOVES Star Trek, so it must be REALLY bad!”
Batman is open to reintrepretation, so is James Bond - lots of things are. This is mostly because they are being set in a different time period. 2008 James Bond is different from 1960's James Bond. That works. Star Trek isn’t open to significant reintrepretation, because it defines its own universe and the time period it takes place in is not changing. If it breaks its own rules, it stops being Star Trek. Yes, update things, use modern technology to make better movies, improve our view of the Star Trek universe; make it bigger, badder, faster, bolder than ever before. But make it Star Trek, not a mindless action movie filled with non Star-Trek like characters, which unfortunately is an awful lot like what this trailer looks like.
In my experience, if it looks like %^& and smells like @#$%, you can bet that 99.9% of the time it actually is @#$%. This is why this trailer is so frightening for so many people. It doesn’t look like Star Trek at all, it looks like just another stupid action movie in Star Trek clothing.
Now, it is a trailer folks, and much remains to be seen, but I don’t really believe that the movie is going to come out with such huge flaws repaired (Scene 2: Young kirk flies up on his space-motorcyle and gazes upon the enterprise under construction in Space Dock... NOT), so I will wait to see it to make a final judgment, but so far, they have totally, totally lost me.
When, oh when, will the people in charge actually ‘get’ it?
