nuTrek, moving forward....
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Oddly enough, my disappointment with (Star Trek) Enterprise was that it wasn't a radical enough of a departure from the source material not that it didn't neatly tie into the "canon history" of the other four shows. I wanted it to have an aesthetic that was very divergent from the rest of ModTrek, and it was but it didn't go as far as I think they could've gone.
And on that note if they do do a story on a strange new world I hope they hire some guys who came design a really impressive planet for them to explore.
Inhabited by some very impressive aliens as well.
Yeah, let's have Kirk get it on with a thirteen-foot tall blue chick. 
BTW, I'd think that Saldana's rising star in L.A. will be powerful incentive for Paramount to feature Uhura prominently in the next Star Trek movie. That would be tres cool.
BTW, I'd think that Saldana's rising star in L.A. will be powerful incentive for Paramount to feature Uhura prominently in the next Star Trek movie. That would be tres cool.
Yes, awesome cool. One of the (many) better decisions of the Supreme Court was to make Uhura the female lead of a Trek film.
Absolutely Right(TM). Awesome casting.
Yes that too.
A
Amaris
Guest
I have to agree. It also helps that not only is she just gorgeous, but she's really intelligent as well. Zaldana was perfectly cast, in my not so humble and completely non-professional opinion.
Don't be surprised if the STAR TREK franchise becomes like the James Bond franchise, where each new movie from now on shares only certain cast members with its predecessor, and maybe some other cosmetic features, and everything else keeps getting re-invented.
As for the AVATAR remark, you're probably right. The old saying goes "Imitation is the sincerest form of television". Don't be fooled by the big screen and big budgets. The 2009 STAR TREK movie was, at its heart, an overblown TV show. That's TREK by its very nature. Since Hollyweird these days can't seem to find an original idea to save their lives, I wouldn't be surprised if future TREK movies became imitations of other sci fi / action flick / fantasy blockbusters put out by competing studios.
This is just a fad. TOS gave us 79 episodes, 4 spin-off series, and 6 movies. TNG gave us another 4 movies. Based on that, my uneducated guess would be this new "reimagining" fad will burn itself out in a total of 2-4 movies. I'll be mildly surprised if/when it gets to movie #3, and I'll feint if it reaches movie #5.
The one thing that's unnerving about all of this is I'm not sure what the NuTREK stands for. Is this the beginning of a new visionary thing, like what TOS became? Or is this new franchise going to devolve into a well-polished STARSHIP TROOPERS? I guess it all depends on what competing blockbuster the Hollyweirdo executives at Paramount decide they're going to imitate next.
Honestly, who cares? NuTrek is big, loud, fun and dumb. It has as little to do with "old time TOS religion" as RENT had to do with La Boheme. As a TOS fan, I really don't want to see what Abrams would do with other elements of the mythos. Seeking "Kirk" act like a ridiculous loudmouthed college jock horndog was about all I could stomach.
I'm all for reinventing. Three of the most cowardly things Abrams did was (1) adopt the uniforms and certain trappings of TOS (including "McCoy's" De Kelley impersonation), (2) hire Nimoy, and (3) bother to address canon at all. He should just unapologetically make it his own.
But it isn't, can't be and shouldn't be TOS.
I'm all for reinventing. Three of the most cowardly things Abrams did was (1) adopt the uniforms and certain trappings of TOS (including "McCoy's" De Kelley impersonation), (2) hire Nimoy, and (3) bother to address canon at all. He should just unapologetically make it his own.
But it isn't, can't be and shouldn't be TOS.
I would expect something like that, yeah. Maybe three films in more-or-less this style with Abrams running the show, then on to another version.
She may be the best recasting.
BA-ZING!
Kirk was well seasoned. He was an experienced soldier and, when demanded of him, a diplomat. He also took advantage of his charm and good looks. But he wasn't a beer swigging, breast grabbing, hot rod driving "repeat offender." Not in the "original timeline." That was Beaker's point.
The Honeymooners didn't have a series of feature films in the 80's to keep the concept in the public eye. And very few programs reached the pop culture heights of Trek, which grew more popular as time went on. Maybe it would have peaked and deminished by the early 90's without new Trek series, but "forgotten"? Nah. It made too much of an impact.
And, what, Abrams went back to Kirk and Spock because nobody cares about the old characters? Of all the Trek shows, the original series is the one that sticks around in the public consciousness. As good as TNG was, nobody's clamoring for a reboot with Picard. The later Treks will be forgotten long before TOS. They've already faded, they don't have the repeat value of the original. Yet TOS keeps getting trotted out, refurbished, restored, and enhanced.
The longevity of the original characters is established. The nuTrek films will keep the characters alive by making fresh adventures. But without the continued popularity of TOS, the movie wouldn't have been as much of a success. Now, they'll feed off each other. nuTrek will (and has) stimulated interest in the old show, which will help the interest in the next movie. It's all good.
Last edited:
Pretty sure he also knew that the characterization of Pine's Kirk was silly, exaggerated, selective and designed to provoke - it is that obvious. 
I would want ot see something different, written with a TOS sensablility. I doubt that would happen , perhaps due to studio fears about not making enough money. IMO, that is why they did a TOS reboot and not tried another part of the unexplored Prime Universe timeline.
I also believe that two more movies from Abrams, and unless it "Catches Fire" replace his team by another and start again.
I also believe that two more movies from Abrams, and unless it "Catches Fire" replace his team by another and start again.
Since we never saw the younger Kirk in the original timeline its hard to say if he swilled beer, grabbed a boob or drove a hot rod. We do know that Kirk liked the ladies, drank alchohol, had a healthy disrespect for authority and was a bit of thrill seeker.
Works for me. Best thing Star trek ever did.
Now that the origin story is done, I'd like to see them get back to exploring strange new worlds. The eleventh Trek film was very entertaining, but it did feel like a brochure of what is (hopefully) yet to come. And I'm fine with the reinvention. It's inevitable. I had a problem initially, like I did with the Bond producers rebooting 007, but I bit my tongue after seeing Casino Royale and Star Trek (2009). Trek and Bond have both now crossed that threshold when they no longer belong to one generation, or imagining. It's like Sherlock Holmes or Tarzan.
They should just fire Abrams and his writers and have some better people reboot Abrams' reboot. That is probably the only way nuTrek would have any hope of being good going forward. Otherwise....
For nuTrek to be good under Abrams he'd have to:
1. Stop shaking the camera.
2. Stop trying to make Trek be a Dawson's Creek-esque smutfest in space.
3. Make sure the plot is plausible and doesn't have holes big enough to drive the whole Fed starship fleet through.
4. Have intelligent dialogue.
5. Stop trying to de-canonize much better Trek work by much better men.
6. Make sure the characters, including the villains, aren't one-dimensional caricatures.
7. Stop rehashing plots (whether intentionally or not) from old episodes of Trek (I.e. "Valiant").
8. Respect the dignity of the characters (I.e: Uhura, Spock, related to point 2 as well).
9. Make sure the film has a meaning or at least some semblance of a point.
etc. etc.
But yeah, not like any or most of that is gonna happen. nuTrek will probably only be good again when Abrams' hold over the franchise expires and someone else takes over.
For nuTrek to be good under Abrams he'd have to:
1. Stop shaking the camera.
2. Stop trying to make Trek be a Dawson's Creek-esque smutfest in space.
3. Make sure the plot is plausible and doesn't have holes big enough to drive the whole Fed starship fleet through.
4. Have intelligent dialogue.
5. Stop trying to de-canonize much better Trek work by much better men.
6. Make sure the characters, including the villains, aren't one-dimensional caricatures.
7. Stop rehashing plots (whether intentionally or not) from old episodes of Trek (I.e. "Valiant").
8. Respect the dignity of the characters (I.e: Uhura, Spock, related to point 2 as well).
9. Make sure the film has a meaning or at least some semblance of a point.
etc. etc.
But yeah, not like any or most of that is gonna happen. nuTrek will probably only be good again when Abrams' hold over the franchise expires and someone else takes over.
Similar threads
