Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoilers)

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

It's only vague because you left out my explanation.

I left out nothing. You must have added to your original post after I quoted you (or while I was quoting you) because the rest of it wasn't there when I quoted your post.

And having since gone back to read your 'explanation,' I found only more undefined terms, broad generalizations, and speculation.

Everyone includes us aswell yes, but the focus when it comes down to it needs
to be on everyone but us. We are not a big enough market to focus on and
frankly I think this movie would be shit if they catered to most fans on this board.

You are missing my point. The purpose of including Nimoy is to cater to exactly those people that you suggest they not cater to.

So either you are in denial that Nimoy is in the movie, or you think that Star Trek fans are not interested in seeing Leonard Nimoy in a Star Trek film. Or your argument (loose as it is) is flawed.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

But deeper than that, Nimoy has our trust. (I will assume the role of a 'skeptical Trekkie' for the rest of this post, to further illustrate my point.) Fans all over teh Internets have decided that this movie must be good solely because Nimoy has agreed to be in it, so clearly Nimoy's goodwill aura has extended over the production even before the movie has been released.

Star Trek V would seem to refute this point.

I'm not saying that it has that effect on every fan. In fact, it shouldn't. For example, it does not have that effect on me.

I am saying that it is a desired effect, or at least a desired side-effect, of having Nimoy in the movie.

And based on many comments I have seen, it is already working.

 

[trekkerguy]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

It's only vague because you left out my explanation.

I left out nothing. You must have added to your original post after I quoted you (or while I was quoting you) because the rest of it wasn't there when I quoted your post.

And having since gone back to read your 'explanation,' I found only more undefined terms, broad generalizations, and speculation.

Everyone includes us aswell yes, but the focus when it comes down to it needs
to be on everyone but us. We are not a big enough market to focus on and
frankly I think this movie would be shit if they catered to most fans on this board.

You are missing my point. The purpose of including Nimoy is to cater to exactly those people that you suggest they not cater to.

So either you are in denial that Nimoy is in the movie, or you think that Star Trek fans are not interested in seeing Leonard Nimoy in a Star Trek film. Or your argument (loose as it is) is flawed.

It's not loose in any way. The success of Trek, as has been shown in the past(Voyage Home, First Contact, TNG)relies on finding a way to appeal to the general audience, not us. We're not enough to carry it and will be here regardless. That's what I said.

Nimoy is in the film because the story called for it, like Shatner is not in the film because the story did not call for it.

 

[Outpost4]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Sam, while I agree with your basic point, that old Spock is a safety blanket for the viewer - someone we can trust - I think you are laying it on a bit thick. When it comes to screenwriting, stick to your day job. We here at TrekBBS care about timelines and reset buttons. The average movie goer just wants a good story with a happy ending. No way will the movie resolve anywhere near your take.

The movie going public doesn't need Spock to anoint the new crew any more than Sean Connery needed to bless the new James Bond. Or maybe more to the point, even if Peter Sellers had risen from the grave to do a cameo in Steve Martin's Pink Panther movie, that film would have still been a turkey. A clever plot, well told, with some powerful action sequences, cool special effects and clear character development of people we care about, is all this new crew of the Good Starship Enterprise need. Nimoy makes the transition easier, and may be essential to the plot, but is not required for the acceptance of these youngsters by existing Trekkies.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

It's not loose in any way. The success of Trek, as has been shown in the past(Voyage Home, First Contact, TNG)relies on finding a way to appeal to the general audience, not us. We're not enough to carry it and will be here regardless. That's what I said.

Well, this line of thinking keeps getting more and more removed from the point of this thread, but I'll address it anyway.

Star Trek had survived for many years by appealing mostly to Star Trek fans and occasionally (when most successful) to a chunk of the general audience.

It has only been of late when "we" have not been enough to support Star Trek, and not because of any inherent failing on our part, but because Star Trek began to fail to entertain most of "us" anymore.

None of which has anything to do with my post, which is all about how Abrams has made a reboot of Star Trek which he hopes will revitalize Trek and appeal to a wide audience, and how he (in my speculation) put a little Nimoy/Spock band-aid on the canon issue, thereby accomplishing all of the things that I detailed above.

Nimoy is in the film because the story called for it...

Which you could not possibly know (nor could I), as neither of us has seen the movie.

And even if you are right, that doesn't invalidate all of the other reasons I detailed above as incidental perks.

The benefits are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they all work together. Which is why it is so genius. If I'm right. And I usually am.

...like Shatner is not in the film because the story did not call for it.

Which you similarly could not possibly know. Besides, some small part of me believes he still might be. (Currently, I'm rooting for a little scene right after the final credits.)

We can speak with more authority after we've both seen the movie.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Sam, while I agree with your basic point, that Spock is a safety blanket for the viewer - someone we can trust - I think you are laying it on a bit thick. When it comes to screenwriting, stick to your day job. We here at TrekBBS care about timelines and reset buttons. The average movie goer just wants a good story with a happy ending. No way will the movie resolve anywhere near your take.

I was just going for some broad strokes. I wasn't about to submit my screenplay or anything.

The movie going public doesn't need Spock to anoint the new crew any more than Sean Connery needed to bless the new James Bond.

Oh, sure, it doesn't need it. It's just an added bonus. I never meant to argue that it was essential. In fact, my concern is that it will come off as forced or heavy-handed, in which case many will agree that they never should have done it all.

My post is about what I thing they are trying to do. We won't know until we see the movie if they accomplished any of these things.

 

[trekkerguy]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Star Trek had survived for many years by appealing mostly to Star Trek fans and occasionally (when most successful) to a chunk of the general audience.

When it's barely gotten by or failed, it was relying on "hardcore" fans alone.
When it's excelled(or done decent by other industry standards), it's been
when it pulled in casual audiences. Trek fans simply aren't enough.
Sooo... Nimoy being some sort of ploy to pull in Trek fans is a silly notion
as the Trek fans will show up regardless and it really isn't about us.

Nimoy is in the film because the story called for it...

Which you could not possibly know (nor could I), as neither of us has seen the movie.

Um, we all know this. He's in the movie.
If the story did not have a part for him he wouldn't be in it.

...like Shatner is not in the film because the story did not call for it.

Which you similarly could not possibly know. Besides, some small part of me believes he still might be. (Currently, I'm rooting for a little scene right after the final credits.)
We can speak with more authority after we've both seen the movie.

They've already stated he's not in it because the parts they wrote for him
seemed contrived, so they left it out. Which reinforces my point about Nimoy.
They wouldn't include Shatner because the storyline didn't call for it
without it seeming contrived, so Nimoys role must be purposeful to serve the story.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Um, we all know this. He's in the movie.

You and I seem to have different, uh, debating styles, so I'm just going to walk away now and we'll call it even.

 

[Kryton]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

I know why Old Spock's back...it's his revenge for all those arguments I won!

 

[BillJ]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Nimoy is in the film because the story called for it...

Old Spock is in the movie because the plot calls for it. Old Spock could have easily been played by Zachary Quinto. Sam is one-hundred percent right as to why Nimoy is in the film. Paramount wants Trekkie money too, we're the ones who are going to buy the spin-off merchandise.

Care to play again?

 

[Outpost4]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

For whatever reason, I'm just glad Nimoy is there. I thought I'd never live long enough to see Nimoy play Spock one more time.

I think I just validated part of Sam's argument.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

0Yes.

Drat. Beat me to it.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Old Spock is in the movie because the plot calls for it. Old Spock could have easily been played by Zachary Quinto. Sam is one-hundred percent right as to why Nimoy is in the film. Paramount wants Trekkie money too, we're the ones who are going to buy the spin-off merchandise.

But Nimoy is also of curiosity value to the general public, a group more vast than ageing Trekkers. Older people who go to movies and will remember Nimoy for 60s and 80s nostalgia value.

 

[cooleddie74]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Old Spock is back because of one reason...and one reason only.


Affirmative Action for Aged Actors.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

(Or "A4", for those of you keeping score at home.)

 

[I am not Spock]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Nimoy is there to say, "Hey, old fans. You still have to watch this. This still counts. You're still on the hook. You can't just pretend it never happened. Canon. Canon. Canon. Get out your wallets."

LOL!

I think this is precisely the reason Nimoy is there. You've hit the nail on the head.

Someone should use that line as their sig.

 

[gastrof]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

I like the OP's suggestion that old Spock sees a scene from the old series in his viewer, but disagree it should be an actual clip from TOS.

At this point, the new actors ARE Kirk, Spock, etc. Re-creating the clip, shot for shot, beat by beat, using the new actors in their slightly revised uniforms, is the way to go. Those of us who know TOS to the point of "Uhura will have a run in her stocking in this scene" will know the original scene, and will KNOW the re-creation is "right".

I disagree with the idea that old Spock then returns to his timeline. The two are one. If Spock has gotten things back on track, then this IS his timeline, to the extent possible. Some things will have changed but the essentials are restored.

Once the timeline has been changed to ANY degree, Spock no longer has the same future to return to. All he can do is move forward in the revised timeline, and arrive at the point in time he was at the start of the film. (Once the minor timeline changes have taken place, even if there WERE still a parallel timeline/universe that matched TOS exactly...which is just SILLY...Spock would be isolated from it. He's a part of the revised timeline now. See BTTF part two. *grin* )

Spock will simply be home again, in the era of his advanced age, and will find that while some things are a little different, nothing that really matters is changed...

Except that Data is still alive and has always looked like Robin Williams.

 

[Kryton]

Re: Old Spock as Narrator/Pitchman/Skeptical Trekkie (Probable Spoile

Data is still alive and has always looked like Robin Williams.

He's a real Millennium Man.