I know I have talked about my disapproval of the new rebooted Trek movies before but I found an article recently that accurately explained how I feel towards the subject. here's the link http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-star-trek-reboot-hates-idea-being-star-trek/ Now while I might not agree with EVERYTHING said in this article, most are dead ringers of my opinion on the subject so lets get to it...
#5. "The Franchise Was Already In Bad Shape"
-Okay this is one of the only ones that I disagree with. While I agree that the franchise was dying, they made the mistake of grouping DS9 in with the "failing" franchises. I would disagree, while it was different than prior series' it was still a very well done series. I'm not a big fan of voyager but I still wouldn't say it was dead yet. I don't think the death happened until Enterprise. Though I will admit I agree it was starting to die, and the reboots brought hope, they just didn't fulfill that hope I had.
#4. "The Reboots Have About As Much Understanding And Respect For Its Fans As The Star Wars Prequels"
-Now I'll be honest I have seen all of the Star Wars movies (except the new one) but am not a fan, so I will talk only about the Trek side of this argument. My biggest complaint and the one I am most vocal about is THE COMPLETE LACK OF BONES IN THE MOVIES! This was when I knew I wouldn't like the new movies. McCoy was my favorite character in TOS and in the reboots they used him for maybe 2 one liners that a TOS fan would recognize, beyond that he was just a name. That rubbed me the wrong way more than any other mistake. He was a main character, one of THE main characters. It was Spock, Kirk and McCoy, they WERE the series, the fact that they completely forgot that fact ruined it for me. Additionally, while I understand that this was supposed to be an "alternate universe" (which allowed them to change it how ever they want) they either should have owned that or not don't it at all. the "alternate reality" was just a cop-out for them to change anything they want. Throwing Khan in and using that felt like a remake of the greatest star trek film ever (Wrath of Khan) but they remade it in a way that completely stripped Khan of everything that made the character who he is. Not to mention the Kirk, Spock, Uhura love triangle. I know in TOS they made slight referances to the fact that Spock and Uhura had some small hint of a possible romance but in the movies they took it to an extreme and made Spock an emotional mess, which is the polar opposite of what made Spock who he was, so that's 2 main characters they botched (in my opinion)
#3. "Fans Tolerate It Because It's Better Than Nothing"
- I wanted to like the movies, I really did but there was just so much about the movies that I just couldn't ignore it. I like that it gave the franchise the new boost it needed to this new generation, but it was done so incorrectly that anyone who claims to like these new movies are likely those who weren't large fans of the original series.
#2. "The Studio Made Star Trek Mainstream To Appeal To Everyone"
- This is another one that irked me, and it doesn't apply just to the rebooted Trek movies. Money seems to outweigh the accuracy of a movie. I can understand wanting to make money off of a movie, but sacrificing the basics of what made a show great, just to bring in money is so wrong in my book. All of these factors lead me to the final part of the article...
#1. "By Making Star Trek "For Everyone," They Alienate The People Who Love It"
-As I mentioned before I understand that by rebooting Star Trek they wanted to bring in a new audience, but in the process they gave up everything that made the original series so great, they sacrificed the high brow scientific portions of Trek (whether possible or not) and replaced them with explosions, unlikely romance, and nonstop action, which while that all makes for a great block buster movie, it counters everything the federation stands for. The Trek universe is all about exploration, diplomacy and science, and this movie throws all of that out of the window. What really hits the nail on the head for me was the quote stated in the article from one of the writers, he said "They had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y" If that doesn't make your heart hurt I don't know what could.
Again this is all opinion, I don't hate on anyone who does like the new reboots, but I personally think that they were done poorly and ignored all of the amazing factors that made Star Trek great.
#5. "The Franchise Was Already In Bad Shape"
-Okay this is one of the only ones that I disagree with. While I agree that the franchise was dying, they made the mistake of grouping DS9 in with the "failing" franchises. I would disagree, while it was different than prior series' it was still a very well done series. I'm not a big fan of voyager but I still wouldn't say it was dead yet. I don't think the death happened until Enterprise. Though I will admit I agree it was starting to die, and the reboots brought hope, they just didn't fulfill that hope I had.
#4. "The Reboots Have About As Much Understanding And Respect For Its Fans As The Star Wars Prequels"
-Now I'll be honest I have seen all of the Star Wars movies (except the new one) but am not a fan, so I will talk only about the Trek side of this argument. My biggest complaint and the one I am most vocal about is THE COMPLETE LACK OF BONES IN THE MOVIES! This was when I knew I wouldn't like the new movies. McCoy was my favorite character in TOS and in the reboots they used him for maybe 2 one liners that a TOS fan would recognize, beyond that he was just a name. That rubbed me the wrong way more than any other mistake. He was a main character, one of THE main characters. It was Spock, Kirk and McCoy, they WERE the series, the fact that they completely forgot that fact ruined it for me. Additionally, while I understand that this was supposed to be an "alternate universe" (which allowed them to change it how ever they want) they either should have owned that or not don't it at all. the "alternate reality" was just a cop-out for them to change anything they want. Throwing Khan in and using that felt like a remake of the greatest star trek film ever (Wrath of Khan) but they remade it in a way that completely stripped Khan of everything that made the character who he is. Not to mention the Kirk, Spock, Uhura love triangle. I know in TOS they made slight referances to the fact that Spock and Uhura had some small hint of a possible romance but in the movies they took it to an extreme and made Spock an emotional mess, which is the polar opposite of what made Spock who he was, so that's 2 main characters they botched (in my opinion)
#3. "Fans Tolerate It Because It's Better Than Nothing"
- I wanted to like the movies, I really did but there was just so much about the movies that I just couldn't ignore it. I like that it gave the franchise the new boost it needed to this new generation, but it was done so incorrectly that anyone who claims to like these new movies are likely those who weren't large fans of the original series.
#2. "The Studio Made Star Trek Mainstream To Appeal To Everyone"
- This is another one that irked me, and it doesn't apply just to the rebooted Trek movies. Money seems to outweigh the accuracy of a movie. I can understand wanting to make money off of a movie, but sacrificing the basics of what made a show great, just to bring in money is so wrong in my book. All of these factors lead me to the final part of the article...
#1. "By Making Star Trek "For Everyone," They Alienate The People Who Love It"
-As I mentioned before I understand that by rebooting Star Trek they wanted to bring in a new audience, but in the process they gave up everything that made the original series so great, they sacrificed the high brow scientific portions of Trek (whether possible or not) and replaced them with explosions, unlikely romance, and nonstop action, which while that all makes for a great block buster movie, it counters everything the federation stands for. The Trek universe is all about exploration, diplomacy and science, and this movie throws all of that out of the window. What really hits the nail on the head for me was the quote stated in the article from one of the writers, he said "They had a script for Star Trek that wasn't really working for them. I think the studio was worried that it might have been a little bit too Star Trek-y" If that doesn't make your heart hurt I don't know what could.
Again this is all opinion, I don't hate on anyone who does like the new reboots, but I personally think that they were done poorly and ignored all of the amazing factors that made Star Trek great.
