Primarily TOS fans on the new movie?

[jayrath]

As the Reeves-Stevens wrote in the introduction to "Prime Directive," I look forward to all sorts of interpretations of the original series, just as different generations interpret, and reinterpret, opera. (It's what they said -- not me! . . . But I agree.)

I find, though, that I am more and more put off by fan gossip: that TOS "needs" such and such, or that the old series is not good enough for new, young fans.

The movie is almost a year away, but I hate to admit that I am aleady feeling negative about it, only because so many are so ready to be so negative about anything that came before. In a way, its the TOSR argument again, this time made worse by bad-mouthing Shatner, or the original art direction, or even we 40-something senior citizens (ahem).

I've always disliked these sorts of Trek loyalty tests, putting one incarnation in opposition to another. And I'll view the movie with a fresh mind. But I also feel marginalized for liking TOS; as in, I am dumb for being completely satisfied by the original, that anyone with brains craves a fresh approach.

Does anyone else feel the same way?

 

[MANT!]

I have compared all of the series, and find that TOS just does it all for me..Just a matter of what my preferences are ( I also love the original Japanese Godzilla movies but that's another tale )Trek will remain Trek as long as the spirit of the original stay's true.

 

[A beaker full of death]

It, like all modern Trek, has no impact upon TOS. TOS should not be interpretted any differently in light of someone's new take, be it this movie or TNG.

 

[USS Mariner]

It'll be nice to see what someone else does with the mythos. Anything has to be better than the crap shoved in our faces for the last 10 years.

Oh yes, Coto was a hack. That doesn't count.

 

[Forbin]

Actually, I feel the other way - anyone with brains should be perfectly satisfied with the unadulterated original. Those who think it needs a fresh approach are the dummies.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

TOS doesn't need a fresh take. It needs new actors because the originals are too old or no longer with us. For new TOS to continue to live on the small and large scenes, recasting is necessary. If you're happy with the old, fine, you still have that and nobody can take it away from you. And of course books will never require recasting. I'm willing to see what Abrams can do.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Bah. I'm not against it, but I don't need a new Captain Kirk. What I need is something that captures the spirit of the original. Master & Commander did that, as did the UK Hornblower series. I'll stick to that.

 

[wws]

While I was kinda looking forward to the new film, I'm not happy at all that they are including Carol Marcus and the Kobioshi Maru (spelling..have not idea) from ST2. I don't really include the movies after TMP as real ST:TOS. I know many will not agree with me on this. Bad scripts, with little or no continuity between props, music, characters and so on.

They realy should have Gary Mitchel there and Not Carol Marcus.

The sad thing is that I really liked Nick Meyer's Time after Time. It's one of my favorite movies, but what he and HB did to Star Trek... I really didn't appreciate.

wws

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Carol Marcus is in the film? Did I miss an annoucement?

 

[Ronald Held]

Why does it need a fresh take/retake? Why can't other movies be shot in the TOS era with a simlilar approach.
My concern(one anyway) is the due to the events of FC, this movie will be canonical no matter what happened or was referenced in a TOS episode or movie.

 

[ancient]

Carol was cut, but would be in the sequel. That's the last I heard.

Anyway, I don't think we 'need' a new take, nor do we 'need' an unaltered take. We all have our hopes, but I won't be completely devistated if it doesn't work out exactly the way I hoped. I think most people are flexible enough to enjoy more than one flavor of ice-cream aside from their favorite. I hope it'll provide a somewhat interesting 2 hrs of entertainment.

 

[Lord Garth]

I'm looking forward to the movie but I'm only pushing 30. Do I allow for the possibility the movie is bad? Sure. The same as good. I won't know either until I'm watching JJ Abrams' film and I'm not familiar enough with his previous work to form an opinion. All I've seen of his is Mission: Impossible III. The damage to the M:I film series was already done by the time JJ Abrams arrived and he did as good as one could considering the direction those movies had taken; the third one is far more watchable than either the first or second.

I'm not going to mention spoilers for ST XI but, without going into details, the movie has more story elements I'm interested in than any of the four TNG movies combined.

At the very least it'll be better than Insurrection and Nemesis. Leonard Nimoy had issues with Generations and declined to direct when he was told he'd have to shoot the script straight. Leonard Nimoy's involvement in Star Trek (2008) sends a message to me that the current script is stronger than the one for Generations.

JJ Abrams is completely new to producing and directing Star Trek. Whatever else the movie will be, it won't be the "same old, same old".

The Gaurdian of Forever story made me cringe but it's been confirmed by Harlan Ellison that the Gaurdian isn't in it so whatever details were in that "leaked" synopsis are suspect.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Lord Garth said:

At the very least it'll be better than Insurrection and Nemesis. Leonard Nimoy had issues with Generations and declined to direct when he was told he'd have to shoot the script straight. Leonard Nimoy's involvement in Star Trek (2008) sends a message to me that the current script is stronger than the one for Generations.

Or he's just completely out of give-a-shit.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Babaganoosh said:
Carol Marcus is in the film? Did I miss an annoucement?

She's not in it. She was in an earlier draft of the script but she's not in the shooting script. She may appear in the sequel.

 

[igrokbok]

TOS deosn't need a fresh "take". I had weathered the years well and just got a new coat of paint with the remastered efforts. It's the studio that needs a fresh ANYTHING to breath life into the dead cash cow. Berman's 24th century mediocrity killed it. So naturally they go back to the magic that started the phenmenon.

Now whether or not the new creative team can pull of a successful "Star Trek" adaption or come up with another dud like Burton's Planet of the Apes of Will Smith's Wild Wild West has yet to be seen. There's an awful lot of lighting in that TOS bottle. If they can capture half of it again they will be lucky. But I wish them luck.

 

[Plum]

jayrath said:
<SNIP!>... or even we 40-something senior citizens (ahem).

Oh Jesus, yep that's me too.

I've always disliked these sorts of Trek loyalty tests, putting one incarnation in opposition to another. And I'll view the movie with a fresh mind. But I also feel marginalized for liking TOS; as in, I am dumb for being completely satisfied by the original, that anyone with brains craves a fresh approach.

Does anyone else feel the same way?

Marginalized for liking TOS? Relax, it's retro.

 

[USS Mariner]

18 in Feb. Then again, I've been told I was born 30.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

As someone who grew up watching the original and the animated series, thrilling at the release of each movie as I got older and entered my teen years, I say bring it on. It was just a matter of time before Kirk, Spock and the rest were recast with different actors; something that was predicted by Susan Sackett and Gene Roddenberry in their book on the making of TMP.

As long as it has the motifs, the same sense of adventure and exploration, I could care less if it is recasted and its look altered. Give me a good story with these characters and I'm in.

 

[ClayinCA]

Mariner Class said:
18 in Feb. Then again, I've been told I was born 30.

18 in February?? Lord love a duck, I remember being 18...

...oh damn, no I don't!

 

[mada101]

I just want a movie that's canon (and that means visually, too). If its a reboot or an alternate timeline, I'm not interested.

I don't care if it's told in a modern 21st century way, but visually I'm really sick of all these "dark, gritty and realistic" so-called science fiction shows/films. As good as they may be script-wise, I think I've seen enough rusty old starships and uniforms that look like US Navy cast-offs. I'd love to see more pulp. 1960's retro pulp. Flared trousers, bubble-seats on the Rec Deck, some of the female crew in miniskirts and Go-Go boots, pearly white Federation starships with smooth hulls, magnificent skyscrapers that look like they came from the cover of "Amazing Stories", and so forth

Sadly, this isn't what the new movie will be giving us. It's TOS for a new generation. My Trek has ended (the First Star Trek canon). But I hope that there will be a new fanbase for the Second Star Trek.