Purist Sees The Light

[VulcanJedi]

Okay, I get it. The only way we'll ever see TOS again is with 3D animation; which would be really cool.

I think I get this "reimagining" thing. It's not that JJ or anyone doesn't dig seriously on classic 1960s Trek; no, that's not it.

Star Trek was about the future; TOS has become a sort of myth; that's different.

So, "reimagining" makes sense.

Basically, if we could start over, what would we do different? What needs to stay and what isn't important?

JJ has made the vital comments indicating he gets it; it's about terror and mystery; drama. That is what often is forgotten with later versions of Trek.

It's almost more of a horror movie than a fantasy show. With a strong moral foundation; a captain who valued human life. And the recent spoilers indicate we see that value for human life in Captain Kirk, who is perhaps so willing to save people, he goes against the grain; or the prime directive maybe?

 

[Michael]

VulcanJedi said:
The only way we'll ever see TOS again is with 3D animation

No. You just have to flip in one of your TOS DVD's to enjoy some vintage Trek.

 

[Franklin]

Belar said:

VulcanJedi said:
The only way we'll ever see TOS again is with 3D animation

No. You just have to flip in one of your TOS DVD's to enjoy some vintage Trek.

Until the reboot. Then all those DVDs go blank BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAPPENED!

Actually, the OP is a very thoughtful post. Roddenberry's theme included an element of humanity, hope, danger, and even horror (at least in the fear of not understanding the unknown when it's before you -- which is a form of horror).
I have every faith that Abrams will be true to that theme. The theme goes beyond whether or not buttons were blue or red. Or whether or not the Enterprise is 947 feet long or 2947.
After getting bogged down in a thread about the Enterprise being built on Earth or not, I'm still of the opinion that what matters is the spirit of "Star Trek". The technical details mean nothing in the long run compared to being true to the characters and the themes.

 

[-Brett-]

I'm not seeing where this "reimaging" is coming from.

Everything I've seen suggests the opposite.

Vulcans look essentially the same. Spock looks essentially the same. The Enterprise looks essentially the same. The arrowhead insigia is the same.

If this was getting the BSG treatment, all of that stuff would have been changed.

 

[MANT!]

-Brett- said:
I'm not seeing where this "reimaging" is coming from.

Everything I've seen suggests the opposite.

Vulcans look essentially the same. Spock looks essentially the same. The Enterprise looks essentially the same. The arrowhead insigia is the same.

If this was getting the BSG treatment, all of that stuff would have been changed.

And Spock would have been Female...

 

[C.E. Evans]

I never considered myself a purist, but I always did like the visual progression of things from TOS to VOY and the movies. ENT disrupted that flow for me and was a constant source of irritation that I couldn't ignore.

That being said, after ENT, I resigned myself to Star Trek XI being a much needed "do over" of the franchise rather than anything else. Once the recasting began, it was much easier for me to accept--and in one way, look forward to--other changes such as the look of the Enterprise, the uniforms, the props, etc. It actually is a case that the less the movie looks exactly like TOS, the better it will be.

Go fig...

 

[mada101]

-Brett- said:
The Enterprise looks essentially the same. The arrowhead insigia is the same.

Err...no it doesn't. It's about twice the size of the original Enterprise. The nacelles are different shapes. The bridge is modeled after the TMP design. The arrowhead insignia appears (going by the 'spy photos') to now be used by all of Starfleet, despite the fact that during TOS it was unique to the Enterprise, with other ships and Starfleet installations using different insignia.

 

[decompiler]

J.J. is bringing 1966 Star Trek into 2008 so that the next caretaker in his position can bring the series from 2008 into 2048.

Eventually you'll have no choice but to give the 'ole car a new set of tires.

 

[shapeshifter]

I'm sorry mada but that we were actually looking down a nacelle from either direction was never proven. It was more likely looking aft, towards the shuttle bay from the top of engineering hull.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

*eats an apple* hey... this doesnt taste the same as the apple I ate 40 years ago... *goes on a rampage* :-D

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

mada101 said:

-Brett- said:
The Enterprise looks essentially the same. The arrowhead insigia is the same.

Err...no it doesn't. It's about twice the size of the original Enterprise.

No, it isn't.

The nacelles are different shapes.

No, they're not.

The bridge is modeled after the TMP design.

1) That remains to be seen. 2) Who cares?

The arrowhead insignia appears (going by the 'spy photos') to now be used by all of Starfleet, despite the fact that during TOS it was unique to the Enterprise, with other ships and Starfleet installations using different insignia.

And how many spy photos have you seen that you have conclusive proof are taking place on Starfleet ships other than Enterprise?

 

[davejames]

Franklin said:
Actually, the OP is a very thoughtful post. Roddenberry's theme included an element of humanity, hope, danger, and even horror (at least in the fear of not understanding the unknown when it's before you -- which is a form of horror).
I have every faith that Abrams will be true to that theme. The theme goes beyond whether or not buttons were blue or red. Or whether or not the Enterprise is 947 feet long or 2947.
After getting bogged down in a thread about the Enterprise being built on Earth or not, I'm still of the opinion that what matters is the spirit of "Star Trek". The technical details mean nothing in the long run compared to being true to the characters and the themes.

Agreed. The Trek Universe has gotten bogged down in SO much weighty history and detail over the years. Every planet and every alien has a long and detailed history by now, and it seems like an Enterprise crew can't go anywhere without bumping into people they've already met.

You go back and watch TOS, and it's just a show about a crew and their starship. It's very direct and focused on those two things, and you don't have all this other stuff getting in the way. I really miss that.

 

[Balrog]

davejames said:
The Trek Universe has gotten bogged down in SO much weighty history and detail over the years.

It's true. Fans deserve new history and detail to weigh it down.

 

[Franklin]

Lloyd_Dobler said:

davejames said:
The Trek Universe has gotten bogged down in SO much weighty history and detail over the years.

It's true. Fans deserve new history and detail to weigh it down.

It's also what's kept the Trek from seeming approachable to someone who just may want to see a good story.

My wife doesn't know an Andorian from a Tellerite, and has no inclination to learn. She's no fan, but does enjoy the occasional TOS episode as well as TVH and TUC.

The key word, she "enjoys" them. She's not picking them apart. She's not bogged down with the knowledge so many of us have of what's "wrong" or "inconsistent" or "important canon being set" in an episode or movie. She doesn't read more into things than is usually there.

In some way, when Abrams releases his movie, we'll all be on fairly even ground with her. It's virgin territory. Respectful of the past, but entirely new. That just doesn't settle well with a lot of people. And, I pity those who will go to the movie and find themselves picking it apart rather than enjoying it. I plan to enjoy it. They'll be plenty of time to pick it apart later.

 

[Photoman15]

Son_of_Soong said:
*eats an apple* hey... this doesnt taste the same as the apple I ate 40 years ago... *goes on a rampage* :-D

What's worse is that these "purists" want to eat an apple from 1966, outdated as it will be today (2008). I think a fresh apple from a tree would be more palatable and enjoyable.

 

[Stag]

davejames said:
...You go back and watch TOS, and it's just a show about a crew and their starship. It's very direct and focused on those two things, and you don't have all this other stuff getting in the way. I really miss that.

I agree. For all those who insist that these changes ruin the history of TREK or are not canon, look at TOS episodes themselves. They went back and forth on a number of different things ... engineering had several different layouts, so did the transporter room. Planet orbit shots were reused so frequently you would think there were only three or four types of planets in the galaxy. There were times when phasers could be fired from Sulu's panel or from phaser control. Oh and where was the exact location of the phaser emitters anyway? The phaser color was different from time to time and even the style of the beam was different.

Sure, the explanation for all this is that this was a weekly TV show with a budget that needed to be met and if they could reuse some stuff, or had to "adjust" a set to help tell the story, they did it. They did not have a TREK bible that they referenced, that was left to the writers who brought the characters to life.

It was fandom that started with the canon stuff and made it larger then life, so big that it is really choking the creativity of the writers if they have to abide by every single thing that has gone on in the 700 or so previous TREK episodes.

Frankly, when I was a kid watching TOS, I didn't care if one week the transporter room had a food replicator and the next it had a view screen. Or if one week Scotty's desk in engineering was at one side of the room or on the other the next week, or if the planet they were orbiting looked the same as the one they orbited in episode 3 of season 1, I looked forward to the story, the adventure and the interplay between the main characters.

IF the new movie can re-create the Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley dynamic with Pine/Quinto/Urban, that is what will count for me and will make it an enjoyable TREK movie in the spirit of the original series that we quite frankly haven't had since TUC. I remember when TMP was coming out, I could not wait to get a glimpse of the new Enterprise. Granted, this story is different, but I am still excited to see the new version of the ship. However, at the end of the day the SFX and the ship design, inside and out, are just means to an end. I want to care about the top 3 guys again, I want to laugh at their friendly jibes, I want to see Spock aggravate McCoy, I want to see Kirk woo the chicks and kick ass on the baddies...and at the end of the movie I want to see the lead three exchanging a little conversational banter letting us all know that despite all that has happened, they helped each other get through it.

 

[Baldus885]

-Brett- said:
I'm not seeing where this "reimaging" is coming from.

Everything I've seen suggests the opposite.

Vulcans look essentially the same. Spock looks essentially the same. The Enterprise looks essentially the same. The arrowhead insigia is the same.

If this was getting the BSG treatment, all of that stuff would have been changed.

I heartily agree. The Enterprise is patently the same shape. Abrams would have been laughed out of the office if he'd proposed a TOS movie that looked exactly like the 60's TV series.

It seems to me that this movie is as different to TOS as TMP was, and yet TMP has been accepted as canon. This new one will be too, given time.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Baldus885 said:
and yet TMP has been accepted as canon.

It took a long time for many fans. Especially after the look of ST II seemed to ignore it as much as possible and start again.

Acceptance of (and nostalgia for) TMP has grown steadily over the years. Much to my delight.

 

[cbspock]

JJ has a way to win the fans over who don't believe...

He will be planting these outside all the theatres...lol

-Chris

 

[Tomalak]

mada101 said:
Err...no it doesn't. It's about twice the size of the original Enterprise. The nacelles are different shapes. The bridge is modeled after the TMP design. The arrowhead insignia appears (going by the 'spy photos') to now be used by all of Starfleet, despite the fact that during TOS it was unique to the Enterprise, with other ships and Starfleet installations using different insignia.

But that's completely the point! All that minutiae only matters to a few fans, it's not the reason most people like Star Trek. The original series showed two or three different models of the Enterprise in every episode. Which is the "right" one? Who cares about insignia or the size of the ship? I highly doubt that Roddenberry, Coon, Solow et al gave a damn either. It's about the story telling, not the window dressing. At least, it is to me.