Simple Question: Do You Like The Reboots?

[urbandefault]

On other hand, you can argue that the latter-day shows had already gotten too far away from classic TOS, albeit perhaps in the opposite direction. Even before the new movies were a gleam in anybody's eyes, I was arguing that modern-day TREK was in danger of forgetting that Trek was supposed to be fun. Frankly, VOYAGER could have used a bit more space monsters and action.

Maybe it was just me, but at times it felt like the later shows thought that Trek was above cheap thrills and excitement. To my mind, Star Trek needed to get back in touch with its scrappy, pulpy space-opera roots before it got too refined and dignified and solemn. At the very least, the new movies seemed to have restored to Trek some of TOS's zest and swashbuckling spirit.

Has the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction? That's a judgment call.

(And Khan remains the best Trek movie ever, so I would argue that Meyer knew exactly what was he doing, and made all the right calls.)

Thank you.

 

[BillJ]

Now along comes JJ and he revamps the whole thing into the very adolescent style of fare that GR sought to step away from. He makes it into something styled right at the attention challenged audience who can't sit still for anything unless it's loud, flashy and moves like a roller coaster. And not a bit of it makes a lick of sense.

Which is non-sense and completely ignores the fact that there are many long time fans who actually like the Abrams films and think they compare well to the source material. I happen to like that it moves like a roller-coaster. I'm older but not an old man.

For me, Star Trek should be fun. Scratch that, it has to be fun or else I'm not interested. Move back to people sitting around in conference speaking in stilted dialogue and I'll be out.

 

[Warped9]

Movie Trek has a different set of standards and expectations than TV Trek. Its that simple. When Trek returns to TV I'm sure it won't be like any of the films. It will be a product of television and based on what works on TV. Just as TOS took it's cues from adult Westerns, TV Trek will take its cues from what ever is working on TV. Today that would be GAme of Thrones, the Walking Dead, Mad Men and Breaking Bad. (For better or worse) Tomorrow? Who knows? What it won't be is a note for note copy of TOS or TNG+

Agreed.

 

[Amaris]

Now along comes JJ and he revamps the whole thing into the very adolescent style of fare that GR sought to step away from. He makes it into something styled right at the attention challenged audience who can't sit still for anything unless it's loud, flashy and moves like a roller coaster. And not a bit of it makes a lick of sense.

Which is non-sense and completely ignores the fact that there are many long time fans who actually like the Abrams films and think they compare well to the source material. I happen to like that it moves like a roller-coaster. I'm older but not an old man.

For me, Star Trek should be fun. Scratch that, it has to be fun or else I'm not interested. Move back to people sitting around in conference speaking in stilted dialogue and I'll be out.

This. Also, I'm out if the story is confined to heavy lore that is oppressive. Star Trek, as a franchise, got so overburdened that the stories became heavily stilted, and stodgy, because there was no room to be creative. Canon had to be followed. I'm sorry, when a show takes itself as seriously as a religion, it's time to step out until the fun returns.

 

[BillJ]

1966-1969 is a great place to visit, but I don't want to be trapped there where Star Trek is concerned.

 

[Amaris]

1966-1969 is a great place to visit, but I don't want to be trapped there where Star Trek is concerned.

Amen. The same stories over and over again presented in the same original context is just a slower way for a franchise to die. The Abrams films gave the franchise a much needed shot in the arm. I understand that some people won't like it, but it's either evolve or die. Going back to the well for the same exact stories in the same exact context isn't how a series evolves.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Now along comes JJ and he revamps the whole thing into the very adolescent style of fare that GR sought to step away from. He makes it into something styled right at the attention challenged audience who can't sit still for anything unless it's loud, flashy and moves like a roller coaster. And not a bit of it makes a lick of sense.

Which is non-sense and completely ignores the fact that there are many long time fans who actually like the Abrams films and think they compare well to the source material. I happen to like that it moves like a roller-coaster. I'm older but not an old man.

For me, Star Trek should be fun. Scratch that, it has to be fun or else I'm not interested. Move back to people sitting around in conference speaking in stilted dialogue and I'll be out.

On this site at least, the fans of the new movies seem to be older and fans of TOS. According to the various polls I seen.

 

[plynch]

Can't believe I'm arguing with Greg Cox. Next thing I and Christopher will agree on split infinitives. I DIGRESS . . .

But, I actually find Voyager the most fun and space opera-y of all the Berman-Trek. I think it's my second-fave series. Because of the fun I perceive. I am doubting myself now. . .

II. I think I never weighed in on the OP's question. I do not really care for the new movies. I like calm and quiet things generally. However, nor do I really care for the old ones. At least judging by my viewing habits (never).

 

[BillJ]

Roddenberry caught lightening in a bottle and I've really enjoyed all of Trek that he had direct input in. I doubt there will ever be another creative type like him.

But...

I'll take J.J. Abrams over Bennett, Meyer, Berman, Piller, Behr, Taylor or Braga any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. I feel like a kid again when I watch his take on the Star Trek universe.

 

[Amaris]

Roddenberry caught lightening in a bottle and I've really enjoyed all of Trek that he had direct input in. I doubt there will ever be another creative type like him.

But...

I'll take J.J. Abrams over Bennett, Meyer, Berman, Piller, Behr, Taylor or Braga any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. I feel like a kid again when I watch his take on the Star Trek universe.

Yep. I went from a somewhat burned out 29 year old Trek fan (I was 29 in 2009), to 4 years old, watching Star Trek for the first time and being entranced and excited by what I was seeing. The movie single-handedly rekindled my love of Star Trek; TOS in particular.

 

[Warped9]

1966-1969 is a great place to visit, but I don't want to be trapped there where Star Trek is concerned.

As much as I enjoy Star Trek Continues for allowing me to have new adventures in the TOS universe I do not see it working for mass market television today. And as much as I love TOS there are things i'd like to see differently today.

I simply don't accept that JJ's formula was the only way to do it. It's not.

 

[BillJ]

I simply don't accept that JJ's formula was the only way to do it. It's not.

I also don't think it's the only formula. But I do think it works for the big screen. His movies are simply fun to watch for this long time fan.

 

[Ghrakh]

Trust me. The way some people talk, at least when comparing the new movies to the old show, you'd think that TOS never indulged in cheap thrills and excitement and was a purely "cerebral" exercise in Deep Thinking . . . .

It would help if you quoted. Otherwise, I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Ghrakh]

What I was pointing out was that there's sometimes a degree of selective amnesia involved when comparing TOS to the new movies. The TOS I grew up on had plenty of monsters and action and excitement, as well as cool, mind-blowing sci-fi concepts, social allegories, etc.

+1

OK, so what mind blowing sci-fi concepts and social allegories do you like in the new films? You know, the ones present in the TOS, the show who's "reputation is massively overblown" as you stated earlier.

 

[Warped9]

I simply don't accept that JJ's formula was the only way to do it. It's not.

I also don't think it's the only formula. But I do think it works for the big screen. His movies are simply fun to watch for this long time fan.

I don't argue it's enjoyed by some. But for myself I find it annoying as hell and tiresome. I simply see nothing recognizable of the Star Trek I admired so much.

People keep arguing it's an either/or issue in defending the movies. It's not. There are other ways it could have been done and be just as successful and possibly more so by not alienating large numbers of existing fans as well as appealing to new ones. The various polls themselves show that there are a large number of existing fans that were turned off. It didn't have to be that way. The number of dissenters could have been much smaller even given that you can never please absolutely everyone.

 

[BillJ]

What I was pointing out was that there's sometimes a degree of selective amnesia involved when comparing TOS to the new movies. The TOS I grew up on had plenty of monsters and action and excitement, as well as cool, mind-blowing sci-fi concepts, social allegories, etc.

+1

OK, so what mind blowing sci-fi concepts and social allegories do you like in the new films? You know, the ones present in the TOS, the show who's "reputation is massively overblown" as you stated earlier.

Hmm... criticism of US policy concerning drone warfare and executing criminals without trial. Sci-fi concepts... being able to beam across light years. Just off the top of my head while watching Island Life on HGTV.

 

[BillJ]

The number of dissenters could have been much smaller even given that you can never please absolutely everyone.

How so? Seriously?

You have a fan base that is spread over five different TV series and runs the gamut from age 15 to age 70. What could they have done to make that disparate group of people all happy?

 

[Ghrakh]

+1

OK, so what mind blowing sci-fi concepts and social allegories do you like in the new films? You know, the ones present in the TOS, the show who's "reputation is massively overblown" as you stated earlier.

Hmm... criticism of US policy concerning drone warfare and executing criminals without trial. Sci-fi concepts... being able to beam across light years. Just off the top of my head while watching Island Life on HGTV.

TUC has been criticized for being transparently topical, and "beaming across light years", that's been pointed out that it was already done in TNG and DS9.

 

[Cyke101]

+1

OK, so what mind blowing sci-fi concepts and social allegories do you like in the new films? You know, the ones present in the TOS, the show who's "reputation is massively overblown" as you stated earlier.

Hmm... criticism of US policy concerning drone warfare and executing criminals without trial. Sci-fi concepts... being able to beam across light years. Just off the top of my head while watching Island Life on HGTV.

I just realized, STID is perhaps the first Trek movie since TFF where the main villains aren't killed by our heroes. Marcus is killed by Khan (the crew was essentially mixed up in their power plays), and Khan himself is put back into cryo-prison.

TUC has been criticized for being transparently topical

Wait, you asked for an example of an allegory, and BillJ gave it. What does that criticism of TUC have to do with your question? If you're talking about quality of allegory, that's all in the eye of the beholder, and wasn't present in your original question.

And if you discount transparently topical, you can also then call out TOS for its handling of race relations, TNG for the Outcast, DS9 for war and eugenics, Voyager for euthenasia and civil rights, and ENT for 9/11 analogies, all among other topics. But then the point is that those particular episodes used sci-fi to discuss social and political allegories, just like STID did.

 

[BillJ]

TUC has been criticized for being transparently topical, and "beaming across light years", that's been pointed out that it was already done in TNG and DS9.

The Undiscovered Country is my second favorite Trek movie. You didn't say new sci-fi concepts. Not sure there have been too many completely new concepts introduced since TOS across Trek.