Simple Question: Do You Like The Reboots?
- Thread starter Mudd
- Start date
It's alright, I wouldn't have given my opinion if I didn't expect a rebuttal.
Maybe it's an age thing. For me, however, as mentioned above; it's a big part of the Star Trek package. That is to say, amongst the list of things that make Star Trek Star Trek (that was an odd turn of phrase).
Well, now we're getting to the root of the issue. I love "The Motion Picture" so I don't really care about that. Since I'm already predisposed to hate this new film (seriously, those first ten minutes are painful), then I'm not inclined to let anything go.
The Uniforms!!!
I think you can probably anticipate my response...
Don't resurrect it! Or reboot it! Or remake it! Or reimagine it! Or whatever else!
I'd have preferred a new story, with new characters, in the same old universe. And, I'd have preferred a dozen other things that would've probably kept any new film's profitability low and budget very high.
One is intensely and deliberately otherworldly, the other is a very contemporary, grounded setting that could be found anywhere in the western world.
They're both bars. That's about it. Is Deep Space Nine a "skin mod" for Star Wars as well?
We put up with Voyager being connected to Deep Space Nine. The Next Generation movies being connected to The Next Generation. Enterprise being connected to the original series. So tough shit I guess.
Passion for the material isn't key to success. Guys like Meyer and Bennett had no "passion" for the material and weren't fans. I doubt Wise did. They were "passionate" about making good films though. You don't need a PhD in Treknology and Trekstory to make a good Star Trek film. You don't need to love the show either.Cromwell said:
In the long run it is the next film in the franchise. And what was done is no different than what happened with TMP, TWOK and TNG. They redid some stuff. They ignored other stuff. And invented new stuff. Right or wrong is subjective. Many fans ( at least 95 here) think it was done right.
So you'd rather let STAR TREK sit on a shelf, gathering dust, rather than risk updating it?
My own attitude is that we're not doing STAR TREK (or anything else) a favor by treating it like some untouchable sacred cow that that can't be tinkered with. Better to play with the toys than wrap them in plastic so they stay just the way you remembered them.
Even if you have to break a few "icons" in the process . . .
No... for the exact reasons I specified.
I liked Voyager.
Twenty-five percent of which were pretty good. Either way, that comes under my pre-emptive argument against the "bad episode" argument.
Should I find the new film less objectionable because of "Threshold" or "Insurrection"?
I liked Enterprise (sort of).
I guess, but that doesn't really change anything I've said, does it? It's tough shit when it rains, but we still complain about it.
...
That's not what I said.
I don't really think I treating it like an untouchable sacred cow, I'm just criticising the result of touching it. The result, obviously, could have been better.
On the whole, I agree with you. If the choice was between "Star Trek (2009)" and "Nothing", I'd go for the former, because it's at least inspired in me a greater love of the franchise. Every time I start think too much about the Supernova, for example, I re-watch "Balance of Terror", "The Defector" or "Unification.
I agree, my problem with the film is that I find so many things wrong with it. You can hand-wave some things, tolerate other but it gets to a point when it becomes too hard to ignore.
Greg is in his fifties, as am I. How old are you?Cromwell said:
Most folks, even some who hate the rest of the film love that part. Many count it as some of the most powerful scenes in Star Trek.
The Uniforms? They're probably the closest of anything in the film to the original.
With the possible exception of Urbans's McCoy.
Gaaahhh.....curses, thou beatest me to it!
Not to mention that the trailers for TWOK seemed to borrow heavily from Star Wars in the sound effects department. The phasers in the trailers had Star Wars blaster sound effects....so, yeah....forsaken long before any accusations of JJ Abrams turning Star Trek into Star Wars.
Oh, and TFF using SW blaster sound effects for the last time we see the Bird of Prey fire her disruptors in the film.
Greg is in his fifties, as am I. How old are you?Cromwell said:
Most folks, even some who hate the rest of the film love that part. Many count it as some of the most powerful scenes in Star Trek.
The Uniforms? They're probably the closest of anything in the film to the original.
With the possible exception of Urbans's McCoy.
The things I appreciate most about these uniforms is that:
1. They keep the basic shape of the TOS uniforms, simply updating the fabric and patterns for modern audiences (even McCoy gets his short-sleeves back!)
2. I'll take these vibrant colors over the too stuffy, too layered, too drab First Contact uniforms any day. They were cool in the 90s, but the Matrix is over; no need for "darker = better" in movies that are trying to be as bright as possible these days.
Sorry, I missed a post.
Oh, there's no doubt about that. I added as one more point against him. I like the man (I loved "Alcatraz").
It doesn't feel that way to me. Just the title alone suggests otherwise. This isn't "Star Trek XI: Nero's Revenge".
Well, yes, I hope I didn't appear to be suggesting otherwise.
Good for them?
Not yet twenty... nearly.
On a visceral, emotional level, yes, sure. It got my blood pumping when I saw it in the cinema.
But on a logical level or, more accurately, on a nit-picky fan-boy level... no way!
What rank is Uhura?
Oh, there's no doubt about that. I added as one more point against him. I like the man (I loved "Alcatraz").
It doesn't feel that way to me. Just the title alone suggests otherwise. This isn't "Star Trek XI: Nero's Revenge".
Well, yes, I hope I didn't appear to be suggesting otherwise.
Good for them?
Not yet twenty... nearly.
On a visceral, emotional level, yes, sure. It got my blood pumping when I saw it in the cinema.
But on a logical level or, more accurately, on a nit-picky fan-boy level... no way!
What rank is Uhura?
Why?
And There was no number attached to Generations through Nemesis either. Or no subtitle for Rocky Balboa. So again I'm confused by what you think this proves.
In what way? What's illogical? What bothers your inner fanboy?
Lieutenant.
What rank is Uhura?
What rank is Marla?
Different perspectives and priorities, I guess.
True story. A (very pleasant) fan told me once that he couldn't get into the new movie because the insignias on the uniforms were wrong in the Kelvin sequence. I nodded politely, but I confess that what was going through my head was:
"The insignias? A gigantic alien warship from the future has just emerged from an artificial black hole, brave Captain Robau has been been mercilessly executed, George Kirk valiantly sacrifices his life even as his infant son draws his first breadth . . . and you're fretting about the friggin' insignias?"
(Cromwell, forgive me if this was you!
)
What about the drama? The excitement? The emotion?
"Visceral" trumps nitpicking the costume design in my book. I'd rather a movie get my blood pumping than perfectly duplicate some fifty-year-old costumes.
Then again, I confess I have no idea what's wrong with Uhura's uniform in that photo. She's missing some stripes or whatever? That's not something I ever noticed while caught up in the movie.
True story. A (very pleasant) fan told me once that he couldn't get into the new movie because the insignias on the uniforms were wrong in the Kelvin sequence. I nodded politely, but I confess that what was going through my head was:
"The insignias? A gigantic alien warship from the future has just emerged from an artificial black hole, brave Captain Robau has been been mercilessly executed, George Kirk valiantly sacrifices his life even as his infant son draws his first breadth . . . and you're fretting about the friggin' insignias?"
(Cromwell, forgive me if this was you!
)What about the drama? The excitement? The emotion?
"Visceral" trumps nitpicking the costume design in my book. I'd rather a movie get my blood pumping than perfectly duplicate some fifty-year-old costumes.
Then again, I confess I have no idea what's wrong with Uhura's uniform in that photo. She's missing some stripes or whatever? That's not something I ever noticed while caught up in the movie.
Well then, you're obviously not a "true fan."Different perspectives and priorities, I guess.
True story. A (very pleasant) fan told me once that he couldn't get into the new movie because the insignias on the uniforms were wrong in the Kelvin sequence. I nodded politely, but I confess that what was going through my head was:
"The insignias? A gigantic alien warship from the future has just emerged from an artificial black hole, brave Captain Robau has been been mercilessly executed, George Kirk valiantly sacrifices his life even as his infant son draws his first breadth . . . and you're fretting about the friggin' insignias?"
(Cromwell, forgive me if this was you!
What about the drama? The excitement? The emotion?
"Visceral" trumps nitpicking the costume design in my book. I rather a movie get my blood pumping than perfectly duplicate some fifty-year-old costumes.
Then again, I confess I have no idea what's wrong with Uhura's uniform in that photo. She's missing some stripes or whatever? That's not something I ever noticed while caught up in the movie.
As I recall, and, mind you, this was six years ago, he was referring to the old idea that each ship once had its own insignia, instead of the now-standard Starfleet delta.
Which, as Trek trivia goes, is pretty much a footnote these days, and not something I'd expect a modern-day reboot to worry about. Even the latter-day series treated the delta as the general symbol for Starfleet.
Mostly, though, I was just kinda bemused that anyone would even be looking at the insignia during the whole Kelvin sequence. I'd like to think that a Romulan attack and the death of Kirk's father would be more compelling than some minor costume detail!
Well then, you're obviously not a "true fan."Different perspectives and priorities, I guess.
True story. A (very pleasant) fan told me once that he couldn't get into the new movie because the insignias on the uniforms were wrong in the Kelvin sequence. I nodded politely, but I confess that what was going through my head was:
"The insignias? A gigantic alien warship from the future has just emerged from an artificial black hole, brave Captain Robau has been been mercilessly executed, George Kirk valiantly sacrifices his life even as his infant son draws his first breadth . . . and you're fretting about the friggin' insignias?"
(Cromwell, forgive me if this was you!
What about the drama? The excitement? The emotion?
"Visceral" trumps nitpicking the costume design in my book. I rather a movie get my blood pumping than perfectly duplicate some fifty-year-old costumes.
Then again, I confess I have no idea what's wrong with Uhura's uniform in that photo. She's missing some stripes or whatever? That's not something I ever noticed while caught up in the movie.
Hey, don't look at me, *I* was looking at the uniform's fabric.
(I mean, no wonder everybody was sweating!)
I just like the acting and I'm a sucker for that kind of 50s/60s setting... Oh... you mean, the other thing?
It's just one mored thing I can add to the list of reasons why I don't like the film. As I said before, I less and less inclined to cut it any slack.
You shouldn't be confused. It's called "Star Trek". What's the obvious implication? That this isn't just the next instalment.
Well, without watching it through again (and just reading through the transcript), I could list a number of things. Again, each one taken on its own could be tolerate, explained away, or whatever, but they're hard for me to ignore when taken together.
Also, these things (apart from 2, 4 and 7), only started to bother during my second viewing. I didn't think about them the first time around.
1. Why does Nero's ship look like a weird space monster? Isn't it supposed to be a civilian mining vessel?
2. Why does the Captain refer to the Star-date as being "2233.04"? What's the point of even calling it a star-date if it's just a truncated version of the Gregorian Calendar?
3. Why don't any of the Romulans look like Romulans? Aren't they supposed to be from the twenty-fourth century?
4. Why does the USS Kelvin only have one warp nacelle? Isn't that a very risky design choice?
5. Why does the insignia of the USS Kelvin look almost exactly like the insignia of ship that hasn't even been built yet? Is that Starfleet standard? If so, why?
6. Why would you keep a heavily pregnant mother aboard a starship? Shouldn't she be back home on Earth or, at least, on some sort of safe, well-staffed, facility that isn't stationed dangerously close to the Klingon Neutral Zone?
7. What are all those weird-looking aliens? Why haven't I seen any of them before? Did those races all just decide not to participate in Starfleet after a few decades?
8. How can a torpedo manage to damage a ship's auto-pilot function but not it's navigational computer? What's the difference between inputting something manually and inputting a pre-programmed string of commands?
9. Why is Nero a psychopath? Aren't Romulans supposed to be devious, cautious master strategists? Why are these Romulans acting like deranged violent thugs?
10. Why are hundreds of people following the commands of someone who is clearly a psychopath?
11. If Nero is as much of a psychopath as he clearly seems to be, why doesn't he destroy all of the fleeing shuttles and escape-pods? Can twenty-third century shuttles move faster than his vessel?
(If it's so crippled that he can't go after them, then how does it get repaired? Who would be willing to repair a ship commanded by a weird psychopath who has nothing to offer in return?)
12. Why, exactly, can't Kirk abandon ship? Isn't there a point at which it becomes impossible to evade enemy fire due, purely, to the proximity between the two ships? What is he doing? Will the ship stop moving forward if he leaves?
You could tell from that picture? Or, do you mean to say that the relevant characters just all happen to know her rank? If so, then why do the male characters all need ranks on their sleeves?
What are 24th century Romulan mining vessels supposed to look like?
Too make it easier for those not fluent in Trek to immerse themselves in the film.
What are 24th century Romulan miners supposed to look like?
Depends what purpose it was designed for. But you could actually have two sets of warp coils within the single nacelle. It would be more economical from a construction point of view.
The arrowhead was always suppose to be the emblem of starship personnel, per Gene Roddenberry.
Why not? Women don't just give up their lives and work just because they're pregnant.
So we should stifle creativity?
Who knows? Not really important to the plot.
I don't know? They watched their planet and families die. The mind can be a fragile thing.
Ask the crews of various starships over the years.
Because the Kelvin crippled it.
Do you have proof he has nothing to offer in return?
I don't even know what this is about...
EDIT: Nevermind. George Kirk was following through his final duty as Captain and going down with the ship.
I don't mean to seem rude or evasive but I don't think us going back and forth over this would make for a good discussion.
Those are simply a list of all the things I didn't like about the first ten minutes; whether you can argue against them really doesn't change anything. I was asked what I disliked about it, and I answered.
It was really to catalogue my nit-picks (I'm that sort of person and, yes, it does damage my experience of the film).
Similar threads
