Star Trek Fundamentalism

[The Wormhole]

You screwed it up with your love of registry numbers, canon violations, lack of imagination and self important demographic that reduced Trek to a soap opera set in outer space.

You only have yourselves to blame - have the guts to identify yourselves and justify your ignorance.

I dare you.

As you wish. I am The Wormhole, Trek Fundamentalist #0172.

I do not fear change. Indeed, I agree that after the stagnation that was Enterprise, Trek needs a fresh approach to reivent it. But based on what I currently know about Trek XI, I am not convinced this is necessarily the right way to go. I acknowledge that when I do see it, I may end up enjoying it, falling in love with it, seeing it 015 times in theatres and buying up every variation that comes out on DVD. But until this happens, I will express the opinion I currently hold, and will continue to do so until I see reason to do otherwise.

And indeed you are the same. You have not yet seen the movie, and you hold to your belief that it'll be excellent. You could end up hating and despising it when you do see it. But you express your current opinion that it is good, and you will do so until you have reason to do otherwise.

And for the record, I am not as doom and gloom as I seem to be. It is true, I am not completely excited about the movie, but I am not some zealot bent on a crazed desire to see this movie fail. I just pretend to be.

 

[Plumster]

You screwed it up with your love of registry numbers, canon violations, lack of imagination and self important demographic that reduced Trek to a soap opera set in outer space.

You only have yourselves to blame - have the guts to identify yourselves and justify your ignorance.

I dare you.

As you wish. I am The Wormhole, Trek Fundamentalist #0172.

I do not fear change. Indeed, I agree that after the stagnation that was Enterprise, Trek needs a fresh approach to reivent it. But based on what I currently know about Trek XI, I am not convinced this is necessarily the right way to go. I acknowledge that when I do see it, I may end up enjoying it, falling in love with it, seeing it 015 times in theatres and buying up every variation that comes out on DVD. But until this happens, I will express the opinion I currently hold, and will continue to do so until I see reason to do otherwise.

And indeed you are the same. You have not yet seen the movie, and you hold to your belief that it'll be excellent. You could end up hating and despising it when you do see it. But you express your current opinion that it is good, and you will do so until you have reason to do otherwise.

And for the record, I am not as doom and gloom as I seem to be. It is true, I am not completely excited about the movie, but I am not some zealot bent on a crazed desire to see this movie fail. I just pretend to be.

Never once said I'd enjoy it as far as I recall. I said it could be good or it could be bad.

Misquoting and twisting is another Zealot's tactic though.

What I most certainly did say and allude to was that I loved the fact that it's 'outing' those who have nothing left to offer Trek.

 

[Plumster]

We might love it,we might hate it but it had to happen and it had to be done to show once and for all that geriatric actors running around in wigs and corsets on shaky sets is not what Trek is or should be, that idiot aliens with the de rigour bumpy foreheads frying eggs in the mess while in the 'Delta Quadrant' is not really entertainment.

Trek may die in May but what it takes with it once and for all is the idiots, the zealots and fundamentalists who contributed to it's demise. Fuck them and fuck what they did.

So let me get this straight...people who enjoyed Trek and so watched it were the ones who "contributed to its demise," and people who didn't watch it were saving it?

Dingaling.

No - the people who gradually turned it into a nerdfest are responsible for killing Trek, marginalising Trek and generally making it unwatchable to anyone who might want to dip in and dip out.Think about that.

Why are the usual suspects whining about a big budget movie? It's their dirty little secret, it's their guilty pleasure.

And it's about to be plastered all over Burger King etc.

Like I said, fuck them and fuck what they did to Trek - shite like Voyager or a big budget movie with big production values and a chance to start over without these cretins seems like heaven on earth to me.

No peace in our time.

"Once more unto the breach, dear friends."

 

[Ghrakh]

Like I said, fuck them and fuck what they did to Trek

You tell em. Starting sites like TrekToday, Trekcore, Memory Alpha, and whatnot. Bunch of cretins.

 

[Plumster]

Like I said, fuck them and fuck what they did to Trek

You tell em. Starting sites like TrekToday, Trekcore, Memory Alpha, and whatnot. Bunch of cretins.

It's sooooo niche friend and sooooo geeky.

The studio want mainstream and they don't want geeks. We're finished whether you like it or not. We'' have fan productions, fan fiction etc but we'll never have Voyager again.

Hurrah..!!

I've figured out what pisses off the pedants and it's because this time I don't think the fan base will make or break the film and there's a few of them that HATE that.

Fan power brought it back in 1979 - it did not bring it back this time.

They HATE that.

They HATE the fact that JJ is bigger than they are and that this has a momentum of it's own removed from what they think or want.

They see themselves as Trek and all that surrounds it. It's obvious to anyone who tries to engage with them.

All the major Trek actors allude to it at some point or other in their biographies - the fans and their reaction to the destruction of the Enterprise - the fans and their reaction to Sulu Captaining the Excelsior - the fans and their reaction to the death of Spock - the fans and their reaction to Nimoy/Shatner directing etc.

The fans were the actors allies and little snippits would get released before anything happened if the actors did not approve of what they were asked to do. Roddenberry was the 'brains' behind so much of that - the old letter writing campaign - pressing the flesh at conventions etc.

That core of fans hates the fact that they have nothing to do with or any hold over this movie - and that's why the opinions by certain 'fans' is so negative.

I think fandom may well split after this movie because nothing they do or say has any relevance within the studio today. They cannot make or break this film - only Joe Public can do that now and they hate that- the dirty little secret is out and it will finally be seen for what it is. It's either niche entertainment or it's about to go seriously global in a way that it has not for 20 years. That, of course, was a whole generation ago.

In some ways - the chickens have come home to roost. Trek toward the end of it's last run was not relevent to many at all - it was relevent to a few.

This film is the acid test of that rationale - radical and different production values are being mooted in place of tired and worn out methodology that entertained an undemanding few so long as it had chubby and aging actors turning out for another payday.

Patrick Stewart looked as bored as anyone could possibly look in his last two outings as Picard. What future was there in that?

You will see the future come May 2009 - and it's a future that NONE OF THOSE NICHE WEBSITES YOU MENTIONED HAVE ANY INFLUENCE OVER.

You might love it, you might hate it.

I hope you all grow up.



__________________

 

[Hello It's Me!]

To suggest that watching voyager led to the demise of trek is to present an argument that is too narrow to be the sole cause or too broad to be actually relavent to the actual demise.

 

[Ghrakh]

It's sooooo niche friend and sooooo geeky.

?

The studio want mainstream and they don't want geeks. We're finished whether you like it or not. We'' have fan productions, fan fiction etc but we'll never have Voyager again.

Hurrah..!!

So you hated Voyager. I knew plenty of people, not Trekkers, who enjoyed the show.

And?

Fan power brought it back in 1979 - it did not bring it back this time.

What did then?

They HATE the fact that JJ is bigger than they are and that this has a momentum of it's own removed from what they think or want.

What JJ hasn't done is create his own franchise...

They see themselves as Trek and all that surrounds it. It's obvious to anyone who tries to engage with them.

Hurrah for blanket stereotypes!

This film is the acid test of that rationale - radical and different production values are being mooted in place of tired and worn out methodology that entertained an undemanding few so long as it had chubby and aging actors turning out for another payday.

So you object to Nimoy being in this film.

You will see the future come May 2009 - and it's a future that NONE OF THOSE NICHE WEBSITES YOU MENTIONED HAVE ANY INFLUENCE OVER.

You're sure about that?

 

[Plumster]

It's sooooo niche friend and sooooo geeky.

?

The studio want mainstream and they don't want geeks. We're finished whether you like it or not. We'' have fan productions, fan fiction etc but we'll never have Voyager again.

Hurrah..!!

So you hated Voyager. I knew plenty of people, not Trekkers, who enjoyed the show.

And?

What did then?

What JJ hasn't done is create his own franchise...

Hurrah for blanket stereotypes!

This film is the acid test of that rationale - radical and different production values are being mooted in place of tired and worn out methodology that entertained an undemanding few so long as it had chubby and aging actors turning out for another payday.

So you object to Nimoy being in this film.

You will see the future come May 2009 - and it's a future that NONE OF THOSE NICHE WEBSITES YOU MENTIONED HAVE ANY INFLUENCE OVER.

You're sure about that?

Spoiling tactics by the zealots - nothing more. Voyager was merely the commanding officer of the good ship 'Mediocre' - a vessel awash with examples of shite characterisation and tired stories - her sister ship Enterprise set sail on a similar course as did other ships of the line from the 'TNG Movie' class of vessels.

I refer you to my OP - you can debate it but don't ask me to bother with spurious spoiling arguments of little substance. Nimoy Shimoy - he don't need the money so he's doing it for the art. Can't be that bad can it? He gives the impression that he is a man of integrity.

Trek post 1998 was on it's ass, this either reinvigorates it or kills it, it's either good or it's bad, it takes money for the studio or it owes money to the studio.

It's a business now and those quaint little internet sites won't make a smack of difference because you'll go and watch it regardless of what the critics say as will all the people who log on to those NICHE sites.

What's important will be the the way the mainstream press receive it - what's important is the merchandising deals getting done now and the viral internet stuff preceding it.

You and a few thousand zealots are nothing.

Do you understand chummy?

Nothing - you had your chance and you ruined it.

Only your arrogance will never allow you to see it.

 

[plynch]

First of all, there is a really mean-spirited tone in this thread.

Second, "Star Trek" is a specific series. To say the later series killed it or ruined it is impossible.

It got substantially weakend mid-first season when space got safer, the federation stronger and the crew more chuckle-y.

TNG recaptured the hope/wonder of Star Trek somewhat. But it was no longer 1967, the age of space exploration with a different Gemini mission every week and moon landing yet to come. Different times are going to produce a different show and ethos.

I used to like DS9. The charm has worn off. It is a show set in the Trek universe, not "Star Trek." Voyager actually gets it right sometimes, in spite of several bland characters and plots resolved by technobabble of the week. Enterprise? I can't comment, since I (Trekkie since 1972) just forgot to watch it after the first season. That's my comment actually.

So I agree with the OP as to the general decline. But HOW do you attribute the demise to the OCD Trekkers debating/obsessing everything? I don't get the leap there. They somehow would've STOPPED watching Voyager if it had been better drama/writing? Or was the root of the problem that a built-in fanatic base existed, so the producers could "settle" for a lesser product they knew would be watched regardless?

I'm just curious how the one (fanboys, for want of a better term) led to the other (decline in quality).

 

[plynch]

Maybe it was the loss of Gene Roddenberry. For all his faults, have you read his memos dissecting story outlines and scripts? He was a writer first, and for all his personal faults his 60s Liberal/Arthur C. Clarke/Theodore Sturgeon outlook was a big part of Star Trek. (JJ Abrams has said his film recaptures that. The trailer just looks like hyper explosions for the masses, but I'm willing to reserve judgement.)

I know other threads/posters blame a lot on Berman. I do not know about him. It seems logical the demise of Trek-related shows and movies should be blamed on producers, though, and not one segment of the viewers.

 

[Icy_Penguigo]

Plumster:

You hate people who have a different opinion about a movie that you haven't seen yet than you? And you're happy they're suffering right now? That's fucked up.

From the frequency and rabidness of your posts, it sounds like you're every bit as obsessive and nerdy as the HORRIBLE fanboys that ruined Star Trek by liking it enough to be interested in it, talk about it with other people, etc.

You have some issues, dude. I think this hate-spewing thread should be closed.

 

[M'Sharak]

^ I'm going to let it run a little longer and see if it can't get somewhere useful soonish.

First of all, there is a really mean-spirited tone in this thread.
[...]

Though it's being made in a somewhat roundabout fashion, I think that the OP had a point in mind at the start of the thread, and that it may not have been so mean-spirited in intent as might appear on a cursory reading.

However...

...

Spoiling tactics by the zealots - nothing more.

[...]

You and a few thousand zealots are nothing.

Do you understand chummy?

Nothing - you had your chance and you ruined it.

Only your arrogance will never allow you to see it.

I think generally addressing the fandom issue rather than the more personal focus seen in these lines would be the way to go. There's a potentially interesting topic here and I'm inclined to believe it could continue if things remain in perspective.

A good rule to remember: "Don't make it personal and, just as importantly, don't take it personally if it's not aimed at you."

 

[DanTheGrey]

I'm cautiously optimistic. I'm in the 3rd category which is "willing to give it a go, but a bit gunshy". I'm all for a brand new take on the series, though I have to admit that I was in favour of complete restart. No links/camoes/time travel. Just a brand new story with an updated flair.

As for rushing out to the theatre, I haven't done it for the last 2 Trek movies and won't for this one without seeing a pile of favourable reviews from places other than here. That last requirement is simply because of the intense passions on both sides, so I'll look for more mainstream reviews to see if it will appeal to me or not.

I would like it to do well if it's a good movie and can stand on it's own. If it's just cashing in on the name "Star Trek" and not bringing anything to the table then I'll just quietly mutter about it and wait for a used copy on DVD or for it to show up on a movie channel.

 

[dillon3001]

I'm fully expecting this movie to be a good-to great film based IMO from other works I've seen JJ Abrams do. As far as fandom zealots ruining Trek, I'm not sure i buy into that, though I couldn't give you any specific evidence that supports or denies that theory outright. There's going to be a million fans out there with possibly a million different takes on what Trek "should have been" and what the movie "should be".

I've always ranked my entertainment value with tv series or movies with a question:

"Was this worth watching?" or "Was this movie worth the price of admission to me?"

If the answer is yes, then I'm happy.

As far as fandom folks causing Trek's decline, I think one cause could have been too much Trek. Up until 2001, there were at least 2 Trek series on TV, not counting any in syndication. There is likely alot of other factors that play into Trek's decline for those who are more knowledgeable about those facts than myself.

I dont personally see Trek as a dying or fading franchise. I doubt Paramount would pump this much money and effort into a new movie unless they thought it had a good chance to make profit. Trek just needs a little rejuvenation, a little "newness" and its my hope this movie will give us just that.

My 2 cents are given

 

[trekkerguy]

^^^ I have to disagree on your point about whether Trek was dead.

The series had been canceled due to horrid ratings, the last film failed
horribly at the box-office and there was absoloutely no plans for the
future of Trek. Several different projects got canned cause they felt
it just wasn't Trek's time and it wouldn't bring any interest.

This is not a continuation of Trek, it's a revival.

 

[SheliakBob]

Blaphemers! This horrid J.J.Trek abomination shall be divisive, destructive and evil! E-Vile, I tell you!!
yup.

 

[MANT!]

First to get one thing out of the way..

Fandamentalists.
" ... (noun, pl.); fans who violently believe the only valid interpretation of any entertainment source is a dogmatic adherence to their favorite version of that source. Any change to the smallest detail is inherently unacceptable (see also "heresy") and met with frantic scorn. See also Hal Jordan and Klingons, bumpy vs, smooth.

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2004/12/fandamentalism.html

This actually was a problem back in 1979 when TMP was going to be released..leaks of the "New Enterprise" the uniforms etc. were causing great consternation in certain fans.."How dare they change the Enterprise etc"..so this isn't new to me.....Oh TMP didn't make money because of the fan base, it made money because the general public was curious to see it. The trailers weren't aimed at Star Trek fans...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwivz3gECus
but at the movie audiences of the day.


I've seen this all before..and I'm looking forward to see JJ's take on Trek..

 

[trekkerguy]

^^^ Love your avatar.

And the point about the fanbase.

 

[Psion]

I ain't biting.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

And do you know what really pisses the Zealots off?

The studio is not listening to them any more, no more letter writing campaigns that are noted, no more 'leaks' from the cast over plot details not to their liking and no more making a film for a few lonely people hiding in their cellars.

I love that, I can't tell you how amusing I find this..
.
.
.
If a big budget film with a big production value cannot reinvigorate the franchise then I am happy to consign Trek to posterity and reflect, at leisure, on the bits I loved while ignoring what I hated as well as those who killed a friend while protesting 'we told you so'.

You screwed it up with your love of registry numbers, canon violations, lack of imagination and self important demographic that reduced Trek to a soap opera set in outer space...

Yeah, pretty much.