STiD, Kirk and the Abrams Team

[Opus]

It is interesting that almost the same criticisms levied against Abrams and the new films were said against Bennett and TWOK. And it is TWOK that is now revered as the Trek standard that Abrams failed to meet, just as TWOK was considered a Trek Failure for missing the mark vs. TOS. And the defenders are saying almost the same things as well, including concerns over all the vitriol within the fandom.

I'd love to get my hands on the original copies of the Interstat mag, or at least full transcripts. If anything, I find the whole thing an interesting study.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm going to be linking to these posts every time someone tries to act like the new movies have destroyed Star Trek and all it stands for. Which will be a lot. It's amazing how little fandom has changed.

Now watch someone come in and try to prove that all these 1982 anti-Wrath of Khan fans were wrong but those saying the exact same things about the new movies are right

 

[Opus]

Oh, I'm sure that's soon. Although I suspect the "usual suspects" are ignoring this thread now. It might just sting too much to know that the beloved TWOK was not considered by ALL of fandom as an "instant classic" and Trek's pinnacle achievement they have allowed themselves to believe. There was, in fact, a rather loud vocal minority that despised the film, Harve Bennett and other fans who dared like the film.

But here's a gem I missed. Change the name from Harve Bennett to JJ Abrams and one would think it was lifted directly from TrekMovie. Remember - She is saying this about The Wrath of Khan:

Barbara P. G addresses Harve Bennett:

At this point I have given up hope of ever again seeing a Star Trek movie that does not offend me—one with a good plot, decent characterization, science that is not obtrusively horrible, etc. I have only one heartfelt plea left for you: Please, please, do not completely destroy the essence, the very soul, of Star Trek. Leave out the campiness, the bad taste, the repetitive plagiarism, the gimmicks, but mose especially leave out the excessive, genocidal, meaningless violence. Remember that there are more intelligent, inventive ways to deal with the "villains" of your movies than always blowing them up. Thank you.

Interstat, Issue 70: 1983

 

[ComicGuy89]

Opus, you insane, crazy fella!

I want to call you brilliant but that was some deviousness you pulled! Oh, this is going in my favourites, surely.

I can't believe anyone could say those things about TWOK! That's crazy!

 

[M'Sharak]

Oh, I'm sure that's soon. Although I suspect the "usual suspects" are ignoring this thread now. It might just sting too much to know that the beloved TWOK was not considered by ALL of fandom as an "instant classic" and Trek's pinnacle achievement they have allowed themselves to believe. There was, in fact, a rather loud vocal minority that despised the film, Harve Bennett and other fans who dared like the film.

But here's a gem I missed. Change the name from Harve Bennett to JJ Abrams and one would think it was lifted directly from TrekMovie. Remember - She is saying this about The Wrath of Khan:

Barbara P. G addresses Harve Bennett:

At this point I have given up hope of ever again seeing a Star Trek movie that does not offend me—one with a good plot, decent characterization, science that is not obtrusively horrible, etc. I have only one heartfelt plea left for you: Please, please, do not completely destroy the essence, the very soul, of Star Trek. Leave out the campiness, the bad taste, the repetitive plagiarism, the gimmicks, but mose especially leave out the excessive, genocidal, meaningless violence. Remember that there are more intelligent, inventive ways to deal with the "villains" of your movies than always blowing them up. Thank you.

Interstate, Issue 70: 1983

That makes some interesting reading.

 

[Opus]

Opus, you insane, crazy fella!

I want to call you brilliant but that was some deviousness you pulled!

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfUM5xHUY4M[/yt]

(I'm borrowing this from King Daniel. I laughed when he posted it. I had to again! He also posted the original link to Interstat on another board here, so big thanks for that too!)

I can't believe anyone could say those things about TWOK! That's crazy!

But oh so true. I'm old enough to remember stuff like this posted in other periodicals like Starlog and Best of Trek books.

It's why I think years from now, when Abrams is releasing his SW movies, Trek fans will be looking back at these movies and saying, "Those were the good old days!"

 

[cardinal biggles]

It's why I think years from now, when Abrams is releasing his SW movies, Trek fans will be looking back at these movies and saying, "Those were the good old days!"

I guess it depends on who they get to direct Star Trek 3. And Abrams will still be there in an oversight role, and the rest of the team he assembled will be in place, so I don't think it'll be that different without him behind the camera.

I will be very interested in the reactions of SW fans when Episode VII comes out in two years, especially with all the hate towards Lucas over the prequel trilogy and the constant revisions to the OT every time there's a new media release (SE, DVD, Blu-ray). Be curious to see if and how quickly that evaporates in the wake of "J.J. Wars".

 

[Opus]

I think, after the prequel debacle and with Disney's oversight, there is a better than good chance the SW movies are going to be out of this world.

Of course we won't absolutely know until they are released. But still, if they (Disney) handle Wars like they are handling Marvel, fans should be optimistic to say the least.

As far as Trek is concerned, Abrams will have a close hand, I'm sure, on the look and feel of this movie. Bad Robot's his baby - He's not going to turn his back on a sure money-maker for his company.

 

[Enterprise is Great]

I betting that a number of fans who previously disliked/hated the SW prequels will suddenly find a new love for them when the Abrams directed Episode VII comes out.

 

[F. King Daniel]

"at least the prequels were true Star Wars!"

 

[controlfreak]

The OP became irrelevant once it used the phrase "characerization rape." It's hard to take any further "criticism" seriously.

 

[Opus]

Not my quote. It was from an Interstat issue that was published back in 1982 about The Wrath of Khan.

Another important point is that the quoted sections I posted were from multiple fans, not just one person. Interstat was like the Flintstone version of TrekBBS.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Interstat, Issue 70: 1983

Does anyone else find it a little funny that the letters that seem the most malicious and vile are written by women, if only because it contradicts the commonly-held stereotype?

 

[M'Sharak]

Interstat, Issue 70: 1983

Does anyone else find it a little funny that the letters that seem the most malicious and vile are written by women, if only because it contradicts the commonly-held stereotype?

I hadn't paid that much attention to the names, other than to notice that some names seem to come up much more often - regular letter-writers then, frequent posters now? Looking again, I notice how many of those frequent letter-writers were women, and that it (once again) puts the lie to the notion of active Trek fandom historically being a predominantly male group.

As far as malicious and vile letters go, that's not a huge change, either. The same thing can be seen today with some fans who have invested much time and study in their beloved world or universe, and perhaps more among those who use it as a setting for their own stories, timelines, star-charts: if they feel it's being tampered with by unbelievers, by the uninitiated, by the unworthy, well... sometimes they get upset and maybe use strong words.

 

[Opus]

I find it interesting that they seriously wanted to petition Paramount to have fans involved with script approval.

Yikes! That's getting hardcore.

 

[Sindatur]

I find it interesting that they seriously wanted to petition Paramount to have fans involved with script approval.

Yikes! That's getting hardcore.

What...What would be wrong with th...

<Sorry, just couldn't keep a straight face for the whole sentence, I almost made it, though>

 

[cardinal biggles]

I find it interesting that they seriously wanted to petition Paramount to have fans involved with script approval.

Yikes! That's getting hardcore.

Not that Paramount would ever accede to such a thing, but at least it's not as batshit crazy as the notion that We the Trekkies could fund a full, 22-episode fifth season of Enterprise out-of-pocket.

 

[Sindatur]

... but at least it's not as batshit crazy as the notion that We the Trekkies could fund a full, 22-episode fifth season of Enterprise out-of-pocket.

I call Bullshit, you just need to cut back on the effects a bit

Say, for example, using stick figure storyboards and Flash animation

 

[DonIago]

Return of the styrofoam rocks!

 

[Set Harth]

One humorous note...if we presuppose that residual effects of Genesis will re generate Spock's body, what will then happen to him? He will find himself inside a casket which must be well-sealed (or it would not have made it to the surface), push on the cover, be unable to open it, suffocate, and die—only to be re-regenerated, push on the lid, suffocate, die—be re-re-regenerated, suffocate ad infinitum. What a sad fate, indeed!