What would save Kelvin films isn't an adherence to world building or trying to establish its universe in contrast to Prime, but just to go back to basics and tell a good story with likable characters. That's all it needs. I'm really bored these days of fans arguing over timelines. In a lot of ways, the discussion over Star Trek has become too much about world building (Kelvin fans wanting more definition for that timeline, Prime fans only wanting more definition of that timeline).
I hear you, but this isn't merely arguing over timelines, this is about common sense and...water being wet.
Kelvin trek is separate from Prime already. It's the point, and pretending people are nitpicking if they don't want to ignore that it wasn't a tos prequel, and thus set in the prime timeline, is disingenuos. All the more now that you have TV series establishing that the two realities co-exist and aren't mutually exclusive.
Tarantino here isn't asked to personally move the moon away from earth's orbit, you know.
That's why Tarantino's comments are somewhat refreshing to me. He doesn't care about timelines and what makes each different. To him, the 2009 film and TOS are of the same simply because in his views it's about the characters.
I beg to differ. His comments show that he doesn't care about the characters either. If he did, he wouldn't make that silly comment about Pine and Quinto playing Shatner and Nimoy that is simply incorrect because they never did that, nor they were asked to do that (as jj&co said over and over).
If he cares about the characters, he should recognize and respect the fact they quite obvioustly are their own people with their own story. Instead, he's only looking for an impersonation of his faves with no regard for the characters *for* the characters.
Had him cared about these characters (both tos and kelvin), that would've been the biggest reason for him to get the timeline.
I see nothing refreshing in someone who doesn't want to understand something as simple as an alternate reality, but he's presumptuous enough to still want to make a movie in this verse..
Besides, I read the fanboys make the same comments against this trek and the faux 'I dont get it, I want tos to still happen!' discourse since years . He isn't even original.
If he were a random fanboy I'd think he was trolling. Knowing that it was Tarantino doesn't make much a difference for me, I still think that kind of commentary is silly and not really inspiring.
Tl dr: I really don't think you can tell a good story with these characters if you ignore, well,
the story they have.
These guys aren't tos kirk&co and they never will, unless you think characters have no free will and having completely different life experiences doesn't shape people in important, foundamental, ways.
I see no care for the characters and stories here. I only see pretexts to placate one's own nostalgia for the old thing by turning even this trek into a mere surrogate of it. I see zero respect for the current cast too.
I think he should be free to tell whatever story he wants, and then just leave it to the fans to connect the dots.
You mean give him a pass if things make no sense.
It isn't the fans job to know the source material and connect the dots to improve quality and coherence a movie . It's his job, and he will get paid very good for it too, I will add.
The problem with the above is that Star Trek has always been one canon, not dissimilar to Doctor Who, and by making all those changes in ST09, they opened up the distraction. It could have easily been avoided but Abrams made a choice, and that choice still has ramifications.
It's canon now.
It's a distraction if you want to make it one because you don't like it. Otherwise, it's just a plus and having this amazing opportunity to get a reboot of the iconic characters where things can go differently, and it doesn't overwrites the original. If you don't like these movies, they don't affect your enjoyment of the prime timeline stuff.
Trek isn't new to different realities and one should appreciate someone made the trek universe bigger.
I'm a tos fan, and a fan of the prime timeline shows, but I'm also a fan of this trek (gasp!). It isn't a distraction for me to like both, it's all very neat and easy actually.
Plus, let's face it, Abrams is more about lens flares and effects than he is about stories. In franchises he didn't create, his idea of a movie is to simply borrow from things done before. STID for example, was a terrible ripoff of TWOK, but as poorly marketed as possible. And of course, TFA was a rip off of ANH.
Yeah, I disagree. I wouldn't be here liking and still defending kelvin trek if his movies weren't about stories. I wouldn't still care about them.
Like I said previoustly, the (old) issue here is rather simple. I think some can't let go of prime, Shatner etc and they think they are, as people who only care about prime, more valid fans because they believe that only the prime timeline is valid trek and by consequence, only those who like it are valid fans.
The ones who like kelvin trek too (including those who only like kelvin trek, eg newest generations of fans) aren't valid fans, hence they don't deserve respect. Not even into a board that is dedicated to this trek.
