• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The audacity of Abrams and the Insult

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tentacle

Lieutenant Commander
Red Shirt
Where is the insult you ask? I’ll tell you where the insult lies. I grew up on TNG reruns, this got me into TOS reruns. What has got me hooked on Star Trek was this vision of a utopia universe, the belief that this universe could, some day, come true. And then finally DS9, VOY (even though I find a lot of problems with it, but it was still Star Trek, it still happened in the universe I love, and I still tuned in everyday to see what’s happening in my universe.), ENT (I am actually the few that like it. Because I appreciated what it try to do. It was a prequel, but it respected my universe to enough to not wipe out everything that came before it. ENT even tried to patch up some of the holes left behind by TOS and TNG – how the klingons got smooth foreheads, the origin of the green Orion woman.) All the Star Trek that came before this movie happened in my universe, the alternate universe is only used occasionally as a diversion.

In comes Abrams a self proclaimed none Star Trek fan, with his action/adventure movie (just because it’s in space does not a Scifi make) have the audacity to wipe away my entire youth. And he thinks so little of trek fans’ intelligence to feed us the crap of it’s an “alternate timeline”, your universe still exists (we’ll just never going to tell new stories about it) bullshit. With this new film Abrams basically said fuck you to Gene and all those that follow and believe in Roddenberry’s vision of a utopia future. Some of you will never understand why that this is such a slap in the face. That is because you have not gone through your youth being a nerdy kid that is constantly bullied beaten for being a fan of Star Trek. The trekkies endured the ridicule the beatings in an increasingly epistemological world. But we believe in a better future, the world can be better than what it is. This is what gives me comfort when I come home bloodied. And now Abrams and Co. Have basically said that your vision of a utopia is not good enough and it doesn’t appeal to the masses. We will turn the name Star Trek into another run of the mill action/adventurer. Someone on this forum have even gone so far to suggest that, now Star Trek is another mass consumed product trekkies no longer need to endure the ridicule anymore. Well that just screams “you do not understand”!!! And raise doubt to your claim of being a trekkie, or possibly a self hating trekkie, secretly wanting acceptance from the “cool kids”. Now if wanting Star Trek to be better than a run of the mill action film, and not have the name tarnished sounds elitist. Then I say to you the scars (both physical and emotional) I bear have earned me the right.

Some would argue that Abrams did throw the fans a bone by putting in little gems and reference to TOS. But I would argue most of those references are a comical abstraction of iconic characters, even none followers will understand. Kirk sleeps around with green woman, and now it had finally happened in the film. Bones saying “damn it I’m a doctor not a __________”. Scotty reduced to a bad Scottish accent (thank god they didn’t put a bottle in his hand). Chekov is nothing more than a bad Russian accent now, (well at least he didn’t suggest everything was invented in Russia). Sulu is nothing more than a sword wielding ninja (at least he get to keep his top on). Spock is an emotional train wreck barely holding on to his logic (who would maroon Kirk at an icy planet). Uhura is now the girl friend of Spock (which brings to question the integrity of Spock, for having a relationship with one of his student). Wearing a red shirt is a death sentence. This film portrays the cliché of Star Trek very well and uses it as a punch line. Even the little gem of Kirk being allergic (a nod to TWoH) was handled with comical bubble hands that it cheapens it. So this is what TOS had been reduced to, clichés and comic relief. Now a trekkie is used to being made fun of, and we do have a sense of humour, so we too can have a chuckle at those comical renditions of the characters. But all those cumulated to a slap in the face when Vulcan got sucked into a black hole thus rendering the previous trek universe irrelevant. (If you do not understand why that is such a big deal, you’ll need to understand the importance of Vulcan in star Trek lore).

But being a Star Trek fan and an optimist at heart I hope the future of trek will not be this bastardized version, and trek will return to its utopia version of humanity. For that I can only hope.

For those of you, like me, can’t swallow the kool aid, just remember in the words of Sybok “have faith my friends, there are more of us than you know”.
 
Read the books. They're still doing brilliant things in the universe you love, and will be for years.
 
Quite a few people seem to disagree with you. They found the utopian ideals of Star Trek to be alive and well in this film, and found a great deal to like in the characters, the dialogue, the emotion and the humor.

So, how can that be? Are we all idiots? Drugged? Suffering from some form os mass hysteria? It's very strange.
 
Funny, I thought Abrams gave the audiences some credit by challenging their imagination somewhat. New universe, different outcomes, no info dump, good characters.
 
(even though I find a lot of problems with it, but it was still Star Trek, it still happened in the universe I love, and I still tuned in everyday to see what’s happening in my [emphasis mine] universe.)

And we cut to the root of the problem right away.

It's not yours. Never was.
 
Where is the insult you ask? I’ll tell you where the insult lies. I grew up on TNG reruns, this got me into TOS reruns. What has got me hooked on Star Trek was this vision of a utopia universe, the belief that this universe could, some day, come true. And then finally DS9, VOY (even though I find a lot of problems with it, but it was still Star Trek, it still happened in the universe I love, and I still tuned in everyday to see what’s happening in my universe.), ENT (I am actually the few that like it. Because I appreciated what it try to do. It was a prequel, but it respected my universe to enough to not wipe out everything that came before it. ENT even tried to patch up some of the holes left behind by TOS and TNG – how the klingons got smooth foreheads, the origin of the green Orion woman.) All the Star Trek that came before this movie happened in my universe, the alternate universe is only used occasionally as a diversion.

In comes Abrams a self proclaimed none Star Trek fan, with his action/adventure movie (just because it’s in space does not a Scifi make) have the audacity to wipe away my entire youth. And he thinks so little of trek fans’ intelligence to feed us the crap of it’s an “alternate timeline”, your universe still exists (we’ll just never going to tell new stories about it) bullshit. With this new film Abrams basically said fuck you to Gene and all those that follow and believe in Roddenberry’s vision of a utopia future. Some of you will never understand why that this is such a slap in the face. That is because you have not gone through your youth being a nerdy kid that is constantly bullied beaten for being a fan of Star Trek. The trekkies endured the ridicule the beatings in an increasingly epistemological world. But we believe in a better future, the world can be better than what it is. This is what gives me comfort when I come home bloodied. And now Abrams and Co. Have basically said that your vision of a utopia is not good enough and it doesn’t appeal to the masses. We will turn the name Star Trek into another run of the mill action/adventurer. Someone on this forum have even gone so far to suggest that, now Star Trek is another mass consumed product trekkies no longer need to endure the ridicule anymore. Well that just screams “you do not understand”!!! And raise doubt to your claim of being a trekkie, or possibly a self hating trekkie, secretly wanting acceptance from the “cool kids”. Now if wanting Star Trek to be better than a run of the mill action film, and not have the name tarnished sounds elitist. Then I say to you the scars (both physical and emotional) I bear have earned me the right.

Some would argue that Abrams did throw the fans a bone by putting in little gems and reference to TOS. But I would argue most of those references are a comical abstraction of iconic characters, even none followers will understand. Kirk sleeps around with green woman, and now it had finally happened in the film. Bones saying “damn it I’m a doctor not a __________”. Scotty reduced to a bad Scottish accent (thank god they didn’t put a bottle in his hand). Chekov is nothing more than a bad Russian accent now, (well at least he didn’t suggest everything was invented in Russia). Sulu is nothing more than a sword wielding ninja (at least he get to keep his top on). Spock is an emotional train wreck barely holding on to his logic (who would maroon Kirk at an icy planet). Uhura is now the girl friend of Spock (which brings to question the integrity of Spock, for having a relationship with one of his student). Wearing a red shirt is a death sentence. This film portrays the cliché of Star Trek very well and uses it as a punch line. Even the little gem of Kirk being allergic (a nod to TWoH) was handled with comical bubble hands that it cheapens it. So this is what TOS had been reduced to, clichés and comic relief. Now a trekkie is used to being made fun of, and we do have a sense of humour, so we too can have a chuckle at those comical renditions of the characters. But all those cumulated to a slap in the face when Vulcan got sucked into a black hole thus rendering the previous trek universe irrelevant. (If you do not understand why that is such a big deal, you’ll need to understand the importance of Vulcan in star Trek lore).

But being a Star Trek fan and an optimist at heart I hope the future of trek will not be this bastardized version, and trek will return to its utopia version of humanity. For that I can only hope.

For those of you, like me, can’t swallow the kool aid, just remember in the words of Sybok “have faith my friends, there are more of us than you know”.
I couldn't agree with you more.

I can understand why the movie was made, but I think it should have been a complete reboot. The alternate timeline nonsense is just insulting.
 
The problem with ENT trying to patch up the continuity errors shown in TOS and TNG was that, well, how to put this....nobody cared. A general audience would (and has got) only be bored by the continuous info dump, and if a show can't stand on its own, then it will fail.

This film does honour Trek, or at least what's always mattered about Trek (the spirit if you will, the core ideas), but it can also exist without one having to know about the rest of the franchise. Which is a good thing. If you need to have watched TOS and TNG to get this thing, well then you've got Nemesis. And we all know how well that one went.
 
the paralell universe isnt insulting if one is familar with the mirror universe.
it and trek prime always existed side by side.
this will co exist with them both.
different branches of the time stream..


interview with orci


Q: You're referring to the increasingly popular "many worlds" theory about the possible structure of the space-time continuum.

A: Exactly, and we chose that approach not only because it's the most up-to-date speculation about time travel, but in terms of telling a time-travel story it inherently preserves the established events of "Star Trek" in an alternate reality, and that allows breathing room between those stories and what we're doing now. It's also really fun for us, as writers, because "Star Trek" got us into science and now science is helping us to preserve "Star Trek," which is pretty amazing when you think about it


Q: So, for example, television history remains the same — the first interracial kiss on network TV was between William Shatner (as Kirk) and Nichelle Nichols (Lt. Uhura) on the original "Star Trek" — but now you've rewritten "Star Trek" history with another Uhura kiss that's going to have a lot of "Trek"-bloggers buzzing with speculation.

A: That's an example of what I'm referring to. We wanted to create a harmonic equivalent of that moment from the canon. We wanted our original material to still be informed by the canon, so that even the things that feel very different in the movie are still inspired by the canon. We didn't want anything to be new just for the sake of being new.

====
MoviesOnline: It was a genius way to reboot the series using the theory about multiple, alternate timelines going against everything that Back to the Future taught us about time and embraced this theory. Can you talk a little bit about why you chose to do that? Obviously it gives you greater freedom moving forward so where do you envision it going?

Bob: There’s two things.

Alex: We did it just because we wanted…this movie had to be both for new fans because just the expense and the pressure of it. We couldn’t just throw away what fans knew. We couldn’t just disrespect what I as a fan loved about Star Trek, so the idea of having it be something where the freedom is literally bought by Leonard Nimoy’s Spock in a time travel scenario which has been covered in episodes of The Next Generation thus making it canon essentially. It seemed like the perfect solution to bringing something new so you wouldn’t have to know anything about Star Trek but, if you did, you were literally following the continuing adventures of Leonard Nimoy’s Spock.

Bob: And the other problem that we all faced was when we said, okay, we really want to do this, we know the fate of the characters, we know some die, we know some live, so how do you ever put them in genuine jeopardy in a way that’s truly unpredictable and surprising for the audience because again it is a 5-year mission. So hopefully, there will be more than one and if there’s more than one, then we want the audience to be able to not stay ahead of them and that’s what lead us to the solution that we all came to.
__________________


to do with the optimism and humanity and of finding your purpose through unity," explained Abrams. "It ends up being a guiding principle of the movie. It needed to be faithful to the optimism that Gene Roddenberry wrote with during a time of fear and hate and suspicion. He was writing of our future where we were not just surviving it, but by cooperating and collaborating, we actually thrived. That to me, more than ever, is a relevant idea."
 
Where is the insult you ask?

...

For those of you, like me, can’t swallow the kool aid, just remember in the words of Sybok “have faith my friends, there are more of us than you know”.
We've just had one "Kool-Aid and insult" thread closed, thanks. I don't think we're quite ready for another one just yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top