Tired of the same old questions....

[Warped9]

I sometimes get rather tired of the same old questions:

- If you're a Trek fan then how come you don't watch...(fill in the film or TV series)?
- We know you're a fan so why aren't you excited about the new film?
- Why won't you see the new film?

Is everyone automatically a fan of every incarnation of Batman or Superman or 007 or whatever? Then why assume someone is automatically a fan of every incarnation of Trek?

Sometimes you reach a point where you say, "Look, I like how it was done before and don't see any improvement in the new version. I don't care for the latest version of Coke."

Every version of Trek was/is a new take on the concept--sometimes it works for you and sometimes it doesn't. There's no law saying you have to be a fan of everything.

In the case of a reboot many of my criticisms are muted simply because they're cutting ties (in terms of continuity) and starting with a clean slate. That's fair. But just because it's Trek doesn't mean I have to automatically embrace it, even if it's TOS derived.

*Sigh*

 

[Gary7]

In war time, sports fans of rival teams tend to become more amicable. In peace time, the rivalry can become vicious. Most people seem to need to find friends and enemies, even when the "enemy" is really unwarranted.

Just because someone prefers one series over the other, they shouldn't be ridiculed. If new fans come on board who embrace the reboot but don't care for the series, that's their prerogative. If someone finds TOS the 'real' Trek and can't stomach anything else, they shouldn't be blasted for that. The problem tends to be when criticism is injected. All of us who appreciate the Roddenberry Star Trek should be open to the Abrams reboot for the film on its own, rather than cursing it for timeline violations. It's clearly a separation of "realities", so speculating on how to make it "fit" in Roddenberry Star Trek canon is pointless.

Sure, it's fun to speculate what might happen... Abrams may churn out a sequel, maybe two. And there could be a new TV series down the road. Who knows. And that would be fine. But it would have to remain a separate incarnation of Roddeberry's idea. Keeping that in mind should keep everyone happy. But I think the real problem is that those of us who appreciate "original" Star Trek want to see another production faithful to the original Star Trek canon. And it doesn't look like we're going to get it... except in fan fiction productions.

 

[Mallory]

Sure, it's fun to speculate what might happen... Abrams may churn out a sequel, maybe two.

Star Trek sequel in the works.

 

[Shatmandu]

I reply to those types of questions with this:

"Just because I like women doesn't mean I want to beef Roseanne Barr."

Works.

Joe, right

 

[Warped9]

But I think the real problem is that those of us who appreciate "original" Star Trek want to see another production faithful to the original Star Trek canon. And it doesn't look like we're going to get it... except in fan fiction productions.

I'd be happy if they could jeep faith with the original spirit, which is something I believe went missing a looong time ago.

 

[sbk1234]

I reply to those types of questions with this:

"Just because I like women doesn't mean I want to beef Roseanne Barr."

Works.

Joe, right

Hey! You said "women!"

 

[Green Shirt]

I reply to those types of questions with this:

"Just because I like women doesn't mean I want to beef Roseanne Barr."

Works.

Joe, right

Its gonna take me a while to get over the mental image.

 

[Gary7]

But I think the real problem is that those of us who appreciate "original" Star Trek want to see another production faithful to the original Star Trek canon. And it doesn't look like we're going to get it... except in fan fiction productions.

I'd be happy if they could jeep faith with the original spirit, which is something I believe went missing a looong time ago.

Even during TOS, there was a shift in spirit... the 3rd season. Was it better or worse? Well, I'd say there were more flop episodes in the 3rd but thankfully some decent ones. And I really didn't care for the 1st two seasons of TNG... it wasn't until the 3rd that I began to appreciate it. Roddenberry had begun to back off due to health problems and never saw season 3 complete. Although the Berman-Piller team had issues, they did foster some really great episodes. Although Roddenberry got Star Trek started, I think it was only natural for him to "pass the torch". And I think the spirit did continue on, just in a different way.

At what point do you feel the spirit went missing?

 

[Michael]

I sometimes get rather tired of the same old questions:

- If you're a Trek fan then how come you don't watch...(fill in the film or TV series)?
- We know you're a fan so why aren't you excited about the new film?
- Why won't you see the new film?

Yeah, who are they, asking ... questions!

 

[Gary7]

Sure, it's fun to speculate what might happen... Abrams may churn out a sequel, maybe two.

Star Trek sequel in the works.

Amazing... they're THAT confident to get a sequel screenplay already in the works. At least it's good to see that they'll be open to adjustments from fan reactions to the first movie. But I wonder how they'll be "taking in" those reactions.

 

[Michael]

Sure, it's fun to speculate what might happen... Abrams may churn out a sequel, maybe two.

Star Trek sequel in the works.

Amazing... they're THAT confident to get a sequel screenplay already in the works. At least it's good to see that they'll be open to adjustments from fan reactions to the first movie. But I wonder how they'll be "taking in" those reactions.

Not fan reaction. Audience reaction.

 

[plynch]

Sometimes you reach a point where you say, "Look, I like how it was done before and don't see any improvement in the new version. I don't care for the latest version of Coke."

Every version of Trek was/is a new take on the concept--sometimes it works for you and sometimes it doesn't. There's no law saying you have to be a fan of everything.

In the case of a reboot many of my criticisms are muted simply because they're cutting ties (in terms of continuity) and starting with a clean slate. That's fair. But just because it's Trek doesn't mean I have to automatically embrace it, even if it's TOS derived.

Yes. I love the series, "Star Trek." A particular show made during the space age with particular actors, and a particular ethos, feel, joie, etc.
This movie looks very different.

I like your Batman comparison. The Lewis Wilson serial is far dif. from Adam West's camp and Christian Bale's gloom.

Maybe the new film'll be good. But it'll be a different good, though its characters are named Kirk and McCoy.

Peace and well-being to all.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Every version of Trek was/is a new take on the concept--sometimes it works for you and sometimes it doesn't. There's no law saying you have to be a fan of everything.

Not even the original.

 

[Mysterion]

I reply to those types of questions with this:

"Just because I like women doesn't mean I want to beef Roseanne Barr."

Works.

Joe, right

Hey! You said "women!"

THE WOMEN!

 

[Warped9]

I sometimes get rather tired of the same old questions:

- If you're a Trek fan then how come you don't watch...(fill in the film or TV series)?
- We know you're a fan so why aren't you excited about the new film?
- Why won't you see the new film?

Yeah, who are they, asking ... questions!

Sorry. It's mostly coworkers. There are quite a few around here that like to talk about movies and such. And most of them are about half my age. Often we agree in varying degrees and periodically we disagree.

There's some buzz of interest about the next film from guys who were weaned on VOY and/or contemporary Trek and they don't seem to grasp why I'm not excited about the film.

"The trailer is awesome! And it looks just like the original!"



In situations like this there's a familiar issue that crops up. When you're of a certain age you sometimes might feel that nothing really good happened before your time. It isn't really good unless it's brand spankin' new. It's usually when you get older that you start to appreciate things from before your time and experience. Certainly not everything old that came before is great and the best and not everything new is guaranteed crap. Even if you're willing to look at new things you still develop a sense of what will or will not interest you.

There's one guy here who really appreciates that I've introduced him to older films (pre '90s), and although he doesn't express himself as I would I've noticed how he's gotten more analytical and discerning. We still don't always agree, but we can discuss and get insights into how someone else might see something.

I sometimes see something of my younger self in these guys and that may be partly why I can relate with them and rib them on a certain level. With one of them that seemed really juiced about the next film I couldn't resist needling him at one point with a remark that got a laugh. "Well, if you watch Voyager then you'll watch anything."

 

[Kelso]

I disagree with the notions that younger people primarily love newer things and that people who love the classics would be put off by the new Trek film. Those characterizations certainly aren't applicable across the board. I'm only 28... but I grew up watching classic TV and film (including the original Star Trek). Most of the stuff I love was made long before I was born.

I am, however, genuinely looking forward to the new film.

 

[Warped9]

^^ And if you reread my post you'll see I was not lumping everyone into two camps. Of course there are always exceptions but that doesn't invalidate what I've observed first hand over the years.

 

[Cakes488]

I sometimes get rather tired of the same old questions:

- If you're a Trek fan then how come you don't watch...(fill in the film or TV series)?
- We know you're a fan so why aren't you excited about the new film?
- Why won't you see the new film?

Is everyone automatically a fan of every incarnation of Batman or Superman or 007 or whatever? Then why assume someone is automatically a fan of every incarnation of Trek?

Sometimes you reach a point where you say, "Look, I like how it was done before and don't see any improvement in the new version. I don't care for the latest version of Coke."

Every version of Trek was/is a new take on the concept--sometimes it works for you and sometimes it doesn't. There's no law saying you have to be a fan of everything.

In the case of a reboot many of my criticisms are muted simply because they're cutting ties (in terms of continuity) and starting with a clean slate. That's fair. But just because it's Trek doesn't mean I have to automatically embrace it, even if it's TOS derived.

*Sigh*

I echo this sentiment. And considering this movie is being pumped out of H-wood I don't have much hope for it actually being mentally stimulating....but we'll see.....

I tell ya I'm not running to the movie theatre to see it oh hell no.....

 

[Forbin]

As a warplane buff, I love a good aerial combat film. The Blue Max being, probably, my favorite. I never thought I could stand a silent film (a drama, anyway - Buster Keaton rules), so i avoided seeing Wings for a long time.

Wings turned out to be a totally enjoyable, dramatic, enthralling, humorous ("bubbles!!") movie.

But the modern attempt at the same thing - Fly Boys - blew chunks.

Yes, I'm rambling...

 

[Gary7]

I can relate to the same thing, about being caught up in the "new"... I remember when Battlestar Galactica came out (the first series) and was enthralled with the special effects. So, I put Star Trek out of my mind and focused on BG... Star Trek was "old". "Tired".

But later on, I came to my senses... BG was a bit ridiculous. Sure it had great special effects for the day, but the stories were weak and the acting mostly sub par. And teenie-bopper posers. Kind of like Aaron Spelling in space. I came back to the old Trek and began to appreciate it more.

But you know what? I think the newer series helped keep the older series alive. I mean, if you're stuck with just those old 74 episodes they get tiring after a while. The newer Star Trek series refreshes the basic premise... and then you've got more to work with. Your mind can be in TNG one day and in TOS the other. I'm glad ENT came out, even though it tanked. It gave credence to the other series that came before it. And then of course, there's the movies. We're lucky that the Star Trek franchise has produced so much material.

I really think this new movie will excite some new fans into the fold. Despite the age stigma, there could very well be many who get curious and want to dig into the past. They'll want to know more about what framed this movie. I've no doubt that we'll get many more questions repeated over and over again... and lots of argument over "the timeline". Actually... I'm thinking that once the movie is out, someone should craft an FAQ to keep it all in perspective. That way the newbies can be guided in the right direction without bombarding the boards with repeat questions.

I'm not going to see ST:XI the weekend it comes out... maybe wait a couple of weeks. Of course, it'll be hard to avoid that part of the forum, but I'd rather be surprised. I just hope folks don't dump spoilers into THIS forum!