Trek canon is dead. Thanx JJ!

[Crazy Eddie]

The life of a screenwriter is neither glamorous nor rewarding...

Maybe if it was we'd get some better movies every summer.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The life of a screenwriter is neither glamorous nor rewarding...

I wouldn't say that...AFAIK, the only thing it's certainly not is low stress.

 

[xortex]

You have never seen and will never see a big budget motion picture where "most of the money went to commissioning stories."

It's hard to determine what the most money ever paid for a screenplay has been, but the best information I can come up with is about five million dollars for "Deja Vu" in 2006. That may have been passed, and if anyone has a more recent record holder please post it - but whatever it is, I'll be shocked if it's up to eight figures yet.

In any event, "Deja Vu" must be one of the most intelligent, thoughtful, mature and moving films ever made...that just follows from the fact that the writers were paid so much, right?

O.K. some of the money. We know they are great screenwriters but do they have great ideas, probly not.

 

[The Squire of Gothos]

It's clear to me one thing the upcoming new Star Trek film ultimately lays to rest... the idea of 'canon' in Star Trek fandom. And I'm happy about that! At least, the assurtion that Trek history is a straight line

I'm cool about it too. My first thoughts were "Trek is dead, long live Trek!"

 

[FordSVT]

Nah ... it simply establishes a parallel universe. This new one co-exists with the old, and there are even possibilities of cross-overs occurring.

Y'know (and I know you know) this is just popular fiction. I can watch one version for a couple of hours, and then another version for a couple of hours, and enjoy both without feeling any need to make them fit together by means of "parallel universes" or "alternate realities."

Since there is and was zero chance of the studio resurrecting a faithful version of the original 1960s "Star Trek" I can't get wrapped up in our faux "Captain April's" concern about this one "wiping out" or "replacing" the old one.

It is a curious syndrome of Trek fans that we seek continuity in our fiction. Are fans like myself denying reality on some level and substituting an alternative of someone else's creation? Or are we instead so grounded in the real world that we seek out more verisimilar fiction than those who prefer Bond or Batman. I adopted a "parallel universes" outlook on a lot of things years ago, including Star Trek, and since then find it easier to accept continuity weirdness. Without it, I'd be a lot closer to April's camp on the issues.

....a lot of other stuff....

I'm essentially of the same mind. Many-worlds interpretation of quantum reality is how I think the universe operates anyway.

And it's not just choices, if every distinct atomic quantum state "creates" it's own reality, simply going back in time, no matter how much one attempts to mirror the universe they just left, is going to create a new one just by being there, just by pushing some air molecules around differently.

And the added bonus in believe this is that, somewhere out there, there is actually a parallel universe where Star Trek is real.

 

[3D Master]

After 40 years, 11 movies and 6 tv series, does anyone really care about canon anymore?

I don't. Trek's always played fast and loose with its own history, frequently ignoring stuff that isn't convenient from a dramatic standpoint. Which is great, I'd rather have good storytelling than someone combing over scripts from 1968 to make sure their cool idea fits with some fan's notion of what's acceptable.

Trek XI seems to be going a little further in this regard, but I'm willing to forgive more violations in this story because they're fudging "facts" that were more casually established than those in later Trek series. Take "Balance of Terror" for instance, which is rife with facts about Romulan-Federation history that made sense for that episode but would make for a piss-poor story if you were to actually recount events that took place prior to it.

The writer of the episode wasn't writing it with a larger canon in mind so they weren't taking into account that the Romulan War as written was probably the most boring conflict in fictional history. I say retcon away, boys.

No, actually, the Romulan-Federation history given in that episode would produce one of the most amazing, oppressive, dark, terrifying, and nothing short of fantastic stories prior, during and just after the Romulan War.

But of course, that requires an IMAGINATION.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

But of course, that requires an IMAGINATION.

Well, then, it'd be wasted on the kind of fans who fixate on minutiae. Canonistas are some of the least imaginative people in the world.

 

[theenglish]

^^^
Yes, a Romulan War based on how it was written with terrifying unseen and powerful enemies invading Federation territory could make for an excellent series. Unfortunately, Enterprise was canceled just as the writing was reaching a quality that could have done justice to it.

 

[number6]

But of course, that requires an IMAGINATION.

Well, then, it'd be wasted on the kind of fans who fixate on minutiae. Canonistas are some of the least imaginative people in the world.

QFT.

 

[theenglish]

Good writing that makes a story clear and intact without having to know anything about the larger universe, while still remaining faithful to established canon is not an unreasonable thing to ask for, I don't think.

 

[3D Master]

^You know... your first line or two just gave me a thought: Perhaps all Trek needs is people who won't strictly follow the established to the "T". Maybe it needs someone who will do their own thing when they think it's best. I mean, doing their own thing gives the writers and directors a lot more flexibility in the story telling they can do. Eventually, you have so much history and so much back story that you become weighed down on details and minutia, and all that's left to do is either tell a cookie-cutter story to keep everything accurate or start over. So, regardless of what JJ plans on doing with the canon, I think I welcome it.

Which is just plain bullshit.

Fanfiction and the books have been writing stories that not only adhere to continuity, but even USE continuity and things never told about them, to tell ever interesting stories.

It simply requires an IMAGINATION.

But it seems these days, such a thing is hard to come by.

But of course, that requires an IMAGINATION.

Well, then, it'd be wasted on the kind of fans who fixate on minutiae. Canonistas are some of the least imaginative people in the world.

No, they are some of the MOST imaginative people in the world. We are capable of imagining story after amazing story that does not defy continuity, so when a (professional) writer claims such things, and/or writes a story that defies continuity, the obvious exclaim is: "Foul", "bullshit", "you're lazy so it's bad".

Better for them to remember the moment for their turn -- when someone mucks up something they've loved and respected for years and people say, "Who cares?" becauses it's just entertainment.

How do you "muck up" something that has never tried very hard to be internally consistent to begin with?

Or, in other words, are Trill symbiots harmed by transporter beams (as in TNG's "The Host") or not (as in all of DS9)?

They're only harmed if they're carried by the lumpy-headed Trill type, not the spotty-headed ones.

See? Easy!

I was more thinking along the lines of: the Trill kept themselves secret from just about everyone else, Starfleet, the Federation (and thus transporters) don't know about them, and the bio-filters would treat them as a parasite and remove them.

Somewhere in between that TNG-episode and DS9 the knowledge has gotten more widespread knowledge - at least in Starfleet - and the bio-filters have been adjusted to know the symbiote for what it is - and thus NOT remove them.

And that is EXACTLY why I am so "cavalier" about it's reinvention.
Not because I have some hatred or resentment for old Trek.
I've explained that several times. It needs to survive for the next
generation to experience and have some effect on.

And because I would prefer to have more Trek to enjoy and experience over
the next 40 years. But anything that stagnates dies. Trek needs change
to survive, and it needs to be good entertainment for me to enjoy it.

So I am in full support of exactly what is happening with Trek.

You know what, that's what some of us so-called "canonistas" have been saying for a long time. Funny thing is, reinventing Star Trek for a new era, does NOT require even one breach of continuity. You can do the reinventing without a single continuity error.

You just have to be willing to make the effort, and the imagination to support such an effort.

But people running Star Trek - and many fans it seems - either don't have the willingness, don't have the imagination, or have neither.

And here comes the "new reinvigorated Trek": horrendously pessimistic future, breaking continuity all over the place, horrible characterization, empty pile of SFX - NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER IN ALL THE MATTERS IT COUNTS: it's AGAIN a time travel story, it's AGAIN a ridiculous blow up the planet story, we have AGAIN a mustache twirling villain, MORE juvenile sex humor, we now suddenly have the umpteenth "look they're destined to be together" pile of junk, which equals NO imagination just formulaic nothingness.

Welcome to "new Trek", aka: pile of junk, just like the previous two films and the last series.

Brilliant; but not really.

 

[Borgminister]

imagination remix

[Joke of course, prompted by the CAPS...]

 

[Qonos]

But since it seems that you also can't take a constructive critique toward how you come across at times, I guess our conversation is over.

Again, you assume that you are more passionate about Trek.
That's my problem, not that it could be different perspectives but that your "seniority" with Trek gives you the belief you must be more passionate about it when really there is no way for you to tell or for it to even be measured.

And if generalized comments(especialy like the one you pointed out in your post which made no sense at all in your example) are coming across wrong, I am sorry that's how you or "Yours" are taking them. But I will not stop commenting on a type of attitude that seems utterly irrational, especialy since none of those comments have been personal attacks on anyone.

And goddamnit I got dragged back into this. This conversation should have been over many post ago but I keep coming back to it. There, I listened to your critique and made my response.

Jolan Tru.

It seems that the conversation Isn't over...

I wonder then, using your logic, how is it that you can assume that the passion of other's around here with longevity, isn't greater?

Granted, physically measuring it is impossible, but does that make your belief anymore valid than theirs?

Doesn't the fact that We have differing Perspectives quantitatively mean that Our passion must also, some how, be measurably different?

Given that longevity would tend to bring about greater time to build up a stronger passion, doesn't it logically follow that those of Us who have been around longer might have a greater passion about TOS?

(mind you, though I haven't specifically said so up to this point, I have been talking about Our passion toward TOS since this movie deals directly with it.)

And why does someones opinion have to be utterly irrational just because it's different from yours?

And please take note, I did not drag you back, you chose to comment one more time.

Seems to me YOU are the one picking the fight here. Drop it, you're looking like the type of trek fan that gets the condesending sneers and looks from people. IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN A TREK FAN IT DOESN'T WORK ON SENIORITY.....

And the fact that people tenaciously cling to a tv show to give their life balance and a center belies a deeper mental problem in them. I love Star Trek. I love Transformers, hell I'm a big Fan of Greatest American Hero, but I learned long ago that the only place I can find myself is within myself. Trek has some valuable messages, but it isn't sacred.


And 3d you use the word imagination like a catch phrase which makes me doubt the depth of yours. I've been a writer, a painter, a cook and and entertainer. I have created and I have seen things created, only critics expose on how uncreative a creative persons efforts can be.

Did Jackson Pollock lack imagination? What you find unimaginative I find refreshing, because I've seen the extent of what can and has been done in the "Prime" timeline from Trek and no matter what I still think the blind adherance to trek canon is one of it's faults. The writers of TOS never worried about canon, Canon came after because fans wanted stability, because fans can be a very unimaginative lot who fear change and never strive to say "What If" IF is the most powerful word in the english language.

Old Trek canon isn't dead, it's just living with Elvis, JFK and Andy Kauffman in Hawiaii

 

[dillon3001]

Ive never understood the mind set of 'if you didnt watch since the 60's your opinion doesnt quite count as much' as whats the real difference with watching from the start 40 years ago or watching reruns/TNG when it was first out in the 80s as a small child?

I remember exactly where I was when 'Encounter at Farpoint' was on TV for the first time, and to an 8 year old living near Fresno at the time, IT WAS AWESOME

 

[M'Sharak]

...

...

Seems to me YOU are the one picking the fight here. Drop it, you're looking like the type of trek fan that gets the condesending sneers and looks from people. IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN A TREK FAN IT DOESN'T WORK ON SENIORITY.....
...

That will be enough, thank you. I'm the one who gets to tell people to drop it, not you, and for whatever it's worth, I'm senior to all of you (except maybe Dennis -- he's pretty damned old.)

Discuss the death or non-death of canon and give your opinions as you will, but this isn't a contest of "who's the better Trek fan"; I don't know where that crap came from, but it sure isn't any part of Trek and I wouldn't mind seeing it go away again. Let's knock off the personal stuff. It's not needed and I'm getting tired of seeing it.

And don't shout. I hate shouting.

 

[dillon3001]

^^^
Yes, a Romulan War based on how it was written with terrifying unseen and powerful enemies invading Federation territory could make for an excellent series. Unfortunately, Enterprise was canceled just as the writing was reaching a quality that could have done justice to it.

When i heard that that was a possibility for some of season 5 or so of ENT, it only bummed me out even more. I had to get dragged kicking and screaming by my brother to start watching it (near the end of season 3), but after that it was one my favorite Trek series.

Maybe that relates a little bit to Trek XI. Just gotta give it a chance

 

[Gepard]

And don't shout. I hate shouting.

WHAT IF IT'S SPOCK?

 

[Kaziarl]

Which is just plain bullshit.

Fanfiction and the books have been writing stories that not only adhere to continuity, but even USE continuity and things never told about them, to tell ever interesting stories.

It simply requires an IMAGINATION.

But it seems these days, such a thing is hard to come by.

Ok, first of all I love reading the books. But quite frankly they are well known for NOT following cannon. In my own writing I try to follow cannon myself, but even I have to take a few creative leaps to get the story told.

 

[archeryguy1701]

Which is just plain bullshit.

Fanfiction and the books have been writing stories that not only adhere to continuity, but even USE continuity and things never told about them, to tell ever interesting stories.

It simply requires an IMAGINATION.

But it seems these days, such a thing is hard to come by.

Because, as we all know, taking a franchise in your own direction requires a great deal less imagination than following in the footsteps of everyone to come before these guys.

 

[xortex]

So Star Trek is getting triple bypass surgery. TOS was never the problem with Trek and to render it meaningless is well meaningless.