What are your thoughts about seeing the prime universe again?

[fireproof78]

The JJ films appeals to the short attention span people because they like the FX fix and aren't interested in much of a plot or character development. The JJ films are clogged with FX grafted over lazy writing .i.e NuSpock parodying OldKirk with the Kahn yell. (I do think the Pegg one is better because the relationships have finally become more significant)

The TOS bores the short attention span people because the films go at a normal movie pace - at least after TMP. And no, they aren't "cerebral", lol, but they are emotionally intense as our our heroes are tested in some profound and significant ways. They are immense people who have developed decades of services behind them.

There are other reasons people don't like TOS than "short attention span."

There are other reasons that people like Kelvin films than "FX and lazy writing."

I'm not delivering a lecture to the APA. I'm posting to readers of a Star Trek forum. LOL.

So inaccuracies are fine if not delivered before the appropriate body?

I don't understand this type of attitude.

 

[JWPlatt]

...I do think the Pegg one is better because the relationships have finally become more significant.

Agreed!

 

[JWPlatt]

So inaccuracies are fine if not delivered before the appropriate body?

I suggest taking up the use of "ADD," which I repeated to retain the context, with WB2 to understand further. I got the point. So would anyone who understands common, albeit imprecise, usage.

 

[fireproof78]

I suggest taking up the use of "ADD" with WB2 to understand further. I got the point. So would anyone who understands common, albeit imprecise, usage.

I'll bear that in mind.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

The JJ films appeals to the short attention span people because they like the FX fix and aren't interested in much of a plot or character development.

I really like the new films, particularly STID and Beyond, because of what they have to say about our approach to terrorism and keeping true to our values (STID) and the effects of war and abandoning soldiers after their service (Beyond). Also they're fun movies. But as we all know, Trekkies aren't allowed to have fun.

The TOS bores the short attention span people because the films go at a normal movie pace - at least after TMP. And no, they aren't "cerebral", lol, but they are emotionally intense as our our heroes are tested in some profound and significant ways. They are immense people who have developed decades of services behind them.

I'm one of those young 20-something millennial short-attention-span "mobile culture" Trekkies and TOS is my favorite Trek, of all the series. So...

I'm not delivering a lecture to the APA. I'm posting to readers of a Star Trek forum.

ADD is an actual medical condition -- it affects real people who have actual hardships and struggles because of it. And they don't appreciate their condition being cheapened as a derogatory synonym for spacey or inattentive. (My gf was diagnosed with ADD when she was a kid). A friend of mine who has OCD feels similarly when people who have mundane habits say they are "so OCD." So, it's just a matter of choosing your words carefully. Ya know, being thoughtful and compassionate, like Ye Olde Trek.

 

[JWPlatt]

Sorry about forgetting to publish a trigger warning first.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

Sorry about forgetting to publish a trigger warning first.

I'm fine. It doesn't affect me personally because I'm not affected by those conditions. I just think people should be thoughtful and considerate.

And I find it hilarious how some Trekkies go on and on about the importance of the message of Star Trek and then roll their eyes at "political correctness" and "trigger warnings" and "SJWs." Like, what message is that again? LOL

 

[mos6507]

Trek has become a victim of its own success in the sense that I don't think you can draw any universal generalizations about Trek fans anymore. Maybe in the distant past you could say they were left-leaning autistic socialists, but now I've seen plenty of evidence of more right-wing-focused Trek fans. It doesn't matter if most of the body of Trek is left-leaning. People find something that attracts them and ignore/deny/rationalize the rest. As such, saying things like "ADD" or anti-PC has no more meaning than trying to apply these labels to the general public. So all it does is invite a barrage of "hey, I'm not [insert this epithet here]!"

 

[Paradise City]

I really like the new films, particularly STID and Beyond, because of what they have to say about our approach to terrorism and keeping true to our values (STID) and the effects of war and abandoning soldiers after their service (Beyond). Also they're fun movies. But as we all know, Trekkies aren't allowed to have fun.


I'm one of those young 20-something millennial short-attention-span "mobile culture" Trekkies and TOS is my favorite Trek, of all the series. So...


ADD is an actual medical condition -- it affects real people who have actual hardships and struggles because of it. And they don't appreciate their condition being cheapened as a derogatory synonym for spacey or inattentive. (My gf was diagnosed with ADD when she was a kid). A friend of mine who has OCD feels similarly when people who have mundane habits say they are "so OCD." So, it's just a matter of choosing your words carefully. Ya know, being thoughtful and compassionate, like Ye Olde Trek.

They don't have much to say on terrorism. CumberKahn goes on some terrorist spree in revenge against Marcus. Marcus plots some false flag thing and starts gratuitously torturing the Enterprise. There's no real commentary there, just a very mangled plot with some implausible characterizations that proceeds at a break neck speed. The first two aren't fun movies, they are virtually unwatchable. .

My reference to short attention span people is merely mild satire. I don't indulge people who's threshold for light ribbing is so low they can't abide mild satire. But the reality is I think you know perfectly well my remarks don't impact upon anyone, you're just using that as the rhetorical weapon at hand to fend me off.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm fine. It doesn't affect me personally because I'm not affected by those conditions. I just think people should be thoughtful and considerate.

And I find it hilarious how some Trekkies go on and on about the importance of the message of Star Trek and then roll their eyes at "political correctness" and "trigger warnings" and "SJWs." Like, what message is that again? LOL

I tend to agree. How is a meaningful discussion supposed to happen if stereotypes still abound?

But, I honestly only spoke up because I was concerned that a stereotype was being perpetuated.

They don't have much to say on terrorism. CumberKahn goes on some terrorist spree in revenge for Marcus. Marcus plots some false flag thing and starts gratuitously torturing the Enterprise. There's no real commentary there, just a very mangled plot with some implausible characterizations that proceeds at a break neck speed. The first two aren't fun movies, they are virtually unwatchable. .

My reference to short attention span people is merely mild satire. I don't indulge people who's threshold for light ribbing is so low they can't abide mild satire. But the reality is I think you know perfectly well my remarks don't impact upon anyone, you're just using that as the rhetorical weapon at hand to fend me off.

How can anyone know it's in jest?

 

[Balok's Decoy]

They don't have much to say on terrorism. CumberKahn goes on some terrorist spree in revenge against Marcus. Marcus plots some false flag thing and starts gratuitously torturing the Enterprise. There's no real commentary there, just a very mangled plot with some implausible characterizations that proceeds at a break neck speed. The first two aren't fun movies, they are virtually unwatchable. .

My reference to short attention span people is merely mild satire. I don't indulge people who's threshold for light ribbing is so low they can't abide mild satire. But the reality is I think you know perfectly well my remarks don't impact upon anyone, you're just using that as the rhetorical weapon at hand to fend me off.

It's really not worth my time debating the merits of the Kelvin Timeline because people have Very Strong Feelings about them, and it always ends up being two people talking at each other. One of the more disappointing aspects of Trek fandom these days.

Also not worth trying to explain why people should avoid generalizations or insensitive word choices that could make a person feel like shit, because hey, if you haven't learned why that's a nice thing to do by now...

 

[Kemaiku]

A friend of mine who has OCD feels similarly when people who have mundane habits say they are "so OCD." So, it's just a matter of choosing your words carefully. Ya know, being thoughtful and compassionate, like Ye Olde Trek.

Whereas I have clinical OCD and don't mind people using the phrase.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

Whereas I have clinical OCD and don't mind people using the phrase.

Yes, let's defer to the people who don't care and ignore the people who do.

 

[Ralphis]

Part of me had kind of hoped they would set the new show in it's own third timeline, apart from the Original and Kelvin Timelines, just to give it some freedom. But for the most part I'm pretty stoked about it. I always wanted to see the TOS era though the eyes of a different crew, and it looks like that's what we'll get... in a roundabout way.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

Part of me had kind of hoped they would set the new show in it's own third timeline, apart from the Original and Kelvin Timelines, just to give it some freedom. But for the most part I'm pretty stoked about it. I always wanted to see the TOS era though the eyes of a different crew, and it looks like that's what we'll get... in a roundabout way.

Huh, I'd not considered that option. In this third timeline, would it contain all the same characters, just alternate versions (a la Kelvin)? How different do you see it?

 

[Ralphis]

Huh, I'd not considered that option. In this third timeline, would it contain all the same characters, just alternate versions (a la Kelvin)? How different do you see it?

I've always loved the TNG episode Parallels where it established that there's already an infinite number of realities that exist in the Star Trek universe, so my thought was to further explore one of those quantum realities.

I had envisioned something pretty close to the Original Timeline in regards to what major events have occurred and will occur, but with modernized aesthetics (ship, bridge, etc). However, there would be freedom to diverge wherever the show-runners saw fit. Nothing too major (like Vulcan imploding), but if it works better for their story, so be it. Have some fun and be creative, but at the same time make it feel familiar.

I know, I know, mush easier said than done and probably not practical. That's why I'm writing posts on the innerwebs and not in the writers' room.

But, again, I'm very acceptive and ecstatic for a return to the Original Timeline.

 

[drt]

Part of me had kind of hoped they would set the new show in it's own third timeline, apart from the Original and Kelvin Timelines, just to give it some freedom.

Not only the freedom, but Star Trek still has one foot in the sixties' idea of the future. I'd be curious to see what a completely rebooted version might look like.

But for the most part I'm pretty stoked about it. I always wanted to see the TOS era though the eyes of a different crew, and it looks like that's what we'll get... in a roundabout way.

Pretty much where I land - when the new series was announced, I thought that we were most likely to get another Kirk /Spock reboot, this is probably the next best thing in my mind.

 

[Rahul]

I really like the new films, particularly STID and Beyond, because of what they have to say about our approach to terrorism and keeping true to our values (STID) and the effects of war and abandoning soldiers after their service (Beyond). Also they're fun movies. But as we all know, Trekkies aren't allowed to have fun.


I'm one of those young 20-something millennial short-attention-span "mobile culture" Trekkies and TOS is my favorite Trek, of all the series. So...


ADD is an actual medical condition -- it affects real people who have actual hardships and struggles because of it. And they don't appreciate their condition being cheapened as a derogatory synonym for spacey or inattentive. (My gf was diagnosed with ADD when she was a kid). A friend of mine who has OCD feels similarly when people who have mundane habits say they are "so OCD." So, it's just a matter of choosing your words carefully. Ya know, being thoughtful and compassionate, like Ye Olde Trek.

You know what? I don't like the nuTrek movies very much. But I love your attitude.

I think the JJ. Abrams movie are mostly fluff, bland entertainment pieces, that I wouldn't have strong opinions for if I wouldn't have such an intense dislike for Robert Orci. I hate his 9/11-truther conspiracy shit that he tries to sneak in into every movie he writes for, from Transformers to Star Trek, his dumb dialogue, and how non-chalantly everyone just reacted to the Holocaust-level like extinction of the Vulcans, being sad for a single scene, and then forgetting about it, cracking a joke, smiling, and sailing into the sunset.

That being said: They are entertaining movies. I think the "short attention span"/ADD-editing is one of their major strenghts. And they have many admirable qualities, from the acting, the characters, the jokes, the visuals,... They are entertaining.

I don't like them. But that's my personal taste. Don't ever let anyone tell you you shouldn't like them! I like a lot of things many other people don't like. Episode I for example. I was a child when I saw it. I had a great time. I will forever like this movie. People hating it? Yeah, some of the criticism is actually very valid, there a many points where the movie has failings. Does it stop my enjoyment of it? Nope. Not a little bit.

Never let other people tell you what you should like or not like. If they have valid points for disliking something? Accept them. Put them down under "reasons other people don't like stuff", and accept there is more than one valid viewpoint of a thing. If somebody tells you it's stupid, lazy, and nobody should like it? Ignore that.

So yeah. From a "not-fan-of-nuTrek" to a fan of nuTrek: Don't stop liking those movies

 

[WB2]

I find the new movies being ADD movies both the story, jumping straight into action, but also the pacing, the short cuts, the everything has to be fast fast fast quick quick fast.

My two fav trek movies are TSFS because of its heavy emotional investment, and TMP for it's very SCI FI story. There is nothing quick , fast or as I put it ADD about them. Thats the universe I like and want to go back to.

Saying that oh First Contact was an action movie.. Fine, it was, but the action had a point and a 7 year build up.

 

[Mudd]

You know what's "lazy writing?" Posting commentary chock full of imappropriate overly familiar cliches - like calling a movie "ADD" or repeating a tired joke about lens flares. That sort of thing is unimaginative, unobservant, and lazy in the extreme.