I made popcorn and bought a six-pack.
Just leave before the make up sex.
What do you diehard TOS fans think of the new movie?
- Thread starter treklover
- Start date
Just leave before the make up sex.
number6
Vice Admiral
I hate it when Mom and Dad fight.
I made popcorn and bought a six-pack.
Just leave before the make up sex.
I brought a Flip-cam.
Well, if you want to see something that makes Trek look pretty slick by comparison, find an episode of Cimarron Strip
I've watched a couple of episodes of "Have Gun, Will Travel" and think they hold up kind of well, but it's probably just me.
I'd bet that "Balance Of Terror" could be shot today from the same script, edited so as to leave out not a single fragment of dialogue or dramatic moment, and be assembled five to eight minutes shorter than the original - it's largely a matter of the rhythm of editing and having a sense of current audience expectations. The later Trek shows suffered from the cut in length of episodes over the years from about 50 minutes for TOS to around 42 for Star Trek: Enterprise, but that has a lot to do with Trek simply not keeping up much stylistically while the rest of TV evolved past it.
What do you care; I thought you didn't like the new novels after the numbering was dropped years ago?
The novels have plenty of time to play in the sandbox until Romulus goes kabloohey. And if the leftover Romulans simply move their base of operations to New Romulus what really changes?
Well, if you want to see something that makes Trek look pretty slick by comparison, find an episode of Cimarron Strip
I've watched a couple of episodes of "Have Gun, Will Travel" and think they hold up kind of well, but it's probably just me.
I'd bet that "Balance Of Terror" could be shot today from the same script, edited so as to leave out not a single fragment of dialogue or dramatic moment, and be assembled five to eight minutes shorter than the original - it's largely a matter of the rhythm of editing and having a sense of current audience expectations. The later Trek shows suffered from the cut in length of episodes over the years from about 50 minutes for TOS to around 42 for Star Trek: Enterprise, but that has a lot to do with Trek simply not keeping up much stylistically while the rest of TV evolved past it.
I have never heard of Cimarron Strip. I have some Googling to do.
It's interesting that you mention Have Gun, Will Travel because I was thinking that a lot of Westerns seem to hold up, to me, relatively well - at least better than the dramas. But then again, that might just be me too.
And I suspect you're right about reshooting "Balance of Terror."
EDIT: It looks like Cimarron Strip would make Robau cry.
Probably so, but I was confused - I just realized that it was "High Chaparrel" I was remembering.
Probably so, but I was confused - I just realized that it was "High Chaparrel" I was remembering.
Wow. That looks... even worse.
I thought the original series was horribly dated when I first watched it in 1991... and I was only ten years old. I'm not at all surprised that a modern day adult had the same reaction. If she thought BoT was dated, you should show her some of season three's finest.
Oh, and before anyone jumps on me... I love TOS. It is my favorite TV show of all time. Hell, I love that silly old show far more than any healthy person should love a TV show.
Oh, and before anyone jumps on me... I love TOS. It is my favorite TV show of all time. Hell, I love that silly old show far more than any healthy person should love a TV show.
Leave 'em alone, boys - if they don't want to see the film, it's their choice. No skin off our noses...
Early 70's superfan, here. Three cons a year '74 through the mid eighties, fanzine-readin', Space shuttle namin' flea on the back of Lincoln Enterprises. Still have a couple of audio cassettes I recorded of the show back in the day, so I could listen to them without impugnity.
The realization that TOS was dead came to me, finally, on Dec 7, 1979 - "The Day That Will Live in Infamy." Sure, there have been some very good "TOS" movies, but they weren't the old TOS - they were the "Burger King Uniform" series. As an old dog fan, I could appreciate 'em - as long as I kept a sensible line between the "Then" and the "Now." Call those films "Oldguy Trek." Call 'em "Geezer Trek." Call 'em what you will - they were still (mostly) fun, and I (with a few glaring exceptions) enjoyed the little tidbits I got. So, Shatner waddled and toddled, and usually made his old fight with the Gorn look like something out of a "Bourne" movie. He's an old guy - cut him some slack...
The new film is the same way. TOS is still dead, and will never return. But that's OK - everything dies, and I've got the DVDs. Then and Now. Easy-peasy.
This Trek is my son's Trek, and - so far - I love what I've gotten so far - and, most importantly, so does he now. The Lightsaber has been put aside. It's no paragon, but they had a lot to establish with this one. We have a Kirk - and apparently a crew - more than worthy of the "ba-ba- BAH!BAH!BAH!-bahba bahh-bahh!" scenes... now it's up to the scriptwriters to make it worthy of the brains and heart.
Definitely Trek - and a whole lot more Trek than a lot of the Haters give it credit for.
Early 70's superfan, here. Three cons a year '74 through the mid eighties, fanzine-readin', Space shuttle namin' flea on the back of Lincoln Enterprises. Still have a couple of audio cassettes I recorded of the show back in the day, so I could listen to them without impugnity.
The realization that TOS was dead came to me, finally, on Dec 7, 1979 - "The Day That Will Live in Infamy." Sure, there have been some very good "TOS" movies, but they weren't the old TOS - they were the "Burger King Uniform" series. As an old dog fan, I could appreciate 'em - as long as I kept a sensible line between the "Then" and the "Now." Call those films "Oldguy Trek." Call 'em "Geezer Trek." Call 'em what you will - they were still (mostly) fun, and I (with a few glaring exceptions) enjoyed the little tidbits I got. So, Shatner waddled and toddled, and usually made his old fight with the Gorn look like something out of a "Bourne" movie. He's an old guy - cut him some slack...
The new film is the same way. TOS is still dead, and will never return. But that's OK - everything dies, and I've got the DVDs. Then and Now. Easy-peasy.
This Trek is my son's Trek, and - so far - I love what I've gotten so far - and, most importantly, so does he now. The Lightsaber has been put aside. It's no paragon, but they had a lot to establish with this one. We have a Kirk - and apparently a crew - more than worthy of the "ba-ba- BAH!BAH!BAH!-bahba bahh-bahh!" scenes... now it's up to the scriptwriters to make it worthy of the brains and heart.
Definitely Trek - and a whole lot more Trek than a lot of the Haters give it credit for.
I think Dennis makes some interesting points, even if I don't agree with all of them. On the other hand, Cakes488's replies are more of the "Star Trek: Love it of leave it" variety of which I do NOT agree with at all, and the cheap shots about "getting out more" are tacky and uncalled for.
Especially since Dennis is actually engaging with the issue in a reasoned manner rather than making pronuncements from on-high. I'm enjoying this last set of posts--agreeing with a bit, disagreeing with a bit, but enjoying them a lot.
Besides, anyone who knows Dennis knows that TOS is far and away his favorite Trek series. He's just not the type to be blinded by love.
Besides, anyone who knows Dennis knows that TOS is far and away his favorite Trek series. He's just not the type to be blinded by love.
Last edited:
Hope for the best, expect the worst, that's me. I'm a sucker for punishment, I keep going back even after having my low expectations filled time and again.
The destruction of Romulus matters to me because I invested in the brilliant world-building done in the Diane Duane books. It matters to me because it was a throwaway line designed to give nonsensical motivation to a throwaway villain. I think it was a bad decision on the part of the filmmakers. I've already said that I would have preferred Trek 2.0 to be a complete reboot, that way the original continuity would have been untouched. I applaud sentiments such as yours, that can take the worst of Trek, twist it, reshape it, and make it work in your personal continuity. Maybe some entertaining literature does come from it. Unfortunately, I cannot see a bad mistake as anything other than a bad mistake.
As much as I enjoyed Diane Duane's "Rihannsu" saga, TNG (and even the TOS movies) totally ignored her work - indeed, because the tie-ins have never informed the parent series (and ST III gave all the "honor and duty" stuff to the Klingons) - which is why her final volume attempted to create a bridge between "her" Romulans and TNG's Romulans.
You must also hate "Nemesis" for not portraying Remus as a more-livable world? And for killing off the entire Senate.
Blaming JJ's ST movie for somehow negating the time you invested in Duane's novels seems misguided to me. I'm sure Diane herself has not lost any sleep over the destruction of Romulus. The film hasn't destroyed Romulan society, merely the (second) planet where it evolved. It's an empire after all, with numerous worlds under its jurisdiction. Lots of Romulans weren't at home the day the planet blew up, and the Romulan fleet was out on patrol.
And the Cylons aren't chasing the survivors, either. (Though I wonder how hard it will be for the Federation to keep the Klingons from picking the RSE's bones.)
You missed the bit of my post which clarified just why I hate the destruction of Romulus...
Because it was cheap and wasteful.
As for Nemesis, there are a multitude of reasons why I hate, loathe, despise, and if prompted, readily spew bile at that waste of celluloid. The Remans (escapees from Buffy) are just one fly circling a monumental turd.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
It the motivation for the character Nero.
And how could the destruction of a fictional planet be 'cheap' and 'wasteful'? 'Tragic' and 'sad' I could understand. But this?
number6
Vice Admiral
There seems to be a lot of posturing without any real substance to back up these " mighty proclaimations."
I feel the same way. Even though her world wasn't canon, I made it my personal canon. I think she had a better grip on the Romulans than the TNG and beyond folks and she made a rich and vibrant society come alive. They weren't the cardboard characters (only sneaky and mostly evil) that were portrayed on too many TNG or DS9 eps.
Nemesis was a p.o.s. Right, some human clone is going to escape the mines. Right, he's going to convince the xenophobic Romulans to help him. And finally, he'll be able to destroy the Romulan Senate. For me, this not only required that I suspended disbelief, but expelled it altogether.
The problem is, it seemed gratuitous. Oh, let's find a motive for Nero to be pissed at Spock and come and make the Federation go kaboom if he can.
Two of the most interesting Federation societies were destroyed, one in each of the timelines. All to satisfy the need of a rather cardboard character.
I don't like it. I do like the movie, so obviously for me, I have conflicting emotions.
As for Remus, Josepha Sherman and Susan Schwartz did a dandy job of reconciling me to the existence of Remus and the Remans with Vulcan's Soul: Epiphany.
Similar threads
