When was new better?
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Well, before I saw the film, I thought that in all likelihood Star Trek (2009) was going to be something that I did not enjoy sitting through. I felt that way right up until the opening moments of the film when I heard the TOS viewscreen chirp. Except it wasn't the same ol' chirp. It had a slightly different rhythm that suggested it might even be something like pings of sonar. I thought, My God! What a great take on that old concept! Only a few seconds had passed and I was greatly impressed. Then, I sat back with a big smile on my face and really enjoyed the next two hours. I was even bummed when it was over.
I feel that I had good reason to be pessimistic. I cannot tolerate modern successful blockbusters like Bayformers, and I was truly disappointed with Jackson's Lord of the Rings. But later, after Star Trek, I saw Cloverfield, which I thoroughly enjoyed; if I had seen that before Star Trek, perhaps I would have been somewhat less worried. That just went to show me that not everything coming out of Hollywood today is necessarily awful. Another example: I really, really enjoyed Captain America.
Now, Star Trek (2009) is not a perfect film. But then again, when has there ever been a perfect Star Trek film? I have to go all the way back to 1982 to find a Star Trek film that I like better than Star Trek (2009). So, I've been accepting things for years that were below the standard of what was delivered in 2009. Or not. I mean, there are some Star Trek films that I just can't stand.
Another set of disappointments for me are the Star Wars prequels. I've seen Star Wars (1977/ANH) over a thousand times by now I'm sure, and while I gave them a chance, the prequels are all markedly inferior to both ANH and TESB. But then again, I was disappointed with Return of the Jedi. On the other hand, I'm really getting into The Clone Wars.
New is not necessarily better. But without new, you have no chance of better. Without new, you have no chance of anything beyond what you know. Life with just reruns is like Merlin trapped in his "enchanted slumber" in Excalibur. It's tragic in the Shakespearian sense.
I admire the arts, I study them, and I support them with my patronage. I have aspirations someday of creating art displayed to the public. So, I have to encourage the creation of new art. If I don't like something I see, those are the breaks; that's the chance taken. But if I do like what I see (or hear), my life is enriched because something memorable has been added to it that was not there before, that has affected and moved me. That's the hope. To receive that enrichment, you have to be open to it.
I feel that I had good reason to be pessimistic. I cannot tolerate modern successful blockbusters like Bayformers, and I was truly disappointed with Jackson's Lord of the Rings. But later, after Star Trek, I saw Cloverfield, which I thoroughly enjoyed; if I had seen that before Star Trek, perhaps I would have been somewhat less worried. That just went to show me that not everything coming out of Hollywood today is necessarily awful. Another example: I really, really enjoyed Captain America.
Now, Star Trek (2009) is not a perfect film. But then again, when has there ever been a perfect Star Trek film? I have to go all the way back to 1982 to find a Star Trek film that I like better than Star Trek (2009). So, I've been accepting things for years that were below the standard of what was delivered in 2009. Or not. I mean, there are some Star Trek films that I just can't stand.
Another set of disappointments for me are the Star Wars prequels. I've seen Star Wars (1977/ANH) over a thousand times by now I'm sure, and while I gave them a chance, the prequels are all markedly inferior to both ANH and TESB. But then again, I was disappointed with Return of the Jedi. On the other hand, I'm really getting into The Clone Wars.
New is not necessarily better. But without new, you have no chance of better. Without new, you have no chance of anything beyond what you know. Life with just reruns is like Merlin trapped in his "enchanted slumber" in Excalibur. It's tragic in the Shakespearian sense.
I admire the arts, I study them, and I support them with my patronage. I have aspirations someday of creating art displayed to the public. So, I have to encourage the creation of new art. If I don't like something I see, those are the breaks; that's the chance taken. But if I do like what I see (or hear), my life is enriched because something memorable has been added to it that was not there before, that has affected and moved me. That's the hope. To receive that enrichment, you have to be open to it.
nuBSG, for one...
For me it wasn't better it was just bad in a different way.
I liked the ship, but it just wasn't the Enterprise... all right I get the idea that technology in the late 20th/early 21st Century was/is outstripping the tech we see in Star Trek, and kids today think it's hilariously outdated, I just didn't feel "at home" with all the bright lights and glass... IMO Enterprise [the TV series] made a better effort at re-imagining the look of the future.
Wonder Woman underwent some Epic Fail changes for the [canned] new TV series...
Sometimes it's best to stay with what works the best.
Did they ever catch the guy?
One can like or dislike a design or a story, but talking about "accepting it" is literally nonsense. Like anything else in the world, it exists. No one gets to vote on that.
You can be really ridiculous sometimes the way you try to pick apart every little thing someone might say in order to make yourself look superior. It's bloody obvious that when someone says they can't accept something it's a personal opinion and not an assertion of fact.
As a sci-fi fan, I have had a lifelong interest in the future. This includes, I guess, both seeing it happen and then wondering what the hell we're going to get next. Nostalgia and backwards looking is all well and good, so long as I remember things seldom were as good as mey memory would have it (and even my memory can be pretty critical), but I'm always looking forward to plonking down and seeing something new. The sometimes reflexive resentment towards the future or new things I see in sci-fi fandom continue to fail to make any sense to me. Hatred of CGI because it is CGI, for example, is kind of unusual here.
Now, 'new' is relative. Obviously most sci-fi we get in media is quite frequently either part of an existing franchise - like J.J. Abrams' Star Trek - or a basically derivative concept - like Joss Whedon's Firefly (the space western is at least as old as the 1930s).
What matters first and foremost is neither their originality nor the manner of their relationship to past sci-fi products - although both can matter a great deal to me if I care about such things - but whether or not the product, of itself, is any good.
Both Abrams' Star Trek and Firefly really were rather good.
What do I want, media-wise?
I guess more blockbusters like Avatar. More surreal landscaes of the inner eye, in cinemas. And maybe some more good TV serials, not a lot on that excite me much (just finished Falling Skies's first season - wasn't bad overall, so there's that.)
Onward, etc.
Now, 'new' is relative. Obviously most sci-fi we get in media is quite frequently either part of an existing franchise - like J.J. Abrams' Star Trek - or a basically derivative concept - like Joss Whedon's Firefly (the space western is at least as old as the 1930s).
What matters first and foremost is neither their originality nor the manner of their relationship to past sci-fi products - although both can matter a great deal to me if I care about such things - but whether or not the product, of itself, is any good.
Both Abrams' Star Trek and Firefly really were rather good.
What do I want, media-wise?
I guess more blockbusters like Avatar. More surreal landscaes of the inner eye, in cinemas. And maybe some more good TV serials, not a lot on that excite me much (just finished Falling Skies's first season - wasn't bad overall, so there's that.)
Onward, etc.
Sorry - don't get you.
Did you catch the guy who "bummed" you...
(makes sense if you realise that in certain parts of the world a bum is your butt area)
^ It could have been consensual
Oh. Aha, one of my Canadian friends says that. We don't say that here, so I didn't have any idea, and didn't put it together. (I meant it more in the sense of, Whoa! Bummer, dude!)
But yeah, OK....
No, I didn't catch the pervert....He was wearing a raincoat too.
Like it or not, change is with us...some things will be accepted by younger audiences and much will not. Older audiences have a harder time with it. Sometimes you have to understand why its done rather than liking the end result. Personally I like seeing different interpretations of the same entertainment. The oddest thing about "change" in reference to SF fans is...they have a really hard time accepting change in what is supposed to be a literature/genre of ideas.
As for listing new things I like better than the old, the list is almost endless. One of my least popular opinions seems to be for the remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still". Its better in almost every aspect from concept, writing, acting, art design, special FX, but people are so stuck on the perception of the original being a classic they can't get past it.
RAMA
As for listing new things I like better than the old, the list is almost endless. One of my least popular opinions seems to be for the remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still". Its better in almost every aspect from concept, writing, acting, art design, special FX, but people are so stuck on the perception of the original being a classic they can't get past it.
RAMA
Similar threads
