Where are we right now??

[F. King Daniel]

Ok there's no way you can see that as directly comparable.

First of all, Cardassia was not wiped off the face of the galaxy. The Cardassian homeworld is still intact and Cardassians will still live there. Second of all, as I've explained before, Cardassia was DS9's baby. The writers of DS9 spent 7 years fleshing out that whole region of space, they earned the right to bring their stories to a meaningfulconclusion. Now if in the DS9 finale we saw Troi coming to visit DS9 in a shuttle and it exploded, that would be a different matter, albeit hilarious.

They're both massive changes to the status quo. There may be more Cardassians than Romulans left, but they've still gone from a major galactic power to a zero in a heartbeat. And what happened after this massive change? Nothing.

"Earned the right" is still a complete joke. Star Trek was dead, JJ Abrams's team brought it back successfully, with a hugely entertaining movie. In doing so, they've most certainly earned the right to do what they want! To say otherwise is elitist crap.

 

[You_Will_Fail]

They're both massive changes to the status quo. There may be more Cardassians than Romulans left, but they've still gone from a major galactic power to a zero in a heartbeat. And what happened after this massive change? Nothing.

"Earned the right" is still a complete joke. Star Trek was dead, JJ Abrams's team brought it back successfully, with a hugely entertaining movie. In doing so, they've most certainly earned the right to do what they want! To say otherwise is elitist crap.

Deep Space Nine was a show whose very concept meant that it would be telling the story of Bajor/Cardassia/The Wormhole. Everything they did on the show was to do with their own show and the stories they were telling.
Nu-trek blew up Romulus in a whole other universe than the one they're even involving itself with in this series of movies.

I mean, how much more simply can this be put? What is up that you cannot see the difference here?

 

[cooleddie74]

"Earned the right" is still a complete joke. Star Trek was dead, JJ Abrams's team brought it back successfully, with a hugely entertaining movie. In doing so, they've most certainly earned the right to do what they want!

I'd give you a gold medal and kiss you if I could get away with it. Kudos.

The $259 million domestic box office take for the first movie gave Paramount and Abrams both the justification and chance to make another film, and since we're dealing with a different timeline and characters with slightly different life experiences then the script can say and do whatever it wants, even if it runs contrary to what the characters said or did in the TOS timeline. This isn't OUR movie or franchise no matter how much of our lives we've invested in it. It does not exist in the realm of public domain. It is a business, and if that business stops making money and tanks it will go the way of the dinosaur and the dodo...and I for one do not want to see the entire TREK franchise die off because the filmmakers pandered to every nitpicky complaint from a certain percentage of the fanbase and gave us films that did poorly at the box office or bombed in the Nielsen ratings.

 

[Greg Cox]

I think anyone who says it did feel like Trek to them is probably deluding themselves.

Oh Lord, not the "deluding themselves" thing again.

Can we just accept that fans of good will, who all know and care about STAR TREK, can disagree about the reboot without asserting that anybody who feels otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about or has "talked themselves into believing it."

Look, we get it. To you, it's not STAR TREK if it's set in a different universe without all the old continuity. Fair enough. But as I've tried to explain repeatedly, and as this thread would seem to demonstrate, not everybody regards this as the unforgivable deal-breaker that you do.

I say this politely: can you please stop trying to read our minds and telling us what our "true feelings" are?

Here's a crazy idea: just take me at my word that the new movie sure felt like Star Trek to this lifelong Trekkie . . .

 

[You_Will_Fail]

This isn't OUR movie or franchise no matter how much of our lives we've invested in it. It does not exist in the realm of public domain.

What on earth does that have to do with anything? You made this post to tell me that I have no creative control over Star Trek? Are you under the impression I think otherwise?

 

[You_Will_Fail]

I say this politely: can you please stop trying to read our minds and tell us what we really feel? Here's a crazy idea: just take me at my word that the new movie sure felt like Star Trek to this lifelong Trekkie . . .

If I took my neighbor at her word when she answered the door after a disturbance and told me she was "fine", she'd be chopped up into pieces right now instead of sucking my toes.

 

[cooleddie74]

This isn't OUR movie or franchise no matter how much of our lives we've invested in it. It does not exist in the realm of public domain.

What on earth does that have to do with anything? You made this post to tell me that I have no creative control over Star Trek? Are you under the impression I think otherwise?

No. Just making a statement some of the more hardcore and emotionally-involved fans on both sides of the issue seem to forget at times. In the end, neither my vision, tastes and preferences in TREK nor yours matter a hill of beans to the studio. It's whether it makes money or not and is good business for them. Like the facts or not, TREK post-DS9 was on a downhill slalom towards irrelevancy and a coma if not death. The creators revived it with the alternate timeline idea and using new sets, costumes and actors. We can complain all we like, but in the end the producers will do what they feel is best for the franchise whether we disagree with their decisions or not. TREK, like it or not, is a commodity. A creative, intelligent commodity...but alas, just a commodity.

 

[You_Will_Fail]

They won't necessarily do what's best for the franchise, only what's best for their quarterly earnings reports. And no, in my opinion, they're not completely connected

 

[Greg Cox]

I say this politely: can you please stop trying to read our minds and tell us what we really feel? Here's a crazy idea: just take me at my word that the new movie sure felt like Star Trek to this lifelong Trekkie . . .

If I took my neighbor at her word when she answered the door after a disturbance and told me she was "fine", she'd be chopped up into pieces right now instead of sucking my toes.

Huh?

Are you implying that a crazed axe murderer is standing behind me, forcing me to say that rebooting Star Trek is fine with me?

Or maybe I just have a different opinion.

 

[cooleddie74]

They won't necessarily do what's best for the franchise, only what's best for their quarterly earnings reports.

The risk we as fans will have to take. Could they theoretically end up making a complete and utter mess of things? Sure, but anybody in the post-Berman and Braga era could make a mess of things by making the wrong decisions with the franchise. Even if TREK 2009 had B&B at the helm and featured Jean-Luc Picard and the Enterprise-E there's no guarantee it would have been a success, and another big TREK movie flop could have torpedoed the entire franchise for good. So just leaving the same producers, writers and actors in place was no guarantee of sunshine and rainbows, either.

 

[You_Will_Fail]

Maybe you know that if you begin to accept that nu-Trek isn't really the direction you wanted to see Trek go in, you'll feel like some sort of uncool trek purist nerd, but you wanna be hip and down with the kids or whatever so keep on believing that nu-trek is great and totally what the franchise needed. I mean it made $257 million at the box office, so it must be awesome right? Let's not mention Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen grossed $402 million that same year.

Its totally easier to like things that are popular than be against them in the end.

 

[cooleddie74]

Its totally easier to like things that are popular than be against them in the end.

I like TREK 2009 because, in my honest opinion, it is a very good film. I could care less if it were popular or made a quarter of a billion dollars at the box office. Success is irrelevant in this situation. The massive box office was simply the cherry on the sundae, nothing more...and its runaway financial success kept the TREK franchise alive and breathing. It was a happy and pleasant side effect.

 

[Nerys Myk]

How about I like things because I actually like them? Heck, I'm a fan of Enterprise. It rarely gets more unpopular than that in these parts.

 

[Greg Cox]

Maybe you know that if you begin to accept that nu-Trek isn't really the direction you wanted to see Trek go in, you'll feel like some sort of uncool trek purist nerd, but you wanna be hip and down with the kids or whatever so keep on believing that nu-trek is great and totally what the franchise needed. .

There you go again, implying that anyone who disagrees with you on this has some sort of dubious ulterior motive and can't really believe what they're saying.

Do you get that, to put it mildly, this seems to show a certain lack of respect for other people's opinions?

We're not all deluded or lying to ourselves just because we don't feel the same way you do.

(And, no, an axe murderer is not forcing me to type this!)

 

[You_Will_Fail]

Maybe its just Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Someone is holding you captive?

 

[Misfit Toy]

Maybe you know that if you begin to accept that nu-Trek isn't really the direction you wanted to see Trek go in, you'll feel like some sort of uncool trek purist nerd, but you wanna be hip and down with the kids or whatever so keep on believing that nu-trek is great and totally what the franchise needed. I mean it made $257 million at the box office, so it must be awesome right? Let's not mention Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen grossed $402 million that same year.

Its totally easier to like things that are popular than be against them in the end.

Wow - can you not accept that different people can enjoy different things? Your opinion carries NO more weight than anyone else's. If you can't get past that, then your experience with TrekBBS (and the internet as a whole) will be very disappointing.

 

[F. King Daniel]

They're both massive changes to the status quo. There may be more Cardassians than Romulans left, but they've still gone from a major galactic power to a zero in a heartbeat. And what happened after this massive change? Nothing.

"Earned the right" is still a complete joke. Star Trek was dead, JJ Abrams's team brought it back successfully, with a hugely entertaining movie. In doing so, they've most certainly earned the right to do what they want! To say otherwise is elitist crap.

Deep Space Nine was a show whose very concept meant that it would be telling the story of Bajor/Cardassia/The Wormhole. Everything they did on the show was to do with their own show and the stories they were telling.
Nu-trek blew up Romulus in a whole other universe than the one they're even involving itself with in this series of movies.

I mean, how much more simply can this be put? What is up that you cannot see the difference here?

The film does concern itself with the Prime universe. Old Spock and Nero are from there. Romulus' destruction was the catalyst for the whole movie and new timeline.

It's your comparison that's flawed. You're seeing it as a random, unrelated Family Guy skit wheras it was the pivotal moment that set everything in motion. You're seeing the two timelines as totally seperate, wheras it's all the same fictional Star Trek world.

 

[You_Will_Fail]

I can accept that different people enjoy different things. Its just I feel people sometimes aren't honest with themselves when it comes to what they *really* feel.

Someone is holding you captive?

I was referring to the people who *claim* they have no problem with nu-Trek.

 

[cooleddie74]

Maybe its just Stockholm Syndrome.

No. It's having an open mind about a new cast, costumes, sets and timeline and managing to ignore the many catcalls of failure at the time to enjoy a very good and entertaining movie.

And I *am* being honest with myself regarding my feelings about nuTrek. I honestly, genuinely like it. Why is that so offensive? And like I stated earlier, no...I don't think nuTrek is as good as TOS. But I don't think a lot of TREK is as good as the original series...some of it not even by a longshot.