Delta1 said:
I don't care all that much. I was interested in the casting of the Spocks, but every bit of news, every leak, every coy "No comment" from Orci, and even the teaser itself have left me cold. I'm getting the feeling that what JJ sees in Trek--as valid that may be--is not what I see in it. I know teaser != trailer, haven't seen the finished film, yadda yadda yaddda, but going just from what I've seen in the teaser, he's making a big deal about "mankind in space." Tracking in JFK, Neil Armstrong, and NASA countdowns like the aural equivalent of the Enterprise main title graphics. That doesn't do much for me. It's Star Trek; space travel is fairly mundane. Tying it in to real life aerospace endeavors has always felt fake and hollow to me, kind of like saying, "Look how important we are!" If we see so far apart on that point, where else would my inclinations diverge from JJ's?
You and I interpreted the trailer in two completely different ways. I didn't see it at all as trying to tie the voyages of the Enterprise into a historical chain of space exploration. I think it's more placing "Space, the final frontier" into a context of iconic 60s space-related statements/soundbytes, etc. Those words are part of our national culture - lots of non-Trek fans can probably identify where the phrase comes from.
I saw it as a way to reinforce the fact that Trek was there 40 year ago, and it's coming back in a big way. And in that context, I found it exciting.
It's perhaps a fine-hair distinction, but I think it makes a difference.
After the last 10 years of Trek - VOY, ENT, the dreadful TNG movies and untold hours of meaningless Treknobabble - I'm more than ready for a new vision and a new style.
I don't want Trek to become a clone of the new BSG or some of the other shows. But as long as this movie captures the essence of the characters and harnesses the elements of Trek that matter, I'll be satisfied.
I'm past caring whether the ship and sets and uniforms look exactly like they did on TOS. If this is a pure reboot (which I don't think it will be) - fine. That may be what we need.
There are people out there who disown the third season of TOS because Roddenberry wasn't involved. In fact, the old, original Xeroxed copies of the Star Trek Condordance even note lots of inconsistencies in the third season. So some people don't think that's Trek.
Lots of fans hated TMP when it came out because they didn't think it captured the spirit of TOS and the characters, so that's not Trek. Some people reject the later TOS movies because Roddenberry wasn't involved, or they saw it as too militaristic or whatever.
It's simply impossible that ANY Trek movie - even if it starred the original cast, was written by Roddenberry and Fontana, directed by Marc Daniels and designed by Matt Jeffries - would satisfy everyone.
What fascinates me is all the people who are so down on this movie before it's even wrapped principal photography. People who were down on it when Abrams was announced as the director.
Where's that open-mindedness that Trek was always trying to teach us about? Why can't we simply wait for the movie to come out, then judge it based on what it actually is, rather than our speculation about what it might be like.
