Why are Trekkies so Hateful of Star Trek?

[F. King Daniel]

I'm a fan of Nemesis and think the TNG TV series is mostly awful. I certainly don't like ST'09 because it's the "cool" thing to do - I like it because I love these versions of the characters and sense of epic adventure.

 

[Greg Cox]

To be clear, this is not just a Trekkie thing. If anything, the generational wars can get even more intense in comic-book fandom.

You want to start a fight? Ask who the "real" Batgirl is, or Green Lantern, or the Flash . . .

And there are still old-school Battlestar Galactica fans who rage (pointlessly) against the more recent version.

 

[-Brett-]

I have to wonder sometimes as well, do they really love the 2009 film or do they love the idea that society isn't mocking them for the moment because JJ Abrams made Star Trek "cool?"

I find the premise that Abrams made Star Trek cool and that it's now "okay" to be a Star Trek fan to be questionable at best. Maybe the stigma against the property itself isn't as bad as it once was, but "cool" is far too strong of a term. The stigma against being a "Trekkie" remains as strong as ever.

 

[Greg Cox]

I have to wonder sometimes as well, do they really love the 2009 film or do they love the idea that society isn't mocking them for the moment because JJ Abrams made Star Trek "cool?"

I find the premise that Abrams made Star Trek cool and that it's now "okay" to be a Star Trek fan to be questionable at best. Maybe the stigma against the property itself isn't as bad as it once was, but "cool" is far too strong of a term. The stigma against being a "Trekkie" remains as strong as ever.

But how pervasive is that "stigma" in real life? I mean, I suppose it could be an issue if you're a teen in high school and worried about dating and peer pressure and fitting in, but I can't say I've ever been on the receiving end of any anti-Trekkie prejudice in the real, grown-up world. None of my neighbors, relatives, or non-Trekkie friends have ever given me a hard time about it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

To be clear, this is not just a Trekkie thing. If anything, the generational wars can get even more intense in comic-book fandom.

You want to start a fight? Ask who the "real" Batgirl is, or Green Lantern, or the Flash . . .

And there are still old-school Battlestar Galactica fans who rage (pointlessly) against the more recent version.

Gordon, Jordan and Allen.

 

[Greg Cox]

To be clear, this is not just a Trekkie thing. If anything, the generational wars can get even more intense in comic-book fandom.

You want to start a fight? Ask who the "real" Batgirl is, or Green Lantern, or the Flash . . .

And there are still old-school Battlestar Galactica fans who rage (pointlessly) against the more recent version.

Gordon, Jordan and Allen.

I'm inclined to agree, but, trust me, those are fighting words in some circles!

 

[Nerys Myk]

To be clear, this is not just a Trekkie thing. If anything, the generational wars can get even more intense in comic-book fandom.

You want to start a fight? Ask who the "real" Batgirl is, or Green Lantern, or the Flash . . .

And there are still old-school Battlestar Galactica fans who rage (pointlessly) against the more recent version.

Gordon, Jordan and Allen.

I'm inclined to agree, but, trust me, those are fighting words in some circles!

I should have gone old old school with Kane, Scott and Garrick.

 

[Greg Cox]

Gordon, Jordan and Allen.

I'm inclined to agree, but, trust me, those are fighting words in some circles!

I should have gone old old school with Kane, Scott and Garrick.

I remember at least one fan who threatened to boycott the Green Lantern movie unless they included Scott. Really!

We all have our icons . . .

 

[Saito S]

I agree, but part of my point is that fans are not just slamming new stuff, but large sections of "the good old days." Why?

Why not? Why is it ok to slam new things but not old things? I agree with J on the topic of "hate, vs. HATE", as well. A lot of what goes on here is the former. Even when people might use the word "hate", in a casual sense ("I just hated that scene where (something something). Ruined the whole episode for me!"), I think a lot of that is still just how people talk. Perhaps they are very into the conversation, but that's what this place is for; it's a Trek message board, and it's for discussing ALL Trek, not just the new stuff. Granted, sometimes it DOES cross the line into outright, actual hatred, and goes way too far. But that's the minority, and its existence shouldn't preclude us from having discussions or disagreements about aspects of Trek we don't like.

With all that in mind, why shouldn't people discuss things they didn't like about pre-Abrams Trek? People have differing opinions. A bit upthread, King Daniel mentioned that he liked Nemesis, and thought most of TNG itself was terrible. These are not exactly common viewpoints within this fandom, or on this board. I'm no stranger to being in the minority when it comes to which parts of Trek I do and don't like, myself: I respect TOS for laying the foundation of Trek, but as a TV show, I find the majority of it hilariously cheesy and overwrought (and no, I don't mean the 60s effects or sets, I mean the writing and production values) to the point of near unwatchability. Obviously, this too is a fairly uncommon viewpoint here. Am I not allowed to talk about that, simply because I'd be "slamming old Trek"? If not, why not?

Your welcome. I have a theory that most of the so-called JJ-Trek fans are not the majority of the Trek fan base. At best they are half of the fan base, and then even most of that are fair-weather fans who might have "loved" the 2009 film but turned on the 2013 film.

I have to wonder sometimes as well, do they really love the 2009 film or do they love the idea that society isn't mocking them for the moment because JJ Abrams made Star Trek "cool?" I also think most of the so-call JJ-Trek fans are more vocal online (where it's safer) then out in public, and past seeing the films and buying the DVD/Blu-ray, don't seem to show their love the same way fans of the pre-Abrams era have and still do. But I could be wrong... (Probably not.)

And right here, you prove yourself to be a huge part of your own described problem. This is just politely worded bashing. You are calling into question the motives and sincerity of everyone who likes Abrams-Trek, whether they are/were also fans of "oldTrek" or not. As Greg Cox pointed out, many people simply like the films because they... simply like the films.

The Abrams movies are only bad Trek (or bad movies, or both, however you feel about them) in your opinion. You personally don't like the direction they took. Fine. That doesn't give you the right to assume that what you want out of Trek is what everyone wants out of Trek. And to then start throwing out theories about how everyone who says they like the new films is actually just jumping on the bandwagon, or they are not "true fans", or other such nonsense, is just as bad as any "bashing" that you've been railing against.

 

[BillJ]

I love Star Trek. Though I believe that certain elements of it haven't aged very well. I think it's okay to be critical of those elements to a certain degree but believe bashing the creators/actors should be out of bounds outside the context of the shows they worked on.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

I have to wonder sometimes as well, do they really love the 2009 film or do they love the idea that society isn't mocking them for the moment because JJ Abrams made Star Trek "cool?"

I find the premise that Abrams made Star Trek cool and that it's now "okay" to be a Star Trek fan to be questionable at best. Maybe the stigma against the property itself isn't as bad as it once was, but "cool" is far too strong of a term. The stigma against being a "Trekkie" remains as strong as ever.

But how pervasive is that "stigma" in real life? I mean, I suppose it could be an issue if you're a teen in high school and worried about dating and peer pressure and fitting in, but I can't say I've ever been on the receiving end of any anti-Trekkie prejudice in the real, grown-up world. None of my neighbors, relatives, or non-Trekkie friends have ever given me a hard time about it.

I always assume people who say fans of NuTrek are relieved they are mainstream now must be quite young themselves. This is just not something that features in day to day life outside of high school.

 

[Greg Cox]

I find the premise that Abrams made Star Trek cool and that it's now "okay" to be a Star Trek fan to be questionable at best. Maybe the stigma against the property itself isn't as bad as it once was, but "cool" is far too strong of a term. The stigma against being a "Trekkie" remains as strong as ever.

But how pervasive is that "stigma" in real life? I mean, I suppose it could be an issue if you're a teen in high school and worried about dating and peer pressure and fitting in, but I can't say I've ever been on the receiving end of any anti-Trekkie prejudice in the real, grown-up world. None of my neighbors, relatives, or non-Trekkie friends have ever given me a hard time about it.

I always assume people who say fans of NuTrek are relieved they are mainstream now must be quite young themselves. This is just not something that features in day to day life outside of high school.

Exactly

Which is not to dismiss the concerns of the poor youngsters still stuck in high school. It's easy for us adults to pooh-pooh any "stigma" because our adolescent days are behind us, but not every Trek fan is that lucky!

Throwing my memory back through time, I don't remember Star Trek being an issue in high school, but that could be because I was barely aware of being there. I pretty much went through grade school with my nose in a book, oblivious to social concerns. It wasn't until I discovered fandom in college that I actually joined the human race.

In short, being a Trekkie hardly hurt my social life. It gave me one!

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Heh, yes if someone had looked down on me in high school because of Star Trek I would probably have been shocked they had noticed me enough to speak to me

 

[BigJake]

Is this how TOS fans felt when TNG came out? Or TNG fans when Voyager came out?

I doubt it. Each incarnation and project has had its detractors, and I certainly never cared much for VOY and ENT -- I'm not even overfond frankly of most of the movies post-TWOK, the TOS movie franchise was already looking tired when TSFS came out -- but the substantive difference between NuTrek and other changes in incarnation is very real. With due respect to the standard "we've seen this all before" line, I would not compare it to other fandom rows, since the property has undergone a genuine and deliberate transition to a different sub-genre.

I have a theory that most of the so-called JJ-Trek fans are not the majority of the Trek fan base. At best they are half of the fan base, and then even most of that are fair-weather fans who might have "loved" the 2009 film but turned on the 2013 film.

The perception that "Trekkies" have turned on STiD is a media oversimplification, but I certainly do see a shift in perception and increasing numbers of people starting to question the nature of the project, and not just among the hardcore fandom. (I noticed STiD turn up with surprising consistency on "Most Disappointing Movie" lists at the end of 2013, for instance.) It's ironic to see this happen in response to STiD, because it's actually much the better of Abrams' films IMO in a lot of ways -- it certainly isn't guilty of any sins that ST09 didn't commit in spades, aside from the infamous "borrowing" of elements from TWOK -- and I don't think it's about "fair-weather fans" either. It's just that the novelty of seeing Trek get the truly big-budget Big Dumb Action Movie treatment is gradually wearing off (as it was always going to do).

I have to wonder sometimes as well, do they really love the 2009 film or do they love the idea that society isn't mocking them for the moment because JJ Abrams made Star Trek "cool?"

I definitely don't think it's cricket to imply that Abramstrek fans' enthusiasm is less than genuine... and most certainly any doubts I ever had that Abrams would attract his own over-the-top fans have been laid to rest. The only real difference I can see is that NuTrek in and of itself will not likely be inspiring new generations of scientists anytime soon; it simply has nothing at all of that content or aspiration. But it may prove and probably already has proved for some a gateway drug to the older series, so there's that.

 

[BillJ]

The perception that "Trekkies" have turned on STiD is a media oversimplification, but I certainly do see a shift in perception and increasing numbers of people starting to question the nature of the project, and not just among the hardcore fandom. (I noticed STiD turn up with surprising consistency on "Most Disappointing Movie" lists at the end of 2013, for instance.)

I keep seeing certain people promoting this point-of-view yet I've not seen any great shift in perception outside of people trying to sell magazines and drive website hits.

 

[BigJake]

If I have some time later today or tomorrow, I could certainly assemble a list of the "Most Disappointing" links I mentioned (and post it on the appropriate forum). Except... I don't know that the ensuing conversation would necessarily be worth it. I'd have to think about that.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

I agree, but part of my point is that fans are not just slamming new stuff, but large sections of "the good old days." Why?

Why not? Why is it ok to slam new things but not old things? I agree with J on the topic of "hate, vs. HATE", as well. A lot of what goes on here is the former. Even when people might use the word "hate", in a casual sense ("I just hated that scene where (something something). Ruined the whole episode for me!"), I think a lot of that is still just how people talk. Perhaps they are very into the conversation, but that's what this place is for; it's a Trek message board, and it's for discussing ALL Trek, not just the new stuff. Granted, sometimes it DOES cross the line into outright, actual hatred, and goes way too far. But that's the minority, and its existence shouldn't preclude us from having discussions or disagreements about aspects of Trek we don't like.

With all that in mind, why shouldn't people discuss things they didn't like about pre-Abrams Trek? People have differing opinions. A bit upthread, King Daniel mentioned that he liked Nemesis, and thought most of TNG itself was terrible. These are not exactly common viewpoints within this fandom, or on this board. I'm no stranger to being in the minority when it comes to which parts of Trek I do and don't like, myself: I respect TOS for laying the foundation of Trek, but as a TV show, I find the majority of it hilariously cheesy and overwrought (and no, I don't mean the 60s effects or sets, I mean the writing and production values) to the point of near unwatchability. Obviously, this too is a fairly uncommon viewpoint here. Am I not allowed to talk about that, simply because I'd be "slamming old Trek"? If not, why not?

Your welcome. I have a theory that most of the so-called JJ-Trek fans are not the majority of the Trek fan base. At best they are half of the fan base, and then even most of that are fair-weather fans who might have "loved" the 2009 film but turned on the 2013 film.

I have to wonder sometimes as well, do they really love the 2009 film or do they love the idea that society isn't mocking them for the moment because JJ Abrams made Star Trek "cool?" I also think most of the so-call JJ-Trek fans are more vocal online (where it's safer) then out in public, and past seeing the films and buying the DVD/Blu-ray, don't seem to show their love the same way fans of the pre-Abrams era have and still do. But I could be wrong... (Probably not.)

And right here, you prove yourself to be a huge part of your own described problem. This is just politely worded bashing. You are calling into question the motives and sincerity of everyone who likes Abrams-Trek, whether they are/were also fans of "oldTrek" or not. As Greg Cox pointed out, many people simply like the films because they... simply like the films.

The Abrams movies are only bad Trek (or bad movies, or both, however you feel about them) in your opinion. You personally don't like the direction they took. Fine. That doesn't give you the right to assume that what you want out of Trek is what everyone wants out of Trek. And to then start throwing out theories about how everyone who says they like the new films is actually just jumping on the bandwagon, or they are not "true fans", or other such nonsense, is just as bad as any "bashing" that you've been railing against.

THIS.

Also, I wish that said fans would just stick to the old shows and movies (as well as the fan movies/shows) instead of seeing the new movies and constantly bitching about them. lest everybody forget, this is an action-adventure space opera with a veneer of sci-fi, not the totality of serious sci-fi (although it has a supporter who's a literary sci-fi writer.)

 

[BigJake]

Also, I wish that said fans would just stick to the old shows and movies (as well as the fan movies/shows) instead of seeing the new movies and constantly bitching about them.

No. People will continue watching new content and will continue to form their own opinions about it. Suck it up.

 

[BillJ]

I love when people have differing opinions. I hate when those differing opinions are presented as the "truth". Some people hate the Abrams films, some people love them. Some people hate Voyager, some love it. Every version has it lovers and haters.

 

[Timewalker]

It's not just Trekkies who are like this. I've seen it a lot with Whovians and other fan groups.

Most Whovians have very definite opinions on which Doctor is their favorite, and which Companion. From my observations on this forum, there's more acrimony over the actual number of regenerations the Doctor has undergone, do the Doctors need to be "renumbered," and how old is he, than some of the sorts of things other fans talk about (ie. actors' personal lives).

Some of those discussions include the frustration of Classic Who fans (Doctors 1-8) vs Modern Who/nuWho fans (Doctors 8.5, aka the War Doctor - Doctor whatever-the-number-is, played by Peter Capaldi).

The Whovian discussions get rather emphatic at times, but I've yet to see any Who-related discussion get so vicious and meanly personal as some of the Star Trek ones have.

Nothing's changed, milojthatch. Every incarnation of Trek has sprouted passionate detractors going all the way back to The Motion Picture - the only difference is which side of the fence you find yourself on now.

You might find this thread of interest, where some negative Wrath of Khan reviews from Interstat in '82/'83 had few names swapped around by Opus (Harve Bennett becomes J.J. Abrams, for example) and read almost exactly like the negative Into Darkness comments you find here on the BBS and elsewhere (Bennett doesn't like or understand Trek, it's a shallow Star Wars shoot-em-up, killing Spock was hack writing, the characterizations are terrible etc). I'm afraid this has all happened before and it will happen again - but now thanks to the internet, it's much easier to complain. No more writing letters, posting them and getting it published by the editor of a letterzine - just tap away on your keyboard or phone and it's there for all to see in less than a second.

EDIT: HERE is one of the fanlore.org pages with the Interstat letters.

I was an Interstat subscriber for awhile, and it was fascinating to follow some of the arguments.

OP you're part of the problem. You complain about 'haters', then admit you are one. You complain about STV haters calling them "silly" but say similar negative things about JJ-Trek.

The problem is people like you. And me. If you think its a problem, then stop complaining about JJ Trek.

If I understand correctly, the OP wanted to explore the idea of hating some aspect or other of fandom. It's hard to do that without giving examples.

And there are still old-school Battlestar Galactica fans who rage (pointlessly) against the more recent version.

Why is it pointless to say I thought nuBSG was ridiculous?

You might as well say it's "pointless" to give an opinion on anything you don't like - some TV show or movie, a book, or your least favorite green vegetable.