Will Trek XI repel old fans?

[Amaris]

Forget it, guys.

Star Trek fandom has degenerated into the aforementioned wet-crotched cheerleaders ready to herald the arrival of whatever polished turd Paramount sees fit to hurl our way, so long as it has a Star Trek label attached.

They wanted a reboot, they got it.

Now let's see if they can keep that going for forty years.

I'm not the one with the problem. You seem to be upset because there are people being optimistic about this movie. People who want a good story, and want to see what J.J. Abrams has accomplished. We're looking to the future with hope and optimism.

So your problem is that we've degenerated into a group of people willing to give a man a chance to see what he can do with our beloved show, and maybe, just maybe, recapture that magic that was lost over time. You're against new people finding something refreshing about this series that has existed for 40 years. A series that would love to tell more stories, but can't because the people who moved the characters have died or are too old to continue. A perfect opportunity to infuse some new life into this show. A chance to show people that Star Trek is powerful science fiction, with a dash of hope and humanity thrown in for good measure. You're against anything this man has to do to make it possible.

You're griping over set design.
You're griping over the bridge.
You're dead set against the movie because you don't like the design.

That is what you're telling me.
Yet, you can't just not see the movie. You have to rage against the system, you have to make your voice heard so that you can express your displeasure over something that does not negatively affect you beyond you not getting your way.

You're behaving like a petulant child. A spoiled rotten child who is used to getting what he wants, and if he can't have it NO ONE can!

Go ahead and continue raging over the details. Get into an apoplectic fit over canon and bridge design. Throw a tantrum about nacelles and command shirts, because it's fruitless. The movie's made and now we wait. You can pass the time by being a pessimistic crotchety grouch who likes to try and make people feel miserable for liking something you don't. I'd prefer to do something more important, like consider the story and the ideals of Star Trek this movie presents.

Some children gaze at the stars and wonder.
Some children wish to reach those stars.
And then some children just want the stars to come to them, and hold their breath and kick their feet when they won't.

I'd like to see far more of the former, but here I'm seeing some of the latter. Shame on you for behaving like such a child. You should know better. Star Trek has apparently taught you nothing.

J.

 

[archeryguy1701]

Forget it, guys.

Star Trek fandom has degenerated into the aforementioned wet-crotched cheerleaders ready to herald the arrival of whatever polished turd Paramount sees fit to hurl our way, so long as it has a Star Trek label attached.

They wanted a reboot, they got it.

Now let's see if they can keep that going for forty years.

I can't speak for the rest of the crew, but I'm not automatically hating this "polished" turd because I haven't seen anything to hate yet... in fact, we still haven't really seen anything. We have a trailer and a small handful of pictures.

Quick question for you. If you want to hate this movie because it isn't exactly like Trek 1969, that's you're perogative. But, why are you in here? I haven't seen anything from you but reminders about how much this movie is going to suck.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Didn't all of Roddenberry's other projects fail because of they were made of shit?

"The Questor Tapes" had great potential - and ultimately the character became the very popular Data in TNG. And the human sidekick, played by the very likable Mike Farrell, then an unknown, became a hit in TV's "M*A*S*H".

The studios weighed up between working with GR or going with "The Six Million Dollar Man", and Steve Austin won.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Forget it, guys.

Star Trek fandom has degenerated into the aforementioned wet-crotched cheerleaders ready to herald the arrival of whatever polished turd Paramount sees fit to hurl our way, so long as it has a Star Trek label attached.

They wanted a reboot, they got it.

Now let's see if they can keep that going for forty years.

I'm not the one with the problem. You seem to be upset because there are people being optimistic about this movie. People who want a good story, and want to see what J.J. Abrams has accomplished. We're looking to the future with hope and optimism.

So your problem is that we've degenerated into a group of people willing to give a man a chance to see what he can do with our beloved show, and maybe, just maybe, recapture that magic that was lost over time. You're against new people finding something refreshing about this series that has existed for 40 years. A series that would love to tell more stories, but can't because the people who moved the characters have died or are too old to continue. A perfect opportunity to infuse some new life into this show. A chance to show people that Star Trek is powerful science fiction, with a dash of hope and humanity thrown in for good measure. You're against anything this man has to do to make it possible.

You're griping over set design.
You're griping over the bridge.
You're dead set against the movie because you don't like the design.

That is what you're telling me.
Yet, you can't just not see the movie. You have to rage against the system, you have to make your voice heard so that you can express your displeasure over something that does not negatively affect you beyond you not getting your way.

You're behaving like a petulant child. A spoiled rotten child who is used to getting what he wants, and if he can't have it NO ONE can!

Go ahead and continue raging over the details. Get into an apoplectic fit over canon and bridge design. Throw a tantrum about nacelles and command shirts, because it's fruitless. The movie's made and now we wait. You can pass the time by being a pessimistic crotchety grouch who likes to try and make people feel miserable for liking something you don't. I'd prefer to do something more important, like consider the story and the ideals of Star Trek this movie presents.

Some children gaze at the stars and wonder.
Some children wish to reach those stars.
And then some children just want the stars to come to them, and hold their breath and kick their feet when they won't.

I'd like to see far more of the former, but here I'm seeing some of the latter. Shame on you for behaving like such a child. You should know better. Star Trek has apparently taught you nothing.

J.

Nothing to add, really, except that I'll gladly switch sides if you tell me where you got your avatar.

 

[ancient]

Well, I'm hoping for a pretty cool 2 hours.

Now, in the meantime let us examine the scientific deepness of the last ten movies...

...

hm, that's a preeeeeetty low standard.

 

[3D Master]

Exactly what makes it so low?

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Didn't all of Roddenberry's other projects fail because of they were made of shit?

"The Questor Tapes" had great potential - and ultimately the character became the very popular Data in TNG. And the human sidekick, played by the very likable Mike Farrell, then an unknown, became a hit in TV's "M*A*S*H".

The studios weighed up between working with GR or going with "The Six Million Dollar Man", and Steve Austin won.

And it had Robert Foxworth as the andriod, Questor. Although, I recall reading that Roddenberry had Nimoy in mind for the part. Nimoy, however, turned it down because he didn't want to play another character that didn't display outward emotion.

 

[trekkerguy]

Just in reply to the topics original post.

I am 20 years old, maybe that's too young for my opinion to matter.
But I grew up watching TNG from birth, have seen every episode of
every series, all the movies, have obsessed over Trek novels of all
eras and expanded Universe. Spent countless hours reading and
researching trivial Trek information. In conclusion I consider myself and
"Old Trek fan" in terms of exposure to Trek not age.
And to me this whole argument/discussion is silly.

I love all of past Trek, and here I sit as excited as ever for this new
incarnation. I suppose Batman, Superman and 007 have had all these same
arguments and discussions among their fans. But in the end I think most of
the "Old" fans will be dissapointed when they realize this is still Trek.
But just getting the makeover it's badly needed for a few years now.

Whatever the case, I hope everyone will be able to see past their own
noses and go out to see what could be a very good Trek film and
help launch it into it's next 40 years instead of living in the last 40.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Forget it, guys.

Star Trek fandom has degenerated into the aforementioned wet-crotched cheerleaders ready to herald the arrival of whatever polished turd Paramount sees fit to hurl our way, so long as it has a Star Trek label attached.

They wanted a reboot, they got it.

Now let's see if they can keep that going for forty years.

You really have no standing to make that sort of statement; your posts never show any evidence of particularly good taste or judgment where this stuff is concerned. Nor, BTW, have you kept anything "going for forty years" - Trek was around before you discovered it and will doubtless be doing fine after you've moved on. You're a passive consumer, one of millions. Same goes for any of us.

All that "degenerated into..." nonsense is nothing more than transparent sulking.

Cheer up - maybe Abrams will fix it so the bridge isn't rotated 36 degrees off center.

 

[pookha]

as a fan of star trek since its first run i can accept a certain amount of evolution of just what is star trek.
for that matter look at how the show itself evolved from the ship, uniforms , characters from the cage until the series itself.

the whole concept of federation wasnt even in place until i think the coming of gene coon.

so now we are getting possibly a different view of a pretty unfamiliar time period.

but until we actually see the movie we cant judge just how different it is from the basic of trek. which goes beyond some minor detail on the ship which could have been different depending on the year but rather the fundamental elements of trek.
the characters, the sense of optimism for the future.

 

[Basil]

Well, to answer the original question, I'm not terribly excited about this film anymore. I posted before about the secrecy surrounding its making being a turnoff, my interest waning considerably with the dearth of marketing, and haven't seen anything just yet to change my feelings I will see the film on DVD for free at some point.

I like the slightly updated uniforms (though wish the more accurate ribnecks had also made it rather than just the black V-necks) and even the neo-Nazi Romulans, but a lot of everything else -- from the 80s-looking starship Kelvin to the albino bridge set -- feels tonally wrong. I liked the understated, intelligent quality of the early Trek episodes, but this film gives me the impression it's going to be about "awesome" explosions and hyper-kinetic editing, with lots of childish bickering among the crew until they predictably come to respect each other.

 

[trekkerguy]

Well, to answer the original question, I'm not terribly excited about this film anymore. I posted before about the secrecy surrounding its making being a turnoff, my interest waning considerably with the dearth of marketing, and haven't seen anything just yet to change my feelings I will see the film on DVD for free at some point.

I like the slightly updated uniforms (though wish the more accurate ribnecks had also made it rather than just the black V-necks) and even the neo-Nazi Romulans, but a lot of everything else -- from the 80s-looking starship Kelvin to the albino bridge set -- feels tonally wrong. I liked the understated, intelligent quality of the early Trek episodes, but this film gives me the impression it's going to be about "awesome" explosions and hyper-kinetic editing, with lots of childish bickering among the crew until they predictably come to respect each other.

So lemme get this straight.

1. You're part of the financial problem when it comes to Trek.
2. That era is probably when Science Fiction ship asthetics were at their best.
3. Would TMP please you then? Every good Scifi film needs good action.
4. I certainly hope we have some of that since... oh yeah... it's kinda about that...

 

[Basil]

Well, to answer the original question, I'm not terribly excited about this film anymore. I posted before about the secrecy surrounding its making being a turnoff, my interest waning considerably with the dearth of marketing, and haven't seen anything just yet to change my feelings I will see the film on DVD for free at some point.

I like the slightly updated uniforms (though wish the more accurate ribnecks had also made it rather than just the black V-necks) and even the neo-Nazi Romulans, but a lot of everything else -- from the 80s-looking starship Kelvin to the albino bridge set -- feels tonally wrong. I liked the understated, intelligent quality of the early Trek episodes, but this film gives me the impression it's going to be about "awesome" explosions and hyper-kinetic editing, with lots of childish bickering among the crew until they predictably come to respect each other.

So lemme get this straight.

1. You're part of the financial problem when it comes to Trek.
2. That era is probably when Science Fiction ship asthetics were at their best.
3. Would TMP please you then? Every good Scifi film needs good action.
4. I certainly hope we have some of that since... oh yeah... it's kinda about that...

I'm not even sure what exactly you're talking about. Did see TMP in the theaters when it came out -- wouldn't call it understated and intelligent so much as underwhelming and ponderous because it put its sterile technical aesthetic way ahead of plot and characterization. If there's any financial problem, it's when people spend their hard-earned cash on something inferior -- sends the message to Hollywood to make more just like it and gives dweebs something to sneer at when they pay to see it for the fifth time.

 

[trekkerguy]

Well, to answer the original question, I'm not terribly excited about this film anymore. I posted before about the secrecy surrounding its making being a turnoff, my interest waning considerably with the dearth of marketing, and haven't seen anything just yet to change my feelings I will see the film on DVD for free at some point.

I like the slightly updated uniforms (though wish the more accurate ribnecks had also made it rather than just the black V-necks) and even the neo-Nazi Romulans, but a lot of everything else -- from the 80s-looking starship Kelvin to the albino bridge set -- feels tonally wrong. I liked the understated, intelligent quality of the early Trek episodes, but this film gives me the impression it's going to be about "awesome" explosions and hyper-kinetic editing, with lots of childish bickering among the crew until they predictably come to respect each other.

So lemme get this straight.

1. You're part of the financial problem when it comes to Trek.
2. That era is probably when Science Fiction ship asthetics were at their best.
3. Would TMP please you then? Every good Scifi film needs good action.
4. I certainly hope we have some of that since... oh yeah... it's kinda about that...

I'm not even sure what exactly you're talking about. Did see TMP in the theaters when it came out -- wouldn't call it understated and intelligent so much as underwhelming and ponderous because it put its sterile technical aesthetic way ahead of plot and characterization. If there's any financial problem, it's when people spend their hard-earned cash on something inferior -- sends the message to Hollywood to make more just like it and gives dweebs something to sneer at when they pay to see it for the fifth time.

Good job, you missed every point. The reference to TMP was lack of action.

Well how do you know it's inferior till you see it? And then once you havn't
given it a legitimate chance and see it on DVD... oh it's good.
Hmm, maybe I should have seen that in theatre... oh too late no one gave
it a shot because of assumptions and now there shall be no sequel.
You the "Hardcore fan" along with the general public assume it isn't
good enough to go see and therefore doom it before it even sees the screen.

 

[Basil]

So lemme get this straight.

1. You're part of the financial problem when it comes to Trek.
2. That era is probably when Science Fiction ship asthetics were at their best.
3. Would TMP please you then? Every good Scifi film needs good action.
4. I certainly hope we have some of that since... oh yeah... it's kinda about that...

I'm not even sure what exactly you're talking about. Did see TMP in the theaters when it came out -- wouldn't call it understated and intelligent so much as underwhelming and ponderous because it put its sterile technical aesthetic way ahead of plot and characterization. If there's any financial problem, it's when people spend their hard-earned cash on something inferior -- sends the message to Hollywood to make more just like it and gives dweebs something to sneer at when they pay to see it for the fifth time.

Good job, you missed every point. The reference to TMP was lack of action.

Well how do you know it's inferior till you see it? And then once you havn't
given it a legitimate chance and see it on DVD... oh it's good.
Hmm, maybe I should have seen that in theatre... oh too late no one gave
it a shot because of assumptions and now there shall be no sequel.
You the "Hardcore fan" along with the general public assume it isn't
good enough to go see and therefore doom it before it even sees the screen.

Well, I guess I'd feel bad if you'd made coherent points in coherent English. At any rate, the original question was about repelling old fans -- what I've seen so far has indeed repelled me. I'm not sure one can say a movie has repelled them if they've actually gone to see it. I may change my mind about catching it in the theater if the trailer or other future marketing efforts sway me, but at this point, what I've seen just doesn't impress me. Oh, and what else is playing that weekend?

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Oh, and what else is playing that weekend?

Next Day Air and My Life In Ruins

 

[Captain Robert April]

Oh, and what else is playing that weekend?

Next Day Air and My Life In Ruins

The week before, it's Wolverine, the following week is Angels & Demons, and the week after that is Terminator Salvation.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I am 20 years old, maybe that's too young for my opinion to matter.

I can certainly relate to that. I heard about TMP's gala Sydney premiere night from a friend at my 21st birthday in December '79. I'd just finished three very interactive years at teachers college (writing and performing live skits, making mini movies on b/w video, puppet shows with audio tracks, etc), and was told I faced a possible four year wait to get a fulltime job. Interactive ST fandom found me at exactly the right time.

It's when ST became inaccessible to the young that it lost the chance for continued audience growth. I recall hearing that families watched syndicated TOS and first-run TNG together. Many adults have fond memories of Saturday morning TAS. Even though TMP was a bit high brow/boring for kids, it was still a "G" movie and lots of kids were exposed to it.

Somehow, not too many kids were attracted to DS9, VOY or ENT.

 

[trekkerguy]

I am 20 years old, maybe that's too young for my opinion to matter.

I can certainly relate to that. I heard about TMP's gala Sydney premiere night from a friend at my 21st birthday in December '79. I'd just finished three very interactive years at teachers college (writing and performing live skits, making mini movies on b/w video, puppet shows with audio tracks, etc), and was told I faced a possible four year wait to get a fulltime job. Interactive ST fandom found me at exactly the right time.

It's when ST became inaccessible to the young that it lost the chance for continued audience growth. I recall hearing that families watched syndicated TOS and first-run TNG together. Many adults have fond memories of Saturday morning TAS. Even though TMP was a bit high brow/boring for kids, it was still a "G" movie and lots of kids were exposed to it.

Somehow, not too many kids were attracted to DS9, VOY or ENT.

It's going to be fun again I think. The Geezers that can't see the light of
day can complain all they want on the boards. I think we're going to see
a growth of fans and interest after the new film and it will be nice to be
a part of instead of bitching from the sidelines.

And Basil... nevermind you and the rest aren't worth it.
Huh... I think that may be what Paramount is finaly catching on to.

 

[Bad Bishop]

Cheer up - maybe Abrams will fix it so the bridge isn't rotated 36 degrees off center.

This used to bug me. It's shown in the Enterprise Blueprints (the first ones sold in bookstores). The artist made the turbolift line up with the ship's center, and so the bridge had to be rotated accordingly. Have fans or other artists come up with an alternative plan for the NCC-1701 bridge?