As a fan of Star Trek old and new it will never die. Even though the Roddenberry Universe is gone the Mirror Universe that is done by Abrams leave a lot of new content to be added. Who knows we could even have all series in the Mirror Universe. However I would love to see a new series!
Here's my probably wrong opinion on all the hate toward the new Trek...
No matter what we think about it... even if we think it's the worst movie in the history of cinema...
Thousands and thousands of people love the new Trek. Why would you want to take that away from them?
I mean, how would we feel if people who hate TNG or TOS weren't just satisfied by not watching it, but instead went on massive rants trying their best to make it so we didn't get to watch it?
If we don't like the new Trek, all we have to do is refrain from watching it. Problem solved. I don't know why trying to ruin it for the people who love it has to be part of that scenario.
Why can't we just let the people who enjoy it... enjoy it. I don't like sea food. I deal with that by not eating sea food. I don't tell people eating sea food, "That's not REAL food! That's TRIBBLE! You're an idiot for liking that!"
I just don't eat sea food.
It's not about taking anything away from anyone. On the contrary, it is the NuTrek fans who are trying to take away the historically established Trek (without which, their beloved NuTrek simply would not exist) by insisting that 'art needs to be updated to remain relevant' (a concept I find flawed and refutable at even the most rudimentary level)
What I was trying to point out, is that these films have not been made with the intent of revitalising the franchise. They have not been made with the intent of continuing with the franchise. They have been made, for the third time of pointing it out, as 'pretty pictures for the masses'. Nothing more, nothing less. Hollywood seems to be working on the trilogy route at the moment, so I think it is safe to envisage a third instalment of NuTrek, but then that will be it. Hollywood will move on, and those who thought they were going to be getting new series on TV will be left rather bemused and disappointed, despite the inevitability based on the available facts...
It's not about taking anything away from anyone. On the contrary, it is the NuTrek fans who are trying to take away the historically established Trek (without which, their beloved NuTrek simply would not exist) by insisting that 'art needs to be updated to remain relevant' (a concept I find flawed and refutable at even the most rudimentary level)
What I was trying to point out, is that these films have not been made with the intent of revitalising the franchise. They have not been made with the intent of continuing with the franchise. They have been made, for the third time of pointing it out, as 'pretty pictures for the masses'. Nothing more, nothing less. Hollywood seems to be working on the trilogy route at the moment, so I think it is safe to envisage a third instalment of NuTrek, but then that will be it. Hollywood will move on, and those who thought they were going to be getting new series on TV will be left rather bemused and disappointed, despite the inevitability based on the available facts...
I admit I'm speaking from anecdotal experience here, but I've not seen one single example of the new Trek trying to "Take away" my classic trek. I still have all the DVDs. Netflix still has all the series. Netflix added all the Treks just as the hype for the second movie was on the rise. To me, that sounds like it was helping classic Trek, not hurting it.
I got to re-watch all of Enterprise, TNG, and DS9 purely because the new movie was coming out.
I personally know several people who gave the old shows a chance based entirely on the fact that they loved the movies. I also know several people who booted up STO purely because the new movies just put them in a Trek mood.
So I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that fans of the new Star Trek are trying to take away classic Trek. It seems to be opening them up to it (again, in my anecdotal experience). I have, on the other hand, seen post after post of people just completely bashing the new Trek. Folks will post a simple question about the JJ movie and it brings in a dozen hate posts. I've never seen someone post a question about, say, TNG, and people come in and say, "WHO CARES! NEW TREK IS ALL THAT MATTERS NOW ANYWAY!"
If you want to point out some specific examples of this happening, I'm totally open to being wrong here.
Oh for sure, I've no beef with that, I just find it amusing that folks think this is some kind of ongoing resuscitation of the franchise, when it's unlikely to go beyond three movies, and a near-pathological refusal to acknowledge that the original material (faults and all) is still entertaining in it's own right. Also, if any of the cast shame themselves, I wouldn't be surprised to see re-casting as happened to Megan Fox in Transformers...
We'll see. If it's profitable, there will be more.
I'm not saying the original isn't entertaining. But by the same token, endless reruns mean that the show has become a specter that will slowly fade from the collective memory.
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and Ludwig van Beethoven. Both my father and my grandfather knew/know their music by heart - 200+ years after the classical music era ended. That is the legacy I would have for my beloved Trek - to be remembered a thousand years hence as a defining piece of cultural heritage.
We don't live in the Trek Prime timeline, either. At least, I don't remember Khan Noonien Singh ruling a quarter of the Earth's surface as a vicious despot in the 1990s - maybe I just missed it while taking a very long nap or something...
...for that matter, I don't recall any space platforms launched on Saturn V rockets exploding on launch in the '60s, either. (And believe me, the explosion of a Saturn V wouldn't be the sort of thing you could just cover up, not unless you could get someone to start a nuclear war and claim it was a medium-size warhead.)
[QUOTE=scruffyvulcan;11535171]I admit I'm speaking from anecdotal experience here, but I've not seen one single example of the new Trek trying to "Take away" my classic trek. I still have all the DVDs. Netflix still has all the series. Netflix added all the Treks just as the hype for the second movie was on the rise. To me, that sounds like it was helping classic Trek, not hurting it.
I got to re-watch all of Enterprise, TNG, and DS9 purely because the new movie was coming out.
I personally know several people who gave the old shows a chance based entirely on the fact that they loved the movies. I also know several people who booted up STO purely because the new movies just put them in a Trek mood.
So I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that fans of the new Star Trek are trying to take away classic Trek. It seems to be opening them up to it (again, in my anecdotal experience). I have, on the other hand, seen post after post of people just completely bashing the new Trek. Folks will post a simple question about the JJ movie and it brings in a dozen hate posts. I've never seen someone post a question about, say, TNG, and people come in and say, "WHO CARES! NEW TREK IS ALL THAT MATTERS NOW ANYWAY!"
If you want to point out some specific examples of this happening, I'm totally open to being wrong here.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying the original isn't entertaining. But by the same token, endless reruns mean that the show has become a specter that will slowly fade from the collective memory.
I'm not following your logic on that point, surely re-runs serve to keep a show alive, not only in people's memories, but in their daily lives... As mentioned, there is some form of Trek showing daily on Sky, and I frequently see Baywatch in the listings too... I admit, I don't always get the chance to watch them, but they're certainly there if I get a hankering...
It's not about taking anything away from anyone. On the contrary, it is the NuTrek fans who are trying to take away the historically established Trek...
Like ridgeless Klingons and Romulans suddenly appearing with ridges?
Trill hosts and symbionts looking different in their debut in TNG from how they were in DS9?
Remans suddenly appearing out of nowhere just for Nemesis?
Borg only interested in technology, then interested in us, then suddenly having a queen, then multiple queens?
Troi never kissing Riker with a beard before Insurrection, but actually did?
Data's emote chip looking different than the one from Season 4?
Data's cat changing appearance?
I could go on, but I think you get the point: The claim and insinuation is quite flawed. Spare me.
Like ridgeless Klingons and Romulans suddenly appearing with ridges?
Trill hosts and symbionts looking different in their debut in TNG from how they were in DS9?
Remans suddenly appearing out of nowhere just for Nemesis?
Borg only interested in technology, then interested in us, then suddenly having a queen, then multiple queens?
Troi never kissing Riker with a beard before Insurrection, but actually did?
Data's emote chip looking different than the one from Season 4?
Data's cat changing appearance?
I could go on, but I think you get the point: The claim and insinuation is quite flawed. Spare me.
:rolleyes:
Spare you? Spare us your trolling... :rolleyes: The text you boldened is using an entirely different context, and don't pretend you didn't realise that. The discussion is nothing to do with changes made in the established canon during it's run, and that is a wholly different context to the idea of series re-boots and outright remakes in the name of 'remaining relevant'
:rolleyes:
Maybe in the very long-term grand scheme of things, but I will be very surprised if there is a fourth Trek movie by 2020...
I'm not following your logic on that point, surely re-runs serve to keep a show alive, not only in people's memories, but in their daily lives... As mentioned, there is some form of Trek showing daily on Sky, and I frequently see Baywatch in the listings too... I admit, I don't always get the chance to watch them, but they're certainly there if I get a hankering...
To me, "alive" means that the show is continuing to to have new episodes made. If there is no new stuff then it's not alive.
To me, "alive" means that the show is continuing to to have new episodes made. If there is no new stuff then it's not alive.
Ahh, yes, in terms of production, Trek is definitely dead. What I was meaning, is that it has not dropped off the cultural radar, and is very much alive in the hearts and minds of its fans, without need for updating or 're-imagining for relevance'. Baywatch is another such series. It may be dead, but it is certainly not forgotten. Shows like Street Hawk, Alien Nation etc, are a different matter
Ahh, yes, in terms of production, Trek is definitely dead. What I was meaning, is that it has not dropped off the cultural radar, and is very much alive in the hearts and minds of its fans, without need for updating or 're-imagining for relevance'. Baywatch is another such series. It may be dead, but it is certainly not forgotten. Shows like Street Hawk, Alien Nation etc, are a different matter
I wonder if exact scripts reenacted as stage plays would work for TOS. Enough of them to do a different play each week. Would need a large venue like LA or NY, but I think it would sell out on a regular basis - I would buy tickets to see it.
I wonder if exact scripts reenacted as stage plays would work for TOS. Enough of them to do a different play each week. Would need a large venue like LA or NY, but I think it would sell out on a regular basis - I would buy tickets to see it.
Especially if the surviving cast members were directing the shows. They could direct the episodes the way they wanted them directed at the time. It would be a fascinating insight into the show. And breath some new life into the old episodes.
old trek will never die as long as my tng and tos dvds work
LONG LIVE THE NEXT GENERATION!!!!!!!
You can always download it or what it in netflicks.I downloaded the lateest JJ movie and it is trash and I ma glad i didn't pay dime to go and see it.It is rip off from ST2 WOK.
Rick Bermon did a good jop at destroying Star Trek by killing off two of it icons namely Kirk and Data he broke the cardinal rule of Star Trek no one dies.....
I would say old Trek is bar better then mew Trek.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Age StarTrek-Gamers Administrator
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer Star Trek Gamers
Especially if the surviving cast members were directing the shows. They could direct the episodes the way they wanted them directed at the time. It would be a fascinating insight into the show. And breath some new life into the old episodes.
That would definitely be an interesting twist if they were to direct :cool: I'd spring for tickets for something like that :cool:
I don't see how that post is trying to destroy classic Trek. That post is just as easily describing what TNG was to TOS or what DS9 was to TNG.
I don't see that as remotely trying to take away the our old Star Trek. I gave several specific examples in my reply showing how fans of these movies are more than willing to experience classic Trek now. Heck, my 20 year old niece is currently marathoning Trek on Netflix based solely on her love of the Abrams movies. She likes some of them and doesn't like others, but I really don't see how that's anything but Abrams' movies bringing classic Trek to new viewers. I'm not sure how that means new fans are trying to destroy the original Trek.
I don't see how that post is trying to destroy classic Trek. That post is just as easily describing what TNG was to TOS or what DS9 was to TNG.
I don't see that as remotely trying to take away the our old Star Trek. I gave several specific examples in my reply showing how fans of these movies are more than willing to experience classic Trek now. Heck, my 20 year old niece is currently marathoning Trek on Netflix based solely on her love of the Abrams movies. She likes some of them and doesn't like others, but I really don't see how that's anything but Abrams' movies bringing classic Trek to new viewers. I'm not sure how that means new fans are trying to destroy the original Trek.
All great works of art must go through transitions, especially if they remain relevant to future generations. For example, the movie adaptations of famous comic books must change to meet the challenges of the different medium of film even if that pisses off the canon-loving fans. Remakes of "classic" movies serve to refresh their place in our culture.
As I said in response to that post, I utterly disagree that art needs to go through any kind of transitio to 'remain relevant', and that Classics will always be engageable to the audience, and gave a few examples.
As I said in response to that post, I utterly disagree that art needs to go through any kind of transitio to 'remain relevant', and that Classics will always be engageable to the audience, and gave a few examples.
I actually wholeheartedly agree with you that the assertion that art needs to be updated is a bit on the absurd side. I was just disagreeing with the suggestion that fans of new Trek "are trying to take away the historically established Trek."
Updating Trek doesn't equate to taking away the old Trek. If anything, it brings it back to the forefront. Those who don't like the new movie preach the glories of the old and those who do like the new movies give the originals a chance they normally wouldn't have given them. That's not blind speculation on my part. I personally know people who are enjoying old Star Trek purely because they loved these movies.
I've personally never met a single fan of the new Star Trek who wants Netflix to remove the classic shows or who thinks they shouldn't sale the originals on DVD.
I have, however, met plenty of people who desperately want them to stop making these new movies.
Again, I admit my opinion is based entirely on my own experience, which is certainly not enough to base a sweeping conclusion on... but it is enough anecdotal evidence to form an opinion... and in my experience, most fans of the new Star Trek are very open to the classics, but the people who don't like the new Trek actively want it to disappear forever.
I just don't get that level of hatred for a movie that has done no damage to the franchise in any way, shape, or form. Whether it has helped the franchise is arguable (although I think it has) but no matter what we think of the movie, it most certainly hasn't hurt the franchise.
I actually wholeheartedly agree with you that the assertion that art needs to be updated is a bit on the absurd side. I was just disagreeing with the suggestion that fans of new Trek "are trying to take away the historically established Trek."
Updating Trek doesn't equate to taking away the old Trek. If anything, it brings it back to the forefront. Those who don't like the new movie preach the glories of the old and those who do like the new movies give the originals a chance they normally wouldn't have given them. That's not blind speculation on my part. I personally know people who are enjoying old Star Trek purely because they loved these movies.
I've personally never met a single fan of the new Star Trek who wants Netflix to remove the classic shows or who thinks they shouldn't sale the originals on DVD.
I have, however, met plenty of people who desperately want them to stop making these new movies.
Again, I admit my opinion is based entirely on my own experience, which is certainly not enough to base a sweeping conclusion on... but it is enough anecdotal evidence to form an opinion... and in my experience, most fans of the new Star Trek are very open to the classics, but the people who don't like the new Trek actively want it to disappear forever.
I just don't get that level of hatred for a movie that has done no damage to the franchise in any way, shape, or form. Whether it has helped the franchise is arguable (although I think it has) but no matter what we think of the movie, it most certainly hasn't hurt the franchise.
So why not let the folks who enjoy it, enjoy it?
It's not so much that they want to get rid of old Trek, but the rebuttal to almost any criticism of Nu Trek, is "It's a re-boot, it doesn't matter if XYZ detail is different, because it's new..." as if that is actually a justification which supersedes any critique or analytical review. My issue with Nu Trek has always been more an issue with JJ as an individual, not so much the films themselves. 09 specifically said that it was alternate dimension, so there is no destruction of established canon, so I can live with the movies as Staurday Night Entertainment. What I don't like is the attempt to justify flaws with the argument that because it's a reboot, it is actually revitalising the franchise (new fans maybe, but I bet there won't be a forth movie, nor any new series, so the franchise is not truly revitalised at all) as well as finding the idea (from Hollywood) that a re-boot is actually a legitimate creative process, rather than a fancy name to cover a lack of creativity and ride on the coat-tails of an established franchise (be it Trek, A-Team, Spiderman, Starsky & Hutch) by the production staff rather distasteful
It's not so much that they want to get rid of old Trek, but the rebuttal to almost any criticism of Nu Trek, is "It's a re-boot, it doesn't matter if XYZ detail is different, because it's new..." as if that is actually a justification which supersedes any critique or analytical review. My issue with Nu Trek has always been more an issue with JJ as an individual, not so much the films themselves. 09 specifically said that it was alternate dimension, so there is no destruction of established canon, so I can live with the movies as Staurday Night Entertainment. What I don't like is the attempt to justify flaws with the argument that because it's a reboot, it is actually revitalising the franchise (new fans maybe, but I bet there won't be a forth movie, nor any new series, so the franchise is not truly revitalised at all) as well as finding the idea (from Hollywood) that a re-boot is actually a legitimate creative process, rather than a fancy name to cover a lack of creativity and ride on the coat-tails of an established franchise (be it Trek, A-Team, Spiderman, Starsky & Hutch) by the production staff rather distasteful
I've been a Trekkie for a good 30 years and I happened to really enjoy the new movies...
That said, I mostly agree with your points here.
I agree it's silly to pretend a re-boot is anything legitimately creative. Truly inspired reboots are incredibly rare. I think John Carpenter's "The Thing" from the 80's qualifies (yes, that movie was a re-make), but for every "The Thing," we get a thousand movies along the lines of "Clash of the Titans", "Conan", "Fright Night", etc. Some are decent, some are TRIBBLE, but for the most part, none are inspired.
So yeah, I grant you that point for sure.
I also agree with you that this iteration of Trek won't have much longevity. 20 years from now, when someone mentions Captain Kirk, the overwhelming majority (IMO) will still picture Shatner.
My only point (and this wasn't directed at you specifically) is that I don't get the hate for the new movie. I'm not talking about whether or not people liked the movie. I mean deep, visceral hatred.
It's just a reboot. Like it or hate it, it'll be gone in a few years. At worst, it won't have any impact on the franchise as a whole and at best, it'll help usher in a new era for Trek, purely because of the renewed interest from studios in the franchise.
I mean, one of my all-time favorite films was the original "Fright Night." I thought the remake was - overall - painfully mediocre and had absolutely none of the charm of the original. But I don't hate the remake. I'm just not a fan. And the remake isn't going to take away the old Fright Night. It's just a crappy remake. No big deal.
I just don't understand the outrage toward this movie (again, this might or might not be you; I don't know). If you like it, great. If you didn't like it, great. It's just a remake and it'll be the way of the dodo soon enough and Trek will either be in a better place or in exactly the same place it was in before these movies were made.
So why not just let the folks who love it enjoy the ride?
I've been a Trekkie for a good 30 years and I happened to really enjoy the new movies...
That said, I mostly agree with your points here.
I agree it's silly to pretend a re-boot is anything legitimately creative. Truly inspired reboots are incredibly rare. I think John Carpenter's "The Thing" from the 80's qualifies (yes, that movie was a re-make), but for every "The Thing," we get a thousand movies along the lines of "Clash of the Titans", "Conan", "Fright Night", etc. Some are decent, some are TRIBBLE, but for the most part, none are inspired.
So yeah, I grant you that point for sure.
I also agree with you that this iteration of Trek won't have much longevity. 20 years from now, when someone mentions Captain Kirk, the overwhelming majority (IMO) will still picture Shatner.
My only point (and this wasn't directed at you specifically) is that I don't get the hate for the new movie. I'm not talking about whether or not people liked the movie. I mean deep, visceral hatred.
It's just a reboot. Like it or hate it, it'll be gone in a few years. At worst, it won't have any impact on the franchise as a whole and at best, it'll help usher in a new era for Trek, purely because of the renewed interest from studios in the franchise.
I mean, one of my all-time favorite films was the original "Fright Night." I thought the remake was - overall - painfully mediocre and had absolutely none of the charm of the original. But I don't hate the remake. I'm just not a fan. And the remake isn't going to take away the old Fright Night. It's just a crappy remake. No big deal.
I just don't understand the outrage toward this movie (again, this might or might not be you; I don't know). If you like it, great. If you didn't like it, great. It's just a remake and it'll be the way of the dodo soon enough and Trek will either be in a better place or in exactly the same place it was in before these movies were made.
So why not just let the folks who love it enjoy the ride?
I think it's an anger and disappointmen that something people consider themselves fans of, is being given the re-boot treatment for no other reason than they can, and expect them to 'be grateful that there's new trek available at all', and that people are buying it. As for letting them enjoy the ride... someone's idea of a good time may be paying a TRIBBLE to stamp on their cubes, but that doesn't make it a good idea No one would want to see their brother subjecting themselves to such treatment, but would step in and call an intervention, and I think this may be a similar instinct.
Comments
It's not about taking anything away from anyone. On the contrary, it is the NuTrek fans who are trying to take away the historically established Trek (without which, their beloved NuTrek simply would not exist) by insisting that 'art needs to be updated to remain relevant' (a concept I find flawed and refutable at even the most rudimentary level)
What I was trying to point out, is that these films have not been made with the intent of revitalising the franchise. They have not been made with the intent of continuing with the franchise. They have been made, for the third time of pointing it out, as 'pretty pictures for the masses'. Nothing more, nothing less. Hollywood seems to be working on the trilogy route at the moment, so I think it is safe to envisage a third instalment of NuTrek, but then that will be it. Hollywood will move on, and those who thought they were going to be getting new series on TV will be left rather bemused and disappointed, despite the inevitability based on the available facts...
I admit I'm speaking from anecdotal experience here, but I've not seen one single example of the new Trek trying to "Take away" my classic trek. I still have all the DVDs. Netflix still has all the series. Netflix added all the Treks just as the hype for the second movie was on the rise. To me, that sounds like it was helping classic Trek, not hurting it.
I got to re-watch all of Enterprise, TNG, and DS9 purely because the new movie was coming out.
I personally know several people who gave the old shows a chance based entirely on the fact that they loved the movies. I also know several people who booted up STO purely because the new movies just put them in a Trek mood.
So I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that fans of the new Star Trek are trying to take away classic Trek. It seems to be opening them up to it (again, in my anecdotal experience). I have, on the other hand, seen post after post of people just completely bashing the new Trek. Folks will post a simple question about the JJ movie and it brings in a dozen hate posts. I've never seen someone post a question about, say, TNG, and people come in and say, "WHO CARES! NEW TREK IS ALL THAT MATTERS NOW ANYWAY!"
If you want to point out some specific examples of this happening, I'm totally open to being wrong here.
I'm not saying the original isn't entertaining. But by the same token, endless reruns mean that the show has become a specter that will slowly fade from the collective memory.
My character Tsin'xing
...for that matter, I don't recall any space platforms launched on Saturn V rockets exploding on launch in the '60s, either. (And believe me, the explosion of a Saturn V wouldn't be the sort of thing you could just cover up, not unless you could get someone to start a nuclear war and claim it was a medium-size warhead.)
I got to re-watch all of Enterprise, TNG, and DS9 purely because the new movie was coming out.
I personally know several people who gave the old shows a chance based entirely on the fact that they loved the movies. I also know several people who booted up STO purely because the new movies just put them in a Trek mood.
So I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that fans of the new Star Trek are trying to take away classic Trek. It seems to be opening them up to it (again, in my anecdotal experience). I have, on the other hand, seen post after post of people just completely bashing the new Trek. Folks will post a simple question about the JJ movie and it brings in a dozen hate posts. I've never seen someone post a question about, say, TNG, and people come in and say, "WHO CARES! NEW TREK IS ALL THAT MATTERS NOW ANYWAY!"
If you want to point out some specific examples of this happening, I'm totally open to being wrong here.[/QUOTE]
On Page One of this very discussion...
I'm not following your logic on that point, surely re-runs serve to keep a show alive, not only in people's memories, but in their daily lives... As mentioned, there is some form of Trek showing daily on Sky, and I frequently see Baywatch in the listings too... I admit, I don't always get the chance to watch them, but they're certainly there if I get a hankering...
Trill hosts and symbionts looking different in their debut in TNG from how they were in DS9?
Remans suddenly appearing out of nowhere just for Nemesis?
Borg only interested in technology, then interested in us, then suddenly having a queen, then multiple queens?
Troi never kissing Riker with a beard before Insurrection, but actually did?
Data's emote chip looking different than the one from Season 4?
Data's cat changing appearance?
I could go on, but I think you get the point: The claim and insinuation is quite flawed. Spare me.
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
My character Tsin'xing
Ahh, yes, in terms of production, Trek is definitely dead. What I was meaning, is that it has not dropped off the cultural radar, and is very much alive in the hearts and minds of its fans, without need for updating or 're-imagining for relevance'. Baywatch is another such series. It may be dead, but it is certainly not forgotten. Shows like Street Hawk, Alien Nation etc, are a different matter
I wonder if exact scripts reenacted as stage plays would work for TOS. Enough of them to do a different play each week. Would need a large venue like LA or NY, but I think it would sell out on a regular basis - I would buy tickets to see it.
Especially if the surviving cast members were directing the shows. They could direct the episodes the way they wanted them directed at the time. It would be a fascinating insight into the show. And breath some new life into the old episodes.
QFT
QFT.
The people that think Gene was such a great guy are the people that have never read anything about him.
Kirk's Protege.
Rick Bermon did a good jop at destroying Star Trek by killing off two of it icons namely Kirk and Data he broke the cardinal rule of Star Trek no one dies.....
I would say old Trek is bar better then mew Trek.
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
I don't see how that post is trying to destroy classic Trek. That post is just as easily describing what TNG was to TOS or what DS9 was to TNG.
I don't see that as remotely trying to take away the our old Star Trek. I gave several specific examples in my reply showing how fans of these movies are more than willing to experience classic Trek now. Heck, my 20 year old niece is currently marathoning Trek on Netflix based solely on her love of the Abrams movies. She likes some of them and doesn't like others, but I really don't see how that's anything but Abrams' movies bringing classic Trek to new viewers. I'm not sure how that means new fans are trying to destroy the original Trek.
Just to clarify:
As I said in response to that post, I utterly disagree that art needs to go through any kind of transitio to 'remain relevant', and that Classics will always be engageable to the audience, and gave a few examples.
If you like the Old Trek, like the Old Trek, that's fine.
If you like both, like both, that's fine.
There's no need to argue about it, to prove one side right or wrong, to claim that New Trek destroys Old Trek or that Old Trek is irrelevant.
Isn't that, after all, the true spirit of Star Trek? We can all coexist peacefully?
I actually wholeheartedly agree with you that the assertion that art needs to be updated is a bit on the absurd side. I was just disagreeing with the suggestion that fans of new Trek "are trying to take away the historically established Trek."
Updating Trek doesn't equate to taking away the old Trek. If anything, it brings it back to the forefront. Those who don't like the new movie preach the glories of the old and those who do like the new movies give the originals a chance they normally wouldn't have given them. That's not blind speculation on my part. I personally know people who are enjoying old Star Trek purely because they loved these movies.
I've personally never met a single fan of the new Star Trek who wants Netflix to remove the classic shows or who thinks they shouldn't sale the originals on DVD.
I have, however, met plenty of people who desperately want them to stop making these new movies.
Again, I admit my opinion is based entirely on my own experience, which is certainly not enough to base a sweeping conclusion on... but it is enough anecdotal evidence to form an opinion... and in my experience, most fans of the new Star Trek are very open to the classics, but the people who don't like the new Trek actively want it to disappear forever.
I just don't get that level of hatred for a movie that has done no damage to the franchise in any way, shape, or form. Whether it has helped the franchise is arguable (although I think it has) but no matter what we think of the movie, it most certainly hasn't hurt the franchise.
So why not let the folks who enjoy it, enjoy it?
It's not so much that they want to get rid of old Trek, but the rebuttal to almost any criticism of Nu Trek, is "It's a re-boot, it doesn't matter if XYZ detail is different, because it's new..." as if that is actually a justification which supersedes any critique or analytical review. My issue with Nu Trek has always been more an issue with JJ as an individual, not so much the films themselves. 09 specifically said that it was alternate dimension, so there is no destruction of established canon, so I can live with the movies as Staurday Night Entertainment. What I don't like is the attempt to justify flaws with the argument that because it's a reboot, it is actually revitalising the franchise (new fans maybe, but I bet there won't be a forth movie, nor any new series, so the franchise is not truly revitalised at all) as well as finding the idea (from Hollywood) that a re-boot is actually a legitimate creative process, rather than a fancy name to cover a lack of creativity and ride on the coat-tails of an established franchise (be it Trek, A-Team, Spiderman, Starsky & Hutch) by the production staff rather distasteful
LOL, you don't actually play this game, do you?;)
I do, but STO is not the totality of Star Trek.
I've been a Trekkie for a good 30 years and I happened to really enjoy the new movies...
That said, I mostly agree with your points here.
I agree it's silly to pretend a re-boot is anything legitimately creative. Truly inspired reboots are incredibly rare. I think John Carpenter's "The Thing" from the 80's qualifies (yes, that movie was a re-make), but for every "The Thing," we get a thousand movies along the lines of "Clash of the Titans", "Conan", "Fright Night", etc. Some are decent, some are TRIBBLE, but for the most part, none are inspired.
So yeah, I grant you that point for sure.
I also agree with you that this iteration of Trek won't have much longevity. 20 years from now, when someone mentions Captain Kirk, the overwhelming majority (IMO) will still picture Shatner.
My only point (and this wasn't directed at you specifically) is that I don't get the hate for the new movie. I'm not talking about whether or not people liked the movie. I mean deep, visceral hatred.
It's just a reboot. Like it or hate it, it'll be gone in a few years. At worst, it won't have any impact on the franchise as a whole and at best, it'll help usher in a new era for Trek, purely because of the renewed interest from studios in the franchise.
I mean, one of my all-time favorite films was the original "Fright Night." I thought the remake was - overall - painfully mediocre and had absolutely none of the charm of the original. But I don't hate the remake. I'm just not a fan. And the remake isn't going to take away the old Fright Night. It's just a crappy remake. No big deal.
I just don't understand the outrage toward this movie (again, this might or might not be you; I don't know). If you like it, great. If you didn't like it, great. It's just a remake and it'll be the way of the dodo soon enough and Trek will either be in a better place or in exactly the same place it was in before these movies were made.
So why not just let the folks who love it enjoy the ride?
I Know. It's just amusing to see the term "peaceful coexistence' used in this forum.
Somebody get this person a trophy, or an in game accolade.:D