Why would any Star Trek fan want the new Film to crash and burn?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael on November 22, 2008 at 9:08pm

Well said my friend. may you live long and prosper.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Patriot Storm on November 22, 2008 at 9:24pm

I am concerned about the notion of a reinvention of the original. How many times have stories been reinvented such that the original message gets lost in the reinterpretation? As long as they don't resort to time travel to change everything over and over again... Maybe they will prove me wrong and keep the original message. There were a lot of universal truths in the original. I hope it isn't about the oohs and the ahs with the special effects. In a day and age when people mistrust others because of color of skin, religious beliefs and so much more, people must remember the lessons of embracing diversity. Some people teach tolerance, but who wants to be "tolerated" because they are different? "Tolerated" has such a negative tone if you think about it. My experience has shown me people want to be accepted for who and what they are.

This, of course, is my opinion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael on November 22, 2008 at 10:24pm

I think you have made some good points. My hope is that if nothing else, non Trekkers will enjoy the movie, and then search out TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager, and even the much maligned (I believe misunderstood, and undeservedly disliked) Enterprise. If there are more people wanting new Trek, maybe paramount will start to think about a new series or more movies.

Also, wasn't The Motion Picture a lot of standing around gawking at special effects.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Patriot Storm on November 22, 2008 at 10:48pm

True, a good sci fi will have special effects. Yeah, they were showing off the latest in Motion Picture, but how many people are on a journey of discovery and self-realization? A lot of people loved the original so much that they tried to add to it with their writings. James Blish once said he received more fan mail for his novelization of the original series than he did his own works. I hope that Paramount does the new movie justice.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Irina on November 23, 2008 at 10:58am

Excellent, Jim. I think some people just like to complain. No matter what, they will hate the movie. I have a friend who, like me, has been a fan from the beginning. Yet completely UN-like me, she has already decided she hates the movie, says she will not even go. Precious canon! Ack, I'm rolling my eyes! I think like anything else, ST can be made into a positive or negative. Negative people are so caught up in the details that they've forgotten the meaning behind it all.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by BlueTopaz on November 23, 2008 at 12:33pm

Good question Jim.
Regardless of whether 'I' like the film or not, or whether it fits someone else's idea of 'canon', this film could do wonders for the Star Trek franchise which desperately needs some new life breathed into it. It might spark the curiosity of young people who have never watched that "nerdy TV show" into maybe giving it a chance. If "Mr. Cool" J.J. Abrams likes Star Trek, well then...
There have been re-imaginings and retellings of many things, for example: Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare. (Romeo and Juliet itself is a re-telling of much older stories). The re imaginings and retellings may all have their good and bad points, but do any really take away from the original?

Jim, you're right. If the movie bombs Paramount/CBS may give up on Star Trek all together, if not forever, then perhaps for a good long time.

Just my opinion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by sue smith on November 24, 2008 at 1:08pm

GIVE THE FILM A CHANCE!!! How can anyone have an opinion about something they have not seen.
Why not reserve judgement till after they see it. What ever happened to I.D.I.C.
I agree that if it gets boycotted Paramount may think twice before making another one. My favorite guy is Shatner and it is a shame he is not in it but that will not stop me from viewing the movie before commenting on it.
The cast look good and I'm glad Nimoy's in it so will go with an open mind. Some say I have a very open, even spacious mind.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul on November 24, 2008 at 4:14pm

from what i have seen of the film : the gist looks like how the friendship of kirk, bones, and spock become friends, it also goes into the inner workings of each charater and the reasons why spock realy doed not bring up he is half human why kirk is reckless and what pain he carrys most of the things that have been partily brout up in other films with some great action, fantastic fights, close up explosions and an equal vilan to rival kirk bolted around it.........................................
or it could be something different , but then again look at jj's work and i must say it has to be better than star trek generations which had most of the orig star trek crew missing

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jamie on November 24, 2008 at 7:58pm

To put it simply; keeping something alive isn't always a good thing. Sometimes it's best just to let something die with whatever shred of dignity it has left. If the new movie is great, it will be a rejuvination of the franchise as we know it... however if it goes off on a whole new tangent separate from Gene's vision, it will be like giving someone a brain transplant because they have Alzheimer's disease. The face will still be there, but it won't be the same person. That is why a lot of fans hope that the film won't encourage more to be made. If it is loyal to the previous films and Tv series' however, I can see many of those people quickly changing their stance.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Son of M'oog on November 24, 2008 at 10:07pm

Having been a Trek fan for some years now, I was overjoyed to hear that another movie was in the pipeline. However, my joy turned to luke-warm anticipation when i saw the trailer...... Dont get me wrong, I dont want the film to bomb, I think it will take loads of cash at the box office. I just don't like the way that things are re-invented and often do not deliver on a lot of levels (to name a few movie redo's : Starsky and Hutch, Incredible Hulk, Herbie to name the worst offenders but not the only ones). When i viewed the trailer for the new movie, i thought the shots of the bridge were a perfect example, it may be flashy with lots of eye candy but it is a long way short of anything StarTrek that i have ever seen (to me it looks like they shot the bridge scenes in the local mobile phone shop with a few monitors strewn about). That, along with the blatant re-writing of Trek history (another no-no) regarding the Enterprise being built in a desert? I'm sorry but this just seems like a cash grabber and not one for die hard trek fans. I will watch it no doubt, however i'm already cringing.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Talon Lardner on December 9, 2008 at 12:07am

I'm not so sure it is completely rewriting everything we know, there may be a few tweaks that contradict an obscure 20+ year old book or two, but overall, it works well with established, on-screen canon.

And besides, it surely can't be worse than the FIRST Star Trek film.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Talon Lardner on December 10, 2008 at 6:56pm

This film takes place chronologically about 10 to 20 or so years before that Pilot anyway (Ballpark guess, forgive me if I am wrong, just judguing from Kirk's age and whatnot), so there is plenty of years of slack to explain why Piper's aboard and why Bones appeared and whatnot.

▶ Reply to This

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page