Reminder What Star Trek is all about. Part 1 of 2

[MrSchultzstaffel]

JJ Abrams effectively killed the old Star Trek in favor of his served-up, fast-food version that totally stinks on ice! JJ Abrams has nothing but total contempt for the original fans and was determined to shove his fast-buck, plastic concept down their throats if they wanted it or not. Fan's have petitioned the studio for years about what they really want to see in Star Trek, so it's not like the studio heads don't know; they just don't care. JJ's "Trek" has had it's 15 minutes....and it's up.

[charlesvan13]

@MrSchultzstaffel

I never watched the new Star Trek movie. I could tell it was just a dumb action flick.

Hollywood has a habit of ruining good ideas. I never saw the Mission Impossible movies, because they did the same thing to a good tv show.

[MrSchultzstaffel]

@charlesvan13 The trouble is not only that Hollywood has a habit of ruining good ideas, but that there are also hundreds of excellent ideas that are ready, willing and available to be made into movies and TV shows as we speak, but there is absolutely no will to do so what so ever because it's considered politically incorrect, there's no political message to the project, the initial idea wasn't posed by the relatives of the studio heads, it's unsolicited material or the profits would be shared.

[MrSchultzstaffel]

@charlesvan13 So they green-light re-makes of other people's ideas that don't need to be re-made so that they can bank on existing name recognition and effectively run the concept into the ground for a fast buck! Movies are no longer made for the fans in so much as they are made for the approval of the "inside Hollywood crowd." The fans petitioned JJ Abrams for what they wanted and he angrily rejected their pleas and was determined to ram his ideas down their throats "if they wanted it or not."

[neonknights]

Abrams and his hack writers turned Star Trek into a Michael Bay popcorn CGI action movie for kids. They forgot what Star Trek was really about. I don't mind action - but while Trek had it's share of it, the messages were it's core. Well, at least the new movie was better than Enterprise. But that says nothing, as Enterprise was a load of crap.

[Dimitri0809]

Star trek isn't the best depiction of factual future reality but it's close.

[OTmikhail]

you guys are all nuts with your comments. The new Trek movie was fantastic, great way to bring us back to the original and now have free reign to do whatever they want instead of being restricted by the trek canon. I think the "alternate" trek is more like our own future than the 60's version.

[sondano]

@OTmikhail except it has shitty actors and stupid tricks like the Spock/Uhura thing in the turbolift and the transporter room. And throwing Kirk out of the ship yeah right that's our Spock indeed. Hello?

[yetanothertubeuser]

@sondano Don't forget that it's another Spock from another timeline ... Why don't you just take it as a movie, and not as annals.

[joeylodes]

The bottom line is that … Nick Meyer and Irvin Kershner (RIP) … who both ironically NEVER HAD ANY previous experience with science fiction … created THE definitive chapters in both the Trek and Star Wars universes, respectively. It's simply because they KNEW DRAMA! … and also knew that a 4 min and 20 sec fly-around of a ship … or digitally adding a thousand distracting images... does not add to this DRAMA … it ultimately TAKES AWAY from it!

[EjkoUSC]

If Trek were left up to you guys it would have STAYED DEAD. I'm a hardcore Trek fan. I've seen every episode of TOS, TNG, The Animated Series, working on season 3 of Voyager and 5 of DS9. After that will take on Enterprise. If I was stranded on a desert island and could take only one film franchise with me it would be the Star Trek movies. But even I understand why it killed itself. It was a beached whale and what Abrahms did was necesarry and wildly exceeded expectations. Mine as well. TREK!!!

[SpikeDubbs]

@EjkoUSC Couldn't agree more sir.

[Actionguy1]

"Gene cared about the content".

Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman DO NOT!

[usmckozmo]

"There are no programs that have been on for 40 years"

Umm...Dr. Who :P

[StelarCF]

@usmckozmo true

[Mbast1]

Been a fan of Trek since I was a kid. Grew up watching the cartoons, and reruns of TOS with my Dad. I AGREE about Roddenberry's vision. BUT, I STILL think the new movie was a blast. Yes, it was mostly about the adventure, but given today's audience, the movie carried the ideas forward as best they could.

[qwertzy121212]

The new Star Trek wasn't that bad. Still better than most of the next gen movies. And Enterprise.

[00cipher]

Ugh. Come on guys. Who cares?

[ImaginarySanity]

The idea for a prequel was proposed in the early 90's and Gene HATED the idea. I don't think he would like Abrams' movie either.

[Zenutheduck]

@ImaginarySanity - >>"and Gene HATED the idea"<< It was Gene Roddenberry who proposed an a prequel idea at a convention in the late 1960s (I think it was late 1960s I believe.) It was PARAMOUNT who hate the idea though. Gene also hated the idea of "The Wrath of Khan," probably the most popular Trek installment, so there you go.

[Zenutheduck]

@ImaginarySanity - >>"and Gene HATED the idea"<< It was Gene Roddenberry who proposed a prequel idea at a convention in the late 1960s (I think it was late 1960s I believe.) It was PARAMOUNT who hate the idea though. Gene also hated the idea of "The Wrath of Khan," probably the most popular Trek installment, so there you go.

[Jack1981ish]

WOK might have had a militaristic approach, but it had a lot more depth than the new one.

[hanshotfirst1138]

The accusation that Roddenberry's vision had been violated was throw at Nicholas Meyer's now well-regarded films, as well as the majority of Ron Moore's run on DS9. Really, there's always been a certain difficulty with it: Roddenberry's vision of a utopia clashes with one of the fundamental stories of storytelling: CONFLICT. It's always a difficult tightrope to walk. Personally, with regard to Trek, I simply CANNOT agree with the assessment that Roddenberry was the sole central pillar of it.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Numerous excellent episodes and storylines were written by others, and indeed he disagreed with many of the storylines created by people like Moore and Meyer. I don't think that it's fair to say that everything revolved around Roddenberry; without people to push against him, Star Trek would have never had the opportunity to grow or change. The more fundamental problem with Abrams' movie was simply that it wasn't really ABOUT anything. There were no overarching themes or philosophical ideas.

[hanshotfirst1138]

There was an obvious respect for the characters by a hugely talented cast, however, something that deserves the full attention it has received. I won't lie; I have reservations about that, not the least of which is the cynical assessment that had the characters not been developed the way in which they were, then there wouldn't have been the great performances from the contemporary cast. However, it's also undeniable that they deserve credit for their fantastic characterizations.

[hanshotfirst1138]

I have friends who have never expressed an interest in Star Trek who've said "But I did like the new movie," and once again, my inner cynic argues that that's because it's NOT Star Trek as it was before. But it's just as easy to forget that Nicholas Meyer was a Trek neophyte, that there were many who hated TNG and DS9 on their premieres. Who knows, maybe the "new" Trek will turn out the same way.

[hanshotfirst1138]

We can't forget the countless people who've also contributed to Trek: Okuda, Moore, Berman, Philer, Braga, Jefferies, Knoll, Coto, Stewart, Shatner, Meyer, Bennett, and on and on. It's not ALL about Roddenberry. It comes back to his vision of course, but art has a way of growing into something else; not everything was always his doing. He planted the seeds, but many others cultivated the soil, and they all deserve credit.

[zigertube]

Berman and Braga did just craptastic jobs that it's amazing that Trek survived their butchery.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Well, from the perspective you're looking at, it didn't. They did VOY and ENT, and then Abrams came along.

[sondano]

@hanshotfirst1138 talented cast?? They butchered Kirk, Spock Scotty Uhura everyone. They are all B actors without any gravitas. After people like Nimoy Kelley Brent Spiner Patrick Stewart Montalban or yes Shatner himself there is a very very high standard for good Star Trek acting and these new kids on the block simply don't have a clue

[hanshotfirst1138]

@sondano No. The didn't. The assertion that Shatner himself was quite frankly anyone's idea of a talented actor is pretty ludicrous. He simply found a role that suited him perfectly and became iconically identified with. Virtually everyone managed to successfully parrot the older actors mannerisms while still feeling fresh. Plus, lest we forget, very few of people involved with TOS were quite frankly not great actors. They were charismatic and talented and found roles that fit them.

[hanshotfirst1138]

Watch the new Nightmare on Elm Street movie to see a true desecration of something beautiful. The new Trek film at least didn't have Michael Bay's name in the credits. I know how resistant to change fanboys are, but I think that some are being too harsh on the new movie. Let's let time decide. Just because Shatner and co. aren't in it, that hardly means that it should just be automatically dismissed. Lets see how history judges it.

[daneviler]

@sondano Ah kind of like the actors of the original series back in the 60s would of been view as b movie actors on a soon to be cancelled scfi tv show.Did anyone outside the scfi nerd community really looked at Shattner and Niemoy and go hey after trek come and read this script to this big film called The GODFATHER!

[Orca8472]

I totally agree.

[joeylodes]

would give my left nut to see The Wrath of Khan in the theater again

(ps ... jj's new 'trek' made me sick)

[hanshotfirst1138]

Roddenberry himself took issue with many element of Meyer's militaristic approach, but the cast and crew essentially ignored him and created KHAN, now a favorite. What does this sound like? So really, this is hardly anything new.

[sondano]

@hanshotfirst1138 WOK had much much more than just a militaristic approach. In fact that wasn't even it's main theme. And Roddenberry obviously didn't reject the very idea of blowing up this or that occasionally. Stuff like that happened in TOS too

[hanshotfirst1138]

@sondano Which could be said of the new movie as well. There's a naval vibe all over and Meyer said blatantly that he though of TOS as "Gunboat diplomacy." But he told a good story and made what's now the fanboy favorite. Let's let time decide. I understand the backlash against Trek Zero, but look at the Michael Bay-ified NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. THAT'S a travesty to something beautiful. At least Abrams Trek was made by writers who loved the franchise and actors who clearly loved the characters.

[Zenutheduck]

@hanshotfirst1138 - Exactly. Like it or not folks, Roddenberry wasn't this visionary genius that some of you wish he was.

[StelarCF]

@Zenutheduck yeah he wasn't like we imagine him he was better

[Actionguy1]

@joeylodes I'm with you. Abrams' Trek was a worthless piece of shit!

[gaelenfade]

all those actors and actresses are immortal because of star trek

[sondano]

that Abrams had amnesia to Roddenberry's vision give him too much credit the guy didn't get it in the first place he is a Star War fan and he made a galimaufry that is neither Star Wars nor Star Trek but a typical hollywood "big picture" appealing to the LCD

[tyraela115]

@sondano, drentched in sorrow I must agree with you. However, regardless of that J.J. Abrams guy the Gene`s idea will live on in those of us that trully understant and remember what Star Trek is all about.

[mentalrectangle]

the new movie wasn't bad, but it could've definitely had some kind of meaning to it

[MsOliviaGarden]

Thank you for the documentary! What shocked me most about the JJ Trek movie is that it has got so many positive reviews. I highly suspect that JJ and Paramount have bribes those critics to muffle the voices of those who genuinely in love of Star Trek.

[Zenutheduck]

@MsOliviaGarden - Nope, where's my paycheck then? Just insecure words is all. People liked it, get over it.

[Actionguy1]

@MsOliviaGarden I have to agree. JJ Abrams' Trek was Trash!

[Jack1981ish]

In regards to the new movie, Star Trek at it's best was more than just action. At it's core (of the best eps and movies) were great themes to deal with.

[Susana1027]

A friend of mine was personally told by Gene Roddenberry that the purpose of Star Trek was to convey the message of peace and not war - and that this was the reason that Star Trek was cancelled even though it was extremely popular, and profitable.

[merdufer]

this makes me sad

[florisbee]

tnx 4 posting