Is Star Trek dying in the theatres?

posted on June 1st, 2011, 9:05 am

Angry Picard in FC might have had something to do with the Borg taking over the ship, destroying his mind and assimilating humanity. On its own it was a good movie,

that would only fly if he didnt completely deal with it in the series. they showed numerous times he was over it, and not angry and wanting revenge.

it was a good movie, but it seems like they forgot the series when making it.

in ST XI they just crossed the line of no return. whatever happens after that is altered; Picard , Sisko , Defiant , Galaxy class . everything is altered and has been remade, until they can get back to it. And I think the worst part is that it is continuation of the Universe, I think to really find it appealing is to forget everything that happened in Star Trek history and watch it. otherwise it gives a slight sense of emptiness "everything you know has been changed for good."

i think jjtrek works better if u accept it as an alternate universe and that it doesnt remove or change everything that happened before. sisko still punched q, neelix still poisoned the crew with the delta quadrant's most common vegetable, leola roots, and paris and janeway still had lizard babies (oh wait we ignore that )

posted on June 1st, 2011, 10:24 am

The new series does not delete the other series and movies, it's a parallel timeline that runs parallel to the older one, much like the mirror universe does with the prime universe.

Honestly, I think there is great potiental with this new parallel timeline and the new actors. It will also bring new people into the franchise and boost the popularity of Trek. I do believe eventually, they may end up running a parallel series or movies that follows on from Nemesis, but right now they are focusing on the new Trek and rightfully so.

At the end of the day it's Trek, and if someone bad mouths it, obviously they aren't a true Trek fan or one who understands Gene Roddenberry's vision of what Trek was founded on.

posted on June 1st, 2011, 2:56 pm

I guess you're right. its like "in a mirror darkly" in Enterprise. but the Problem is that people will mistake that for the cannon, it will also make new ST fans not want to watch the old series because they're, well, old. and in turn, They'll make the gaming industry turn towards the ST XI timeline instead of the Real one. thats my main problem. They make a series about ST XI? sure, I wouldn't have it any other way.But make it so that people know to watch the old ones. Maybe publicise some games or episodes, anything to make them realise that this isn't the cannon universe.

Edit: This reminds me of a guy that said "definition Cannon: a desperate attempt to make something fictional real."

posted on June 1st, 2011, 3:07 pm

I'd probably laugh if some new Trek fans who've never seen the old come and ask why we've defiled canon...

posted on June 1st, 2011, 6:03 pm

if the TNG remastering goes ahead then old trek might get some new life breathed into it. i'd love to watch tng with better effects/quality.

posted on June 2nd, 2011, 2:15 am

People will always be curious about what came before, while TOS may not get much attention TNG, Voy etc will. My son who I think first saw STXI has now seen all TNG and ENT and will eventually watch VOY and DS9.

As long as us who grew up with TOS. TNG etc enourage the newer generation of fans to at least give the older series a go, people will still watch the older series.

posted on June 2nd, 2011, 3:43 am

I enjoyed the film, the acting quality was excellent and the alternate timeline idea was refreshing.

posted on June 2nd, 2011, 3:59 am

Personally i think the alternate timeline idea was brilliant.  It freed star trek, and is allowing it to grow in a whole new direction, without treading, and or having to be held to the old series.  It allows anything to be possible in the new trek, while our beloved old trek can still remain.

posted on June 2nd, 2011, 8:18 pm

Yes but ST XI is always restrained by the physics. like the "cannon" XI Enterprise was 700m.  the sovereign's not 700, how can a 23rd C ship be 700m. I still think they could have leaped another century like they did in the ST OS to ST NG. that would have allowed more breathing room than with XI. since the alternate universe is in the past, they have to discover ,eventually, all the places that Picard discovered. They have a style and size limit. they have a tech limit etc...
like I never understood this
(ST XI
-Scoty, take us to maximum warp
-ay sir, Warp factor 4
and this
ST ENT
-She's pushing it capt,
-Take her to warp 5.
WAIT, TIME-OUT. YOU MEAN THAT IN 200 YEARS THEY DECREASED A whole WARP FACTOR!?)

posted on June 2nd, 2011, 8:21 pm

Warp is always incosistent, the different Warp scale between Eras (TOS has Warp 14, TNG can't reach Warp 10) don't help...

The ship size is rubbish, the model scale is still that of the original Enterprise refit.

posted on June 2nd, 2011, 8:34 pm

Well, not the same size but 366 meters instead of 305 for the refit/A.

@Grand Admiral Thats ILMs "official"(not canon!) size...for like two/three scenes in the movie so, you can definitly ignore the 700m size. The numbers over at EAS are the ones to go with.

posted on June 3rd, 2011, 9:39 pm

I have mixed feelings.

I guess ultimately I don't have so much issue with setting it in another universe, but then they had to go and try to draw in the prime universe with the whole Romulus exploding-two Spocks-psycho Romulan miner-red matter thing. If you want to start a new universe, fine, but leave the other ones out of it. But on the other hand I feel like letting them play the "different universe" card is just a cop out.

Then there were a few other things which I really didn't like, including turning the Enterprise into some god awful monstrosity. The JJ-prise looks like someone said to the designers, "Here's one of the best starship designs in Trek. Make it look new  ." I did like the new bridge save the lens flare and those weird clear wall/dividers/console things. They serve no purpose and only clutter the bridge. But then the engine room looks like and industrial factory; WTF. So I feel like there were a number of things they just ruined.

and I quote "That said, part of what we have to do is listen to it all, ask a lot of questions about what people’s expectations are — and then let all of that go when we sit down to write."

That is one of the most arrogant and childish attitudes I have ever heard. No wonder things came out the way they did. That is definitely not the way to get the old fan base.

star trek's had a long and brilliant history, but has built up a lot of mythology and canon, some would say baggage. you cant have the same writers forever, new writers have to come in and pitch new ideas, but then they are tied down by the mythology and requirement to keep things continuous. in a way a successful franchise brings about its own end.

The thing is, look at something like Star Wars which has far, far more background and mythology and I don't think you could ever get someone to say, "Oh, lets ditch all this baggage and start over." (Correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm not that much of a Star Wars fan; I'm just basing that opinion on appearances.)  Now granted, Star Trek is far broader in terms of story and focus, but I think the point still stands. You may not like the established details, and yes occasionally they may need to be reconciled or fixed, but to throw all of it out is foolish and a bit childish. Actually it brings to mind Orwell's 1984 which is a little scary.

At the end of the day it's Trek, and if someone bad mouths it, obviously they aren't a true Trek fan or one who understands Gene Roddenberry's vision of what Trek was founded on.

Actually, I would love to know what Roddenberry would think about this new Trek. My understanding is that he actually developed quite a bit of detailed background way back when (obviously only a fraction made it to the screen).

posted on June 3rd, 2011, 9:55 pm

The thing is, look at something like Star Wars which has far, far more background and mythology and I don't think you could ever get someone to say, "Oh, lets ditch all this baggage and start over." (Correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm not that much of a Star Wars fan; I'm just basing that opinion on appearances.)  Now granted, Star Trek is far broader in terms of story and focus, but I think the point still stands. You may not like the established details, and yes occasionally they may need to be reconciled or fixed, but to throw all of it out is foolish and a bit childish. Actually it brings to mind Orwell's 1984 which is a little scary.

star wars doesnt have a lot of baggage, 6 movies. thats it. trek has 5 series, hundreds of episodes, and 10 movies.

star wars also has a lot more space to explore, with a lot more things that can be done in its universe. while trek has been everywhere. its done the prequel series. its done ship in space, its done space station, its done ship lost in space.

having writers come in and pitch stories for a new star trek series (in the same canon as the old ones) would be a chore. cos you would have to have people check everything they write to make sure it fits with previous trek. non trekkie writers would have a difficult time pitching stories.

thats part of how star trek's success hinders it in the end. nothing can go on forever, and as a franchise continues, new creators will constantly have to live up to the past shows and improve upon them. which isnt easy.

look how many fans whine about new shows/spinoffs in general. and so many scifis have had these "fans" who try to revise their show's canon and whine about the new incarnation hoping they can get the old one back etc.

in the end the only way forward for trek was a reboot, there was no way of continuing with more of the same.

that doesnt mean delete the old sutff, just put it to one side, and do something new.

old trek canon contradicted itself a lot, there was no way to fix it without pissing at least some people off.

posted on June 4th, 2011, 12:24 am

The reason the engine room looks as it is, is due to running out of money for sets so they had to improvise. With any luck this time around they may have a refit of the engine room. 

posted on June 16th, 2011, 5:19 am

That is one of the most arrogant and childish attitudes I have ever heard. No wonder things came out the way they did. That is definitely not the way to get the old fan base

I didn't say that. The new star trek producers did