The end of JJTrek, finally?

As a life long Trek fan, when the 2009 version came out I accepted it. Trek had gotten stale. Rick Berman knew how to make one thing. He and his teams made it well, but it was getting boring. The TNG films were decent for fans but not huge in terms of crossover potential, which is what a studio always wants. The exception was First Contact which is a very straight forward action film. Paramount wanted more of that. TOS had the pop culture cache for them to do an exciting reboot. It made sense logically, and the first couple times I saw it, I loved it. They threw long time fans a bone with saying it was an alt timeline-- but after a couple viewings that didn't hold up considering the ages of the crew.

And if you really think about it, they are basically telling us that this kid washes out of West Point, stows away aboard the Nimitz, then then takes command as the Russians start World War Three.

Anyway, I was willing to forgive it and be excited for the follow up. They got it all set up, everything was in place, they could have done literally anything... and they try to remake TWOK, the most untouchable of Treks, which, Nemesis already proved you shouldn't even try to get remotely close to. But from a studio perspective, there's logic to ot. Chasing the money is the game.

Point being, I get exactly why they did what they did, but it was never going to work long term.
 
@kristen jones, I get it was rhetorical. I was getting at how one can appreciate the new films as generic, turn-your-brain-off popcorn fare, but they Just Don't Work™, in themselves and even less as Star Trek. Throwing the window dressings and character names around is smoke and mirrors to distract from some truly uninspired writing and characterization -- especially if the aim was to revitalize interest in Star Trek for a new generation. See follow-up thought below...

@SethS, I get it, too. And agree my biggest problem wasn't that they did it -- but that they did it so very badly. The gist I got was "take us back to the beginning, when the Enterprise was launched and Kirk-the-legend was created... Only they run into the same problem as adapting Tolkien. The backstory is structured like real history. There are some convergence points, but often it's just a series of dyssynchronous little things that all add up over time. The Enterprise was launched when Kirk was 10, and had two Captains before him. He worked his way up the ranks rapidly and diligently, and commanded a Destroyer prior to getting the Enterprise. He never met Spock until the transfer-of-command, when Pike was laterally promoted to a desk job (also the first time he met Pike). McCoy he had known, a bit, having been one of the attending doctors while Kirk was recovering from the Farragut incident at Starfleet Medical.

I think if they'd taken their inspiration from the novel "Final Frontier" (no relation to the film of same name, which came later)... It features George Kirk being brought on the Enterprise by his old friend Captain Robert April for this new ship's maiden voyage/shakedown cruise on what's supposed to be a fairly simple milk run for a Constitution class ship. Then Stuff Happens™. The narrative is shepherded along by interstices where George is writing letters home to his sons, of whom he sees far too little. The bookends of the novel are James Kirk re-reading these old things while on leave back in Iowa, while he's contemplating taking early retirement after Edith Keeler died.

But if they'd done something like that... Regardless of what a couple people upthread said, Chris Hemsworth's George Kirk was my favorite part of Trek09. When he did what he did, oh, I am not ashamed to admit I was crying in the theater. It still chokes me up on subsequent viewings. If they'd done faithful but updated (i.e., cleaned up for modern resolutions, but not overdone) sets, uniforms, etc. Subtle "aztecing" of the Enterprise hull, a la TMP... That ship can be plenty gorgeous on the big screen if detailed (and not overdetailed) correctly. Let George and April introduce the new general audience to Starfleet and starships and the Enterprise, drop some nuggets of the setting into the mix -- the wars with the Romulans almost a century before, simmering problems with the Klingons for the last couple decades, and like that. If one wanted, even end with a 10-year-old Jim Kirk reading his dad's newest letter, looking up into the sky, and saying "...someday..."

There's plenty going forward from established lore that's either never been seen, or only ever been seen with tight '60s TV budgets. The Four Years War in the 2250s, where Captains Garth and Pike distinguished themselves in action against the Klingons... The Axanar Peace Mission, in which "new fledged cadet" Jim Kirk participated. The Farragut incident. The reappearance of the Romulans (something they apparently have a knack for). There were plenty of Prime timeline story possibilities they could have gone for, that would have appealed to general audiences, thinking sci-fi fans, and old-guard Trekkies alike. I find it insultingly sloppy and lazy that they didn't seem to even try.
 
How would that be any different to Old School Trek fans being upset that original Kirk has been recast? It's literally the same scenario...the only difference being the viewpoint of the individual fans.

Look... i don't dislike The Shat at all. And I don't dislike any of the Trek we've been given so far, except that I must admit I really haven't been thrilled by Discovery.

What DOES seem a bit ironic to me is that I am really liking The Orville....which isn't even technically Trek but it captures 90's era trek for me very well, albeit with the addition of humour...which i will admit is hit or miss.

But--as before--these are my OPINIONS, and they are not being stated as fact, and they are also not being stated as an invitation for anyone to try to change my mind, or "show me the light" so to speak.

As TOS purist I found it quite wrong to recast those characters, which bought me a little grief, to get over it and allow a new generation to enjoy Trek, Ninoy approved, yadda yadda.
I think that those original actors made those characters work greatly because of who they were and they were integral to their creation. Unique. Not to be aped or
impersonated. Another ship with the same mission, another crew would have been appropriate.

They should have brought their "A" game for something that rebooted Trek.
There is nothing else like it, nothing as optimistic about our human future together exploring the
stars and exploring the human condition and what we can level up to. It does it in an entertaining way and people
don't even know they are getting a good dose of something positive.
Nothing comes close and to have it watered down into generic space action bang zap boom is painful to see. I know they
want to make a buck, Roddenberry wanted to make a buck. But you can do both.
I get sometimes you do that, I get that, but rebooting TOS really means they should have brought the "A" game.


“The visions we offer our children shape the future. It _matters_ what those visions are. Often they become self-fulfilling prophecies. Dreams are maps...........
I do not think it irresponsible to portray even the direst futures if we are to avoid them we must understand that they are possible. But where are the alternatives Where are the dreams that motivate and inspire We long for realistic maps of a world we can be proud to give to our children. Where are the cartographers of human purpose Where are the visions of hopeful futures of technology as a tool for human betterment and not a gun on hair trigger pointed at our heads” -Carl Sagan

Capt. Picard: I sincerely hope that this is the last time that I find myself here.
Q: You just don't get it, do you, Jean-Luc? The trial never ends. We wanted to see if you had the ability to expand your mind and your horizons. And for one brief moment, you did.
Capt. Picard: When I realized the paradox.
Q: Exactly. For that one fraction of a second, you were open to options you had never considered. *That* is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebulae, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence.
 
First of all if I were trolling I wouldn't be concerned. I enjoy the "JJ" Trek because of the characters. I think Pine perfectly embodies a young/brash Kirk. And it would be a huge loss to try and replace him at this point.

The Trek films of old failed IMO for being too un-fun storys/adventures IMO.
TMP for example is awful to watch! No fun at all!
The series needs new blood, new ideas, new direction etc.
Why is this wrong?
 
I think you miss the point. KIRK took the bull by the horns and ran with it an made it work.

In which iteration? CessnaDriver didn't pull that description out of the ether. TOS Kirk was a consummate career Starfleet officer. He was devoted to his studies in the Academy. His friend had to set him up on dates or he'd've never left his room. He was a brutal student-instructor, described as "positively grim", in whose class "you either think or sink". He took the Kobayashi Maru test repeatedly, attempting to find a way to beat the no-win scenario, and ended up reprogramming the simulator to make it possible to do so -- himself, not a sciences cadet he charmed into doing the work for him. He was always pushing, always volunteering, always advancing... But not by "taking the bull by the horns and [...] making it work". Contrary to Trek09, mavericks don't get command of a top-of-the-line Starship as young as Kirk did. He was driven, but not reckless.

The Trek films of old failed IMO for being too un-fun storys/adventures IMO.
TMP for example is awful to watch! No fun at all!
The series needs new blood, new ideas, new direction etc.
Why is this wrong?

First of all, the "Trek films of old" very much didn't fail. TMP made bank. As did TWOK and TVH. TSFS was hurt a bit due to all the other awesome summer movies in '84, and TUC turned off a lot of long-time fans with its rather harsh portrayal of Starfleet. But they were far from failures.

TMP is a snooze-fest because, as I said upthread, Paramount rushed a workprint out the door. The first effects house was running way behind schedule and way over budget, and when the second effects house delivered, the director basically had to drop in entire effects sequences uncut roughly where they belonged and call it done. He literally took the last flight out of L.A. with the only existing print of the film still wet in the can to make the D.C. premiere the next day. His Director's Cut is much tighter (but still, those uniforms...).

New blood, new ideas, new direction... All good things in the abstract. But it needs to be intelligent and optimistic. Those are the two big things Trek has been falling down on, more and more. The optimism started faltering in DS9, but they were still intelligent stories. I'm not a fan of Ron Moore's lazy PVP writing style. Trek at its best is when Our Heroes come together to solve the external threat -- PVE. Not argue amongst themselves. But that's the kind of drama Moore knows how to write. By the time we got to Nemesis, it had just gotten stupid. And these new films have been all flash with no substance. Which is kind of anathema to what Trek is about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In which iteration? @CessnaDriver didn't pull that description out of the ether. TOS Kirk was a consummate career Starfleet officer. He was devoted to his studies in the Academy. His friend had to set him up on dates or he'd've never left his room. He was a brutal student-instructor, described as "positively grim", in whose class "you either think or sink". He took the Kobayashi Maru test repeatedly, attempting to find a way to beat the no-win scenario, and ended up reprogramming the simulator to make it possible to do so -- himself, not a sciences cadet he charmed into doing the work for him. He was always pushing, always volunteering, always advancing... But not by "taking the bull by the horns and [...] making it work". Contrary to Trek09, mavericks don't get command of a top-of-the-line Starship as young as Kirk did. He was driven, but not reckless.
.
Where was any of this crap seen on screen?

First of all, the "Trek films of old" very much didn't fail. TMP made bank. As did TWOK and TVH. TSFS was hurt a bit due to all the other awesome summer movies in '84, and TUC turned off a lot of long-time fans with its rather harsh portrayal of Starfleet. But they were far from failures.

TMP is a snooze-fest because, as I said upthread, Paramount rushed a workprint out the door. The first effects house was running way behind schedule and way over budget, and when the second effects house delivered, the director basically had to drop in entire effects sequences uncut roughly where they belonged and call it done. He literally took the last flight out of L.A. with the only existing print of the film still wet in the can to make the D.C. premiere the next day. His Director's Cut is much tighter (but still, those uniforms...).

New blood, new ideas, new direction... All good things in the abstract. But it needs to be intelligent and optimistic. Those are the two big things Trek has been falling down on, more and more. The optimism started faltering in DS9, but they were still intelligent stories. I'm not a fan of Ron Moore's lazy PVP writing style. Trek at its best is when Our Heroes come together to solve the external threat -- PVE. Not argue amongst themselves. But that's the kind of drama Moore knows how to write. By the time we got to Nemesis, it had just gotten stupid. And these new films have been all flash with no substance. Which is kind of anathema to what Trek is about.

Yea STTMP is an absolute snooze fest. It's aweful. TWOK is amazing! The rest are complete DREK! And none perform well. This is why JJ Trek went the way it did. To make something new and fresh. Unstagnate the series and make it new.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yea STTMP is an absolute snooze fest. It's aweful. TWOK is amazing! The rest are complete DREK! And none perform well. This is why JJ Trek went the way it did. To make something new and fresh. Unstagnate the series and make it new.

And it's petering out faster than that old Drek Trek. Last flick was a financial disappointment. Only three films in.
 
Nemesis was the worst-grossing, and the only one to not make back its budget. Adjusted for inflation, TMP was the second highest grossing, just behind Trek09. TWOK was the most profitable, making back several times its mere $11 million budget.

And all of that only goes to show there are a lot of people out there who will pay to go see a mindless, flashy space adventure. Which Star Trek shouldn't be. Definitely cool to have action-y elements in the course of resolving the problem, but not only action, and just for the sake of action.
 
You know, after listening to all the whining and complaining about Star Trek as it is today, which by the way is still just entertainment. I now understand why as a kid When I mentioned I liked Star Trek other kids threatened to kick my ass. Peace out....losers.
 
Just that from a Hollywood perspective if a movie makes back at least its budget, it's not a failure. If it makes back at least twice its budget, it's considered a success. By that metric, one film in thirteen failed, and for good reason, and six of those thirteen succeeded -- notably not including the three new ones, the latter two of which only marginally made back their budgets.
 
Pft... a film that doesn't profit is NOT a sucess! Get a grip man.

The reallity is JJ Trek is canon and is here to stay. Get over it, or just watch 60's re-runs of "tribbles"....
 
You know, after listening to all the whining and complaining about Star Trek as it is today, which by the way is still just entertainment. I now understand why as a kid When I mentioned I liked Star Trek other kids threatened to kick my ass. Peace out....losers.

Those were the days. Sigh.
A price was to be paid for nerdery, had to stand up for yourself, now it's cool, even huge hit TV shows showcase it.
Though I recall some battles even then as kids, why Lost in Space was no equal to Trek. Why Godzilla was better than King Kong.
 
Surely I’m not the only one who likes ST:TMP??

It’s the one Trek film that gets better and better to me and now ranks as my favorite. It’s a gorgeous movie with a good story, amazing musical score, effects, and solid performances.

It’s even more amazing to watch “Turnaround Intruder” before you turn on TMP. To make the Herculean jump that they made from where they left things on TV to the what was delivered on the big screen, in roughly 10 years, is staggeringly ambitious.

A slow moving, thoughtful, and beautiful Trek movie with an advanced A.I. as the antagonist and the conclusion being the next step in human evolution is called “awful”. Kubrick did the same with 2001 and it’s called a “classic”. Go figure...
 
Last edited:
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top