- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Any other Star Trek:TOS fans hate the Abrams stuff?
Posted on 2/15/13 at 8:57 am
Posted on 2/15/13 at 8:57 am
I go beyond "not my cup of tea", and I just viscerally hate the movie, the new characters, the whole conversion of Star Trek from a character-based drama to a Michael Bay-esque, all flash, no substance, wooden conversion of the TOS characters, essentially reduced to one-note jokes.
Am I being reactionary? I don't really want to be converted and I know many TOS fans really enjoy it (although I simply cannot understand it in context of, particularly TOS and DS9), but I wanted to throw this out and see if any TOS fans agree with me.
ETA: Without going full Nerd, "TOS" stands for "The Original Series", to distinguish from the subsequent television series and films.
Am I being reactionary? I don't really want to be converted and I know many TOS fans really enjoy it (although I simply cannot understand it in context of, particularly TOS and DS9), but I wanted to throw this out and see if any TOS fans agree with me.
ETA: Without going full Nerd, "TOS" stands for "The Original Series", to distinguish from the subsequent television series and films.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 7:08 pm
Posted on 2/15/13 at 8:58 am to Ace Midnight
I remember someone getting upset when I mentioned that I never watched the old ST movies or TV shows, but really enjoyed the recent movie.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:02 am to Ace Midnight
Can you write out your short hand so I can understand what you're talking about? Not being snarky.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:04 am to ProjectP2294
quote:
I remember someone getting upset when I mentioned that I never watched the old ST movies or TV shows, but really enjoyed the recent movie.
THAT I can completely understand. Having no connection to the original series' characters, as these bear only a superficial resemblence, I completely get that. What I don't get is this seemingly significant majority of TOS fans who not only like it, but LOVE it. I can't tell if it is peer pressure, the whole, "We're supposed to like it because it is much better done than the TNG movies" or whatever, but I recognize it was a very well made movie, but it is far more Star Wars than Star Trek, which, to be fair, Abrams said all along, as he was a fan of the former and not the latter.
I'm still waiting for a TOS fan to go beyond, "It's targeting a broader audience" which is no reason for me to like it whatsoever. I can't count the f*cks I don't give about to whom it is targeted. I have an attachment to the original series characters and the work done in that series and the excellent, excellent films done with those characters. If I'm not supposed to remember or worry about that, why the f*ck am I watching this movie?
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:05 am to Ace Midnight
quote:TOS - 79 episodes
I go beyond "not my cup of tea", and I just viscerally hate the movie, the new characters, the whole conversion of Star Trek from a character-based drama to a Michael Bay-esque, all flash, no substance, wooden conversion of the TOS characters, essentially reduced to one-note jokes.
TNG - 178 episodes
DSN - 176 episodes
Voyager - 172 episodes
Enterprise - 98 episodes
New Movie - 127 minutes
Yeah, I can't see at all why they didn't include the character development that we've come to expect from the tv shows...
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:05 am to Patrick O Rly
quote:nm
Can you write out your short hand so I can understand what you're talking about? Not being snarky.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:07 am
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:06 am to Ace Midnight
Are you being reactionary?
Yeah.
That Star Trek movie was very, very good.
And I would hardly call the movie substance-less or the characters wooden.
It's not same; it's modern.
That's not a bad thing.
Yeah.
That Star Trek movie was very, very good.
And I would hardly call the movie substance-less or the characters wooden.
It's not same; it's modern.
That's not a bad thing.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:07 am to JawjaTigah
quote:
Agreed. Am probably dense, but cannot decipher TOS either. Sorry.
The Original Series?
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:07 am to JawjaTigah
I'm guessing TOS means The Original Series.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:08 am to hashtag
quote:
Yeah, I can't see at all why they didn't include the character development that we've come to expect from the tv shows...
The relationships don't appear to be intact. Everything has been thrown out in favor of inexplicable action sequences. I understand the limitations of the film medium.
Khan, Search for Spock, The Voyage Home and Undiscovered Country all seemed to stay loyal to the characters, and tell a great story. Even the weaker TOS films, TMP and TFF (even Generations) maintained that connection with the characters and the work that had already been done.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:08 am to Hoodoo Man
quote:It appears to be. And I agree with you - the Abrams movie is new, but it is very good and entertaining. And I was around and loving Star Trek when TOS was not re-runs.
The Original Series?
And for those who aren't sure, let's remember - the character development took decades of the crew being together. They weren't immediately the Kirk and Spock and Bones, et al of TOS fame. Like real people, those relationships and characteristics developed over time. This is like the prequel.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:11 am
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:11 am to Ace Midnight
In the immortal words of the Shat
"Get a Life"
What made TOS special, was the cast chemistry.
"Get a Life"
What made TOS special, was the cast chemistry.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:13 am
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:15 am to dr smartass phd
quote:
In the immortal words of the Shat
If the filmmakers do not care about why I was a fan in the first place, why am I supposed to like the movie?
Because it's new? F*cking Transformers is new.
I understand what he was trying to do. Most remakes/reboots, just phone it in. I agree that was not done in this case. However, after watching the Avengers, I would have much preferred to have seen Whedon's take (himself a Star Trek fan, clear from the work in Firefly/Serenity), rather than Abrams, as I have not enjoyed any of his other work.
I admitted I'm in the minority, I said I did not want to be converted. I was tossing this out to see if anyone else felt the same way. I guess this is just a disagreement with no resolution.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:19 am
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:15 am to JawjaTigah
quote:
This is like the prequel.
Wasn't it set in an alternate universe also?
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:15 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Even the weaker TOS films, TMP and TFF (even Generations) maintained that connection with the characters and the work that had already been done.
Why is that necessary? The Abrams universe (literally) is different than the one created and used in the other movies and shows. I understand your love for characters past - I wanted to vomit at what they did to Deadpool in X-Men Origins - but taken alone, the Abrams movie was pretty damn good. You and I have debated this before, but why are you so against being different? Are you a gay hater, too?
But no seriously, I think you're being reactionary and are unable to move past your love for characters that are barely even base models for the movie. That and your hate for Chris Pine. And explosions (apparently).
ETA: all of which is understandable.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:19 am
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:18 am to Ace Midnight
quote:you are dead to me
rather than Abram, as I have not enjoyed any of his other work.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:20 am to LoveThatMoney
quote:
Why is that necessary?
If they're not going to respect what came before, again, I'm serious, why am I watching it then? If it is just in "the key" of Star Trek, or "flavored" with Star Trek, but it throws everything that made me enjoy Star Trek away, why do I even care?
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:23 am to Ace Midnight
quote:jesus dude ok fine you don't like it. you apparently won't get anyone to change your mind so I really don't get the point of this thread
If they're not going to respect what came before, again, I'm serious, why am I watching it then? If it is just in "the key" of Star Trek, or "flavored" with Star Trek, but it throws everything that made me enjoy Star Trek away, why do I even care?
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:25 am to Ace Midnight
I know which episode of TOS is coming on, within 10 sec of the cold open. I thought TNG was sacrilege when it started. But in the end as I've gotten older, I don't really care, it's a TV show and JJ's new Trek, entertained the hell out of me and that's what counts.
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:26 am to Fearthehat0307
He wants us to hate it.
Regardless, we all answered your question, OP.
Regardless, we all answered your question, OP.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News