|
Zonie63 -> RE: The latest Star Trek movies... (5/12/2013 6:55:17 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake
Yep.
The operating theory is, it ain't the same universe.
No, I really doubt it is supposed to make sense. After all, they didn't have to call it Star Trek. They could have called the frontier after the final frontier.
As a long-time Trekker, I feel the same way, although there are some Trekkers who liked the first Abrams installment.
I got the idea that it was an alternate universe - which is all well and good, but I think what bothered me about it was that they went through a series of unlikely and contrived situations just so they would end up with the exact same characters that were on TOS - even going so far as to having Chekov being born four years earlier than in the Prime Universe (just so he could be an Ensign at age 17). It was getting a bit too cheesy at that point, kind of like "Batman in the operating room."
I kind of get the arguments from the other side, that the TOSsers were getting old and no longer a large-enough fanbase to keep the franchise going, so they needed new blood, new actors, and new fans (and lots of action and special effects, just like in Star Wars). The idea is that it appeals to younger fans who weren't around when the earlier productions came out. I get that, too, although it still begs the question as to why they went through all that ridiculous falderal just to get the same exact characters. It seemed a bit too unnecessarily cheesy to me. I thought it was supposed to be movie about Young Kirk and Young Spock, both of whom had to earn their stripes before they got to the level of senior officers.
I'll give the next installment a chance. After all, not every episode of TOS was a winner, and a few of the movies also laid an egg. So, I won't write them off just yet. But I won't go rushing off to the theaters to watch it. I'll wait until it comes on Netflix.
|
|
|
|
