We'll always have TOS

[M'Sharak]

...Kentucky Fried Chicken?

gastrof means this commercial, mentioned some time back in a thread in the TOS forum and produced (in Australia?) by this guy. There's some uncertainty, apparently, as to whether it was ever aired in the U.S., but you may have seen images from it in avatars, etc.

That was actually quite good...! But now I'm hungry.

Oh, yeah, it's a beautiful job -- well above the level of quality you'd usually expect to see in a fast-food ad. I don't think we ever did work out whether the set was borrowed or built solely for that spot (which would have been pretty extraordinary, if the latter.)

I'm not sure that it would quite have passed inspection on a movie screen, though, and I think gastrof acknowledged that there were differences between it and the OS set.

 

[DaveyNY]

I understand what gastrof is saying, it's a feeling of loss associated with something that you've enjoyed/loved and grown up with for many years, suddenly being irrevocably changed and altered with hardly any consideration for your feelings and in a bluntly, matter-of-fact-way in your face.

It's like having your most favorite, warm, fuzzy teddybear that you've had for a long time, replaced with a cold, plastic crocodile just because you got busy with something else for awhile and forgot you left it laying on the bedroom floor for a couple of days.

Granted, it's not something that is Life-Altering, but it's also not something you can just get over, right away.

I don't understand why some Folks around here have to be so mean spirited, when those of US who have a problem with the changes, express that kind of sentiment as Our opinion.

I'm kinda-sorta looking forward to seeing the movie, but I also kinda-sorta feel that JJ and the Gang Could Have done the same story with perhaps a bit less of a radical change.

For now, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that They pull off a Miracle and it all works out for both sides of this discussion.

But I'm reserving my complete judgment on the matter for May 9th, 2009.

 

[M'Sharak]

[...]

But I'm reserving my complete judgment on the matter for May 9th, 2009.

Probably the best bet of all. Then we will know.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

How the heck is this mean spirited? I consider myself a Trekkie, so it's not like the statement is directed at another group. Or is there some subconciously inserted mockery that I missed? Really, I intend no offense. I am a jester by nature, I aim to amuse, not to enrage.

I simply don't care about the changes made to the film. I lost hope in future Star Trek productions reaching TOS/Movies level of quality part way into VOY. I have the same concerns, oh yes, but I'm fairly confident that it will at the least be better than VOY and ENT, even if it throws continuity out the window, because there will be fresh blood driving it, instead of the same tired old TNG-era writers who worked on the franchise for 15 years, strangling it creativley with their preconcieved notion of what a Star Trek show is. What a Star Trek plot is. So yeah, I see where Gastrof and daveyny are coming from, I've been there. I just don't feel a need in revisiting that issue since I've already covered it ad naseum. It's done, and over for me. I know plenty of TOS purists feel the same way about TNG-onward as I do about VOY-onward. We all have our boundaries with Trek... I respect that, and have no intent to mock it. If the original post in this thread is mean spirited, then I'm the Dalai Llama. I'm looking forward cautiously to this film, but rest assured, if it blows, I will be the first to come on here and yell about it (Ok, maybe not, since I probably won't there at midnight, but you catch my drift.)

The new movie will never live up to the Star Trek glory days, but nothing with the Star Trek name on it will ever again, IMO. All franchises have a creativity shelf life... and what determines whether Star Trek is expired or good, is just around the bend. If a brand I get starts being consistently bad, I switch to a new one, or make my own pie.

Now back to the funny, or I'll unleash the Ass-Rubbing McCoy Clones.

 

[xortex]

What's popular and what's good might be two different things. The hypocrites are the ones changing things and thought TOS was goofy but it's still going strong and will so in a hundred years at least.

 

[DaveyNY]

How the heck is this mean spirited? I consider myself a Trekkie, so it's not like the statement is directed at another group. Or is there some subconsciously inserted mockery that I missed? Really, I intend no offense. I am a jester by nature, I aim to amuse, not to enrage.

I simply don't care about the changes made to the film. I lost hope in future Star Trek productions reaching TOS/Movies level of quality part way into VOY. I have the same concerns, oh yes, but I'm fairly confident that it will at the least be better than VOY and ENT, even if it throws continuity out the window, because there will be fresh blood driving it, instead of the same tired old TNG-era writers who worked on the franchise for 15 years, strangling it creatively with their preconceived notion of what a Star Trek show is. What a Star Trek plot is. So yeah, I see where Gastrof and daveyny are coming from, I've been there. I just don't feel a need in revisiting that issue since I've already covered it ad nauseam. It's done, and over for me. I know plenty of TOS purists feel the same way about TNG-onward as I do about VOY-onward. We all have our boundaries with Trek... I respect that, and have no intent to mock it. If the original post in this thread is mean spirited, then I'm the Dalai Llama. I'm looking forward cautiously to this film, but rest assured, if it blows, I will be the first to come on here and yell about it (Ok, maybe not, since I probably won't there at midnight, but you catch my drift.)

The new movie will never live up to the Star Trek glory days, but nothing with the Star Trek name on it will ever again, IMO. All franchises have a creativity shelf life... and what determines whether Star Trek is expired or good, is just around the bend. If a brand I get starts being consistently bad, I switch to a new one, or make my own pie.

Now back to the funny, or I'll unleash the Ass-Rubbing McCoy Clones.

My apologies, if you feel that my post was directed toward your opening post, HJ.

I understood completely your rather clever juxtaposition of a classic movie scene to this particular situation and didn't mean to say that it was mean spirited in this particular case.

I was referring more to the many times when an opinion like gastrofs' is replied to, by Folks who disagree,...

... essentially, telling the poster to get over it.

Though perhaps it's not always in such a blunt manner, but usually with what could be interpreted as a quite perceptible mean spirited intent.

Those Folks who have many or few objection's to this new version of Trek, understand completely that All of the Existing DVDs/Tapes/Books are not going to just vanish (I hope ), but it is kinda-sorta insulting to constantly have that...

(Curse you TBBS, at 4AM EST)

...particular lame-duck thrown out there on many an occasion, as a mantra that the vocal doubters should live by.

=================================================

OT... (in a lousy Bogart imitation) ...Please forgive me, "Sam"...


'You must, remember this...

This move-ees, just a tryst.

A shot in, to the dark.

A-na-ther mans' in-tur-pra, tation...

of Trek gone by.'


'It's still yet, to be seen...

Just what Bob Orci, means...

by Parallel, Time-Streams.

Is He just talking out, His ass?

As Time Flows by.'


'O-pinions, come and go...

as Trek-ers, join the flow...

reflecting on, the show.

This Nu-Trek has some flaws, We know...

And so, We sigh.'

 

[Crooked Halo]

What's popular and what's good might be two different things. The hypocrites are the ones changing things and thought TOS was goofy but it's still going strong and will so in a hundred years at least.

In my opinion, the original series is and always has been goofy. But that's part of it's charm for me. I grew up with the series and every time I catch an episode while flipping stations, I get washed over with nostalgia and can't help but smile. I'll be damned, however, if I fool myself into thinking it was ever some great work of art that was beyond reproach. Spock's Brain. 'Nuff said.

That said, I love what they're trying to do with the new movie. They're attempting to capture the great feel the original series had but updating both it and its characters to today's audience.

No one was ever going to revisit the original series and keep it exactly as is. It simply wouldn't work and would be utterly ridiculous to even waste the resources for doing so. The closest we would ever get is the Deep Space Nine episode where they come up with some silly trumped-up reason to go back and play around on the Enterprise... but even then, it was a total fanwank episode that didn't fit in at all with the series or reimagination that was the TNG+ universe.

At best, they would have just done what they did with the Next Generation; reference it from time to time, but otherwise ignore and just continue with their reimagination. And it was a reimagination of the most epic proportions.

So yes, we'll always have TOS and neither this movie, the Next Generation, or anything to come in the distant future will change that. But if you have some bizarre idea that anyone, at anytime, would have revisited the original series without heavy retoolings and recastings, you've lost yourself in the Land of Make-Believe. Say hello to King Friday for me.

 

[DaveyNY]

Why is it that when TPTB come up with a FanWank idea, it's OK.

But if a Trek Fan with an objection to it, speaks out his/her opinion, they get told to get a life??

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Louis, this could be the beginning of a long, asocial existence in our parents basements.

Continuing the original joke:

Why did you come here?

For the art...I came to TOS for the CGI.

CGI? There is no CGI in TOS!

I was misinformed...

 

[xortex]

So Abrams is trying to recapture that goofiness. I see.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

OT... (in a lousy Bogart imitation) ...Please forgive me, "Sam"...


'You must, remember this...

This move-ees, just a trist.

A shot in, to the dark.

A-na-ther mans' in-tur-pra, tation...

of Trek gone by.'


'It's still yet, to be seen...

Just what Bob Orci, means...

by Parallel, Time-Streams.

Is He just talking out, His ass?

As Time Flows by.'


'O-pinions, come and go...

as Trek-ers, join the flow...

reflecting on, the show.

This Nu-Trek has some flaws, We know...

And so, We sigh.'

Righteous.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

So Abrams is trying to recapture that goofiness. I see.

If Crooked Halo's "Star Trek goofiness" = "That certain Star Trek 'charm' ", then I hope that is what is trying to be recaptured.

 

[xortex]

So Abrams is trying to recapture that goofiness. I see.

If Crooked Halo's "Star Trek goofiness" = "That certain Star Trek 'charm' ", then I hope that is what is trying to be recaptured.

Except Abrams goofiness doesnt = Roddenberry's goofiness.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

So Abrams is trying to recapture that goofiness. I see.

If Crooked Halo's "Star Trek goofiness" = "That certain Star Trek 'charm' ", then I hope that is what is trying to be recaptured.

Except Abrams goofiness doesnt = Roddenberry's goofiness.

The jury's still out as to whether or not this is a good thing.

 

[Red Ranger]

What's popular and what's good might be two different things. The hypocrites are the ones changing things and thought TOS was goofy but it's still going strong and will so in a hundred years at least.

Vortex,

Hey, I love TOS, too, but there are some goofy things about it. Just watch The Way to Eden, and listen to a space hippie sing, in a Jim Morrison voice, "Steppin' into Eden, yay brother!"

Red Ranger

 

[bryce]

I'm in the middle here I guess...I AM very excited to see this movie, and I think it will ROCK. I like this fresh new take on the old series, and the attempt to make it into something more EPIC, and grander then we have seen on TV, or in relativily modestly budgeted films.

But I wish some of the changes had been a bit less radical. I wish JJ have respected the cannon a little bit more, but I do realize of course that the 40-some years of cannon had to be cut loose a bit or it would have bogged down any future Trek. It's just gotten to be too much. Housecleaning was needed. But I don't know why some things, such as were the Enterprise was built, *had* to be changed. Lay audiences won't care one way or another (I certainly don't think they would have been turned away at all by that small detail) and to the fans it would have been nice to see that bit of connection to the old series they know and love and cherish.

And I certainly am not in the "CHANGE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!" camp. I agree that changes in style and props and sets would be necessary to make the campy and *obviously* outdated 60's designs look good in the big screen. (I became a Trekkie durring the TOS films run, so the old TV sets props always loked kinda silly to me.) But I wish that with the sets and ship and props, that JJ would have done what he did for the uniforms - changed them to something that looks better on the big screen, and looks more realistic and "functional", but still mannaged to retain an *obvious* similarity to the originals. Like if you just squinted your eyes a bit, you could easily see how that *could* have been the same uniforms you had seen all along.

With the bridge, for example, I know it needed some big changes (two turbolifts, for one) and I don't think trying to make a carbon copy like they did in Enterprise would have worked for the big screen. But I still would have liked to have seen something that, while different, you could still look at it (as with the uniforms) and thought "Yeah, I can see that is obviously an updated take on the original." You know, kept some of the original colors and the general layout. Sure, added a second turbolift, and replaced those indvidual screes that ringed the TOS bridge with something like he has in the film (a big wraparound LCD display) and replaced those jelly buttons with *anything* else. And the chairs, including the center seat, needs replacing. No, not the same bridge, but at least something vaguely similar that reminded you of the old bridge, and looked like it was made in the same universe.

I would like to have sen somethign maybe 1/2 way between slavishly cpying almost every detail of the bridge like we got in Ent's "In a Mirror Darkly", the radical residn until it's almost unrecognizable that JJ is giving us. Somewhere in the middle.

Not the over-bright, over designed Apple Store thing we are getting. All those bright lights...and some of them shining down or displays - self *illuminated* displays - that are in turn covered by somewhat reflective surfaces. That would just make the *harder*, not easier to see! Or the bright lights over the helm stations, in between the captian and the viewscreen...because when you are trying to look out into deep dark space (especially out of an actual *window* like we see on this new bridge) too much light will obscure *any* view. You want a darkened room. So why all the bloody light!?

But still, opening day, I will be first in line. Probalble even try to find a midnight show. I will give the movie a chance. Because despite all that, the feel I get from the trailers is one that I kinda like.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

We have the best of both worlds. Old TOS, which cannot be harmed or altered by anything that happens now; and new TOS, a whole new playground for the future that I'm greatly looking forward to. I suspect there will be a few elements of the new movies and hopefully eventually TV series that I will find less than optimal, but overall what I've seen and heard makes me very hopeful.

Anyone who dislikes the new stuff is welcome to ignore it.

And I'm a big fan of TOS, it ranks just after DS9 for me as the best Trek series (and not too far behind either; all the rest are in the dust by comparison).

CAN Picard's/Sisko's/Janeway's era be as we've known it if Kirk's has been changed to the degree it has been? Maybe, but maybe NOT.

Those are in the "new" timeline and never were in the "old" one. See? Problem neatly solved! Now if only my Xmas shopping credit card bills were so easily disposed of...

 

[xortex]

How about Data singing Gilbert and Sulivan. Is that better. I loved the way to eden and spocks brain. I didn't love wink of an eye or the alternative factor. but hey even Beethoven wrote some klunkers.

 

[Shatterhand]

From the first moment we started getting all this info, pictures, etc. on the new movie, and the grievances/complaints/hate rose over certain aspects of it, my personal stand has been that if a hardcore fan absolutely cannot accept the changes that have been made in order for this story to be told, they should just write it off as a "Highlander 2", as in, pretend it doesn't exist, and be on their way. They'll still have the Original Series, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT on DVD to feed their Trek-related hunger, and I'm sure the books will continue to chronicle that established "reality".

However, if the movie is a box office success (and, realistically, that's all that's going to matter when it comes to the degree of success for this film; whether the critics or fans like it will pale in comparison to whether it's still a bankable property), you'll see a lot more material come out of the new movie's "reality" than out of the original. Oh, sure, there will still be plenty of books holding onto the original material to placate the fans, but you can bet credits to tribbles that you're not going to see another movie or television show set in the 24th Century as we've known it. Why? Because it's not bankable anymore. It's been done to death. Voyager and Enterprise beat the dead horse into a pulp and couldn't do a whole lot more for the franchise. ST: Nemesis pretty much nailed the coffin shut for movies set in the TNG era.

What this boils down to is: Star Trek needed to evolve. Did it need all of the changes we're seeing? Maybe not. But there had to be some stylistic changes in order to make it palatible to a possible new audience.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

What this boils down to is: Star Trek needed to evolve. Did it need all of the changes we're seeing? Maybe not. But there had to be some stylistic changes in order to make it palatible to a possible new audience.

Star Trek must evolve. Its dramatic format has reached the limits of this universe and it must evolve. What it requires of its studio, doctor, is the answer to its question, "Is there nothing better"?