GustavoLeao

BEYOND and My Mid-Life Crisis

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the heads up, Gus! If you didn't enjoy it, I'll take it as one MORE reason for me stay away from it altogether. Sorry that you didn't have a good time with it though, of course. Always a shame when one doesn't enjoy the movie one is watching.

To be fair, if you were waiting for Gus's approval of Beyond in order to justify seeing it, that tells us you really never wanted to see it to begin with. :P I'd still give it a go though, as most Into Darkness naysayers liked it a lot which should give you hope. I mean, in the end? It's only 2 hours of your life - in air conditioning! :thumbup:

No, I wasn't waiting for Gus... he only confirmed certain things for me. I have never watched a Nu!Trek movie and I won't do so, I really don't want anything to do with it (and a movie theater is one of the very last places where you'll find me, I always wait for the DVD if a movie REALLY interests me, which admittedly hardly ever happens unless Sir Patrick is in it). If Gus had liked Beyond I'd have been like "glad you liked it, glad you had a good time, guess there is something to it after all", but it would not have changed anything concerning myself and Nu!Trek. I'm really only a TNG fan, not a fan of all of Trek, I'm very picky about what I watch since I generally have no interest in sci-fi and/or action as a genre either, and since Nu!Trek falls into both of these... I'll pass. Gus' opinion was important to me though - because he seems to be going through something I can relate to (not really being into current Trek and having basically zero interest in it). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 I have never watched a Nu!Trek movie and I won't do so, I really don't want anything to do with it ... I'm really only a TNG fan, not a fan of all of Trek, I'm very picky about what I watch since I generally have no interest in sci-fi and/or action as a genre either, and since Nu!Trek falls into both of these... I'll pass. Gus' opinion was important to me though - because he seems to be going through something I can relate to (not really being into current Trek and having basically zero interest in it). 

So I guess this all begs the question: If you claim to have "zero" interest in the new universe, the new films, etc. Why are you in this particular forum at all? I ask because even people who come in here to just throw mud at the films and root for their failure, have at least seen them so they can form an opinion. Just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 I have never watched a Nu!Trek movie and I won't do so, I really don't want anything to do with it ... I'm really only a TNG fan, not a fan of all of Trek, I'm very picky about what I watch since I generally have no interest in sci-fi and/or action as a genre either, and since Nu!Trek falls into both of these... I'll pass. Gus' opinion was important to me though - because he seems to be going through something I can relate to (not really being into current Trek and having basically zero interest in it). 

So I guess this all begs the question: If you claim to have "zero" interest in the new universe, the new films, etc. Why are you in this particular forum at all? I ask because even people who come in here to just throw mud at the films and root for their failure, have at least seen them so they can form an opinion. Just curious.

 

1 - I'm a moderator, it's my JOB to read the things people post on this board, and that includes this sub forum here. We don't have specific moderators who moderate a specific part of the forum, everyone moderates everything when they're here. And reading, sometimes, also leads to posting.

2 - I don't "throw mud", that's simply not my thing, and I'm not here to start doing that either - as you said, I have never seen Nu!Trek and therefore throwing mud at it would be completely illogical. I'm simply a fandom bystander these days, a bystander who still feels a bit of regret that the Trek he likes won't ever be re-made but has come to terms with that, it had its time and that's okay, it wouldn't fit into today's world, and Trek has always been a mirror of its current real life era. I mostly do indeed stick to my TNG corner and I actually do agree that it's where I belong and should be, but I'm still happy that the fans seemed to like Beyond, and I'm the last person who tells others what to like and what not to like. Still, even bystanders have a right to express their thoughts every now and then, I'd say.

3 - This topic in particular spoke to me because, as I said, I can relate to some of what Gus is going through. That's why I'm posting in here sometimes. You won't find me in most of the other "Beyond" topics here, simply because I have nothing to say. I am not a regular participant.

4 - I created the Gay Sulu topic in this sub forum for obvious reasons. One is that no one had posted about it yet and it WAS big news, and the other one is that I'm gay, and a gay character is a "revolution" for Star Trek as a whole - it doesn't matter if I've seen Beyond or not or if I'm interested in it or not. It goes "beyond" that. (Sorry, that pun was just too good to ignore.)

5 - The other Trek sections (except for Discovery) aren't getting much attention these days, and every once in a while I do enjoy having a conversation. That's what message boards are for, after all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 I have never watched a Nu!Trek movie and I won't do so, I really don't want anything to do with it ... I'm really only a TNG fan, not a fan of all of Trek, I'm very picky about what I watch since I generally have no interest in sci-fi and/or action as a genre either, and since Nu!Trek falls into both of these... I'll pass. Gus' opinion was important to me though - because he seems to be going through something I can relate to (not really being into current Trek and having basically zero interest in it). 

So I guess this all begs the question: If you claim to have "zero" interest in the new universe, the new films, etc. Why are you in this particular forum at all? I ask because even people who come in here to just throw mud at the films and root for their failure, have at least seen them so they can form an opinion. Just curious.

 

1 - I'm a moderator, it's my JOB to read the things people post on this board, and that includes this sub forum here. We don't have specific moderators who moderate a specific part of the forum, everyone moderates everything when they're here. And reading, sometimes, also leads to posting.

2 - I don't "throw mud", that's simply not my thing, and I'm not here to start doing that either - as you said, I have never seen Nu!Trek and therefore throwing mud at it would be completely illogical. I'm simply a fandom bystander these days, a bystander who still feels a bit of regret that the Trek he likes won't ever be re-made but has come to terms with that, it had its time and that's okay, it wouldn't fit into today's world, and Trek has always been a mirror of its current real life era. I mostly do indeed stick to my TNG corner and I actually do agree that it's where I belong and should be, but I'm still happy that the fans seemed to like Beyond, and I'm the last person who tells others what to like and what not to like. Still, even bystanders have a right to express their thoughts every now and then, I'd say.

3 - This topic in particular spoke to me because, as I said, I can relate to some of what Gus is going through. That's why I'm posting in here sometimes. You won't find me in most of the other "Beyond" topics here, simply because I have nothing to say. I am not a regular participant.

4 - I created the Gay Sulu topic in this sub forum for obvious reasons. One is that no one had posted about it yet and it WAS big news, and the other one is that I'm gay, and a gay character is a "revolution" for Star Trek as a whole - it doesn't matter if I've seen Beyond or not or if I'm interested in it or not. It goes "beyond" that. (Sorry, that pun was just too good to ignore.)

5 - The other Trek sections (except for Discovery) aren't getting much attention these days, and every once in a while I do enjoy having a conversation. That's what message boards are for, after all.

 

^
Not to mention that Star Trek is about a lot more than just the current or most popular incarnation.

I know for a fact that Mr. Picard is a devoted TNG fan, and IMHO more than 'qualifies' to be on this board (beyond superb moderating skills and a delicious wit!).   One can be a Trek fan even if it's only one branch of the ST tree.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sim   

 

 I have never watched a Nu!Trek movie and I won't do so, I really don't want anything to do with it ... I'm really only a TNG fan, not a fan of all of Trek, I'm very picky about what I watch since I generally have no interest in sci-fi and/or action as a genre either, and since Nu!Trek falls into both of these... I'll pass. Gus' opinion was important to me though - because he seems to be going through something I can relate to (not really being into current Trek and having basically zero interest in it). 

So I guess this all begs the question: If you claim to have "zero" interest in the new universe, the new films, etc. Why are you in this particular forum at all? I ask because even people who come in here to just throw mud at the films and root for their failure, have at least seen them so they can form an opinion. Just curious.

 

1 - I'm a moderator, it's my JOB to read the things people post on this board, and that includes this sub forum here. We don't have specific moderators who moderate a specific part of the forum, everyone moderates everything when they're here. And reading, sometimes, also leads to posting.

2 - I don't "throw mud", that's simply not my thing, and I'm not here to start doing that either - as you said, I have never seen Nu!Trek and therefore throwing mud at it would be completely illogical. I'm simply a fandom bystander these days, a bystander who still feels a bit of regret that the Trek he likes won't ever be re-made but has come to terms with that, it had its time and that's okay, it wouldn't fit into today's world, and Trek has always been a mirror of its current real life era. I mostly do indeed stick to my TNG corner and I actually do agree that it's where I belong and should be, but I'm still happy that the fans seemed to like Beyond, and I'm the last person who tells others what to like and what not to like. Still, even bystanders have a right to express their thoughts every now and then, I'd say.

3 - This topic in particular spoke to me because, as I said, I can relate to some of what Gus is going through. That's why I'm posting in here sometimes. You won't find me in most of the other "Beyond" topics here, simply because I have nothing to say. I am not a regular participant.

4 - I created the Gay Sulu topic in this sub forum for obvious reasons. One is that no one had posted about it yet and it WAS big news, and the other one is that I'm gay, and a gay character is a "revolution" for Star Trek as a whole - it doesn't matter if I've seen Beyond or not or if I'm interested in it or not. It goes "beyond" that. (Sorry, that pun was just too good to ignore.)

5 - The other Trek sections (except for Discovery) aren't getting much attention these days, and every once in a while I do enjoy having a conversation. That's what message boards are for, after all.

 

^
Not to mention that Star Trek is about a lot more than just the current or most popular incarnation.

I know for a fact that Mr. Picard is a devoted TNG fan, and IMHO more than 'qualifies' to be on this board (beyond superb moderating skills and a delicious wit!).   One can be a Trek fan even if it's only one branch of the ST tree.  

Absolutely!

Guess you don't even have to be a Star Trek fan to be able to engage in interesting conversations here... people talk about Star Wars, Marvel, X-Files and plenty of other genre stuff, too. Depending on the news situation, these non-Trek threads even seem to be busier than the ST threads.

And I know a couple of people who only like one or two of the ST shows, but are disinterested in the others ... the question never arose if they are "real" fans. If you like just one aspect of the phenomenon, you'll probably have enough to talk about here. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, Sehlat. I also have zero interest in JJ TREK and DISCOVERY, but I will discuss old-time STAR TREK (TOS, TNG and DS9) wIth pleasure.

And the Omega Sector is an excellent place to discuss comic books, MARVEL movies and even DC Movies, which all are in my zone of interest right now.

Thats what made this place special to me, more so than een TrekWeb was.

Gus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, Sehlat. I also have zero interest in JJ TREK and DISCOVERY, but I will discuss old-time STAR TREK (TOS, TNG and DS9) wIth pleasure.

And the Omega Sector is an excellent place to discuss comic books, MARVEL movies and even DC Movies, which all are in my zone of interest right now.

Thats what made this place special to me, more so than een TrekWeb was.

Gus

Nice to hear.

We try to run a nice place.  ;)

theoffspring130.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

09remember back in 2006-2007 when news of what the new films were going to be was announced, this distanced you even further from the franchise. In your eyes, TOS was scared and the gold standard. Even though using the TOS characters really was the only way to go to rejuvenate a stale and dying franchise, you were steadfast in not at all being supportive of the new films and what they had to accomplish. I will say again though, if it wasn't for the critical and commercial success of J.J.'s films, there would likely be no new Star Trek TV series in 2017. You need mainstream audiences to want to see Star Trek and that hadn't been the case since the mid-90s.

 

-- Steve

This is completely true. As the "Everything Great About..." guy on Youtube said when speaking of '09, he actually knew several people that started sampling other Trek based on Pine and the gang and isn't that the point?

 

Had '09 and STID died on the vine, the likelihood of "Discovery" would have been pretty slim. For every high concept thing like "The Visitor," there has to be room for episodes like "The Doomsday Machine."

All that and...Trek has to make money. It just does.

I just have to say that Doomsaday Machine is great sci fi and great Tv and great storytelling period. Better than anything VOY or ENT ever pulled off. Not wanting to derail the thread, and I agree in so far as trek is best on tv cause it doesn't have to slum it in the pop action genre. I just don't think doomsday machine falls into that genre. 

prometheus59650,

Not at all and I agree with you, I am not glad that BEYOND dropped at the box office and I am not rooting for its failure. I just posted the links because I thought it was interesting that the best loved JJ TREK movie was doing worst than the previous two "maligned" movies. But yeah, I should have post just a link and get over with it. Blame this one too on my current mid-life crisis LOL

Gus

I wouldn't even say the 2009 film was maligned at all. Based on all the word of mouth I heard at the time (and the insane 95% Rotten Tomatoes rating), the first film was by far the most popular of the three. Into Darkness was the one that irked die-hard fans with it's rehash of the Khan plot, but non-fans wouldn't recognize any that... and that's why it made more money than the 2009 film did! I think if Beyond ends up not being as successful at the box office it's because Star Trek has more trouble holding regular non-fans than Star Wars does. Which makes the 4th film with Chris Hemsworth (who's a very popular mega-star) all that more crucial. I'm willing to bet the budget on the next film will be scaled back as well.

-- Steve

STID wasn't hated because it rehashed wrath of Kahn but because it was a stupid nonsensical mess of a story. If they had just remade wrath of Kahn like they remade A new hope into force awakens then it might have been slightly more acceptable. 

Hey Gus, I just have to say you're a great guy. Indeed you are.

It once was your passion for Star Trek that started you into this endeavour of working for TrekWeb, to keep up there even after the site owner had abandoned it, and I'm not sure what kept you going, if it was a sense of responsibility towards the fans and friends you met there, the passionate people who greatly appreciated your work, or the familiarity with the topic, or both; all the connections you've made, and all the investments you've done into this topic. Even when TrekWeb collapsed, you continued posting here, which was greatly appreciated by all your good old and new fan friends, and you can be sure you have found many people who appreciate you and admire your work here.

In political science, there is a concept that's called "path dependency"; it basically means that once the track is set, you can't easily abandon it, because so many people have made the same decision, and too much depends on it to change it, even when there are good reasons to do so. The layout of common typewriter and computer keyboards is such an example -- you have the "qwerty" keyboard, and although studies have found that other orders of the letters on the keyboard are much more efficient in theory, all new keyboards retain this order, because hundreds of thousands of people are used to it, have been schooled to work with it, and the costs of reschooling these people with a new keyboard layout would be much higher than the efficiency benefits of a new layout.

But this is not a technical matter, Gus, it's your life and passion. You feel that a great part of your life, Star Trek and the devotion to it, falls apart from your passion. Or don't you?

So it's really your decision to figure out for yourself... and certainly I can only speak for myself here. But I want to tell you that you will just be greatly appreciated here, as a mere, somewhat anonymous genre fan on this forum, even if you decided to abandon your devotion for Star Trek. You are not dependent on your "path". You've posted here so often that I feel I have an idea about you, and you're just as appreciated, included and welcome as anybody else, even if you suddenly decided to be nobody else than just "Gus the Marvel fan". Nobody would resent your disinterest in modern Star Trek.

So by all means -- you are under no obligation whatsoever to justify your dislike of AbramsTrek or even ST17, if you should dislike it, or feel dispassionate about it. You're still one of us, and your past contributions won't be forgotten, and you'll always be welcome here. :)

So yeah, really no need to feel ashamed or apologize. Many people dislike NuTrek. No big deal. ;)

wise words, Sim. And here's to TrekWeb. It was my first message board. I'll always remember it and it's followers fondly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Doomsday Machine" IS a great episode...I just don't think it's all that deep. It's honestly closer to any of the new movies than the likes of "The Visitor" for instance.

Edited by prometheus59650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sim is right. You don't have to justify anything, Gus. I don't care for Nu!Trek either, but just because I have decided to completely ignore it (and a great deal of other Trek stuff I dislike, too, since I'm not a die hard Trek fan I have the luxury of simply PICKING what I want to see/like, the name "Star Trek" doesn't automatically make me interested) doesn't mean that others can do the same. I've had frustrated Trek fans tell me that they envy how "zen" I am about the whole Nu!Trek thing by now. I guess they have a point, maybe. I just don't CARE about it, I want nothing to do with it, I've never seen it, and I don't plan on changing that, and that's all there is to it, just let me watch my beloved TNG in peace.

All this does not change the fact that Nu!Trek is there, of course. They made it, and they will keep on making it as long as they can milk cash from it. Those who dislike it are faced with three options: Ignore it, voice the problems you have with it or embrace it eventually. You, Gus, chose the second option and there's nothing wrong with that. I for one think it's refreshing to see that there are still people who say "nah folks, Nu!Trek ain't for me, no matter what they do, I'll never fall in love with it". It's as valid an opinion to have as any other. I know what it's like when (well-meaning!) fans try to push you into watching it or wanting for you to become interested and like it after all, and it takes a lot of "being zen" to just tell them - politely - that you would rather not and that it ain't for you and that you would prefer it if they just left you be. Trekkies are very enthusiastic and very passionate, and they simply want to share their experiences, good or bad, and it can be a little frustrating for both sides to tell them "nah sorry not this one for me, please".

Of course, for you Gus, things are even more difficult since you have always been so involved with Trek. I for one can understand completely that you're torn between your love for Old Trek and your frustration about Nu!Trek and that this inner conflict just wants out sometimes.

In short: You got this, Gus. You're trying your best to find a balance, and I for one think that's commendable.

well I've seen them all and I didn't care either. Beyond made me want to care. But here is another hurdle: if all we are going to get is one more movie it's kind of hard to get invested. The previous two film franchises we were already invested in the crews. It's the failure of bad robot that this crew doesn't get cooking until its third and fourth film. 

Gus, what are the latest Beyond numbers? Is it tanking in a way that will make paramount reconsider the franchises future? I have not been following this at all with all the other news going on. Suffice to say I assumed I would see Beyond a second time but I just haven't gotten around to it ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the link to the Sulu is breakout first gay character and now its canon thread?

Beyond was pretty awesome and unexpected. I hope it does better over all and becomes more of a sleeper hit.

Into Darkness probably somewhat soured the milk and people weren't as hip to it.

Also is it too late in production to change Discovery's timeline to somewhere post Nemesis? Ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, the Toronto Star website just posted an article on the sci-fi movie ARRIVALS which features a few quotes from STAR TREK BEYOND actor/writer Simon Pegg on the Current State of Blockbusters Movies. Here is an excerpt of the article with Pegg quotes.

“Part of me looks at society as it is now and just thinks we’ve been infantilized by our own taste,” noted actor Simon Pegg, who plays chief engineer Scotty in the Star Trek movie reboot and is, therefore, the last one you would expect to speak out.
 
“Now we’re essentially all consuming very childish things — comic books, superheroes. Adults are watching this stuff and taking it seriously.
 
“It is a kind of dumbing down, in a way, because it’s taking our focus away from real-world issues. Films used to be about challenging, emotional journeys or moral questions that might make you walk away and re-evaluate how you felt about . . . whatever.
 
“Now we’re walking out of the cinema really not thinking about anything, other than the fact that the Hulk just had a fight with a robot.”
 
Edited by GustavoLeao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, the Toronto Star website just posted an article on the sci-fi movie ARRIVALS which features a few quotes from STAR TREK BEYOND actor/writer Simon Pegg on the Current State of Blockbusters Movies. Here is an excerpt of the article with Pegg quotes.

“Part of me looks at society as it is now and just thinks we’ve been infantilized by our own taste,” noted actor Simon Pegg, who plays chief engineer Scotty in the Star Trek movie reboot and is, therefore, the last one you would expect to speak out.
 
“Now we’re essentially all consuming very childish things — comic books, superheroes. Adults are watching this stuff and taking it seriously.
 
“It is a kind of dumbing down, in a way, because it’s taking our focus away from real-world issues. Films used to be about challenging, emotional journeys or moral questions that might make you walk away and re-evaluate how you felt about . . . whatever.
 
“Now we’re walking out of the cinema really not thinking about anything, other than the fact that the Hulk just had a fight with a robot.”
 

Not all movies were about something. Sure Casablanca was a thin critique on the second World War as seen through a simple interlude in a bar. Sure Apocalyptic Now was a Vietnam update of Heart of Darkness, with a man exploring (not a warrior) who goes mad. Citizen Kane is just about the mystery of Rosebud through an eccentric millionaire and a riff on Hearst, a newspaper mogul. Malcolm X was about the political civil rights figure.

Sure you have topic movies. Star Trek really hasn't been a topic movie franchise since 1986. The last time they actually did an issue was The Voyage Home with the whales.

The Abrams movies, even to some extent Beyond, are not topic movies. They're action movies. That's fine.

Moby Dick in space would just be weird as Star Trek, unless it's turned into Wrath of Khan, which is what they've been trying to redo several times.

Now Beyond had kind of done Heart of Darkness (the original idea for Insurrection, 1998). with a villain that has gone so mad and been so altered he had lost his way.

Plenty of movies without a point have been done throughout cinema history. What was the point of Six Degrees of Separation, other than closeness is like math and Will Smith's character is a phony?

Fried Green Tomatoes was just about growing older, as was Cocoon, as was Terms of Endearment.

Sometimes we go to movies to escape and be entertained. I would much rather sit through a mind numbing movie (such as Marvel movies or X Men movies) on a given day, than some kind of long haired talking movie. Tree of Life was impossible to follow. Gone with the Wind was just very long, even if the message was civil war is bad and rich people's kids are annoying. (GWTW features perhaps the most shrill and annoying child in cinema history, since the later introduction of Macaulay Culkin's character in Home Alone).

Comedies like the National Lampoons movies were not supposed to be high art, and neither was Shawn of the Dead, but they were fun.

I take it that this article is a little sarcastic and is ribbing the film industry, but the guy is one talk about being in silly movies. Ha.

So there are periods where they were just wacky movies with silly plots all through history.

It's not like there still aren't dramas made. Edge of Seventeen is an excellent thoughtful drama film about teenagers dealing with life. It is one of the year's best films, and is under rated by audiences.

Sully was also excellent, about that pilot who landed the plane on the Hudson. It was a thoughtful drama.

Deepwater Horizon and 13 Hours devolved into action pictures, but the original messages were clear and retold at the end.

Arrival, the current one, is thought provoking.

The classic film The Network (not the Net with Bullock, the other one) and Broadcast News which satirized the media were excellent films with thought.

Or you can watch Anchorman if you just want brainless comedy.

I did not include Star Trek VI as there is another new thread about that.

The original Halloween was actually scary.

Beyond was fun but a lot like a Marvel movie, so it's like what is he saying? Is he saying he didn't like his own movie? Ha.

Edited by Chimera82405

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, the Toronto Star website just posted an article on the sci-fi movie ARRIVALS which features a few quotes from STAR TREK BEYOND actor/writer Simon Pegg on the Current State of Blockbusters Movies. Here is an excerpt of the article with Pegg quotes.

“Part of me looks at society as it is now and just thinks we’ve been infantilized by our own taste,” noted actor Simon Pegg, who plays chief engineer Scotty in the Star Trek movie reboot and is, therefore, the last one you would expect to speak out.
 
“Now we’re essentially all consuming very childish things — comic books, superheroes. Adults are watching this stuff and taking it seriously.
 
“It is a kind of dumbing down, in a way, because it’s taking our focus away from real-world issues. Films used to be about challenging, emotional journeys or moral questions that might make you walk away and re-evaluate how you felt about . . . whatever.
 
“Now we’re walking out of the cinema really not thinking about anything, other than the fact that the Hulk just had a fight with a robot.”
 

Pegg is not wrong here, and his statements also back up what Chris Pine said before the movie came out. The attention spans and tastes from mainstream audiences have changed drastically since the 1980s and 1990s. Die-hard Star Trek fans can criticize J.J. Abrams for making the last three films as he did, but they are (a) exactly what the studio hired him to make and (b) for the most part were successful in their execution. As I have said before, the Star Trek we grew up with is ideally suited for episodic television. But that doesn't mean we can't enjoy a 2-hour, action packed, epic adventure on the big screen once in a while too. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a side note, the Toronto Star website just posted an article on the sci-fi movie ARRIVALS which features a few quotes from STAR TREK BEYOND actor/writer Simon Pegg on the Current State of Blockbusters Movies. Here is an excerpt of the article with Pegg quotes.

“Part of me looks at society as it is now and just thinks we’ve been infantilized by our own taste,” noted actor Simon Pegg, who plays chief engineer Scotty in the Star Trek movie reboot and is, therefore, the last one you would expect to speak out.
 
“Now we’re essentially all consuming very childish things — comic books, superheroes. Adults are watching this stuff and taking it seriously.
 
“It is a kind of dumbing down, in a way, because it’s taking our focus away from real-world issues. Films used to be about challenging, emotional journeys or moral questions that might make you walk away and re-evaluate how you felt about . . . whatever.
 
“Now we’re walking out of the cinema really not thinking about anything, other than the fact that the Hulk just had a fight with a robot.”
 

Pegg is not wrong here, and his statements also back up what Chris Pine said before the movie came out. The attention spans and tastes from mainstream audiences have changed drastically since the 1980s and 1990s. Die-hard Star Trek fans can criticize J.J. Abrams for making the last three films as he did, but they are (a) exactly what the studio hired him to make and (b) for the most part were successful in their execution. As I have said before, the Star Trek we grew up with is ideally suited for episodic television. But that doesn't mean we can't enjoy a 2-hour, action packed, epic adventure on the big screen once in a while too. :thumbup:

Yep, it's best suited for TV. The movies really have been kind of topical for their times, and not really cerebral as we like to think. Only really some thinking themes went into some of the stories. TMP was the awe and wonder one where they find a villain who turns out to be a space probe,

TWOK was the submarine battle,

TSFS was the search for a soul, er Spock,

TVH was saving the whales,

TFF was defying a false prophet and blasting a false God,

TUC was a cold war parable and battling a scary guy trying to kill people,

STG was about the passage of time and fighting a planet killing bad guy,

STFC was about fighting space zombies and time travel to first contact,

STI was about displacing a culture that had the secret to youth,

STN was about a clone of Picard threatening folks,

ST09 was about a time trapped Romulan threatening folks and killing planets,

STID was about an evil villain threatening folks and punching hard, and then fighting in a big ship.

STB was about finding a lost and mutated human on a planet but he's a villain who tries to destroy a station.

Thought went into them, but for the most part they were action stories. 

Edited by Chimera82405

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites