★ Star Wars vs. Star Trek || V. 14 ★

[[please delete]]

301.
The film was made to appeal to a modern audience [hence the ridiculous scene with Carol and Kirk]. It does not have much to do with the original television series and films, apart from the characters and their key traits, and was made only to spark interest in Star Trek. The disregard in the beginning was simply there to create an element of suspense [and a way to progress the Spock/Uhura romance and friendship between Kirk and Spock], as was the anti-gravity scene. I do not believe that movie-goers would be as happy with a film that mirrored the original stories. Though none of this justifies the complete alteration of the story line in any way.

I had no idea that the Enterprise was unable to withstand that kind of pressure. I suppose I should have pieced it together, considering the fact that problems always arise when she is pulled in too close by a planet's gravitational forces in TOS.

I have a quick question: Is there any mention of Khan in later episodes of TOS [or any show for that matter], or is he found only in The Wrath of Khan?

- - -

You can pretty much disregard everything I said in that essay up there, seeing as I am a new Star Trek fan and know just a tad bit of the information there is to know. All I have are my opinions.

- - -

@LOCW: I will never stop loving SW, man.
It speaks to me on a spiritual level.
Haha what.

[LOCW_Bluestarwarrior]

302
XD Good. I kind of know what you mean. Doesn't sound weird to me at all.

[[please delete]]

301.
I have a bad feeling about this.
I just really wanted to say that.
Ignore me.

[Kazza.]

300.
"Do or do not, there is no try."
If I had a dime for every time I heard that, I would own the Federal Reserve.

[[please delete]]

299.
If I had a dime for every time I've said it, I would have around ten dollars.

[Kazza.]

298.
My friend said practically every day.
For a year.
And now, she says occasionally.
Like once a month. Maybe once a week.

[[please delete]]

297.
I say it automatically any time the word "try" is said near me.
It has become a bit of a habit.

[Time Traverser]

296
I can see where you're coming from, but Star Trek isn't about ratings when you get to the core of it. We shouldn't have to put half-naked women on screen just to get people to watch something.

It puts a burr under my saddle to see them disregard what truly made Star Trek great. The Golden Rule and basic plot element of most episodes, especially more so in the oldest ones, is to follow the Prime Directive. It's such a rigid rule that must be followed with due cause. Time and time again it is proven that our meddling with the progress of other planets, races and societies causes ruin. No real Starfleet Captain would send a spaceborn ship into the atmosphere of a planet, endangering the crew, the ship and the inhabitants of the planet.

They are also a bit reckless and dubious with the use of warp-drives in the reboot movies. They use while in orbit and blindly. It's not a scapegoat to be abused. There is a significant amount of math and science at work. Pulling to warp next to a planet or star could disrupt the orbital arch and send the space-body spinning out of orbit or careening into another nearby object.

The way they handle the relationship of Spock and Kirk in Into Darkness was appalling. To newcomers it must be so confusing. They spend the entire movie begrudgingly glaring and fighting but yet the writers expect the audience to be sympathetic to them during the warp core scene. After watching The Wrath of Khan, Into Darkness is just silly. If they really wanted us to be really in suspense they wouldn't have mentioned the tribble experiment at all. I could go into a deep debate about Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock but it would spoil the movies for you if you haven't watched them yet.

They don't really mention Khan after his episodes. That's what Star Trek II was for.

If they really wanted to properly reboot Star Trek the correct way they wouldn't need to add scenes with half naked people or completely disregard decades of canon just to make a pretty movie. Star Trek is about the future and about changing ourselves. It was about being bold and bringing heated topics to light. These reboots seem to be backpedaling us. Star Trek is about progress and innovations, to encounter new races and different ideals, to change the mindset of others and to bring our shortcomings. A true reboot of Star Trek would be epic and cataclysmic in this new day and age. There would be so much political heat and backlash if they made a series to put human rights and planet-wide issues into the harsh reality of day. It would be amazing. Imagine a show where they discuss how to combat intergalactic hunger, solving political unrest, embracing diversity in all its tangents. It would be fantastic and bold. One day I hope they realize this and stop thinking about the money foremost and the impact last.
---
EDIT: Ahah, I wrote so many words. LOL

[Kazza.]

295.
-twitch- I just read an entire journal entry about the financial well-being of senior citizens compared to that of people younger than 64. My next one will be about the "Advantages and Disadvantages of Electric Paycheck Bank Deposits" and then I have one on taxes and another on budgeting.
(ﾉ⊙‿⊙)ﾉ～

[[please delete]]

294.

*** Traverser, I will be amazed if you manage to read through all of this without quitting or flipping a table in aggravation. ***

I agree with everything you have said, and I wish they would come to their senses just as much as you do. However, the world revolves around money. To filmmakers, keeping the plot of the movie canonical is unimportant, especially if it will potentially decrease the appeal of the film.

Even with my limited knowledge, I understand that Gene Roddenberry created the series to show that there is hope for mankind. Most films and television shows paint a picture of the future that is disturbing and frightening to think about; they make it seem as if there is no hope for a better tomorrow. Star Trek is about showing that all lifeforms in this galaxy can band together to face any adversary that may come our way. It proves that we as humans can learn to accept those around us, despite the fact that they look, think, or behave in ways that we are not accustomed to. TOS was ahead of its time; it challenged discriminations that existed at the time and won.

I am speaking with the opinions of a newcomer. I can honestly say [and without shame] that I was attracted to Into Darkness by the flashy lights, action-packed scenes, and casting of Benedict Cumberbatch. I did not care about the characters, the story line, or previous films/series. Looking back on this, I realize why older fans are disgusted by the new films. The interest of potential-moviegoers should be sparked by the story itself; the morals and meanings behind the film; and the depth of the characters involved. Not fancy special effects and famous actors.

I will always like the new films, scientific inaccuracies and all [after all, I know nothing of the science of space travel; I will certainly read up on it when I am able]. I see nothing wrong with loving both reboot-Trek and classic-Trek. I myself decided upon entering the fandom to organize them into two separate entities [I do this with Marvel comics, as well, to prevent me from becoming angry at the filmmakers]. But I digress. Horribly.

In conclusion, I hope you do not think that I disagree with you in any way. I also hope that you understand that I never intended to start a debate. It is my natural response to defend the underdog [in this case, J.J. Abrams] so I hope you will forgive me for all of this reading. I pray I did not offend and/or annoy you in any way.

-scurries away and hides under a mountain of Tribbles-