[quote]Feb. 22 2011, 1:06 pm
It's been my opinion that Star Trek movies have been up until 2009, cookie cutter movies. None of them really evolved the franchise/universe/timeline and for me whilst I love them all to different degrees, they were simply made out of the popularity of the TV series.
In 2009 that really did all change. I'm not going to go into great depths but It was obvious that Star Trek from Insurrection/Voyager and Nemesis/Enterprise were running on empty creatively. Star Trek was tired.
JJ Abrams comes along and BAM Trek comes back, reengages a wider, broader audience and gives the franchise a purpose and relevancy in and for the modern world. Forget the ridiculous opinions that this movie betrayed the fans or insulted the canon - canon is a ridiculous concept anyway - stupid - it's all crap and over emotional fans stuck in their ways - if anything could be said about these fans is that they have been for far too long stuck with the notion that Star Trek has to be made a certain way - a way that in the end killed it.
the 2009 movie was a fantastic change of pace, it brought the Star Trek myth alive in a way that had never been seen before and like TNG before it, it was the first time Star Trek had actually embraced it's own notion of boldly going where no one has gone before.
The franchise evolved and embraced a third generation of it's legacy on May 8th and as far as I'm concerned, all for the better. A new generation can now enjoy the qualities that made Star Trek so enjoyable for my generation - I'm an 80's kid, I was brought up with TNG - that Star Trek spoke to me, this Star Trek will speak to a whole new generation and that alone is brilliant. All you winers out there have to accept that something like Star Trek can't stay in one place or tell stories one way or to one group of people forever.
Trekkers/Trekkies - who cares, it's just a word used to define a group of people - it means very little other than that.
[/quote]
1701, I totally agree with what you've written here. It's refreshing to see someone who "grew up" on TNG and that era of Star Trek demonstrate an understanding for why it was necessary to go in the direction that the latest film went.
I can say this much: Obviously this topic has been debated to the point of inducing involuntary vomiting on most of our parts, and I've weighted in REPEATEDLY with my feelings. I think the bottom line (to answer the original question) is:
Star Trek 2009 is "for" anyone who chooses to enjoy it. That's why it did so well in the theaters and with the critics. While not "prefect," it's an overwhelmingly likable film with charm, wit, adventure, and emotion.
The only people it's not "for" are those people who (consciously or subconsciously) WANTED and perhaps NEEDED to hate it. I'm not going to go into the points that you've articulated...but I agree wholeheartedly with every one of them. BUT, prior to and following the opening of this film, you should have seen some of the complaints on this message board from "Star Trek fans." It was, quite frankly, embarassing and DISTRESSING and it has actually permanently scarred my perception of Trek fans.
These people would do the online equivilant of throwing themselves on the ground, kicking and screaming about such details like (I'm not kidding you...you can't make this $#it up):
1. The Kelvin has a "zero" to start it's registry number.
2. The ship corridors shown on the "Under Construction" website (way before the movie was released) were "too dark and not Star Trek-like"
3. Kirk shouldn't have killed Nero at the end of the movie because that's "not what Gene would have wanted" (oh, somebody f-in shoot me)
4. The design of the Enterprise bridge is an "ergonomic nightmare."
5. YOU CAN'T BUILD A STARSHIP ON THE GROUND!!! ARRRHHHHHGGG!!!
6. The warp drive effect is "too much like Star Wars!!! NOOOOOO!"
7. The commercial said "not your father's Star Trek EEHHHH!! DISRESPECT!!!"
8. (one of my favorites) The characters are all too cool and good looking.
9. (another favorite) Captain Robau walks through stupid plastic flaps like you'd find in a walk-in freezer. NO! WORST TREK MOVEE EVAR!!!!!
Anyway, I think you get the point. And, I honestly think that the movie was INDEED NOT made for these people. I think it was a purposeful and intentionally calculated decision (risk). And, it clearly paid off. It was these types of people that Berman and Braga were trying to cater to in the post TNG era...and the result was stagnation and irrelevance, despite best intentions. This is why it's best when the creators DON'T LISTEN to what the fans want. JJ knew that. Don't give them what they want... Give them what they need, and accept that there will be fallout.
And, people are still struggling with it today. There are people who can't let go. And they won't. They'll continue to fight what they consider to be a "nobel battle" for "what GENE would have wanted" and that kind of rhetorical crap. They're blinded by their own selfishness for what THEY think the franchise shold be, and they lose sight of what the franchise MUST be.
