ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Classic versus New

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 10 2013, 5:18 pm

The REB00T SERIES is how TOS was always MEANT to be!
The Original Series is also one of my Guilty Pleasures ...
I mean, let's face it, even with the special effects redo's,
drop-ins and enhancements, no CGI can alter the many
1960's T.V. aspects, or William Shatner's atrocious acting.
Yet, when you see some guy in a gorilla suit, play-acting
with Shatner out in a public park ... that does not owe for
spectacle! So, I still enjoy TOS, sure. There's room for both.


willowtree

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1137

Report this Sep. 13 2013, 10:05 am

I don't for a second buy that the remakes were how trek was "supposed to be" unless Gene Roddenberry comes to me himself and says so.


I don't think it's a "sin" to like both, but I personally don't like the new movies. I think they lack everything that made Trek special and unique

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Sep. 13 2013, 5:17 pm

I'm a die-hard NEXT GENERATION
fan and yet, I find the original series
to be fun camp! It's most enjoyable.
Now, finally, praise you Jesus, the
Original Series can be presented in
a way that transcends the era it was
made in ... even the acting is far
superior to the TOS era. I for one
hope the sequels keep going beyond
the slated three. The reboot has
captured the FUN of TOS, without the
camp of TOS. A far superior product.


rodsterinfl

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3

Report this Sep. 14 2013, 5:39 pm

Like you I was raised on TREK but I wore out vhs tapes of the movies, bought laserdiscs of two movies and own DVD and now blue ray of all movies and have all the series. I enjoy the classic STAR TREK because of its cerebral problem solving nature. Each series varied on the degree of action IMO but overall it is a great tribute to entertainment. That said, while I like most all things sci-fi, I do not care for the change to STAR TREK. I enjoyed watching both new movies for what they were- good sci-fi but it is not the same. The focus is, as most modern movies, on special effect and action. I like it but there is a difference between the classic trek and the new one and to me, they do not compare.


Ironically though, I rank classic trek very different from many. I found NG to be often boring with too little action and all talk and DS 9 not much different. The best balance in classic STAR TREK was IMO, Voyager with good content, detailed problem solving (cerebral) and action. This new TREK is somewhat out of focus to me, not only reality difference but almost like a all out action movie in space or something with sex scenes of course. Kinda like the last two 007 James Bond flicks only in space. 

skok

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 24

Report this Sep. 15 2013, 12:03 pm

I like the New trek as well. . . . .they have respected most of the Conventions that made ST what it is for almost 50years now. For example Spock. . . .never thought i could like anyone as Spock other than Nimoy, but i stand Corrected. . . . . .Didnt care for the Beastie Boys nonsense with Kirks Upbringing. . but so be it. . . . . .


Only Gripe about the new movies is (at least in Into Darkness) the NEVER ending Famliy Guy style "Chicken Fight". . . .same with Robocop2. . . .it just never ended, on & on & on & on. . . .by the time the SF scene came up i was bored & tryin to figure out how much longer i gotta sit through this, checked FB etc. . . . . .


Star Trek is about the Human Condition. . . . .leave the never ending CGI battles for Transformers/Teenie Bopper Crowds or whatever. . . . .I mean, we dont see EVERY second of traveling form Kronos to Earth. . . . .do we need to see EVERY fingernail scratch & spilled water bottle of every squabble. . . . . .

Hawklord

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1432

Report this Sep. 25 2013, 4:05 pm

Like what YOU want to like, regardless of what anyone else says!

poundpuppy29

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 96

Report this Oct. 01 2013, 10:30 pm

No it is not a Sin I hope we get new Trek with new characters and a new series I think it is possible more than before


 photo STcomfinalIRRH2.jpg poundpuppy29 AKA Erika My Fav Scifi /Fantasy T.V. Shows, Movies, My Franchises, My Fav Ships, My Fav Characters & My Sports Teams & My Fav Sitcom

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2161

Report this Oct. 02 2013, 4:29 pm

Quote: TravisMalcolm @ Aug. 19 2013, 5:45 pm

>

>Do you like "The lord of the rings"? I worship the books and the author (along with Dickens and Dame Christie) but hated the first two movies and refused to watch the third one. However, the movies introduced countless people to the original. So, no it's not a sin.

>


I loved Lord Of The Rings trilogy, but--even though the new Hobbit movies follow the book pretty closely--they don't seem as interesting, somehow.  Perhaps it's the curse of being prequels to an incredibly fantastic finish.


Being a Vulcan fan, I hated the way the new timeline ruined the previous one, instead of developing its strengths.  So, I do not plan to watch any of the new Trek movies until they bring the timeline back to its original pathway.


Var Miklama--Zakdorn, engineer. "A sound mind in a FULL body!" "Time, like latinum, is a limited quantity in the galaxy."

Orlenda

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 84

Report this Oct. 09 2013, 7:06 am

well.....i personally didnt care for the new movie (and i havent seen STID yet)-it isnt that i'm inflexable, its just that it didnt have the roddenberry flare that makes trek trek for me.....trek is about morals and values, and this new movie was just an action film.  I didnt like ENT for the same reason.  Fun is fine and all-but i need substance to really enjoy something.  As someone that enjoys science, history, and ethics-Trek that makes me think is the trek for me.

SpockType

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 289

Report this Jan. 28 2014, 12:56 pm

It certainly isn't a sin to like both classic and new. I also do. I'd also say it's more like being broadminded. 


A mind is like a parachute - it works best when open.

Securion

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6

Report this Jan. 28 2014, 3:53 pm

STO was like every other cheap and stupid sci-fi show during that time; Horribly bad.
TNG was what made Star Trek into Star Trek. Without it there wouldnt be a Star Trek following to this day.
VOY was good as well.
DS9 was good except from the horribel acting from Avery Brooks and all the garbage about religion. (Seriously?! RELIGION in a Star Trek series?!)


imho

Post Reply

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum