Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112
I do not mean to disparage....and forgive me if it sounds as if I am....but, the folks who did not like the new Trek are in the vocal minority apparently.
The new Trek is likely going to continue as it did for the first film, although admittedly, I hope with a somewhat meatier story.
However, in the end, Star Trek is many things to many different people.
For some, it is Roddenberry dogmatism, which, I hate to say, I've found rather hypocriticial.
For others, despite Roddenberry's POV, it it still something worthy of some profundity and headiness.
For still others, it is an action tale with hot babes and one apparently well-endowed paramour for these babes that we all wish we were.
For me, Star Trek resembles everything, from heady stories, to all out action flicks, to starship porn, to beautiful babes in the sack with the Captain (myself wishing I were said captain) LOL!
I cannot subscribe to the "one truth" about Star Trek, because there is no "one truth". As I've said, Star Trek is many things to many people. For some, it is a multitude of things...for others, it is a singular matter. But regardless...Trek is Trek, as is Battlestar is Battlestar.
I only get fanboyish when it comes to covering up Wonder Woman or Lara Croft....otherwise, let things go as they may.  |
Steve -
Pardon me a bit, but some of the comments you've made feel just a bit on the edge of being a bit disparaging. It's one thing to comment on the film, what you like, what you don't and why, but the discussion surrounding the 2009 film seems to mirror the same kind of conversation back in 2003+ over the remake version of BSG. I'm not trying to drag that up again, but the big problem back then was that the discussion always turned personal. The discussion started out well enought, but then it got rather pointed when discussing those that liked it and those that didn't The comments always alluded to either side's viewpoint as being part of an inherent character flaw (i.e. "fans that like it are....." or "folks that don't like it are...")
Whenever someone says that they don't like the 2009 film, even when they elaborate what they did or didn't like about it, there's always someone bringing up how much money it made, what's wrong with the Trek fans that didn't like it and so on. Those comments seem to be made in an effort to dismiss or deflect the comments posted by those that didn't enjoy it.
In the end, it really is about individual likes and dislikes. Most, if not all of us are of an age where there's room for all opinions. It doesn't have to be characterized as being "dogmatic" or "hypocritical". If you can accept the axiom that Trek means many things to many people, then you should be able to accept that not all Trek fans share the same viewpoint, or that their viewpoint is not irrelevant because you view it as a vocal minority. Why does it matter how many people like or dislike it?
I've seen quite a few discussions on the 2009 film take place on multiple message boards. On one board, every time the discussion comes up, it always results in the thread being locked because it takes a personal turn. People are just not going to agree on this, but that doesn't mean that people that enjoy the film are sycophants or miscreants because they feel how they feel. It's just a difference of opinion and as simple as that.
The days of "my Trek beats your Trek" is something that all of us should be well past at our stage of life, be it fanboyish or not.
Bryan
