To many, Trek is a beautiful lady….and we love her.

But more often than not, Trek is a bunch of pretty flowers…that smell BAAADDDD!

;-)

However, Stark Trek evolved into a 40-year adventure, built upon a foundation of consistent storytelling. Each iteration developed in part on the history of it’s previous series. That cohesion, plus good writing on the Human Condition is what Star Trek is all about. Trek was not just science fiction, but a vehicle to address social and economic issues affecting man through a sci-fi vehicle

——

That’s arguable at best. The 40-year adventure is rife with jarring inconsistencies as well as wild fluctuations in quality. It has missed the mark as many times as it has hit it…painful but true.

Also, it’s too early to declare that the new movie is bereft of social commentary. Since Mr. Orci is a huge Trek fan, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that he ‘gets’ what makes Star Trek work. Mr. Nimoy’s participation also gives me cause for optimism.

And to you, my apologies, since English isn’t your first language. But I’m sure that in excess of 90% of the cases, the posters here using ‘cannon,’ when they mean ‘canon,’ do not have your excuse (which you don’t have, either, really, since you not only admitted, but INDEED admitted you know the difference between – and how’s that for grammar?) Additionally, the fact that posting on this site is not “professional writing” is irrelevant. As I (and others) have said many times previously, there is no excuse for it. They are two different words, two different spellings, with two different meanings. If it was a one time deal, you could chalk it up to ignorance, a typo, whatever. But when it has been pointed out over and over and over and over, how many times does it take for people to see it? So, no slack cutting will be forthcoming. It’s ignorance and laziness that you can’t make excuses for since so many people have made such an issue about it. Everyone needs to learn the difference between the words, use them correctly from now on, and forget about it.

And a belated thank you to Anthony (who is probably the only one reading this thread at this point.) I appreciate that he let the political discussion re Star Trek/Obama go on for a while. We were able to discuss it without it getting heated, and I was pleased to see the different perspectives and mildly surprised that so many people here are concerned about Obama and aren’t taking part in the media-inspired worship that seems so common. My impression is that there are many more Trek fans at the left end of the political spectrum than on the right (the true right; real conservatives and libertarians, not the neo-cons like Bush et al, who are at the left end with the other big government folks), and it’s nice to see I’m not the only Trek fan that doesn’t buy into the collectivist mentality. (Sorry for that little jab, but that’s how I see it, and I appreciate Anthony allowing some leeway and diversity as I said before. And I withdraw some of my previous snotty remarks now that he’s practicing some true IDIC.:-) )

No one is discarding anything. As happens with all heroic myths, a new version of that story is being told.

No one is saying the new Trek is the greatest movie ever. But most of us (at 33 years old, I saw Star Trek from its second UK run onwards and grew up on TOS) are fans who are excited to see these characters return and are enthusiastic about the film.

You’ll find that most of us are happy to discuss the new film, while the knuckle-draggers are directly out to spoil our party, rather than contribute anything beyond ‘This film will suck!’ After two years of whingers saying little else, you’ll understand why the inhabitants of site called ‘TrekMOVIE.com’ are getting a bit tired of the endless, witless vitriol.

So you think the classics fans should be completely alienated after years of selfless devotion? Discarded like a used kleenex? Told they no linger matter? That they arent entitled to an opinion about something they care deeply about? It’s not whining, it’s CARING.

I had forgotten that people here were only entitled to their opinions if they praise JJ and his upcoming, perfect work of art.

Any effort that sacrifices old fans for new ones deserves neither.

I really want to like this movie, the trailer gives me the feeling that this looks really cool. I honestly get the tingles in the back of my neck when I see the trailer. But when I read the descritptions of 20 minutes of the film, it sounded like someone kind of just aped Star Wars. And the other thing that kind of bugs me is that it seems like I know more about the characters and who met who than the writers. And Abrams is a really talented guy that if he wants to do a film like the original Star Wars he could without blatantly copying them.

I want to like this film. It looks cool. But I am now kind of worried.

But why can’t Altman avoid dropping the F-bomb three times? It detracts from his credibility. An otherwise cogent article is cheapened by the use of that word. Doesn’t add a thing. Not cool. And believe me, I’m no prude.

He’s a good enough writer to not need it.

Sure WE already knew it but in 30 years time when my great grandchildren watch the 6 films in order I think they’d be more impressed NOT knowing who the second twin was and NOT knowing who Darth Vader is. If they’d edited those elements out it would have been a shorter and better film.

With Trek, the things they seem to have changed have been for the sake of convenience, which is annoying. They could allude to Kirk being a bookworm simply by featuring Gary Mitchell in once scene referring to Kirk as a bookworm. Job done.