Wil Wheaton Advises Trekkies To ‘Relax’ Over New Star Trek Movie February 20, 2009
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Celebrity, Star Trek (2009 film), TNG , trackback
Yesterday it was reported that TNG’s Wil Wheaton participated in (and blogged about) the Star Trek segment of the MTV Spoilers show (airing Saturday at 8PM EST). Today Wheaton blogged some more about the show, and has some advice for his fellow Trek geeks, excerpts below.
Relax!
Go to MTV’s Blog to see the full post from Wheaton, but here are a couple of quotes
It was all stuff that I’ve seen already, but it looked cool and everyone in the theater loved it. You know, a lot of my fellow Trekkies are all worked up because the trailer shows all this action stuff, and I keep hearing people dismissively calling it “Star Trek: 90210” just because there are young people in it or something. I really hope those guys can take a step back and realize a couple of things: these trailers and previews aren’t aimed at us; they’re aimed at teenagers, so they have to be presented in a language that they understand.
…
This is not to say that the “Star Trek” movie is all mindless action, or style over substance; I can’t tell you why, but I know that it isn’t. I also can’t tell you why, but I also know that it’s pretty goddamn awesome.
I guess what I’m saying is, relax, people. This isn’t “Dukes of Hazzard” or “Land of the Lost.”
Read the full blog post at MTV. Plus Wheaton has also blogged at MTV about his thoughts on the new Watchmen movie.
Loading ...
Comments»
Thanks Wil!
I vote its going to be awesome, 90210 or not.
I agree 100% Wil!
“This isn’t “Dukes of Hazzard” ”
…. someone needs to do a mashup of Boss Hog chasing after Kirk and Spock intermediately! Extra points for a green skinned Daisy Dukes making googly eyes at James T.
Thank you for that, Will. Much appreciated.
Goddamn right!
It honors Federation Day (US release date), what’s more to want?
Once again, it seems appropriate to note that the characters and universe of Star Trek have earned a place amongst literary icons such as Tarzan and Sherlock Holmes. The public has come to accept many iterations of these stories, to varied acclaim.
As far as I know, this has not ever happened to TV series characters and scenarios. ( I welcome correction on this)
More than any other advice to the skeptic, I offer this paradigm as the best chance to see the new movie for what it is: a high budget iteration of classic beloved characters. I intend to sit back and enjoy the ride.
And then there is Phase II which just keeps getting better and better.
Trek fans: just be glad our franchise didn’t go the way of many others: death by corporate boardroom decision. We have kept it alive. We can continue to keep it alive.
Will… THANK YOU! I’ve never posted on this site before but I get sick of hearing people take shots at a movie they’ve NEVER EVEN SEEN YET. You have to go into this with an open mind and actually see the movie before you judge it. Just remember, “prime” Trek gave us The Final Frontier and Nemesis…shouldn’t JJ and company get a fair shot at releasing their movie before everybody blasts them for it?
Correction: “Wil” …oops
I’ve always been confident that JJ knew what he was doing, but I will say it’s nice to hear good things from Wil too.
He’s always been pretty straightforward when talking about the Trek movies and series. If it outright sucked, I’m sure he would say so.
Well, I have a lot of faith in Wil’s judgment in this sort of thing. Especially since early on, he expressed the same annoyance I was feeling at constantly being told “this movie is not being made for Star Trek fans” and having the people behind the movie always making jabs at us. So, this really does make me feel good.
Hey now, don’t be rippin’ on Land of The Lost. Them’s fighting words.
Agree with the “relax” sentiment. Be thankful there’s ANY kind of Trek movie being made, particularly in these economic times!!!
I like Wil, but surely as talented as he is, he can construct a commentary without profanity. And I wish TrekMovie.com would exercise a bit more discretion in editing out such profanity in quotes and/or response postings….
No Dukes of Hazzard? You mean the Enterprise will NOT be painted orange, have the Confederate flag on the saucer and jump the Mutara Nebula? Nooooooooooooo!
I’m a life-long fan of the show and I loved the Dukes of Hazard movie…
Personally, I’m not worked up because of the action stuff. Action is awesome.
I’m worked up because I hate the production design of almost everything I’ve seen thus far.
Wil Wheaton… the voice of reason.
Dukes Of Hazard
The Dukes are more of a Star Wars comparrison.
General lee is Millennium Falcon
Luke is Luke,
Bo is Han,
Daisy is Leia
Uncle Jesse is Obi Wan
Cooter is Chewie
Rosco is Darth Vader-always chasing them Duke Boys/REBELS
Boss Hogg is the Emperor
Shame, Shame. Everybody knows your name!
BTW, Wil says it’s footage he has seen, Anthony’s sources say there is new footage in there not seen before. What is the dealio?
Lol, Wil. This movie will be better than your blog work.
As with all remakes, there will be changes and different interpretations. Technology will be advanced here because you have to remember that in the 1960’s, we were not as advanced as we are now. Today’s audiences expect more, expect to be “Wowed”. Instead of dwelling on doing the story with an “Ancient” Capt. Kirk it is only fitting and right that everyone be re-cast in the story. The same premise was true of the Bond Series, for many of us, we could not imagine James Bond without Sean Connery. The Franchise survived and I am sure the Star Trek Franchise will also. When “The Next Generation” was about to be aired, many Trekkies did not like the fact that it used the “Star Trek ” name and Venue. That soon ended when the series aired with enhanced Plots, Technology, etc. Until the new Star Trek Film is shown, we should all be in anticipation as to what it will offer. The Star Trek Saga continues, let’s see what new Frontiers this one takes us to.
Enterprise, what is your damage?
Every time this site does an article or interview about someone you come in and attack them. We get it, you hate EVERYONE. Does that make you feel better?
#19—Perhaps Wil has seen a bit more. He does seem to imply that…
“This is not to say that the “Star Trek” movie is all mindless action, or style over substance; I can’t tell you why, but I know that it isn’t. I also can’t tell you why, but I also know that it’s pretty **** awesome.”
It sounds to me like Wil has seen something for which Bad Robot required a NDA signature.
If Trekmovie says it is “new”, then chances are, is probably is new to us.
It could also mean that it is only new to those who were not able to see JJ’s 20-minute preview. Who knows?
I think I’ll set my TiVo and find out…
Paramount told me it was new. It could be that it comes from a preview that Wil or I (and other press) have seen before. I do not expect whatever it is to be a lot, bearing in mind there is a whole new trailer coming in just a couple of weeks and the Spoilers show is half hour (minus commercials) and the focus is Watchmen, with ‘exclusive clips’ of four other movies. I doubt Trek gets more than 60 seconds, including Wil’s comments. We will know in about 30 hours
Decloaking . . .
Wil Wheaton tells me to relax, so like I’m supposed to be all better now; yea, now that’s real world, since it’s coming from one of the most spastic f-bomb Trek movie critics of all time. Yes, I’m being sarcastic. }:-/>
Recloaking,
@23…
Happy CT day!
Judgment Day comes May 8, 2009.
#26—Thanks, Thorsten. But I’m ready for the birthdays to cease!
:)
Is today your BD, Closet? If so, I have a VHS copy of Star Trek V, signed by the cat lady with 3 breasts, headed your way!
Happy Birthday!
Land of the Lost. Sigh. I saw a trailer for that upcoming stinker last weekend, and it almost made me weep.
Okay, so I shouldn’t say stinker without seeing it. There has been more than one SNL-alum-high-concept-farce that I turned my nose up at first, but enjoyed when I finally saw it. But it is hard to argue that that movie is going to be a reinterpretation faithful to the spirit of the original. Unlike Star Trek, which is.
Happy Birthday, Closettrekker
“Wil Wheaton… the voice of reason.”
…You forgot to add [/sarcasm].
Was it not Will Wheaton who a few months ago was ripping on JJ’s movie (and every other ST movie), or did I dream that? Then, when he got backlash from some of his comments, he bemoaned the fact that people were ragging on him. So now that he has seen some of the movie, he does not take back his earlier comments, but decries those who are of the same opinion as himself before he viewed it. And of course it would not be Wheaton without the obligatory profanity to round out his opinion. I will look forward to the movie without his helpful opinion, thank you very much.
I don’t agree with Wil on much, but he is dead on about this movie.
It’s going to be great.
No it won’t be a direct tie in, canon wise….because it can’t be!!! It would simply not work.
The timeline has to change!!! It has to accommodate the advances in movie-making technology. This would never translate from the TOS of the 60’s to the big screen in the 21st century.
If I was a betting man, I’d say that Nimoy’s Spock will explain this in the movie.
Anyway, back to the subject at hand……Wil is right!
#18-So true it’s hilarious. Seriously though, I’m with Wil…I get a really good feeling about this movie. Question is, will the general public get a good feeling and will there be enough hyped up people to drag the naysayers into the theaters? Time will tell.
What are we all going to talk about after the movie comes out??
AFTER everyone vents about the plot, cast, barcode scanners, iBridge, fugly ship, canon, timeline, etc?
Start planning, Anthony!
Thank God, another healthy perspective on the film.
Wil identifies a major concern for a lot of fans, myself included: Star Trek is not, and was never intended to be, a dumb action franchise. Let’s have plenty of action, by all means; but I want substance. I want heart. I want an intelligent story with a good message, in the vain of all the great Star Trek scripts. TOS’ essential ingredients were action, humour, love and romanticism; but, above all, it was a morality play. Drop the technobabble; but keep the philosophy and the sense of adventure. I’m excited to hear that the new trailer will uncover some of the emotion in Kirk’s story. A great man once said that it doesn’t really matter who, when, or where. What matters is WHY. The emotional aspect helps explain the ‘why’ to Kirk’s story.
36. Dr. Image
What are we all going to talk about after the movie comes out??
Oh trust me.. people that hate this movie before seeing it will still hate it for years to come.. just like with STV and Nemesis.
But I agree with Wil.. people need to relax and just go see it. I am really looking forward to it!
Dude, isn’t it kinda silly Wil Wheaton has to tell US to chill out? Come on.
Oh, and people give me crap, but when Brannon Braga has an article on this site people rag on him.
#29—Just what I always wanted!
#31—Thanks.
#33—I agree that his own personal opinion has no more value than any other, but I don’t recall him ragging on the movie, just the choice of material for the trailer. But in all fairness, perhaps you read something of his that I didn’t.
The way I look at it is much the way I took Kevin Smith’s comments awhile back. It doesn’t convince me that this will be a great movie, but it doesn’t hurt my feelings toward its potential either.
I have yet to hear or read of anyone who has seen significant amounts of the film that said it was bad. That says more to me than any one person’s opinion that it’s going to be great.
What I am convinced of is that— even if it isn’t as great as Nimoy (as well as the Mrs.), Smith, and Wheaton try to assure us—we’ve probably seen worse from a Star Trek film!
:)
“Dude, isn’t it kinda silly Wil Wheaton has to tell US to chill out? Come on. “
…One should consider the source, no? Considering how he was ragging on Abrams a few months back, this is sort of a case of pot-kettle-black.
Yeah great, that bloody MTV page opened about a squillion parasitic web pages and forced a shut down.
Nice one.
I take back all the Wesley bashing I’ve done over the years. Thanks, Will!
Oh my fellow Trekkies!!!
It behooves us to abide by the advice of yon Wil Wheaton — The Great Bird of the Galaxy created a world where prejudice and judgementalism were not the accepted norm — where human-kind worked to overcome their prejudices and learned to judge AFTER seeing/reading/witnessing for themselves instead of relying on hearsay and other less than accurate forms of disclosure.
Such should be our collegial attitude toward Star Trek XI — we should be glad that Paramount was willing to spend the amount of money it spent on this movie — that JJ Abrams and the two Trekkie writers were willing to take on the project given what is at stake. Paramount could simply have called Star Trek dead, with the auction that took place in 2007 and the closure of The Experience. The studio chose not to do so and to risk lots of money to rejuvenate the franchise.
It apparently has finally dawned on Paramount and CBS Television that Star Trek remains as popular as ever — that the conventions are multi-generational — with TOS-era folks, the succeeding generation and then their children’s generation — some of whom became Trekkies because of TNG, some because of DS9 and some because of Voyager.
In any event. I have no doubt that some of what has been said about Star Trek XI is specifically aimed at those who are not now fond of or even relate to Star Trek — to widen the audience base. If we want more series and movies and to really keep Star Trek alive and keep the hope of that better world alive — then money must be made to justify all of that — and, as Richard Arnold noted in The Hollywood Reporter article, word-of-mouth is just as important to bring non-Trekkies into a movie as it is to bring Trekkies.
That gives me a bit of hope since it doesnt seem like Wil Wheaton is one to BS around about this stuff. I havent trusted what most other celebs have said about the movie just because its all seemed forced and over the top, but this seems to be down to earth. Im not in the camp yet with the people who say its for sure gonna be awesome, but Im less inclined to believe its going to destroy everything Trek used to stand for either.
Re: 7:
I don’t think Trek can lay claim to that. Off the top of my head, Britain’s Doctor Who has been reinventing the lead character/concept for 40 years.
Thanks WW!
I was never part of the Ensign-Wesley hate club back in the day, but meaning no disrespect to the man, and not even disagreeing with what he says, I still have to ask:
Who cares what Wil Wheaton has to say about this movie? He’s not even tangentially involved with it and he’s not exactly an A-list celebrity, even in the Trek universe.
#49 His opinion is no less valid than yours. And he’s at least acted on a Star Trek series. So, I think his opinion is as welcome as anyone elses.
When people say “Who cares what __________ thinks?” I always think “Well, who cares what you, they, I or anyone else thinks once you get right down to it!” Forums are for expressing opinions.
I’ll still have to see the film for myself and make my own decision as to quality — it wouldn’t matter who critiqued it beforehand.
It’s cool Wil likes the new movie, but my mind was made up on it when I saw the first preview.
We’re from the Federation. We’re here to help.
Sid, you beat me to it. Can anyone here explain how Wil Wheaton is relevent and how his opinion means more than anyone else with internet connection?
I’m looking forward to the film and I want it to be good. But, to herald Wheaton’s take on some footage he’s seen like he’s returned with the Dead Sea Scrolls is a little ridiculous.
#49 – “Who cares what Wil Wheaton has to say about this movie?”
You, myself, and many others took time to read the article and comment on it, so you tell us.
“He’s not even tangentially involved with it and he’s not exactly an A-list celebrity, even in the Trek universe.”"
This goes for 99% of the posters here as well, who are mostly every day Joes, so should their opinions be even more discarded?
“Can anyone here explain how Wil Wheaton is relevent and how his opinion means more than anyone else with internet connection?”
Can you explain how it means any less? Are you saying he is not entitled to state his opinion or make it public? And because he was sort of a major cast member for a good part of TNG there ARE people interested in his opinion.
well i get the sense that Wil has seen more than he is letting on and therefore he has a more INFORMED opinion than the average fan. He is also a professional critic with his reviews at TV Squad and elsewhere and clearly an expert on Trek as much as any other expert.
so yes I weigh his opinion more than the basic knee-jerk reactionary screaming about canon here any day
56. Kruge
Agreed. Wil is a movie critic, so to hear him say good things about the movie is definitely a compliment, especially since its apparent he’s seen much more than we have. So yes, I do care about his opinion and considering that he was, as I recall, skeptical about his movie from the beginning, this is high praise.
Pardon. I meant to say “Skeptical about THIS movie”.
But he hasn’t seen it yet. He’s seen what we’ve seen, right? Wil isn’t a movie critic. He’s an actor with a blog. Some of these Trek actors were hating Abrhams last yeat. Now, they love him.
I am sooo glad that there wasn’t an internet for public use back when ST:TMP was coming out, with all the many changes in practically everything, the fans would have killed it before it came out with all the carping. Sometimes not knowing more is better.
I like to point out to everyone who is saying this is star trek 90210, Next Gen has been called that as well and I love that Series!
#50 & #54:
You both make my point. His opinion is EXACTLY as valuable as mine — but whenever I say anything about the movie, it is not front page’d on TM. This is because I have nothing to do with this movie, and have no unique or interesting perspective to offer on it. Neither does Wil Wheaton. Why is it a news item?
Perhaps someone who was an extra in a Voyager hallway scene would like to chime in! That’d clearly be front page material as well.
If you’re not interested in Mr. Wheaton’s opinion, the article is very clearly labelled.
Once you’ve availed yourself of this convenient and accessible means of determing the article’s subject matter, you have the option not to read it.
It’s that simple.
#62 — As it’s been pointed out, Wil is a film critic. Also, apparently, he’s seen the film. At least that’s what I get out of his inferences.
If so, that makes him uniquely qualified to not only voice his opinion of the film, but also calm any fears or concerns some fans may have about the movie.
All that in addition to what I posted earlier.
Somehow, I don’t think a Voyager hallway extra would be as interesting or newsworthy.
I suspect Anthony has good reason for focusing on Wil’s opinion.
I never was a Wesley Crusher fan…or really even a Wil Wheaton fan. But, hey, I welcome his opinion on the new film. I find it interesting to read all opinions from those who have had some exposure to the production — whether they actually worked on the film or not.
I even found James Cawley’s views interesting.
II am merely pointing out that EVERYONE’s opinion is valid on the movie. No one’s should be above the other even if there name is in the title.
The complaints about being too action-oriented, I can understand.
But calling the movie “Star Trek 90210″ is as ridiculous as calling TOS “Star Trek: Lost in Space” just because they share a similar 60s design aesthetic.
This from the guy who probably thought Wes Crusher was a meaningful addition to TNG.
Re the idea that the trailer is speaking the “language” of teenage audiences: It wasn’t _that_ long ago that I was a teen, and I would have gagged on trite voiceovers of the “Maybe you were meant for something different” variety just as much then as I do now.
General moviegoing audiences – teen or otherwise – aren’t dumb (or at least, they aren’t any dumber than Star Trek fans), and pretending they are is very “Cloud Minders,” and not in that fun, sexy “check out the dress on Droxine” way.
#62: Difference of opinion, I suppose — actually, I value Cawley’s opinion, not just because he’s in the new movie and thus genuinely knows more about the whole deal than we do, but because his hobby with Phase II means he’s plugged into the production/creative side of Trek (unofficial as it may be) as well as just the performance side.
Again, I’ve got to stress that I mean no disrespect to Mr. Wheaton and whatever it is he’s doing these days — I just feel that what he’s said above is nothing new.
Here’s the thing…
I may love this movie,
I may hate it.
Either way, I CANNOT EFFING WAIT TO SEE IT!
#33. Denise
Couldn’t have said it any better. Thank you!
kg
Thanks, Will. I hope some of these guys listen to you, but some people want to hate no matter what. Some people have already decided they aren’t going to like the movie.
Not me.
41 closet
Happy belated birthday, I see!
I’m not am everyday visitor/poster. Too much work and too many kids. Not quite Octodad, but there are four little trekkers running around. Sorry I missed it! (sidebar: it is interesting to watch my five year olds gravitate to Star WARS, and my twelve year old start to grow out of SW and get more interested in Star TREK, for what it is worth…)
Happy birthday! Guys like us are lucky; got another birthday coming on 10 November!
I agree with you, 33. Denise de Arman – February 20, 2009.
I would add that it wasn’t just Wil. Many of the TNG supporting cast (for which Wil doesn’t even qualify, really, given his tiny role on the series) have voiced their disapproval of the new film. Some, such as Sirtis and Dorn, made their comments a while ago; however, I never heard of them retracting their comments.
It’s obvious that much of the praise some TNG actors (and Wil!) are giving this new film is more than a little self-serving: they want a new TNG film. This is after many of them bemoaned Star Trek; and said they were either told old to play the parts, glad it was over, or both! Thankfully, I can’t see Paramount making another TNG film. After ploughing-in over $150m reinventing the Star Trek franchise, with an alternative universe young Kirk and crew, Paramount is not going to return to TNG if this film is successful. And they are certainly not going to return if the new film fails. Ergo, Star Trek is dead. Long live Star Trek.
A TNG film has little hope of appealing to the mainstream, certainly now. The TNG crew never came close to the status in popular culture of the original crew. The average filmgoer has heard of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy; but not Riker and co (with the possible exception of Picard). The reason the TNG films were not huge successes in the mainstream is not simply because of budget. The crew, the concept, didn’t appeal to the mainstream. In fact, it didn’t appeal to many Trek fans, who thought Picard and co were a poor substitute for the young, charismatic, and brilliant Kirk and his crew. Moreover, the TNG supporting cast are now well into their 50s; and Patrick Stewart is almost 70. How are they going to sustain an action movie? And how many more movies could they make? Paramount could only make a couple more TNG movies, at best; and what would they do after that? The franchise would be dead. And what story could they tell about TNG? In Nemesis, the TNG crew disbanded and went their separate ways, with Data dying. Any story about the Titan and/or the Enterprise E would require knowledge of the Trek back-story. Mainstream audiences don’t know this back-story; and this is precisely why the new film, Trek XI, may appeal to them. The fanatical Trekkie in the cinema, dressed up as Bele, who has seen all 10 episodes and every episode of all 6 series, is on equal footing with the person who has never seen Star Trek before!
‘Goodbye Jean-Luc, I’m gunna miss you, you had such potential, but then again, all good things must come to an end…’ (Q, ‘All Good Things’)
All 10 films, not episodes! Sorry.
Well, that’s positive news from Wil. I appreciate it. Brightens up my perspective on the movie.
@ Closettrekker: Happy Birthday!
I can’t make a judgement call on a film based on three minutes of clips from various trailers and TV ads, or a few stills that aren’t shot to really give you any idea behind the design. And while toy images are nice, they are not images from the set and will change to accomodate toy production budgets.
No ruling here until the film opens.
77,
Oh dear, Dave, you don’t fit in here at all. What’s up with that?
:)
years back I would have never thought these words would leave my lips (or fingers), but LEAVE WIL WHEATON ALONE! He seems like a nice enough young guy and his opinion is his, just like ours are ours.
Like someone else said, at least he’s actually acted on a Star Trek series and HE HAS MET GENE RODDENBERRY. How many of us can say that? (not me)
I’ve always thought the movie was gonna rock, but if Wil says so, I thing so even more strongly.
OK, enough of my 2 cents.
#3 – Hahaha. I would do that, and you know it… If I was that good with Movie Maker.
Put my Photoshop magic to work..? ;D
Kudos to Wil for keeping positive. 90210, I’m sure this won’t be. A film that attracts my generation (as in, people born in the ’90’s), hopefully!
well…just watched the ‘exclusive clips’ on MTV and as usual for that network and it’s ‘aimed at pre-teen’ or johnny knoxville types in an attempt to please the fan-boy base, it was a complete waist of my sweet Jesus time. absolutely nothing than a few of the trailer clips and the behind the scenes footage on the esurance site that we have already scene…
didn’t expect anything else so i wasn’t all that disappointed
@ 63
“Once you’ve availed yourself of this convenient and accessible means of determing the article’s subject matter, you have the option not to read it.”
But…b-but then we couldn’t whine and toss about insults about the guy’s blog! If we just IGNORED articles containing the opinions of folks of superior public interest whose opinion we held in low regard, then we couldn’t take time to comment and make sure everyone knew that we didn’t approve of them getting more face-time and say-so than the average poster! I want to make this known without adding to, or enriching the discussion whatsoever!
Back me up, Enterprise!
>>The TNG crew never came close to the status in popular culture of the original crew. <<
Are you kidding? TNG was one of the highest rated shows ever in syndication, and had the most mainstream appeal of any Star Trek series.
SHUT UP, WESLEY! Just kidding!
#7
DOCTOR WHO.
That is all.
#83
Couldn’t agree more. Some people seem to forget that fact. Why did the films fail?
Probably because the powers that be tried to make them action packed. On the show it was ultimately the story and the acting which carried everything.
If you need proof, I refer you to one of the best if not the best TNG episode ever made, ‘The Inner Light’
Simply put, a bloody great story. One which reduces me to tears every time I view it.
To 83. T.U.M. – February 21, 2009:
No; I am not mistaken. And your comments don’t refute mine. I claimed that the TNG crew never came close to the status in popular culture of the original crew. In other words, Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Sulu, Uhura, etc., are more famous than Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Troi, etc. This is obviously true. (This partly explains why Paramount have returned to the beginning, to Kirk and crew, and not continued with those average-bad TNG movies that very few people watched.) Picard, of course, is well-known; the other members of his crew, progressively less so. To illustrate: the average film-goer (not a Trekkie) has heard of Uhura, but not Troi!
You are probably correct when you say that ‘TNG was ONE of the highest rated shows ever in syndication, and had the most mainstream appeal of any Star Trek SERIES [my emphasis]’. But that has little, if any, bearing on what I claimed.
#7 sez “Trek fans: just be glad our franchise didn’t go the way of many others: death by corporate boardroom decision. We have kept it alive. We can continue to keep it alive.”
The situation is better than that, though, because the truth is, we don’t have a franchise. We have Star Trek, and Star Trek is a heck of a lot bigger than any mere collection of trademarks, copyrights and cowardly bean-counters. Paramount, for better or worse, has the franchise … but Star Trek has survived in years of vacuum when the franchise was functionally deceased. Star Trek doesn’t _need_ the franchise. If the franchise dies forever, Star Trek will live on.
It’s probably going to be a piece of shit, but they’re still getting my money so who cares?
If we should not complain about the film without having seen it, neither we should not simply accept that the film is great (so STFU Trek fans) without having seen it.
#21 – you miss the point. It’s the screwing with canon that’s annoying most of the people who are being negative about the movie, not the fact that their fave characters are being re-cast.
…and Wheaton says:
It was all stuff that I’ve seen already, but it looked cool and everyone in the theater loved it. You know, a lot of my fellow Trekkies are all worked up because the trailer shows all this action stuff, and I keep hearing people dismissively calling it “Star Trek: 90210” just because there are young people in it or something. I really hope those guys can take a step back and realize a couple of things: these trailers and previews aren’t aimed at us; they’re aimed at teenagers, so they have to be presented in a language that they understand.
… for the first time I disagree with him.
This new ST doesn’t have to include 90210 teenagers and action because it needs to be “presented in a language they understand.”
TOS was a big hit with teens when it first started and TOS had a bunch of “middle-aged” guys like Kirk and Scotty and McCoy and Sulu.
Yet teens still dug it.
So I think it’s BS that Trek has to be “90210′d” in order to appeal to today’s kids. And if I’m wrong, if today’s kids can’t get ST for what it is…
aw, screw ‘em.