I did not mean to imply I approve of all these remakes. I think they are mostly egregious abominations. Nevertheless it is a reality.

Your comparison to Shakespeare is apt, for that is at the core of what I was getting at. We don’t remember Shakespeare for his ensemble of actors, but rather the depth of characters and resulting dialogue embedded with intricately woven stories evocative of rich tapestries in which one sees ever new and fresh patterns emerging which somehow manage to suit anyone’s contemporary decor.

My point in a nutshell is that the roots of Trek are what is important here. There is a rich cache of precious gems in the original characters and backgrounds created for TOS. The most important thing is that they can be brought out, polished and made relevant to a new generation of kids who have rejected the past in favor of an ever growing self-absorbed and materialistic society.

Yet like Shakespeare, the characters and stories endure finding new life with new production companies. When we think of Shakespeare some think of Laurence Olivier, Richard Burton, or Kenneth Branagh, and yes even Keanu Reeves and Leonardo DiCaprio. Does anyone remember John Barrymore? Ask any 30 year old to name even 4 Shakespearean actors. And just like Shakespeare, it is the content of the material that is important, not the actors who portray it.

So, in the long run, it will not matter whether anyone remembers William Shatner’s Captain Kirk, so long as Captain Kirk continues to live in our imaginations through someone else. And just like Shakespeare’s general audiences of the time got over the fact someone else played those parts written just for the revered Richard Burbage, and eventually forgot him altogether, so will it be in our future. In the end it is the material that lives on to inform new generations by the idols of their age. As it always has been and likely always will be. It is simply a fact of life, no matter how hard we resist it or wish it were not so.

I used to imagine that we were the same age, but now I wonder if we are even from the same planet?

Remakes and reimaginings are not the be all and end all that you make them out too be.

In my lifetime, there have also been many “rediscoveries” of that which had gone before (THE THREE STOOGES, THE MARX BROTHERS, and even THE MONKEES for crying out loud.)

Even that other Bill S., The Bard himself, who had a great influence on many ToS and movie narratives is not forgotten to this day. And need I remind you that he was member of his works’ original cast as well?

“The Franchise” with which you refer is purely a Paramount of the era’s invention to describe a lucrative market they found they could exploit. It was not, nor is not the be all and end all of STAR TREK:

“A second Star Trek adventure is in pre-production, probably because the first Trek flick scored well with European audiences (Americans remained relatively loyal to the syndicated TV series.)” – REBORN LOSERS, Robert Alan Ross, ST. PETERSBURG TIMES, November 8, 1981

news.google.com/newspapers?id=KfQNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=PHsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6061,5858891

Sponsorship, corporate or otherwise is not the basis for that which endures, as you should well know.

Like I said, if a version of “Trek” isn’t delivering the kind of Trek I want to see, I really don’t care if the “franchise” lives on or not. 24th century “Trek” died and I haven’t shed a single tear. It just wasn’t my bag.”

Very well said. I agree completely. TOS was sexy, adventurous, endearing, funny, romantic, and unafraid of a good old-fashioned bare-knuckled fistfight….and above all else, it was fun! That’s what I got out of ST09, and it’s something that, in my opinion, has been missing for a long time.

I too have not shed a tear for 24th century Trek, nor for a continuation of the “geeks only club” that Star Trek had become in the Next-Gen era.

Some people will no doubt dislike the new Star Trek because they feel it is too different from what was done from 1987-2005….but ironically, I felt the same way in 1987 and beyond. The last time I was truly content with the state of Trek was around 1986, with a very successful film at the box-office that I found quite endearing, and the promise of a new series on the small screen to come. I gradually lost interest (especially post-1991) in what was being produced right up until the announcement of Bad Robot’s involvement in Star Trek. Something about that convinced me right off the bat that *this* was something I might enjoy.

Count me among those happy to see Star Trek return to its roots in 2009. I’ve been waiting more than 2 decades to see it happen.

Conversely, what do I care if the franchise lives on or not if it’s not representing what I fell in love with to begin with? TNG and it’s ilk did nothing to proliferate the Trek I loved so I had so interest in it. Just being in the same fictional universe just didn’t cut it. When it all died on the vine 5 years ago I had no feelings what so ever.

Now, Trek is back and it’s more in line with what I like in my Star Trek, so I’m back on board. I hope JJ’s version continues, not because it keeps Star Trek going, but because it’s embodies TOS and it entertains me in a similar fashion.

Like I said, if a version of “Trek” isn’t delivering the kind of Trek I want to see, I really don’t care if the “franchise” lives on or not. 24th century “Trek” died and I haven’t shed a single tear. It just wasn’t my bag.

Everything goes, me mates!

Even Kirk got kilt by a metal tube bridge.

I once got kilt by a metal tube… but that bloody cyborg averted and now runs some Paciifc state o’ yer’ Union…

I been watchin’ old ToNGe epsiodes lately… God, they should be erased… and replaced wit’ Mannix!!!!

Who Mourns Fur’ Mannix?

KIRK: Mr. Spock, how come, in the real 23rd Century, they have visually enhanced both my butt and crotch for the vertebra-instertion-net that all the young kids plug into? Kids are… actually touching my velour!

SPOCK: Well, at least you are not making cooing noises before commercial breaks. Damned new fangled sound effects.

SCOTTIE: Maties! They brushed me teeth on tha’ close-ups!

McCOY: Gootchie-gootchie goo.

CmdrR the THIRD: I can’t believe gramps actually watched this frakking bullplop. Let’s go get some solar powered emu burgers and retsin beef cola! I’ll drive us there in my new Fugi Uni-Cycle Butt Thruster.

God… I need some sleep…

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…

We live in a culture where everything gets remade now, over and over. They are remaking Bill & Ted’s Excellent adventure for cryin’ out loud! How can they do that? Well one reason is nostalgia by the original audience, but the bigger reason is that the original was forgotten and a new generation sees it as fresh – it worked once, it’ll work again and keep making money.

Ask any 10 year old kid who George Reeves is. Ask them who Superman is. WIll they even remember Christopher Reeve? Do any of you remember Kirk Alyn? I’ll bet you any 10 year old kid who grew up during the 40s and early 50s will. And that’s but one example. It’s inevitable that the original will eventually be forgotten, just as Lucille Ball will, despite the ubiquitousness of the series in syndication, if for no other reason than it’s in black & white. A new generation loses touch with the entertainment of the past. How many movies stars from the 30s can any of you name? However many it is, I bet you’ll remember more from the 40s, 50’s, etc. This despite the fact the 30’s was the Golden Age of film in Hollywood. New generations embrace their own and seek a more modern style, and lets face it, CBS Digital’s efforts aside, TOS only continues to look more and more dated as time goes by. Eventually there will be a new generation who could care less. I once asked a 22 year old “actress” at a party about Doris Day and she was clueless, never even HEARD of her. And this was 10 years ago!! While I might expect any-old 22 year old business major not to know Doris Day, I would expect an actress of any age to know her, even to day.

Yes the time will come when TOS will no longer be syndicated. But by that time, it will be available as an “historical document” on some on-demand internet for anyone to see and CBS will continue to profit from it. But the kids of the day will be embracing the latest actor to play James T. Kirk, debating his merits against the old Kirk: Chris Pine, and Star Trek will go on producing an ever new installment, TOS will for all practicle purposes be forgotten. And ultimately what difference will it make if anyone remembers TOS as long as the franchise lives on?

Why on earth would you want anything about Trek to be forgotten?

(…Ok, maybe Neelix, but still!)