@98… I disagree that exploration wouldn’t work. Avatar has shown that audiences are definately open to movies that creatively explore new worlds. I also think that, with the times we live in, people are looking to movies as an escape from reality, and a dash of optimism and the excitement of exploration would be well received….

——————————————————————

In my opinion, the focus of Avatar is about:

• exploitation of culture and people

• exploitation of environment and finding balance

• CGI and 3D technology

Avatar has nothing to do with exploration. It is also very simplistic and silly in my view, in that it stacks the deck in favor of the view it’s in favor of.

TREKs oversimplified and silly “optimism” is out of step with the times. I think it’s funny you would use Avatar as your example because it makes my point. Avatar’s only saving grace is it’s the humans that are exploiting, which is something TREK would never do (because we are such an evolved people… how nauseating). I find what and who is exploiting in Avatar more realistic than what TREK would have done with this story. There will come a time when TREKs optimism will be the flavor of the day, but this is not that day. A harder and different TREK needs to be made and following the TOS/TNG model and not DS9, is in my view, a mistake.

sample line:

@Kirk: “My name is Captain James T. Kirk… and men, i want my Klingon scalps.” LOL XD

Yup. On one hand, ST09 and its sequels give Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman/Paramount the opportunity to create all-new villains and situations.

On the other hand, Nestor Carbonell would make a seriously badass Khan…

Saw Shatner on Jimmy Kimmel the other night. The man is practically begging to be in Star Trek again.

Star Trek looks AMAZING in 1080P. GORGEOUS.

Not a better piece of movie music written in ‘09 than Giacchino’s score for ST.

And Stephen Lang was the best part of Avatar as the Kick ass bad guy, Colonel Quaritch. The man astounds.

Can’t wait for the ST sequel! I think it’s going to be an interesting year.

I want them to stay away from redoing the classics

Was this alternate universe created to allow them to not be restricted by canon or to just be lazy and redo what came before?

I hope its the former.

I still have gripes with the changes but I accept the film because its an alternate universe which exists parallel to the other shows and does not erase it.

Try something new, I feel more Trek fans will be angry if Khan is re done.

Star Trek is more than Khan and the Borg.

However, a remake of “Space Seed” or something close to it could really explore some interesting contemporary issues (genetic engineering, choosing the sex of babies, etc. etc.)… I’ve always felt Trek, like all science fiction, is best when it’s doing that.

Finally, should they decide to go “the bad guy” route and bring Kahn, I suggest casting Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson… I think he has the looks and the swagger to pull it off.

TOS came out in a time when the concept of a new frontier, a new world order, yes, even semi-expansionism existed, carried forth by our superior and enlightened views. It fit right in with the then (and now to some degree) U.S. view to compete with communism and now terrorism. That simply won’t work anymore. Don’t delude yourself into believing that wasn’t an element of TREK in the late 60s because it clearly was. Yes, it was humanized a bit, but it was there and can be seen even in TNG. DS9 remains my favorite TREK because it got away–in part–from that and for that I am grateful.

TREK must grow and adapt and reformat itself if it’s going to gain a wider audience. Exploring strange new worlds is not in and of itself going to cut it in my view. TREK has to find a new voice and direction. Going back to TOS was a plus, but also a minus. I still would have rather seen a DS9 movie. It’s themes of spiritualism, war, good and evil, quasi-mysticism are simply more contemporary than TOS or TNG.