Why are Star Trek fans so bitter about the reboot?

[blu-mike]

I haven't met one Trek fan who loved Star Trek(2009) and Into Darkness. Honestly, if Star Wars was being rebooted I wouldn't mind if it was done right.


But why do the Trek fans hate the reboot and sequel so much that they voted Into Darkness as the "Worse Star Trek movie"

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by blu-mike

I haven't met one Trek fan who loved Star Trek(2009) and Into Darkness. Honestly, if Star Wars was being rebooted I wouldn't mind if it was done right.


But why do the Trek fans hate the reboot and sequel so much that they voted Into Darkness as the "Worse Star Trek movie"

Well, I'm a Trek fan from all the way back to the 70s and the original series. I've seen everything multiple times.

I like the reboot. I really enjoyed the 2009 film, and I think Into Darkness could have been better, but it was still a good movie.

So there. Now you've met one person.

[ilovenola2]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

Well, I'm a Trek fan from all the way back to the 70s and the original series. I've seen everything multiple times.

I like the reboot. I really enjoyed the 2009 film, and I think Into Darkness could have been better, but it was still a good movie.

So there. Now you've met one person.

And another here!! I liked them as well.

And this senior can make you all jealous because I actually spent a day on the set of the Star Trek original series-- second season, "Catspaw."

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Well, I'm a Star Trek fan from the Next Generation era and I love the reboot. I love the original series too, but I only followed that series several years after TNG ended.

But, I can understand why. By having Vulcan

[Show spoiler]destroyed

and altering some significant backstory elements of some characters, the film fundamentally wipes out the existence of everything Star Trek that has come before. In one regard it is a complete disrespect to Gene Roddenberry (the creator) and everyone who worked so hard on all Star Trek projects. In another regard it is an extreme homage to what Star Trek did best. So, the combination is quite volatile since those who recognize both of these aspects desperately want to defend the old material while being extra emotional about the fact that it was handled in such a wonderful Star Trek manner.

Just my $0.02 though. "You don't have to take my word for it."

[Spidey Blu]

I don't think Into Darkness wis the worst Trek film, but it felt like a piss poor excuse to use Khan. And the whole trying to keep his identity a secret thing kinda hurt the movie.

[Samus Aran]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

But, I can understand why. By having Vulcan

[Show spoiler]destroyed

and altering some significant backstory elements of some characters, the film fundamentally wipes out the existence of everything Star Trek that has come before. In one regard it is a complete disrespect to Gene Roddenberry (the creator) and everyone who worked so hard on all Star Trek projects. In another regard it is an extreme homage to what Star Trek did best. So, the combination is quite volatile since those who recognize both of these aspects desperately want to defend the old material while being extra emotional about the fact that it was handled in such a wonderful Star Trek manner.

I don't know about you, but I still see Star Trek episodes on TV and my Blu-ray movie box set hasn't vanished from existence.

They bent over backward to say the new movies were an alternate reality rather than erasing the known timeline. It's the first sequel, prequel and reboot all rolled into one! (And there are rumors the new Terminator movies are following the same path.)

A lot of fanboys clamor for something fresh and different... but only if it's exactly the same as everything that came before.

Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable' - YouTube

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

I don't know about you, but I still see Star Trek episodes on TV and my Blu-ray movie box set hasn't vanished from existence.

They bent over backward to say the new movies were an alternate reality rather than erasing the known timeline. It's the first sequel, prequel and reboot all rolled into one! (And there are rumors the new Terminator movies are following the same path.)

A lot of fanboys clamor for something fresh and different... but only if it's exactly the same as everything that came before.

[Show spoiler]
Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable' - YouTube

OMG, isn't that truth? Don't even get me started on how prevalent that exact sentiment is in superhero comics fandom. Yeesh.

[Samus Aran]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

OMG, isn't that truth? Don't even get me started on how prevalent that exact sentiment is in superhero comics fandom. Yeesh.

The biggest issue with Trekdom is that the most vocal (militant) Trekkies or Trekkers "define" true Star Trek as whatever it means to them -- their specific and singular point of view, their fan fiction -- and everything else is wrong and everyone else is wrong. They don't accept that Star Trek can be different things to different people.

[jittersuperhero]

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

I don't know about you, but I still see Star Trek episodes on TV and my Blu-ray movie box set hasn't vanished from existence.

They bent over backward to say the new movies were an alternate reality rather than erasing the known timeline. It's the first sequel, prequel and reboot all rolled into one! (And there are rumors the new Terminator movies are following the same path.)

A lot of fanboys clamor for something fresh and different... but only if it's exactly the same as everything that came before.

Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable' - YouTube

Speaking as someone who did enjoy the new movies but am married to a lifelong Trek fan who hates them with utter detestation, while the movies, TV series and books remain available, they have become the alternate reality or "Legacy". The JJ Abrams reality has become the primary. They are doing the same thing with the new Star Wars. Any expanded universe stuff became non canon even if formerly considered canon or pseudo canon. When you add the fact that Star Trek has now shed some of it's more cerebral nature for flash and bang, it's a recipe for strong feelings.

[nagysaudio]

I'm a Star Trek fan. Here's why: The reboot and its sequel are both pieces of idiotic garbage!!! The original series was about realistic science. Exploration. It inspired hundreds of ideas which changed the world.

The new movies? Ignorant tripe. No different than the stock comic book movie. So why call it Star Trek?

[Elvis]

Because they tried to make Star Trek something it is not. The alternate time line thing was just plain silly. The only thing they got right was the casting it's just too bad the scripts were garbage. Oh what could have been.....

[master gandhi]

Abrams brought us Star Wars disguised as Star Trek. It's cool on its own as fun escapist entertainment, but it doesn't truly represent Trek at its core. Just on the surface. It makes perfect sense to me that he would then be approached to do Star Wars. Having said that, I dig Abrams and all his films and can't wait for his next one. I just wish he hadn't tried to connect his Star Trek reboot films to classic Trek by using Leonard Nimoy's presence and Khan (who looks and acts nothing like Khan in "Space Seed" or Wrath of Khan; I thought this was an alternate timeline, not a bizarro universe). Those parts don't completely work.

[iank]

Originally Posted by nagysaudio

I'm a Star Trek fan. Here's why: The reboot and its sequel are both pieces of idiotic garbage!!! The original series was about realistic science. Exploration. It inspired hundreds of ideas which changed the world.

The new movies? Ignorant tripe. No different than the stock comic book movie. So why call it Star Trek?

Yup. And I'm not even much of a fan in the first place but I still call BS on the reboot. Into Darkness was particularly egregious - the last 30 minutes especially were embarrassingly, laughably bad.

[fiveseven4combat]

Originally Posted by Samus Aran

I don't know about you, but I still see Star Trek episodes on TV and my Blu-ray movie box set hasn't vanished from existence.

They bent over backward to say the new movies were an alternate reality rather than erasing the known timeline. It's the first sequel, prequel and reboot all rolled into one! (And there are rumors the new Terminator movies are following the same path.)

A lot of fanboys clamor for something fresh and different... but only if it's exactly the same as everything that came before.

Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable' - YouTube

Very true. The new movies actually made me a fan of the franchise. I was never too big on Star Trek, I watch TNG a little when I was younger, but never really fell in live with it. But the new movies are great IMO.

[Randall Flagg]

I am a Star Trek fan and i'm not bitter about the reboot.

[mport5150]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Well, I'm a Star Trek fan from the Next Generation era and I love the reboot. I love the original series too, but I only followed that series several years after TNG ended.

But, I can understand why. By having Vulcan

[Show spoiler]destroyed

and altering some significant backstory elements of some characters, the film fundamentally wipes out the existence of everything Star Trek that has come before. In one regard it is a complete disrespect to Gene Roddenberry (the creator) and everyone who worked so hard on all Star Trek projects. In another regard it is an extreme homage to what Star Trek did best. So, the combination is quite volatile since those who recognize both of these aspects desperately want to defend the old material while being extra emotional about the fact that it was handled in such a wonderful Star Trek manner.

Just my $0.02 though. "You don't have to take my word for it."

I think this is well said and agree completely

[Kryptonic]

If you're using Honest Trailers for your arguments, you're failing already.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

If you're using Honest Trailers for your arguments, you're failing already.

Correct.

[Lutz]

Star Trek has always been deeply Humanist and I don't see any of that in the new movies.

It is about characters with morals, beliefs, exploration and finding - most importantly - joy and fulfillment from life. Again...

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

If you're using Honest Trailers for your arguments, you're failing already.

Disagree.

The honest trailer makes some good points. As it points out, the use of Khaaaan was unoriginal, uninspired, etc. The use of Spock and the tangled destruction and yet continued existence of the original time line is also a problem. The trailers also point out how nu Kirk is something of a decline from original Kirk.

Again, I like the new movies ok. I'm glad they've revived the franchise. But they've got flaws and weaknesses that the honest trailers get at pretty well.