Why are Star Trek fans so bitter about the reboot?

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by peckinpah

I should've phrased that better. Let me try it again.

Certain fans are okay with that stuff happening in the later series, but try to inject it into any iteration of the original characters and they have a stroke. It's not the sort of thing Roddenberry would have allowed (and if he did it would have ultimately been inconsequential, forgotten as soon as the end credits rolled), so in their minds it shouldn't be allowed. And had Roddenberry not been forced to give up control of the franchise, it's highly unlikely any of it would have been introduced.

To me, what many people see as hopefulness in TOS is really more of a blind naivete. The ugly and messy territory Into Darkness hints at is a lot more interesting and relevant than the heavy-handed moralizing that was Roddenberry's forte. I don't think it's impossible to explore some of the themes old-school fans want to see, but you damn sure can't do so in the hippy-dippy way Roddenberry did.

True.

Also, remember though, that TOS went from 66-68. Even if they had WANTED TO attack some of those themes, it never would have made it to the screen. I mean, this was the era of "Lassie" and "Cimmaron" and "Gentle Ben" and "The Flying Nun."

Storylines like the Cardassians employing torture or Section 31 or the Borg eliminating the individuality of the main character, etc. -- those just wouldn't have been allowed anyways.