The next Next Generation
The kids will never understand the Star Trek we grew up with, says Lynn:
So why shouldn’t they have a cool new Star Trek movie with lots of exciting modern special effects even if it does completely disrespect Star Trek history? Star Trek history has already been disrespected plenty. It started when they changed the Klingons. Now everyone thinks of Klingons as those guys with the big, bumpy foreheads but they weren’t like that in the original series and I never liked the change. I think of these new Klingons as a completely different race who just happen to have the same name.
I take a sideways approach: I argue (to myself) that the 1960s TV production, due to limited budgets, sought to maximize the gee-whiz factor by emphasizing the two things the presumed audience was interested in most: technological mumbo-jumbo from the future and skirt lengths from adolescent daydreams of [fill in any era you like]. Nobody was looking to see if Klingons were properly wrinkly.
And having grown up on comics, I’m used to this sort of “reboot”: Marvel has reworked the Fantastic Four so often I’m having to resort to identifying series by the color of Invisible Woman’s hair, and that sounds even sillier than you think it does.
Still, the new Trek isn’t that new:
There is so much material for spin-offs and yet Star Trek producers always go for pretty much the same formula: a starship (usually named Enterprise) with approximately half a dozen regular main characters, all officers, plus a few lesser and recurring characters. Yeah, DS9 was a space station but that didn’t alter the basic formula all that much.
On the other hand, DS9 had some serious grittiness at the heart of it: to me, at least, it was a relief to see a universe in which the Federation was at best a minor player. (Which also justified Voyager, at least at first.)
Jeffro »
12 May 2009 · 9:49 am
Yeah, ya gotta cut TOS some slack for their budget. I also agree that DS9 was well done – I liked it better than TNG, Voyager and Enterprise.
I also liked the new movie. Yep, the plot is thin, and the action sequences are overwhelming, but the whole thing was entertaining. Some members of a forum I frequent are complaining that there are timeline errors, and there isn’t enough plot, and character development is lacking – ad infinitum.
It’s just a movie, not Shakespeare engraved on holy tablets. Enjoy it or don’t. I do.
Don »
12 May 2009 · 2:10 pm
TOS was a once in a lifetime lightening strike. As for everything since, I believe the expression is: “Its all good.”
Jacqueline »
13 May 2009 · 10:05 am
The reboot of Battlestar Galactica went really, really well, so I am optimistic about the new Star Trek. (Plus, the movie ROCKED!)