I'm losing faith that this "prequel" will work... | Report this post to moderator
By: Writer4GoodTrek (Odo's file, contact) @ 11:02:47 on Jan 17, 2008

The problem with dealing with prequels in the “Star Trek” franchise is that they exaggerate broader canon problems related to “Star Trek” lore and the real world commerce.

The real world commerce is one thing with limitations of audience expectations, technology, business, and history. “Star Trek” lore is a fictional universe that must be kept internally consistent regardless of real-world commerce for the sake of the artistic integrity of the franchise as a whole. That is not to say that the two can influence each other. For example, to meet the demands of real-world commerce, a “Star Trek” film must appeal to a broad audience, so artistically the film must meet the audience at a different place in terms of having to explain some things than a TV episode would. In the same way, the demands of commerce must make concessions to “Star Trek” lore by not infringing upon the “Star Trek” canon with demands that could not fit into it.

The problem with “Star Trek: Enterprise” is that it was made as something set in a future plausible 150 years in OUR FUTURE and not plausible 115 years in TOS’ past. And all of the sudden the Eugenics Wars are referred to being decades in the past and not over a century and a half ago. The production design was modern (advancing current real-world technology) and not uber-retro (devolving technology show on TOS). Etc. Etc.

This mistake can’t be made again with this upcoming movie because it would be even more damning to the integrity of the franchise. This project has to be the redeeming force that will restore the credibility lost with the previous four films and two series. If this prequel film makes any artistic mistakes, it would be the final nail in the coffin and “Star Trek” would have been killed by Paramount’s greed.

The situation of doing a “Star Trek” project that takes place in the era of TOS is tricky because we know what everyone and everything looked like. It is analogous to when Marty McFly went back into the events of “Back to the Future (Part I)” in “Back to the Future, Part II”. Because it has been over forty since the original production(s) and not five years (as in the case of the BTTF sequel), there is a problem. We are married to a look to the props, costumes, ships, special effects, and so forth that is inconsistent with the expectations of a modern audience. And yet any “Star Trek” movie or TV show that takes place in the TOS era has to be handled in the same deliberate and delicate way as the DS9 episode “Trials and Tribble-ations” because this needs to be like watching a lost movie that takes place between TOS episodes “The Cage” and “Where No Man has Gone Before” – it can’t play like the supposed new scenes that take place during TNG’s episode “Pegasus” that were seen in ST: E’s “These Are the Voyages…” (where Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis are clearly 11 years older and the details are just not quite right).

As you note, doing a retro-TOS film would not translate well with a mainstream audience. And recasting TOS icons will not translate well with “Star Trek” fans. That is why the whole project is probably as really, really bad idea unless the writers and filmmakers are divine in solving these issues within the context of the canon. No matter the plot, they better have an explanation for why, for example, Captain Pike looks and acts like Bruce Greenwood and not Jeffrey Hunter (one in the “Star Trek” universe – we know the real-world one).

From the sound of things, it doesn’t seem like that is the case. All I can say is that I’ve tried to keep an open mind - but with each photo and sound bite, it is more clear that this is going to be a clusterf**k that will ruin the franchise once and for all.

Reply

Quote

Cool Logo | Report this post to moderator
By: StarFleet Captain (Odo's file, contact, web site) @ 06:20:23 on Jan 17, 2008

The new logo looks good. I Like it.

--------

"I can't be President. I mean, I've abused cocaine and I've been arrested. Besides, its completely stupid to believe somebody can be President just because his father was."

--Charlie Sheen (Saturday Night Live 2000)

Reply

Quote

A blow against PC! | Report this post to moderator
By: sb2004 (Odo's file, contact) @ 06:18:36 on Jan 17, 2008 | (1)

I'm quite happy that it looks like Abrams isn't going all PC on us and is sticking to "Where no MAN has gone before".

I also noticed the words "A new vision" here. Could is be that they're finally going to call an apple an apple and admit it's a reimagining?

Honest, guys, while people will still complain I guarantee a good 85% of the ill-will being generated by the rumors and "insider reports" would be eliminated if they just said they were imagining the franchise and not trying to shoehorn it into 40 years of backstory.

Al

Reply

Quote

Oh Yes, | Report this post to moderator
By: Jean-Luc (Odo's file, contact) @ 20:46:21 on Jan 16, 2008

I am registered! Interesting that it's paramount.com/startrek instead of the main startrek.com site, but they do want to give it a fresh start I guess.

Hopefully some of the poor bastards that got laid off will be working on this site!

--------

[ This signature intentionally left blank. ]

Reply

Quote