XPost: alt.tv.star-trek.tos   
   From: liam@valentijn.nu   
      
   Sandman wrote:   
   > In article ,   
   > Wiseguy  wrote:   
   >   
   >> Prequels don't ruin a franchise, whether you like them or not.   
   >   
   > Well, then JJ Abrams can't, either. I was responding to YourName that   
   > claimed that JJ Abrams would destroy the "real Star Wars", whatever   
   > that means.   
   >   
   > And I think you mean that prequels can't ruin the originals - the   
   > franchise as such is the sum of all its parts, and if some of those   
   > parts are bad, it certainly can ruin the franchise as a whole. The   
   > original movies aren't ruined though.   
   >   
   >> They only tell what's gone before.  Sequels, on the other hand, can   
   >> ruin a franchise by turning the story in stupid directions.   
   >   
   > Huh? That makes no sense at all. The prequels can introduce directions   
   > that ruins the franchise just as much as sequels. Like introducing   
   > "midichlorians" that if you take it into consideration ruins Yodas   
   > entire sensei talk on Dagobah.   
      
   Actually, I prefer midichlorians over mumbo jumbo talk. :-) It made The   
   Force more likable to me.   
   But as a whole the prequels were not as good as the first movies made. As   
   they /originally/ were made.   
   They were better than the 2009 incarnation of Star Trek I think, which was   
   official Star Trek, but not as I (want to) know it.   
      
   --   
   Wouter Valentijn http://www.j3v.net   
      
   Kirk:  "My God, Bones... what have I done?"   
   McCoy:  "What you had to do. What you always do: turn death into a fighting   
   chance to live."   
      
   Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.   
      
   liam=mail   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)