XPost: alt.tv.star-trek.tos, rec.arts.movies.current-films, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   From: ted@loft.tnolan.com   
      
   In article ,   
   Steven L.  wrote:   
   >On 12/9/2009 3:07 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   >> "Smokie Darling (Annie)"  wrote in message   
   >> news:08e41785-e42f-4238-865c-31efceb6d2af@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com...   
   >>> On Dec 9, 9:33 am, trag  wrote:   
   >>>> On Dec 9, 9:56 am, "Smokie Darling (Annie)"   
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> I agree with Ted here. The whole Soran plot was just a device   
   >>>>> (mcguffin, if I may), the real plot was reintroducing all the   
   >>>>> characters that most ST viewers "know", and the new interactions based   
   >>>>> on a certain event that occurred.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> That's not the Kirk that I "know".   
   >>>   
   >>> Which is why I put it in quotes.  They have the same names, but   
   >>> because of a certain event, they have changed (some a little, some a   
   >>> lot).   
   >>   
   >> "Certain events"   
   >> Translation: Nobody in Hollyweird knows (nor cares) how to make real Star   
   >> Trek any more.   
   >   
   >It seemed like real Star Trek to me.   
   >   
   >Kirk was arrogant but dedicated and resourceful,   
   >Spock was struggling with his human half (and the bias of other Vulcans   
   >against it), his relationships with Amanda and Sarek were as we knew them,   
   >McCoy was gruff but decent.   
   >   
   >We seem to have two sets of contradictory criticisms here:   
   >   
   >The OP started out by saying that the movie was too derivative of years   
   >and years of past Trek plots,   
   >   
   >but now you're saying that the movie wasn't real Star Trek.   
   >   
   >That's a contradiction.   
   >   
   >I happen to agree with the first poster, but I cut Abrams some slack   
   >because his "five year mission" was to reboot the Trek franchise with a   
   >new cast of actors, but not throw away the key relationships among the   
   >crew or their key motivations. So he had to essentially revisit each one   
   >separately, rushing by at breakneck speed:  Young Kirk was reckless but   
   >matured later, young Spock was tormented by his classmates (that scene   
   >was lifted out of TAS "Yesteryear"), young Spock loved his mom Amanda,   
   >Sarek rationalized marrying Amanda as "logical", on and on.   
   >   
      
   Actually young Spock was a bit different as he got key support from   
   his father at a time when Old Spock didn't, and that support was   
   in favor of his human side.  That seems to have made a difference   
   in his being able to let go enough to keep a girlfriend..   
      
   I thought that was well done, but again not something the casual   
   audience will notice since he's still "pointy-ears + logical".   
      
      
   				Ted   
   --   
   ------   
   columbiaclosings.com   
   What's not in Columbia anymore..   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)