From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: sdlitvin@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: Star Trek: Am I the Only One?

On 12/9/2009 2:27 PM, GeneK wrote:
> "A Watcher"  wrote in message
>> Isn't a point of the latest movie? Changing their past changed the
>> characters we knew in the original ST. Now they can go on and make new
>> movies based on these different characters. There's no end to it.
>>
>> Of course that will confuse the casual viewers who are really into ST.
>
> It's THE point of the movie, i.e., "this is why our new Trek is different
> from the old Trek but still fits into canon." But casual viewers couldn't
> care less about canon, and for longtime viewers, "this is a reimagining
> of Trek with a new canon" would be probably be explanation enough
> for a good film and "fitting into canon" won't redeem a bad one.
> GeneK

This movie vindicated MY position on the future of Trek, which I had 
stated here before (check the Google archive):

Star Trek does NOT require the original actors, nor the original sets, 
nor the original ship models, nor the original props.  The basic concept 
would work with any actors and any type of ship (as long as it was large 
enough to hold a varied crew).

Critics have to deal with the passage of time:  James Doohan is gone, 
DeForest Kelley is gone, and the other actors are quite old now--too old 
for any more swashbuckling derring-do.  If a TOS-type series is to have 
ANY future, it HAS to be rebooted from a new cast of actors.  Otherwise 
the only other alternative is to let Star Trek die off once and for all.

I doubt that Abrams' critics would be happy about that.  If production 
of the movie had fallen through for any reason, they would be the first 
ones lamenting that "TOS is dead, too bad."



--
Steven L.


--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux
 * Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)