The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/index.php)
-   Star Trek XI: The Movie (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Good news: Kids love the new Trek (http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10372)

SouthernSpockette 01-03-2010 05:19 PM

Good news: Kids love the new Trek
 
At least one kid does...my niece. This isn't anything siginificant, I just believe this is something cool, and want to share it.

She is 10, and is into Moxie Girls, Littlest Pet Shop, Hannah Montana and iCarly. When she stayed with me over the weekend, it was a battle getting her to watch Star Trek with me. The DVD was a Christmas present, and I wanted to watch it. She was afraid of being bored, but begrudgingly gave in.

She LOVED it!!! She talked a lot about how she liked the (young) "Spock" character, and begged me to let her take the movie home so her Mom could watch it. I would have let her, but was afraid it'd be eons before I got it back. They'll have to watch it with Comcast's "On Demand".

If this can happen with one person, I wonder how many other new trek fans there may be out there.

:thumbup:

jerhanner 01-03-2010 08:02 PM

That's good news!

kevin 01-04-2010 01:40 AM

That's a nice story to hear!

Dominus of Megadeus 01-04-2010 03:12 AM

...and THAT'S what's UP!

I think there are some folk that are lacking vision. Your niece is an example of who, in part, Mr. Abrams & Co. were targeting--a future fan base. Some say, "The messed with 'my Trek'." I would say, "No...'Your' Trek was messed with long ago." "Your" Trek was messed with by William Shatner, who came out with "The Final Frontier." It was messed with by the hands of director and producer of "Star Trek: Nemesis". It was messed with by the producers of "Voyager" and "Enterprise". Even more insidious, "your" Trek was "messed with" by the hands of time--a production that (even in it's day, admittedly by those involved with the series) was hobbled by lack of funding and spotty writing (and the latter happens with every series from time to time)...A ship design that needed updating when the first film came out (hence the "refitting"--even admittedly was needed for a new series, "Phase II"). Time has no feelings...no regard to a fan base...No regarding for a TV series cast members. Trek needed new blood. It needed new life...a new style...some injection of rock-and-roll (Rock and Roll of the new millennium, not that from the 1950's and 60's).

Everything about this film paid homage to the original series, while going for "the new"--not for the sake of being new, but of necessity. The pacing of the story grabs the attention of today's audience while still honoring what came before. The writing and the acting have proved empirically to be winners both with the audience and with critics (which equals to the stamp of approval, financially in the box office, and critically with accolades). It's growth...It's evolution...It's change.

It's no longer "your" Trek. It's no longer "my" Trek. It's SouthernSprockette Niece's Trek. To that, I am grateful for the change.

chator 01-04-2010 11:10 AM

yes, that is good news...for Paramount that may have a Trekkie for life to buy up their overpriced Trek products, watch their up-coming Trek films, etc. The younger you get them the stronger impression you can make upon them, and longer you can have a milch cow to leech off of.

When i was five i got into Star Wars. I didn't get into Star Trek until i was a teenager. That was because i couldn't understand Star Trek at five. I'm not sure what a five-year old will get out of Star Trek, they'll have memories of space and of things blowing up, going Kabooy! Good-looking young guys running around on a spaceship, and bad men in black with tatoos.

NCC-73515 01-04-2010 11:31 AM

Dominus, we are one. :D
The people (younger than me) who liked the new movie found WoK boring! Imagine that :(

Lady Vaako 01-04-2010 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chator (Post 292417)
When i was five i got into Star Wars. I didn't get into Star Trek until i was a teenager. That was because i couldn't understand Star Trek at five. I'm not sure what a five-year old will get out of Star Trek, they'll have memories of space and of things blowing up, going Kabooy! Good-looking young guys running around on a spaceship, and bad men in black with tatoos.

Well, I feel for you... My earliest memories of science-fiction will forever be linked to Star Trek and I was about five years old when I first saw an episode of TOS on TV for the first time. Star Trek is what made me fall in love with science-fiction at such an early age.

And to me, it wasn't just about things exploding and good-looking guys running around in a spaceship (although I have to admit that Spock was one of my earliest crushes). What I got out of Star Trek at that age was a complete sense of awe that came from the idea that maybe one day space travel and exploration would be something we'd be able to achieve. I loved the stories, the funky characters and yes, even the technology even though I couldn't understand any of it. But to me, that's what made it all the more fascinating.

On the other hand, I didn't start paying attention to Star Wars until "The Empire Strikes Back" came out...

kevin 01-04-2010 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chator (Post 292417)
yes, that is good news...for Paramount that may have a Trekkie for life to buy up their overpriced Trek products, watch their up-coming Trek films, etc. The younger you get them the stronger impression you can make upon them, and longer you can have a milch cow to leech off of.

When i was five i got into Star Wars. I didn't get into Star Trek until i was a teenager. That was because i couldn't understand Star Trek at five. I'm not sure what a five-year old will get out of Star Trek, they'll have memories of space and of things blowing up, going Kabooy! Good-looking young guys running around on a spaceship, and bad men in black with tatoos.

Let's see, clear bitterness at someone having a nice story about the new film to share aside......

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Vaako (Post 292438)
Well, I feel for you... My earliest memories of science-fiction will forever be linked to Star Trek and I was about five years old when I first saw an episode of TOS on TV for the first time. Star Trek is what made me fall in love with science-fiction at such an early age.

And to me, it wasn't just about things exploding and good-looking guys running around in a spaceship (although I have to admit that Spock was one of my earliest crushes). What I got out of Star Trek at that age was a complete sense of awe that came from the idea that maybe one day space travel and exploration would be something we'd be able to achieve. I loved the stories, the funky characters and yes, even the technology even though I couldn't understand any of it. But to me, that's what made it all the more fascinating.

Nicely said - I was about 7/8 when I started with Trek and at first it was just because I would watch anything set in space!!

NCC_1701A 01-04-2010 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dominus of Megadeus (Post 292337)
...and THAT'S what's UP!

I think there are some folk that are lacking vision. Your niece is an example of who, in part, Mr. Abrams & Co. were targeting--a future fan base. Some say, "The messed with 'my Trek'." I would say, "No...'Your' Trek was messed with long ago." "Your" Trek was messed with by William Shatner, who came out with "The Final Frontier." It was messed with by the hands of director and producer of "Star Trek: Nemesis". It was messed with by the producers of "Voyager" and "Enterprise". Even more insidious, "your" Trek was "messed with" by the hands of time--a production that (even in it's day, admittedly by those involved with the series) was hobbled by lack of funding and spotty writing (and the latter happens with every series from time to time)...A ship design that needed updating when the first film came out (hence the "refitting"--even admittedly was needed for a new series, "Phase II"). Time has no feelings...no regard to a fan base...No regarding for a TV series cast members. Trek needed new blood. It needed new life...a new style...some injection of rock-and-roll (Rock and Roll of the new millennium, not that from the 1950's and 60's).

Everything about this film paid homage to the original series, while going for "the new"--not for the sake of being new, but of necessity. The pacing of the story grabs the attention of today's audience while still honoring what came before. The writing and the acting have proved empirically to be winners both with the audience and with critics (which equals to the stamp of approval, financially in the box office, and critically with accolades). It's growth...It's evolution...It's change.

It's no longer "your" Trek. It's no longer "my" Trek. It's SouthernSprockette Niece's Trek. To that, I am grateful for the change.

:iagree:

I-Am-Zim 01-04-2010 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dominus of Megadeus (Post 292337)
...and THAT'S what's UP!

I think there are some folk that are lacking vision. Your niece is an example of who, in part, Mr. Abrams & Co. were targeting--a future fan base. Some say, "The messed with 'my Trek'." I would say, "No...'Your' Trek was messed with long ago." "Your" Trek was messed with by William Shatner, who came out with "The Final Frontier." It was messed with by the hands of director and producer of "Star Trek: Nemesis". It was messed with by the producers of "Voyager" and "Enterprise". Even more insidious, "your" Trek was "messed with" by the hands of time--a production that (even in it's day, admittedly by those involved with the series) was hobbled by lack of funding and spotty writing (and the latter happens with every series from time to time)...A ship design that needed updating when the first film came out (hence the "refitting"--even admittedly was needed for a new series, "Phase II"). Time has no feelings...no regard to a fan base...No regarding for a TV series cast members. Trek needed new blood. It needed new life...a new style...some injection of rock-and-roll (Rock and Roll of the new millennium, not that from the 1950's and 60's).

Everything about this film paid homage to the original series, while going for "the new"--not for the sake of being new, but of necessity. The pacing of the story grabs the attention of today's audience while still honoring what came before. The writing and the acting have proved empirically to be winners both with the audience and with critics (which equals to the stamp of approval, financially in the box office, and critically with accolades). It's growth...It's evolution...It's change.

It's no longer "your" Trek. It's no longer "my" Trek. It's SouthernSprockette Niece's Trek. To that, I am grateful for the change.

I must lack vision. Because I pretty much disagree with everything you just said. And I'm proud to say that my 5 y/o son has seen both TOS and STXI and he would much rather watch TOS. To be honest, he actually prefers TAS. And that's fine with me. Since I'm one of the fathers who the "This Ain't Your Father's Star Trek" ads refers to, it makes me proud that my son is following in my footsteps as a fan of TOS over NuTrek. Thank God I'm rubbing off on him a little.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.