View Single Post
Old 11-13-2008, 04:01 AM
SouthernSpockette's Avatar
SouthernSpockette SouthernSpockette is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: TN
Posts: 529

Originally Posted by jesustrek View Post
'I have done a movie for the future fans of Star Trek, not for the old' J.J. Abrams, today in Spain.

-The director and producer was fan in his youth of 'The Star Wars' but never he was him of 'Star Trek'-

I'am a Old Fan, and I do not want STAR TREK that be as,,,,SW, ok ?

admirer that trusted that never involved to a"SW", in a projectof STAR TREK, maybe that be the first one and time finalizes it.

Jesus Salinas, Mexico.
I don't mind him saying that. It tells me that Star Trek has a future. That is an objective which we all can agree on, isn't it? I believe the source of disagreements lies within where we believe Star Trek's potential is.

The whole truth of the matter can be surmised to observing the franchise's history books--from Star Trek: Generations to present. It shows that if Star Trek sticks to the status quo going forward (the status quo being the format from projects past), public impressions of Star Trek will never change and the franchise will continue to dwindle as will public interest. It's one thing to be a true Trekkie, but it's another thing to be a loyal fan who wants Star Trek to thrive--even if it means that a few things have to change in order for it to do so.

To sum it up, what would be such a good thing about sticking to the old fans' format? Where would there be any benefit in watching something you love die--just it can be kep the same for the purpose of satisfying selfish druthers? I think it would be akin to the old adage of "beating a dead horse". I also think that adage can be applied to this whole arguement.
"Why is any object we don't understand always called 'a thing' ?" ~ Dr. Leonard H. McCoy, Star Trek: The Motion Picture

Last edited by SouthernSpockette : 11-13-2008 at 08:06 AM.
Reply With Quote