View Single Post
  #33  
Old 11-29-2008, 12:14 PM
kjh1701 kjh1701 is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vuedoc View Post
I was introduced to ST at a very impressionable time in my life- I think I was 5 or 6. These childhood memories became very dear to me and became very solidified in my mind. I read all the tech manuals and novels and it became a very real universe to me. I wanted everything to make sense, just as I did in real life. The iconic forms of the landing party equipment became burned into my head and to this day, they remain my favorite toys. From middle school, I would argue with my friends over minutia of plot continuity and various inconsistencies. For me then, anything that deviates from all this is anti-canon. I am not saying that I want to live through the 1960s again but for a franchise to have lasted as long as it has and to have generated a 40 real time earth-year history over 5 TV series and 10 thus far movies, anyone attempting to interact with that history had better respect it. The nacelles and the saucer and the size of the viewscreen on the bridge and the thread count in the uniforms don't mean as much to me as the story, but by that I don't mean the quality of the script as much as the respect for the history that has been set up for us over the past 40 years. What canon means to me is : don't change things that have been set into place and have been so for 4 decades.

So with regard to the 3 inconsistencies mentioned above, I would not even know where to start, nor would I want to because I am having trouble accepting these new facets of the story, though I am far more pissed about point 'B' than 'C'.
Wow. You're the first person I've found on here who came so close to expressing my own opinions. And I couldn't have said it any better than you did. I'm 42 now and grew up the same way, only I got into Star Trek during the first syndicated reruns. But that was the early 70's and I was like 5 or 6. I grew up doing the same exact things you did - technical manuals and books until the first movie came out. Debating details with friends and so on for the last 35 years. So yeah, I'm a little set in what I believe - to me canon is what's been around for the last 40 years. Why does it have to be changed?

So for my answers to points A, B and C:

A. Somebody wrote a new Star Trek script who either didn't know the history of Star Trek or just didn't give a damn.

B. See answer A.

C. See answer A.

How to fix this? Get somebody to make a sequel movie that actaully knows the history of Star Trek and respects what has already been established over the last 40 years. Then write a story where old Spock uses the Guardian of Forever or some other form of time travel to go back and make things right, thus erasing all the changes made in the previous "reboot" movie.
Reply With Quote