# I'm sorry, but all the new Trek films are garbage compared to the original ones **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 10, 2019, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907 "2019-03-10T19:21:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Reindeer\_Flotilla](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/reindeer_flotilla/32/3024_2.png) [@Reindeer\_Flotilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reindeer_Flotilla)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/41 "2019-03-11T22:58:42Z")
Ah found it. Here’s the brilliant take down of _Star Trek: Into Darkness_ that emphasizes the whole Doesn’t-Understand-The-SciFi-Universe-He’s-Dealing-With effect Abrams brought to the last Star Trek movie. [Star Trek Into Darkness: The Spoiler FAQ](https://io9.gizmodo.com/star-trek-into-darkness-the-spoiler-faq-508927844) ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/42 "2019-03-11T23:00:02Z")
> [@burpo\_the\_wonder\_mutt](#): > > ^ The Wrath of Mudd? ”The Wrath of Mudd’s Scorned Women”. There is little reason beyond lazy marketing to continue to produce _Star Trek_ properties. This isn’t some eons-long story arc like _Dune_ or an exploration of a transformative discovery like _The Expanse_; it is transparently a Horatio Hornblower/Age of Sail milieu set in space using technology with no rational basis or consistent limitations which the characters use in the most facile manner. It is a problem successive series have tried to deal with by isolating the story in a remote outpost or on the other side of the galaxy, or facing some kind of conspiracy, which has been successively less appealing, and Abrams essentially dismissed everything he didn’t like about the original series and referenced just enough to appeal to fan service without having to worry about any continuity, which begs the question of why bothering to call the film “Star Trek” at all. I shudder to think what a Tarantino-directed _Star Trek_ film would look like. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/43 "2019-03-11T23:22:43Z")
Abrams is to _Star Trek_ as Verhoeven is to Heinlein. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/44 "2019-03-11T23:39:09Z")
Aah but see, that’s a big part of the point. Abrams Trek ISN’T Horatio and the age of sail set in space. It’s Star Trek in a somewhat different universe. Kahn was a pretty big thing in TOS, so I’d expect him to show up in this version, but would be highly surprised if he wasn’t different. In the TOS universe, Voyager was able to land, they even showed it once. In this new world, why shouldn’t the Enterprise be capable of landing? Y’all are trying to cram the old universe into the new universe. I’m gonna just stay over here off your lawn while you fret about leaking quantum wineskins. Heh, didn’t we have a thread a while back about exactly that? A Tarantino scripted and directed Star Trek? Pretty damn funny if I’m remembering right. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/45 "2019-03-11T23:43:51Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > He not only missed the point, he flew past it at transwarp speeds. The entire point of the _Kobayashi Maru_ exercise is that it is a test of character, e.g. how do you handle a hopeless situation. By reprogramming the test, as described in _Wrath of Khan_, Kirk avoided having to face the “no-win scenario”, and in typical fashion outwits Khan by guile (pretending the _Enterprise_ to be in much worse condition than it actually was on an open channel monitored by Khan), only to then have to face the death of Spock, which for him (and the fans who revered that relationship) was the ultimate no-win scenario, which also parlays into the general theme of the film of loss and mortality, as symbolized by the reading glasses gifted to Kirk early in the film, which were broken during the battle. It is deft screenwriting that manages to deal with the readily apparent aging of the cast, undercuts the myth of Kirk as an invulnerable hero and paragon of virtue, and gives weight to the death of a major character in a way that few films can manage. > > Abrams treated the test as a “fill in the gaps” fan service moment, relying on knowledge of the original _Wrath of Khan_ for any impact, and Kirk as a smirking, apple-chewing asshat has no real character to play; he’s just a guy who is promoted from cadet to captain in less time than it takes to eat a hot meal. It is the weakest kind of writing and plotting that just skips from scene to scene making the characters do and say whatever just to drive action sequences and the thin excuse for a plot. > > Stranger The test in Wrath of Khan showed something about Kirk’s character which we knew but didn’t know we knew. It was a brilliant example of showing character It also brought us back to the beginning of TOS. Kirk as invulnerable hero was kind of a myth, but also something we saw in the bad writing of the end of the TOS run. Kirk knew about death. Consider the end of “Balance of Terror” where he had to deal with the death of the kid whose marriage he almost performed. And he was reduced to giving inadequate support to the guy’s almost widow, The last scene, of Kirk walking alone down the corridor, is powerful. It is far from the “another redshirt bites the dust” of the later episodes. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2019, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/46 "2019-03-11T23:48:43Z")
> [@guestchaz](#): > > Aah but see, that’s a big part of the point. Abrams Trek ISN’T Horatio and the age of sail set in space. It’s Star Trek in a somewhat different universe. Kahn was a pretty big thing in TOS, so I’d expect him to show up in this version, but would be highly surprised if he wasn’t different. In the TOS universe, Voyager was able to land, they even showed it once. In this new world, why shouldn’t the Enterprise be capable of landing? Because the Abrams universe is the same as ours except for the attack that killed Kirk’s father, and that the Enterprise can’t land in either of them. It is right in the fucking writer’s guide, IIRC. I could have sent JJ a copy of mine if he needed it. Anyone not knowing that should not only not be allowed near a ST movie set but shouldn’t be allowed next to an Enterprise model kit. Not that JJ probably ever had one. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/47 "2019-03-12T00:11:58Z")
Aha, [here](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=844152) it is. Writing Tarantino’s Star Trek Is that the writer’s guide he was given? Honest question, I know that they exist, but I don’t have any idea what may or may not have been in the writers guide for this version of Star Trek. Obviously Abram’s STU is not the same as TOSU. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/48 "2019-03-12T01:09:50Z")
> [@guestchaz](#): > > Aah but see, that’s a big part of the point. Abrams Trek ISN’T Horatio and the age of sail set in space. It’s Star Trek in a somewhat different universe. Kahn was a pretty big thing in TOS, so I’d expect him to show up in this version, but would be highly surprised if he wasn’t different. In the TOS universe, Voyager was able to land, they even showed it once. In this new world, why shouldn’t the Enterprise be capable of landing? Except that it isn’t a “different universe”; it is the same universe except one change; the destruction of the _Kelvin_. Abrams could have dealt with that by severing the reboot completely but instead writes in this “alternate timeline” where things happen the same way only in random order for no particular reason. It’s like an thirteen-year-old’s attempt at fan fiction complete with gratuitous boob shots and lame callbacks. But the dumb pseudo-connection to the original cast films isn’t the real problem; the problem is that it is just sloppy plotting and lazy writing with character inconsistencies and a complete reliance on dumb tropes within its own series. They’re just films that are badly written and indifferently produced. The first film literally sent one character through [“The Chompers”](https://youtu.be/gqRdT8m1Suo) for no reason other than to create some kind of fake tension, which was after Kirk landed on Hoth and had to fight of the wampa, which officially qualified that film as being pieced together from other, better films. I’m not really a fan of _Star Trek_, so I don’t particularly care that Abrams and company changed the characters, jiggered with the timeline, or invented new technobabble that didn’t exist in the original timeline, but these movies are just objectively bad even setting aside the fact that they exist at all just to clip from the original films without any of the sensibility of the characters. When a transparent satire like _Galaxy Quest_ treats its source subject with more respect and is an objectively better film than the Abrams “pseudo-remakes” it isn’t good filmmaking. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/49 "2019-03-12T01:18:33Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Abrams is to _Star Trek_ as Verhoeven is to Heinlein. No no no no no. You can hate Verhoeven, but that dude had something to say, and boy howdy did he say it, with two upraised middle fingers. The only thing Abrams ever raises is a glitter-coated lens-flared question mark doing jazz hands. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/50 "2019-03-12T01:24:47Z")
Point taken. How about “Abrams is to **Star Trek** what Carlo Rossi is to fine wine.” No, that doesn’t convey the utter contempt and incompetence we need here. But we can’t post political screeds in CS, so I’m stumped. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/51 "2019-03-12T01:28:46Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I am, a Star Trek fan, but to be honest, I think there have been a total of two good Star Trek movies; Wrath of Khan and Voyage Home. T I have to disagree. Voyage Home is a horrible movie. It’s as much fan service as Abrams’ films. Quippy one liners, stupid plot. At least it doesn’t have a fan dance. The whole alien whale probe was stupid. I fully expected the whales to tell their masters to keep killing everyone on the planet. We probably deserved it. > [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > …Kirk as an invulnerable hero and paragon of virtue… I’ve never met a paragon. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/52 "2019-03-12T01:47:09Z")
> [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](#): > > I have to disagree. Voyage Home is a horrible movie. It’s as much fan service as Abrams’ films. Quippy one liners, stupid plot. At least it doesn’t have a fan dance. The whole alien whale probe was stupid. I fully expected the whales to tell their masters to keep killing everyone on the planet. We probably deserved it. You have it wrong. Voyage Home is not canon, it’s a perspective of TOS like Galaxy Quest, and yes, it is fan service. It should have been the end of the franchise though. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/53 "2019-03-12T03:07:21Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Because the Abrams universe is the same as ours except for the attack that killed Kirk’s father, and that the Enterprise can’t land in either of them. It is right in the fucking writer’s guide, IIRC. I could have sent JJ a copy of mine if he needed it. In fact, that was the very reason for the transporters. It would have taken up screen time to show the Enterprise landing and taking of. The producers came up with the idea of using teleportation to beam down a landing party in the wink of an eye. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/54 "2019-03-12T04:03:37Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > You have it wrong. Voyage Home is not canon, it’s a perspective of TOS like Galaxy Quest, and yes, it is fan service. It should have been the end of the franchise though. It was an attempt to put things back on track after the train wreck called _ **The Search for Spock** _. One thing I’ve always disliked about the series was how people could be so easily resurrected. If you’re gonna kill somebody off, fer Chrissakes, let them remain dead. That’s how things work in the real world. Not only that, it’s bad storytelling: Spock’s self-sacrifice lost all of its meaning when he was magically brought back to life. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/55 "2019-03-12T07:47:40Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Except that it isn’t a “different universe”; it is the same universe except one change; the destruction of the _Kelvin_. > > Stranger Don’t forget Leonard Nimoy reprising his role as TOS Spock one last time, advising Pine-Kirk and Young Spock both of the nature of HIS relationship with TOS Kirk. It is most definitely a separate dimension within the Star Trek meta-universe. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 8:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/56 "2019-03-12T08:03:43Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > It’s like an thirteen-year-old’s attempt at fan fiction complete with gratuitous boob shots and lame callbacks. > > Stranger Please don’t insult 13 year olds. They probably would have done better. It is more like fanfic written by someone who only caught snippets of the show, but did it because that’s what the cool kids are doing. It kind of reminds me of the very first Star Trek novel by Mack Reynolds. I’m sure he never saw any episodes. Reynolds wrote much better than what you find in that book. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/57 "2019-03-12T15:28:34Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > You have it wrong. Voyage Home is not canon, it’s a perspective of TOS like Galaxy Quest, and yes, it is fan service. It should have been the end of the franchise though. Who says it’s “not canon”? How could it not be? The only quasi-official non-canon movie is V, and that’s by common consent, not anything from “on high”, AFAIK. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/58 "2019-03-12T15:36:52Z")
> [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](#): > > Who says it’s “not canon”? How could it not be? > > The only quasi-official non-canon movie is V, and that’s by common consent, not anything from “on high”, AFAIK. I’m not saying it can’t be canon, but I think it’s done as a sort of retrospective and farewell. It’s certainly the end of the line for me, everything done after was STINO. As mentioned it brings back Spock, great for the fans, but not making any real sense. I like to see it as a gift to the fans to make up for the bad movies and go out on a high note. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/59 "2019-03-12T17:03:28Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > It kind of reminds me of the very first Star Trek novel by Mack Reynolds. I’m sure he never saw any episodes. Reynolds wrote much better than what you find in that book. I loved that novel. Granted, I was only 10 or 11 when it came out. In fact, when it was reprinted several years later, I bought a new copy. ---
**Author:** ![Caldris\_bal\_Comar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce7236/32.png) [@Caldris\_bal\_Comar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caldris_bal_Comar)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2019, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907/60 "2019-03-12T17:43:27Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Except that it isn’t a “different universe”; it is the same universe except one change; the destruction of the _Kelvin_… That’s really understating the differences, though. The destruction of the Kelvin was the point where the timeline diverged, but that can have had any number of changes in how events played out when compared to the original universe. There are at least three obvious changes in addition to the Kelvin’s destruction–Nero and the Narada flying around the galaxy, the destruction of Vulcan, and the existence of a second Spock, none of which happened in TOS. And the effects could be far wider–the loss of the Kelvin to the overwhelmingly superior armament of the Romulans would likely have triggered changes in Starfleet’s tactics, things like the initiation of Section 31’s dreadnought construction (it was Section 31 in Into Darkness, wasn’t it? I forget), or, on a smaller scale, designing starships to be able to operate in atmosphere (or water!). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-sorry-but-all-the-new-trek-films-are-garbage-compared-to-the-original-ones/830907.md?page=4)