[Hermanator]

You can view the article at http://ufplanets.com/content.php?260...Bang-Theory-is

[Seldon]

Wow. Should have tagged this as a rant rather than an article. I was not under the impression Star Trek needed saving, it is alive and well and is going through a quiet period like most fanchises do.
I did not think the JJ movies were that bad, some obvious flaws but then we should remember some of the other movies and remember how terrible some of those were as well. I also do not agree that people nowadays see Star Trek fans as you described, the likes of Wheaton, Takei, Stewart to name a few still show a liking for Star Trek and these guys are far removed from your description.

[Hermanator]

I'll accept rant. Though I was going more for a polemic. The argument has always been that before JJ Trek there was no Trek on TV since the 90s, so I think it certainly did/does need saving.

Takei and Stewart can't really be considered fans, but rather Cast members. I think Wheaton could be considered a Star Trek fan as well as a fan of other cult sci fi. I would argue he fits the stereotypical view quite well. Other than the fact he doesn't live with his mother; though he is rich.

[Kains]

Awww Hermy, bias level went from BBC to CNN on this one.

[Caymen Greener]

How dare you condemn someone to stepping on a Lego... that is beyond reproach!

Seriously, I agree JJ is not "saving" Trek, but what Kains said - this is MSNBC-level reporting. Enjoyable read though.

[Leoferwic]

I must agree that this is far more of a rant than an article, and Kains, I think the bias level went from BBC to Faux News on this one I do feel that the JJ Trek movies have spurred an interest in Star Trek as a franchise and this may lead more people to learn more about the Roddenberry Trek instead. Action movies, tight costumes and weapons fire do tend to draw attention much more than jokes that only certain people will understand, even on a show with a large viewer base. Still, this was an interesting read, thank you Hermanator.

[Hermanator]

You all just wait until we reach a video version of this system, that'll allow me to spread my deep rooted hatred of JJ Abrams via face and speech. Truth is I didn't even mention Simon Pegg, and I really, really dislike Simon Pegg. He to me is like the young drug smoking demographic for Bill O'Reilly

Some bad Language, but imminent future.

[DevlinTrask]

I have to admit that I just watched half of season one of the TBBT and I own the first three seasons on BR. I can't tell you why I didn't watched more but it felt to 'fast' for me.
And does it really saves Star Trek? Yes, it might give people a new or a certain different view onto Trek but I don't think it will bring people to watch a whole series of Trek. TBBT is a comedy show of 25 minutes per episode. Star Trek is a Sci-Fi Drama of 45 minutes per episode and I have to discover each day the attention span of people is getting shorter and shorter.
And for the J.J. version of Trek there is no arguing that he brings new people to the franchise. If they stick to it or even become Trekker is another question. do we have to like it as 'die hard fans' is another question. But it is cinema and it is a different experience than TV. My wife joined me the first time for something Trek by watching the first J.J. movie with me at the cinema. So there Paramount succeed. Everything else is just personal likes or habits in my opinion. you may aim your phasers now but my shields are up :mrgreen:

[Mazoue]

Interesting article-rant-polemis there Herminator. I always do enjoy reading your thoughts. As for my opinion, I do think popular culture now a days does have a hand in saving Trek. You've mentioned The Big Bang Theory and I will agree with you it has in a big way influenced perception and encouraged nerdisme everywhere including Trek. Sadely, apart from self made project like Star Trek Renegades or other Trek projects, we only see Paramounts official work in continuation - I use this term loosely - of the Trek universe and that is the one living in the head of JJ Abrams. I most say that I am a JJ fan but I am not blinded - no pun intended (well maybe) by what he is doing. That is rebooting or retooling the "The Original Series" and I can see how that could be a cardinal sin for most trekkers. I for the most part enjoy his version of trek but will ultimately admit I deeply miss having a Trek series in the prime universe. I feel this is why there is so much hope behind another season of Enterprise on Netflix or the possible eventuality of having Star Trek Renegade come to television. I for one, would have enjoyed seeing another Enterprise in another time period. For instance, look at the Defiance experiment where what you do in-game via missions influence an element in the show. I think given the resources, that sort of experiment would work with Star Trek. But I hate to admit it, so long as JJ has his grip on Star Trek, we will not see a series on TV and if we do, it'll be a JJ Trek.

[Hermanator]

That is rebooting or retooling the "The Original Series" and I can see how that could be a cardinal sin for most trekkers.

This is my main problem. JJ Trek to me is what Mormonism is to the Catholic Church.

Enterprise on Netflix is what I'm holding my breath for, though I think it is likely I will suffocate. I can't see JJ Abrams letting go of Star Trek. This is the man who made something out of nothing, and then brought it back down to nothing i.e. Lost. I'd imagine he is taking regular health check ups out of fear that he could internally combust with dollars, just as a result of having something, which he is turning into nothing. I think a Television show based off JJ Trek would be even worse than a movie.

I personally have found both movies to be quite painful events in my life. To such an extent I'm considering talking to the University counsellor. I keep on getting flashbacks of Benedict Cumberbatch killing Klingons with nose rings, spock screeching and of course Chris Pine's wooden acting. Let alone Simon Pegg who has been keeping me up with his abysmal destruction of the character of Scotty,though he was better in the later movie than its predecessor. What does irritate me to such an extent is the relationship between Spock, Kirk and McCoy being dumbed down by emotionalizing Spock and yet failing to rationalize McCoy. Kirk is supposed to be neutral, and they are supposed to be on each shoulder, convincing him to take a certain action. This part is now as one sided as this "article".

[Seldon]

I think you're being over dramatic.

JJ isn't directing Star Trek 3, he's tied up with Star Wars, but will remain as a co-producer. A director has yet to be announced.

Whether you choose to accept reality or or not, JJ's movies did bring in viewers who would no doubt explore other avenues of Star Trek, so he is helping to keep the franchise going. Dune, as horrible a movie as people insist it is, inspired me to read the book. The Lord of the Rings movies, got my brother into Tolkien.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime...?page=2&p=.htm

I think articles in the future need to be a little more thought provoking, conversation starting, less emotional rants.

[Hermanator]

Well, I like to think you can read my "Deep thought" articles if you want thought provoking. This article got cleared by Connor and Mikester, if they believed it were unsuitable they wouldn't have published it. So I think that conversation is best without me present.

The nature of the article is not an emotional rant, for that to be the case I would have had to be emotional. It was intended to be a heavy criticism with comical elements. If it missed the mark I apologise. Nor was I hoping anyone would agree, if anything this article was from my perspective intended to put forward a strong opinion on one side, and allow others to disagree.

You have to bare in mind that I write many if not most of my articles up to three months before their publication, both here and my student paper. When you write two articles on the Philosophical / Ethical side of Star Trek back to back, it's quite comforting to unwind on something which could potentially be a little controversial.


I think thats all the explaining I need to do. I have received messages and teamspeak pokes about people finding this "Article" amusing and fun. I have also recieved your Criticism. All I can say is, thank you for reading. I apologise if it didn't entertain you in the way it entertained others. But if you would like to carry on with the conversation whether or not this article is suitable for the FNS news system, I would suggest you talk to Connor or Mikester. They are the ball and chain to every article published on this system, they clear them and add pictures.

[Kains]

Seems I have unintentionally added fuel to a potentially derailing train: We are criticizing the format and display of Herm's article, while largely bypassing just how wrong he is.

We are like fools sitting around watching Fox News and talking about the ethnic diversity of all of their young Caucasian, and Blonde, news team, when the truly terrible part is the maligning of that downright epic theatrical production of Star Trek. A rip-roaring juggernaut of a film, which has brought Mac stores to the 23rd Century, highly sexed up everything, and turned out beloved Engineering into a brewery.

I can't help but feel that this is nothing but good ('Cept for the Mac store part, that can die and burn in a chemical fire).

Plus, by giving credit to Big Bang Theory instead of where it rightfully belongs, Hermy not only shames himself, but that great institution Federation News Service, which is a pillar of our community as a whole. Why have a couple of math geeks poking fun at stupid people, which, frankly, many of us do all day long, when you can watch enormously out of scale space ships, (Which become redundant with transporters working across the galaxy), or incredible acts of bravery (Like the same space jump scene two movies in a row), incredible technology (Which gets outdone every time elsewhere in the film), or half naked science chick (Which I find no fault with at all...)


(Actually, all joking aside, I'm not a fan of Big Bang: Not that it is a bad production or anything, just reminds me waaay too much of people I had to attend university and live with. As a side note, I wonder if I can get lens flare on my sig... hmmm)

[Solace]

This was an interesting read to say the least. I don't really have much to add in terms of discussion as I'm trying to figure out what to say about this... ()

I was reading some of the comments and I'm not sure if I'm missing the point or the joke at all, but it seems theres a lot of deep seated hatred for this article or am I missing the point?

Anyway, I would like to add that this article does point out a few things about JJ Trek, although I do not entirely agree with hermies conclusions. I think it's a balance of both worlds.. allow me to explain:

"JJ Trek" has brought attention and life back into the trek universe and made it the topic of discussion again, 2 successful movies and most likely a third, if you dislike JJ Trek then that is your opinion, but I would have to say that without JJ Trek the possbility of another Star Trek TV series would be zero. Now theres talk of rebooting Star Trek Enterprise for Season 5 and the possibility of a concurrent Star Trek Titan {Make this happen!} tv series.

Taking into account the big bang theory..

The Big Bang Theory seems to embody the star trek series from TOS to TNG - making jokes and witty remarks that remind us of the good times of those series and the fun we have had watching and rewatching them! The big bang theory idolizes the Roddenberry vision of what star trek is. Roddenberrys vision of star trek is the most important aspect of trek and no one will dispute what Gene set into motion back in the 1960's.

JJ Trek is a 're-envisioning' of Roddenberrys star trek, trying to shed a more modern light on an old IP, attract the younger and newer generation of people into the star trek fanbase and keep moving from there. Times change and so will star trek. Like Chancellor Gorkon said:

"You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it."

This same could be applied to JJ Trek.

[Shakken]

"egotistical presumptuous imbecile" may be a little strong. But I am going to agree with Herm here. I have tried really hard to ignore JJ Trek's existence, I have not seen Lensflare 2, return of the phaser or whatever it was called.

I may be the only one Herm but good on ya!