New Star Trek Trailer

[thatmariolover]

I would like this made public:

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "TREKKIE" AND A "TREKKER"?

"Trekkie" is obviously the more common term, the one found in some dictionary or something or other. Anyway, many people have assigned different definitions distinguishing between a "Trekkie" and a "Trekker"--one's a casual fan, one's an obsessed fanatic, one's got a life, one's a loser--but their definitions tend to vary and switch (depending on which side of the Trekkie/Trekker argument they stand on).

But my basic definition of the difference between a "Trekkie" and a "Trekker" gets down to the root of the issue, and I think it's one most will agree is true:

Trekkie: a Star Trek fan.

Trekker: what a Star Trek fan who doesn't like the term "Trekkie" (because they think it's demeaning, or indicates a group of Trek fans of a different kind) calls himself or herself.

I'm not saying that "Trekkers" are snobs--they just don't like "Trekkie," which some people might feel is a belittling term used by non-Trek fans for our ilk.

As for me, I have no qualms about being called a Trekkie or a Trekker, but to be "politically" correct, I refer to other Trek fans as "Trekkers" so as not to alienate those who do not like being called "Trekkies."

That out of the way, I am a Trekkie. My brother tends towards the trekker end of the spectrum, though that's just because he can rattle off stuff like "OA team member member 4" in episode 8, season 2, entitled "A Tribble ate my Ballsack" in casual conversation. He's more knowledgeable about the franchise than he is protective of it (thank God).

Regardless, we're both waiting to pass judgement until we see it. But I agree, they're certainly going for a different crowd. Disgust won't set in until they start a new Star Trek series for the 90210 crowd instead of catering to the proper Sci-Fi appreciating crowd (then again, maybe it'd be easier for the geeks to get laid if they could talk about Star Trek with girls? But I digress...).

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by thatmariolover

I would like this made public:



That out of the way, I am a Trekkie. My brother tends towards the trekker end of the spectrum, though that's just because he can rattle off stuff like "OA team member member 4" in episode 8, season 2, entitled "A Tribble ate my Ballsack" in casual conversation. He's more knowledgeable about the franchise than he is protective of it (thank God).

Regardless, we're both waiting to pass judgement until we see it. But I agree, they're certainly going for a different crowd. Disgust won't set in until they start a new Star Trek series for the 90210 crowd instead of catering to the proper Sci-Fi appreciating crowd (then again, maybe it'd be easier for the geeks to get laid if they could talk about Star Trek with girls? But I digress...).

Anything with the prefix "trek" is synonymous with "virgin" in my books.

[Neo]

I think it looks great. Hopefully it will breath some new life into the Trek franchise. I think I've gotten over the whole rewriting history part of it. The jury is still out on whether this should be viewed as the new canon or if it's kind of like a parallel universe. Abrams simply said it was a "reintroduction", whatever that means.

It will be successful if the movie concentrates on the characters rather than on the action. In a Star Trek movie, the action should always be the backdrop, not the main feature. One of the original producers (Berman or Braga) said that Star Trek was primarily about the action. This philosophy is what lead to the cow patties known as Insurrection and Nemesis. I know First Contact had a ton of action, but it only served to create drama and interesting story lines for the characters since the Borg are their arch enemies.

At its core, Star Trek has always been a show about morality. Being in space and flying around in ships are just the backdrop. If you reverse that, you just get another cookie-cutter mind-numbing series of action scenes. Oh, and they need to start using actual models again instead of CGI'ing all the ships. All that computer generated shit shuts my brain down.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Neo

I think it looks great. Hopefully it will breath some new life into the Trek franchise. I think I've gotten over the whole rewriting history part of it. The jury is still out on whether this should be viewed as the new canon or if it's kind of like a parallel universe. Abrams simply said it was a "reintroduction", whatever that means.

It will be successful if the movie concentrates on the characters rather than on the action. In a Star Trek movie, the action should always be the backdrop, not the main feature. One of the original producers (Berman or Braga) said that Star Trek was primarily about the action. This philosophy is what lead to the cow patties known as Insurrection and Nemesis. I know First Contact had a ton of action, but it only served to create drama and interesting story lines for the characters since the Borg are their arch enemies.

At its core, Star Trek has always been a show about morality. Being in space and flying around in ships are just the backdrop. If you reverse that, you just get another cookie-cutter mind-numbing series of action scenes. Oh, and they need to start using actual models again instead of CGI'ing all the ships. All that computer generated shit shuts my brain down.

Yay Neo is back...
For how long though?