From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: YourName{at}YourISP.com (Your Name)
Subject: Re: Star Trek Into Darkness

In article , Lance Corporal Hammer
Schultz  wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:36:23 +1200, Your Name wrote:
> >
> > If I owned the Mona Lisa then I have the "rights" to
draw a moustache and
> > glasses on it because I believe it looks better that way ... that doesn't
> > make it the correct, moral, nor intelligent thing to do.
> 
> Very poor analogy.  Abrams didn't use CGI to add effects to ST:TMP and
> then burn the original negatives.  He made new movies.
> 
> Abram's Star Trek movies are imperfect but they are Trek.  Not because
> the studio has the right to use the trademarks; but because the
> stories have the archetypes.

The "stories" (largely stolen and butchered from Gene Roddenberry) don't
actually fit with anything in the existing franchise, and so are not
obviously not part of the existing franchise, and therefore are not
actually "Star Trek".

If they want to make a new show / movie ... then make a NEW show / movie,
with a new name.

If they want to make a "Star Trek" show, then it MUST fit with what has
come before, and not via same lame, half-assed time travel excuse that
doesn't work thanks to all the other silly changes and inconsistencies.

It's an extremely simple and common sense thing to understand.
Unfortuantely most people are apparently even "simpler" and have no
"common" sense, and most people who claim to be "fans"
only see the words
"Star Trek" and blindly eat it up. :-(
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux