View Single Post
Old December 30 2012, 01:22 PM   #104
Shikarnov
Rear Admiral
 
Shikarnov's Avatar
 
Location: Texas (Connecticut & Ivanovo in years past)
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
The big problem with those novels is that NOTHING CHANGES. There is zero risk to the main cast, and we all know their fates. They can't even learn anything especially new that will change their outlook on life.

That's why my favourte part of the novelverse is the post-Nemesis 24th century stuff, where change both personal and to the rest of the galaxy can and does happen.

This reset is really the only way we can do anything truly meaningful with the original characters.
Well, I don't see that there needs to be risk to the main cast to tell a compelling story. The fun of Star Trek is in the exploration of strange new worlds / ideas and how the heroes solve various puzzles. Neither of these are diminished at all (in my opinion) just because we know the captain won't die, get trapped in the Mirror Universe, transferred to another ship, etc.

As an example, I don't think anybody seriously thought Kirk was going to remain stuck in the past in City on the Edge of Forever, and yet the story was still considered one of Trek's best - a timeless classic watched over and over again. Or that Scotty wasn't going to get the transporter working just in a nick of time to pluck the captain off the Constellation before destroying the Planet Killer. Etc. Etc. Etc.
__________________
"It is logically impossible for people to know God exists without any proven evidence. It is, however logically plausible to believe something does not exist if there is no evidence of it."

Last edited by Shikarnov; December 30 2012 at 01:42 PM.
Shikarnov is offline   Reply With Quote