Hober Mallow wrote:
What they have done with these two movies makes me long for Rick Berman.
I didn't like the movies either, but damn, that's taking it too far.
I started watching TNG in 1990, so I'm a little late to the party. But you still had to find something wrong with Original Star Trek to think it needed the re-boot treatment.
The reason it needs to be rebooted is not because there's something wrong with it, but because there's something right
with it. Otherwise it wouldn't be rebooted.
That's a good point--that extends beyond just STAR TREK.
Too many people seem to think that a remake or reboot somehow constitutes a rejection
of the previous version, when that's not really the case. Accepting a new version doesn't mean you think the old version wasn't good enough. It's perfectly reasonable to appreciate both on their own terms--and accept that the new version is doing things differently. Not necessarily better, nor worse, but differently.
Doing a new version of Star Trek, and tweaking the formula, doesn't mean you have to insist that every previous version was somehow flawed. It just means you're having fun with an old standard, like doing a new jazz interpretation of "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" or whatever.
Again, that doesn't mean the classic Judy Garland version isn't still great, but there's always room for another variation on the theme. Nothing is sacred, nothing is set in stone. Everything is grist for the mill.