RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,702
Posts: 5,431,595
Members: 24,833
Currently online: 427
Newest member: PlainSimplGarak


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 7 2009, 10:31 PM   #31
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

urbandk wrote: View Post
I disagree. I think Star Trek has had enough "reboots"...
I'm glad you used the quotes, because Star Trek has never done a reboot before. RESET BUTTON, yes, but never a reboot for the entire franchise a la Batman or Jack Ryan.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 10:36 PM   #32
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

Temis the Vorta wrote: View Post
A straight reboot would have had no emotional connection to TOS.
It would have the same characters. That's all the connection we need.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Mr. Laser Beam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 10:41 PM   #33
urbandk
Commodore
 
urbandk's Avatar
 
Location: the European "canon" is here
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
urbandk wrote: View Post
I disagree. I think Star Trek has had enough "reboots"...
I'm glad you used the quotes, because Star Trek has never done a reboot before. RESET BUTTON, yes, but never a reboot for the entire franchise a la Batman or Jack Ryan.
Notwithstanding in-universe explanations, I don't know what else you'd call TMP or TNG except "reboots." Just like the new movie is a "reboot." They've all been radical reimaginings of the Star Trek concept. They're all "Based on Star Trek created by Gene Roddenberry." They all have tenuous links to what came before. The fact that some fans have more ease reconciling the wildly different movies and TV series than they do reconciling the new movie is just the same old broken record as before. Some fans cried bloody murder when TMP came out for messing with TOS. Some of these same fans were irate with TNG. And now these same fans are rending their hair and clothes over yet another reimagining of Star Trek.
__________________
urbandk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 10:47 PM   #34
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

urbandk wrote: View Post
newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
urbandk wrote: View Post
I disagree. I think Star Trek has had enough "reboots"...
I'm glad you used the quotes, because Star Trek has never done a reboot before. RESET BUTTON, yes, but never a reboot for the entire franchise a la Batman or Jack Ryan.
Notwithstanding in-universe explanations, I don't know what else you'd call TMP or TNG except "reboots."
Sequels.

Or in the case of TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT, spinoffs.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 10:47 PM   #35
Yug
Lieutenant Commander
 
Yug's Avatar
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Temis the Vorta wrote: View Post
A straight reboot would have had no emotional connection to TOS.
As if that new target audience of current teens had any emotional connection to TOS.

The trailers were cool. And Sylar was in it. And Abrams directed it. That's why it was successful.

That the characters were called Kirk and Spock is totally irrelevant.
But that's just it, they didn't want to abandon classic Star Trek. They hoped to bring 40 years of fans with them and expand interest to the younger demographic as well. I don't believe the "target" audience was teens. But had it been a true reboot, Trek fandom would have rejected it just like you seem to, and without giving it a chance.

Fuck Sylar.
Yug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 10:48 PM   #36
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
urbandk wrote: View Post
newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
I'm glad you used the quotes, because Star Trek has never done a reboot before. RESET BUTTON, yes, but never a reboot for the entire franchise a la Batman or Jack Ryan.
Notwithstanding in-universe explanations, I don't know what else you'd call TMP or TNG except "reboots."
Sequels.
WIN!
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 10:49 PM   #37
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

urbandk wrote: View Post
Notwithstanding in-universe explanations, I don't know what else you'd call TMP or TNG except "reboots." Just like the new movie is a "reboot."
Spin-off? Continuation? Sequel? Basically anything other than reboot.

Reboot, in serial fiction, means a discarding of much or even all previous continuity in the series, to start anew. Effectively, all previously-known fictive history is declared by the writer(s) to be null and void, or at least irrelevant to the current storyline, and the series starts over.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:00 PM   #38
urbandk
Commodore
 
urbandk's Avatar
 
Location: the European "canon" is here
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

Shazam! wrote: View Post
urbandk wrote: View Post
Notwithstanding in-universe explanations, I don't know what else you'd call TMP or TNG except "reboots." Just like the new movie is a "reboot."
Spin-off? Continuation? Sequel? Basically anything other than reboot.

Reboot, in serial fiction, means a discarding of much or even all previous continuity in the series, to start anew. Effectively, all previously-known fictive history is declared by the writer(s) to be null and void, or at least irrelevant to the current storyline, and the series starts over.
What is that, Wikipedia?

A reboot as far as I'm concerned is a wholesale re-imagining of a series. Feel free to disagree with me over semantics, but that's what TNG, TMP, TWOK, DS9, and Enterprise were. They took all kinds of liberties with Star Trek's values, aesthetics, and internal coherence while paying lip service to what preceded them. As far as I am concerned, they are all reboots, timeline or no timeline.
__________________
urbandk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:05 PM   #39
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

urbandk wrote: View Post
Shazam! wrote: View Post
urbandk wrote: View Post
Notwithstanding in-universe explanations, I don't know what else you'd call TMP or TNG except "reboots." Just like the new movie is a "reboot."
Spin-off? Continuation? Sequel? Basically anything other than reboot.

Reboot, in serial fiction, means a discarding of much or even all previous continuity in the series, to start anew. Effectively, all previously-known fictive history is declared by the writer(s) to be null and void, or at least irrelevant to the current storyline, and the series starts over.
What is that, Wikipedia?

A reboot as far as I'm concerned is a wholesale re-imagining of a series. Feel free to disagree with me over semantics, but that's what TNG, TMP, TWOK, DS9, and Enterprise were. They took all kinds of liberties with Star Trek's values, aesthetics, and internal coherence while paying lip service to what preceded them. As far as I am concerned, they are all reboots, timeline or no timeline.
Well as far as the rest of the English speaking world is concerned, they were sequels and spinoffs. Mainly this is because sequels can and do tinker with the "aesthetics and values" of a series without being reboots. This is why the Mission Impossible movies are not considered reboots, despite the fact that Jim Phelps turned into a bad guy for some reason.

It occurs to me that the only reason Trekkies have problems with the idea of a reboot is that Trek has never actually tried it before; it's never really needed to. Other series have, with varying degrees of success, and the ones that did not stopped coming out with new material. We (or rather, those of us too deep in the Trekset) just aren't used to thinking of it as a line of fiction capable of having alternate versions/incarnations that may or may not have anything in common.

Although it will be F*cking hilarious, thirty years from now, when somebody decides to do a remake of Star Wars.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:07 PM   #40
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

urbandk wrote: View Post
A reboot as far as I'm concerned is a wholesale re-imagining of a series.
The rest of the world disagrees with you
Feel free to disagree with me over semantics
Thanks.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:08 PM   #41
Yug
Lieutenant Commander
 
Yug's Avatar
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
Although it will be F*cking hilarious, thirty years from now, when somebody decides to do a remake of Star Wars.
And it WILL happen, I give it twenty years.
Yug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:16 PM   #42
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

So I guess First Contact was a reboot, since they changed the ship, the uniforms, redesigned the Borg, and recast Zephram Cochrane, right?
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:35 PM   #43
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

How about we just get rid of the word "reboot" altogether? No one can even agree on what it means, making it worse than useless.


Should it have been a straight reboot? No, I don't think so, and I have yet to be convinced otherwise by any argument or assertion I've seen presented (most of which have tended toward the "Admit it's a reboot! I demand that you admit this was a reboot!" end of the spectrum, with much invective and frothing at the mouth.)
__________________
"Recently my 8 year-old cousin asked me, with a wicked twinkle in his eye, if I'd ever microwaved a banana. I'm terrified to try, but I'm sure whatever happens—splattering, abrupt, radioactive—sounds exactly like an Annie Clark guitar solo."
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2009, 11:49 PM   #44
EnsignRicky
Commodore
 
EnsignRicky's Avatar
 
Location: Somewhere Far Beyond
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

Time for reboot to get re imagined.
__________________
Use Only As Directed
EnsignRicky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 8 2009, 01:47 AM   #45
Disillusioned
Commander
 
Re: Should it have been a straight reboot?

Eh. Some people want it to be a reboot, others don't. It really isn't any more complicated than that, despite some variation in the reasons why.
Disillusioned is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
reboot

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.