Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

[RAMA]

Without a doubt...if you don't know why then you haven't been paying attention.

[The Keeper]

YES, YES, a thousand times; YES!

[R. Star]

No. But apparently reboots are the current fad in Hollywood these days. Why come up with something original when you can just take an old concept, change a few details and sell it again?

And if they were going to reboot it, then they should have just done a clean cut instead of trying to tether it however loosely to the "prime" universe.

[thumbtack]

It would be a bit difficult to explain why nuKhan had a completely different life after being unfrozen without a reboot. The decision to reboot was not some egregious or arbitrary one made solely to annoy maladjusted canon enthusiasts. It was necessary from both a creative and business standpoint.

[EnsignRicky]

A reboot, sure.

Our beloved Spock living out his final days in a Biffhorrific alternate 23rd century, not so much.

[DEWLine]

No.

But we got at least one more good movie anyway. So it works out.

Like I said: same multiverse, different timeline. All they did was add more cool stuff to the toybox.

[iguana_tonante]

Yes.

[C.E. Evans]

I actually think that Trek needed more a creative reboot than an in-universe one. Adventure movies were becoming bigger and bigger in scale, while Trek movies were feeling more and more like expanded television episodes and were no longer drawing the attention of anyone other than Trekkies and general sci-fi fans. It's also possible that while TNG was very successful on the small screen, that success didn't carry over to the big screen all that much and had begun to fade with Insurrection.

I really don't think the TOS nostalgia factor was the biggest draw or reason for Star Trek XI's success--beyond Trekkies, I believe the majority of moviegoers were new to Trek or only had a passing familiarity with TOS (at best, they knew the names of Kirk, Spock, and Scotty). I think what really made the movie a hit was it being just a fun action movie with a likable cast and cool visuals--and that is what's going to carry over into Star Trek XII more than it being a TOS reboot, IMO.

[Nerys Myk]

Star Grinch wrote:

---

No. But apparently reboots are the current fad in Hollywood these days. Why come up with something original when you can just take an old concept, change a few details and sell it again?

Its always been the "fad" in Hollywood, probably going back to the start of the 20th Century. They like proven properties.

Wouldn't setting a new Star Trek film or series "post-Nemesis" also be "taking an old concept, changing a few details and selling it again"?

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Yes, it would.

To make any Star Trek movie at all in the future would be "taking an old concept, changing a few details and selling it again."

[Dukhat]

EnsignRicky wrote:

---

Our beloved Spock living out his final days in a Biffhorrific alternate 23rd century, not so much.

Put it this way: He could have had some stupid, pointless death in the prime universe like Kirk did in Generations. Instead, he's living out his final days helping his fellow nuVulcans. Heck, maybe he could even broker peace with the nuRomulans like what he was doing before, now that the Vulcans are significantly reduced in population.

Oh, and...yes.

[Greg Cox]

The Overlord wrote:

---

Star Trek 11 essentially rebooted the franchise, do you think that was the right move?

It certainly seems to be working.

Every series or character gets rebooted eventually. How many different versions of Sherlock Holmes or Tarzan or Batman have there been? Why should Kirk and Spock be any different?

Nothing wrong with rebooting a concept to introduce it to a new generation of viewers.

[Cadet49]

Absolutely, it needed a reboot! I enjoyed some of TOS televised spinoffs, like TNG, but felt some of the series became too focussed on philosophical debates, making Trek more cerebral and thought-provoking in some ways, which I enjoyed at the time, but I missed the adventurous spirit of the original series - plowing ahead into the adventure of the unknown! The new movies have brought back that adventurous spirit, while getting rid of the jargony technobabble and philosophizing that often slowed the narrative down, in my opinion - this new version of Trek feels exciting and new, with an energetic new cast!

Creating another ship with yet another crew, would not have appealed to a general audience - when the average person thinks Star Trek, they think Kirk, Spock, McCoy ... Trek needed to return to it's pop culture icons ... with a more modern twist.

[Phily B]

The Overlord wrote:

---

Okay but lets go into why you think Star Trek needed a reboot or not.

Now Star Trek had two bad movies in a row and two rather bland TV series, was there no way to get past besides a reboot?

I don't see how, especially considering all the ridiculous time travel nonsense that was introduced in Enterprise and Voyager, including all the technology Voyager brought back from their adventures in the Delta Quadrant, including the weapons that essentially made The Borg redundant.

[wissaboo]

yes, every incarnation was a weaker and weaker rerun of tng.