RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,404
Posts: 5,505,873
Members: 25,127
Currently online: 599
Newest member: OneOfFour

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


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 December 30 2012, 10:05 PM   #151
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
Back on topic, rebooting Star Trek is the best thing to ever happen to it. Let's be honest, Star Trek was dead. After driving the movie series into the ground and ending Enterprise with the single worst episode of its run, Trek wasn't really going anywhere.
I don't think a reboot of continuity was needed, just a reboot of creative energy and marketing. Doctor Who ran for 26 seasons before being cancelled in 1989. It returned in 2005 and was a complete continuation of the old continuity. It just marketed itself to a new audience and didn't rely on old continuity. I think Trek would have gotten along fine doing that.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:06 PM   #152
EnsignRicky
Commodore
 
EnsignRicky's Avatar
 
Location: Pre-Apocalyptic Earth
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

I too agree that they should have rebooted it.

The fact that we have to invent words like total reboot and partial reboot clearly indicates that they did not.
__________________
Use Only As Directed
EnsignRicky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:06 PM   #153
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

RandyS wrote: View Post
Jackson_Roykirk wrote: View Post
Yes.

Personally, I would have much rather have had Abrams and Co. just call this relaunch of the franchise a flat-out re-boot without jumping through the hoops of having Nero change the timeline...
...But that's just me.
No it isn't. it's me too.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed 2009, and expect to enjoy 2013, but yeah, I still feel that a straight reboot without ties to past Star Treks would have been better. And I'll use Batman as my frame of reference. Adam West, Michael Keaton, and Christan Bale all made fine Batman stories on their own without relying on each other.
Well in a way, it was a complete reboot. The characters were (re)introduced with an entirely new future ahead of them. The method by which Orci and Kurtzman gave themselves a blank slate to start TOS over again was quite imaginative. Nothing old was lost, yet everything is also new and fresh. Best of both worlds, really.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:15 PM   #154
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

DalekJim wrote: View Post
A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
Back on topic, rebooting Star Trek is the best thing to ever happen to it. Let's be honest, Star Trek was dead. After driving the movie series into the ground and ending Enterprise with the single worst episode of its run, Trek wasn't really going anywhere.
I don't think a reboot of continuity was needed, just a reboot of creative energy and marketing. Doctor Who ran for 26 seasons before being cancelled in 1989. It returned in 2005 and was a complete continuation of the old continuity. It just marketed itself to a new audience and didn't rely on old continuity. I think Trek would have gotten along fine doing that.
But it's really an apples and oranges comparison. JJ Abrams wanted to do Star Trek, specifically he wanted to do Kirk and Spock. The old continuity hemmed in the dramatic potential of a Kirk and Spock movie, we know when one dies and know that the other lives deep into the 24th century. It's tough to ramp up the danger when you know nothing can happen to the characters your writing.

Whatever I think of the movie itself, Abrams made the right move by rebooting the franchise. No one was going to get excited by another film featuring Modern Trek characters nor do I think anyone would've been excited by generic characters in a universe that was a continuation of the Prime universe.

By the way, blaming liking a film on being stoned is a really, really weak way of trying to pass off your original thoughts as not reflective of what you really thought.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:36 PM   #155
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Whatever I think of the movie itself, Abrams made the right move by rebooting the franchise. No one was going to get excited by another film featuring Modern Trek characters nor do I think anyone would've been excited by generic characters in a universe that was a continuation of the Prime universe.
I think so long as a likable actor was playing the character, modern blockbuster audiences wouldn't care who was in the captain's chair or who his first officer was.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:47 PM   #156
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

BillJ wrote: View Post
The old continuity hemmed in the dramatic potential of a Kirk and Spock movie, we know when one dies and know that the other lives deep into the 24th century. It's tough to ramp up the danger when you know nothing can happen to the characters your writing.
I'll bet you any money in the world that none of the crew are killed off in the 1 or 2 more films we're likely to get.

The dramatic potential is as hemmed in as it always was.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:49 PM   #157
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
The Mirrorball Man wrote: View Post
DalekJim wrote: View Post
But surely having Spock in it would be more of a stigma than not? Spock is associated by the general Star Trek hating public as a nerd icon. Somebody that nerds like. The type of people who make "hilarious" jokes about people living in their mother's basement (NEVER GETS OLD!) would be turned off by a movie with Kirk and Spock in a way they wouldn't have been with new characters and no Vulcans on the bridge.

It's fun to speculate.
Well that movie exists and those people were not turned off, no speculation is necessary.
In fact, Spock is probably the most popular character from it.

Back on topic, rebooting Star Trek is the best thing to ever happen to it. Let's be honest, Star Trek was dead. After driving the movie series into the ground and ending Enterprise with the single worst episode of its run, Trek wasn't really going anywhere. Thankfully, we got a movie that not only honored the past, but speaks to current audiences. It saved Star Trek and is merely the start of future greatness.

I'd been saying for years, Trek needed a reboot. Canon had become to much a mess and the franchise felt like it was suffering from small world syndrome. The sense of scale was gone.

I'll admit I didn't like the '09 movie when it came out. But I blame a lot of that over still being annoyed with the middle figure we got with TatV and not having a lot of faith in the new actors. I gave the movie some time off--about a year or so--came back and found that I enjoy it. Take it on its own merits without all the baggage from the original franchise, and it's an enjoyable movie.

Still, I miss my lava lamp engine cores from the TOS movies.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:54 PM   #158
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Shazam! wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
The old continuity hemmed in the dramatic potential of a Kirk and Spock movie, we know when one dies and know that the other lives deep into the 24th century. It's tough to ramp up the danger when you know nothing can happen to the characters your writing.
I'll bet you any money in the world that none of the crew are killed off in the 1 or 2 more films we're likely to get.

The dramatic potential is as hemmed in as it always was.
You might be right, you might be wrong. But the actions that are taken by these characters aren't controlled by twenty year old movie and TV episodes anymore.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:57 PM   #159
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Dukhat wrote: View Post
I've already stopped taking him seriously.
Good, now both of you kindly stop talking to me as you will never have anything interesting to add to this or any discussion beyond blunt heckles.

The Mirrorball Man wrote: View Post
As it stands, that's the explanation the movie leads us to believe, in my opinion.
I think it would have made sense for him to have been waiting for Spock if he didn't also have the ultimate goal of destroying Earth. Surely he'd have got that over with first? If only to pass the time .
But he needed the "red matter" from Spock Prime's ship to do that. So getting it over first was NOT an option.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 11:10 PM   #160
Snow Miser
I'm Too Much
 
Snow Miser's Avatar
 
Location: Ice-related Pun
View Snow Miser's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Snow Miser Send a message via AIM to Snow Miser
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

DalekJim wrote: View Post
A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
Back on topic, rebooting Star Trek is the best thing to ever happen to it. Let's be honest, Star Trek was dead. After driving the movie series into the ground and ending Enterprise with the single worst episode of its run, Trek wasn't really going anywhere.
I don't think a reboot of continuity was needed, just a reboot of creative energy and marketing. Doctor Who ran for 26 seasons before being cancelled in 1989. It returned in 2005 and was a complete continuation of the old continuity. It just marketed itself to a new audience and didn't rely on old continuity. I think Trek would have gotten along fine doing that.
Doctor Who has been rebooted several times during its own run, the concept is built into the show. Just say the Doctor has been on his own for a while and reintroduces villains and concepts to the audience through the companion. It's one of Doctor Who's strengths that other shows lack. You can't really do that with Star Trek, the closest they came to that was creating new crews that audiences cared about less and less.
DalekJim wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Whatever I think of the movie itself, Abrams made the right move by rebooting the franchise. No one was going to get excited by another film featuring Modern Trek characters nor do I think anyone would've been excited by generic characters in a universe that was a continuation of the Prime universe.
I think so long as a likable actor was playing the character, modern blockbuster audiences wouldn't care who was in the captain's chair or who his first officer was.
Actually they would. Audiences aren't stupid, they know about Kirk and Spock if only by osmosis. Classic Star Trek is part of our culture if you've never seen a single episode or movie. Everyone knows "Beam me up, Scotty", "He's dead Jim" and the Vulcan hand sign. The only crew that audiences really seemed to connect to besides the original was TNG, who were aging and not really wanting to do another movie. Plus all the Next Generation films went downhill from First Contact and Nemesis was so bad it killed the movie franchise. It would have been difficult to make a movie with the DS9 and VOY crews, mainly because only Trek fans knew about them and even less cared. There would definitely not be an ENT movie either. A movie series based on an entirely new crew wouldn't work either, the whole movie would have to be focused on getting to know them and how they work together. It would bomb. To compare it to Doctor Who, it would be like the 60s Doctor Who movies. There is a character similar to the Doctor. But he's a human called Doctor Who and it has no connection to what people know.

By rebooting it, we were able to return to the Kirk era with the only characters that most audiences ever truly gave a damn about. They didn't have to display who most of them are because we know them already. We don't have to have Scotty's job explained, he's the engineer. We get slightly different motivations for the characters, but it works and makes them seem like flesh and blood people. This gets the general population who only know the classic series. Toss in the sex and explosions and they get excited about a Star Trek movie. It also introduces them to the universe and may inspire them to check out the rest. It also gets the fans due it being a new take on classic characters.
__________________
Have An Awesome Possum Holiday!
Snow Miser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 11:25 PM   #161
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

You know, it's probably worth noting that we're talking about a spectrum when it comes to the audience's knowledge of Star Trek. At one end, you have people who don't know or care who the captain of the Enterprise is, and at other end, you have the lifelong fans who can quote chapter and verse on every episode. But those aren't the only options--or very representative of the general audience.

In between, you have millions of people who have enjoyed the occasional Trek movie or TV series over the years, and maybe even watched TOS or TNG semi-regularly, but whom, for whatever reasons, had gradually drifted away from the later spin-offs and movies. But whom, yes, still know who Spock is and what "beam me up" means.

Somewhere in the middle of that spectrum is where the vast majority of the audience lies, not out at either extreme. It's not an either/or situation pitting hardcore Trekkies against total newbies.

Rebooting TOS, but without forty years of baggage, was the smart, sensible way to reach that huge middle ground.
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com

Last edited by Greg Cox; December 31 2012 at 12:01 AM.
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 11:31 PM   #162
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Rhovanion
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
nightwind1 wrote: View Post
Star Grinch wrote: View Post
... cheap humor over substance...
Yes, because TOS didn't ("I, Mudd") have ("The Trouble with Tribbles") humor ("The Squire of Gothos") over ("Shore Leave") substance.
Don't forget "A Piece of the Action" . . . .
Shatner's gangster impression makes me cringe.
__________________
Whatever happens on earth, that up there, that's the endgame.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 11:58 PM   #163
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

BCG wrote: View Post
I'm sorry but I don't buy this. One of the biggest problems was how everything stayed the same. Why shouldn't they just make a new universe with no convoluted plots to tie it with the already known one? They should've just severed all ties with the old one and explain offscreen or something that it was a mirror universe to appease the fanboys that the old one exists, which keeps the new universe consistent with the old one without trying to make awful plots to connect the two.
Each to their own. I liked their in-universe reset, and enjoy the easter egg references in the post-Nemesis novels.
Additionally, the characters suffer the same problem. Regarding the lines, one or two popular lines are okay, but it was overkill and told me they're trying, albeit poorly, to try to make these the same characters. Lastly, they depend too much on "destiny" to make this like the old stuff, but they end up making the movie worse. Spock and Kirk are good friends in the old universe. Spock and Kirk start off hating each other in the new one, which seems natural given their irritable personalities. But they have to become friends immediately because Old Spock told them to do so. So then they become faux-friends instead of any building up of true friendship. Why not build up the relationship over several movies? Would stink of less fakeness. Or why does Kirk have to be promoted (commissioned?) to captain? Kirk was the captain in the old series so apparently he has to be captain in this movie. Why not have the next movie years later when Kirk is further along in his career? He became an admiral offscreen in The Motion Picture so why does he have to become captain onscreen in this movie? In the mirror universe episodes not everyone has the same role as the regular universe so why does everyone have to end up the same in this one? Why does Kirk have to be captain and him and Spock friends? Making these things so made the movie lose organic feel and made it too unbelievable because they didn't move enough away from the previous universe and they poorly forced things things through.
From what I know of Into Darkness...


He needed to be captain to set that up.

And as for Kirk and Spock...

They're allies, but not yet the friends they were in Old Spock's timeline.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 12:39 AM   #164
Snow Miser
I'm Too Much
 
Snow Miser's Avatar
 
Location: Ice-related Pun
View Snow Miser's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Snow Miser Send a message via AIM to Snow Miser
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
You know, it's probably worth noting that we're talking about a spectrum when it comes to the audience's knowledge of Star Trek. At one end, you have people who don't know or care who the captain of the Enterprise is, and at other end, you have the lifelong fans who can quote chapter and verse on every episode. But those aren't the only options--or very representative of the general audience.

In between, you have millions of people who have enjoyed the occasional Trek movie or TV series over the years, and maybe even watched TOS or TNG semi-regularly, but whom, for whatever reasons, had gradually drifted away from the later spin-offs and movies. But whom, yes, still know who Spock is and what "beam me up" means.

Somewhere in the middle of that spectrum is where the vast majority of the audience lies, not out at either extreme. It's not an either/or situation pitting hardcore Trekkies against total newbies.

Rebooting TOS, but without forty years of baggage, was the smart, sensible way to reach that huge middle ground.
It's really the only thing they could have done if they made another movie. Paramount isn't in the business of making a minority of Trek fans happy, they want to make money. Kirk, Spock and McCoy are known on some level to a vast majority of audiences. It could have been done poorly and just a cash grab. But it is a really good and entertaining movie. A lot of thought was put into it and they took the time to put in a ton of references to the original series. Like the sound effects, the tribble and a ton of other details.
__________________
Have An Awesome Possum Holiday!
Snow Miser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 12:58 AM   #165
Santa Claus
Believe
 
Santa Claus's Avatar
 
Location: J. Allen's Rooftop
Send a message via ICQ to Santa Claus Send a message via AIM to Santa Claus Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Santa Claus Send a message via Yahoo to Santa Claus
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

I'm glad it got a reboot for several reasons:

A) We were never going to see another TNG movie. The returns just weren't there. Not only that, but there wasn't even the faintest hint of a DS9/VOY/ENT movie, again, because the returns weren't going to be there. TNG was a highly rated TV series, and by their 4th outing, they had fizzled. It happens, but contrary to the wishes of a number of fans, subsequent series movies were not in the cards, and will not happen, not in the usable lifetimes of the actors in said series.

B) I was thrilled to see the original crew taken in a new direction, and I wasn't disappointed. I think STXI was exactly what Star Trek needed. Fresh faces, updated technology, and out from under the burden of a top heavy in-universe canon.

I look forward to STXII. I expect it to be fun, fast paced, and loaded with adventure. I don't think it will disappoint.
__________________
---------
"I believe... I believe... It's silly, but I believe." - Susan Walker
---------
❄ A Joyful Holiday Season to You All! ❄

Santa Claus is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 09:27 PM.

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