RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,892
Posts: 5,330,250
Members: 24,555
Currently online: 538
Newest member: berlyn

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


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 31 2012, 06:53 AM   #196
Dale Sams
Captain
 
Dale Sams's Avatar
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

To answer the question. Did it need a reboot? No. Did it work? Yes.

They could make a new TV series post Nemesis if they wanted. They could make a damn good one. Bring in real Sci-Fi writers, do whatever you want. You wouldn't need a gimmick. Shit...have season one be the voyages of The Enterprise-E commanded by Picard, and then kill him. WHAM!

Get real writers (and a producer) GD so the show hits the ground running and we don't have to mess with anymore of this 'finding their feet nonsense'.

Edit: By gimmick (rereading i see killing Picard after one season could be called a gimmick) I mean the premise is to boldly go where no man has gone before. Not, "Cadet years" or "Delta Quadrant"..no bloody a,b,c,d or nil. Just E.

Last edited by Dale Sams; December 31 2012 at 07:58 AM.
Dale Sams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 07:02 AM   #197
UFO
Captain
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
...
How about the new direction of all the characters not standing around chattering superficially but at length about alleged Big Ideas while boring the audience to tears?

That's certainly been an improvement.
Well, I guess you only watch Star Trek for the pictures.

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
I think you hit on something: The reason it feels--for me at least--like TOS condensed is that we already have a history with these characters.
Yes, with all those Easter eggs and whatnot, it is a kind of Reader's Digest Trek, but excluding the most important bit: A sense of optimism based on a better, though not overly idealist view of the future.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
...
Besides, you seem to be working on the assumption that reboots are a bad thing to be avoided at all costs.
...
Trek was arguably overdue for a reboot . . . and where's the harm in that?
A good question. A reboot, by it very nature, emphasises that what we are looking at is just a commodity, like an updated version of brand X washing powder. It takes away the alot of the idea that this is something of value with it's own internal history. Indeed something pretty rare, given it's longevity. From that point of view, what they actually did was one of the writer’s better choices IMO, with no real down-side (if you believe it is worthy of the name). Of course to take advantage of that we would have to stop pretending that it is a reboot. It isn’t, even though it accomplishes many of the same goals. The causal connection (in universe) prevents it from being one, of course.

Yes, I know people will keep calling it a reboot. That's just too convenient a word, and I doubt there's another one.


A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
A part of me thinks that a series set in the prime universe's future could work. Maybe have the Federation collapse or focus more on alien races, but it really wouldn't be Star Trek anymore. The series was at it's best when it was humanity dealing with something, but never letting our worst aspects control us.
And yet I have read people claim TNG didn't make enough references to TOS. Without computers a little fact checking could have been a pain, but it should be pretty easy nowadays, especially if your future is 100 years along from TNG.

Oh and maybe we could compare notes on why something might not be Star Trek any more (see above).
UFO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 07:48 AM   #198
Balrog
Commodore
 
Balrog's Avatar
 
Location: Balrog
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

DalekJim wrote: View Post
Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.
Good Trek movies have never been about sci-fi ideas.
__________________
Anybody got some peppermint?
Balrog was Lloyd Dobler
Balrog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 08:11 AM   #199
Awesome Possum
I've Rebooted Myself
 
Awesome Possum's Avatar
 
Location: Someplace Shiny
View Awesome Possum's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Awesome Possum Send a message via AIM to Awesome Possum
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Jingle Balrog wrote: View Post
DalekJim wrote: View Post
Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.
Good Trek movies have never been about sci-fi ideas.
Revenge is such a scifi concept. Also whatever Voyage Home was about, saving whales and trying to seduce the mom from 7th Heaven.
__________________
"Libertarianism is a good idea on paper, until you look at it."
Greg Proops, The Smartest Man in the World
Awesome Possum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 08:41 AM   #200
Enterprise is Great
Rear Admiral
 
Enterprise is Great's Avatar
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

If people want an exploration of sci-fi ideas don't look for it in a Star Trek movie or in just about any mainstream sci-fi movie but instead pick up a novel by Alastair Reynolds, Iain Banks or Asimov and other writers. And maybe some Star Trek novels as well. It's easier to explore these ideas in print. Film is too much of a visual medium to do it effectively (though I'm sure some of you can come up with movies that do). Star Trek especially TOS was about telling cool action adventure (and the occasional comedy) storylines with some superficial ideas thrown in to the mix to give it some substance.
__________________
JJverse Star Trek...ROCKED on May 17, 2013 and beyond!
Enterprise is Great is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 11:28 AM   #201
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

los2188 wrote: View Post
Did Star Trek need a reboot? This is the same question I posed many months ago. The answer? Truthfully, no. I also don't believe that anyone can justly argue against the answer of no. Here's why...I'm sure that there are writers out there that could come up with many, many new and exciting stories set in the prime timeline. I'm sure there are also producers and directors that could have taken Trek into new and exciting eras, all the while staying in the prime timeline, be it before Star Trek Enterprise, after Star Trek Nemesis and everything else in between. With all that said, the reboot did work in resurrecting a stale franchise. It gives Trek the ability to do new and different things that they might not have been able to do in the prime timeline. I'm not against a reboot at all, but I know, and I think everyone else could admit that given the right circumstances, writers, ideas, etc...there could have been many, many great stories and such told in the prime timeline that would have pumped new and exciting life into the Trek franchise. I also don't buy the argument that sticking to continuity would be a bad thing in making Trek exciting again. Let's be honest, the current Trek movies are sticking to certain continuities even now and that's not at all a bad thing. I think that if they had made more Trek in the prime timeline, the best idea would have been to move forward past the TNG era. Even in a timeline past the TNG era, certain continuities didn't necessarily have to be mentioned or written about. For example....let's say a version of Trek set 80 years after the TNG era was made and the story was about future Klingons who have denounced their warrior ways and embraced something like...let's say kindness and helping others. With that said, do we really need to mention anything about how many centuries ago, Klingons at one point had no ridges due to an attempt at genetic engineering? I just believe that given all the correct circumstances, Star Trek has a lot of life left in it, without having a reboot, but as I've said before, I'm not against it, and the reboot has worked and I enjoy the re-imagined Trek just as much.
But again, Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock are pop culture icons and as much as I love it, the truth is the generic Star Trek universe setting was a proven failure both on television and in movies. With Enterprise they revamped the show twice. They went darker and edgier with the third season's Xindi war, then got new writers and a new showrunner to take the fourth season in another new (direct-prequel-tastic) direction. Neither idea worked. Nemesis was a major flop, despite having the biggest budget and marketing push (at the time) since The Motion Picture and starring the cast that were at the helm during Trek's most financially successful period.

J.M. Straczynski and Bryce Zabel put it best, I think, in their 2004 pitch for a rebooted TOS:
"Over the decades, Star Trek has become so insular, so strictly defined, and placed so many layers upon itself that the essence of what made us love it in the first place has been lost. The all-too-reasonable desire to protect the franchise may now be the cause of it's stagnation.

Imagine buying a new Porsche and leaving it in the garage all the time, because if you take it on the road, it might get scratched. But that's exactly what's happened to Star Trek. The Porsche is still clean and polished, but we're driving around in a nice, reasonable family car.

It's time to throw caution to the wind and go out for a drive... a real drive..."
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3

Last edited by King Daniel Into Darkness; December 31 2012 at 12:07 PM.
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 03:11 PM   #202
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

los2188 wrote: View Post
The answer? Truthfully, no. I also don't believe that anyone can justly argue against the answer of no.
Yes, it did.

The only sensible alternative for Paramount would have been to spend their money on non-Trek movies and TV shows instead.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 03:27 PM   #203
Chronius Fawkes
Ensign
 
Location: USA
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
Chronius Fawkes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 03:31 PM   #204
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Chronius Fawkes wrote: View Post
Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
This is just non-sense. The movie wasn't made for the fans but for the general ticket buyer.
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 03:31 PM   #205
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Chronius Fawkes wrote: View Post
If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 03:34 PM   #206
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
Jingle Balrog wrote: View Post
DalekJim wrote: View Post
Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.
Good Trek movies have never been about sci-fi ideas.
Revenge is such a scifi concept. Also whatever Voyage Home was about, saving whales and trying to seduce the mom from 7th Heaven.
Hah! We're obviously coming at this from completely opposite directions. The Voyage Home is a marvelously entertaining, feel-good movie that appeals to everyone, fans and non-fans alike. I get sucked into it every time I stumble onto it on TV.

It's easily my second-favorite Trek film after Khan . . . which was, of course, all about revenge.
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 04:13 PM   #207
Balrog
Commodore
 
Balrog's Avatar
 
Location: Balrog
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Chronius Fawkes wrote: View Post
If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
Ah! Good to know, thanks!

I had to get a shot of that for my lower back...
__________________
Anybody got some peppermint?
Balrog was Lloyd Dobler
Balrog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 04:15 PM   #208
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Tennessee
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
A Very Jewel Christmas wrote: View Post
Jingle Balrog wrote: View Post

Good Trek movies have never been about sci-fi ideas.
Revenge is such a scifi concept. Also whatever Voyage Home was about, saving whales and trying to seduce the mom from 7th Heaven.
Hah! We're obviously coming at this from completely opposite directions. The Voyage Home is a marvelously entertaining, feel-good movie that appeals to everyone, fans and non-fans alike. I get sucked into it every time I stumble onto it on TV.

It's easily my second-favorite Trek film after Khan . . . which was, of course, all about revenge.
I tend to count II, III & IV, as one movie when ranking. I know they're not, but the trilogy aspect of the story works really well.

You could strip all the reboot nonsense off ST'09 and it'd pass for a TNG or TOS movie. I guarantee had they done the same script with the classic crew (kind of hard, with Doohan and Kelly being dead, just saying) or the TNG cast--even DS9 or Voyager--people would have fallen all over themselves praising it.

Chronius Fawkes wrote: View Post
Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
Dude, I've probably watched the movies, the tv shows, and read the tech manuals more times than a man with an active sex life should be willing to admit to, and even I had to look that one up.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
Good men don't need rules, The Doctor (A Good Man Goes To War)
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 04:20 PM   #209
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

SeerSGB wrote: View Post
Chronius Fawkes wrote: View Post
Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
Dude, I've probably watched the movies, the tv shows, and read the tech manuals more times than a man with an active sex life should be willing to admit to, and even I had to look that one up.
Hell, I've been a professional Trekkie for nearly twenty years and I had no idea what that was . . . .

You shouldn't have to pass a written exam to enjoy a STAR TREK movie!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2012, 04:27 PM   #210
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
View SalvorHardin's Twitter Profile
Re: Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
SeerSGB wrote: View Post
Chronius Fawkes wrote: View Post
Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.
Dude, I've probably watched the movies, the tv shows, and read the tech manuals more times than a man with an active sex life should be willing to admit to, and even I had to look that one up.
Hell, I've been a professional Trekkie for nearly twenty years and I had no idea what that was . . . .

You shouldn't have to pass a written exam to enjoy a STAR TREK movie!
And you call yourselves fans? I am disgusted to be in the same thread with you both.
__________________

SalvorHardin is offline   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 04:56 PM.

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