RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,346
Posts: 5,502,468
Members: 25,119
Currently online: 663
Newest member: mahler

TrekToday headlines

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

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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 June 14 2013, 05:39 AM   #16
GalaxyX
Rear Admiral
 
GalaxyX's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Dear God that was a long read. Didn't finish it.

Trek needed to be rebooted because the core of what it is needed to be redone in a more contemporary style with the better cinematographic technologies available now.

The 60's series is great but only old timers find it all endearing. My first introduction to it was in my teens, and while I liked it, I had to "ignore" a lot of the 60's tropes in it to enjoy it more.

On the other hand, TNG, my favorite series had such an impact on me, that I clearly remembered thinking in my teens "this is how the future will be!".

Yet I look back on it, and now find myself casually ignoring some of the 80's tropes in it, and thinking "wow I thought that was going to be the future? what was I on"

The new generation could never get into either series now, it's too far apart from what the world currently is now. JJ Trek is reflective of today's cinema.
Reimagining Trek to be more contemporary is a plus for me even if it's less cerebral.
__________________
Top Gear America: Jay Leno, Adam Carolla, Tim Allen. DONE!
GalaxyX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 05:41 AM   #17
Cadet49
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

I absolutely agree that Trek needed a reboot, even for those of us that loved the other series back in their day. To me, Trek, in its original core, was about adventure and leaping into the unknown, excitement, danger as Kirk and crew faced new adventures ... a western-style frontier adventure, with the bizarreness of a sci-fi Twilight Zone episode thrown in from time to time, something I felt got lost in the later Treks - I actually loved the first two seasons of TNG, because they still had that "out there, bizarre adventures" feel to them - remember when Q made Riker a Q, and had the crew fight "pig men" dressed in French Revolutionary outfits on a contructed world? Loved that bizarre stuff!

Trek had lost some of that "adventure" element over time ... it became about politics, and diplomatic negotiations that get interrupted, or studying quasars, or preventing a war through impassioned speeches ... all of which were important elements of TOS, but they weren't the core focus, in my opinion - the focus was on exploring, and bizarre or unusual sci-fi adventures! This new movie manages to touch on some of those relevent themes that make us think, but never slows down its pace to lose us as an audience wanting a good adventure like the original series ... these two films have highly entertained me ... I'm excited again to watch Trek for the first time in almost 15 years! Sure, there are plot holes, but I like the action-adventure feel of new Trek, while still holding onto the roots (exploring a new world, Prime Directive debates while running for their lives, etc) - the "fun" in Trek is back!
Cadet49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 07:04 AM   #18
Charles Phipps
Commander
 
Charles Phipps's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

I think part of the problem, of course, is the rapid fire of series was filling in the galaxy a little too much. There's now no region of the universe unexplored in Trek in the "home galaxy." We know what's in the Gamma and Delta Quadrants when we should have been focused more on the "unexplored" parts of the next-door neighbors.
__________________
Check out the United Federation of Charles:
http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
Charles Phipps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 07:05 AM   #19
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

I agree Trek needed a reboot. Having watched all series or Trek I think I know where Trek went wrong. Like so many others have said Star Trek became boring and formulaic.

1960's TOS has a charming simplicity to it. It's not perfect but enjoyable to watch. I don't think Timeless is to strong a word to describe how I and my friends feel about it.

1980's-1990's TNG: Improves on the TOS formula but doesn't copy TOS. I actually like the first 2 seasons of TNG because it felt like the creative team was taking risks and trying to find a formula. After that TNG did improve but you knew what to expect from it. If you like TNG it's because of the characters and the situations they are put it.

1990's DS9: Here is where the biggest change happened. DS9 takes the franchise in a whole new direction from it's predecessors. It was risky and people didn't receive it well. But by season 3 the bugs were largely ironed out and DS9 powered through to tell it's own unique story. Like TNG it focuses on seeing characters work their way through problems. Although DS9 it was more like you lived with these character's day to day. Superb.

1990's-2000's VOY: Another attempt to take the franchise is a new direction. While the premise was bold, and the set up staked out conflict. It all fell apart shortly. Like TNG and DS9, the first two seasons of VOY were underwhelming. By season 3 the show became TNG-lite. While TNG is responsible for starting this trend. The creative team of VOY relied on it to get there show through it's paces. Things got worse and or better when 7 of 9 was added to the show. B'Ellanna, Tuvok, Chakotay and Neelix all seemed to fade into the background with her addition. While Tom Paris was the resident authority on everything. How important was his job on Voyager when even Wesley was shown to be competent enough to pilot a ship. Harry Kim was Voyager's punching bag and resident death victim. So he stuck around for those reasons. Janeway and The Doctor took up everything that 7 of 9 didn't have. While this trend disappeared at the later part of season 6 through season 7. VOY's story is uninspiring and boring. The audience knew VOY would get home. TNG broke through and became a pop culture sensation, DS9 changed the game in the Trekverse, VOY just kind of did it's own thing which was something we had already seen...

2000's ENT: Just can't leave the TNG formula alone can you? First two season summed up right there. Made worse by the EXTREMELY forced Kirk/Spock/Bones dynamic that was copied for Archer, T'Pol and Trip, with a bonus of SEXUAL TENSION. Woooo. Temporal Cold War attempts to be clever but is really out of place in the first two seasons. Finally someone lit a fire in Berman and Braga's asses. The Xindi arc being like a defibrillator placed on the chest of the franchise and shocked back to life. While the parallels to 9/11/ muslim jihadist/ culture misunderstanding messages were forced and grating at times. The arc did work and it's conclusion was satisfying. Just get rid of that toe rag Daniels telling Archer how important he is when he really isn't. Season 4 being everything a prequel Trek series should've been from the start but by then it was too late to save the series. It's a shame because ENT started to turn itself around to something admirable.

JJ's Trek is purely for entertainment. Star Trek like any series/film property has that primary goal to be entertaining. So far JJ has succeeded at that. The public and fans like his films because they are entertaining. Is he doing anything radically different than what we've previously seen? Not really, but the spectacle outweighs the substance when it comes to JJtrek. Which is enough to inspire confidence to see more of it.
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 02:29 PM   #20
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Jon1701 wrote: View Post
Personally, I would have done a full on reboot. No messing about.

None of this alternate universe stuff. I mean, it virtually is a full reboot - they just won't say it out loud.
Pretty much how I feel. Yes, Trek needed to be rebooted to be commercially viable, but instead of doing a clean reboot they're still clinging to the Prime Universe by thin threads with all this alternate timeline stuff and Nimoy Spock who has taken a solemn vow never to discuss his timeline, unless someone's asking. Then he'll make an exception just this once.

Romulan_spy wrote: View Post
I definitely think that a reboot was a good idea. The biggest problem with old-trek was that it had become too formulaic, riddled with technobabble and cliched. With JJ-trek, we got a show that is exciting and fun again and feels fresh.
Abrams Trek is still clichéd. Hell, all Abrams and his writing lackeys do is string together a bunch of tropes and call it a day. They just do it in an energetic and "exciting" way.

And while technobabble was undeniably one of Prime Trek's downfalls, the Abrams series is taking it in the opposite direction of being completely scientific illiterate. Okay, so Star Trek has never been once for scientific accuracy, and if I'm completely honest I prefer sci-fi which isn't slavish to pure science. But still, "Aft nacelle" sounds sloppy and unprofessional. "Lightning storm in space" sounds like something out of a child's storybook.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 05:12 PM   #21
Jon1701
Rear Admiral
 
Jon1701's Avatar
 
Location: Manchester, UK
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Jon1701 wrote: View Post
Personally, I would have done a full on reboot. No messing about.

None of this alternate universe stuff. I mean, it virtually is a full reboot - they just won't say it out loud.
Pretty much how I feel. Yes, Trek needed to be rebooted to be commercially viable, but instead of doing a clean reboot they're still clinging to the Prime Universe by thin threads with all this alternate timeline stuff and Nimoy Spock who has taken a solemn vow never to discuss his timeline, unless someone's asking. Then he'll make an exception just this once.
Without a full on reboot the left side of my brain still does the mental gymnastics of how this all fits into canon but the right side of the brain just tells me to shut up and watch the movie. All the little differences in treknology throb like a splinter stuck in my foot that I can't get out and I'm trying to ignore.

If they'd just pressed the restart button you could have had anything - (a female spock, a chimpanzee in sickbay...Klingons on roller skates) and it really wouldn't have mattered as long as it was a good movie.

__________________
www.moviebreadbin.com
Movie reviews sponsored by that toupee that Patrick Stewart had sent over from London that time.

Last edited by Jon1701; June 14 2013 at 05:23 PM.
Jon1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 05:49 PM   #22
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Trek needed this, no matter if it was a partial reboot or a full reboot. Trek became stale under Rick Berman's watch. Once Trek established how it was going to write and produce shows in the 3rd season of TNG, it never deviated far from it. It became television paint-by-numbers: Teaser - credits - build-up to the end of Act 1 - lather - rinse - repeat.

Even the TNG movies had the same storytelling and style as the shows. And they looked cheap on the big screen.

TV and movies began changing their style and substance, but Trek stayed the same. ENT was 22nd Century TNG, with the same production values and storytelling as 1990 TNG.

Abrams brought Trek into the 21st Century. Finally.
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 14 2013, 06:53 PM   #23
Robert_T_April
Captain
 
Robert_T_April's Avatar
 
Location: Yesterday's Enterprise
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
I love Roddenberry but he wasn't perfect and even original Trek was improved by his fellow writers, Bill Shatner's suggestions, and even the writers on occasion. In any case, I think the movies aren't PERFECT but they've breathed life into the franchise and got people to start thinking about Star Trek in new ways.

Then again, I'm just waiting for the Klingon War we've been denied since when they were first introduced.

TNG's episode Yesterday's Enterprise, which partially took place in an alternate timeline, gave us a small glimpse of what a war with the Klingons could be like. It's one my favorite TNG episodes. Very cool and thought provoking.

I wouldn't mind seeing a major conflict with Klingons as the main plot in the next film at all. As a matter of fact, I feel that it has be done! No time travel...no Cumberbatch, just a great story centered around the Klingons.
Robert_T_April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 01:10 AM   #24
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Jon1701 wrote: View Post
If they'd just pressed the restart button you could have had anything - (a female spock, a chimpanzee in sickbay...Klingons on roller skates) and it really wouldn't have mattered as long as it was a good movie.
I think I like all of those ideas.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 02:46 AM   #25
Charles Phipps
Commander
 
Charles Phipps's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

FYI, my double accent on the writers was a joke (a comment on Gene sometimes ignoring their contribution) not a repetition.

And yes, MORE KLINGONS!
__________________
Check out the United Federation of Charles:
http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
Charles Phipps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 03:27 AM   #26
throwback
Captain
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

The argument in favor of a reboot is dealt a serious blow I think when the writers have to resurrect scenes from a older movie to complete their new movie. The nature of a reboot is that it is original, as much as one can be original. Chris Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises is a complete reboot of the Joker-Batman dynamic, and it doesn't used scenes from Tim Burton's Batman to complete the film.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 04:15 AM   #27
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

This way is working - they threw a sop to the hardcore trekkies.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 05:03 AM   #28
Charles Phipps
Commander
 
Charles Phipps's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

throwback wrote: View Post
The argument in favor of a reboot is dealt a serious blow I think when the writers have to resurrect scenes from a older movie to complete their new movie. The nature of a reboot is that it is original, as much as one can be original. Chris Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises is a complete reboot of the Joker-Batman dynamic, and it doesn't used scenes from Tim Burton's Batman to complete the film.
I think the general statement has been it was 75% a good movie and 25% rip-off.
__________________
Check out the United Federation of Charles:
http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
Charles Phipps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 01:53 PM   #29
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
The argument in favor of a reboot is dealt a serious blow I think when the writers have to resurrect scenes from a older movie to complete their new movie. The nature of a reboot is that it is original, as much as one can be original. Chris Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises is a complete reboot of the Joker-Batman dynamic, and it doesn't used scenes from Tim Burton's Batman to complete the film.
I think the general statement has been it was 75% a good movie and 25% rip-off.
The problem with That Scene being copied is that it is one of TWOK's most memorable scenes even among non-Trek fans. And aside from switching Kirk and Spock, it's practically copied exactly. Everyone I know is complaining about it, even casual fans.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 15 2013, 02:29 PM   #30
Charles Phipps
Commander
 
Charles Phipps's Avatar
 
Re: Why a reboot was necessary (IMHO)

Yeah, it passed from "homage" (Keeping Khan is enough of an homage) to rip off then.
__________________
Check out the United Federation of Charles:
http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
Charles Phipps is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
star trek 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 11:37 PM.

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