RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,382
Posts: 5,504,943
Members: 25,126
Currently online: 588
Newest member: Captain Allen

TrekToday headlines

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

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
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 > Misc. Star Trek > Future of Trek

Future of Trek Discussion of future Trek projects.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 23 2013, 12:00 PM   #496
Relayer1
Rear Admiral
 
Relayer1's Avatar
 
Location: The Black Country, England
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

I'm still loving the 'prime' timeline in the novelverse - it's dynamic, changing and very well done. It is and always will be my first love.

I'm also enjoying the new continuity, but not quite as wholeheartedly as the older one.

I can't see the new continuity being canned, but in its present form it has a limited shelf-life. Movie contracts and film star cast members won't give the sort of longevity you get with TV shows. At some point Pine, Quinto and co. will move on and necessitate another reboot, a spin off or a jump forward in time.

I wouldn't be hugely surprised if a show or film set in the 25th century or beyond doesn't happen, working as a follow-up to either timeline. Most of the differences in takes on the TOS era wouldn't be noticeable after a couple of hundred years, although the loss of Vulcan and/or Romulus may need some inventive retconning...
__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...
Relayer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 12:35 PM   #497
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

As with all reboots and remakes, these will be quickly forgotten, especially since they don't bring anything substantial and new to the table. All they did until now was Part 1: The Reboot, and Part 2: The Re-Use of a Previous Villain.

Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy, while having the same Part 1 and Part 2, left a deep footprint on the franchise, because what it offered had great impact and was truly fresh and new to the franchise. Cumberbatch's Khan in comparison to Montalban's Khan was in no way as exciting and fresh as Ledger's Joker in comparison to Nicholson's Joker or any previous Joker incarnation. Abrams' "lens flares because the future is so bright" approach is nowhere near as well done as Nolan's "realistic, down to earth take" on the Batman universe (and yes, I'm well aware of the controversy regarding the word "realism" in that context).

When people think of James Bond, they immediately think of Sean Connery, and then of Daniel Craig. Because Connery was the first and mostly considered the best, and then Craig's Bond movies left their mark as being special Bond films. People might also think of Roger Moore, but more because of the camp.



And my main problem with the Abramsverse is - I said that years ago about Part I and it hasn't changed with Part II - there is NOTHING in these films that needed the reboot of TOS. You could have told the story of Part I in the TNG universe, with the same style, and the same characters. A group of young hotshot cadets, one of them lost his father, the other one struggles with being between two worlds, Picard instead of Pike as mentor, a crazy Romulan with a black hole weapon, and Vulcan gets destroyed, Picard retires and hot shot cadet becomes hotshot Captain of the Enterprise-E. Part II, a section 31 conspiracy and an extremely angry spy with special abilities, eventually the hot shot cadet/captain sacrifices himself to save the Enterprise-E falling into the atmosphere, and the bad guy's Section 31 super secret battleship destroys half of San Francisco.

I don't feel any attachment to the names Kirk, Spock and McCoy, and they are played by different actors with entirely different takes on these characters anyway, so I don't see the reason. Because some guy in the marketing department thinks that Kirk == 100 million dollars box office and Unknown == 1 million dollars box office. Yeah right. How well they can actually pre-determine the box office performance of their films we already know.

Last edited by JarodRussell; September 23 2013 at 12:53 PM.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 02:52 PM   #498
anh165
Commander
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I don't feel any attachment to the names Kirk, Spock and McCoy, and they are played by different actors with entirely different takes on these characters anyway, so I don't see the reason. Because some guy in the marketing department thinks that Kirk == 100 million dollars box office and Unknown == 1 million dollars box office. Yeah right. How well they can actually pre-determine the box office performance of their films we already know.
And this is why you and the minority will safely be ignored by movie industry, if popular culture reflected your lack of 'attachment' to Kirk, Spock and McCoy then there would be no market for Star Trek at all, let alone a boring TNG era reboot.
__________________
No animals were harmed during posting ...
anh165 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 03:24 PM   #499
Mr. Comic Book
Ensign
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

SolitaryJustice wrote: View Post
Mr. Comic Book wrote: View Post

...I don't want the "prime timeline" back. It's time to move on.
I don't know if I entirely agree. One of the endearing things about cultural icons like Star Trek and Doctor Who is that they haven't been rebooted. Star Trek has found a unique way to continue anew, and Doctor Who has had one of the most brilliant runs in modern sci-fi television.
Give it time. Eventually, when the Hartnell-present continuity of Dr. Who runs its course, it'll be rebooted from scratch. It's not going to be immune to a complete restart at some point.

And you know what? It shouldn't. It's a strong enough property to withstand it. Star Trek is only now showing it can survive rebooting and reinterpretation and still be successful. I don't see where or how the same can't apply to Dr. Who.

I can't see the new continuity being canned, but in its present form it has a limited shelf-life. Movie contracts and film star cast members won't give the sort of longevity you get with TV shows. At some point Pine, Quinto and co. will move on and necessitate another reboot, a spin off or a jump forward in time.
Every incarnation of a long-running franchise has a limited shelf life. Periodic reboots are the norm, not the exception. I wouldn't expect the Abramsverse to last for decades on end. It's just not realistic, nor would it remain accessible to newcomers were it to drag out as the "prime timeline" did. It would eventually fall victim to the same pitfalls that killed the old continuity. There is something to be said for knowing where to call it quits instead of wearing out your welcome, and Paramount would be wise to do that from here on out.

Further, if guys like Superman, Batman, Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes, Robin Hood, and such can be recast and rebooted frequently without any undue harm to the characters, I don't see how or why Kirk, Spock, and the gang can't do the same. I don't see them as being more fragile than any other long-standing characters.
Mr. Comic Book is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 03:43 PM   #500
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
As with all reboots and remakes, these will be quickly forgotten,
Like the John Carpenter remake of THE THING? Like the Cronenberg remake of THE FLY? Like the new-and-improved BATTLESTAR GALACTICA? Like every Dracula adaptation since Bela LUgosi? (Sorry, Christopher Lee and Gary Oldman!) Like the Richard Lester version of THE THREE MUSKETEERS? Like every SUPERMAN movies since Kirk Alyn? (Sorry, Christopher Reeve!)

"all reboots and remakes" is way too sweeping a statement!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 03:45 PM   #501
bountifulboxesjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bountifulboxesjeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Belz... wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
^For reference.
I'm serious. How would one tell the difference once we go back to the 25th century ? I mean, look at TNG. How do you know it's in the same timeline as TOS ? So that's my question: why mention the prime timeline if you're going to make a show in a totally different time period ?
TNG referenced to TOS throughout the series as I expect in a generation after next show. They even had Bones on the first episode.
bountifulboxesjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 03:54 PM   #502
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
You know, I sometimes wonder how much the objection to reboots simply comes from seeing one's encyclopedic knowledge of pop-cultural trivia rendered obsolete. "No, not after I memorized all those Starfleet registry numbers and Cardassian history!"

On one hand, I understand that pang. I have stacks of DC Comics reference books and back issues that can no longer be relied on for research purposes. On the other hand, that's not really a compelling reason to bring back a discarded continuity.

STAR TREK is more than just an encyclopedia of fictional facts about an imaginary future. In the grander scheme of things, Trek trivia contests are not as important as telling compelling stories that will appeal to everyone, not just those of us who can recite all of Kirk's exes by heart.
I think you hit the nail right on the head, Greg
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:04 PM   #503
Yanks
Fleet Captain
 
Yanks's Avatar
 
Location: NX01 Bridge
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Belz... wrote: View Post
Yanks wrote: View Post
What? Really?

Hell, it did some rehashing of ST09!
I see a lot of talking but not a lot of actual demonstrating. What did they rehash ?
Plinket (i think that's spelled right) did a short vid on it.

One that comes to mind is Kirk doing another space shoot jump.
__________________
Mankind was born on Earth. It was never meant to die here..”
Yanks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:08 PM   #504
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
You know, I sometimes wonder how much the objection to reboots simply comes from seeing one's encyclopedic knowledge of pop-cultural trivia rendered obsolete. "No, not after I memorized all those Starfleet registry numbers and Cardassian history!"

On one hand, I understand that pang. I have stacks of DC Comics reference books and back issues that can no longer be relied on for research purposes. On the other hand, that's not really a compelling reason to bring back a discarded continuity.

STAR TREK is more than just an encyclopedia of fictional facts about an imaginary future. In the grander scheme of things, Trek trivia contests are not as important as telling compelling stories that will appeal to everyone, not just those of us who can recite all of Kirk's exes by heart.
The whole "Dear god, what have I wasted my life doing?!..None of it matters anymore!...I...I am a basement dwelling nerd!...no...no...NOOOOOOOOOO!" moment.

I can see it.

On a serious note: You're probably right. And then toss in the concept of Hate Reading, and some things start becoming a little clearer about the more zealous of the anti-reboot crowd.

Not saying some people do not have a genuine dislike for the new movies. That I can get: people have different tastes, the wheel in the sky and all that. The people who take it as a personal affront, who make it an issue of being personally owed something, who go after the production team on a very personal level, those people have lost touch with reality--IMO.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:09 PM   #505
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
As with all reboots and remakes, these will be quickly forgotten,
Like the John Carpenter remake of THE THING? Like the Cronenberg remake of THE FLY? Like the new-and-improved BATTLESTAR GALACTICA? Like every Dracula adaptation since Bela LUgosi? (Sorry, Christopher Lee and Gary Oldman!) Like the Richard Lester version of THE THREE MUSKETEERS? Like every SUPERMAN movies since Kirk Alyn? (Sorry, Christopher Reeve!)

"all reboots and remakes" is way too sweeping a statement!
Most? I already listed exceptions with the TDK trilogy and Craig Bond films. There are some versions of previous works that leave a big mark, no doubt about that. I don't see something like that in the Abramstrek films. They have their 15 minutes of fame but then they will be "forgotten", especially if TOS gets rebooted again and again.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:23 PM   #506
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
As with all reboots and remakes, these will be quickly forgotten,
Like the John Carpenter remake of THE THING? Like the Cronenberg remake of THE FLY? Like the new-and-improved BATTLESTAR GALACTICA? Like every Dracula adaptation since Bela LUgosi? (Sorry, Christopher Lee and Gary Oldman!) Like the Richard Lester version of THE THREE MUSKETEERS? Like every SUPERMAN movies since Kirk Alyn? (Sorry, Christopher Reeve!)

"all reboots and remakes" is way too sweeping a statement!
Most? I already listed exceptions with the TDK trilogy and Craig Bond films.
Better, but I really do think that remakes get a bum rap. Hollywood history is littered with classic films that are remakes: BEN-HUR, THE WIZARD OF OZ, THE MALTESE FALCON, TARZAN THE APE MAN, THE MARK OF ZORRO, SOME LIKE IT HOT, THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, THE HORROR OF DRACULA, VICTOR/VICTORIA, THE THING, THE FLY, etc. In some cases, there are several classic versions of the same story.

I'm not sure when we decided that remakes and reboots are the devil. I mean, nobody objects when the Met puts on a new production of "Carmen" or Broadway stages a revival of "Death of a Salesman." But remake an old movie or TV show . . . sacrilege!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:37 PM   #507
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
As with all reboots and remakes, these will be quickly forgotten, especially since they don't bring anything substantial and new to the table. All they did until now was Part 1: The Reboot, and Part 2: The Re-Use of a Previous Villain.

Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy, while having the same Part 1 and Part 2, left a deep footprint on the franchise, because what it offered had great impact and was truly fresh and new to the franchise. Cumberbatch's Khan in comparison to Montalban's Khan was in no way as exciting and fresh as Ledger's Joker in comparison to Nicholson's Joker or any previous Joker incarnation. Abrams' "lens flares because the future is so bright" approach is nowhere near as well done as Nolan's "realistic, down to earth take" on the Batman universe (and yes, I'm well aware of the controversy regarding the word "realism" in that context).

When people think of James Bond, they immediately think of Sean Connery, and then of Daniel Craig. Because Connery was the first and mostly considered the best, and then Craig's Bond movies left their mark as being special Bond films. People might also think of Roger Moore, but more because of the camp.



And my main problem with the Abramsverse is - I said that years ago about Part I and it hasn't changed with Part II - there is NOTHING in these films that needed the reboot of TOS. You could have told the story of Part I in the TNG universe, with the same style, and the same characters. A group of young hotshot cadets, one of them lost his father, the other one struggles with being between two worlds, Picard instead of Pike as mentor, a crazy Romulan with a black hole weapon, and Vulcan gets destroyed, Picard retires and hot shot cadet becomes hotshot Captain of the Enterprise-E. Part II, a section 31 conspiracy and an extremely angry spy with special abilities, eventually the hot shot cadet/captain sacrifices himself to save the Enterprise-E falling into the atmosphere, and the bad guy's Section 31 super secret battleship destroys half of San Francisco.

I don't feel any attachment to the names Kirk, Spock and McCoy, and they are played by different actors with entirely different takes on these characters anyway, so I don't see the reason. Because some guy in the marketing department thinks that Kirk == 100 million dollars box office and Unknown == 1 million dollars box office. Yeah right. How well they can actually pre-determine the box office performance of their films we already know.
I agree with most everything you said there up until the end. The 09 movie(annoyingly without a name still), was at least fresh and seemed to indicate they might go outside the box by destroying Vulcan, even if you apparently had to buy a comic book to realize Nero really isn't an idiot who was just twiddling his thumbs for 20 years waiting for Spock.

Into Darkness... well that one really offered us nothing new at all. It cherry picked elements from across the franchise, tossed them into a blender and viola! "New" movie! By all accounts they set themselves up for another re-hash of Khan in the third movie out for revenge, though I guess we'll be a few years waiting and seeing on that one. Still, nothing we haven't seen it would seem.

There has always been a fad in Hollywood for rebooting things. It's a lot easier than coming up with anything original after all, and the people will pay every time. I'll agree the Dark Knight triology was a good example. Though to me Pierce Brosnan is the Bond I grew up with.

You're right about the plot, down at it's core, people simple enough you could swap out generations, characters and what not and not have to change too much. I will say you're wrong about the NuKirk, Spock and McCoy not drawing in people. They are, even if they're in reality just names attached to different people that are completely different than the heroes of old. But most people don't know or care about that and just want a good action movie, and figure they've heard of that Kirk guy and he's good for it. It's historic fact in Hollywood you can repackage the same product and keep selling it over and over again. Just the way it is.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:46 PM   #508
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

R. Star wrote: View Post
It's historic fact in Hollywood you can repackage the same product and keep selling it over and over again. Just the way it is.
Exactly. Hollywood has been in the remake business since the silent era. My favorite example: The Unholy Three (1925), a truly bizarre crime thriller starring Lon Chaney Sr., was remade as a talkie only five years later--with largely the same cast!

And people complain that Spider-Man was rebooted too fast!

(And, famously, the classic 1941 production of The Maltese Falcon was the third movie version of that story to be released over a period of only ten years.)

So, yeah, rebooting Star Trek is just standard operating procedure. You live long enough, or watch enough old movies, you see everything get remade--several times over!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 04:50 PM   #509
David.Blue
Lieutenant Commander
 
David.Blue's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Hollywood makes movies to make money. Given the current state of the motion picture industry, a "Great BIG Trek" a la Abrams makes sense. But as Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy shows, that in no way means you have to throw away quality of storytelling. And I would argue that trilogy will end up more profitable than the Abrams Treks in the long run.

Having said that, if JJ Abrams goes off to do Star Wars and leaves Trek behind, then somebody else can pick up the reigns and do something better with his alternate timeline. It isn't as if all the eps of TOS were high quality, yet all things wonderful in TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT proceeded from that!

However...

From what I understand, the film industry is in serious flux. With the price of tickets what they are, and competition so increasingly diverse and readily accessible, we'll see what happens. If making three or four Treks for the internet costs a tenth as much as STID yet makes one quarter the profit, then we're talking a very different business plan for exploiting the franchise, which in turn impacts the possibilities quite a lot.

Such a scenario might well provide for alternate series/films in different continuities, each with a distinct "look."
David.Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 05:03 PM   #510
Yanks
Fleet Captain
 
Yanks's Avatar
 
Location: NX01 Bridge
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

R. Star wrote: View Post
... The 09 movie(annoyingly without a name still), ...
It's called "Star Trek"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/
__________________
Mankind was born on Earth. It was never meant to die here..”
Yanks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
prime trek

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 11:02 PM.

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