RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,084
Posts: 5,398,480
Members: 24,735
Currently online: 628
Newest member: extremedalek

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

City on the Edge of Forever #3 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

TV Alert: Shatner TNG Documentary
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22


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 > Site Forums > TrekToday News Items

TrekToday News Items Discussion of TrekToday news items

 
 
Thread Tools
Old September 2 2008, 04:36 PM   #31
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Tulin wrote: View Post
I have come to the conclusion that the only people who actually liked ENT were about fourteen when it started airing.
Sorry - Trek fan since 1966 here, and I loved most of "Enterprise." So your generalization fails on the basis of the first exception.

Having observed "Star Trek" for as long as it's been around - and being old as dirt, of course - is the basis of my perspective on "The Franchise." I'm not nearly as impressed by the supposed "high points" nor as dismissive of the "failures" of the whole thing as a lot of people on the Internet appear to be.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 04:39 PM   #32
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

captcalhoun wrote: View Post
the books prove you don't need a reboot to be creative.
Wrong. The books and comics and what-have-you merely prove that if the costs of production and distribution are much lower than that of a commercial film or network TV series, there are enough Trek fans who are invested in the existing version of the Franchise to make its continuation profitable.

This has very little bearing on what's necessary to make a movie work for enough people for it to succeed.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 04:39 PM   #33
Nerys Ghemor
Vice Admiral
 
Nerys Ghemor's Avatar
 
Location: Cardăsa Terăm--Nerys Ghemor
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

TJinPgh wrote: View Post
Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
On the other hand, I think the current continuity works very well as the basis for literature (both official lit AND unofficial fanfic). Not being under the same degree of time and budgetary pressures that a movie is, there's no reason, especially with resources like Memory Alpha and Beta available, that an author cannot do the research to work within the existing continuity. The intricacy is now very well suited to the written format, much like the extreme detail in the Star Wars: Expanded Universe continuity, or Tolkien's Middle Earth.
This has more or less been my point all along.

We are supposed to believe that these guys are brilliant, creative geniuses who can spin gold out of dental floss. Yet, they can't figure out a way to do for $150m what a bunch of fans have done for a fraction of the cost with New Voyages.

Not to mention all of the other fan fiction out there that's centered around all new crews and ships.

All we really have here is Terminator on a starship with a bunch of teen pin ups playing the leads.

Forgive me if I don't see anything overly original or creative about the whole thing.
Except that I am going to withhold judgment on the movie until I actually see it--nowhere in my original post was I suggesting I already know how the movie is going to come out. I am not taking sides in that part of the debate. Just to be clear about the context, the comment you excerpted had more to do with books than the movie.
__________________
Are you a Cardassian fan, citizen? Prove your loyalty--check out my fanfic universe, Star Trek: Sigils and Unions. Or keep the faith on my AU Cardassia, Sigils and Unions: Catacombs of Oralius!
Nerys Ghemor is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 04:53 PM   #34
Charlie Kelly
Commodore
 
Charlie Kelly's Avatar
 
Location: York, United Kingdom
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Tulin wrote: View Post
Actually, ENT is thought of by most people as worse.

I have come to the conclusion that the only people who actually liked ENT were about fourteen when it started airing. It was their "gateway" show. It was new and they accepted it as theirs.


The rest of us were a bit older and had seen it all about eight times before. We weren't buying the out of date snake oil Bermaga were trying to peddle to us.
I'd enjoyed every Star Trek series by the time Enterprise came along and I know many people who are the same. It's a shame your 'conclusion' has nothing to back it up.

Getting back on topic...

I don't agree that the franchise needs to be rebooted to produce a good film; It's just an excuse for being lazy with the source material. Doctor Who is a good example of how wrong this reasoning is as it has just as much history as Star Trek and yet when they brought back the series in 2005 it became one of the most successful shows on British Television.

And how is following Star Trek or Doctor Who continuity any different to doing a period film?? Pearl Harbour didn't exactly follow history and it was sh*t.

Don't get me wrong though, the film can be a reboot and I'll still enjoy it if it's good. It'll just be sad that it won't the same Kirk and Spock I watched growing up.

Charlie
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC)
Charlie Kelly is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 05:09 PM   #35
PKerr
Rear Admiral
 
PKerr's Avatar
 
Location: Tampa Fl
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Garrovick wrote: View Post
I'm sorry Mr. Damon Lindelof

You are mistaken

It did not.

It needed some one with imagination to go forward, to continue the saga.

However, your new movie will make a very nice purchase some day from the DVD bargin bin. Might even make the rainy Saturday afternoon DVD rental list from NetFlix.
Well said. Spot on.
You basiclly beat me to it.
PKerr is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 06:18 PM   #36
zenophite
Rear Admiral
 
zenophite's Avatar
 
Location: AlphaVerse
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Enterprise was not necessarily better or worse than any of the other TNG+ shows. Maybe some of it was retreaded but that's the nature of the game when you don't change the production team regularly.
Looking back at TNG alot of that was pretty damn boring too.
__________________
The reason we have two ears and only one mouth, is that we may hear more and speak less.
- Zeno of Cittium (334-262 BC)
zenophite is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 07:17 PM   #37
Aragorn
Admiral
 
Aragorn's Avatar
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

number6 wrote: View Post
I find your comment extremely insulting. There were plenty of adult TOS fans that liked ENT.
Of course he's going to insult people who like what he doesn't. Who do you think you're talking to?
Aragorn is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 07:36 PM   #38
Saxman1
Commodore
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

zenophite wrote: View Post
Enterprise was not necessarily better or worse than any of the other TNG+ shows. Maybe some of it was retreaded but that's the nature of the game when you don't change the production team regularly.
Looking back at TNG alot of that was pretty damn boring too.
Berman and company were able to give Parmount/UPN/Viacom/Whatever what they were looking for until CBS took over ENT. The CBS team wanted to continue the relatively high-priced ENT long enough to produce enough eps for syndication: they were drooling to cancel it, but not until that point. One can argue that ENT outdrew the BG reboot every week but what mattered until CBS took over is that Berman's team delivered what the parent company was looking for. There were a lot of fans (myself and the Mrs. included) who thought ST should have changed production hands just for the sake of freshness for VOY and ENT, but that wasn't in the cards. DS9 was pretty much IB's baby at a certain point, which certainly helped it to stand out vs. VOY and ENT.

I am not saying I hated the post-TNG series, but VOY and ENT are likes, while TNG and DS9 are loves. Big diff. A breath of fresh air might have helped, but companies are driven by the bottom line and to some extent, Berman delivered. The fact that VOY and ENT were stuck on the hapless UPN didn't help them any, but there you go.
Saxman1 is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 07:39 PM   #39
Temis the Vorta
Fleet Admiral
 
Temis the Vorta's Avatar
 
Location: Tatoinne
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Nah, it didn't need a reboot, and focusing on trivial details was not the problem with VOY and the first three seasons of ENT anyway. Lack of new ideas was the problem, but those new ideas could easily have been merged with existing canon, just as DS9 took a new and invigorating approach without doing any serious damage to canon.

The reason that going back to TOS and recasting - not rebooting - is a good idea is simply that most people don't know or care anything about Star Trek at this point, so that Kirk-Spock-Enterprise is effectively the Star Trek brand now, and when you're rebuilding a brand up from years of neglect and mismanagement, starting with what people have heard of is a good strategy.

The lack of general knowledge or solid public opinion about what Star Trek is, is actually a good opportunity. If they had to rebuild from a strongly negative image, that would be a far worse situation.

The TOS premise and character concepts are timeless and therefore still strong. They've lain fallow for so long that people have not become sick of them; most don't know much about them, any more than most of the people going to see Iron Man knew anything about some second-tier comic book character. The lack of preconceptions about what the movie should be allowed people to enjoy and appreciate it when it turned out to be great. Star Trek can do the same.

Looks like the recasting has been done well, for the most part. I'm very optimistic that they've gone for the right strategy, even if they won't admit the real reason, since it's a tad cynical and mercenary, but that's show biz. I don't hold it against them in the least, and there's no reason a mercenary branding strategy approach would preclude Star Trek XI also being an excellent movie on its own merits.
Temis the Vorta is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 07:40 PM   #40
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Charlie Kelly wrote: View Post
And how is following Star Trek or Doctor Who continuity any different to doing a period film?
Because history happened. "Star Trek" did not and will not. Shakespeare was not particularly faithful to the several versions of "Romeo and Juliet" that existed at the time he wrote his play, and that worked out very very well.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 07:46 PM   #41
Temis the Vorta
Fleet Admiral
 
Temis the Vorta's Avatar
 
Location: Tatoinne
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

PumpHunter wrote: View Post
Anyone who calls it a "franchise" is just another greedy robot who should be kicked out on their ass.
Rest assured that the people who own Star Trek think of it as a franchise, and we should all be glad they do. Franchises and sequels are the big thing in Hollywood. If Star Trek were not an eminently revivable franchise, we wouldn't be getting a new movie or anything else for that matter.

And reactions like this is the reason Lindlof and others involved in the movie don't dare confess that they are doing a TOS recasting for very solid business reasons - its the approach most likely to work in reviving Star Trek.

It's idiotic to hold this against them. They work in a business where they are expected to be financially successful. The fact that Star Trek is a franchise plays a large part in its financial success. That's just the way it is, regardless of how anyone feels about it, so why not just accept it and move on?
Temis the Vorta is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 07:56 PM   #42
Saxman1
Commodore
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Temis the Vorta wrote: View Post
PumpHunter wrote: View Post
Anyone who calls it a "franchise" is just another greedy robot who should be kicked out on their ass.
Rest assured that the people who own Star Trek think of it as a franchise, and we should all be glad they do. Franchises and sequels are the big thing in Hollywood. If Star Trek were not an eminently revivable franchise, we wouldn't be getting a new movie or anything else for that matter.

And reactions like this is the reason Lindlof and others involved in the movie don't dare confess that they are doing a TOS recasting for very solid business reasons - its the approach most likely to work in reviving Star Trek.

It's idiotic to hold this against them. They work in a business where they are expected to be financially successful. The fact that Star Trek is a franchise plays a large part in its financial success. That's just the way it is, regardless of how anyone feels about it, so why not just accept it and move on?
I agree 100%. From a business perspective a franchise it what you want, something marketable, bankable, reliable. Batman, Star Wars, the Marvel Universe anyone? ST is in good company.

I refuse to judge the new film until I see it and I am thinking it will be very, very, good. I don't see what all the fuss is: Berman's team killed the movie franchise/TNG with ill-timed, poor vehicles - let's give the fresh blood a chance.

This is not meant as a beat-up Berman's team email, but through oversaturation (too many ST series on poor network or syndication - DS9 on WGN in Chicago..always pre-empted by sport and VOY/ENT on UPN) and poor products (the TNG films), ST was effectively dead.
Saxman1 is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 08:12 PM   #43
Charlie Kelly
Commodore
 
Charlie Kelly's Avatar
 
Location: York, United Kingdom
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Starship Polaris wrote: View Post
Charlie Kelly wrote: View Post
And how is following Star Trek or Doctor Who continuity any different to doing a period film?
Because history happened. "Star Trek" did not and will not. Shakespeare was not particularly faithful to the several versions of "Romeo and Juliet" that existed at the time he wrote his play, and that worked out very very well.
I'm not saying you can't get an excellent film with a reboot but I'm saying you can get an excellent film without rebooting as well.

I just want to see them continue the Star Trek Universe I've grown up with, not start a new one. That's just my personal preference of cause, I'm not saying either option is 'wrong'.

Charlie
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC)
Charlie Kelly is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 09:36 PM   #44
captcalhoun
Admiral
 
Location: everywhere
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

i was 23 when ENT started and i liked it, except the damn 'finale'...
captcalhoun is offline  
Old September 2 2008, 09:53 PM   #45
Basil
Fleet Captain
 
Re: 'Star Trek' Needed A Reboot

Well, Lost in Space had a reboot, as did Godzilla, Superman, Thunderbirds, The Avengers, Bewitched, Speed Racer (when did he become a white guy?), The Saint, I, Spy, Starsky and Hutch, Get Smart, etc. For every Casino Royale or Batman Begins (two franchises with a history of starting over in some form), there are two or three reboots or adaptations that not only failed but failed spectacularly, or miserably, depending on your point of view. I think Star Trek will do okay business, but I'm guessing that it won't quite become the blockbuster Paramount is gambling on. The move to a May release date seems an attempt to get a jump on the summer competition, rather than go head to head with it.
Basil is offline  
 

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 10:58 PM.

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