Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by The Overlord, Dec 28, 2012.
Star Trek 11 essentially rebooted the franchise, do you think that was the right move?
No, it was completely pointless. See also The Amazing Spider-Man.
Should have just given us a new ship and crew instead of setting the franchise back 40+ years and making it a cosy nostalgia cash-in akin to The A-Team.
Yes. I've wanted to see new actors take on the iconic Trek roles since I saw Batman in 1989 and was introduced to the whole concept of rebooting. And a straight prequel would have suffered the same continuity lockout problems that Enterprise did.
Okay but lets go into why you think Star Trek needed a reboot or not.
Now Star Trek had two bad movies in a row and two rather bland TV series, was there no way to get past besides a reboot?
Absolutely. It was old and sagging under its own weight. A reboot gives the chance to tell new stories with familiar names without having to worry about all the stuff people like us tend to worry about.
It is an issue that has been discussed to death the past 5 years. I don't really care to do it again, the arguments and counter-arguments are always the same.
I'll stick to a simple yes.
Yes. It was pretty much the only way to ensure a future for Star Trek.
People tend to forget how bleak the future was after the abortion that was Enterprise.
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.
We're all adults. We can understand there being a re-telling of an old story in a new way, without there being an "in-universe" explanation for that new re-telling.
It was absolutely time to reboot it.
I liked Enterprise. Enterprise should have been more of a reboot than it was, but apparently no one at the studio had the nerve; the whole thing had to collapse before it could be rebuilt.
I agree with all of this.
Absolutely yes! I loved Voyager and Enterprise, I enjoy watching the last two TNG films (flawed though they may be).
Star Trek is a lot of things to a lot of people but at the very end of the day Trek is a brand and it is a business. It got an amazing and outstanding run on TV and in film but it had just run its course.
Trek, the way it was being presented on TV and on the big screen just wasn't doing it for a broader audience. They needed something fresh and new but familiar. There is no way they were going to gamble Star Trek's name on a brand new set of characters it is clear that Paramount wanted something that people would recognize (TOS) but done with a fresh coat of paint. Add in some of the hottest creative people in film at the moment and you've got a winner on your hands.
As it turns out, that is what they got. I've lost count of the number of people who never even gave Trek a chance until the JJ movie and while prefer to stick to that specific incarnation many more have come to like all that came before.
Star Trek definitely needed a reboot if it was going to survive. I don't think Trek XI was the way it should have been rebooted, but there's no real point dwelling on that anymore.
Without a doubt...if you don't know why then you haven't been paying attention.
YES, YES, a thousand times; YES!
No. But apparently reboots are the current fad in Hollywood these days. Why come up with something original when you can just take an old concept, change a few details and sell it again?
And if they were going to reboot it, then they should have just done a clean cut instead of trying to tether it however loosely to the "prime" universe.
It would be a bit difficult to explain why nuKhan had a completely different life after being unfrozen without a reboot. The decision to reboot was not some egregious or arbitrary one made solely to annoy maladjusted canon enthusiasts. It was necessary from both a creative and business standpoint.
A reboot, sure.
Our beloved Spock living out his final days in a Biffhorrific alternate 23rd century, not so much.
Separate names with a comma.