Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by The Overlord, Dec 28, 2012.

  1. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Absolutely Right(TM).

    TNG probably didn't happen if it weren't for the confidence that Paramount's people had in the soon-to-be released fourth TOS-based movie, The Voyage Home. During the summer of 1986 they were so happy with that thing that after two reasonably successful films that failed to increase the audience for Trek above a certain ceiling - TWOK and TSFS - they believed that Trek was a property with growth potential.

    Of course no one would ever have made a TNG movie without the track record of six TOS movies. The studio saw TNG as a sequel series from the beginning (they even planned to add it to the TOS syndication package as a "fourth season" if the sequel had failed to catch on) intended to extend the life of the property as Shatner and the other actors aged.

    Now that the studio has seen that Star Trek can be successfully restarted using the core characters and setting and that this approach yields much bigger box office returns than the older model we can expect them to do it again and again - as others have with Batman, Spider-Man, the X-Men, James Bond and so on. The old faux "future history" is an additional source of characters, premises and story situations (did I mention Kirk versus the Borg ;) ), not a template to be followed again in "evolving" Trek forward.
     
  2. Dale Sams

    Dale Sams Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    I will be very surprised if at the end of this upcoming film, there isn't a direct sequel hook in the last shot (ala "Casino Royale") or after some credits (Ala "Avengers")
     
  3. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Yeah, I expect that the sequel hook is leading to (further) Khan stuff.
     
  4. mos6507

    mos6507 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2010
    Why does fun preclude thinking? At its best, Trek was both, although usually not both at the same time, but spread over the entire series run, certainly, or even the movies (TMP vs. IV comes to mind).

    If you look at anything that is classic and timeless, usually there is complexity there. Look at music for instance. Think of the Beatles catalog, or Led Zeppelin. That's a wide variety of genres present. Those bands were not one-trick ponies, and TOS covered a lot of ground.

    I think in this cynical "I know something you don't know" internet culture, people love to come onto forums and be provocative and try to tear icons down to size. But really, great shows were great shows, period, and Trek was great. There isn't any sort of vandalist deconstruction that will be able to take that away.
     
  5. mos6507

    mos6507 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2010
    I agree with you that the TNG era went off the rails. At best, it was watchable, not must-watch TV. I don't agree with you that the nu-Trek approach was the right solution. I think it's possible to hate how Berman and Braga slowly ground the franchise to dust while not welcoming JJ Abrams and his lens-flare with open arms. All they really needed to do was find a better steward of the franchise without having to pass the ball to someone who saw Trek itself as something that was broken and needed a hip-hop ADD do-over.

    Hollywood has a bad habit of understanding the origin of success and attributing blame for failure. They are all too eager to throw the baby out with the bathwater in order to find a successful formula to pander to prime demographics. Sometimes it pays off and sometimes it doesn't, and oftentimes the critical payoff doesn't match the financial, hence perennial arguments on boards like this.
     
  6. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Since no one is doing the first or trying to do the second it's not a concern that need be addressed.
     
  7. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    The problem with what your saying is that J.J. Abrams didn't have twenty-six, or even thirteen, episodes to hook the audience on Star Trek 2009. He had two hours and likely a laundry list of things that had to be accomplished in that time frame...

    • Reset the universe.
    • Do origins for Kirk and Spock.
    • Introduce the minor characters.
    • Introduce the Enterprise.
    • Have Kirk as the Captain by the end of the film.
    • Plus introduce a villain and give us a reason for the events to unfold.

    Are there things I'd do differently? Sure! I loathe the Academy section of the film for a bunch of reasons I won't go into. But I thought both the Kelvin and Enterprise sections of the film were well done with a couple of nitpicks. I thought Abrams did a competent job directing and thought only Pegg and Saldana felt wrong for the roles they were given.

    When they were actually making this film there was no guarantee of a sequel, so they had to make it count. And I think for the most part they did.
     
  8. AloriaDax

    AloriaDax Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    I'm gonna say no for extremely selfish reasons. I like Star Trek perfectly the way it was. My whole life has been all about Star Trek and now I could give a shit about the "NuTrek" that has been coming out. I am not at all looking forward to the new movie and it pisses me off to no end that JJ Abrams is doing Star Trek now even though he was never a fan before. I know that in order to get more fans a reboot was necessary, but to be honest, I don't care about new fans. I want my Star Trek to be the way it always was. I don't want or care for this "NuTrek", it means nothing to me.
     
  9. The Stig

    The Stig Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    BBC Storage, hiding from Chris Evans
    Shatner has a few words for you.
     
  10. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    One way to look at it is that there was never going to be new movies/TV set in the Prime timeline. So you have a complete story and need not worry about the Abramsverse. :techman:
     
  11. SeerSGB

    SeerSGB Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    RIP Leonard Nimoy
    Bolding, mine.

    I've always been curious about that POV in fandom (really any Fandom, not just Trek). Would the person rather the franchise whether and die out than be retooled and retold for new generations?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2013
  12. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Yeah, really.

    The old version was done. There's no difference between just not paying attention to Abrams's movies and those movies not existing. So why be upset?
     
  13. Keeper

    Keeper Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Location:
    Land of Illusion
    Try to relax?
     
  14. lurok

    lurok Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Location:
    Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
    It's only a movie?
     
  15. AloriaDax

    AloriaDax Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    To answer your question: The franchise would never die out to me because I have the DVDs to watch over and over so it would always be a part of my life. And I think it is that way with a lot of people. It will always be a part of their lives. They will teach their children to love it. It wouldn't die out if they didn't make any more movies. I don't believe that at all.
     
  16. Dale Sams

    Dale Sams Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Exactly and AGAIN...it's 6-10 frigging hours in an 'alternate timeline'. Big frigging deal. To use a baseball analogy, it's not like NuTrek is blocking any Trek on the farm. On the contrary, the existance of NuTrek will accelerate any plans to make a new TV series.
     
  17. Keeper

    Keeper Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Location:
    Land of Illusion
    *stated in 'cough'* Con-tri-dict-ion. Then why are you so pissed? Go live happily ever after with your DVDs, right?
     
  18. SeerSGB

    SeerSGB Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Location:
    RIP Leonard Nimoy
    Oh it'd die out. It already was losing relevance to younger generations--hence the reboot. Star Trek is a product--no matter how much we enjoy it--and if the product doesn't sell they don't make anymore of it.
     
  19. Noname Given

    Noname Given Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Location:
    None Given
    Except TNG fans tend to forget that without TOS and the TOS films - TNG WOUULD NEVER have been made. And personally, TNG Season 1 was TERRIBLE all around. When it was in first run syndication trhe station showing first run TNG episodes in my area sandwiched them between two TOS episodes (IE one aired prior to TNG and one aired afterwards.)

    Yes, TNG did manage to survive and gain a following; but if not for TOS, it may not have.
     
  20. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    Your opinion has a sort of, "You kids and your modern music!" ring to it, but you have a perfectly legitimate point of view. If I hadn't liked ST09, or Abrams had taken it in what I thought was a ridiculous direction (female Scotty, or whatever), I probably wouldn't have been interested in it, either. I may have thought it more of an opportunity lost rather than not caring at all, though.
    But I happened to like ST09 a lot, and so far the next movie sounds intriguing, too. So -- .

    BTW, have you seen ST09? It's not clear from your post. If you didn't like it, you're hardly alone here.