If you were in charge of a Trek reboot, what ten things would you change?

[Grendelsbayne]

Insurrection made a big deal of Geordi seeing a sunset when his eyes regenerated. There were many instances of him wanting to see normal.

Enjoying a temporary opportunity isn't the same as actively wanting to give up his implants in favor of regular vision.

Like I said, I don't know all the ins and outs of the character, but I don't personally recall any moment where he specifically said that was what he wanted. If there was, I'd be interested to know when so I can check out the transcript and see the context.

I mean you could try to explain away LaaW by saying he decided Pulaski's procedure was too risky, but his first thoughts are clearly focused on the idea that his unusual sight is a part of him and he isn't sure if he wants to give that up.

 

[Captain Clark Terrell]

Both yes and no. Another example I LOVE is VOY's "Distant Origin", which is partly like a first contact story told from the viewpoints of the aliens (dinosaurs). I especially loved them getting things wrong based on evidence (like assuming humans are "matriarchal", because of Janeway). That is both funny and a realistic look at how science actually works.

But that can also get old really really fast. Like "Enterprise being taken over by badguys" and "Captain being kidnapped by aliens" it's one of the standard plots you should repeat too often, otherwise it gets stale. Also budget is an issue, you'd have to create complete new sets everytime and have lots of new actors (with heavy make-up) in big roles - all cost a LOT of money.

Still, I'd love to see that once every other season, and I definitely prefer it to the regular cut-aways to the aliens that DIS and DS9 gave us in a story arc.

One idea that might work is to have back-to-back episodes that deal with the exact same event but from different points of view. One thing I really liked about TNG’s “Timescape” is that its plot allowed it to repeat several events but in a way that showed them from both a Starfleet and a Romulan perspective, thus demonstrating that the two crews were actually working together to stop an impending disaster. Using a similar concept for separate episodes would minimize the number of new sets and actors needed for the episodes, as the guest characters would largely be the same in both.

 

[Butters]

I would change almost everything that we’ve come to know about Trek.

I’d strip it right back to that familiar pale ship we first see in the Cage, zooming in toward the bridge dome, after that, forget everything you think you know.

I’d keep the star dates original purpose, to conceal the Earth year. We could be a hundred years or a thousand years away, and we’ll get conflicting clues. Today’s boundaries and politics would have no relevance or bearing on future folk.

Captain Kirk? Maybe, but Kirk would be his first name. All of the characters would be new, and maybe familiar too, Vulcan science officer has been done already, thrice now. What can anyone add to what Nimoy gave us? The Vulcans would be the recurring baddies, that look terribly similar to our closest trading partners, the Romulans.

I’d keep warp drive, and transporters, universal translators, replicators and holodecks.

I’d keep the analogous stories, using the alien worlds to tell balanced human stories. The crew would be human. It’s not a documentary or a future history.

I’d have a banging soundtrack. Special effects that supported to action, without being the centre of it. Shots would be a mix of photo realism and idealised high concept art.

I’d have a cameo by The Doctor, and maybe K9. And Ace.

Space would be big and lonely, the series is about the crew of a ship out there for new stones to look under. Life would be rare, intelligent life rarer. We’ll the missions to barren rocks, but just finding moss would be remarkable, but a pattern would slowly emerge in the discovery of habitable worlds.

I’d use sci fi writers.

 

[Rahul]

Basically in a Trek reboot, Geordi's eyes would be cloned and he would see like everyone else. As for Pike, his plotline might have to be changed in new Trek, like it was for the Kelvin timeline.

All current science indicates that technological solutions aren't going to be more efficient than natural organs (or cloned organs). Hearing aids can never reproduce the true sound lost by cochlear hair cells by one example--that's why labs now are trying to find ways to regrow them.

I always assumed the problem with Geordies' eyesight wasn't his eyes, but is brain - basically the connection part between the two, but on he brain side. Because it shouldn't have been difficult in Star Trek to replace common organs by cloning. But what they established in TOS (with what Pike had) was they still can't repair everything in the brain.

And the visor was essentially feeding information directly into his brain, through those thingies in his temple. That would make sense both as an illness that shouldn't be easy to cure in the future and a palpable technical solution to a medical problem. And Geordie was the only one we ever saw with a Visor, so it wasn't something common - every common eye illnes should have been easily curable - but something super rare anc complicated.

And yes, I know they often said "his eyes" were the problem. But I thought of that as just a matter of speech. Overall I really, really liked how Geordie's condition was depicted, because it both showed physical impariments to be super rare in the future, more than today, suggesting widely available cures (which should be the case - in the future), but at the same time them still existing, but also being treated as totally normal and acceptable by society.

One idea that might work is to have back-to-back episodes that deal with the exact same event but from different points of view. One thing I really liked about TNG’s “Timescape” is that its plot allowed it to repeat several events but in a way that showed them from both a Starfleet and a Romulan perspective, thus demonstrating that the two crews were actually working together to stop an impending disaster. Using a similar concept for separate episodes would minimize the number of new sets and actors needed for the episodes, as the guest characters would largely be the same in both.

That's actually a great idea for a storyline!

 

[thribs]

Actually, I've stopped reading Star Trek novels a long time ago...
Not that I don't like them anymore. There is just SO MUCH literature I'd much more like to read, it's already an exercise following my regular reading list.

It's a good thing all Trek novels are non-canon anyway.

But because of that, if something important or noteworthy happens in one of the novels (like this one), can you please describe the important parts here in the forum? I barely even have the time to watch Star Trek and other television shows I'm following. I simply don't have the time for more Trek novels.

Spoiler: Control Spoilers

You find out that the leader of the Section is a AI program (think Skynet) that they call “Control”. A program created in the 2150’s that was supposed to monitor the planet and report emergencies to the proper authorities if and when they occur. Over time the program got bigger and more ambitious. When it detected the Xindi probe it didn’t know where to report the danger to and so it put into a series of events into action that would eventually cause the creation of the coalition, and then Federation as a way to protect Earth from further dangers. Section 31 is a force it creates when it feels it needs more manpower to enforce its control in protecting the Federation.
It exists in every piece of Federation software which is how they can monitor nearly everything that happens.
It took the combined forces of Bashir, Douglas, Data and Lal to expose the AI and put an end to the order but it was never destroyed.

 

[Rahul]

Spoiler: Control Spoilers

You find out that the leader of the Section is a AI program (think Skynet) that they call “Control”. A program created in the 2150’s that was supposed to monitor the planet and report emergencies to the proper authorities if and when they occur. Over time the program got bigger and more ambitious.

That's actually a neat idea!

When it detected the Xindi probe it didn’t know where to report the danger to and so it put into a series of events into action that would eventually cause the creation of the coalition, and then Federation as a way to protect Earth from further dangers. Section 31 is a force it creates when it feels it needs more manpower to enforce its control in protecting the Federation.
It exists in every piece of Federation software which is how they can monitor nearly everything that happens.
It took the combined forces of Bashir, Douglas, Data and Lal to expose the AI and put an end to the order but it was never destroyed.

Aaaaaaand it's gone completely off the rails....

Like, literally, that would be a giant, enourmos retcon of the entire Star Trek universe, and a whole lot to the worse. Like a subversion of the entire idea of Star Trek and what it stands for: That we can come peacefully together. Apparently...no. Whoever wrote this piece doesn't belive in humankind being able to better themselves and is also apparently super big on "the-ends-justify-ALL-means", which is IMO a horrible contradiction to the Trek ethos and I shuddered every single time DS9 endulged in it.

Overall, this sounds like a fan-fiction version of Isaac Asimov's "I, robot" cycle, introduced into Star Trek. All with a big A.I secretly taking over to better humanity and all that. Just with missing the core values of both Star Trek and Isaac Asimov's all-controlling A.I. (which really only works if it's meant to control humans - something it can adapt to over times - and would fail against an entire alien universe with things beyond the imaginable really, really fast.

I think this idea as you describe has a few good thoughts going on for it.
But overall it would be too much of a retcon of the entire Trek universe, doesn't make a whole lot of sense, goes waaaaay too deep into the whole "Section 31 is actually needed to protect the future" (and not "section 31 is a menace to said perfect future") - schtick an...
...I'm just glad it's non-canon. Like, completely just in the realm of sanctioned fan-fiction. Nice little thougt experiment. But nothing more than that.

 

[Phil123]

1 – Transporters can only transport to other transporters. Otherwise the technology doesn’t make sense. Plus, as someone is converted to data and then essentially copied with the original being taken apart – what stops people being killed on away missions and being brought back from the dead? Nothing. Might be easier to get rid of them altogether.

2- Starships cannot land. They are huge structures build for space, and the idea that they can glide though the atmosphere and land never make sense to me. Same goes for being built in Iowa.

3- Following on from the above, shuttlecraft for planetary landing need to look like a craft designed to operate in a planetary atmosphere. When they take off and land there should be wind and dust etc everywhere, if they are to ‘glide’ they need a wing type design.

4- More uniform variation for specific tasks. This is something the Kelvinverse does get a bit more right. Away teams should have jackets/clothes for the conditions expected, perhaps all over a standard uniform worn on the ship.

5 – Unless a reason why ships would not be fully networked is given (like in Battlestar) no more carrying around multiple PADDs, or bring reports on them. This was completely understandable in TOS and early TNG given current tech. However by the time we get to Nelix wheeling a trolley of PADDs to Seven of Nine with her parents journals it’s unforgivable. Even forgetting that she should be able to access them all on any terminal on the ship or on any PADD, why are there so many!? How much did they write?

6 – More alien looking aliens and other planets and cultures. I do recognise that this is probably more of a budget thing.

7 – SPACEships don’t need to be AIRodynamic.

8 – Far greater percentage of Starfleet crews should not be human.

9 – Bridges should be designed totally differently. They should not be on the top of the ship and should not all be looking at a high viewscreen. 99% of the time they would all just be staring into black space and have to twist around to talk/work with each other.

10 – No section 31.

 

[Rahul]

1 – Transporters can only transport to other transporters. Otherwise the technology doesn’t make sense. Plus, as someone is converted to data and then essentially copied with the original being taken apart – what stops people being killed on away missions and being brought back from the dead? Nothing. Might be easier to get rid of them altogether.

Transporters aren't Stargates, though. The image of the crew materializing on the surface of a planet is as iconic as it get's for Star Trek. Having only one plattform on one side (and giant dishes focussing on the other end) makes IMO sense and is a good compromise.

But I absolutely stay with my number of people = number of pads demand.

2- Starships cannot land. They are huge structures build for space, and the idea that they can glide though the atmosphere and land never make sense to me. Same goes for being built in Iowa.

Well, if they are structurally sound enough to maneover in tight battles, they should be able to withstand Earths gravity (it's only 1g! Manoevers can add up many g's).

3- Following on from the above, shuttlecraft for planetary landing need to look like a craft designed to operate in a planetary atmosphere. When they take off and land there should be wind and dust etc everywhere, if they are to ‘glide’ they need a wing type design.

This one is actually absolutely not necessary. Aerodynamik designs are made to most efficiently converse impulse engery into lift. If you have almost limitless engine power (which you MUST have to be able to reach orbital velocity without giant fuel tanks), you can lift up basically whatever you want, aerodynamik design is more of an obstacle at that point. Add to that that different planets would have widely different atmospheres (and thus the aerodynamic design for one planet - Earth - would be an absolute catastrophe for other planets, say Mars or Venus), and it makes much, much more sense for spaceships simply being lifted by downward facing impuls engines, instead of via aerodynamics.

4- More uniform variation for specific tasks. This is something the Kelvinverse does get a bit more right. Away teams should have jackets/clothes for the conditions expected, perhaps all over a standard uniform worn on the ship.

Absolutely agreed!
This would also allow them to sell more different action figures

5 – Unless a reason why ships would not be fully networked is given (like in Battlestar) no more carrying around multiple PADDs, or bring reports on them. This was completely understandable in TOS and early TNG given current tech. However by the time we get to Nelix wheeling a trolley of PADDs to Seven of Nine with her parents journals it’s unforgivable. Even forgetting that she should be able to access them all on any terminal on the ship or on any PADD, why are there so many!? How much did they write?

Yes and no. Neelix' trolley of PADDs was stupid as hell. But OTOH I like working on a laptop, PAD and phone simultanously, so there should absolutely be multiple PADDS on every desk. Just not... trolleys.

6 – More alien looking aliens and other planets and cultures. I do recognise that this is probably more of a budget thing.

YES!
Well, it probably wouldn't be a budget thing if they wouldn't blow their budget on having multiple space battles every other episode! That's purely a matter of focus. And I say: Living and breathing alien worlds are IMO much more important than to fill your Star Wars-quota every week!

7 – SPACEships don’t need to be AIRodynamic.

Yeah. But then again: We know nothing about Warp drives. Maybe the engines like curves? I don't know. To be honest, I don't really care, as long as it looks good.

8 – Far greater percentage of Starfleet crews should not be human.

Depends. I'm not a fan of having these super exotic aliens running all over the ship, which are so different from humans they are basically completely lonely on this ship. On the other hand, too many humanoid aliens (like Bajorans or Vulcans or Bolians) are not that good for convincing me those are real aliens.

I'm a fan of having a mostly human crew with some good aliens in them, but then gladly a lot of different aliens from the same species on board. It's IMO much more realistic than having exactly one member of every other species on board.

9 – Bridges should be designed totally differently. They should not be on the top of the ship and should not all be looking at a high viewscreen. 99% of the time they would all just be staring into black space and have to twist around to talk/work with each other.

But then they don't all look at the camera in a dramatic situation!
I would prefer it if they used the main screen more often to show relevant information (relative position and speed of the starship, data about the region or situation they're in), instead of it always being treated as a fucking window.

10 – No section 31.

YES! Please.

 

[Phil123]

Nice breakdown, while I still probably hold to my points, you have some strong counter arguments for some. I do agree the beam down image is iconic, and no you're right I probably wouldn't want to loose it.

 

[Garrovick]

If I did a reboot, I'd at least be honest about it and call it a 100% total reboot with no connections at all to anything that came before (in-jokes and sly fan-only references notwithstanding). I wouldn't try to explain it away using the tired alternate-timeline or this-really-is-the-prime-universe-even-though-nothing-looks-or-feels-the-same explanations.

 

[flandry84]

/\Agreed.The lengths people go to to explain the slightest things has become an obstacle to the Trek universe.My own personal bugbear is the Klingon forehead thing.What a load of old guff !

 

[Tenacity]

5 – Unless a reason why ships would not be fully networked is given

Big reason is that it is a show, one watched (hopefully) by a audience. A audience that needs to know what's going on. Instead of everyopne sitting quietly at their stations reading individual padds to get up to speed on what's going on, they all get up and leave their stations, often during a crisis, and meet in a conference room to talk.

A real world reason might be information security. Put a piece of infomation in the 'network' and who know who going to read it. So you put it in a disconnected padd and walk it to the person who's authorized to see it.

8 – Far greater percentage of Starfleet crews should not be human.

In a change from years past, I'm really starting to lean toward the idea that Starfleet is a mostly Human organization, with a smattering of non-Humans. I understand about the expense of makeup being a reason, but the show does seem to show mostly Human crews.

Something I would change in my reboot is that when we see a ship like the T'Kumbra (DS9) it would have a distinctive Vulcan design. We saw Vulcan starship designs in ENT, TMP (maybe) and ST'09.

9 – Bridges should be designed totally differently. They should not be on the top of the ship

All it would take would be a small amount of dialog to establish this. While yes robbing the captain's ready room of a lovely window, the main bridge should be with sick bay and the computer core deep inside the ship.

10 – No section 31.

I think section 31 should have disappeared after it's one outing during DS9, Not disappeared as in the organization was destroyed in some fashion, just that it faded into the shadows. No ENT, Into Darkness or DIS.

"Section 31 is actually needed to protect the future"

StarTrek should never be a Polly-anna story with rainbows and unicorns.

Picard might have lived in some kind of protected bubble, but not Kirk, Sisko or Janeway, all of whom seem to have a realistic view of the actual nature of the existence they were living in.

Archer started out overly optimistic, however his experiences before and during the Xindi crisis provided a education. This in no way wreaked the character, it provided the character with growth.

Kirk: "I not going to kill ... today."

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Big reason is that it is a show, one watched (hopefully) by a audience. A audience that needs to know what's going on. Instead of everyopne sitting quietly at their stations reading individual padds to get up to speed on what's going on, they all get up and leave their stations, often during a crisis, and meet in a conference room to talk.

A real world reason might be information security. Put a piece of infomation in the 'network' and who know who going to read it. So you put it in a disconnected padd and walk it to the person who's authorized to see it.In a change from years past, I'm really starting to lean toward the idea that Starfleet is a mostly Human organization, with a smattering of non-Humans. I understand about the expense of makeup being a reason, but the show does seem to show mostly Human crews.

Nah, that doesn't hold up. To start with, 90% of what we see on those disconnected pads isn't sensitive information at all. Duty rosters, standard reports, academic papers and personal papers. And secondly, Starfleet has no concept of information security at all. A complete stranger is allowed to read through the exact schematics of the very ship they're sitting on because it never occurs to sf that they could use that information to try to take over the ship.

 

[Rahul]

"Section 31 is actually needed to protect the future"

Picard might have lived in some kind of protected bubble, but not Kirk, Sisko or Janeway, all of whom seem to have a realistic view of the actual nature of the existence they were living in.

Archer started out overly optimistic, however his experiences before and during the Xindi crisis provided a education. This in no way wreaked the character, it provided the character with growth.

Kirk: "I not going to kill ... today."

Star Trek isn't. It should NEVER be not a positive future though.
And Section 31 is definitely not a positive attribute. It's a clandestine organization undermining said positive future. Not actually protecting it.

If you fell for that, you might as well believe torture actually stops terrorism (there is NO indication for that, in fact all the facts show exactly the opposite). It's a fundamental misunderstanding of how the world works - sadly, one humans are prone to: Easy answers. a problem? Hit it with a hammer! Oh, you made it worse? And the problem wasn't actually the root, and you needed a different tool? Well, stop it, hammer!

It's the same "no tolerance"-bullshit, punishing people after certain strikes no matter the circumstances. You were attacked as a child? Too bad you fought back, it's already the second time you did that! What do you mean you were bullied and specifically targeted? Don't care, it's your second time, up to detention you go!

That line of thinking is NOT going to help anyone, If anything, it's going to erode the fundaments of society on a fasttrack, and it needs to be constantly fought because it consistently crops up with humans (becasue humans are some power-hungry bullshitters if we get the chance).

As such, the existence of an organization of 31 is actually plausible. But never, ever actually really fall for their propaganda!

Show me ONE TIME in history where "ends justify the means" has actually worked and not worsened the whole situation! You won't find any. Because in humanity there is no "ends", no logical "endpoint" - they way go there, the means, is all we have. THAT'S the essence of who we are. "Ends justify the means" is just ideological bullshit to justify being a horrible human being.

 

[Phil123]

This. (Rahul above)

This, after all the details, and ships, and characters are whipped away, is Star Trek.

Nice.

 

[valkyrie013]

The ends don't justify the means, and pretty much the hole of voyager series is a statement to that fact. Janeway could have gotten home sooner on an number of ocasions, if she compromised herself and the crew. But she held herself to a higher level, within the ideals of the federation, be peaceful, help where needed, etc. And we saw stiff like the Equinox of when people go bad.
However, on the flip side of that coin, I don't personally believe in the "no kill" rule like superman or batman. It should be a last resort of course, but, sometimes, I takes killing a person to make things stop.

On the Bridge thing,
I completly agree on the viewscreen, it should show things like a heaads up display, Course, speed, current position, time, etc. Instead of a view of warping stars, maybe show a "tactical" display or like the airlines on the tv, a ship on a map marking where they are. and estimated time of arrival, that or play Spaceballs on the screeen

 

[flandry84]

/\Now I want to watch Spaceballs the movie!

 

[Admiral2]

How in the hell did I miss this thread? I've been a reboot booster since ages before the JJ-boot.

Oh well. so I'll be the Johnny-come-lately.

1. Human Centric: We'll get the controversial one out of the way right off. It would be an Earth ship with a human crew and the stories would be about Humanity making its way into the wider universe. I get all the "interstellar cooperation" bit, but this is a "know your target audience" thing, and until you can prove E.T. is streaming our television, the best characters are the ones people can identify with the most.

2. No Federation: It's the UN in space. I have no love for the UN on Earth. I'd have nothing to do with it.

3. No Prime Directive: It is fundamentally impossible to know what any action you take will do to the cultural development of any race. Doing nothing can be just as harmful to the race as doing something. It's a stupid rule.

4. Starfleet IS a military organization: Debate over, philosophical discussion done, it's the space navy.

5. Enough wth the up-armored Klingons!: I never liked the forehead-ridge Klingons of the TMP and TNG eras, and Klingons in STD just look fifteen kinds of dumb. How would I depict Klingons? I would go down to Gold's Gym and Muscle Beach and find the tallest, biggest, most jacked M-Fers I can, give 'em short Fu Manchus and fangs and tatto the f--- outta their arms, then I'd dress 'em like bikers. Giant, alien space bikers. (Like WWE's Undertaker.) You want the Klingons to look bad-ass? Make them look bad-ass!

6. Warp is instantaneous: No more factors. It's teleportation. You're just there. Save the speed changes for impulse (half, full, etc.).

7. Apply MJOI to the ship design: What is MJOI, you ask? "Matt Jeffries' Original Intent." What is that, you say? It breaks down to the following:

- the nacelles provide power as well as propulsion
- that means no power source in the center of the ship and no engine room
- that means no saucer separation ever, because it's unnecessary, because you can just dump the affected nacelle if you're having a reactor issue
- and a bunch of other things that would never have been inflicted upon us in canon if TPTB had followed MJOI

8. No transporters: We can afford to depict shuttles and shuttle landings now. Let's stick with those.

9. No Time Travel. Ever: The Vulcan Science Institute has determined that time travel is impossible. I agree, so it will be in my reboot.

10. No Barriers: The Great Galactic Barrier is great galactic nonsense. It's gone.

I could actually list lots more, but the thread question only asked for ten.

 

[Phil123]

I would defiantly watch your show, it sounds good fun, but it doesn't really sound like Star Trek.

To me the "UN in space" and the "not primarily a military organisation" are the heart of Trek, I can do without just about everything except those two!

But hey, each to their own, that's the beauty of Trek, IDIC.

 

[Admiral2]

I would defiantly watch your show, it sounds good fun, but it doesn't really sound like Star Trek.

To me the "UN in space" and the "not primarily a military organisation" are the heart of Trek, I can do without just about everything except those two!

But hey, each to their own, that's the beauty of Trek, IDIC.

I understand. Lots of people agree with you about those being the hearts of Trek, including me. My position is that I'm not always sure that they should be.