Also, the show is called Discovery, not Trojan Horse.
Re-Boot the Re-Boots?
- Thread starter HaventGotALife
- Start date
Yay! False advertising!
I think another reboot would either reboot TOS again or it would be a Star Vehicle like the Mission: Impossible movies are for Tom Cruise. Quentin Tarantino is the wild card. Who knows what he'll come up with. But his film will expand the possibilities beyond what they are right now.
If they go the TOS route, they'll probably take more liberties than they did last time: mix and match crews, storylines, change genders, races, things like that. The Abrams Films stuck to the exact same make-up as TOS. They treated the reboot with kid gloves. This time, I don't see them doing that.
If they go the TOS route, they'll probably take more liberties than they did last time: mix and match crews, storylines, change genders, races, things like that. The Abrams Films stuck to the exact same make-up as TOS. They treated the reboot with kid gloves. This time, I don't see them doing that.
after hes done on MI7/8 maybe Cruise will jump over to Trek like Nimoy did with M:I and he'll see out his leading man days in Star Trek: Relaunched
Last edited:
i think paramount is in a similar position sony was in after the failure of the amazing spider-man series. they didn't want to reboot yet again but they had to keep making spidey films or lose the license. so they cut a deal with marvel studios and released two hugely successful MCU-connected films that don't reek of desperation to keep the franchise and license alive, but still accomplished those goals.
paramount's star trek is at a similar crossroads and there's a similar lifeline in the form of CBS's burgeoning star trek universe. i'm thinking paramount either tries to take one more bite of the kelvin timeline apple and maybe eek out a box office success, or they hook up with CBS (which may happen anyway if viacom and CBS re-merge) and make films tied to the discovery-verse. since there's no real way to resurrect the pre-kelvin film series (plural), those are the only immediate futures i can really see happening. unless they let the franchise lay dormant again (an option sony didn't have because of the rights deal with marvel) and reboot later on down the road.
paramount's star trek is at a similar crossroads and there's a similar lifeline in the form of CBS's burgeoning star trek universe. i'm thinking paramount either tries to take one more bite of the kelvin timeline apple and maybe eek out a box office success, or they hook up with CBS (which may happen anyway if viacom and CBS re-merge) and make films tied to the discovery-verse. since there's no real way to resurrect the pre-kelvin film series (plural), those are the only immediate futures i can really see happening. unless they let the franchise lay dormant again (an option sony didn't have because of the rights deal with marvel) and reboot later on down the road.
Last edited:
Paramount has the benefit of not having a fixed timeframe to make a new Star Trek movie (or lose the license). So essentially, they are screwed in the short run, because they ran out of options (they ust did a TOS reboot, and Picard and Seven are back on television already).
But in the long run, they have a lot of options. As already pointed out, rebooting the reboot is one (this time, they can claim "prime universe", and make the story fit with TOS), they can jump on the bandwagon of CBS, and put already existing Trek characters on screen. Or do something completely wild. In fact, the more time passes, the more options they gain, to do whatever they (or a director they hire) want to do, unbound by what had been done before.
What if you hate the next reboot even more?
What if you hate the next reboot even more?
That's a risk I'll have to take.
M
marlboro
Guest
Whatever you do Hollywood - dont do anything new. Or worse - something new and good.
We've had a twenty year flood of remakes, prequels, sequels, and comic book movies - enough already.
We've had a twenty year flood of remakes, prequels, sequels, and comic book movies - enough already.
So just the 20 years before? And the 20 years before that?
The history of film as entertainment — from the very beginning, when movie-making was an East-coast thing and Hollywood was still nothing but citrus groves — is filled with remakes, prequels, sequels, and movies based on comic books (and pulps, penny dreadfuls, dime novels, & c.)
When audiences stop buying it.
More like 120 years (ok, only about 80 for comics).