Contest: VOTE Changing the make-up of the original 7 cast in a reboot/re-imagination of TOS?

[Bry_Sinclair]

My take on a revamped cast for TOS:
Commanding Officer: Captain James T. Kirk, Human male (assigned along with his husband, Spock)
First Officer: Commander Uhura, Human female (cybernetically enhanced)
Chief Science Officer: Lt. Commander Spock, Human/Vulcan male (assigned along with his husband, James Kirk)
Chief Engineering Officer: Lt. Commander Montgomery Scott, Human male
Chief Medical Officer: Lt. Commander Leona McCoy, Human female
Chief Helm Officer: Lieutenant Hikaru Sulu, Human male
Chief Tactical Officer: Lieutenant Willard Decker, Human male
Chief Communications Officer: Lieutenant Shiboline M’Ress, Caitian female
Ship’s Psychiatrist: Lieutenant Christian Chapel, Human male
Chief Navigation Officer: Ensign Ilia, Deltan female
Chief of Security: Senior Chief P’Avel ch’Ehkov, Andorian chan

 

[Jayson1]

Voyager.

Holy Run-On!

"Voyager" is different. As are all the Trek's that aren't "TOS." While I think one can make a argument that the concept of a spaceship exploring space is played out unless you make some drastic changes to the concept it's still not the same as returning to "TOS" over and over. You can do plenty of new stuff within the universe because I do think the Trek universe has more potential for different kinds of stories than say "Terminator" or "Ghostbusters." The idea of going back to "TOS" time and time again seems like something that simply starts to feel old nobody what kind of new spin you take on the show.

What a gender or race switched KIrk has that you don't have with say a Sisko and Janeway or Burnham is the direct comparisons to the previous versions of KIrk including Shatner who will always be the standard by which all KIrk's are measured. SIsko and Janeway and Burnham have the luxuary of being judged on their own merrits.

One thing not talked about though is the idea of taking characters who were seen as lesser characters and elevating them now that you can explore them in more depth than you can because of past sexism or racism. The modern Uhura is a huge upgrade over how the character was treated on "TOS." If wanted someone could explore a Nurse Chappel or Yeoman Rand or Dr M'Benga in away they never were on "TOS." To me that is when you can make good use of modern society, taking something that has already been established and expanding on it in the present day and not only giving them more depth but maybe even becoming the standard for said character. I would love for example to see a new Trek show that has Uhura from the Kelvin Universe as captain of her own ship.

Jason

 

[Scout101]

Original crew was diverse enough, don't see the point in gender/race bending just to be edgy and different. Too much about window dressing, and not enough about WHY, or how that will affect the story you are trying to tell. If Kirk was Asian, other than struggling to pitch the show in the 1960s, what about the story would have to change? Nothing. There would have been a few offensive stereotypes worked in, most likely, but otherwise no different.

I'd be annoyed with another reboot right away, but recasting happens. And if there's a casting or story you MUST tell, and want to change things to support it, fine. Starbuck in BSG is a fine example, but mixing the whole cast around just to say you picked different characteristics defeats the point for me, and is more stunt casting than solid storytelling. After an episode or two, so what?

TOS was pretty diverse, especially for its time. Making the engineer Welshie instead of Scotty is funny for Futurama, but doesn't change much for real storytelling. if we're that far down towards the bottom of the barrel, don't bother rebooting. If you want a companion series that has NEW characters, and want a different mix, go nuts.

 

[Jayson1]

Original crew was diverse enough, don't see the point in gender/race bending just to be edgy and different. Too much about window dressing, and not enough about WHY, or how that will affect the story you are trying to tell. If Kirk was Asian, other than struggling to pitch the show in the 1960s, what about the story would have to change? Nothing. There would have been a few offensive stereotypes worked in, most likely, but otherwise no different.

I'd be annoyed with another reboot right away, but recasting happens. And if there's a casting or story you MUST tell, and want to change things to support it, fine. Starbuck in BSG is a fine example, but mixing the whole cast around just to say you picked different characteristics defeats the point for me, and is more stunt casting than solid storytelling. After an episode or two, so what?

TOS was pretty diverse, especially for its time. Making the engineer Welshie instead of Scotty is funny for Futurama, but doesn't change much for real storytelling. if we're that far down towards the bottom of the barrel, don't bother rebooting. If you want a companion series that has NEW characters, and want a different mix, go nuts.

Starbuck wasn't the only character to be gender or racially changed. So was Adama and Boomer. What that show had going for it though is it was a full remake. The new show had very little in common with the old show to a point where it felt like a completely new kind of show. DIdn't hurt the old shows wasn't all that great.

I am thinking that's time to replace the reboots with remakes especially in those situations were you want to gender or racial swtich a character. That is how you make it work best IMO in the long run. If you did those switches with the "TOS" crew but basically keep the same concept much like it has always been then I got to wonder what the point is? To fully seperate yourself from what came before i think it's important to make more changes as opposed to keeping it the same or the switches feel almost pointless. They add diversity which is a good thing but why tie diversity to a old product, a product that in many situations is played out.

If I was making a new "TOS" my version would have diversity but it be a vastly different kind of show. For example maybe the Enterprise crew would be modern day people or people in the near future to a point where the world is still like ours. The United Nations using tech recovered from a alien spaceship to build the first interstellar starship and it's the Enterprise. KIrk ad Uhura are part of NASA,Bones is Australian country doctor,Chekov and Sulu are a married couple who served in the military flying advanced military craft. Scotty would be a kind of a computer nerd more than the auto mechanic. He would have led the way in building this new Enterprise. Spock would be a Vulcan who was the only survior of the craft.

Not only that but these people would live on earth and basically interface with android bodies on the ship which is I know a little like "Avatar." Based on the idea that the future of space travel in unmanned travel. This would kind of combine that idea but still having a human element aboard as well. The ship would explore space and whenever sensors picks up something interesting the crew hooks into the computer so they can explore it. Otherwise the spend time on earth living their daily lives.

Jason

 

[Scout101]

You were ok until the last paragraph, and then it veered into a ditch.

But yes, remake things for real, don't just shuffle the deck chairs. If you wanted to see TNG with a female captain, watch VOY, don't watch a rebooted TNG with a female Picard. Sick of things being considered edgy because they gender swapped the roles. End of the day, story still has to stand on its own, novelty factor only gets you so far. If it's well written, it won't matter if the Captain is male, female, black, Asian, whatever. if it's not well written, people will tune out no matter HOW crazy diverse you choose to make the group. Still gotta tell a story, and 'look, everyone is Trans in this reboot' is a gimmick, not a story. Inclusiveness is all well and good, but it feels like reading any of the Future of Trek pitches in here. Lots of ideas about crew makeup, ship size, number of weapon ports, not as much thought into what the crew is going to do, what their struggle is, and why anyone would watch other than to see the way you arranged the deck chairs.

 

[Kor]

Futurists conjecture that deep space exploration will not be done by ships with living personnel aboard, but via mind-uploading to automated ships equipped with powerful computers. But that would radically change the format of Star Trek as we know it.

Kor

 

[Scout101]

difficult to Boldly Go if you stay home. While it's possible/likely for US, not a show I'd be thrilled to watch. Also, reason that's the projected course of exploration is due to the lack of FTL. Since Trek HAS FTL, that problem isn't an issue.

 

[Jayson1]

Futurists conjecture that deep space exploration will not be done by ships with living personnel aboard, but via mind-uploading to automated ships equipped with powerful computers. But that would radically change the format of Star Trek as we know it.

Kor

I know but that is part of the fun. Bringing some real change. Plus the bonus is we are talking one show. You can always follow that up with yet another view of the future were humans are back out into space again.

Jason

 

[Greg Cox]

When the fans pointed out actual problems with Discovery, CBS accused the fans of being anti-diverse, racist, misogynist and homophobic.
.

To be fair, some fans are anti-diverse, racist, misogynist, and homophobic.

Not all of them, of course, and not all criticism comes from that place. You can, yes, have legitimate gripes with a show without falling into any of the above categories. But, Lord, let's not pretend that the reactionaries aren't out there or that you have to look hard to find them these days.

See also STAR WARS, DOCTOR WHO, comics, etc.

 

[Jayson1]

To be fair, some fans are anti-diverse, racist, misogynist, and homophobic.

Not all of them, of course, and not all criticism comes from that place. You can, yes, have legitimate gripes with a show with falling into any of the above categories. But, Lord, let's not pretend that the reactionaries aren't out there or that you have to look hard to find them these days.

See also STAR WARS, DOCTOR WHO, comics, etc.

I think everyone knows that these types of people are out their but the question is what should you first assume when someone has issues with something?. Do you assume it's coming from a racist or sexist place but you might be wrong or vice versa. I always prefer to give people the benefit of doubt they are coming from a more honest place even if I might be wrong. It's better to be wrong on not knowing someone is a asshole than it is to insult someone who isn't one IMO. I don't see it in terms of looking hard but maybe finding the ability to tell the difference which is something that can be hard to do.


Jason

 

[F. King Daniel]

To be fair, some fans are anti-diverse, racist, misogynist, and homophobic.

It wasn't Trek related, but I read an article this morning about LGBT+ incusion in TV and the top comment was a wall of bible quotes. And under that a bunch of stuff that reminded me that outside of our enlightened bubble, we have a very long way to go.

 

[Jayson1]

It wasn't Trek related, but I read an article this morning about LGBT+ incusion in TV and the top comment was a wall of bible quotes. And under that a bunch of stuff that reminded me that outside of our enlightened bubble, we have a very long way to go.

You think that is crazy. Every once in awhile I see this Youtube channel that thinks everyone is about Devil Worship it seems in Hollywood. It was saying Jack BLack was a satanist because he made some kind of joke about selling his soul or something on "The View" I think it was.

Jason

 

[Greg Cox]

I think everyone knows that these types of people are out their but the question is what should you first assume when someone has issues with something?. Do you assume it's coming from a racist or sexist place but you might be wrong or vice versa. I always prefer to give people the benefit of doubt they are coming from a more honest place even if I might be wrong. It's better to be wrong on not knowing someone is a asshole than it is to insult someone who isn't one IMO. I don't see it in terms of looking hard but maybe finding the ability to tell the difference which is something that can be hard to do.

There can be indicators. If within two paragraphs, they're muttering darkly about liberal agendas, political correctness, and SJWs, are gravely concerned that the "normal" straight white male characters aren't getting a fair break, and that somehow this is personally insulting to them . . .. well, you can probably assume that they're not just bothered by "canon violations" or pacing issues.

Don't get me started about the guy who was literally counting the number of straight white males in a recent DOCTOR WHO ep in order to prove that the show was off-course.

Which usually translates to: "No fair! They're not making this show just for people like me anymore."

 

[fireproof78]

You think that is crazy. Every once in awhile I see this Youtube channel that thinks everyone is about Devil Worship it seems in Hollywood. It was saying Jack BLack was a satanist because he made some kind of joke about selling his soul or something on "The View" I think it was.

Jason

I recall a "Christian" website accusing Christian performing artist Michael W. Smith being a Satanist because of how is album covers were presented.

Conspiracy theories abound everywhere.

 

[Jedi Marso]

New characters
New ship
New time period
New adventures

I'm convinced now that this is the way to go forward. As much as I love the TOS era, nobody is going to go back and reboot that to anyone's satisfaction.

 

[Lord Garth]

The Abrams Films did pretty well, so I think a different version of TOS can be accepted. I have no opinion, one way or the other, about what they should do about future films.

I expect to get a huge kick out of whatever Quentin Tarantino puts out in his Star Trek film. It'll either be great because it's so good, or it'll be great because it's so bad. Either way, it's win-win for me.

Beyond that, whatever they do with the movies, they'll do. I have CBS All Access Star Trek.

 

[Jayson1]

New characters
New ship
New time period
New adventures

I'm convinced now that this is the way to go forward. As much as I love the TOS era, nobody is going to go back and reboot that to anyone's satisfaction.

Why does their always have to be a ship? You can do a multiple locations show. In fact my nerd senses is thinking this is what the Picard show is going to be about. Well not about so much but how how the format of what it will be about is, told.

Jason

 

[dswynne1]

It wasn't Trek related, but I read an article this morning about LGBT+ incusion in TV and the top comment was a wall of bible quotes. And under that a bunch of stuff that reminded me that outside of our enlightened bubble, we have a very long way to go.

Sounds more like trolling. And personally, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a "false flag" involved as well. After all, when one is dedicated in being a crusader for any cause, that person is more than willing to chase "ghosts", even when none exists, in order to justify one's existence.

 

[Rahul]

This is my first poll, so please, be gentle.

With the changing demographics of the television audience, and with CBS/Paramount's need to stay "current", how would the general STAR TREK audience feel if the original series [TOS] was rebooted/re-imagined to be more reflective of today's audience? Could we have an African-American version of James Kirk? Could Spock's mother have been Asian instead? How about a Welsh engineer instead of a Scottish one? How about a female Sulu, or a male Uhura? Or, how about an entirely different crew make-up being the pioneers of the historic five-year mission, instead of the characters we know and love (i.e. an Andorian "first officer" instead of a Vulcan one)? Or is the original seven set in stone for some people?

Anyway, I would really like to read your comments on this. Thanks in advance. Peace.

For a straight up, nuBSG-like total reboot? Of course!
But then again, I DON'T want the Trek universe to completely reboot - and if you want a more representative crew, you could just create a new one! Which, incidentally, is what happened!

For another sem-reboot / lost tales / phase II 2.0 - version of TOS? No thanks. The characters should stay esentially the same. Of course you can add characters, and redistribute the weight given, like ST09, which put a lot more focus on Uhura.

But to be super, duper honest: For me, Kirk is Shatner, Nimoy is Spock, and every other incarnations are only shadows or copies - even the ones I haven't even seen yet (like DISCO's Spock). Just let them be! And give us new characters.

 

[Jedi Marso]

Why does their always have to be a ship? You can do a multiple locations show. In fact my nerd senses is thinking this is what the Picard show is going to be about. Well not about so much but how how the format of what it will be about is, told.

Jason

DS9 proved that there doesn't have to be a ship- or that there does, given the immediate introduction of the Runabout and then, later, the Defiant.

However, I guess my point is that if you are going to have a ship in the show, have a new one, not a reboot- same as the other stuff in my list.