Could Star Trek be Re-rebooted?

[Dukhat]

They massively over-estimated fans' abilities to cope with an overall update. So did I, tbh.

I don't quite see it like that. Rather, I think that TPTB simply underestimated the lasting influence of TOS in their effort to try and change Star Trek into their vision of it. Which, unless you're Nicholas Meyer, tends to ultimately fail. I also think that TPTB (past and present) can't get out of the mindset that every Trek show, no matter what time period it takes place in, must have tons of elements from TNG.

 

[Danja]

Anyway, could the Romulan supernova be "undone"? Sure, theoretically, anything could be done. But why would it? Why would Paramount feel the need to go and undo a critical plot point from a movie that made them money sixteen years ago? Why after continuing to use the destruction of Romulus as a key plot point in Picard and Disco would they want to undo all that? "Because they can" or "because some fans were upset by this" are not legitimate reasons for going forward with this.

They could always split it off Kelvin-style into another timeline.

 

[The Wormhole]

Honestly, Disco's first season just wasn't that good. People complained about the different look of everything as an extension of their general dissatisfaction with the show's writing. The response on the production side to the criticisms the show got was to go all in on the nostalgia and memberberries, and given Pike and the updated TOS look for the Enterprise were among the more popular elements of Disco's second season, that dictated the direction things took for SNW. If Disco's first season had better writing, I think fans would have been more accepting of the changes they made to the aesthetics. Granted, that couldn't have happened, given all the behind the scenes drama that show was plagued with in its first season.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

They massively over-estimated fans' abilities to cope with an overall update. So did I, tbh.

We shouldn't have to 'cope' with Star Trek.

 

[fireproof78]

They massively over-estimated fans' abilities to cope with an overall update. So did I, tbh.

Indeed and it's a bit frustrating.

 

[Shawnster]

Agreed, yes.



ETA: alright, tongue in cheek moment aside, there is a huge leap of logic to calling people "babies" for missing a series and declaring it "dead" as though no one can ever enjoy it again.

Absurdist claim is absurd.

My sarcasm must have gotten lost in translation.

For all intents and purposes, those old continuities are dead. Sure, someone revived Batman 66 in comic form, but ask someone that doesn't read comics and they will say that continuity is dead.

 

[fireproof78]

My sarcasm must have gotten lost in translation.

For all intents and purposes, those old continuities are dead. Sure, someone revived Batman 66 in comic form, but ask someone that doesn't read comics and they will say that continuity is dead.

Ok... and? I don't think interest is dead not does it make it something that can't be enjoyed.

If that's dead I hope to be so successful after my death.

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

For all intents and purposes, those old continuities are dead. Sure, someone revived Batman 66 in comic form, but ask someone that doesn't read comics and they will say that continuity is dead.

Six-issue reprintable story arcs are very much alive.

 

[BillJ]

We shouldn't have to 'cope' with Star Trek.

Which is why your TV has a power button and up/down channel selector...

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

Which is why your TV has a power button and up/down channel selector...

I've set mine for ''No Majel'' unless THE MENAGERIE's running.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Which is why your TV has a power button and up/down channel selector...

When I think of Star Trek I've had to cope with, I think of episodes like And The Children Shall Leave, The Outrageous Okona, Cost of Living, Threshold, These Are the Voyages. My ability to cope with Star Trek has been tested quite a lot over the years, and I've stuck with the shows because I know there's always something better coming.

But bad ideas we have to put up with shouldn't be built into a series by design. They should be doing things we don't have to cope with. Things that we would like to see on the TV! Then we don't have to use all those other buttons.

 

[BillJ]

But bad ideas we have to put up with shouldn't be built into a series by design.

As much as I'm not a fan of CBS Trek, I don't think they sit around a table, laughing at all the things they've picked to piss fans off. They likely seemed like good ideas, at the time.

Entertainment is not an exact science. If it was, nothing would ever fail.

 

[Nerys Myk]

They always forget Star Trek fans are a prickly, conservative, reactionary bunch.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

As much as I'm not a fan of CBS Trek, I don't think they sit around a table, laughing at all the things they've picked to piss fans off. They likely seemed like good ideas, at the time.

Entertainment is not an exact science. If it was, nothing would ever fail.

Yeah, I'm not really arguing that the folks making Discovery wanted fans to 'put up' with their choices. But that's how it was phrased in the line I was responding to:

"They massively over-estimated fans' abilities to cope with an overall update. So did I, tbh."

Like it was something negative we just had to learn to deal with.

 

[fireproof78]

As much as I'm not a fan of CBS Trek, I don't think they sit around a table, laughing at all the things they've picked to piss fans off. They likely seemed like good ideas, at the time.

Entertainment is not an exact science. If it was, nothing would ever fail.

Indeed. Despite what the Internet would have us believe there is no exact science to making successful entertainment. They're not evil masterminds with a cruel plot to overthrow all that is good in the Star Trek world.

Instead, they look at what's popular and try to grab on to that to make an entertaining product.

And it's not like fandom gives them an exact target. Deep Space Nine is now considered the most popular series in Trek so they try to include war plots. What's the most popular villain? The Borg so they show up again and again.

Then you add in the fact that production crews hire creative people who want to be able to create something unique and fun so they add their own ideas to the universe. Except, now, they're choices are so scrutinized that they can't ever be successful because it's too much of a change.

So, with all those competing ideas now go make an entertaining product to satisfy casual audiences as well as fans to ensure you make money.

"I just wanted to say good luck; we're all counting on you."

 

[BillJ]

Yeah, I'm not really arguing that the folks making Discovery wanted fans to 'put up' with their choices. But that's how it was phrased in the line I was responding to:

"They massively over-estimated fans' abilities to cope with an overall update. So did I, tbh."

Like it was something negative we just had to learn to deal with.

I've found the Space Battleship Yamato-remake has actually scratched my Trek itch in a major way. Took the bones of the original and created a stellar update.

 

[fireproof78]

They always forget Star Trek fans are a prickly, conservative, reactionary bunch.

When, when you're dealing with historical documents of Star Trek's caliber you must show respect.

 

[BillJ]

They always forget Star Trek fans are a prickly, conservative, reactionary bunch.

Any time any creator steps into the franchise ring, they are going to piss someone off. As inevitable as death and taxes.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

When, when you're dealing with historical documents of Star Trek's caliber you must show respect.

I mean, this, except without the sarcasm. Because I like Star Trek and I think it's pretty good.

They always forget Star Trek fans are a prickly, conservative, reactionary bunch.

Famously the opposite of what Star Trek is, but okay.

Sorry, should I be saying "Star Trek should be respected and good" in the controversial opinions thread instead? Is this something we're all just going to have to learn to disagree on?

Edit: genuinely sorry, I'm getting grumpy, I will back off.

 

[fireproof78]

mean, this, except without the sarcasm. Because I like Star Trek and I think it's pretty good.

I like Star Trek too and think it's pretty good, mostly but I don't think it requires respect like a historical replica piece.

I expect variety in my Star Trek. It's what I grew up with was random changes that went unexplained. Uniforms changed, ships changed, make up changed. It was all a fun and interesting ride to explore and know the details while knowing the next film could go somewhere else.

Same with Trek comics or books. The styles could vary wildly. It was a wooly at times trying to make sense of it all, and the Klingon design was awful.

I just don't have the same desire for respect the way I see it thrown around in other opinions. Respect in terms of "don't change things" has not been a lot of my Trek experience. Maybe that's colored my opinion but I'm not a huge fan of never changing and calling that respectful.

That's me though. Personally, I'd have had Captain Pike the whole time not Kirk.