Disappointed that Abrams' Star Trek wasn't a "total" reboot?

[finnobrit]

Looking at the opinions about the new Star Trek film, it seems generally divided into two camps:

-People who like the new film and are glad to see it try to restart the franchise

-People who don't like the new film because it breaks with the existing continuity

The thing is, I don't fit into either of those categories, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm the only one.

For a very long time I thought the series needed a reboot, as the massive amount of continuity was starting to make new episodes very complicated for outsiders. I was therefore very very excited to see this was going to happen with the new Abrams film.

But when I saw the film it was a disappointment.

Part of the problem for me was that this wasn't really a reboot. The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one (even using one of the original actors playing his character from the original timeline), so in a way this is still an extension of the existing Trek universe.

(I was also very disappointed by the hyperactive direction which messed up the pacing, and made it difficult to follow the characters' emotions. But that's probably a topic for another thread.)

Am I the only one who wanted a "real" reboot, with no link at all to the past Trek episodes?

Something like Burton's Batman or Moore's Galactica would have suited me just fine: not a replacement in any sense, but a genuine alternative version.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Close enough for government work.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Close enough for government work.

Yep. This is a "stealth reboot" that serves all the necessary purposes.

 

[Franklin]

Even though I'm not a canonista, I will admit that a total reboot would've miffed me (OK not boycott miffed, but still miffed a bit). Like "teh canon" or not, no matter how you slice it, the history created in the Trek world (even with all its contradictions) became too important a part of the franchise to just summarily dismiss it as if it never happened

In that light, I thought what they did was the closest anyone could've come to allowing Trek fans to have their cake (respecting the old canon) and eat it, too (giving Star Trek a fresh new start). Very clever, really.

 

[M'Sharak]

[...]

For a very long time I thought the series needed a reboot, as the massive amount of continuity was starting to make new episodes very complicated for outsiders. I was therefore very very excited to see this was going to happen with the new Abrams film.

But when I saw the film it was a disappointment.

Part of the problem for me was that this wasn't really a reboot. The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one (even using one of the original actors playing his character from the original timeline), so in a way this is still an extension of the existing Trek universe.

[...]

Am I the only one who wanted a "real" reboot, with no link at all to the past Trek episodes?

No, you're not. Quite a number of people have expressed similar sentiments here, starting well before the movie was released. Some felt that tying the story to elements of the established continuity was playing it too safe.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one

Not the film I saw.

 

[knine]

The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one

Not the film I saw.

Yes, this comment left me scratching my head as well.

 

[M'Sharak]

The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one

Not the film I saw.

Yes, this comment left me scratching my head as well.

(I think that's called "hyperbole".)

 

[darkshadow0001]

Looking at the opinions about the new Star Trek film, it seems generally divided into two camps:

-People who like the new film and are glad to see it try to restart the franchise

-People who don't like the new film because it breaks with the existing continuity

The thing is, I don't fit into either of those categories, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm the only one.

For a very long time I thought the series needed a reboot, as the massive amount of continuity was starting to make new episodes very complicated for outsiders. I was therefore very very excited to see this was going to happen with the new Abrams film.

But when I saw the film it was a disappointment.

Part of the problem for me was that this wasn't really a reboot. The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one (even using one of the original actors playing his character from the original timeline), so in a way this is still an extension of the existing Trek universe.

(I was also very disappointed by the hyperactive direction which messed up the pacing, and made it difficult to follow the characters' emotions. But that's probably a topic for another thread.)

Am I the only one who wanted a "real" reboot, with no link at all to the past Trek episodes?

Something like Burton's Batman or Moore's Galactica would have suited me just fine: not a replacement in any sense, but a genuine alternative version.

I'm actually glad it wasn't a "reboot." The story line made the movie believable, it told how these characters came to be about and seperate from TOS. In a sense it was a "reboot", but they did it in a way where it was still Star Trek... remarkable. And this gives a chance to go back to the original timeline if Abram's Trek universe doesn't work out

 

[Tarek71]

I would have preferred a complete reboot myself. But then again I don't think this Trek is going to last. JJ Abrams is not the last person who will take a whack at the Trekverse. I think there will be other incarnations in the future, including complete reboots. I just don't picture Abrams spending 20 years of his life on Star Trek. I think he will move on eventually and others will have their shot at it on the big and small screen.

Like Arthurian Saga, I think Trek will live on for a long time and will be retold and re-imagined many times in the years to come. If you don't like this one, just hang on, and wait for the next incarnation. I suspect we will not have to wait decades for it.

 

[The Wormhole]

Honestly, I find that avoiding the whole reboot by establishing the movie as an alternate timeline serves no purpose other than throwing a bone to the original fans, hoping this gesture will be enough for them to enjoy the movie.

They should have just rolled the hard six and made it an honest reboot. That would have proven Abrams and Cohorts have balls.

 

[Therin of Andor]

serves no purpose other than throwing a bone...

They should have just rolled the hard six and made it an honest reboot. That would have proven Abrams and Cohorts have balls.

No, you know that there would have been fans saying, "JJ, why didn't you just throw us a bone?"

 

[Temis the Vorta]

They rebooted it just enough to do what they needed to do: bring back the old characters but leave the story wide open for new adventures. I see the merit of that approach but don't want rebooting for rebooting's sake.

 

[finnobrit]

The entire plot was devoted to explaining how the new timeline linked to the old one

Not the film I saw.

Yes, this comment left me scratching my head as well.

The whole plot revolved around a villain who had come for revenge against a character from the original timeline, played by the same actor from the original series. This original timeline character then gets Kirk back on the ship, and even introduces him to Scotty.

They even had a scene discussing how the villain's actions was changing their futures, to make it extra-clear to people that this timeline was linked to the original one.

I couldn't really see any point to this, other than to please the existing fans, but if you're worried about existing fans why do a reboot at all?

This is what got to me: either stick to the original timeline, or do something totally separate. In many ways it reminded me of Star Trek Generations for very similar reasons, it felt too contrived.

Imagine if Tim Burton's Batman had tried to explain why they no longer pranced around in 1960s garish costumes...

But this is all just my opinion, I only started this thread to see if anyone else shared this opinion.

 

[finnobrit]

They rebooted it just enough to do what they needed to do: bring back the old characters but leave the story wide open for new adventures.

Why did they even have to mention the original timeline to do that though?

Why not just do something like Batman Begins? That was certainly what I was expecting when I went to see the film.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Why did they even have to mention the original timeline to do that though?

Because some of us were thrilled they did.

Had the film been an almighty financial and critical flop, maybe I would be looking for reasons to be angry.

 

[finnobrit]

Why did they even have to mention the original timeline to do that though?

Because some of us were thrilled they did.

This is interesting, because as a fan it actually annoyed me deeply to see the original timeline being changed.

To me, it felt like they weren't just presenting an alternative version of Trek, it felt like they were actually wiping away the original version too.

As a fan I would actually have been a lot happier with seeing something that was clearly a totally separate remake. Again though, this is just my opinion, totally respect others.

And if they'd ever wanted to do crossover stuff with characters from TNG or whatever, they could have either reimagined those too, or they could have done a "Mirror Mirror" style parallel universe story.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

They devoted a couple of minutes of the film to providing a fig leaf for the reboot by introducing Spock Prime. This is hardly "spending the whole movie" rationalizing it.

As a fan I was glad to see old Spocko, and pleased with the way they handled it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Its not like they pulled a "Crisis On Infinite Earths" and spent a whole year destroying the previous continuity.

 

[JarodRussell]

A total reboot would have been better. They could have been more creative, and the characters could have been representative of our time, not the past. Chekov, Uhura, those are characters for the 60s. I would have accepted all of the changes I have been bitching about in a BSG-style reboot without any links to the original.