Well, yeah. If you read something into my post that I actually didn't say, then I guess I totally said it.
I said, justifiably, that old Trek wasn't working anymore. Enterprise and Nemesis showed that. Paramount/CBS lost their confidence in the product as it was.
What was needed, for the franchise to continue, is a fresh approach. What they chose was a reboot. I never said, thought or implied that it was the only choice, though I will admit that it's the one I would've taken myself, had I been in their place, and I had been saying it for a while before ST09 was announced.
Perhaps then you should endeavour to say exactly what you mean to begin with - on the Internet, people misunderstand other people quite easily. Or, alternatively, not get apparently offended when people read into a short sentence to find the exact meaning. Either works.
You said one sentence. That sentence was in reply to this:
It didn't need rebooting, it needed fresh ideas and a fresh perspective, and a break.
To which you said
Which is exactly what a reboot is. The old series was clearly no longer working.
Implying that the reboot was the only logical/desired course of action by saying that the old series wasn't working.
If you honestly can't see how that reads like that to me, that's perfectly fine. But please don't get snarky because others see things in your words you don't.
Doctor Who's revival is nothing short of amazing, and it's a fantastic series. And yes, it shows that you can just pick up where you were and go on. However, most of the new show doesn't hinge on knowledge of the old show, so the impact of keeping the previous history of Who was minimal.
Also, as stated before, Trek's reboot isn't actually a full reboot, as it's an in-universe reboot that's dependant upon everything else happening before, and the new movies are full of references to old Trek as well.
To the bold: that, right there,
was my point. Did you need to know all that much about TOS when TNG came along? Nope, it seemed fairly self evident what the hell was going on. My entire point, before this little irrelevant side-step into talking continuity in Doctor Who, was that Star Trek didn't necessarily need a reboot to be made successful again, and frankly this entire conversation has made me wish I hadn't bothered posting.
And Trek's reboot might as well be a "full" reboot. Visually speaking it is, completely: technology, from the get go, looks more advanced than the Enterprise E, there's an entirely different aesthetic to the entire universe, weaponry's changed from beams to bolts...
Story wise, apart from the clunky origin story for the universe, it's also different: the characters have different relationships to one another, different attitudes, different skills. Basic information changes from one universe to another, where suddenly everyone forgets that they aren't meant to know what Romulans look like. Spock Prime being there doesn't stop it from being different.
I can't see how anyone can argue it's not a full reboot. Because it really is, down to it's very fibre. It's just a different beast. That isn't even a bad thing, FFS, as it's clearly been wildly successful. Good for it. Now if you'll excuse me, I made my point, and I have less than no interest in continuing this conversation further.
