Do you think Star Trek needed a reboot?

[F. King Daniel]

Did Star Trek need a reboot? This is the same question I posed many months ago. The answer? Truthfully, no. I also don't believe that anyone can justly argue against the answer of no. Here's why...I'm sure that there are writers out there that could come up with many, many new and exciting stories set in the prime timeline. I'm sure there are also producers and directors that could have taken Trek into new and exciting eras, all the while staying in the prime timeline, be it before Star Trek Enterprise, after Star Trek Nemesis and everything else in between. With all that said, the reboot did work in resurrecting a stale franchise. It gives Trek the ability to do new and different things that they might not have been able to do in the prime timeline. I'm not against a reboot at all, but I know, and I think everyone else could admit that given the right circumstances, writers, ideas, etc...there could have been many, many great stories and such told in the prime timeline that would have pumped new and exciting life into the Trek franchise. I also don't buy the argument that sticking to continuity would be a bad thing in making Trek exciting again. Let's be honest, the current Trek movies are sticking to certain continuities even now and that's not at all a bad thing. I think that if they had made more Trek in the prime timeline, the best idea would have been to move forward past the TNG era. Even in a timeline past the TNG era, certain continuities didn't necessarily have to be mentioned or written about. For example....let's say a version of Trek set 80 years after the TNG era was made and the story was about future Klingons who have denounced their warrior ways and embraced something like...let's say kindness and helping others. With that said, do we really need to mention anything about how many centuries ago, Klingons at one point had no ridges due to an attempt at genetic engineering? I just believe that given all the correct circumstances, Star Trek has a lot of life left in it, without having a reboot, but as I've said before, I'm not against it, and the reboot has worked and I enjoy the re-imagined Trek just as much.

But again, Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock are pop culture icons and as much as I love it, the truth is the generic Star Trek universe setting was a proven failure both on television and in movies. With Enterprise they revamped the show twice. They went darker and edgier with the third season's Xindi war, then got new writers and a new showrunner to take the fourth season in another new (direct-prequel-tastic) direction. Neither idea worked. Nemesis was a major flop, despite having the biggest budget and marketing push (at the time) since The Motion Picture and starring the cast that were at the helm during Trek's most financially successful period.

J.M. Straczynski and Bryce Zabel put it best, I think, in their 2004 pitch for a rebooted TOS:
"Over the decades, Star Trek has become so insular, so strictly defined, and placed so many layers upon itself that the essence of what made us love it in the first place has been lost. The all-too-reasonable desire to protect the franchise may now be the cause of it's stagnation.

Imagine buying a new Porsche and leaving it in the garage all the time, because if you take it on the road, it might get scratched. But that's exactly what's happened to Star Trek. The Porsche is still clean and polished, but we're driving around in a nice, reasonable family car.

It's time to throw caution to the wind and go out for a drive... a real drive..."

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The answer? Truthfully, no. I also don't believe that anyone can justly argue against the answer of no.

Yes, it did.

The only sensible alternative for Paramount would have been to spend their money on non-Trek movies and TV shows instead.

 

[Chronius Fawkes]

Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

 

[BillJ]

Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

This is just non-sense. The movie wasn't made for the fans but for the general ticket buyer.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

 

[Greg Cox]

Some of us find sci-fi ideas more interesting than "BUCKLE UP! FIRE EVERYTHING!" lens flare shenanigans.

Good Trek movies have never been about sci-fi ideas.

Revenge is such a scifi concept. Also whatever Voyage Home was about, saving whales and trying to seduce the mom from 7th Heaven.

Hah! We're obviously coming at this from completely opposite directions. The Voyage Home is a marvelously entertaining, feel-good movie that appeals to everyone, fans and non-fans alike. I get sucked into it every time I stumble onto it on TV.

It's easily my second-favorite Trek film after Khan . . . which was, of course, all about revenge.

 

[Balrog]

If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

Ah! Good to know, thanks!

I had to get a shot of that for my lower back...

 

[SeerSGB]

Good Trek movies have never been about sci-fi ideas.

Revenge is such a scifi concept. Also whatever Voyage Home was about, saving whales and trying to seduce the mom from 7th Heaven.

Hah! We're obviously coming at this from completely opposite directions. The Voyage Home is a marvelously entertaining, feel-good movie that appeals to everyone, fans and non-fans alike. I get sucked into it every time I stumble onto it on TV.

It's easily my second-favorite Trek film after Khan . . . which was, of course, all about revenge.

I tend to count II, III & IV, as one movie when ranking. I know they're not, but the trilogy aspect of the story works really well.

You could strip all the reboot nonsense off ST'09 and it'd pass for a TNG or TOS movie. I guarantee had they done the same script with the classic crew (kind of hard, with Doohan and Kelly being dead, just saying) or the TNG cast--even DS9 or Voyager--people would have fallen all over themselves praising it.

Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

Dude, I've probably watched the movies, the tv shows, and read the tech manuals more times than a man with an active sex life should be willing to admit to, and even I had to look that one up.

 

[Greg Cox]

Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

Dude, I've probably watched the movies, the tv shows, and read the tech manuals more times than a man with an active sex life should be willing to admit to, and even I had to look that one up.

Hell, I've been a professional Trekkie for nearly twenty years and I had no idea what that was . . . .

You shouldn't have to pass a written exam to enjoy a STAR TREK movie!

 

[SalvorHardin]

Not by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be. The only thing that keeps me happy about the whole thing is quantum mechanics, and the idea that the original timeline still exists in another universe. If you don't know what verterium cortenide is, then your opinion of the matter is moot IMNTHO.

Dude, I've probably watched the movies, the tv shows, and read the tech manuals more times than a man with an active sex life should be willing to admit to, and even I had to look that one up.

Hell, I've been a professional Trekkie for nearly twenty years and I had no idea what that was . . . .

You shouldn't have to pass a written exam to enjoy a STAR TREK movie!

And you call yourselves fans? I am disgusted to be in the same thread with you both.

 

[lurok]

Well, that's told me. I'll just grab my coat...

 

[Mach5]

The franchise needed an overhaul, that much was obvious, and has been obvious since the last few seasons of DS9. And as Dennis said, Enterprise was supposed to be IT, but it wasn't. And these expectations of ours were way to fucking high considering the show was being made by the same two schmucks who haven't delivered anything of any real value since the mid nineties.

But as much as Trek needed an extensive overhaul, I don't think a reset button was all that necessary.

 

[Dale Sams]

The franchise needed an overhaul, that much was obvious, and has been obvious since the last few seasons of DS9. And as Dennis said, Enterprise was supposed to be IT, but it wasn't. And these expectations of ours were way to fucking high considering the show was being made by the same two schmucks who haven't delivered anything of any real value since the mid nineties.

But as much as Trek needed an extensive overhaul, I don't think a reset button was all that necessary.

Your assesment of DS9 is way off. And it became obvious immediatly that Enterprise wouldn't be it as soon as the notes of that theme song started to play.

And as you said it was helmed by those two schmucks.

 

[Mach5]

Your assesment of DS9 is way off.

Not an "assessment".

Just an observation.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Your assesment of DS9 is way off.

Only to the extent that he consigns its failure to carry the Franchise successfully forward to only its last seasons.

In fact, DS9 lost viewers consistently throughout its run beginning from the second episode aired. You can have your own opinions about its quality, but not your own facts about its success.

 

[Dale Sams]

Your assesment of DS9 is way off.

Only to the extent that he consigns its failure to carry the Franchise successfully forward to only its last seasons.

In fact, DS9 lost viewers consistently throughout its run beginning from the second episode aired. You can have your own opinions about its quality, but not your own facts about its success.

Is it possible that the very nature of syndication at the time of DS9 and what the post TNG shows had to compete with as opposed to TNG had an effect? I'm actually asking.

edit: I can certainly see why they would lose viewers immediatly though after the first few eps. DS9 is a 'dirty' looking show (as opposed to TNG)....and I've always hated those jumpsuits... Top that off with Bajoran mysticism, Bajoran politics etc...I suppose I meant I objected to the notion that (at the time you mention) a very-well written and done show needed an overhaul, not seeing you meant from a business standpoint.

 

[Mach5]

DS9 was, for the most part, a great successor to The Next Generation. The only problem was that non-fans couldn't give a shit about the post-occupation Bajor, Cardassians, Klingon political intrigue and such. The same stuff that gave most of us (fans) nerd-gasms the "normal folk" found pretty much unwatchable.

I suppose I meant I objected to the notion that (at the time you mention) a very-well written and done show needed an overhaul, not seeing you meant from a business standpoint.

The fact is, the general audiences never found any appeal in DS9. And instead of learning from that, CBS gave us TNG's ugly annoying younger sister (Voyager), followed by the "Faramir" of TV shows (TNG's geeky little brother ENT, which could have held its own with some encouragement, but sadly, no one ever saw it).

 

[los2188]

Just to try and clear a few things up about my post. Again, I have no problem with the reboot. The reboot was very clearly successful. Mission accomplished. When I said that the reboot wasn't NEEDED, I emphasize the word NEED or NEEDED. I also stated that I don't think anyone can argue that it was absolutely needed. The reason I say that is because to think that there isn't one writer, producer, director, etc out in this planet that we call earth that couldn't re-imagine and come up with new and exciting Star Trek movies and stories in what ever way they see fit to release it and it be in the prime timeline and it be successful like current Trek is, seems to me to be a ridiculous statement. Am I making any sense? I understand that Kirk and Spock are icons, but to say there couldn't be a new crew introduced or a re-telling of some older stories, or stories of Kirk and Spock that were not ever told, not be a success is again a huge stretch to think. Again I have no problem with the reboot, but to say it was NEEDED, as in there was no other option and without it, Trek would die, is a huge stretch and unlikely. But when it's all said and done, the reboot worked (the success of the reboot is all that really matters) and I'm very happy with what they've done and am excited to see where things go from here. Does that clear things up a bit from where I'm coming from?

 

[lurok]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the studio talked with anyone - say, a Bryan Singer - about a post-NEM movie? I know there's been talk about TV series, but not movies.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

...Furthermore, it seems as if "fans" can rationalize anything, even if its just a faint resemblance to what its supposed to be...

Yes, they can. That makes it even more confusing why some of those same fans seem to become totally unable to fit Abrams Star Trek into the body of work that is "Star Trek" as a whole...

...Actually, let me rephrase that. I think they ARE "able" to do it, but for some reason they are unwilling to do it. It seems some of them just WANT to hate AbramsTrek, so they suddenly become very stubborn and uncharacteristically nit-picky about continuity and canon.