True.However you can kill someone with a knife or a gun. But that doesn't mean a knife is a gun.
But both are murder achieved by different means.
Hated it
- Thread starter KSoldier
- Start date
But both are murder achieved by different means.
Does anyone else call up memories of the Men on Film skits from In Living Color, every time they read the title of this thread? "HAAATED IT!!!" 
This conversation really is getting silly, LOL. They used Prime Spock in the the new movies to reassure existing fans that JJ ABrams wasn't going to be sending out squads to destroy our existing DVDs of prior Trek. In this sense, for Spock Prime, they are Sequels for Prime Spock. But, for the most part, we aren't following the continuing adaventures of Prime Spock, we are following the alternate adventures of Alternate Universe/Timeline Kirk, Spock and the rest, so, in this sense, since old continuity doesn't exist or affect their adventures, it a Reboot for them.
This conversation really is getting silly, LOL. They used Prime Spock in the the new movies to reassure existing fans that JJ ABrams wasn't going to be sending out squads to destroy our existing DVDs of prior Trek. In this sense, for Spock Prime, they are Sequels for Prime Spock. But, for the most part, we aren't following the continuing adaventures of Prime Spock, we are following the alternate adventures of Alternate Universe/Timeline Kirk, Spock and the rest, so, in this sense, since old continuity doesn't exist or affect their adventures, it a Reboot for them.
I guess it depends on how you define a sequel. People seem to differentiate a sequel and a prequel, but really a prequel is a sequel. And in a very loose sense, reboots can be sequels too. But if you define it rigidly as in that it has to follow the storyline of a previous movie, then a lot of movies we would call sequels really aren't (and nor would Star Trek 2009).
Perhaps there should be a new term for this type of movie, as I see it gaining some traction elsewhere. The new Terminator movie is apparently the same kind of thing with alternate universes being used as an excuse to not have to follow any continuity. Because seriously, what continuity did the Abrams movies follow? It really just used the concepts and characters while being able to tell new stories without being beholden to a lot of things. It sounds like a reboot, regardless of the time travel junk.
Haha, I won't be able to unhear this now.
Perhaps there should be a new term for this type of movie, as I see it gaining some traction elsewhere. The new Terminator movie is apparently the same kind of thing with alternate universes being used as an excuse to not have to follow any continuity. Because seriously, what continuity did the Abrams movies follow? It really just used the concepts and characters while being able to tell new stories without being beholden to a lot of things. It sounds like a reboot, regardless of the time travel junk.
Does anyone else call up memories of the Men on Film skits from In Living Color, every time they read the title of this thread? "HAAATED IT!!!"
Haha, I won't be able to unhear this now.
Sure he is. He's teased as having sympathetic motives but in the end reverts to a classic moustache-twirler (sans moustache) who double-crosses and tries to kill the heroes for no good reason at all... other than that He's Eeeevil. Spock-on-Skype said so.
His motives in WoK (and even Space Seed) frankly made more sense and fit together better as a whole character.
Kirk double-crossed Khan first, having Scotty shoot him. If that's not a good reason to turn againt someone, I don't know what is.
IMO the new movies are staying far too close to the original to be called a complete reboot - just look at how they bent over backwards to explain Khan's resurrection. A straight-up reboot would probably find it much easier to just say Khan's a 23rd century engineered human, rather than to stay true to the "space Seed" backstory.
The movies are multilayered - what's a random bit of unobstrusive background detail to a casual viewer is continuty porn for the hardcore. I think they did an amazing job.
The movies are multilayered - what's a random bit of unobstrusive background detail to a casual viewer is continuty porn for the hardcore. I think they did an amazing job.
Yeah - to the suits and the non-Trekkie moviegoers, it's a reboot. But to the fans and Bad Robot, it's sequel/AU prequel/etc.
I would still call it a reboot, it has new actors playing old characters, and re-enacting events from the original continuity only differently. The films are in a totally different class when it comes to budget, style and content - ie action. It has not only (so far) ditched the numbers but also the ':' from the title. That's a reboot in my eyes. Rise of the planet of the Apes has elements from the source material's universe in it, but you without a doubt call it a reboot.
It also gives huge credence to the old continuity - there's post Nemesis Spock in it - hence it's also a sequel.
It tells an origin story about most of the main characters (within the same universe, even though it's linked to the previous canon) - hence it's a prequel.
It also gives huge credence to the old continuity - there's post Nemesis Spock in it - hence it's also a sequel.
It tells an origin story about most of the main characters (within the same universe, even though it's linked to the previous canon) - hence it's a prequel.
Granted, but my original response was to this, specifically:While it's not the "info dump" method to which Joel Kirk refers, background information introduced in dialogue is still, by definition, exposition. Nearly everything we came to know in 'Space Seed' about Khan's background was told, not shown.Does the verbal duel with Kirk and Spock count as exposition? "We offered the world order!"
It can be dual-purpose, I think. The dry details of Khan's background were being told in that scene, but the important parts? His arrogance, his sense of entitlement, superiority and righteousness that explained that background and his subsequent actions in the episode... that was being shown.
As you point out, Jake, Montalban in 'Space Seed' showed attitudes which colored and gave depth to the back story, but that doesn't negate the fact that nearly all of the framework upon which to hang those attitudes was presented via expository dialogue - by McGivers first, and by Spock and others in subsequent scenes.
Two movies both set in Gotham City are "not in the same setting"?
Sindatur said:
I could be wrong, but I've assumed that was the intent of the OP.
Ryan8bit said:
Though it can't be said to dominate the films by any means, they do adhere to things from the Prime-inclusive continuity, such as Khan being from the 20th century, Spock Prime being a Fed ambassador, etc.
Smellmet said:
What about it makes it a reboot? AFAIK it doesn't have irreconcilable continuity problems with the other films, and even if it did, that's still not the same thing as rebooting. In fact, it's a sequel to both First Class and The Wolverine: the 1973 material happens after First Class while the future scenes follow from The Wolverine. If anything it was First Class that seemed at the time to be "part reboot, part prequel" due to its various apparent inconsistencies with the earlier films, but DOFP demonstrates that FC and the earlier films are meant to be in the same continuity despite those glitches.
Smellmet said:
Because it has a completely different origin story for Caesar, among other things.
Superman Returns, while recasting all the characters and changing the time period from the '80's to the beginning of the 21st century, was clearly meant to be a sequel to the first four Christopher Reeve movies.
Batman Begins, while recasting all the characters and changing the time period from the late '80's/early '90's to the beginning of the 21st century, was clearly meant to be a reboot of the Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher movies.
So it's not always that cut-and-dried. However...
I understand your logic here and agree with it, to an extent. The stuff with Prime Spock was definitely meant to take place post-Nemesis, but the changed timeline, although "pre-TOS" is not a prequel to TOS, but a reboot of TOS based on an alternate universe.
Last edited:
I feel like those things are more like factoids than they are continuity. Just because they appealed to fans liking to hear or see different references, doesn't really make it continuity. In addition, a reboot could still be done that maintains these things.
Yes, that is what I said and I stand by it. Or do you think that Gotham just became gothic between Batman Begins and Batman, and got a second lunatic called the Joker ?
I can see your point, there's clearly a few shades of rebooting at work here, you're correct, it is not a straight up 100% reboot, but just has strong elements of all three categories.
That's not what "factoid" means.
By that logic, anything at all can be fan-dubbed a "reboot", even if it bends over backwards to display its shared continuity with previous material throughout the entirety of its running time.
Belz... said:
You might also have said: "Do you think that the Waynes were killed by Joe Chill only to be magically resurrected just in time to be killed by Jack Napier?"
They're not in the same continuity, which was the whole point. It was alleged here that a sequel doesn't have to be in the same continuity as that which it is supposedly a sequel to.
It is. They're insignificant bits of trivia that don't really matter. Fans like to call that continuity, but that's not really what continuity is.
No. I think people tend to think reboot when most of the characters are recast, there's a wholly different creative team with a new vision, and where the future of those characters is no longer established. It doesn't really matter if a single character is the one they recognize, it's essentially a reboot.
Last edited:
Does anyone else call up memories of the Men on Film skits from In Living Color, every time they read the title of this thread? "HAAATED IT!!!"
This conversation really is getting silly, LOL. They used Prime Spock in the the new movies to reassure existing fans that JJ ABrams wasn't going to be sending out squads to destroy our existing DVDs of prior Trek. In this sense, for Spock Prime, they are Sequels for Prime Spock. But, for the most part, we aren't following the continuing adaventures of Prime Spock, we are following the alternate adventures of Alternate Universe/Timeline Kirk, Spock and the rest, so, in this sense, since old continuity doesn't exist or affect their adventures, it a Reboot for them.
Yes, I thought about Men on Film when I first read the title myself...
Similar threads
