How might you have rebooted TOS?

[Warped9]

I have some of my own ideas on this. And I don't mean this thread as a means to bash Trek XI. Let me just say that If I look at it in terms of what they seemed to want in this film then I can envision approaching it differently as to include those elements while still managing for a greater sense of credibility, in my opinion. And, yes, my take on it would also exclude many familiar TOS backstory elements or at least rearranging them.

I want to consider my thoughts a bit more before I commit them to a post, but in the interim has anyone else any thoughts?

How might YOU have rebooted TOS? Would it be a drastic difference or something more subtle?

 

[Botany Bay]

The more I think about it, the more I would have just started off afresh, ignoring all the time travel crap.

But, I suppose their alternate reality idea is clever in that it keeps the cash registers ticking over for the hardcore element of fans who might have stopped buying the repackaged old episodes over and over.

I'd have Pike in command, then something happens to end Pike's command and get rid of Number One. A 30 year old Kirk brings Gary Mitchell aboard as first officer...and off we go...

But, this approach violates the (studio?) requirement to have everyone aged in their early 20's.

 

[Captrek]

The more I think about it, the more I would have just started off afresh, ignoring all the time travel crap.

I agree. They should have done essentially what Battlestar Galactica did, creating a new Trek for the new millennium, taking what they wanted from the original series, discarding what they didn’t want, and billing it as a “reimagining.” As a new take on Trek, it might have worked. As a sequel, I thought the latest film didn’t work well at all.

 

[Bri]

Listen, I loved the movie, but yeah it could have been done differently.

I think they did exactly what they set out to do though, create a pilot for a new series of films that will actually do well.

This being said, I hope the writers read Prime Directive the novel 100 more times before they write the sequel. That book is more in line with what Warped9 likes I think.

I also agree that maybe the new school BSG approach could have worked.

Warped, did you read jms's treatment for a new Trek series a few years back? I know that you liked B5, just like I did. jms on his worst day could write rings around the 2 hacks who wrote the new movie. I only worry in Joe's case that he already put his best ideas into a series, since that treatment did strike me as B5-ish (not that THAT is a bad thing per say).

Regardless, I would LOVE to have had jms's treatment be the template for the movie we all just saw. I haven't looked online yet to see if Joe has commented on his thoughts regarding the new film. I'm understandably curious.

Bri

 

[Wingsley]

If I were "rebooting" TOS, the TV show, on NBC today, I would choose between three possible appraoches:

1: The "reimagining" -- One possibility would be to step back and completely re-invent the wheel, with a whole new approach to STAR TREK, much as Ronald D. Moore did with his remake of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA. No, absolutely not, I am not suggesting a sexually twisted TREK where everyone has lost their minds and goes chasing after mystical demons and icons all the time. Rather, I would take the notions presented in TOS seriously (the Federation, Starfleet, starships, Prime Directive, dedicated career starship personnel as characters, etc.) and come up with a whole new slate of characters. Would there be a Kirk, Spock, etc.? Maybe. I think it would be neat to do a tossed salad reboot use some familiar names, some new names, and just come up with a re-invented cast that is only conceptually similar to TOS, but entirely new. The ship's interiors would vaguely resemble a cross between TOS E and the NX-01 from ENT, to give it a more realistic spaceship look. The ship's exterior appearance might look like Jefferies drawings, or it might look like the carrier-style "Lost era" E, depending on how the reboot would turn out. It would definitely not look like any of the Rick Berman or JJ Abrams approaches. The show could start out with Kirk serving as Pike's XO, in essence, as a captain-in-training. One thing is for sure: Kirk would have to be a credible age, not some twentysomething parody of Shatner's rendition.

2: The "Prequel" -- This approach could either be old-school cannon or a reimagining. Some time in the early-to-mid 23rd century, the Federation is testing out a new breed of Warp 7 starships, and the Enterprise is one of the final versions of this "trial balloon" sent out on a maiden voyage. If this were a direct TOS sequel, the brand-new E would have a completely new crew, and I would probably borrow an idea from ENT and make the captain (April?) and crew into maverick shipbuilders, engineers and uber-pioneer astronauts who were deeply involved ion the ground floor of the Constitution-class project. Even if it were a total reboot, the maverick shipbuilder idea would likely remain the same. Again, the Enterprise would have to have a more authentic spacecraft feel, like a cross between the TOS E and the NX-01 sets.

3: The "TOS Homage" -- this approach is so obvious from all the TOS-centered fan films that I'm shocked Hollywood doesn't get it. Imagine bringing TOS back to life with new actors who would convincingly portray the "original" Pike, Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc. The sets would not have to be exactly the same, but damn close. The characters might even wear 1960's hairstyles and the background music might even echo TOS, but the stories, FX, nd certain aspects of the props and the sets would be improved. (Less cardboard and corner-cutting) Think of the homage as a celebration of 1960's TV and film classics such as TOS, PLANET OF THE APES, and such more recent homages as APOLLO 13. In essence, it would be TOS in HD.


Story-wise, I think it would be best to make such a reboot for TV, not the cinema. I have to tell you, I reached the conclusion years ago that TREK on the big screen is a big waste of money. It has never translated well to cinema. It winds up being either a parody of its former TV self, or it just winds up being an overglorified TV ep. In my opinion, a TREK revival would be better suited to either a new series or mini-series on TV, or maybe a TV movie.

And I would not do a war show. I'm tired of every TREK movie involving some ultimate invasion/threat angle. Some of the best TREK eps involved exploration and some kind of other challenge. ("Where No Man Has Gone Before", "The Menagerie", "Dagger of the Mind", "The Galileo Seven", "The City on the Edge of Forever", "Metamorphosis", "Bread and Circuses", "Is There In Truth No Beauty?", "Requiem for Methuselah", "The Measure of a Man", "Contagion", "Q Who", "Up the Long Ladder", "The Ensigns of Command", "The Enemy", "The Defector", "Yesterday's Enterprise", "Tin Man", "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges", and "First Flight".)

My favorite approach is #3, but I feel any of these would be superior to the Gen Y parody that TREK is becoming.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Loved the movie, but-

-Do it on TV. People expect a lot more out of movies and with the budget it took to take Star Trek to the big screen... it wouldn't be able to be anything other than a blockbuster action flick (unless losing buttloads of cash is no problem). I mean... a well-written Star Trek series would have almost no competition on TV now that BSG is gone.
-Same cast. Whoever Abrams had doing the casting made good picks, IMHO.
-Drop the time travel aspect, make it more of a blatant reboot. Yeah, that'd ruffle a lot of fandom feathers... but it'd be like a Heimlich Maneuver, forcing years of continuity out of Star Trek's throat. And bucking off the canon-crazed Star Trek fans in the process (until they start micro-analyzing "NuContinuity" or "Marvel Ultimate Star Trek" or "TINO" or whatever the hell the Alternate Universe Angry Trekkies would call it.)
-Have actual science fiction writers writing for the show.
-Don't be quite as restricting on what qualifies as a "Star Trek Story" as past groups (Berman-Era) have been. I'm sure there were plenty of perfectly good stories that didn't make it through because they weren't dry enough.
-The visual look of it would have to be updated, to be frank. Hardcore fans of TOS alone aren't enough to keep a high-budget TV space opera alive. Most people would laugh the TOS designs off the screen to be frank (not saying that I would, mind you). Designs would imitate their iconic predecessors, being shaped similarly, but wouldn't be exactly the same. Added slickness and style, etc. I love the original Enterprise... hell, there's nothing wrong with it... it just doesn't look cool to people anymore. They understood this making TMP (And Trek XI). Though, I obviously would go for a more sensible redesign a la TMP. The same could be said of the bridge and props. They're all practical, but they're lacking in a certain aesthetic that screams "futuristic" to the general audience (like the said props, sets and models once did back in the 60s). Update, but keep the general functional intent intact. As far as the general design aesthetic... let's go with TMP meets Art Deco/Streamline, with healthy heapings of soundly-designed speculative stuff. Heck, let's get some new stuff in there. Fresh uses and imaginings for current speculative theories... keep Star Trek's science up-to-date as it goes... i'd be all for that.
-Keep from doing "continuity arcs" or at least doing them too often. Make the show accessible - anyone can tune into any episode and not be completely lost. Two-parters excluded, of course.

Basically, make a show that Star Trek fans can enjoy, but can also introduce Joe Somebody to Star Trek, someone who likes intelligent TV, but may have tuned Star Trek out due to its more recent, shall we say- dry installments.

 

[Wingsley]

^ I agree with HJ that TREK belongs on TV, and if you're going to reboot it, REBOOT IT and come up with something fresh and original.

As far as BSG being "competition", Ron Moore's NuBSG never won a big audience; it wasn't a flop, but it never blossomed into a big winner, either.

I disagree strongly about canon/continuity. Look at STARGATE SG-1. It was on TV for ten years. It was semi-serialized throughout. It was witty, it was funny, it took chances. It stumbled occasionally, with a few stinkers for stories. And a few were not original. It even had a few minor continuity goofs. But by and large, SG-1 was everything Bermanian TREK was not: semi-serialized with story arcs (still many great stand-alone eps), funny, lots of action, variety of story types, witty, engaging of its characters, wonderful bombastic music score, and FRESH. SG-1 proved you can have a great, entertaining sci fi show and still have continuity.

 

[Warp Core Breach]

I wouldn't have. What was, was. It was good. It doesn't need to be spread to future generations like some kind of religion. If they don't get it, their loss.

 

[SchwEnt]

I have some of my own ideas on this. And I don't mean this thread as a means to bash Trek XI. Let me just say that If I look at it in terms of what they seemed to want in this film then I can envision approaching it differently as to include those elements while still managing for a greater sense of credibility, in my opinion. And, yes, my take on it would also exclude many familiar TOS backstory elements or at least rearranging them.

I want to consider my thoughts a bit more before I commit them to a post, but in the interim has anyone else any thoughts?

How might YOU have rebooted TOS? Would it be a drastic difference or something more subtle?

I wouldn't have re-booted TOS.

My Star Trek doesn't need to be re-booted, I like my ST the way it is.

However, I wouldn't have minded a "TOS origins" story, if that's what you mean. And even then...not a re-boot or alternate timeline or JJ-verse or whatever BS term you wanna use.

I see no reason why a TOS origin story couldn't be done without destroying canon.

But sadly, that's not how it turned out.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I'm canonnista and continuity wonk at heart so I'd make it fit between the spaces of the Original Series, only with new actors, SFX and updated sets and costumes. No doubt it would be a failure.

 

[True Trek Fan]

I know I mentioned this in another post but what I would do is use state of the art technology and take images of the original cast and digitalize them in a new exciting way. How exactly you ask? I would use the same concept used in Lord of the Rings for the Gollum character and have actors wearing blue suits with sensors that wrap around their physical bodies and then wrap cgi bodies around them. We can recreate the original actors playing their roles and give them new costumes and new sets and new environments. As in Star Wars Episode iii Revenge of the Sith, Count Dooku played by the aging actor Christopher Lee had ceratin physical scenes digitaly altered. A younger actor doing the physical stunts had his face erased and then had the face of Christopher Lee superimposed. Hollywood special fx wizards can use this same technology to give us the orginal actors playing their roles in a new Star Trek film. The original interior of the ship can be brought up to date without loosing the feel of the 60s set and the original starship Enterprise can once again bodly take the audience on a new trek in space. Who needs new actors playing Kirk, Spock and McCoy when we have the technology to bring back the original crew as their younger personas in a new film epic.

 

[Red Ranger]

You know, given that J.J. Abrams was involved in the new film, I would've sworn he would've given us more "flashbacks" to indicate that Kirk and Spock were bitter Academy rivals who both have to learn to work with each other, because Capt. Pike would've forced them to over the years, leading up to them working together nine years later on the newly refit Enterprise, which is where I would've set the majority of the film's action. We could've then seen in future movies other fleshing out via flashback the rivalary between the future good friends. It's an approach they used in two ST novels: Enterprise: The First Adventure and Strangers From the Sky, and which they certainly had in the newest flick. -- RR

 

[RAMA]

The more I think about it, the more I would have just started off afresh, ignoring all the time travel crap.

This would negate the best part of the "reboot": it preserves the old history--in effect NOT wiping out the history of a 40 year old series for fans, while allowing them to start with a new history that does not effect any other part of fictional history. Brilliant really. Should satisfy everyone right...well no apparently.

RAMA

 

[Captrek]

The more I think about it, the more I would have just started off afresh, ignoring all the time travel crap.

This would negate the best part of the "reboot": it preserves the old history--in effect NOT wiping out the history of a 40 year old series for fans, while allowing them to start with a new history that does not effect any other part of fictional history. Brilliant really. Should satisfy everyone right...well no apparently.

RAMA

But the time travel plot doesn’t adequately explain all the character changes they made. Sure, they explain the difference in Kirk by the death his father, which changed the way he grew up. But what about the others?

Can you imagine Zöe Saldana’s Uhura uttering the “Captain, I’m frightened” kind of lines that Nichelle Nichols always got in TOS? And since when is Chekov a boy genius and Scotty a rebel?

I suppose if you wanted you could write some fanfic to explain how Nero’s incursions completely changed the personalities of all these characters, but Abrams didn’t bother. He simply disposed of the TOS characters, created new characters with the same names, and said, “Somehow Nero changed things to turn those characters into these characters.” That’s crap. If he wanted to discard the old characters and create new characters that are more appealing to the audience he wants to reach, he should have just called it a reimagining instead of trying to present it as a sequel.

Not only does the film not work in its own right as a sequel — despite the time travel trick, it still doesn’t feel consistent with established continuity — but it also has the effect of damaging the rewatchability of the later series. If Star Trek XI is accepted as canon, then the dramatic heart is cut out of all those series. Worf trying to regain his family name? Picard and Kirk trying to save millions of lives on Viridian IV? DS9 trying to defeat the Pah Wraith? Voyager trying to get home? So what? It doesn’t matter whether they succeed or fail, because they’re all going to be erased from history in a few years.

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

Agree with what many people have said about making it a true reboot and not just another time travel gimmick. I would have dropped the old-Spock storyline altogether. As already mentioned, Old BSG hasn't been erased by nu-BSG, and best of all, there's no wittering about it on message boards.

TOS was a product of its era, coming from the civil right movement and cold war brinkmanship, as well as the rapid growth in space exploration at the time. That was what informed the setting and the stories then, but it doesn't need to do it today.


Space exploration has stalled in LEO for now, so I would either set nu-Trek further in the future, or I would make it a whole lot more primitive, more primitive even so than Enterprise was. I'd also extrapolate on what society is like now to make the show more relevant. nu-BSG has the terrorism angle neatly tied up, so I'd avoid that. But the other big issue facing most of us now is climate change (it isn't facing those who don't believe in it), and I would get rid of the third world war completely and replace it with a variety of climate catastrophes, that the Vulcans coming to Earth would have rescued humanity from. Instead of spreading peace love and amity around the universe, there would be a message of eco-responsibility and resource management, and starships would be a far more arboreal environment.

I'd also change the utter fear of genetic engineering to a cautious embrace of medical technology, reflecting where the world is in terms of stem cell research and medical ethics now. There would be wider variety of humans in this universe, and humans would be geneformed to adapt quicker to new environments, rather than worlds being terraformed.

Jeez, I've just described Seaquest DSV.

Ok, that, but good.

 

[Wingsley]

I'm canonnista and continuity wonk at heart so I'd make it fit between the spaces of the Original Series, only with new actors, SFX and updated sets and costumes. No doubt it would be a failure.

A TOS homage would fail only if APOLLO 13 had failed.

"Old" being updated is not necessarily a recipe for failure; it all depends on the purpose of the endeavor and the quality of the writing behind it.

Each new STAR TREK TV show and movie over the last 20 years has had its moments, but by and large it has been Hollywierded by mediocre writing and a lack of overall vision.

 

[Warped9]

I’m going to set aside that I wouldn’t have gone done anything like it was done in the film as is. Instead I’m going to assume the following: TPTB want a restart, familiar characters and energy. I’m also going to overlook the horrible production design of this film.

For me restart/reset/reboot means you can rearrange things and also that you can avoid confusion with the old. And you don’t need time travel and alternate timelines for that. Just start again. I wouldn’t have gotten so heavily involved in origin stories because what really matters to fans and the audience is the familiar crew aboard the Enterprise and boldly going adventure.

You can start the story with a Federation ship encountering a threat, but no Klingons or Romulans and time travel stuff. If you really want to play with the new continuity then introduce the Borg, but better yet come up with something fresher and hopefully equally nasty. You could still have George Kirk as an officer who sadly bites the dust here, but ditch the part of his pregnant wife just escaping and giving birth at the same time. The aliens also learn of humanity, the Federation and Earth during this encounter.

Start with the Enterprise already exists for a few years with Pike in command, and as a nod to Star Trek’s origin an already established crew. There’d be a female Number One as First Officer and a young Lieutenant Spock. Philip Boyce has retired been replaced by a younger CMO named McCoy as well as a similarly aged engineer named Scott. Instead of a youthful Jose Tyler you could have Pavel Chekov. If you want to address Spock’s internal conflicts then you can do it with flashback scenes. The ship could stop at a Starbase and is receiving new orders as well as three new personnel: Uhura, Sulu and at the last minute a brooding young Lieutenant Kirk who is a security specialist as well as a well rated pilot. Kirk has knocked around some, annoying some superiors while also earning kudos for his abilities. Kirk’s background could also be referred to in a couple of flashbacks, but get on with the story.

Pike could play the role of Captain Garrovick (referred to in “Obsession”) in TOS in providing some guidance for Kirk. Big change: don’t make Kirk an asshole and a jerk. Make him inclined to impulse, fine, and he’s also quick thinking on his feet. Kirk and Spock don’t get along at first, also fine, as well as McCoy befriending the often solitary Kirk. Try to give a sense of passing time here rather than everything happening within a space of days.

The Enterprise is assigned to investigating ships disappearing and outposts going silent in a distant sector. Here they encounter the alien threat that destroyed the Federation ship at the beginning of the story. During this encounter Pike is abducted and abused and Number One (give the poor girl a name) takes command where she finds herself riding herd between the overly-logical-to-a-fault Spock and the impulsive Kirk, both of which are loyal to Pike in their own ways and anxious to get him back. A lot of run-and-jump action as well as character banter ensues.

Pike is eventually rescued yet remains crippled (hence the wheelchair). Kirk and Spock begin to show a grudging respect for each other and remain aboard the Enterprise with Number One now as Captain.

Now if you assume that TPTB are anxious for a new franchise with a trilogy of films and you’re reasonably sure you can make the first one pay off, then the second film picks up a few years later. Spock has been promoted to Chief Science Officer with rank of Lt. Cmdr. and Kirk is also a Commander as Chief Tactical Officer and possibly second-in-command as well.

In the interim Starfleet is seriously concerned about a resurgence of the alien menace seen in the previous film. They want it further investigated and possibly even neutralized. Thus they launch a task force squadron with Number One and the Enterprise at the head. Potential for some kewl space combat scenes to come. A lot more run-and-jump action as well as more character banter where we begin to see something remotely resembling the familiar synergy between Kirk, Spock and McCoy. Number One begins to see this as well.

The threat is resolved when Number One with Kirk’s resourceful help defeats or at least deals a serious blow to the alien menace. End the film with Starfleet promoting Number One offship to Commodore or Fleet Captain or whatever. Subsequently Number One recommends Kirk to be promoted to Captain.

The third film in the trilogy? Everyone is pretty much back in place and now you need a genuine final frontier, strange new world type story to round it all out.

Candidly I’m not crazy about the above storyline, but it at least makes more sense than what was done. You could have much of the feel of Trek XI, but I would highly recommend toning done the hyperactive pace periodically. Let’s have a chance to catch our breath.

You could also mix things up more by having the Federation in a longstanding war with the Romulans as part of the background, basically erasing TOS' Earth/Romulan backstory and supplanting this as the first major conflict. But the new threat overshadows the one posed by the Romulans. Just a thought.

Much could also depend on how you want to portray this version of Trek: is it a Federation devoted to exploration or is this more a small aliance of worlds (still a Federation) trying to withstand threats from outside and thus would be more of a military SF type of setting.

 

[USS Mariner]

Cast Faran Tahir as Kirk.

I'm dead serious.

He brings as much charisma and nuance to the role as Shatner did, even though he looks completely different. He stole the first few minutes of the film, and it's a damn share they didn't understand how right he would have been as Kirk.

 

[Forbin]

Me, I'd have taken it as a challenge to write it entirely within the structure of established canon.

There are lots of authors who write novels set in historical times, that fit their stories within real-world history without needing to alter it. It's entirely possible.

And I wouldn't have made the Enterprise so fucking ugly. Keep the original, detail her up a little more for the screen. Period.

 

[Wingsley]

^ There is a great deal of logic and truth to what Forbin says.

STAR TREK "canon" has never been an impediment to creativity. If continuity were the destroyer of enjoyable dramatic series, STARGATE SG-1 and other non-sf dramas/serials like DALLAS, ER, CHINA BEACH and the first five years of L.A. LAW would never have made it off the ground. And both BATTLESTAR series would've been forgettable if that were the case.

I never bought into the Ron Moore quote that TREK "choked on its own continuity".

I firmly believe that if you had the right set of actors, writers and producers who took TOS seriously, they could revive TOS in HD today, it would look great, and if done properly it could be a success. The only "canon" that might have to be set aside would be (maybe) TAS.

But don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a reboot if it is genuine. If Abrams wants to do something new, then he should've done something new. A real reboot means you start with a clean sheet of paper (or very nearly so) like Moore did.