If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Recast

[Ryan8bit]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Plus, pretend for a second that we're not talking about Star Trek for a moment. If this was any other series, would you really expect it to pick right up where it left off, over a decade after it was axed? With all the series that have tried that approach in the history of television, can you name a dozen that have managed to be successful enough to make it past three seasons? I can name maybe four.

Well, Star Trek was certainly one. There's been a recent surge with shows like 24, X-Files, and Twin Peaks, although they weren't really cancelled and are only continuing in limited fashion. Other shows that come to mind are Dr. Who, or cartoons like Family Guy and Futurama. There are probably more than a dozen, otherwise there wouldn't be so many attempts.

Somone had a graph that displayed it better, but there was a period for about a decade (even before TNG ended) where TV Trek was just steadily losing viewers.

The thing about those graphs is they usually paint the picture that someone already wants to see, without actually factoring in a lot of the variables. People use it as an indicator of declining quality or oversaturation (it can't exactly be both), when it's usually a lot more complex than that. At best, they indicated revenue potential, which is the bottom line, and nothing more. Everything else is speculation.

 

[Overgeeked]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Changing Spock's name to Data isn't new and different, and changing Data's name to Odo is even less new and different.

They were all outsider characters but still quite distinct. No-one would ever confuse the half-breed with the robot with the shapeshifter.

As the outsider they play the same role in their group's dynamic. That's why they're the same character. Worf is also an outsider. Seven is an outsider. Making them an android, a shapshifter, an full alien or a cyborg doesn't change that they're a take on Spock.

You've got it backwards. The Outsider character is far, far older than Trek, television, America, and likely Western Culture itself. It's one of those things that appears almost ubiquitously throughout all human literature.

Also, playing the same role in the group dynamic is nowhere near being 'the same character'. If you think these characters sharing the trait of 'Outsider' makes them so identical as to be indistinguishable from each other then you're more than a bit myopic.

 

[fireproof78]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Plus, pretend for a second that we're not talking about Star Trek for a moment. If this was any other series, would you really expect it to pick right up where it left off, over a decade after it was axed? With all the series that have tried that approach in the history of television, can you name a dozen that have managed to be successful enough to make it past three seasons? I can name maybe four.

Well, Star Trek was certainly one. There's been a recent surge with shows like 24, X-Files, and Twin Peaks, although they weren't really cancelled and are only continuing in limited fashion. Other shows that come to mind are Dr. Who, or cartoons like Family Guy and Futurama. There are probably more than a dozen, otherwise there wouldn't be so many attempts.

Somone had a graph that displayed it better, but there was a period for about a decade (even before TNG ended) where TV Trek was just steadily losing viewers.

The thing about those graphs is they usually paint the picture that someone already wants to see, without actually factoring in a lot of the variables. People use it as an indicator of declining quality or oversaturation (it can't exactly be both), when it's usually a lot more complex than that. At best, they indicated revenue potential, which is the bottom line, and nothing more. Everything else is speculation.

Not to be argumentative, but why not? Over-saturation does automatically mean an increase in quality, as there is often a push to put out more of a product more quickly, resulting in faster jobs and possible not a lot of attention to detail.

I agree that there are a number of factors that revolve around the declining numbers, especially a factor of competition on TV, something that is hard to measure.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Plus, pretend for a second that we're not talking about Star Trek for a moment. If this was any other series, would you really expect it to pick right up where it left off, over a decade after it was axed? With all the series that have tried that approach in the history of television, can you name a dozen that have managed to be successful enough to make it past three seasons? I can name maybe four.

Well, Star Trek was certainly one. There's been a recent surge with shows like 24, X-Files, and Twin Peaks, although they weren't really cancelled and are only continuing in limited fashion. Other shows that come to mind are Dr. Who, or cartoons like Family Guy and Futurama. There are probably more than a dozen, otherwise there wouldn't be so many attempts.

Somone had a graph that displayed it better, but there was a period for about a decade (even before TNG ended) where TV Trek was just steadily losing viewers.

The thing about those graphs is they usually paint the picture that someone already wants to see, without actually factoring in a lot of the variables. People use it as an indicator of declining quality or oversaturation (it can't exactly be both), when it's usually a lot more complex than that. At best, they indicated revenue potential, which is the bottom line, and nothing more. Everything else is speculation.

Most of those were off air for 5 years at most. The Prime continuity has been off air for more than a decade (which was the sort if gap I did talk about) and has already had a successful reboot. X-Files and Twin Peaks would fit, but we don't know how successful they'll be. Certainly the last attempts to revive them with films didn't go well, and that's in spite of both shows having ended on cliffhangers.

For the record, I had Doctor Who, Degrassi. Dallas (just), and Columbo.

People can use the ratings to prove whatever they like. But I wasn't talking about why the numbers were going down, just that they were long before Enterprise showed up.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Not to be argumentative, but why not?

Because oversaturation can be independent of quality. If they were constantly generating high quality entertainment that was new and exciting, I doubt that many people would stop watching. Both a decline in quality and oversaturation can happen together, but at that point the oversaturation isn't what kills it, but rather the quality. And yeah, if you spread yourself too thinly, that can cause issues too, but that's not impossible to prevent either.

For the record, I had Doctor Who, Degrassi. Dallas (just), and Columbo.

And not Star Trek!? GET OUT.

I hear what you're saying. I don't think they're going to slavishly devote themselves to an old continuity. I just think if they did return to it (in the way that TNG did after TOS), it would be in broad strokes only. So maybe Vulcan would still be around, but the color of Kirk's eyes wouldn't really matter. Maybe a war with the Dominion happened, but it doesn't matter that the Romulans liberated the Benzite system during it.

And despite that there aren't a ton of examples of shows with 10 year+ gaps returning and being successful, I don't think that makes it any less possible. I think which continuity such a show is set in (Abrams, Prime, or something new) doesn't really have much bearing on that.

 

[BillJ]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

People can use the ratings to prove whatever they like. But I wasn't talking about why the numbers were going down, just that they were long before Enterprise showed up.

I think it is becoming a fair question to ask whether people of the 90's liked "Star Trek" or if they just liked TNG specifically?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

They were all outsider characters but still quite distinct. No-one would ever confuse the half-breed with the robot with the shapeshifter.

As the outsider they play the same role in their group's dynamic. That's why they're the same character. Worf is also an outsider. Seven is an outsider. Making them an android, a shapshifter, an full alien or a cyborg doesn't change that they're a take on Spock.

You've got it backwards. The Outsider character is far, far older than Trek, television, America, and likely Western Culture itself. It's one of those things that appears almost ubiquitously throughout all human literature.

Also, playing the same role in the group dynamic is nowhere near being 'the same character'. If you think these characters sharing the trait of 'Outsider' makes them so identical as to be indistinguishable from each other then you're more than a bit myopic.

Since I'm talking about the Outsider as a literary archetype, of which in Star Trek, Spock is the first and primary example , no I don't think Star Trek invented the idea nor do I think Star Trek characters who represent this archetype are identical.

 

[eyeresist]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Enterprise:

Well, the operation was a success, but the patient died.

I'd say it's actually the opposite: the operation failed, but the patient still has some mobility.

 

[martok2112]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Enterprise:

Well, the operation was a success, but the patient died.

I'd say it's actually the opposite: the operation failed, but the patient still has some mobility.

Perhaps a bit more apt, yes.

And then some bionics got involved, and now Trek is alive and well. Better, stronger, faster.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

For the record, I had Doctor Who, Degrassi. Dallas (just), and Columbo.

And not Star Trek!? GET OUT.

I hear what you're saying. I don't think they're going to slavishly devote themselves to an old continuity. I just think if they did return to it (in the way that TNG did after TOS), it would be in broad strokes only. So maybe Vulcan would still be around, but the color of Kirk's eyes wouldn't really matter. Maybe a war with the Dominion happened, but it doesn't matter that the Romulans liberated the Benzite system during it.

And despite that there aren't a ton of examples of shows with 10 year+ gaps returning and being successful, I don't think that makes it any less possible. I think which continuity such a show is set in (Abrams, Prime, or something new) doesn't really have much bearing on that.

If they're going to use broad strokes, then why on earth should they bother establishing that it's in Prime? Broad strokes will have broken continuity ('canon') anyway. They might as well go for a full-on remake, or stick with Abrams successful hybridised sequel-broad-strokesprequel-TOSremake-thingy.

Or are people really that attatched to Vulcan?

I'm not saying 'Treks never coming back to Tv' nor 'it will fail.' I just can't see them going back to Prime. Besides some Trekkies on the internet screaming for the return of the decades old minutiae that theyre attached to, the people behind the scenes just have no reason to do so...unless someone on this board manages to claw their way up the ranks at CBS.

Oh, I also initially had 'besides TNG' in that initial post where I said I could only think of four. It must have been edited out at some point.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

If they're going to use broad strokes, then why on earth should they bother establishing that it's in Prime?

The thing is, they already kinda have. TNG and its spinoffs weren't some airtight, pristine continuity. Between the shows, they mostly hit the broad strokes when it came to continuity. So why did they do that then?

Or for that matter, why did the new Star Trek adhere to some of that by making it an alternate timeline instead of a straight-up reboot?

 

[BillJ]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Or for that matter, why did the new Star Trek adhere to some of that by making it an alternate timeline instead of a straight-up reboot?

I'm sure Abrams and company were trying to respect long-term fans and have gotten constantly pissed on for the effort over the last seven years.

An object lesson for CBS I'd say.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Yeah, but let's be fair, every Star Trek producer ever has been "pissed on" and always will be despite whatever they do. CBS doesn't really care about any of that.

 

[mos6507]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

As for remakes and revivals, that's a part of art-as has been said may times (and something you should know by now), there is nothing new under the sun-there are only a few

I understand the "everything's a remix" phenomenon. The problem is when everything becomes a reboot rather than a remix then it's like time literally stands still. We'll have a limited number of franchises created a half century or more in the past and they just recycle endlessly. No attempt to even try to forge anything new, just one New Coke variant after another. I think this is kind of sad.

It's like, sure, Forbidden Planet was The Tempest in space, and The Cage was Forbidden Planet moved into the 60s, but there's some creative input required in filing off those serial numbers. I'm glad Star Trek became Star Trek instead of just Forbidden Planet: The Series and it was The Enterprise instead of the C-57D. They had to actually do some world-building in Star Trek rather than co-opting someone else's world-building.

 

[Trekkin]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

...and how exactly does Star Trek's remixed 'world building' from Forbidden Planet differ from 98% of reboots? Most rebooted franchises only have character names and the really broad core concepts in common with their source.

Whilst I think they sucked ass, the attempts to reboot Total Recall and Robocop into new franchises did expand and change things from the original. So did the screen versions of Batman, Superman, Lone Ranger, James Bond, Planet of the Apes, Godzilla, Spider-Man etc. The source material was inspiration for ideas the new runners ideas, not a preexistung script they can use as a shortcut.


There is still plenty of original content being made. The movies may not all be streaking up the 'Top 10 biggest earners of all time' lists (though some of them are), but do they exist and haven't been pushed out by reboots/remakes. San Andreas was inspired by Irwin Allen disaster flicks, but isn't a reboot/remake. Chappie, Avatar, Jupiter Ascending, Intersteller, Last Days of Mars, Detention,The Matrix, Sunshine, Gravity, Splice, Birdman, Lucy, Elysium, District 9, Moon, Chronicle, Meloncholia, Pitch Black, Looper, Outlander etc. Fucking Independence Day and Armageddon.

I want to count Under the Skin, Children of Men, Kingsmen, Cloud Atlas, Edge of Tomorrow and EX MACHINA, but technically they're adaptations of novels and get disqualified for not being original. The list would get a lot longer if you can count adapatauons and move a bit out of scifi.

 

[Mk_Sn]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

I hate this stupid trend of reboots. I'm glad that we're slowly seeing actual sequels and such again, and not "reboots".

I seriously hope they don't do an Abrams style reboot of TNG, which I suspect is the pretense to even doing these TOS reboots, just a sneaking suspicion.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

I hate this stupid trend of reboots. I'm glad that we're slowly seeing actual sequels and such again, and not "reboots".

I seriously hope they don't do an Abrams style reboot of TNG, which I suspect is the pretense to even doing these TOS reboots, just a sneaking suspicion.

I wouldn't worry. There is probably little interest in doing a TNG reboot, remake, sequel or reanything. Abrams or otherwise. Star Trek will be firmly TOS for the foreseeable future.

 

[Mk_Sn]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

Well that's a relief, then I can safely ignore them :P If they did reboot TNG, I'd be too tempted to see how badly they screwed it up. I don't care much for TOS, so it doesn't bother me that much those films suck, other than basically making Star Trek into a lame action franchise.

 

[drt]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

The "action franchise era" really started with First Contact.

I'd bet the original TOS films likely would have been more action oriented if the principal actors hadn't been in their 50s/60s.

 

[martok2112]

Re: If Star Trek Beyond Is The Last Film Should They Start NuTNG or Re

The "action franchise era" really started with First Contact.

I'd bet the original TOS films likely would have been more action oriented if the principal actors hadn't been in their 50s/60s.

It probably would've started with Generations if they stuck to one of the original script drafts, which had the Enterprise crew going aboard the Amargosa Observatory and kicking some Romulan ass, phasers and hand to hand. At least, I'm pretty sure that was one of the original draft's intents. I could be mistaken.