If you were in charge of a Trek reboot, what ten things would you change?

[eschaton]

Put me down as one of those people who doesn't think a Trek reboot is needed, and we can tell plenty of stories within the existing Trek canon. However, there are a lot of things we could potentially "correct" if there was a well-done reboot which would help to create a show more attuned to modern sci-fi norms. Here would be my list.

1. No universal translator. I realize it's a great plot contrivance, but it makes no sense at all, because such a device would essentially need to read everyone's mind in order to work properly. Plus it never makes sense as depicted on the screen, given peoples' lips move in sync with the translated dialogue, not their own tongue. This could limit the type of stories which are told within the Trekverse, but honestly the lame first-contact style stories where we discover aliens exactly like us in every way except for one little thing needs to die.
2. No transporters either. Technically speaking a transporter isn't as out there of an idea, as breaking down someone atom-by-atom and rebuilding them somewhere else probably would be feasible with a lot of processing power. But the tech originally was developed due to TOS budgetary limitations - not being able to show shuttlecraft every week. There's no reason for it in the modern era.
3. Replicators are fine as is, because honestly they are just a further elaboration of modern-day technologies like 3D printing. However, a Trek reboot would hopefully have a better handle on them. For example, perhaps replicators can make anything provided they have access to a supply of the base element, meaning some rare minerals still have value. There should be a more consistent understanding of how replicators result in a post-scarcity economy as well.
4. Trek's computer systems are often startlingly dumb, considering their computers should be centuries more advanced than our own. We know true AI is possible, although 24th century computers seldom break through this barrier. Even if self-aware AI is difficult to achieve, the on-board computers should be able to do a large proportion of the work of running the ship itself - everything from performing evasive maneuvers to locking weapons to engaging in repairs via semi-autonomous drones. Honestly from a story perspective this would be better, as it would free up our crew do do more away missions, and less tech the tech to plot the plot.
5. Humanoid races should be dialed way back. I am fine with keeping some of the established races as humanoid, but going all the way back to TOS and some of the early movies we saw a fair number of non-humanoid races. Trek needs more of them - particularly more who are not some sort of hyper-evolved "energy being."
6. Human-alien hybridization started of course with Spock, but it got to be ridiculous during the Berman era, with virtually every species shown to be cross-fertile despite having very different biochemistry. If we want to leave this in for select races, that's fine, but some in-story explanation, like the Iconians harvesting primitive humans and spreading them in modified form across the galaxy should be used.
7. Starfleet needs to cease to be 90%+ dominated by humans. The Federation was always purportedly an equal partnership between many different alien races, yet virtually every time we see a Starfleet vessel 90%+ of the people onboard are human. I understand this started in part because the idea of Starfleet as being a multi-species organization developed over time, and also due to budgetary limitations. Still, either canonically find some way to explain humans being dominant, or don't show humans as being dominant.
8. Similarly, Trek needs to depict the full scale of 23rd/24th century humanity. This means we shouldn't just see the Federation as "Space America" by way of whoever is easiest to cast as extras in California or Canada. Just sheer luck of the draw should mean the majority of humans in Starfleet (presuming current population trends continue) would be East or South Asian.
9. In addition, Trek needs to depict far more multiracial humans. If humanity put racism behind them, one would presume that any stigma about interracial marriage had vanished. Obviously there would still be a lot of remote places on Earth where most everyone was from one background or another, but we know that a lot of Starfleet officers follow in their parents footsteps, suggesting there should be a disproportionately high level of people from backgrounds so mixed they're no longer any one thing in particular.
10. I'd like a broader depiction of advanced alien races more broadly. In the Trekverse, it seems like nearly every alien race is either less advanced than the Federation, or within a few hundred years of development. Otherwise, they're just some godlike energy being. But the universe is 13.7 billion years old, and there should be many truly ancient civilizations which have not advanced into a higher plane yet are still as far beyond the Federation as the UFP is from a stone-age tribe. This would require developing a different sort of story, but it would offer up a great deal of story potential, given it would drive home that the galaxy is a huge place full of strange wonders built by the elder races.

Thoughts?

 

[Starbreaker]

Beyond had a functional translator that didn't lip synch, and Discovery has had loads of Klingon dialog. But then people complain about having to read a TV show. It's a real Catch-22

 

[Lord Garth]

I was for a reboot as far back as 2003. To put it into context, I thought Star Trek in its form at the time was done (and I was right). BUT I also said I wouldn't have thought you couldn't do anything else with Star Trek if they didn't reboot. Just that they needed a different creative direction.

Back then, I didn't think of 10 things I would've done differently in a reboot, but I will now and use some of the ideas I already had as a starting point.

1. Set the show in the year 3000 or later. There's no way we'll be a space-faring civilization 100, 200, or 300 years from now that's as established as the Federation with Earth at the center of it.

2. If Starfleet's not the military, have another branch that is and have them do what Starfleet doesn't. This keeps Starfleet as explorers and lets someone else do the fighting. ENT actually had something along these lines with the MACOs.

3. Have aliens that are truly alien. If we're encountering the Unknown for the first time, we shouldn't be able to easily understand or communicate with them. And definitely not instantly.

4. Have the ideas that "Technology might've changed but humans have remained the same" and "Humans are evolved, we're no longer the dangerous, savage child race" as the liberal and conservative ideologies of Humanity.

5. But DO NOT make Earth the center of the Federation. It's one world among several. Portray it that way. Maybe Starfleet is mostly Human but it's also truly not the military in this version. There are other fleets that have other races. And there's a militia that's completely integrated that we might or might not see. So, it doesn't have to be All Aliens All The Time.

6. Whether the different nations of Earth today like it or not, the world is becoming more integrated. Especially financially and due to international special interests. War is going to become less and less feasible than it already is. And the reason we haven't had WWIII in the last 70 years is because no nuclearized nations truly want Nuclear War because it's Mutually Assured Destruction. So, there's no World War III in Earth's history and the planet came together as something that evolved out of time as necessity.

7. Why don't we see far more advanced races more often? We used to see them sometimes in TOS but less afterwards. In Star Trek, the Prime Directive prohibits direct contact with Pre-Warp Civilizations. What if there's a similar version of the Prime Directive that Post-Warp Civilizations use? Most of them have no direct contact with Warp Civilizations because they view the Federation as being as primitive as the Federation would see us.

8. No Good Guys vs. Bad Guys. I'd have antagonists with legitimately different points of view that are as well-developed as the Federation's and neither side would be perfect. I'd let the viewer decide who they want to side with and who they want to agree with. Maybe it would even depend on the issue. You agree with the Federation on one issue but with someone else on another.

9. Equal representation of gender and nationalities among Humans. This should be a given.

10. Choices would not be easy and the crew wouldn't be able to fix everything on a Planet of the Week in one episode. Nor would they try to fix something that's none of their business.

BONUS

11. If I were rebooting with the TOS crew, I'd make the crew -- or at least Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Scotty -- about the same age as they were in TWOK. I'd like to see an ongoing series with a 50-year-old Kirk who has to get to know the son he's spent so much time away from and has started to regret some of the choices he's made now that life is starting to catch up to him.

12. Episodes would have a beginning, middle, and end but would be part of a season-long narrative. There'd be arcs within the Federation at large, the galaxy at large, and onboard the ship. It would be a living, breathing universe and I'd give that impression even if we don't see all of it.

 

[Lord Garth]

It seems like it's just us, so far, eschaston, with a full list. So I'll risk a double-post and compare notes.

As you can see, DSC only does two-and-a-half of the things I listed above. #10, 12, and (up to an extent) #9. So, I'm possibly one of the few Trekkies who can get really into a series even if it's not what I personally would've come up with.

But, anyway, let's see where we agree:

Looks like we agree with no Universal Translator to a degree. I think they should have software that can interpret languages the Federation is familiar with but that's the extent of it. Though adaptive smart tech could eventually crack a foreign language with enough exposure.

We agree on computer tech needing to be smarter.

We agree on there being less humanoid-looking aliens, though I came up with an "out" if the make-up budget wouldn't allow for alien-looking aliens all the time (see my Point #5).

I agree that the military branch of the Federation should be better represented by more races, which is why I suggest a Starfleet that's entirely separate from the military branch. So, it's something we agree with fundamentally, we just go about handling it in different ways.

I agree with seeing more of Humanity besides just Starfleet.

We agree about showcasing greater diversity among Humans, as opposed to just diversity within the United States of America and token presences beyond the United States.

And we agree about showing races and societies more advanced than the Federation and what I call Post-Warp Societies. Ones that wouldn't need warp drive to travel from place to place.

.
.
.

So it looks like we're actually on the same page about a lot of things. More than we might've thought going by just the Discovery Forum.

 

[eschaton]

I agree that the military branch of the Federation should be better represented by more races, which is why I suggest a Starfleet that's entirely separate from the military branch. So, it's something we agree with fundamentally, we just go about handling it in different ways.

One intriguing possibility - retcon the Federation into being a much looser union. Indeed, in some ways the Federation borrows from Iain Banks' Culture series, with the post-scarcity replicator and AI economy meaning most Federation worlds are not only developed beyond capitalism, but quasi anarchist. Starfleet thus isn't a quasi-navy, but a very large NGO, similar to Amnesty International, Habitat for Humanity, or the Wikimedia Foundation. People - mostly, but not exclusively humans - join Starfleet because they want to help make a difference expanding the knowledge base of the Federation and to help resolve crises.

Edit: The beauty of this system is it allows for other non-Starfleet organizations as well. For example, an independent Section 31 on steroids is totally doable. Also if you follow the "loose Federation" model, there could be all sorts of internal conflict within "paradise." This is helpful, because if you want to avoid falling back on the universal translator, a fair amount of stories should take place within the core Federation as well, not just on the frontier.

 

[iliescu]

Would perhaps remove more of the prime directive and get them humans better fighting chances sometimes they get out class and it feels odd for those heroes to lose that way (sometimes a bit more than too much). That is about it.

 

[eschaton]

Would perhaps remove more of the prime directive and get them humans better fighting chances sometimes they get out class and it feels odd for those heroes to lose that way (sometimes a bit more than too much). That is about it.

Voyager totally ruined the Prime Directive. The earlier series made it clear it was primarily about non-interference in more primitive civilizations. When it came to warp-capable races, it seemingly just stated that the Federation can't much about in internal affairs of other governments - basically respecting governmental sovereignty. But on Voyager, it was used as a lazy plot device to create moral quandaries on a regular basis (and then ignored half a season later in functionally identical circumstances).

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'd make it an actual reboot. None of this namby-pamby DiscoTrek "It's the same even though it looks totally different, has way better technology and the stories all conflict" or the Kelvin "It's an alternate timeline" stuff (which means they can change stuff like how the universe works)

Maybe something like JMS' TOS reboot pitch from 2003 or whenever it was.

 

[-Brett-]

If I were really doing this, I'd go all the way and make a whole new series. But if we have to keep the Star Trek brand, I agree with most of whats been said so far.

A few things I haven't seen mentioned yet:

I'd make it a reboot of the whole franchise, not just TOS. Shuffle the timeline around so that the characters of TOS and most of the spin offs are more or less contemporaries. Leave the door open for adaptations of worthwhile characters and stories from all series.

I think phasers would need to lose their stun setting. A truly modern Star Trek would need to treat firearms and firearm safety seriously. Depicting consequence-free shootings would seem pretty irresponsible in todays world.

Transporters? I agree they've become too much of a cure-all, but they're such an iconic part of the franchise that I don't think you could cut them completely and still call it Star Trek. Maybe make them so that they require a pad at both ends, so that the characters can't just escape whenever something gets too rough.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

Discovery has had loads of Klingon dialog. But then people complain about having to read a TV show. It's a real Catch-22

Yeah I would love it if Star Trek aliens actually spoke in their native tongue all the time and the translation was in subtitles. I loved that about the early DSC episodes. But I'm pretty sure I'm a minority there.

 

[PureCrimson]

Start it in the FAR future, past anything we've ever seen, by far; no more retconning or fanservice. Its own new thing, and now we can see the best future Trek tech with modern effects.

That would be my first step.

 

[Lord Garth]

Yeah I would love it if Star Trek aliens actually spoke in their native tongue all the time and the translation was in subtitles. I loved that about the early DSC episodes. But I'm pretty sure I'm a minority there.

I have a friend who loves reading Klingon translations and thinks the Klingon language sounds very Shakespearean, especially in DSC. I brought up something unrelated and then she said "I'm reading what they say!" So I waited until they were done.

 

[dswynne1]

Some of the ideas I've read just makes STAR TREK unrecognizable to me. Bleh. But, I'm game.

1) Keep the "Universal Translator". Why? We have that now. Why wouldn't such a device exist in the future? In fact, it would be in the form of an implant, or part of the communication system (like a communicator of some type, or the combadge). I will say that if a new alien civilization is discovered, that's when you can either have the UT partial work, or not at all. But for well-known aliens that have had extensive dealings with Earth, then the UT would come into play.

3) The Federation is basically the UN. Sorry, but if humans can't get along on the same page, I seriously doubt that Earth and some alien government will fare any better. In other words, there will ALWAYS be competing interests.

3) Starfleet is the United Earth's military organization, and UESPA is its "NASA". My idea is that the USS Enterprise and other ships loaned by Starfleet, and are assigned to assist in the peaceful exploration and scientific pursuits with UESPA. Emergency situations and actual hostilities are dealt with in specific protocols that are laid out before hand.

4) Starfleet MACOs are the equivalent of the SEALs; Starfleet Marines are the only "ground" force that exist off-world (the equivalent to the US Army and US Air Force have been rolled into a single organization known as the UE Defense Force, and solely exist on Earth itself, which combines the functions of the US Coast Guard, Merchant Marines, National Guard and Air National Guard).

5) I would maintain the same timeline, but the development of the Warp Drive would be at a slower rate (i.e. no transwarp development). This is probably the only thing I agree upon with GR.

Thoughts?

 

[Lord Garth]

3) Starfleet is the United Earth's military organization, and UESPA is its "NASA". My idea is that the USS Enterprise and other ships loaned by Starfleet, and are assigned to assist in the peaceful exploration and scientific pursuits with UESPA. Emergency situations and actual hostilities are dealt with in specific protocols that are laid out before hand.

That would work. The root behind me thinking the two should be separate is how to resolve argument that Starfleet isn't the military when it clearly is. So, having the Enterprise being part of EUSPA works.

The Enterprises would be EUSPA. The Defiant and Discovery would definitely be Starfleet. Voyager, I could see going either way.

4) Starfleet MACOs are the equivalent of the SEALs; Starfleet Marines are the only "ground" force that exist off-world (the equivalent to the US Army and US Air Force have been rolled into a single organization known as the UE Defense Force, and solely exist on Earth itself, which combines the functions of the US Coast Guard, Merchant Marines, National Guard and Air National Guard).

ENT isn't my strong suit, but I was using them as an example for who could be used for warfare. But Starfleet -- if EUSPA is the separate thing we're talking about -- works just as well.

 

[eschaton]

1) Keep the "Universal Translator". Why? We have that now. Why wouldn't such a device exist in the future? In fact, it would be in the form of an implant, or part of the communication system (like a communicator of some type, or the combadge). I will say that if a new alien civilization is discovered, that's when you can either have the UT partial work, or not at all. But for well-known aliens that have had extensive dealings with Earth, then the UT would come into play.

In that case, it's not a "universal translator" it's just a translator. Certainly there's no reason to not think that future AI, provided it has enough information on a language, will be able to accurately translate it on the fly. I can even buy the idea that the AI could learn new languages much faster than even the best human savant. But the UT as it is shown onscreen is magic, not science. In order to translate dialogue immediately upon first contact, the UT would have to read the minds of aliens, no matter how different their brain structures may be.

Let me also say that although I'm not a huge fan of it, I'm fine with depicting aliens speaking their own tongue as speaking English. This is a contrivance for the audience, just like when a movie which takes place in the Roman Empire or Nazi Germany has everyone speaking English. But something would need to be done in order to drive home there was a communications barrier between the aliens and the Federation. Maybe it could be dealt with "Hunt for Red October" style, with a few lines of subtitled dialogue and then a quick switch to English.

Of course, if every first contact type situation involved a "Darmok-style" learning curve, it would get old quickly. But there would be ways around this. Sometimes a crew could go to a planet already contacted, with language data downloaded into the AI. Other times you could have Federation splinter colonies inhabited by Humans, Vulcans, Andorians, etc. Since the goal of these episodes is typically to show other cultures which are the same as our own except for "one weird trick" there's no reason why they need to be some random forehead-bump race who speaks with neutral Calfornian/Canadian accents.

 

[Samuel]

You can "reinvent" the transporters without making them matter transmitters as in Star Trek with all the implications of that both good and bad.

For example "reexplain" the transporters and short range personal war fields. The transporter chamber encasing a person in a warp field for about a 10th of a second before it collapses meaning a person or object could be transmitted 18.600 miles (30,000 kilometers) but that would be it.

My reboot preference would be a matter of production and effects. Stop doing what modern Star Trek did and constantly showing ships in combat in the same frame on film. Apparently flying right alongside each other.

 

[Kronos]

Love the idea of getting rid of the transporters, or just make them useful for moving non living objects.

 

[mos6507]

I know I'm cutting across the grain but I see Trek as a heritage brand of sorts, sort of like Star Wars (prior to some of the deliberate revisionism in TLJ).

I think that a lot of what Trek stood for is sort of a time-capsule that doesn't really fit today's culture, or in some ways is behind the curve (like all of the self-congratulating backflips over diversity--diversity is now an empty marketing gimmick in Hollywood).

I think that's why, at the end of the day, I guess I'm content to just watch The Orville, in the sense that it doesn't so much as try to change things, but to merely keep things as they were, with plotlines that occasionally touch on more modern first-world problems.

I also think that Trek will not succeed unless it finds more of an auteur or visionary who wants to embrace it. I don't think the committee approach used in Discovery yielded good results. It just needs somebody to rise up and take the bull by the horns. I think that is why there was so much excitement about Tarantino doing a movie. Even as a one-off, you know he would put 100% of his energy into it, that he has some story he's really passionate about, whereas I feel that both Berman and JJ approached the material more like hacks.

 

[Lord Garth]

The fact that diversity is seen as a gimmick shows what's wrong with the society we're living in. It's NOT a trend. It's NOT a gimmick. It's real life. The fact that it's seen as "just a trend" is horrible (for lack of stronger language). "Moving passed it" is even worse. I'll stop right there because I don't want to get started on this. I feel pretty STRONGLY about this subject.

Switching gears. I agree that someone should tackle Star Trek by the horns. At the same time, it can't keep reflecting the future as projected from the 1960s. I don't think the core concept of Star Trek is specific to the '60s. There were stories of people travelling through space long before that.

 

[eschaton]

The fact that diversity is seen as a gimmick shows what's wrong with the society we're living in. It's NOT a trend. It's NOT a gimmick. It's real life. The fact that it's seen as "just a trend" is horrible (for lack of stronger language). "Moving passed it" is even worse. I'll stop right there because I don't want to get started on this. I feel pretty STRONGLY about this subject.

As I said in the Discovery forum, I'd argue that Trek has regressed on diversity as time has gone on. On TOS, out of the six primary human characters, fully half were depicted as being from a country other than America, with a real effort being made to present a future United Earth which was more than just Space America (even if that's the function the Federation played in the show). Discovery cared a lot about representation from an American lens regarding race/gender/sexual orientation, but couldn't even be bothered to make a single main cast member explicitly be from a non-American background.