My Conclusion: STXI = Reboot

[Basil]

Sharr Khan said:

Well, that seemed to be Enterprise's take on things . . . and we saw how that all worked out.

"redesigning", was hardly the thing that killed Enterprise (which I generally liked) being pretty much the same (bland, predicable) of what we'd seen years of already had more to do with that.

Didn't say it was. I said we saw how all that worked out.

 

[Sharr Khan]

Basil said:

Sharr Khan said:

Well, that seemed to be Enterprise's take on things . . . and we saw how that all worked out.

"redesigning", was hardly the thing that killed Enterprise (which I generally liked) being pretty much the same (bland, predicable) of what we'd seen years of already had more to do with that.

Didn't say it was. I said we saw how all that worked out.

But wasn't that the implication? "They did radically different designs then what I expected, so no one watched" tends to be the mentality.

Keep in mind I would have designed the NX-01 different (and also not made its "class" name either) but that's beside the point.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

TeutonicNights said:
I think most people would agree some redesigning just has to be done.
For example if they get in a shuttle, I don't wanna see that huge honking lamp and those ridiculous controls with analog gauges.
I also believe most people would accept a radical redesigning of the sickbay, if some nods to TOS- like McCoy's "poison bottles" and the iconic lifesign display, the biobeds- are included.
While there are those who will never give this movie a chance, most people that are skeptical now will be ready to enjoy it if it's clear JJ tried to respect the old designs going beyond being just "nods" in sensitive areas.

Maybe the bridge design, the uniforms and the Enterprise model are most crucial. No one will give a shit if they totally redesign the shuttle interior or even the corridors, but if the bridge looks very different and "anachronistic", many people will be pissed.
I like Orci's statement about filling the blanks of canon. I want to see "what the original TOS bridge could do": Expand on the original touchscreen controls instead of replacing the buttons with TNG-style controls for example. Also, show what Sulu and Spock are seeing in their viewers, show new places on the ship, like a rec deck with big windows or even a holographic astrometrics lab.

Redesigning the transporter console (and room) will be hard because it's both iconic and looking incredibly crappy.

Maybe some designs cannot be saved. But if they totally throw things away that worked, just to be kewl, that would be a shame.
This movie should be about everything that made TOS so great. That's the characters, true. But it's also some of the designs that are not just "iconic", but also timeless and credible.

Same with the WNMHGB uniforms. They don't even have to all wear them. Maybe only the bridge officers wear them in that period. Maybe security and engineering have special outfits like in TMP. But it would be nice to see the WNMHGB/The Cage uniforms also exist "there".

Agreed.

The best way to look at all this is to pretend that there's a "REAL" version of Star Trek that actually happened (or "will happen") and back in the 1960s, they did their best to replicate that "real" Star Trek, and did so as successfully as they could within the limitations of 1960s technology and a TV show budget.

The 1960s TV show was a pretty close approximation, but it was rough around the edges in some areas, in other words.

If they do a new version, what they need to keep in mind is not "how can we redesign all of this" but rather "how can we better approximate what the 'real' versions of these, which were the targets of the 1960s show's design work as well, would be like?"

We still don't have real 23rd-century technology, so whatever they do will still be an approximation of this mythical "real version." But they can make it "match up" a little bit better in some ways.

The trick is to keep in mind that there's a common "real" version, never actually seen by any of us, that both are striving to approximate.

This mindset allows you to EXPAND, and to IMPROVE, but not to overtly CONTRADICT.

Your shuttle interior comments, for instance, are perfect.

I'd want to see a fold-out visual scanner device, ideally with a roughly spherical body shape. But it need not be an EXACT match for what was done, on a shoestring budget, back in 1966.

You could then say that we're just seeing something closer to what it "always really looked like."

THAT is the way to "update" things. Not to redesign just for the hell of it, to give some "arteeest" an ego boost, or whatever.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Sharr Khan said:

Well, that seemed to be Enterprise's take on things . . . and we saw how that all worked out.

"redesigning", was hardly the thing that killed Enterprise (which I generally liked) being pretty much the same (bland, predicable) of what we'd seen years of already had more to do with that.

Having the wrong colored railings won't kill this film. Being a chore to watch or just plain boring will.

Sharr

Right. The NX-01, while not really very inspiring as a design, wasn't what made me flinch so often during the first two seasons of that show. (I still throw up in my mouth a little every time I think about them trying to turn mind-melding into the vulcan version of gay sex, just so they could preach at us a little bit more.)

 

[Basil]

Sharr Khan said:

Basil said:

Sharr Khan said:

Well, that seemed to be Enterprise's take on things . . . and we saw how that all worked out.

"redesigning", was hardly the thing that killed Enterprise (which I generally liked) being pretty much the same (bland, predicable) of what we'd seen years of already had more to do with that.

Didn't say it was. I said we saw how all that worked out.

But wasn't that the implication? "They did radically different designs then what I expected, so no one watched" tends to be the mentality.

Keep in mind I would have designed the NX-01 different (and also not made its "class" name either) but that's beside the point.

Well, that's what you inferred. I simply stated that was Enterprise's take on things and we saw how it turned out.

 

[Sharr Khan]

Well, that's what you inferred. I simply stated that was Enterprise's take on things and we saw how it turned out.

People tend to make such statements, going under the assumption that one looking at said statment will take certian inferences from it.

Kinda like when I bring up "Transformers" and add on "hey look how that went" most people reading that would rightly infer my point of saying such is: "Oh he's subtly implying they succeeded with Transformers well enough, so we should expect the same in this case".

The same technique is also embloyeed to be condescending or snide.

Sharr

 

[Basil]

Sharr Khan said:

Well, that's what you inferred. I simply stated that was Enterprise's take on things and we saw how it turned out.

People tend to make such statements, going under the assumption that one looking at said statment will take certian inferences from it.

Kinda like when I bring up "Transformers" and add on "hey look how that went" most people reading that would rightly infer my point of saying such is: "Oh he's subtly implying they succeeded with Transformers well enough, so we should expect the same in this case".

The same technique is also embloyeed to be condescending or snide.

Sharr

Not meant to be snide at all. But I write what I mean, and I wrote what I meant. I have noticed, however, that some people take their inferences to be the equivalent to what the poster actually said. That's not always true.

 

[Opus]

Steven Of Nine said:

OphaClyde said:
Even with Nimoy aboard, this is a reboot. To what extent remains to be seen, but it is.

Your main evidence for it being a reboot continues to be that Uniforms have changed.

Sorry, mate, you're overreacting. And quite frankly, we don't want Trek made and remade the way it was, do we? We have those shows and movies already.

This anguish seems self-satisfying and self-pitying.

What anguish? What pity? I haven't said it was a BAD thing, mate.

I am just acknowledging that, unlike past Trek's that have given an obvious nod to the look and feel of TOS, this will be the first Trek that will actually change TOS.

And not just the uniforms, but there is also the hint that the Enterprise herself and many of the sets will be changed, as well as the actors of course.

Bad? Good? I don't know. I've said as much from the beginning. I am, however, looking forward to see it.

 

[Balthier the Great]

gastrof said:

BalthierTheGreat said:
So they changed the uniforms. I think you're placing way to much emphasis on the color of the pants Kirk wears.

The essence of Trek wasn't having Kirk in the right uniform, or not changing the set. The idea is exploration. I'd be far more inclined to call XI a reboot if it lacked the science fictiony goodness of TOS. Somehow all of this got backwards and Trek is only Trek for having the right look. Trek is Trek if it has the Trek nature. It would have been Trek if they made the TNG actors act nude on an empty set. What matters is the content, not the dressing.

I don't think you understand what's being said.

Those of us who've suggested the movie will be at least a type of reboot (possibly meaning to change the look only, but holding to all plotlines we know from the original timeline) aren't saying the movie won't be true to the "spirit" of Trek.

What we're saying is that Trek has always had an established history.

Everything followed what came before. Even ENTERPRISE addressed the seeming discontinuity of Klingon appearance, finally ironing out the one real wrinkle in continuity there was.

If we saw a glimpse back to an earlier Trek era, we saw EXACTLY what we'd seen before. It all matched.

What's happening here is like having a stage play where different actors play the characters with each new act, but they're not supposed to be a different age.

More than that, the sets keep being redesigned, us seeing several different versions of the same room, none of them looking like one another. Again, there not being any significant passage of time in the story.

You'd never accept it. You wouldn't know who was talking to who, and even if they used one another's names while talking, you couldn't be sure if this was the same "Mike and Betty" as you saw in the last act, or if this was a different couple. The changes in the sets would also have you wondering "where are they?", it not being clear that this is supposed to be the same room.

You'd never accept it as "sane" theater. You'd wonder just what these people were doing, and if this was some sort of bizarre "art" piece.

In Trek XI, we can easilly accept the new faces. This is an earlier time in the lives of Kirk, Spock, etc. We understand there have to be younger actors playing them.

To change the appearance of the ship, the uniforms, etc., however, is to change the anchor. We KNOW what the TOS era looked like, and now JJ seems to be telling us "No you don't...but this IS the same era."

In my own thread, I compared this to SUPERMAN RETURNS. Supposedly, Singer intends this to be a sequel to the first two films starring Chris Reeve as Clark/Superman. While some things look different (and it's implied they always have...the costume, for example), the EVENTS of the first two films are what's being held on to. Not the look, but the plot/story/continuity.

It seems that dispite Team Trek's promising us that XI does indeed take place in the same continuity we've always known, their changing the look of EVERYTHING says very plainly it does NOT.

The closest we can come is to view XI as a parallel universe. Maybe a later film with this cast will take place during the five year mission, and make references to things we saw during the series. If this happens, it'll plainly suggest that the STORIES we know are sill valid, but for THIS Kirk and Spock, the things seen in those stories by us LOOKED different than we remember.

Again, it seems the best we're going to have with XI is a very similar parallel universe to "our" TOS.

I don't like that they're changing things, but if it works one way, it can work the other way too.

We might be able to well imagine that while the new Kirk and Spock with their nu-look Enterprise are having various adventures in this and any later films, "our" Kirk and Spock had the very same adventures, but with the ship, uniforms, and equipment that we know from the original series.

Quality of film-making or story-telling isn't what this is all about.

It's simply a matter of things looking different, and the production thus PROVING itself to not be the same universe/continuity we've always known.

It seems CBS/Paramount and JJ have decided to disconnect from "our" Kirk and Spock and their reality, and show us something else.

Okay. Maybe it'll still be a sort of "Star Trek", but it won't be the same, despite claiming to be.

Again, all we know is the art direction. You hate it with the eternal hatred of 10,000 suns. Fair enough. But art direction is only a tiny part of the entire thing. If Spock suddenly is an emo punk, even if the sets are identical, THAT would be a reboot. Or if Kirk is suddenly a woman. That isn't going on.

And there are other hints that suggest that they do intend to honor cannon. Pike being there is a rather large nod. The fact that they've returned to color-coding the departments is good (in the last two movies, everyone wore black and grey). This isn't an open and shut case of JJ taking a leak on TOS.

As a final word, I like the art direction as I've seen it so far. I like having colorful uniforms, I like some of the concept art that's been posted here before.

 

[Vektor]

You know, what this really boils down to is a debate over terminology and semantics. All I can picture is a group of people gathered around shouting in each others' faces:

"It's a reboot!"

"No, it's a reimagining!"

"You're both wrong, it's a reinterpretation!"

Like it makes a flying frak's worth of difference which sort of re-whatever it actually is, or that such a thing can ever in a million years be objectively established. The only thing that is unarguable is that it's gonna be different. The degree of difference is going to be acceptable, even welcome, to some people, and absolutely unacceptable to others. Some people would love to see them change everything and abandon all things anachronistic about TOS, while others will be calling for boycotts if a single cuff braid is out of place or a single control panel button is the wrong color. When all is said and done and the movie is released and we are all able to see it and judge for ourselves, people will still be coming on here and posting threads to say, "See! I told you it was a reboot!" or whatever. These words are meaningless, or at least indistinguishable from each other in any practical, definable sense, which makes them invaluable to people who just want to be able to say they were right all along, no matter what the movie winds up to be like.

Keep playing the game if you want to, but don't kid yourself that it's anything else.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Vektor said:The only thing that is unarguable is that it's gonna be different. The degree of difference is going to be acceptable, even welcome, to some people, and absolutely unacceptable to others.

Exactly right.

 

[ancient]

I don't think anyone is saying it won't be different. Obviously, with all the roles re-cast (except old Spock) we aren't going to be seeing the same old gang. I'd say that was the first major hurtle that caused about 10 or so people in this forum to just...melt.

But that's over now and we're on to the next two hurtles:

1. Continuity (which looks pretty much intact).
2. Set design/uniforms (which may be pretty much anything.)

I hope they at least keep the most iconic designs: The ENT, the bridge, the uniforms I want to be pretty similar. Obviously with better construction materials and a lot neater than the exposed- zipper/dented-walls look the series started to get after 3 years.

And on an unrelated note:

3. A good story. (Damn those details!)

 

[Vektor]

And as Dennis pointed out in another thread, very few of these details will matter hardly at all to about 90% of this movie's target audience. The rest of us will either be able to roll with it and enjoy it anyway or just implode.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I admit I am very curious to know how the Trek novels will (and you know they will) deal with any inconsistencies that may arise.

I mean, they sure did a bang-up job cleaning up the shitfest that was TATV, didn't they?

 

[EyalM]

Reboot/Re-imagining/Remake... Non of these terms has a clear definition. We're like a bunch of priests arguing over how many angels can stand on the edge of a pin.

 

[blaXXer]

I do not understand what all the fuss is about...
Okay, so we got new uniforms, we got uniform chages all the way through Trek: From TOS to TMP and from TMP to TWOK and even several times during TNGs rund.

I do not understand how it would be such a stretch that there had been several uniform changes from ENT to Trek XI to WNMHGB and then to TOS...

 

[Falcor5]

blaXXer said:
I do not understand what all the fuss is about...
Okay, so we got new uniforms, we got uniform chages all the way through Trek: From TOS to TMP and from TMP to TWOK and even several times during TNGs rund.

I do not understand how it would be such a stretch that there had been several uniform changes from ENT to Trek XI to WNMHGB and then to TOS...

Ya good point. I mean talking about uniforms just look at Generations. We saw all sorts of different versions of uniforms worn and that was all in one movie!

 

[xortex]

J.J. should really concentrate on other things than that which went right for TOS instead of substituting his own idea for what is more right than Roddenberries' TOS. This to me is a radical reaction and solution to something that is not exactly right by creating it's direct opposite. It is impossible to know the future, least of which by making things more modern and of the now. This is why there are so few sci-fi visionaries and not everyone can be one just by dumping alot of money into it.

 

[Holytomato]

"I am just acknowledging that, unlike past Trek's that have given an obvious nod to the look and feel of TOS, this will be the first Trek that will actually change TOS."

Mmmm...I'm going to check this statement.

TOS: Vulcanian to Vulcan. USEPA to Starfleet. The Cage's lasers (prop and beam sfx) become WNMHGB's phasers. Time warp factor to warp factor. Lithium to Dilithium. Command Green to Command Gold.

TAS: hand drawn animation. M'Ress. Arex. 30 minute episodes. James Tiberius Kirk. Robert April. No physical models. Shield flares are different. The hull of the Enterprise isn't blue/gray. We see the deflector shield grid on the upper and lower halves of the saucer. Second turbolift. The bussard ramscoops, and lights are the main viewscreen are not done the way they were on TOS. USS Enterprise Starship Class to Constitution Class. Command Green to Command Gold. Nope. Not the same.

Franz Joseph: deflector shield grid seen on saucer. The navigational center screen is different. The torpedo tubes are not on the top off of the saucer, not the underside. Dreadnought class. Constitution Class. Command Green to Command Gold.

TMP: Bumpy Headed Klingons.

DC, Marvel, Gold Key, Malibu, Wildstorm, IDW: Longer episodes. Hand drawn art. Glowing impulse engines. Command Green to Command Gold.

Pocket Books, Ballantine: Hikaru Sulu. Backgrounds on characters. Longer episodes. Covers show deflector shield grid on the saucer, and better looking planets. Leonard H. McCoy. Leonard E. McCoy. Constitution Class to Constellation Class. How did George Kirk Sr. die? Command Green to Command Gold. Bumpy Headed Klingons

ADB's Starfleet Universe: I don't remember Hydrans being in TOS. Starfleet standard duty and landing party uniforms changed. Adam Turner's CGI covers have added detailing to ships. Command Green to Command Gold.

FASA: Klingons, and Romulans. Longer episodes. Command Green to Command Gold. Bumpy Headed Klingons.

LUG: Klingons, Romulans, Vulcans, Andorians, etc. Longer episodes. Command Green to Command Gold. Bumpy Headed Klingons.

TNG's Relics: carpet was wrong color. Starship Class to Constitution Class.

TNG's First Contact's Zef is different from TOS's Met's Zef.

TNG's Klingon and Romulans are different from TOS's Klingon and Romulans.

DS9's Trials and Tribblelations: Enterprise isn't blue/gray, and we see the deflector shield grid on the saucer. Grills in corridors are the wrong color. Cyrano Jones' shuttle is seen. Koloth's ship is green, with added deflector shield grid. Starship Class to Constitution Class. Command Green to Command Gold.

Voyager used a TMP K't'nga instead of a TOS K't'nga, and changed when the Famous Five Mission TM happened. Bumpy Headed Klingons.

ENT's In a Mirror Darkly: CGI Defiant has Aztec pattern, and vertical lines on hull; rear fixed phaser array, glowing impulse engines, new space shots on viewscreens, okudagram seen on main viewscreen, and star streaks inside warp bubble. CGI Gorn, and Tholians are different. CGI Space, planets. Tholian ships have new detail, and the web they spin is different. Enterprise NCC-1701 is no longer the 5th Starfleet vessel to bear the name. Command Green to Command Gold. Bumpy Headed Klingons. Andorians look different.

New Voyages, Exeter, Farragut, and Of Gods and Men: CGI ships, and planets. adds stuff from Franz Joseph. ex Starbase One. Aztec pattern, and vertical lines on hull; rear fixed phaser array, glowing impulse engines, and deflector shield grids. Command Green to Command Gold.

Legacy, Secret of Vulcan's Fury, 25th Anniversary, Judgment Rights, Captain's Chair, Klingon Academy flashback: CGI ships, planets, phasers, transporter beam, and characters. Adds detailing to ships' hulls. Enterprise bridge is changed. Command Green to Command Gold.

TOS-R: CGI ships, planets, and phasers. Readouts are changed. Command Green to Command Gold.

Mego, Playmates, Art Asylum: Command Green to Command Gold.

Mmmm...

None of these examples are done the same as the original TOS. Even the ones made during the original.

TOS has been changed before.

If only Star Trek XI comes as close as Superman Returns, Transformers, and Peter Jackson's King Kong.

and these examples are not considered reboots. :thumbsup:

Final analysis: Star Trek XI is *not* a reboot.

My take on this movie is from Galaxy Quest: Far out in the far away regions of space, in 1966 we picked up a signal of a show called Star Trek. We see out of focus shots. Now, 2007, thanks to signal enhancers we can see what the people from that far away planet saw in 1966. Think- Hubble. :thumbsup:

 

[Therin of Andor]

xortex said:
J.J. should really concentrate on other things than that which went right for TOS instead of substituting his own idea for what is more right than Roddenberries' TOS.

It's not that Abrams thinks he is "more right" than Roddenberry. TOS was made for the sensibilities of a TV audience of the 1960s that had not yet seen man conquer the moon. ST XI is being made for the cinema-going, tech-savvy general public of 2008.