My two cents on the Star Trek reboots...

[CaptainSpirk]

IMO, I feel that we really didn't need a reboot for the "Star Trek" universe, especially one based on the original series characters. If anything, we should have gotten a new set of film series, set in a new century, or if they wanted to reboot the series, base it in the 23rd Century, but with a new ship and a new crew, not based on Kirk, Spock and McCoy; that would have worked for me.

Paramount really messed up the franchise, by hiring a "Star Wars" fan to direct the reboot. J.J. Abrams literally bugged me when he said he was more of a "Star Wars" guy than "Star Trek" person. Go direct "Star Wars" if you want to, don't mess with our territory, which he did. Even his "Star Wars" didn't turn out that good. Didn't they learn when they hired Stuart Baird to direct "Star Trek: Nemesis," a complete novice.

Then, there's the hiring of two writers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, who knew next to nothing about the "Star Trek" universe. If they wanted to reboot the universe, at least base it partially on what's been created before. Instead, they go around changing everything willy-nilly.

What gives them the right changing the Kirk character to being a complete jerk (he literally is called Captain Jerk now). Stealing his uncle's car and crashing it in a ravine and easily rising through the ranks of captain, even though he cheated the Kobayashi Maru and was grounded. Shatner's Kirk looks more of a saint now compared to him.

Also, their interpretation of Spock literally bugs me. Zachary Quinto's Spock is far too emotional for my taste. Sure Spock was half-human, but Nimoy's Spock never displayed that much emotion. Only when he was the under the influence of some alien substance did he display emotion like in "The Naked Time" and "This Side of Paradise," when an alien plant sprayed him with some spores, and nothing more. He even tried to go for Kolinarh (spelling?) discipline to purge all human emotions. I also hate his fling with Uhura. Yuck.

To the actors that portray the familiar characters.
Chris Pine is no Captain Kirk for me. William Shatner will always be Kirk. Period.
Spock (stated above).
McCoy: I don't know why everyone likes his portrayal of Dr McCoy, he doesn't sound like him or act like him.
Scotty: Does not look like James Doohan
Sulu: Why is a Korean playing a Japanese character? At least, in the original series they managed to get the ethnicity right.
Chekov: No resemblance. RIP Anton Yelchin.
Uhura: No resemblance Zoe Saldana.
Bruce Greenwood's Captain Pike is no match for Jeffrey Hunter.
None of the actors resemble the previous actors.

At least "Star Wars" tries to get the actors to resemble their past when they do prequels or sequels etc, a la "Rogue One".

Even the design of the ship literally bugs me. From the huge ugly disproportionate warp nacelles to the brewery resembling the Engine Room to the corridors that resemble more like the "Star Wars" ship. Again, coming from a director who likes "Star Wars" more.

Sure, I did enjoy watching the 2009 film in the theaters, only because I hadn't seen a "Star Trek" film in a long time and seeing Leonard Nimoy in the movie literally brought a tear to my ear. But thinking back on these films, I don't think I can call them "Star Trek" movies anymore. It's fine if it brings more fans to the series, but it shouldn't have alienated old fans, like myself and plenty others, in the process.

I don't think I'll ever watch another version of J.J. Abrams version of "Star Trek" again or rewatch them again. I don't consider any of these films part of the canon.

RIP:
Gene and Majel Roddenberry
Leonard Nimoy
DeForest Kelley
James Doohan
Grace Lee Whitney
Ricardo Montalban

Rant over.

Sorry for the long winded article. Had to get this off my chest once and for all.

 

[F. King Daniel]

IMO, I feel that we really didn't need a reboot for the "Star Trek" universe, especially one based on the original series characters.

You're eight years late.

 

[Smellmet]

This isn't going to end well.

 

[Relayer1]

This isn't going to end well.

Probably not, but I agree with about 80% of his post.

 

[fireproof78]

I think Star Trek needed clean reboot, not just the alternate timeline. However, I enjoyed the cast (mostly), and thought the story of ST 09 was among the best of Star Trek.

However, I do understand why others might not enjoy it and certainly agree that Simon Pegg was miscast. However, the other cast members did well, and a lot of the BTS information indicates that the older cast was quite pleased with their portrayals.

 

[The Wormhole]

Sulu: Why is a Korean playing a Japanese character? At least, in the original series they managed to get the ethnicity right.

Sulu was never intended to be a Japanese character. Indeed, Sulu isn't even a Japanese name. The casting information for TOS describes Sulu as "pan-Asian" meaning any Asian ethnicity was eligible for the role. It is only because George Takei has a Japanese background that the Sulu character became Japanese and was given a Japanese first name. And his first name being Hikaru didn't even happen until TUC in 1991. With all this in mind, there is absolutely nothing wrong with casting a Korean actor to play the character.

Besides, Hoshi Sato on Enterprise is a character who was intended to be Japanese, and they still cast Korean actress Linda Park.

 

[Smellmet]

Probably not, but I agree with about 80% of his post.

I think I disagree with about 80% of it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Perhaps Star Trek Continues would be more up @CaptainSpirk's alley?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Malaika]

This reads like someone impersonating the old-fan-tos-purist-reboot-hater™.
It's just too good to be true.

I also hate his fling with Uhura. Yuck.

ok, CaptainSpirk ^

I don't think I'll ever watch another version of J.J. Abrams version of "Star Trek" again or rewatch them again. I don't consider any of these films part of the canon.

I'm glad you finally saw the light and understood that there is no point in still watching sequels of a successful franchise (this particular trek iteration) that you hate already. I'm happy for you.
It's a pity, though, that those who actually liked these movies, instead, might not even get more movies now because the latest movie 'made by trek fans for trek fans' like 'you' ended up being the least successful of the 3.

 

[CaptainSpirk]

You're eight years late.

I was in hospital in 2013, being diagnosed with terminal cancer, so give me a break. That was also the time when "Into Darkness" came out. Glad I was in hospital for that. My cancer is stable so far, if anyone's wondering.

Sulu was never intended to be a Japanese character. Indeed, Sulu isn't even a Japanese name. The casting information for TOS describes Sulu as "pan-Asian" meaning any Asian ethnicity was eligible for the role. It is only because George Takei has a Japanese background that the Sulu character became Japanese and was given a Japanese first name. And his first name being Hikaru didn't even happen until TUC in 1991. With all this in mind, there is absolutely nothing wrong with casting a Korean actor to play the character.

Besides, Hoshi Sato on Enterprise is a character who was intended to be Japanese, and they still cast Korean actress Linda Park.

Maybe Gene Roddenberry's outline probably gave a clearer background of Sulu's character, even though the series didn't specify it until the Undiscovered Country. Even Uhura was mentioned as being Swahili from the African union.

I sure did hate Linda Park's portrayal of Hoshi Sato. This was also miscast on the Enterprise production part. She looked more Korean than Japanese. Unless her character was meant to have part Korean blood in her. Me, being part Korean BTW, born in Australia.

Perhaps Star Trek Continues would be more up @CaptainSpirk's alley?

I'd rather see these than another JJ verse Star Trek films.

I'm glad you finally saw the light and understood that there is no point in still watching sequels of a successful franchise (this particular trek iteration) that you hate already. I'm happy for you. It's a pity, though, that those who actually liked these movies, instead, might not even get more movies now because the latest movie 'made by trek fans for trek fans' like 'you' ended up being the least successful of the 3.

I hope we don't get another film based on the Kelvin timeline. Abram's idea of going back in time to see Chris Hemsworth's George Kirk will certainly screw up the timeline even more. Also, how will they deal with Anton Yelchin's recent death. Should they recast or bring in a new character? They should recast like many other franchises have done, e.g. Bond. That's probably why they should leave this franchise with the trilogy and restart the franchise again, more to the fans liking.

 

[fireproof78]

I was in hospital in 2013, being diagnosed with terminal cancer, so give me a break. That was also the time when "Into Darkness" came out. Glad I was in hospital for that. My cancer is stable so far, if anyone's wondering.

I'm glad to hear your cancer is stable. That stuff is evil.

Maybe Gene Roddenberry's outline probably gave a clearer background of Sulu's character, even though the series didn't specify it until the Undiscovered Country. Even Uhura was mentioned as being Swahili from the African union.

I sure did hate Linda Park's portrayal of Hoshi Sato. This was also miscast on the Enterprise production part. She looked more Korean than Japanese. Unless her character was meant to have part Korean blood in her. Me, being part Korean BTW, born in Australia.

Well, TVH revealed that Sulu was from San Francisco. GR's point of Sulu was that he was an Asian crewmember, not that he was from a specific country. Even George Takei addressed that with John Cho in the BTS.

ETA: I have a question-in your OP you stated that you don't think Star Trek needs a reboot. However, at the end of this post, you stated that perhaps the Kelvin trilogy should be done and a new reboot done that would satisfy the fans. So, I'm curious-what would that reboot look like?

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I'm not a fan of this Barack Hussein Obama fella we just elected. There's just something about him that rubs me the wrong way. I'd like to see his long form birth certificate once or twice or eight times.

 

[CaptainSpirk]

I'm glad to hear your cancer is stable. That stuff is evil.

Thank you. It sure is evil stuff. I wish they would find a cure for cancer like in the 24th Century.

Well, TVH revealed that Sulu was from San Francisco. GR's point of Sulu was that he was an Asian crewmember, not that he was from a specific country. Even George Takei addressed that with John Cho in the BTS.

Didn't they try to film a scene in TVH when they went back in time and Sulu discovered his great, great, great great Uncle or something and then we find out he is supposed to be Japanese or something? Apparently, they couldn't get the actor to cooperate so they couldn't film it, but the scene appears in the adaptation of the novel.

I wonder if Sulu would have understood the Asian couple arguing then, if he wasn't from a specific region. From the looks of it, he didn't.

ETA: I have a question-in your OP you stated that you don't think Star Trek needs a reboot. However, at the end of this post, you stated that perhaps the Kelvin trilogy should be done and a new reboot done that would satisfy the fans. So, I'm curious-what would that reboot look like?

I think I should have said a new sequel, based in a new timeline, new ship, new crew, etc. They should also ignore the fact that Romulus was destroyed, or Vulcan for that matter.

This isn't going to end well.

Why isn't this going to end well? Am I not allowed to post my opinions?

 

[Smellmet]

Thank you. It sure is evil stuff. I wish they would find a cure for cancer like in the 24th Century.



Didn't they try to film a scene in TVH when they went back in time and Sulu discovered his great, great, great great Uncle or something and then we find out he is supposed to be Japanese or something? Apparently, they couldn't get the actor to cooperate so they couldn't film it, but the scene appears in the adaptation of the novel.

I wonder if Sulu would have understood the Asian couple arguing then, if he wasn't from a specific region. From the looks of it, he didn't.



I think I should have said a new sequel, based in a new timeline, new ship, new crew, etc. They should also ignore the fact that Romulus was destroyed, or Vulcan for that matter.



Why isn't this going to end well? Am I not allowed to post my opinions?

Of course you are. Just jesting. But if I went on the, say TOS forum with a big list slating it I'd expect a LOT of people there to respond in kind to it. It's no different here, especially when your points have been argued to death ad infinitum a million times before. There's plenty of folk here who love these movies and this 42 year old long time fan is one of them.

 

[CaptainSpirk]

Of course you are. Just jesting. But if I went on the, say TOS forum with a big list slating it I'd expect a LOT of people there to respond in kind to it. It's no different here, especially when your points have been argued to death ad infinitum a million times before. There's plenty of folk here who love these movies and this 42 year old long time fan is one of them.

I just had to get this off my chest, when I haven't made my point yet.

 

[Smellmet]

I just had to get this off my chest, when I haven't made my point yet.

The thing is, I feel like these films have actually captured the colourful 'goofy' vibe of TOS, which at it's heart is an action-adventure yarn, and these films reflect that. The films really don't mirror what came after very much, bar call backs, Easter eggs and homages, and especially not Berman-trek, and I can imagine a lot of fans of these other eras don't care for them that much. Your talky techno babble trek this ain't. I don't think bad robot was prepared to take the risk on that flavour of trek when they were developing the 2009 movie, and rightly so in my opinion after the failures of the last few years of the franchise.

I'm also of the opinion that the premise of 2009 movie was an utter stroke of genius, and was much more preferable to a straight up reboot, and was a pure Star Trek solution to the franchise's problems.

That they got big league blockbuster money to make them, with stunning visuals, and a largely stellar cast is just the icing on the cake for me.

Do I think they're perfect? Absolutely not. All three of them have their share of problems, and creative decisions I didn't necessarily agree with, but they are the best Trek movies since 1982 in my opinion.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Figured I'd give a proper reply...

I was in hospital in 2013, being diagnosed with terminal cancer, so give me a break. That was also the time when "Into Darkness" came out. Glad I was in hospital for that. My cancer is stable so far, if anyone's wondering.

I'm sorry to hear that, and wish you all the best.

IMO, I feel that we really didn't need a reboot for the "Star Trek" universe, especially one based on the original series characters. If anything, we should have gotten a new set of film series, set in a new century, or if they wanted to reboot the series, base it in the 23rd Century, but with a new ship and a new crew, not based on Kirk, Spock and McCoy; that would have worked for me.

But I love those characters, and have been wanting to see a modern version of them since I was introduced to the concept of reboots with 1989's Batman.

Paramount really messed up the franchise, by hiring a "Star Wars" fan to direct the reboot. J.J. Abrams literally bugged me when he said he was more of a "Star Wars" guy than "Star Trek" person. Go direct "Star Wars" if you want to, don't mess with our territory, which he did. Even his "Star Wars" didn't turn out that good. Didn't they learn when they hired Stuart Baird to direct "Star Trek: Nemesis," a complete novice.

Then, there's the hiring of two writers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, who knew next to nothing about the "Star Trek" universe. If they wanted to reboot the universe, at least base it partially on what's been created before. Instead, they go around changing everything willy-nilly.

Orci was a huge Trekkie. Don;t assume that just because they didn't re-imagine Trek as you would have, that they weren't fans. Bob's top ten Trek novel list is online somewhere (OTOH, it includes Prime Directive, Spock's World and Ex Machina), and his all-time favourite episode of any television show ever is Next Gen's finale, "All Good Things"

What gives them the right changing the Kirk character to being a complete jerk (he literally is called Captain Jerk now). Stealing his uncle's car and crashing it in a ravine and easily rising through the ranks of captain, even though he cheated the Kobayashi Maru and was grounded. Shatner's Kirk looks more of a saint now compared to him.

Also, their interpretation of Spock literally bugs me. Zachary Quinto's Spock is far too emotional for my taste. Sure Spock was half-human, but Nimoy's Spock never displayed that much emotion. Only when he was the under the influence of some alien substance did he display emotion like in "The Naked Time" and "This Side of Paradise," when an alien plant sprayed him with some spores, and nothing more. He even tried to go for Kolinarh (spelling?) discipline to purge all human emotions. I also hate his fling with Uhura. Yuck.

I think your "nothing more" is a massive misunderstanding of Spock's character, but regardless this is a younger Spock. Remember smiling and shouting Spock in "The Cage"?

To the actors that portray the familiar characters.
Chris Pine is no Captain Kirk for me. William Shatner will always be Kirk. Period.
Spock (stated above).
McCoy: I don't know why everyone likes his portrayal of Dr McCoy, he doesn't sound like him or act like him.
Scotty: Does not look like James Doohan
Sulu: Why is a Korean playing a Japanese character? At least, in the original series they managed to get the ethnicity right.
Chekov: No resemblance. RIP Anton Yelchin.
Uhura: No resemblance Zoe Saldana.
Bruce Greenwood's Captain Pike is no match for Jeffrey Hunter.
None of the actors resemble the previous actors.

They're not supposed to resemble them any more than any of the various Batman actors throughout the years have looked or acted the same. They're new versions of the characters. You hate them, but I thought they all did great.

At least "Star Wars" tries to get the actors to resemble their past when they do prequels or sequels etc, a la "Rogue One".

While seeing CG Peter Cushing was an interesting and entertaining one-off gimmick, I'd hate to see it ever become the norm. *shudder*

Even the design of the ship literally bugs me. From the huge ugly disproportionate warp nacelles to the brewery resembling the Engine Room to the corridors that resemble more like the "Star Wars" ship. Again, coming from a director who likes "Star Wars" more.

I thought it looked great, and the massive engineering sections gave it a sense of scale Trek ships haven't had since The Motion Picture.

Sure, I did enjoy watching the 2009 film in the theaters, only because I hadn't seen a "Star Trek" film in a long time and seeing Leonard Nimoy in the movie literally brought a tear to my ear. But thinking back on these films, I don't think I can call them "Star Trek" movies anymore. It's fine if it brings more fans to the series, but it shouldn't have alienated old fans, like myself and plenty others, in the process.

I don't think I'll ever watch another version of J.J. Abrams version of "Star Trek" again or rewatch them again. I don't consider any of these films part of the canon.

I've rewatched them multiple times and am eagerly awaiting the next one

Rant over.

Sorry for the long winded article. Had to get this off my chest once and for all.

Hope you feel better?

 

[The Wormhole]

Maybe Gene Roddenberry's outline probably gave a clearer background of Sulu's character, even though the series didn't specify it until the Undiscovered Country.

I have Roddenberry's outline right here. The character was supposed to represent Asia as a whole with no specific national ties. Indeed, if the character were intended to be Japanese, he would have been named something else given that there is no "lu" syllable in the Japanese language. Japanese dubs of TOS actually give the character a different name.

Even Uhura was mentioned as being Swahili from the African union.

That actually did get mentioned on the show.

 

[fireproof78]

Thank you. It sure is evil stuff. I wish they would find a cure for cancer like in the 24th Century.

I sure hope so. But then, according to GR, people don't mourn in the future.

Didn't they try to film a scene in TVH when they went back in time and Sulu discovered his great, great, great great Uncle or something and then we find out he is supposed to be Japanese or something? Apparently, they couldn't get the actor to cooperate so they couldn't film it, but the scene appears in the adaptation of the novel.

I wonder if Sulu would have understood the Asian couple arguing then, if he wasn't from a specific region. From the looks of it, he didn't.

Or he simply wasn't listening in on the conversation.

I think I should have said a new sequel, based in a new timeline, new ship, new crew, etc. They should also ignore the fact that Romulus was destroyed, or Vulcan for that matter.

Well, the destruction of Vulcan was in the Kelvin timeline, so if this is a new timeline, then, no, that wouldn't happen. The destruction of Romulus could be averted by time travel shenanigans within the Prime universe, so, again, status quo could be retained.

I personally would prefer an entire reboot of Star Trek completely, with technology on pace with whats being developed, but maintaining that sense of optimism that GR wanted in his action-adventure series.

 

[Dukhat]

I just had to get this off my chest, when I haven't made my point yet.

No offense, but I seem to recall that you "got this off your chest" at least one other time. In the exact same way. And the post was eventually locked.

Ah, yes, here it is. With egotistical ass-head name calling and all.