Reboot and "new and creative" aren't mutually exclusive. Love it or hate it, NuBSG was a new and creative take on the property. Same for NuWho.
Should Abrams Have Done A Clean Reboot
- Thread starter TRON JA307020
- Start date
nbn
Kirk's rise to captaincy really has nothing to do with the alternate timeline. The events precipitated by Nero's attack were not limited to just the Kelvin being attacked and Starfleet going
and carrying on.To be honest, the attack on the Kelvin is actually best viewed by knowing Star Trek continuity. The Earth-Romulan war would only be a generation remove from the Kelvin's time period, and the resulting attack would not be considered an isolated incident but a possible prelude to another war.
Starfleet's response would be to research bigger and better technologies to counter a threat from an enemy that suddenly has better tech. It's an arms race that Starfleet didn't know it was in.
To me, Abrams films are actually better informed by knowing the prior continuity. Knowing about the Romulan War, the change Starfleet went through to prepare for another Narada attack, the impact it would have on the Federation is all better informed by the prior history.
I like the idea of advancement by merit instead of, for example, nepotism and seniority that is often designed to hold back the more talented in favor of past accomplishments. You can argue Kirk's merit at the time, but I will assume in the fiction that Star Fleet found merit in Kirk above others. And sometimes, to develop potential and encourage a pattern of success, you give that sort of chance to someone on the bench.
Didn't they, though?
Unless, by "keep some of the original look" you mean "slavishly reproduce everything ever seen in the 1966-69 TV series, down to the last console jujube," they absolutely did keep a lot of original elements. Not copied exactly, no—who would want that, anyway?—but in form and function and layout very recognizably belonging to the same storytelling universe. There's just no way you could look at it and not be able to tell it was Star Trek.
Lens flare!
Sorry for the 'dogpile' post.
Yes, I loved NuBSG too. Despite it's being a reboot (and I did appreciate the 'this has all happened before' reference). I'm still of the opinion rebooting is a kneejerk and default option in many cases. How hard would it have been to carry the 'same' Spider Man from ASM2 into the MCU, for instance ?
It looks like Mad Max will work as a simple recast, I'm hoping Indiana Jones with Chris Pratt (if it happens) will be the same. No reboot required...
Sorry, talking about reboots is not what I meant. You had an opinion; that's good. I happen to agree.
I meant the "+1" posts where folks just jump - dogpile - onto an opinion without something to add to the discussion. Though they are more tolerable to me when in support of something rather than in support of derision against another poster's opinion. That's the real dogpile.
I'm for what ever produces the best results. Some properties need a good barnacle scraping. Other a fresh coat of paint, And some just a spot cleaning.
Spider-man, with Marvel coming on as "co creators", why they might want to start fresh. I rather like Garfield myself.
No problem - sorry for misinterpreting what you meant !
Nerys - Yes, it does depend on the situation. I had no problem with the Maguire Spider Man not being a continuation of the Nicholas Hammond version.
It is, however, getting to a point now that some companies are so creatively bankrupt that they are on the verge of making the same film over and over again...
They've been doing that since Edison.
No I don't mean they had to "slavishly reproduce it" only to update the original bridge but keep a more classic look. They did that in a limited way in the enterprise episodes "in a mirror darkly". Of course those were on a limited television budget but they did show what could be updated on the TOS bridge to make it look a bit more modern. I would like to have seen the upper display monitors have movement and use the blinking light consoles replaced with touch screen or monitors. And then maybe some other updates to some of the general designs. Basically keep the classic look and color but update a few things.
I'm going out on a limb and say that it isn't a matter of bankruptcy, for the most part (I'm sure there are exceptions). I think it is a matter of fear of losing the audience, with a new, untested product.
Its the same rationale as to my many radio stations will play the same 5 or so songs again and again because the fear of listeners changing the station and never coming back.
Studios have, especially recently, faced a number of major FX houses going out of business, and the fear that they are next. So, rebooting or remaking known material is a safer bet than taking audiences for a new ride.
Same thing goes for Shakespeare
Billy Shakes? What a hack!
I'm going out on a limb and say that it isn't a matter of bankruptcy, for the most part (I'm sure there are exceptions). I think it is a matter of fear of losing the audience, with a new, untested product.
Its the same rationale as to my many radio stations will play the same 5 or so songs again and again because the fear of listeners changing the station and never coming back.
Studios have, especially recently, faced a number of major FX houses going out of business, and the fear that they are next. So, rebooting or remaking known material is a safer bet than taking audiences for a new ride.
Same thing goes for Shakespeare
Billy Shakes? What a hack!
I'm going out on a limb and say that it isn't a matter of bankruptcy, for the most part (I'm sure there are exceptions). I think it is a matter of fear of losing the audience, with a new, untested product.
Its the same rationale as to my many radio stations will play the same 5 or so songs again and again because the fear of listeners changing the station and never coming back.
Studios have, especially recently, faced a number of major FX houses going out of business, and the fear that they are next. So, rebooting or remaking known material is a safer bet than taking audiences for a new ride.
Same thing goes for Shakespeare
I know! He's been pandering the same crap for years.
agreed. No Chris Pratt.
Yeah, good actor, but i just can't see him as Indy...
Yeah he just doesn't seem to be a right fit. Harrison was a lot leaner and not as muscular as pratt. Pratt seems to have a bit more chunky face also. Im not sure I can ever watch a indy movie without Harrison anyway. He owned the character for too long.
Did you watch the Abrams Trek movies? Same theory - new actors replacing the long-time owners.
I can see Pratt's Indy co-eds falling all over him the same way they did Ford's Indy. And the rest of it.
