Star Trek 4: The Next Generation?
- Thread starter Khan 2.0
- Start date
true, I guess the marvel/DC timetables has made me look to trek similar way instead of movie by movie (which is what it should be really)
I wouldn't go that far. Everything gets remade eventually. I wouldn't be surprised if somebody revamps TNG someday.
But, yeah, I'm not sure why everybody is in so much of a hurry to move on to the next reboot--or even worrying about the next next movie at this point.
I mean, seriously, STAR TREK 3 or XIII or whatever we're calling it hasn't even started filming yet and is still more than a year away. It's not even coming out this summer, but the next one. That's forever from now.
Why not hold off on speculating about ST 4 until 2017 at least?
That's funny being most of Star Trek isn't, but why get that in the way.
Plus Kirk has been on the A and the B and next to the crashed D, and Spock has been on the A and the D and maybe even the E. But let's just ignore that.
This!
Not a fan of nuTrek at all although I can understand how the reboot of the original series from the 60's works.
I wouldn't want to see this for TNG, it's the series I grew up with, it's not aged too badly and to honest there is no reason why the TNG cast couldn't reprise their roles for another movie. Lets face it Nemises was a crappy send off for TNG.
I know it won't happen but I'd much rather see another TNG movie than another poor reboot.
While cutting the budget with each successive film.
A spin-off reboot?
No. Please, no.
No. Please, no.
What's the option when this cast leaves? A reboot of a reboot?
Or they could just recast the actors as they go along. There's no rule that says you have to jump-start the continuity every time you switch out a cast member. Hollywood used to recast parts in continuing series all the time.
(Hello, Eartha Kitt, Lee Meriwether.)
Hell some guy at Marvel already said they would probably do that with their movies and referenced James Bond doing it.
You're quoting me out of context.
Point was, that was a dead franchise they brought back in the 21st Century. No one who went to see the last two movies cares about what happened way back in 1973.
Same with TNG. Eventually, no one will care about what happened way back in 2002 (assuming that's not already the case). If enough time passes and they make a rebooted TNG film, you'll have a large portion of the audience who wasn't even alive in 2002.
EDIT: In fact, they tried to bring Planet of the Apes back twice. By 2011, the effort from 2001 was a blip. The fact that I even forgot to mention it before editing this post proves my point.
You don't literally mean "no one", right? Because I, for one, care about what happened in the original movies.
But Garth's point was that, as time goes by,the older movies will have faded in the memory of the general audience, particularly where the younger demographic is concerned. The percentage of the audience that is waiting anxiously for a follow-up to NEMESIS will have dwindled to a precious few.
Here's the thing: Reboots are not primarily intended for the folks who grew up on the previous version. First and foremost, they're aimed at a new generation of moviegoers. If you can win over us old-timers as well, that's great, but that's not really what matters in the long run.
Last edited:
I think you've reached your quota for hair-splitting today.It was Garth, not Gaith.
It was Garth, not Gaith.
Oops. You're right. Let me fix that.
Similar threads
