This film will break tech canon and bend fact canon

[MisterPL]

This film will break ALL canon

Is there ANYONE here open to the possiblility that this movie will be a total reimagining of the franchise? I know I'd rather toss established "canon" (as convoluted as it is) and start from scratch. Meaning when Pine gets too expensive for the franchise, they recast Picard and make him the next captain of the Enterprise. Or promote Sulu or whatever makes sense for THIS incarnation of Star Trek rather than slavishly adhere to a flawed continuity.

Everyone here seems very stuck on the notion that this movie will adhere to old continuity. Maybe I'm missing the posts of those who are expecting something totally fresh.

 

[Kryton]

I'm willing to bet that if this film is NOT successful, it's the last we'll see of Star Trek in ANY form (short of novels, perhaps) for a good decade or more.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Therin of Andor said:

GalaxyX said:
They should never have greenlighted another "Prequel" story. I guess the desperation to recapture past glory made them go in this direction.

No, there is actually a large audience - me included - wanting to see new TOS adventures, but the original cast has grown too old to do the same sorts of stories they did so well in the 60s. And the 80s.

Since all-new characters, all-new casts (DS9, VOY, ENT) stopped garnering the right kind of attention, recasting TOS is an excellent way to go.

That's definitely the hope at the studio. And I think it's probably the best choice for the moment, since the studio is using this film to totally re-evaluate the "franchise"... ie, is it that Star Trek is no longer saleable, or just that the last era's production staff mismanaged it but it's still something that can make the studio money if handled right?

The big worry that I have (which has largely but not completely been alleviated, in my case, through both public and non-public info I've been fortunate enough to be made aware of) is that the film will keep the NAMES but lose the "magic.

The things that made the original series what it was, wasn't the fact that they had a ship called Enterprise with a captain named Kirk and a guy with pointy ears named Spock and so forth. The reality is that you could take every element of the original show and have Uwe Boll do a version of it and it would NOT be the original show in any way. (Not to say that Boll's stuff can't be entertaining if you're up for a low-grade-B-movie... )

The risk here is that the studio, and the audience, is betting the farm that this film will recapture the original magic. Yet since that magic was due to real human beings, virtually none of whom are involved in this version, there s a great deal of risk that they'll fail to recapture any, much less ALL, of that.

I keep hearing people here say "as long as it's a ship named Enterprise with a captain named Kirk I'm happy, otherwise, reboot it all." So, then... suppose that the new BSG had called the ship "Enterprise" and the captain "Kirk" rather than "Galactica" and "Adama." After all... they're just WORDS. Right?

No, unless this film captures the FEEL of the original show pretty well, the whole point of using elements of that show is lost. No point to it whatsoever.

But there IS a greater risk... the remastered Trek is actually doing quite well right now, and this movie could, theoretically, be the thing that kills of the original (where nothing else ever has) by "overwriting" portions of it.

I'm still confident that Abrams is doing the right things for the right reasons. But a few of the casting choices have me a bit more worried than I was before...

Of course, if the Enterprise's nacelles are rocket engines on swivels, I'll walk out of the theater and get my money back.

 

[MisterPL]

GalaxyX said:
They should never have greenlighted another "Prequel" story.

What makes people think this is a prequel of the original? Seems more like a Batman Begins from what I've read.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I LOVE this post...

Number6 said:Nimoy came out of retirement to be in this film.

The writers are fans of the series and the novels. They clearly have a reverence for the show and its ideals based on what they've said in interviews.

As much as I hate Tom Cruise and what he did with Mission Impossible, this team really nailed the style of writing and the flavour of the original show better than the other two films.

They want to tell a story with elements set in the TOS era. Since most of the original actors are too old or too dead to play their former selves, we just have to accept that recasting is necessary.

They cast Pike and Chekov. Chekov would have been in middle school during Pike's command, so this means that the film will show different periods of time.

THERE's that logic that people ought to be using (but many aren't) regarding this film.

With both characters, you have two choices...
(1) total reboot with NO respect for canon whatsoever, or
(2) multiple timeframes

We don't actually KNOW which is going to be the case, but based upon other things (like the fact that the folks making this film actually KNOW WHO CHRISTOPHER PIKE IS, and moreover, CARE WHO CHRISTOPHER PIKE IS) tends to make the first instance seem a lot less likely.

I've been saying for ages that this film is going to involve multiple timeframes... and we'll see certain characters (I've been arguing that it's a Kirk-centric film told from Spock's perspective... nothing I've seen has contradicted that so far) at a variety of points through their lives.

So far, based upon casting choices, we can safely say that we'll see a very young Spock at some point (mid-late teens?) who will NOT be played by "Sylar"... assuming that it's true about the Amanda Grayson casting (which I consider still pretty dubious). It's clear that at least some portion of the film will take place well in advance of TOS (based upon the Pike casting), and that some will take place during/after TOS (based upon the Chekov casting). I'll also bet we'll see a very young Jim Kirk... roughly 12-ish.

Vignettes telling key story points... not just for fanboyish interest, mind you... set in various timeframes, with one primary storytelling phase set prior to TOS.

Looking closely at the hints in those costumes, I saw TMP-era elements, TOS-era elements, later-TNG-era elements, TOS civilian elements... the one thing I didn't see was UNIFORMITY. Which, by definition of the word, means that we're not "really" seeing "the new starfleet uniform." We're seeing SEVERAL DIFFERENT costumes.

How many are Starfleet, or even HUMAN... hard to say. But we DO see at least a couple of cases of boots on women which are very much "TOS-ish" alongside the higher-tech, presumed-Pike-era boots.

We don't know much... but what we do know supports MY beliefs much better than any of it supports a belief that this film is some "total reboot."

Your catching the Pike/Chekov dichotomy is one that I was hoping more people would be picking up on.

 

[number6]

I am just pointing out that none of us have any idea about the nature of the story Abrams wants to tell and that automatically dismissing the idea of the movie because the film may be a reboot/reimagining/redo/ripoff/remake/whatf&ckingever of TOS is a conclusion based on facts not in evidence.

 

[evilalienbraga]

Trekster said:But I hope they don’t break it or bend it to disbelief. That's what I’m worried about. If this was an all out reboot I wouldn't care. They can do whatever they want. But if they are even trying to stay with canon, they better do it right or it defeats the purpose. If breaking canon made a better film then they should of done reboot to start.

Totally agree with you there. If they want to swanny around with making stuff all new and that, they should do a total reboot. It's the lesser of two evils. Yes.

 

[MattJC]

Therin of Andor said:

MattJC said:
With this remake it won't be Trek XI, it will be Star Trek I version 2. I'm sorry if that doesn't make sense.

You're telling me this on a bbs called "Star Trek XI".

It will be TOS for a new generation -

I think Gene Roddenberry would be disappointed that so many fans remain so close-minded about the possibility of more TOS.

But that is incorrect.
It is NOT now or will it ever be the ORIGINAL series.
Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
IT IS ONLY BASED UPON THE ORIGINAL SERIES, NOT ACTUAL ORIGINAL SERIES ITSELF.

 

[number6]

MattJC said:
IT IS ONLY BASED UPON THE ORIGINAL SERIES, NOT ACTUAL ORIGINAL SERIES ITSELF.

No one is saying, or has said otherwise.

 

[USS Excelsior]

Speaking of Tech canon can you imagine if the movie is full of technobabble.

 

[cultcross]

USS Excelsior said:
Speaking of Tech canon can you imagine if the movie is full of technobabble.

Well, we want it nice and verbose

And to Therins epitaph comment

 

[EyalM]

All this talk about breaking canon made me think of this:

 

[xortex]

I don't want it to be verbose but what i want is not going to change things. It would however be nice if when they open their mouths and waste time they had something meaningful to say, that's all that even advances the plot. I.e. no small talk - Like 'Well, Chekov, how do you feel about that ?' Chekov - 'I'm not quite sure.' Wow, I'm hooked and of course everyone has to have an opinion about everything. It's gonna be a touchy /feely movie.

 

[cultcross]

xortex said:
I don't want it to be verbose but what i want is not going to change things. It would however be nice if when they open their mouths and waste time they had something meaningful to say, that's all that even advances the plot. I.e. no small talk - Like 'Well, Chekov, how do you feel about that ?' Chekov - 'I'm not quite sure.' Wow, I'm hooked and of course everyone has to have an opinion about everything. It's gonna be a touchy /feely movie.

Well I was kidding about the verbose - but you've raised a good point regarding touchy/feely/lots of things fro checkov to say. I would be happiest I think, if they don't try to shoehorn in too much screentime for minor characters (of which we seem to have an infinite amount). Because of them becoming so iconic since, its easy to forget that Sulu, Uhura and Checkov's roles in a great deal of Trek was to say 'warp 7, aye', 'hailing frequencies open captain' etc.
If they have a big part in the new movie that's fine - but I hope they don't try to give everyone a really meaty role just because they're 'iconic' characters.

 

[Jack Bauer]

I don't think there will be a based on credit here. You only see that for the spin offs of the original series. None of the TOS movies said "Based on Star Trek created by Gene Roddenberry" just "created by..." just the TNG movies. Or am I wrong about that? So MattJC's insistence it's not Star Trek but based on it is just silly.

 

[Jax]

Well the Enterprise should have blue Photon Torpedos and blue phasers (it is blue right ?) but that fire in burst not a long line like in TNG, onwards.

Theres no reason why the movie cannot keep the exact same tech and how it works with just a CGI upgrade.

 

[Kurgan]

If what we're hearing is true, then the main plot will revolve around a certain someone trying to restore classic canon.I thought it was well known that Abrams had said that he wasn't worried about breaking canon minutia and that it likely would happen but he isn't purposely going to write somethign that would mess with major Trek canon as we know it in any grevious way.

 

[seigezunt]

Starship Polaris said:

GalaxyX said:
They should never have greenlighted another "Prequel" story.

There were only two choices: return to the origins of "Star Trek" or leave the damned thing alone.

True. The rest of it was dead. I see no harm in a try at a TOS homage, reinterpretation, or thingamibob. We still care about these characters.