TOS rethunk...

[Warped9]

I see this and Trek 90210 immediately springs to mind.

I admit I can't get past this. I can get rebooting or resetting the franchise for a newer audience and admittedly one that doesn't include me. But TOS isn't a long forgotten and obscure tv show. It's been with us steadily since 1966. I just cannot see anyone replacing Shatner and Nimoy and Kelly and the rest.

 

[BillJ]

90210 doesn't come to mind. Although I do agree that the recasting is a major hurdle for any Trek featuring Kirk and Company.

I'll give it a shot. If it doesn't work out I still have my TOS DVD's.

 

[A beaker full of death]

As with any classic (think Shakespeare here), I have no problem with a new approach and new actors. But it seems they tried to cast people who would evoke the originals. This Pine guy seems to be imitating Shatner in every photo.

Along those lines, btw, can we officially retire the term "reboot"? Branagh's Hamlet wasn't a reboot of Olivier's.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Along those lines, btw, can we officially retire the term "reboot"? Branagh's Hamlet wasn't a reboot of Olivier's.

Yes, please. Can we also banish that term from comic books as well?

 

[Sector 7]

I am looking forward to this new movie because I love the sense of wonder and excitement and adventure of TOS. That appears to have been lost with all the new Treks. I am hopeful that J.J. and Co. are bringing that back.
I am not thrilled with everything about the new movie. I'm not crazy about the Romulan material they seem to have used for uniforms, or the shiny sheen of the new bridge. I AM willing to give it a chance though.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I see this and Trek 90210 immediately springs to mind.

I admit I can't get past this. I can get rebooting or resetting the franchise for a newer audience and admittedly one that doesn't include me. But TOS isn't a long forgotten and obscure tv show. It's been with us steadily since 1966. I just cannot see anyone replacing Shatner and Nimoy and Kelly and the rest.

If you mean the cast looks like people in their 20s and 30s, you might have a point.

 

[Red Ranger]

People,

It's true that the reboot (sorry, Beaker, I have no problem using it, so I have no stake in "officially" retiring the word), or reimagining, or updating, or whatever phrase you choose to use, falls into territory seldom traveled by fictional characters. You can count on one hand the number of familiar characters who've been recast after another actor made the role famous -- think Sean Connery and James Bond, for example.

However, TOS's characters first appeared on TV. So making a comparison to those characters being recast versus how characters who first appeared in another medium -- novels or comics -- who were then recast, isn't quite apt. But just for the sake of argument, those characters survived such recastings. I'm thinking of Superman, Batman, Tarzan, the Phantom, Buck Rogers, and Flash Gordon, just to name a few.

For the most part, I actually like the actors they picked, although the only one I'm having a hard time accepting is Chris Pine as Kirk. I think the best choices are Zachary Quinto as Spock and Karl Urban as McCoy. Both look enough like their predecessors but also have their own look that they're successful recastings, IMO.

I am looking forward to seeing this movie. Part of the fun is comparing the new version to the original, in all candor.

Red Ranger

 

[FalTorPan]

The movie is what it is. The original series is what it is. Each can stand on its own without pooing on the other.

The upcoming movie might be great. It might suck. In any event, it won't influence my opinion of the original series.

 

[Wingsley]

Trek 90210? I was thinking more like Melrose Space...

 

[Supervisor 194]

Along those lines, btw, can we officially retire the term "reboot"? Branagh's Hamlet wasn't a reboot of Olivier's.

Absolutely.

 

[RobertScorpio]

People,

It's true that the reboot (sorry, Beaker, I have no problem using it, so I have no stake in "officially" retiring the word), or reimagining, or updating, or whatever phrase you choose to use, falls into territory seldom traveled by fictional characters. You can count on one hand the number of familiar characters who've been recast after another actor made the role famous -- think Sean Connery and James Bond, for example.

However, TOS's characters first appeared on TV. So making a comparison to those characters being recast versus how characters who first appeared in another medium -- novels or comics -- who were then recast, isn't quite apt. But just for the sake of argument, those characters survived such recastings. I'm thinking of Superman, Batman, Tarzan, the Phantom, Buck Rogers, and Flash Gordon, just to name a few.

For the most part, I actually like the actors they picked, although the only one I'm having a hard time accepting is Chris Pine as Kirk. I think the best choices are Zachary Quinto as Spock and Karl Urban as McCoy. Both look enough like their predecessors but also have their own look that they're successful recastings, IMO.

I am looking forward to seeing this movie. Part of the fun is comparing the new version to the original, in all candor.

Red Ranger

Totally agree...the one hurdle I see? TOS was really the Kirk and Spock show, with McCoy...I think for this new version to survive they will have to either hope the new kirk/spock click, or go for more of an ensemble story...TOS to me isn't really about the seven crew members, just K/S and mccoy...all the rest is ballist

Rob

 

[Forbin]

As with any classic (think Shakespeare here), I have no problem with a new approach and new actors. But it seems they tried to cast people who would evoke the originals. This Pine guy seems to be imitating Shatner in every photo.

Along those lines, btw, can we officially retire the term "reboot"? Branagh's Hamlet wasn't a reboot of Olivier's.

And Hamlet wasn't a 79-episode, 6.1-movie series starring the same cast for several decades.

 

[Sector 7]

People,

It's true that the reboot (sorry, Beaker, I have no problem using it, so I have no stake in "officially" retiring the word), or reimagining, or updating, or whatever phrase you choose to use, falls into territory seldom traveled by fictional characters. You can count on one hand the number of familiar characters who've been recast after another actor made the role famous -- think Sean Connery and James Bond, for example.

However, TOS's characters first appeared on TV. So making a comparison to those characters being recast versus how characters who first appeared in another medium -- novels or comics -- who were then recast, isn't quite apt. But just for the sake of argument, those characters survived such recastings. I'm thinking of Superman, Batman, Tarzan, the Phantom, Buck Rogers, and Flash Gordon, just to name a few.

For the most part, I actually like the actors they picked, although the only one I'm having a hard time accepting is Chris Pine as Kirk. I think the best choices are Zachary Quinto as Spock and Karl Urban as McCoy. Both look enough like their predecessors but also have their own look that they're successful recastings, IMO.

I am looking forward to seeing this movie. Part of the fun is comparing the new version to the original, in all candor.

Red Ranger

Totally agree...the one hurdle I see? TOS was really the Kirk and Spock show, with McCoy...I think for this new version to survive they will have to either hope the new kirk/spock click, or go for more of an ensemble story...TOS to me isn't really about the seven crew members, just K/S and mccoy...all the rest is ballist

Rob

Perhaps if it had been more of an ensemble show, we could have saved 40+ years of feuding and bickering. Personally I hope it IS more of an ensemble production.

 

[22 Stars]

Yawn, this topic has been hashed to death for the last 2 years.

 

[CaptainHikaruSulu]

I see this and Trek 90210 immediately springs to mind.

I admit I can't get past this. I can get rebooting or resetting the franchise for a newer audience and admittedly one that doesn't include me. But TOS isn't a long forgotten and obscure tv show. It's been with us steadily since 1966. I just cannot see anyone replacing Shatner and Nimoy and Kelly and the rest.

Neither can I. I've been very iffy with the idea of a reboot long before they ever decided to do it.

 

[Outpost4]

Yawn, this topic has been hashed to death for the last 2 years.

The shuttle has left the station and is soon to make its first stop.

Or maybe Bob Dylan said it best:

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'.

 

[I am not Spock]

I will give the new movie a chance.

But I hope it isn't a 'reboot' (there's that dreaded word again).

 

[Warped9]

I will give the new movie a chance.

But I hope it isn't a 'reboot' (there's that dreaded word again).

It really cannot be anything but. There will be just too many differences from TOS in terms of continuity as well as the visual departures. It may well fit in with ENT, but that's a whole other can of worms since ENT didn't gel with TOS either.

TOS was its own thing and Trek XI will be its own thing and neither will affect the other.

I've just come to accept that Star Trek is pretty much done for me. It's very unlikely that a Trek film or project will come along that will reach me in a way TOS did and still does--current mass audience perspectives and tastes have diverged too much. I can only hope that some other SF film or series comes along to fill that particular niche for me, such as Babylon 5 and Stargate did to a limited extent. It's also why I now focus more on my own pursuits than Trek.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I guess it comes down to how much people really liked Kirk/Spock/Bones as opposed to how much they loved Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley. I think a lot of the yearning for the former is really a manifestation of how well the latter worked. We'll see when the movie comes out, I imagine a lot of us long-timers will take a while to adjust even if they do a magnificent job.

 

[RobertScorpio]

As with any classic (think Shakespeare here), I have no problem with a new approach and new actors. But it seems they tried to cast people who would evoke the originals. This Pine guy seems to be imitating Shatner in every photo.

Along those lines, btw, can we officially retire the term "reboot"? Branagh's Hamlet wasn't a reboot of Olivier's.

XI's producers were going to get slammed either way. Either the new movie would be too much like the past...or it would get slammed for being too different from the past...That, IMO, means they are doing a good job.

Rob
Scorpio