TV: A reboot or a new crew?

[Ryan8bit]

Often I see the sentiment here that they should just do another TV series with Kirk & crew. While I admit that I would still watch it*, the prospect of rebooting any of the crews on TV just doesn't excite me. Maybe it's just because I feel like a lot of them had their run and that I'm not going to get much more out of their characters and situations. For the new movies, it's fine because we're only given so much time to devote to each character, but with a TV show can you really do that much more for them? Perhaps, but I just feel that with TV moving on would be better than dredging up the old stuff.

And moving on doesn't mean a show in the 25th century or anything like that. It just means some different characters with a new perspective. I was fine with the concept of Enterprise going back in time, but I just wasn't fond of the execution. Basically, the time period is irrelevant to me.

And I certainly get the idea of rebooting for reasons of familiarity or finances. Also, there's the idea that people might not want to watch the adventures of Captain Mimsey O'Roarke of the USS Asparagus, as Greg Cox put it when referring to novels. But I think some of that applies to TV as well. Why should we care about this new crew? And therein lies the challenge of writing this way: it's difficult. Bringing up old characters and putting them in new situations definitely has its own challenges, but is just way more safe of a decision, and the last thing I want is for them to keep playing it so safe.

So what do you think?


* This reminds me of an old friend of mine who cheered when there was a teaser for maybe First Contact or Insurrection, saying that they could have showed a turd on the screen and put "Star Trek" over it and he'd still be excited. I might be in that group, although I was pretty soured to Trek in 2005. Star Trek is just one of several franchises that have my money no matter what.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

All new crew set in the Prime Universe.

 

[Cinema Geekly]

It really kind of depends.

You are walking on egg shells either way. Prior to the JJ Quasi-Reboot everything Trek related was original content from a premise and casting perspective. But such shows have growing pains and you have to work very hard to make a connection with the audience and that takes time, and sometimes you don't get enough time to make that connection (see Enterprise).

That being said, while a reboot gives you a steady base to start from, you will have immediate comparisons to the things it is rebooting, and the better the show or the more that a show is loved; the harder it will be for the reboot to succeed.

I'll be happy with ANY Trek that gets put on my TV, but I would personally prefer they go with a new crew. But one thing I am almost certain of is this.....

Whatever they do it will take place in the JJVerse. In the TV/Movie business the prime timeline is now seen as a ratings and box office loser, and so far the JJVerse has been a big box office success and a critical success.

 

[2takesfrakes]

I want to see Captain Kirk and company rebooted and resexed, a la Battlestar Galactica style. I'll even go a step farther and say that I do not want to see the production team drive themselves into creative bankruptcy, with us along with them. Have it be an occassional Mini-Series. This way, the money's always reasonably available to keep the quality of the show where it needs to be.

I don't want to see a whole bunch of Econo-Episodes, I've dealt with too much of that as a STAR TREK fan. Fund STAR TREK the way it needs to be funded. And I'll tell you one more thing: I don't want to see a whole new crew in another century and all that crap! I do not want to wade through all of these awkward episodes, whilst they figure themselves out, anymore. CBS, you've got the product. You own the rights. Use what's there ... the names people know and love: Captain Kirk and Company. That's STAR TREK. That's the product.

 

[C.E. Evans]

A new crew (25th-Century) that's as different from TNG as TNG was from TOS, but without going the nuBattlestar Galactica route. But I also think such a crew should have no more than five main characters, with the rest being reoccurring characters that only appear as needed.

 

[USS Triumphant]

All new crew set in the Prime Universe.

Either this ^, set after the end of Voyager, or, the adventures of Captain Morgan Bateson and the crew of the Bozeman, set in the nuVerse.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

What I want and what would be a financial success are almost definitely two different things. I'd love to reboot into the far future, where you can mix up the hostilities and politics of the varying planets. New crew obviously. You skip a lot of canon weight dragging a story down by putting it in the 25th century, you can pretty much do anything. Have earth blown up 50 years prior. Humans are no longer as dominant a species. That kind of thing.

I'd also love to see the time police, USS Relativity as a series but I fear it might just turn into a procedural.

 

[BillJ]

If they decide to do Star Trek on TV again, I'd like to see a return to Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise.

 

[DEWLine]

New crew (as in characters), in either classic or Abramsverse will do. In fact, if both 'verses get regular airtime, I'll be fine with that, too. Doesn't have to be an Enterprise, either.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

If we get a new crew I want a woman captain.

Maybe we could get Lucy Lawless!!

I want a somewhat abrasive, just a little bit tired, experienced woman captain. Who is ballsy and makes ballsy moves that people argue about on the internet afterwards. No noob captains, we already had Archer and NuKirk.

 

[Dukhat]

I think everyone on this BBS would watch either a show with a new crew/ship, or a show with Kitk/Spock/Enterprise. But everyone on the TrekBBS makes up about 1% of the whole Star Trek fandom, and about one-tenth of 1% of the total television viewing public. With that said, CBS will want to cater to the other 99%, and the way to do that is clearly to reboot what the normal everyday guy thinks Star Trek is, which is of course Kirk, Spock, and the Enterprise. It worked for the movies, and it will work for television. Captain Whatshisname of the starship Whogivesacrap won't cut it anymore.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

But what if Our Heroes pass through a nebula thingie and gender change out the other end? Would that fly if we still called them Kirk and Spock?

 

[Skywalker]

New crew on a new Enterprise. Leave Kirk, Spock, and the rest of the original gang for the movies.

 

[Timewalker]

If we get a new crew I want a woman captain.

Maybe we could get Lucy Lawless!!

Now I'm having visions of a starship launching photon chakras, and the Captain making her "I've cut off the flow of blood to your brain. You have 10 seconds to live unless you tell me what I want to know." speech to the hostile aliens she'd have to fight.

Pity the actor who played Ares died. He'd have made a hell of a First Officer!

 

[BillJ]

But what if Our Heroes pass through a nebula thingie and gender change out the other end? Would that fly if we still called them Kirk and Spock?

Would it be successful? I don't know. But the outrage would be glorious to behold!

 

[Ryan8bit]

It worked for the movies, and it will work for television.

I don't know if that's a given. Although there are examples of TV reboots working out, there are a lot more of them failing. The ones that succeed are made relevant for today, and are very fundamentally changed. Even though the new movies are obviously visually updated, I don't think there's enough to carry a series with the same old crew (especially since TV isn't geared towards VFX and one-liners). So if a reboot happened, you'd almost have to expect there to be some more drastic changes. While you may get Kirk and Spock, they probably wouldn't be like the ones we remember. Otherwise it would be really stale.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

It really has to be edgier to succeed IMO. I want to see 13 ep seasons of quality tv, like a lot of shows are today.

 

[Dukhat]

It worked for the movies, and it will work for television.

I don't know if that's a given. Although there are examples of TV reboots working out, there are a lot more of them failing. The ones that succeed are made relevant for today, and are very fundamentally changed. Even though the new movies are obviously visually updated, I don't think there's enough to carry a series with the same old crew (especially since TV isn't geared towards VFX and one-liners). So if a reboot happened, you'd almost have to expect there to be some more drastic changes. While you may get Kirk and Spock, they probably wouldn't be like the ones we remember. Otherwise it would be really stale.

I wasn't implying that a new Trek series with Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise should be a carbon-copy of '60's TOS. nuBSG had many of the "same" characters and the "same" ship, but it was obviously a reboot, as EJO's Adama is clearly not the same person as Lorne Greene's Adama, etc. But as long as the spirit of those characters and that ship are the same, then all you need is the name recognition to go along with it and it will have a better chance of success than trying to sell new characters and a new ship to an audience.

 

[2takesfrakes]

STAR TREK definitely has to become edgier. I don't think that would mean "losing" anything, in terms of the show's optomism, or that the series can't have "heart" or that some really big questions can't be raised. But it's got to be fun to watch. You've got to get caught up in it ...

 

[C.E. Evans]

Star Treks XI and XII are really as edgy as Trek should be (medium profanity and mild sexuality). Trek should span and appeal to a fairly wide age group.