Nor sure what one would fear from a fictional franchise.
All fun and no headaches. I don't need a label to make it workI suspect SNW (like Disco before it) is a lot more fun and a lot less of a headache if we treat it as a reboot.
Because that's pretty much what it is. A prequel that's doing it's own thing, with a few nods to fans along the way.
I used to have fond memories of The Simpsons, now it's been so thoroughly spoiled I don't even rewatch the old episodes anymore. I fear disliking something that used to make me smile.Nor sure what one would fear from a fictional franchise.
You know, I can't actually think of any other good reboots.
Yeah, it seems like the most successful reboots and reimaginings are from franchises that made the jump from another type of media. DC's Henry Cavill/Ben Affleck/Gal Gadot cinematic universe ending and getting replaced with the DC Gunniverse just feels expected, it's how comic book movies work, and there are plenty of new stories to draw from as the comics have been continuing alongside the films.Sherlock Holmes through various movies, plus shows like Sherlock and Elementary.
Maybe not too many TV shows, you’re right.
Technically speaking, the MCU as a whole is a successful reboot.
Then Burton’s Batman, Nolan’s Batman and now the Reeves Batman.
Seems to be more common in movies.
Yeah, it seems like the most successful reboots and reimaginings are from franchises that made the jump from another type of media. DC's Henry Cavill/Ben Affleck/Gal Gadot cinematic universe ending and getting replaced with the DC Gunniverse just feels expected, it's how comic book movies work, and there are plenty of new stories to draw from as the comics have been continuing alongside the films.
Would you count U.S. versions of British shows?Aside from BSG, I’m really struggling to think of another.
I have never watched the new Lost in Space but it ran a few seasons and… sorry, but it can’t be worse than the original?
Can it?
Google tells me the rebooted Hawaii 5-0 ran for ten (!) seasons.
But yeah, these things tend to tank and die. New versions of things like V, Dynasty, Dallas, Quantum Leap… all tanked.
Would you count U.S. versions of British shows?
If so, the U.S. version of THE OFFICE far exceeded the British one.
If you expand this to movies, John Carpenter's The Thing and David Cronenberg's The Fly are usually the gold standards for reboots/re-imaginings of old material that are considered better than the original.You know, I can't actually think of any other good reboots. I fear that a true reimagining, unrestrained by attempts to make it connect to the other shows, would be terrible.
Well .. I would like to say I follow that but I don't.I used to have fond memories of The Simpsons, now it's been so thoroughly spoiled I don't even rewatch the old episodes anymore. I fear disliking something that used to make me smile.
DC Comics have always hit the randomiser button on their characters and their history every few years, every time they need a big new event to grab people's attention, and it's left that universe a confusing mess. I fear that you can't wipe away a story's past, and a reset actually complicates things instead of simplifying them. Permanently.
Original Battlestar Galactica fans used to have hope that their series would get some kind of continuation, but the 2004 show pretty much killed that hope dead. No more classic BSG for them. I fear missing out on stories because doors have been closed forever.
Fortunately BSG '04 was a really good proper reboot! A shining example of how throwing out the continuity and starting fresh can really work. Other good TV reboots (that aren't new comic adaptations) include: I dunno, was Lost in Space any good? Quantum Leap doesn't count, that was a sequel. You know, I can't actually think of any other good reboots. I fear that a true reimagining, unrestrained by attempts to make it connect to the other shows, would be terrible.
It was very good IMO.I have never watched the new Lost in Space but it ran a few seasons and… sorry, but it can’t be worse than the original?
It was very good IMO.
If you don't like it then I will probably have to figure out a way to put your names on the Charlie Brown and Lucy football gif.Yeah, I read as much earlier. TBH I wasn’t fond enough of the original to give it a look in, but given the way our tastes tend to align… well, it must be worth a punt!
If you don't like it then I will probably have to figure out a way to put your names on the Charlie Brown and Lucy football gif.
I have not watched it yet.You’re also a fan?
I think the last time I watched anything related to Lost in Space was the Matt LeBlanc movie at the cinema when it came out.
Which I liked.
At the time.
*ducks*
The whole "Connery's character from The Rock is the same person as Connery's James Bond" theory gets shot down by anyone who knows anything about James Bond or The Rock. Specifically, Bond's military service is that he served in the Royal Navy and made the rank of Commander. Connery's character in The Rock meanwhile served in the Royal Army, got into the SAS and made the rank of Captain. So even if you ignore the intent that all the Bonds from Connery to Brosnan are supposed to be the same person or that The Rock is not officially part of the Bond universe, Connery's character in The Rock still can't be James Bond. At all.
Casino Royale was a reboot. That's well publicized and official. Even if you're not into Bond, that fact was rather inescapable to anyone who paid any attention to the entertainment industry in 2006.
But Trek is so long-running it would be very hard for a reboot to exceed the original continuity, so I don't think it would be a good idea.
The Kelvin Timeline movies scared me into thinking that the Prime Timeline was over, and we'd never get another story in that universe outside of novels.
Then Discovery scared me into thinking that the Prime Timeline had been seriously retconned, with things like the Klingons being unrecognisable. Now I had to imagine that Worf and B'Elanna had giant bald heads this whole time.
Now Strange New Worlds is scaring me that they're going to rewrite TOS with their new actors. That they'll outright say "The Temporal Cold War means those 79 episodes never happened, and now we're showing you the actual story. PS. You still have your DVDs so you actually can't complain, lol. PPS. We need to do this to grow the audience, they'll accept nothing but Spock, please understand."
Honestly, when I look at it like that, the future of Trek is actually getting less scary over time. Picard ended before we could get Dangerous Renegade Naomi Wildman, so we're safe from that. Lower Decks and Prodigy have been working hard to pick up threads from the 90s shows and tidy stuff up. We've had confirmation that the starships Defiant, Voyager, Enterprise-A, Enterprise-D, Enterprise-E, and so on haven't been reimagined like the NCC-1701 apparently was (plus we got to see an old school Constitution class, which actually made me so happy I had to come back to the forum after a year away just to talk to someone about it).
As long as the producers of Star Trek are too scared to properly reboot the franchise, I don't have to be scared that it'll collapse into a giant pile of confusion and contradictions that no one can untangle, where nothing truly matters because it'll just be reset after 5 years. Like what happened with my beloved DC Comics.