Even if you like it, someone else will hate it.
What would you think about TOS ”redone”?
- Thread starter JesterFace
- Start date
Even if you like it, someone else will hate it.
Same here.
I think this is where I'm at, just not in these exact words. Instead of creating new, the creators keep going back to the same well - the TOS era. Part of this is indicative of the times we live in that constantly reboot everything every so often.
One of my biggest complaints with the JJ movies, for example, is we've gone back to the the TOS era. Not only that, but we're retelling TOS stories. If not exactly, then the pattern. First movie - brand new movie enterprise fighting a foe that could destroy Earth (TMP). Second movie - Khan (TWOK) Third movie destroy the Enterprise and get a new NCC-1701A (TSFS). They claim to want to do their own thing but they really don't. If they did, they'd make their own characters and own stories.
Then we have DISC . What does it do? It goes back to a prequel era set just before TOS, tossing in all kinds of TOS references, and ties it's characters to TOS characters Sarek and Spock. We even encounter the TOS Enterprise. Again, if you want to do your own thing, then do your own thing. Cut the apron strings or umbilical cord to TOS. Stand on your own.
The Star Trek universe is large enough to have new characters, new ships, new adventures without returning to the same well and same plot elements and same characters created in TOS.
The money is in Kirk, Spock and the 23rd century. From a business perspective, it is the best place to go to get a good return on investment.
I would love to see a complete re-reboot with James Cameron at the helm. After all these senseless Trekian action flicks I believe Cameron would reintroduce the cerebral element to the storytelling as well as the spectacle of a universe full of awe and wonder. He would also give Paramount Studios the best shot at hitting the $1 billion mark they so dearly desire.
Doesn't need to be Cameron per se (though he has a track record) so long as it is a director with vision and commitment to classic storytelling. Even Kenneth Branaugh would be a solid choice where they could return the budget to $100-120 million.
Doesn't need to be Cameron per se (though he has a track record) so long as it is a director with vision and commitment to classic storytelling. Even Kenneth Branaugh would be a solid choice where they could return the budget to $100-120 million.
I was proud that, out of all these franchises like Batman, Superman, Spiderman, etc... Star Trek had never been rebooted. 50 years of solid, continuous history. Now we have JJ-Prise and DISCO reimagining... I'm over it. I'm fine if they completely reboot from scratch.
I think the reason to dip backwards is to hark to a time when technology is a bit less magical and storytelling can be a bit more rough and ready but modern writers have already seen the magical technology and it helps them out with a deus ex machina moment when they've painted themselves into a corner . Hence Discovery and Nutrek made the tech more magical thus violating canon as well as missing the point .
I'm ambivalent about re-use of TOS characters. On the one hand, people love them and continue to read stories about them. The fan stuff is also quite enjoyable.
On the other hand, it could be more fun to explore other areas, other crews, non-federation or non- Starfleet protagonists and so on. I'd be happy either way.
Didn't Gene Roddenberry's TMP novel state that the look of the Starfleet was what TOS look actually was, not what we saw, so... the production design would be that of TMP in a TOS redux.
Didn't it also state there were rumors everywhere that Kirk & Spock were in a committed long-term same-sex relationship? Not that there is anything wrong with that!
And then subsequent novels were written by hard-core K/Sers and had "undertones" about as subtle as "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield"
I think it said that they were more than friends, more than brothers but after several mind melds that's no surprise. It was cool for him to imply something that people could interpret either way. A bit like in the Captains Daughter where Rand's statement about her dead daughter could be interpreted as Kirk being the father but just as easily not.
Well, I had read a long time ago that Roddenberry wrote it because of the animus he felt toward William Shatner around that period and to egg on that specific niche of fan fiction.
Maybe Simon & Shuster should put out a Star Trek erotica anthology. They could call it "Space Seed Revisited"
I thought he was trying to squelch that bit of fan-fiction/speculation by Kirk explicitly denying it.Well, I had read a long time ago that Roddenberry wrote it because of the animus he felt toward William Shatner around that period and to egg on that specific niche of fan fiction.
Maybe Simon & Shuster should put out a Star Trek erotica anthology. They could call it "Space Seed Revisited"
Maybe GRs anger was directed in the lines that Kirk's adventures were exaggerated. That Kirk wasn't as good as his reputation.
Too bad for GR if that was what he intended that he was the one that ruled that novels weren't canon.
Star Trek erotica Fan-fiction could fill up thousands of anthologies.
Not that I've ever read any of course.
Personally I would not mind a reboot using original characters like they sorta did with the Kelvin time line. Even original story elements. I'm personally (Shameless plug) working on something similar. Tech has limits, tensions are high and I'm trying to write something interesting with good story telling (uncertain cough) but that does not trade action and violence for good writing (someone in the background chuckles)
But really a frame for frame remake would suck. Yes it would look better. But it would be the same old stuff we have seen a hundred, if not thousand times. And while it may be fun to watch the really good episodes (Balance of terror, Space seed etc...) what about the really bad episodes? (Spocks brian) ? Would they be also remade frame for frame despite their flaws? Or would they be improved upon to make more viewable? And if they do that with those episodes why not do it with others? By which point it would be a remake in all but name.
Regardless its unlikely to happen given the current environment of companies only revisiting old series to use the existing fanbase to boost the profits of their otherwise crummy movies and tv shows. Its rare that we see something good (Game of thrones or the Expanse) and even rarer still that something good and original comes around (literally cant think of a single show or movie) that makes waves.
But really a frame for frame remake would suck. Yes it would look better. But it would be the same old stuff we have seen a hundred, if not thousand times. And while it may be fun to watch the really good episodes (Balance of terror, Space seed etc...) what about the really bad episodes? (Spocks brian) ? Would they be also remade frame for frame despite their flaws? Or would they be improved upon to make more viewable? And if they do that with those episodes why not do it with others? By which point it would be a remake in all but name.
Regardless its unlikely to happen given the current environment of companies only revisiting old series to use the existing fanbase to boost the profits of their otherwise crummy movies and tv shows. Its rare that we see something good (Game of thrones or the Expanse) and even rarer still that something good and original comes around (literally cant think of a single show or movie) that makes waves.
If they want to keep re-imagining the Klingons, THIS:
Bring on the Komerex Klingon!!
Bring on the Komerex Klingon!!
Similar threads
