Would you like a bsg style reboot of Star trek?

[Belz...]

There's NOTHING wrong with the holodeck

There's ALWAYS something wrong with the holodeck.

(or any other aspect of Star Trek), period.

I don't think you can determine that by decree. Personally I think, tech-wise, the Replicators were a bad idea because it's a god-tech. Ditto with the transporter when it's not used just to, you know, transport.

 

[Leroy]

I'd like tp see a reboot of star trek like the reboot of BSG:

-no alien
-no superweapons
-no magic technology (transponder,replicator,universal translator)
-no particle of the week
-with more internal coherence
-no time travel
ecc

and you?

It just isn't Star Trek without those things, what would be the point? Even the shows that strayed farthest from what TOS was featured all those tropes.

ùmy idea is to set star trek thousands of years in the feature:

earth colonies many world, then there were wars for the independence of the colonies, a space middle age, with lost of technology and knowledge. The eart will be discriminate for its past of oppression and submit to occupation by one or more of indipendent colonies.

I begin a serie here: the colonie/colonies which occupy earth allow to earth people to explore the space, but gradually, and finally with a long rage exploration ship. It'll be a rebbot of Star trek enterprise.

That's a great idea for an original setting, I think it would be hampered by shoehorning it into Star Trek.

 

[Silvercrest]

It sounds a lot like season 2 of Buck Rogers.

 

[Faria]

Isn't that what we have ? A meaner, more modern Trek ?

I mean a more realistic, less naif and more meture star trek

So... not Star Trek, then ? Haven't we seen all that in other series and franchises ? You don't seem to like Star Trek very much.

I was A star trek fan between 14 and 18, then I find it to naif (with the exception of some episodes) and started to fantasize about a reboot

And did I just read that you don't like horizontal turbolifts ??

yes, i don't like it, they are dumb

 

[Chrono85]

I was disappointed by 2009 reboot of star trek because i hoped it was an opportunity to put off the most naif part of star trek. Unfortunately the reboot highlight the part of star trek i don't like.

I'd like tp see a reboot of star trek like the reboot of BSG:

-no alien
-no superweapons
-no magic technology (transponder,replicator,universal translator)
-no particle of the week
-with more internal coherence
-no time travel
ecc

and you?

What you are proposing is just BSG, which we already have If you take those things out of Star Trek, then it is no longer Star Trek, but just a generic dark scifi thing. Anyway, the transporter may or may not be possible, the the ransponder and universal translator are certainly not magic heck, google has an app right now that is probably the beginnings of an eventual universal translator. Heck, even BSG had a warp drive type system, although in Star Trek, that device doesn't actually take the Enterprise 'faster than light' per se. It's more like a short cut (at least it was retconned that way in TNG). I say just let shows like BSG and Firefly do the darker themes and more practical universe, and let Trek be Trek.

 

[Faria]

I was disappointed by 2009 reboot of star trek because i hoped it was an opportunity to put off the most naif part of star trek. Unfortunately the reboot highlight the part of star trek i don't like.

I'd like tp see a reboot of star trek like the reboot of BSG:

-no alien
-no superweapons
-no magic technology (transponder,replicator,universal translator)
-no particle of the week
-with more internal coherence
-no time travel
ecc

and you?

What you are proposing is just BSG, which we already have If you take those things out of Star Trek, then it is no longer Star Trek, but just a generic dark scifi thing. Anyway, the transporter may or may not be possible, the the ransponder and universal translator are certainly not magic heck, google has an app right now that is probably the beginnings of an eventual universal translator. Heck, even BSG had a warp drive type system, although in Star Trek, that device doesn't actually take the Enterprise 'faster than light' per se. It's more like a short cut (at least it was retconned that way in TNG). I say just let shows like BSG and Firefly do the darker themes and more practical universe, and let Trek be Trek.

For how they work in ST translator and transponder are magic (same for holodeck)

 

[Silvercrest]

So is artificial gravity. Should they get rid of that?

 

[Chrono85]

Well, I could fall back on that often-used quote 'any technology sufficiently advanced.....

our modern smart phones, with their LCD touch screens and internet, and even just the wireless phone part, would look like pure magic and witchcraft to someone from 100 years ago. People should remember that Star Trek is 'science FICTION' and the fiction part is very important The technology doesn't always have to be intricately explained or even possible in the way it is presented, as long as it has some in-universe consistency and it serves the story. I would also argue that the holodeck and translator are 'magic' to us, but because this is fiction, the writers provide some vague plausible science in the background, and then we just fill in the blanks on our own, or just accept it for what it is, and there is nothing wrong with that . If you can't just enjoy Star Trek for what it is then maybe you just need a bit more of an imagination .

 

[Faria]

So is artificial gravity. Should they get rid of that?

yes but, i don't know how to ezplain it in english, artificial gravity is necessary for the show sight

 

[Pavonis]

You're not describing a reboot so much as something more like wiping your computer and installing Linux, then saying it's a Windows OS because you used a Windows logo for your desktop wallpaper.

Your new rebooted "Trek" might be interesting, but, as others have pointed out, it wouldn't be Trek. Why stick the Trek label on it when it's so different?

 

[Marten]

Absolutely not. BSG was wonderful with all it's grittiness, but Star Trek is not supposed to be that way.

 

[C.E. Evans]

It's really a "let's take all the fun and wonderful stuff out of Trek" approach.

 

[Tora Ziyal]

Faria, a lot of us here get picky and critical about little stuff in Star Trek because, overall, we love it so much. But you don't seem like the concept of Trek at all. I don't understand why you're even here.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

You do need aliens and exploration to be Star Trek, and you also need optimism. But, I think you could scale back the tech and still have it be Star Trek.

Warp drive is a plot necessity in order to make it possible to visit other planets. Transporters could be removed, or you could make it so for transporters to work you have to have a transporter fixture at both ends. You can remove all other god-tech to give it that BSG machine gun aesthetic. You can also make the aliens less humanoid and less like us, like the ones in the Ender series. Just so long as the basic drive of the show is to go out, explore space, and try to make friends with aliens.

 

[The Wormhole]

So is artificial gravity. Should they get rid of that?

yes but, i don't know how to ezplain it in english, artificial gravity is necessary for the show sight

Artificial gravity is necessary for the show's budget. They simply don't have money (or even time) to hook all the actors up to harnessess so they float everywhere all the time. It's why BSG never once considered not having artficial gravity.

 

[Silvercrest]

It's still magic tech as far as realism is concerned. The OP wants realism, so I want to see where he draws the line.

 

[Third Nacelle]

Who are we to decide what is and is not realistic technology in the 23rd century?

Did anyone in the 1700s predict an iPhone? Television? Internet? DVD? Space shuttle? Hubble telescope? Automobile? Electron microscope? Electric can opener?

 

[Silvercrest]

The OP.

Although to be accurate, he envisioned thousands of years in the future, not the 23rd century.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

This thread reminds me of something I wrote on another bboard back in 2009:

I think they designed new GALACTICA by taking every facet of STAR TREK TOS and simply reversing it. And it works. Look at the list I've compiled:

Virtuous heroes vs Deeply flawed, complicated characters.

The harmony of Roddenberry's "evolved" man vs Ship's regulars who often hate each other.

Liberal morality plays vs Greek tragedies.

Dramatic dialogue delivery vs Low-key naturalism.

Episodic vs Serial.

Bright lighting with high color vs A more dim and grim look.

No religion (except alien computer allegories) vs Main characters with religions.

Time spent at warp vs Instant FTL jump.

Phasers vs Firearms with bullets.

Transporter, deflectors, tractor beams vs None of the above.

Talking computers vs Keyboard and monitor.

Sliding doors whoosh vs Hinged metal doors creak and clank.

Aliens galore vs Humans (and their creations) only.

Communicator and intercom vs Helmet mic and telephone.

Dreamed-up civilian costumes vs Store-bought clothes and suits.

It's like they made a list of every artistic decision, and nearly every sci-fi decision, that TOS exhibited and simply reversed it. Just that simple: here is what we will not do. Many of the TOS items were necessitated by budget and FX limitations, like the transporter and Spock's hooded viewer. But it goes beyond that and the finished BG product turned out completely valid and even exciting.

BG is the Anti-Trek.

 

[Silvercrest]

The "evolved" thing wasn't around in TOS; that was invented for TNG.

"Instant FTL jump" isn't a reversal of "time spent at warp"; it's just a different way of doing it. Same with "firearms with bullets"; that's not a reversal of having phasers. These things would only be true if they were the only alternatives.

And "none of the above" isn't a reversal of anything.

Thematically, you're probably correct. But the artistic decisions, props, and designs
are just the result of a very different approach, not a conscious reversal.