Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forward?

[JNG]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I speak as a writer when I say that I see no pressing need to disregard what we have got in the way of continuity, and that things which alienate an existing but passionate fanbase (its actual numbers uncertain) in order to bring in a "new majority" are taking a huge gamble. I really don't see the need to take that gamble. They can have their cake and eat it too on this one. Especially in a flick with time travel, you can really push the boundaries without outright contradictions.

 

[superstring01]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I'm ready for the reboot.

Indeed, there's not continuity within the series that we have now, so a more orderly reboot would benefit the series as a whole.

~String

 

[MattJC]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I'm ready for the reboot.

Indeed, there's not continuity within the series that we have now, so a more orderly reboot would benefit the series as a whole.

~String

How is a reboot supposed to benefit the series that we have now?

 

[Qonos]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I speak as a writer when I say that I see no pressing need to disregard what we have got in the way of continuity, and that things which alienate an existing but passionate fanbase (its actual numbers uncertain) in order to bring in a "new majority" are taking a huge gamble. I really don't see the need to take that gamble. They can have their cake and eat it too on this one. Especially in a flick with time travel, you can really push the boundaries without outright contradictions.

Actually if you look at the past series ratings they really do need to fix up the continuity. They need to make something happen with this hodgepodge of contradicting facts that is Trek history. Was Cocrane from Alpha Centauri as stated in TOS, or was he from Earth as stated in First contact. Trek has many of these discrepancies...

Matt go to Wiki and look up Infinite Crisis. It's something DC has done with it's universe from time to time.

When you can't even agree whether your ship is sailing under the banner of the Federation or the United Earth Space Probe Agency, (both were claimed in TOS) the you have continuity issues big enough to fly a Galaxy class cruiser through.

 

[JuanBolio]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I'm ready for the reboot.

Indeed, there's not continuity within the series that we have now, so a more orderly reboot would benefit the series as a whole.

~String

How is a reboot supposed to benefit the series that we have now?

It has the potential to allow it to continue having freshness and a sense of the unknown. We know what happens over the course of several hundred years in the Trek universe. We know what to expect, and that the Federation/galaxy/universe is never in much danger as its still going on in the future.

With a reboot or even a slight alteration, possibilities open up. Trek is all about possibilities. Maybe there'll be a Klingon war in the 23rd century. Maybe some characters will die. Maybe they'll discover new things that make the Trek mythos even more interesting - things that couldn't have been done before.

The old series is still there - they all are. No one is saying they never happened. If it is a reboot is doesn't make them into one huge dream sequence and make everything you know and love about them empty and worthless. It simply adds a new chapter with new potential. Like the old one better? That's fine. But you should wait to judge the new until you actually see it, I think. Its the logical thing to do.

 

[MattJC]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

It doesn't add a new chapter to the already existing series.
It starts a new universe with the Trek label slapped on it.
Some of those continuity errors can be explained with a little imagination. Not all of them, but some.
You don't need to wipe the slate clean to fix the errors that are already there.

 

[Qonos]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

It doesn't add a new chapter to the already existing series.
It starts a new universe with the Trek label slapped on it.
Some of those continuity errors can be explained with a little imagination. Not all of them, but some.
You don't need to wipe the slate clean to fix the errors that are already there.

Of course that means you've never made an omlete Matt.

Some times you gotta break some eggs...

 

[number6]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I don't think the slate needs to be wiped completely to add a new chapter. It's not necessary, for reasons I stated upthread.

 

[Qonos]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I don't think the slate needs to be wiped completely to add a new chapter. It's not necessary, for reasons I stated upthread.

And sometimes a Reboot doesn't mean wiping everything away either.

Do you lose everything in your computer when you reboot it? Or just the information that caused it to crash.. Trek is Crashing.... It to be rebooted.

 

[JuanBolio]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

It doesn't add a new chapter to the already existing series.

It lets potential stories be told that could not otherwise be told within the restrictions of the current Trekverse.

It starts a new universe with the Trek label slapped on it.

Trek is already a multi-verse, with branching timelines and alternate realities. Are you saying the mirror universe and all those stories are not part of Trek?

 

[MattJC]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

It doesn't add a new chapter to the already existing series.

It lets potential stories be told that could not otherwise be told within the restrictions of the current Trekverse.

It starts a new universe with the Trek label slapped on it.

Trek is already a multi-verse, with branching timelines and alternate realities. Are you saying the mirror universe and all those stories are not part of Trek?

Those timelines and universes didn't overwrite anything like this new one is supposedly going to do. In fact all those alternate timelines where reset back to normal by the end of the episode.
I doubt that will happen with this movie.

 

[number6]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

It doesn't add a new chapter to the already existing series.

It lets potential stories be told that could not otherwise be told within the restrictions of the current Trekverse.

It starts a new universe with the Trek label slapped on it.

Trek is already a multi-verse, with branching timelines and alternate realities. Are you saying the mirror universe and all those stories are not part of Trek?

Those timelines and universes didn't overwrite anything like this new one is supposedly going to do. In fact all those alternate timelines where reset back to normal by the end of the episode.
I doubt that will happen with this movie.

You don't really know that. That's just your predisposition.

I'll reserve judgement until I see it for myself.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

It doesn't add a new chapter to the already existing series.

Why can't it?

It starts a new universe with the Trek label slapped on it.

Does it need to do that? Can't it be the same universe?

Some of those continuity errors can be explained with a little imagination. Not all of them, but some.

Do you suppose that might happen with this movie? What would you think if they do exactly that?

You don't need to wipe the slate clean to fix the errors that are already there.

Who has said anything about wiping the slate clean, though? Seriously, who? Some Paramount junior exec, caught flat-footed by an Entertainment Weekly drone, who has no creative role in the film whatsoever and probably has no clear idea of what was on the slate either before or after? Why listen to that at all?

The biggest problem I have with the term "reboot" is that it's unclear; if you ask fifty people what it means -- around here, at least -- you'll get fifty different answers. So it's pretty much useless as a descriptive term, right?

Here's what I'm getting from what they've said: most of the stuff we've seen, from 'The Cage' and 'Where No Man Has Gone Before' onward, and most of the stuff which has been referred to in dialogue, will still be right there where it's always been. What they seem intent on doing is working in the spaces in between, filling in some of what has been skipped over and maybe -- just maybe -- messing around with a few of the assumptions which have been made over the years by Trek fans as a group about what goes in those spaces but which we don't know for sure.

Ask yourself: is that really such a bad thing? Is it too much for someone to toy with... not the established canon... but what we have decided, based on inference and extrapolation, goes in those spaces not yet seen on-screen? That's the impression I'm getting of what may be happening in the movie.

 

[JuanBolio]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

Those timelines and universes didn't overwrite anything like this new one is supposedly going to do.

What do you base that on? How is anything overwritten? Are the old shows going to disappear as soon as this movie hits theaters? Is a new timeline going to make the old one(s) meaningless? Will every episode become empty and without merit because this new thing exists? Why not enjoy both? The test of a great mind is the ability to hold two opposing ideas simultaneously.

And no, the mirror universe and several others were never reset into non-existence. Trek is a multiverse, with multiple universes and timelines existing at once.

 

[Gagarin]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

Nope - I'd enjoy a whole new set of stories, ideas, something fresh to experience.

We'll always have The ORIGINAL Series. And the movies.

But how about changing things up and going through the story again?
Hell yes.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

Zephram Cochran the creator of the warp drive was ORIGINALLY From Alpha Centarui.. IN First Contact he's from Earth..

Actually, Zefram Cochrane was OF Alpha Centauri ("Metamorphosis"). And if he used his new Warp Drive to go off and found an interplanetary Earth colony world on Alpha Centauri then all is well.

Like the aforementioned "Chekove was never on the Enterprise when Khan was." I think that in the least we should see how Abrams and crew address this and work to being a cohesive continuity together...

TOS never said Chekov wasn't around in late Season One. It seems he missed hearing about "Mudd's Women" (see "I, Mudd") but there was plenty of room for him in the lower decks in the later Season One eps.

I believe the writers when they say they and JJ have created a story that fits with previous canonical facts. And if they've fudged a bit, I still don't care. Getting used to a new Saavik (ST III & IV) was trickier to deal with way back in the 80s.

 

[bintak]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

This isn't a superhero comics universe, prone to reboots every ten to twenty years. At least, I'd hope not. I'd prefer to keep and keep on building on what we have. If this movie does that, we're good.

If, on the other hand, we're starting to watch another ST universe, co-existing alongside the one we've grown up with - and we do have precedent for that sort of thing being possible - that's another form of building on what we've had all along. Also fine by me, and it just might be worth my money.

Reboots...make me nervous. No disrespect to those who work on them - some of them have been entertaining reading over the years, in fact.

I just need a lot of convincing. I'm from Saskatchewan, after all.

I'm fine with this explanation for divergence if it is a good Trek.

Just don't battlestar it to hades a la Ron Moore and call it Trek.

Change can be good, if it is a good change.

 

[JoeZhang]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I speak as a writer when I say that I see no pressing need to disregard what we have got in the way of continuity, and that things which alienate an existing but passionate fanbase (its actual numbers uncertain) in order to bring in a "new majority" are taking a huge gamble. I really don't see the need to take that gamble.

You sound more like an accountant than a writer.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I care.

Having said that, Star Trek already has a foot in both camps. Occasionally contradicting old episodes or at the very least casting doubt on history mentioned in passing. Personally I prefer that to wiping the slate clean. Part of the problem is the so called fanon. Stuff that nearly everyone seems to agree on, based on brief dialogue heard onscreen (or worse, no evidence at all).

 

[Ovation]

Re: Would you really care if Star Trek was rebooted anew from now forw

I've been watching Star Trek since 1973--in all its iterations--and have not missed a single episode. Yet I voted for the third option--I don't care one whit about whether this movie is slavishly canonical or wipes the slate clean. I want it to be a great film FIRST. If it is a great film, then I will be quite happy. I quite enjoy other "franchises" where the ROLES are far more important than the actors who inhabit them (or the "look" of the background) and I feel no differently about Star Trek. It's not a religion, it's entertainment (makes it a lot easier to enjoy, in the end).