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

[I am not Spock]

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

Thank You! I too don't want to erase everything that has came before and the way i understood it to be was a we will be seeing how the crew came together and some academy day's plus some sort of time travel involving Spock then I dont mind small changes like the bridge display or " oh my god Kirk saw a Romulan" as long as it's the same charachters and the same basic mission. That being said, an alternate timeline would be eceptable and a TOS era show would definately be cool

I'd like what was promised. Stories that take place within existing continuity.

I would like what they promised us too. A good movie which reinvents, but doesn't 'reboot' Star Trek. I hate the word 'reboot'. It just sounds lazy to me. I agree with you, gastrof. If Abrams wants to write something new, go ahead. There's nothing to stop him from creating a new universe if he wants to, without messing up Star Trek.

 

[Kelso]

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

To be fair, Star Trek was messed up before JJ came along.

 

[Ovation]

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

Do we begrudge people putting on yet another production of Hamlet? Only if it is bad, I should think. Even Hitchcock remade his own work, on occasion (and it succeeded). Not all remakes are as good, much less better than, the original (even if they are not bad in and of themselves) but some are better. Yes, some are also worse (The Vanishing is an egregious example of a bad remake). But Ben-Hur is better as a remake than as an original. There is no inherent reason NOT to try--and this is not even a remake.

No, it's whatever buzzword Abrams wants to use in order to con as many people into the theatre as he can.

Then don't go. Watch your re-runs and be content. Yours is not the only legitimate vision of what Star Trek is or should be. Personally, I like experiencing different interpretations of art--whether that art is theatre, cinema, music or something else. I enjoy both Branagh's and Olivier's Henry V. I like Abbado's and von Karajan's Beethoven symphony cycles. I've enjoyed Superman in the Silver Age, the post-Crisis continuity, the recently rebooted continuity, on film, in cartoons... I like Hendrix's cover of All Along the Watchtower a lot more than Dylan's original (heretical as that may be to Dylan purists).

Seriously--what do you "trek purists" really want? You can't have more TOS adventures without changes--the actors are dead or ancient. No matter what Abrams (or anyone else) does, you still have your DVDs and so on. Don't like what Abrams is doing--don't go see it. Your choice. But get off your collective high horse and stop presuming that because someone's take on Trek doesn't meet your personal approval that anyone who might actually be interested in the new film is some sort of sellout or "false fan".

 

[Captain Robert April]

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

I like Hendrix's cover of All Along the Watchtower a lot more than Dylan's original (heretical as that may be to Dylan purists).

You're in good company. Dylan also prefers Jimi's version.

 

[number6]

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

I like Hendrix's cover of All Along the Watchtower a lot more than Dylan's original (heretical as that may be to Dylan purists).

You're in good company. Dylan also prefers Jimi's version.

Looks like Bob Dylan is more openminded about others interpreting his own work than you are about someone interpreting GR's vision.

 

[MattJC]

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

You can't have more TOS adventures without changes--the actors are dead or ancient. QUOTE]

There you go.

 

[number6]

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

No, it's whatever buzzword Abrams wants to use in order to con as many people into the theatre as he can.

Then don't go. Watch your re-runs and be content. Yours is not the only legitimate vision of what Star Trek is or should be. Personally, I like experiencing different interpretations of art--whether that art is theatre, cinema, music or something else. I enjoy both Branagh's and Olivier's Henry V. I like Abbado's and von Karajan's Beethoven symphony cycles. I've enjoyed Superman in the Silver Age, the post-Crisis continuity, the recently rebooted continuity, on film, in cartoons... I like Hendrix's cover of All Along the Watchtower a lot more than Dylan's original (heretical as that may be to Dylan purists).

Seriously--what do you "trek purists" really want? You can't have more TOS adventures without changes--the actors are dead or ancient. No matter what Abrams (or anyone else) does, you still have your DVDs and so on. Don't like what Abrams is doing--don't go see it. Your choice. But get off your collective high horse and stop presuming that because someone's take on Trek doesn't meet your personal approval that anyone who might actually be interested in the new film is some sort of sellout or "false fan".

This isn't TOS.
This movie is based on TOS. Most of the people involved with this piece of crap weren't even around when TOS first aired.

Of course it's based on Star Trek. Every incarnation of Trek since 1969 is. Weren't you paying attention?

Most of the people involved in writing this new film are fans of the series and even some of the "good" novels. They grew up on the show.

Just like you and me. Except they're not narrow minded jerks.

 

[Akiraprise]

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

Except they're not narrow minded jerks.

^ Chill guy. Thanks.

 

[MattJC]

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

Of course it's based on Star Trek. Every incarnation of Trek since 1969 is. Weren't you paying attention?

Most of the people involved in writing this new film are fans of the series and even some of the "good" novels. They grew up on the show.

Just like you and me. Except they're not narrow minded jerks.

He implied that this movie is one and the same as TOS.

 

[Akiraprise]

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

^ Did you ever get a response at that other board from Orci?

 

[MattJC]

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

I'm still waiting for a response.
He replied to my first private message with "Define reboot", which I did but I don't think he got it or I hit the nail on the head with my response of "Anything that overwrites what has already happened", or something along those lines, I can't remember exactly what I said, and he just refused to answer me. He was online posting at that messageboard after I sent it.
I sent him a second private message with my response about a day after I sent the first one and I'm still waiting. He hasn't been posting on the board for about a week now.
I understand he's quite busy.

 

[number6]

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

Except they're not narrow minded jerks.

^ Chill guy. Thanks.

Well, it's true. and I really mean no disrespect.

The fact is, that the writers and producers are fans of the show and they seem to understand the spirit of the original show at least as much as, if not more, than the people who have been making Trek these last 20 years.

They're not the ones saying that this is a reboot. The whole reboot thing is being overstated by the entertainment media. It's a trend in Hollywood that's exisisted for many years. It a whole lot easier for those who know nothing about Star Trek and it's legacy (remember we are talking about the Hollywood Attention Span) to say that this is a reboot than to explain that the writiers are going to honor continuity and honor everything that has gone before while exploring new possibilities in storytelling, by going back to the origins of the Star Trek universe. See what a mouthful that is?

Now the writers have said it, but not to Variety, but to Trekmovie.com.

Now why would they do that?

Because Variety and EW and People Magazine are for those who have a Hollywood Attention Span and care more about who Miley Cyrus is dating than honoring Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future.

The writers, in giving their interviews at Comic Con and Trek Today and even that worthless SyFy Portal, are talking directly to us. The Fans. The people that care about what they have to say. I think they get it. Based on what I've read I am convinced of that. I'm not digging the visual design ethic, but I also HATED the TMP design ethic, yet it was STILL Star Trek. Who knows? I may feel the same way about this film, but I'm not going to dismiss it without seeing it for myself.
That is NARROW minded and very un Trek. Remember IDIC and all that??

As someone who grew up with the show in the 70s and seen every incarnation since, I have given Trek a shot. Some I've liked, some I haven't. At the very least I've made my own mind up once I've seen it. I made that mistake with TNG and wound up really liking it. (Of course by then it was season 3, when it got good!!)

The fact that a new Trek film is on its way gives me the same giddy anticipation I felt every time a new Trek has been announced. I'm not about to let anyone take that away from me...ecpecially someone who claimes to be a "fan." I find that attitude absolutely disgusting. It's how I feel and I also believe that is extremely relevant to the subject of this post, certainly more relevant than coming into every single thread to proclaim this film's impeding suckage and to name call the people making it.

That doesn't fill me with a lot of respect.

 

[pookha]

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

anything that overwrites what has already happened could apply to certain aspects of tos or at least ignore what happened previously.

 

[number6]

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

Of course it's based on Star Trek. Every incarnation of Trek since 1969 is. Weren't you paying attention?

Most of the people involved in writing this new film are fans of the series and even some of the "good" novels. They grew up on the show.

Just like you and me. Except they're not narrow minded jerks.

He implied that this movie is one and the same as TOS.

How? Show me the quote. Prove to me you're not just blowing the same tune again, as usual.

 

[MattJC]

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

You can't have more TOS adventures without changes--the actors are dead or ancient. QUOTE]

There you go, number6.

 

[number6]

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

You can't have more TOS adventures without changes--the actors are dead or ancient. QUOTE]

There you go, number6.

Well. You can't. If you want to tell Kirk and Spock stories, you have to recast. You haven't proven that the two are the same. No one is saying that JJ Abrams is selling his film as "THE" Original Series. That is preposterous. He is telling a story about Kirk and Spock.

You've only proven that to tell a TOS story you have to recast. Are you telling me that no one is allowed to tell a TOS story with Kirk and Spock ever again??

Who are you to make that decision for everyone?

 

[Nowhere Man]

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

Thank You! I too don't want to erase everything that has came before and the way i understood it to be was a we will be seeing how the crew came together and some academy day's plus some sort of time travel involving Spock then I dont mind small changes like the bridge display or " oh my god Kirk saw a Romulan" as long as it's the same charachters and the same basic mission. That being said, an alternate timeline would be eceptable and a TOS era show would definately be cool

The bridge looking so different IS a pretty big change. It DOES violate the continuity we knew...

IF that's what's happening. (Again, wait and see.)

If the uniforms represented the degree of visual changes we'd see, I'd be on board. (Said that before.) It's making things look SO different NEEDLESSLY that bugs me. It makes it something OTHER than the original Star Trek. It ends what we knew, and uses the Trek name to do something else.

I'd like what was promised. Stories that take place within existing continuity.

Oh, by the way...

A Starfleet officer, especially Kirk, wouldn't have kept quiet about "The Romulans look like Vulcans". I think that'd be something he'd at least report in secret. Can't let that go by, but at the same time can't start a Federation-wide panic. All we need is Vulcan getting nuked by a shipful of renegades with Styles' sentiments.

Don't get me wrong, I agree completely with what you said and they could have made a better effort to make the bridge closer to the original without it looking old or out dated, but I gess a better example would be something like Khan knowing Chekov , when we all know Chekov wasen't at least seen on the E until the 2nd season. Chekov is in this movie, so something like that really dosen'tdestroy's cannon I don't think. You are completely right though, I want what was promissed too

 

[MattJC]

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

You can't have more TOS adventures without changes--the actors are dead or ancient. QUOTE]

There you go, number6.

Well. You can't. If you want to tell Kirk and Spock stories, you have to recast. You haven't proven that the two are the same. No one is saying that JJ Abrams is selling his film as "THE" Original Series. That is preposterous. He is telling a story about Kirk and Spock.

You've only proven that to tell a TOS story you have to recast. Are you telling me that no one is allowed to tell a TOS story with Kirk and Spock ever again??

Who are you to make that decision for everyone?

The poster is implying that they are one in the same, not Abrams.

 

[Therin of Andor]

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

Did every writer of every episode of TOS redesign the bridge? If this is Kirk and Spock, fine. If the actors have to be changed to achieve that, fine, but why change other things? Can't you tell interesting stories on the same bridge of the same ship

Actually, as soon as Roddenberry had negotiated a toy company to license Star Trek models, he had them build him a full size shuttlecraft Galileo in exchange for the rights - which ended up making Sulu's scene, freezing his butt off in "The Enemy Within", rather dumb.

Extra money in the next season's budget, and GR had the Engineering set inexplicably extended.

A director on "Whom Gods Destroy" ordered actors to leave a scene by a non-existent, off-camera door, assuming the needs of the scene would override fans noticing.

 

[number6]

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

Well. You can't. If you want to tell Kirk and Spock stories, you have to recast. You haven't proven that the two are the same. No one is saying that JJ Abrams is selling his film as "THE" Original Series. That is preposterous. He is telling a story about Kirk and Spock.

You've only proven that to tell a TOS story you have to recast. Are you telling me that no one is allowed to tell a TOS story with Kirk and Spock ever again??

Who are you to make that decision for everyone?

The poster is implying that they are one in the same, not Abrams.

No he isn't. He's saying pretty much the same thing as I am: You can't tell a TOS story involving Kirk and Spock without recasting.