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

Actually if you look at the past series ratings they really do need to fix up the continuity.

Ratings have jack shit to do with continuity most of the time.

Was Cocrane from Alpha Centauri as stated in TOS, or was he from Earth as stated in First contact.

"Of Alpha Centauri" is not a big deal to me; maybe he moved there after the Warp 5 Project and/or launched his famous final mission, on which he disappeared, from there. In any case, he looked human, spoke English, and is named Cochrane, which is an EARTH NAME.

Trek has many of these discrepancies...

Some. Many fans enjoy thinking of ways to make things work instead of the boorish process 1. point out error that happens on TV production schedule 2. sit in parents' basement and bask in unwarranted feeling of superiority.

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.

Right, because no ship has ever had multiple agencies associated with it, and all shows that have a few glitches in their first season should be completely rebooted. Considering the logos used, I'd say Enterprise cleaned this one up just fine. But seriously, would something like that require a reboot of 40 years of TV?

P.S.

Just a fun fact: my Technical Manuals say Galaxy is an Explorer, not a cruiser.

 

[BillJ]

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

This bit from my review of Generations has some relevance here:

In my calmer moments, I've acknowledged that if you took away the Star Trek elements from Generations, then it was a pretty good movie. Unfortunately, we can't do that. It has all those Star Trek elements, and that includes thirty years of baggage to lug along behind, and several million volunteer sherpas more than happy to point out where you screwed up in Scene 23.

On one level, I say go ahead and reboot, let those who want a reboot have their fun and leave the rest of us alone.

So long as the mainline canon is left alone and available for further exploration, in novels, comics, tv series, movies, etc., then go ahead and have your Trek v2.0.

However, if some marketing halfwit at Paramount tries to foist this abortion on us as the one and only true Star Trek, then they've got a problem on their hands.

​

No offense... but you take this way to seriously. Star Trek is a Paramount property, they can do with it what they want. And if this abortion makes 300-400 million dollars, I fail to see the problem on their hands.

I have my quibbles with certain aspects of the current project. But no one is coming to take my Star Trek DVD's away. On May 8th/9th, I'll go to the theater and take in the new film. If I like it great. If not... the world will still be spinning when I walk out of the theater.

Now, take a Xanex or two and go watch the Corbomite Maneuver.

 

[BillJ]

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

You forgot option 4:

No matter how far out of whack with continuity... I'll figure a way to shoehorn it in.

 

[Trajet]

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

I couldn't really give a toss about Star Trek's established continuity or canon, and neither will the vast majority of people who go see it at the cinema. Paramount aren't making a movie for Trek fans, and quite rightly so, as the last Trek movie "made for Trek fans" was an unmitigated creative, critical and financial disaster.

2009's Star Trek is all about reconnecting with the general, mainstream audience, and in that context, I think a solidly crafted, entertaining story is far more important and desirable than a story which slavishly follows inconsistent, occasionally idiotic but supposedly canonical facts laid down over 40 years ago.

If you don't want a rebooted or retooled version of Star Trek that's relevant to today's world, don't go see it. I'm sure Paramount will be utterly beside itself over small percentage in revenue they'll lose from the hardcore Trek purists boycotting the film. This film is for the general public and those Trek fans who would like to see the franchise reinvigorated and flourishing, not for the overtly anal geeks who seem to be trapped in a 1960's time warp and know every single fact and line of dialogue from every episode.

What are the odds that the purists will come round if the film turns out to be a critical and financial success?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

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

What are the odds that the purists will come round if the film turns out to be a critical and financial success?

Based on the TNG experience, most of them will and a few of them won't.

Ninety percent of the "Star Trek canon" that purists fret about now was established by modern Trek TV shows that were initially unacceptable to TOS purists.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

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

I couldn't really give a toss about Star Trek's established continuity or canon, and neither will the vast majority of people who go see it at the cinema. Paramount aren't making a movie for Trek fans, and quite rightly so, as the last Trek movie "made for Trek fans" was an unmitigated creative, critical and financial disaster.

2009's Star Trek is all about reconnecting with the general, mainstream audience, and in that context, I think a solidly crafted, entertaining story is far more important and desirable than a story which slavishly follows inconsistent, occasionally idiotic but supposedly canonical facts laid down over 40 years ago.

If you don't want a rebooted or retooled version of Star Trek that's relevant to today's world, don't go see it. I'm sure Paramount will be utterly beside itself over small percentage in revenue they'll lose from the hardcore Trek purists boycotting the film. This film is for the general public and those Trek fans who would like to see the franchise reinvigorated and flourishing, not for the overtly anal geeks who seem to be trapped in a 1960's time warp and know every single fact and line of dialogue from every episode.

HEY!

I'm an overtly anal geek who knows every single fact and line of dialogue from every episode.

And I want them to reboot, cleanly and completely.

This message brought to you by the People Against the Stereotyping of Overtly Anal Geeks Association of America

 

[Qonos]

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

I couldn't really give a toss about Star Trek's established continuity or canon, and neither will the vast majority of people who go see it at the cinema. Paramount aren't making a movie for Trek fans, and quite rightly so, as the last Trek movie "made for Trek fans" was an unmitigated creative, critical and financial disaster.

2009's Star Trek is all about reconnecting with the general, mainstream audience, and in that context, I think a solidly crafted, entertaining story is far more important and desirable than a story which slavishly follows inconsistent, occasionally idiotic but supposedly canonical facts laid down over 40 years ago.

If you don't want a rebooted or retooled version of Star Trek that's relevant to today's world, don't go see it. I'm sure Paramount will be utterly beside itself over small percentage in revenue they'll lose from the hardcore Trek purists boycotting the film. This film is for the general public and those Trek fans who would like to see the franchise reinvigorated and flourishing, not for the overtly anal geeks who seem to be trapped in a 1960's time warp and know every single fact and line of dialogue from every episode.

HEY!

I'm an overtly anal geek who knows every single fact and line of dialogue from every episode.

And I want them to reboot, cleanly and completely.

This message brought to you by the People Against the Stereotyping of Overtly Anal Geeks Association of America

PASOAGAA? Isn't that an Italian dessert?

 

[Ovation]

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

What are the odds that the purists will come round if the film turns out to be a critical and financial success?

Based on the TNG experience, most of them will and a few of them won't.

Ninety percent of the "Star Trek canon" that purists fret about now was established by modern Trek TV shows that were initially unacceptable to TOS purists.

The other ten percent, of course, consists largely of "fanon"--the contradiction of which leads to paroxysms of agony (T'Pol being in Starfleet before Spock being one example among many).

 

[Captain Robert April]

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

Actually, Pasoagaa was war chief of the Fugawee tribe.

 

[Qonos]

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

Actually, Pasoagaa was war chief of the Fugawee tribe.

The Fugawee of course it all makes sense now...

 

[Lapis Exilis]

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

Actually, Pasoagaa was war chief of the Fugawee tribe.

The little know Fugawee tribe of the planet Qualingay invented Overtly Anal Geekiness when they developed the 114 cycle epic poem "Hooloo APAAAA fuwaroooo", which all tribal members were required to memorize and recite before their 16th birthday. Misspeaking a single line, or mispronouncing the name of the 417th Klingon Overloard of the 12th century (the most common mistake), condemned one to being tied to a stake in the middle of the forest and covered in pickle juice, which would draw the pygmies of the neighboring tribe over to tickle ones toes with long feathers, and laugh.

You can confirm this on Memory Alpha. It was on the viewscreen of a yeoman's station in episode 91 of TNG. And, while I want a nice clean reboot, one of the other members of the PASOAGAA has promised that, by god, if it doesn't get a mention in the new movie, he will pour ashes on himself and walk up and down outside the Paramount lot offices, repeating "JJ Abrams, I call for justice!" for three days nonstop, and when Abrams finally appears, he will stab himself in the chest. That is the depth of his love for Star Trek.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

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

Maybe he could just rush the stage at Comic-Con with a pair of handcuffs shouting "Citizen's arrest!?"

 

[Captain Robert April]

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

Nah. Too subtle.

 

[BTX]

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

A little reality check. This movie just doesn't need to be a hit... it needs to last a couple of sequels (and maybe a spin off or two) before it "overwrites" canon. Otherwise this will be a one off that spawns a subset of fanwankery and BBS argument that no one cares about.

BTX

 

[starburst]

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

I wonder how people would be feeling if this was Gene Roddenberry making these decisions and not JJ Abrams.

Star Trek has always evolved with the times and changed bits which dont make sence, between the pilots and TOS Laser pistols became Phasers, time warping became simply Warp drive, Spocks makeup changed etc...however the fans seem to get all upity trying to reconcile these differences when it was actually the guy who is writing the story changing things he didnt like because he could.

 

[SalvorHardin]

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

I wonder how people would be feeling if this was Gene Roddenberry making these decisions and not JJ Abrams.

I believe Gene would be more or less getting the same treatment George Lucas gets today...By some at least

 

[starburst]

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

Most likely, although for Lucas its not always so much about the recent 3 as it is him continually messing with the original ones...for some reason we fans seem to claim ownership over these films, tv shows etc

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

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

I wonder how people would be feeling if this was Gene Roddenberry making these decisions and not JJ Abrams.

I believe Gene would be more or less getting the same treatment George Lucas gets today...By some at least

Probably. He got a taste of that with TNG, leading him to make an angry statement from the stage at the big L.A. Creation Con in 1988 - he declared that "if I'd listened to everything you want, 'Star Trek' would be shit."

 

[number6]

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

I wonder how people would be feeling if this was Gene Roddenberry making these decisions and not JJ Abrams.

I believe Gene would be more or less getting the same treatment George Lucas gets today...By some at least

Probably. He got a taste of that with TNG, leading him to make an angry statement from the stage at the big L.A. Creation Con in 1988 - he declared that "if I'd listened to everything you want, 'Star Trek' would be shit."

Thank you, Sir Dennis, for my new sig line!

 

[SalvorHardin]

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

I believe Gene would be more or less getting the same treatment George Lucas gets today...By some at least

Probably. He got a taste of that with TNG, leading him to make an angry statement from the stage at the big L.A. Creation Con in 1988 - he declared that "if I'd listened to everything you want, 'Star Trek' would be shit."

Thank you, Sir Dennis, for my new sig line!

Dammit, you got to it first

Nice quote, I didn't know he had said that...