Your approach?

[Warped9]

It's been mentioned in a number of threads sporadically: what would TOS fans have preferred? Well lets ask that here. And I'm putting it here rather than in the Trek XI forum because the question is aimed at TOS fans.

But here are the basics: by some unforeseen chance YOU were tapped to helm the next Trek film. You were given two prerequisites by TPTB: it has to be a reboot and you have to return to the original era.

What would you have done?

Beyond that you can reimagine things moderately to drastically. You can use familiar elements in whole or in part. You could set it in the 21st century or the 23rd or the 30th or whatever. You can stick with the familiar names or revisit the Pike era (since that was Star Trek's initial form). You can use all the characters or only a few.

For myself some basics:
- no origin or prequel story. I am seriously sick of these things and it wastes a lot of screen time. Either Kirk has just assumed command or has already been in command for a time (just like in TOS).
- no time travel or alternate universe. It's a freaking restart unconnected to the original continuity.
- no technobabble.
- a smart story with adventure and drama and contextual humour.
- although I might mention Klingons and/or Romulans I wouldn't have any in the story.
- IF the Enterprise were to be redesigned, rather than just tweaked, I know it could be done while still evoking the original and not looking ugly and misshapen.

I'll leave it like that for now.

 

[F. King Daniel]

First let me say I loved STXI. I think they did a great job.

Now - does it have to be a film? Because I quite liked JMS's 2004 TOS reboot TV series proposal (pdf somewhere online). I don't think the execution of the plan would have been any better than Crusade was, but I approve of the basic premise.

I'd love a big epic story about the TOS duplicate Earths, or the Dyson Sphere. Although old Trek premises, they were never built on and could be reintroduced easily in a new Trek continuity.

I too would boot technobabble.
I'd have the ship looking more like a steel monstrosity.
Not have the captain recklessly endanger his life repeatedly. Perhaps a dedicated contact team? Pike in charge of the Enterprise and XO STXI-age Kirk leading landing parties?
Transporters would be an unsure science with more messy transport faliures.
No silly consoles exploding/fireworks when the ship is hit.

A sense of adventure. A planned-out route though the stars.

I'll change my mind about everything by tommorow.

 

[Warped9]

I'd like a decent science fiction idea at the heart of the story without beating people over the head with it.

 

[Admiral Shran]

First, I would never have done a reboot or revisited the TOS era. I would have either done one final TNG movie to give that series a proper closure, but done it correctly with good writing and a decent budget, or I would have started with a brand new crew and ship set during the Earth-Romulan War, maybe with a lot of references to Archer's crew and the Enterprise NX-01.

But, if the requirements are 1.) a reboot and 2.) a revisit of the TOS era, then I'd do the following....

1.) A clean reboot - what we got was a mess that massively altered the "prime" universe as well as the "altered" one.
2.) No ship redesign - the nu-Enterprise just looks wierd on the outside and ultra-confusing on the inside.
3.) No time travel - it can be good when done correctly, but it's been overplayed.
4.) An action piece with a lot of politics thrown in - this is why Star Trek VI is my favorite of the films.
5.) No destruction of Vulcan - seriously, the whole "entire planets are destroyed" concept is getting really, really old and boring.
6.) No origin story - Kirk has been in command for a while and the senior staff has already been assembled.
7.) A much more diverse crew - We'd see many more non-Humans among the Enterprise crew, maybe a few Andorians and Tellarites.

Maybe something along these lines - The Enterprise is escorting high ranking Federation officials, maybe even the UFP President, to a meeting to admit a new member world to the Federation. Either the Romulans or the Klingons are unhappy about the admission of this new member because it gives the UFP a stragetic advantage over them. An attack is made to thwart the admission process, and Kirk and Co., with the help of the politicans, have to set things right before full scale war breaks out.

 

[Shatnertage]

Have fun, take chances, and tell a story that's about more than starships. That's what the best Trek does. And I think that's what the last movie did, though YMMV. There are more than a few things that I didn't like about it--particularly points 2, 3, and 5 that Admiral Shran makes--but if we're talking about the approach we'd take in the biggest possible sense, I'd boil it down to those three things.

 

[Warped9]

I'd like to recapture that "strange new world" and/or "where no man has gone before" sensibility. I want to get away from familiar territory and feel like we're "out there" again.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I was okay with Trek XI - I think they did the "parallel universe" idea for the fans, not the general audience, because the general audience wouldn't worry their pretty little heads why Kirk and Uhura in particular suddenly looked and acted so differently, or fretted that we already know that the whole crew survives well beyond their current ages, and also know everything important that happens to the crew, so what stories are left to tell that matter in the least?

But I wouldn't have minded a frak-canon type reboot, that has the whole gang at the Academy at pretty much the same time, telescoping the age range of the originals, or ignored the idea that Kirk was a serious, studious cadet (which would make him too Spock-like to play well off Spock). Throw in some indications that the future is no more settled than the past - Starfleet knows about the Rommie-Vulcan connection; Klingons love tribbles; Chekov has a brother -and there's no reason anyone needs to worry about the stories being a foregone conclusion. To really drive the point home, one of the main cast (anyone besides Kirk, Spock, Uhura or McCoy) could have died in the movie.

My question is whether the fans would have been okay with a frak-canon reboot? I think the howling would have been much more severe, and that's what JJ & crew were striving to avoid by frakking with the canon of an alternate reality only.

1.) A clean reboot - what we got was a mess that massively altered the "prime" universe as well as the "altered" one.

They didn't alter the past of the prime universe. Canon was preserved.

6.) No origin story - Kirk has been in command for a while and the senior staff has already been assembled.

Why ignore a golden opportunity to tell the story that we've all wanted to see? Or at least, that I've wanted to see?

I'm still a tad frustrated that I haven't seen how the prime-universe Kirk and Spock actually did meet (presumably when Kirk took over command of the Enterprise, on which Spock was already first officer, but long after both had graduated from the Academy). So another approach is a true-to-canon origin story, which means the whole gang cannot be in the first movie, since many of them are not old enough, and it's absurd to think that they would have all met even when some were teens or children.

 

[Admiral Shran]

1.) A clean reboot - what we got was a mess that massively altered the "prime" universe as well as the "altered" one.

They didn't alter the past of the prime universe. Canon was preserved.

Yes, canon was perserved. But since Romulus was destroyed in the "prime" universe, it's been drastically changed.

I'd like to recapture that "strange new world" and/or "where no man has gone before" sensibility. I want to get away from familiar territory and feel like we're "out there" again.

We'll have disagree there. I find that Trek is at it's best when it builds on familiar terrority. The whole "strange new worlds" and "where no man has gone before" concepts never quite worked for me.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Clean reboot Everyone is in situ and been there for a while. Perhaps a scene or two that connects the names with the new faces. I'd prefer an story with some speculative science and some "human" elements. Something for the characters to chew over from an ethical standpoint. Also give everyone something to do.

Not gonna say no to any element no matter how "overused" they might be. Its how you use them, not what they are that counts. The basic design of the ship is fine only a few minor tweeks there. New interiors though, nothing as bright and aneceptic as ST09.

And 'sploshuns and fights

 

[StarryEyed]

I'd like to recapture that "strange new world" and/or "where no man has gone before" sensibility. I want to get away from familiar territory and feel like we're "out there" again.

Then forget the big screen. That format is not going to be successful there - especially in a series of movies. Because of their production cost, movies have to be aimed at the mass-market and cerebral exploration is not going to cut it there.

I don't believe Star Trek belongs on the big screen - that goes for any of the series. You have to compromise too much of what Star Trek is to make it work there.

 

[Warped9]

I'd like to recapture that "strange new world" and/or "where no man has gone before" sensibility. I want to get away from familiar territory and feel like we're "out there" again.

Then forget the big screen. That format is not going to be successful there - especially in a series of movies. Because of their production cost, movies have to be aimed at the mass-market and cerebral exploration is not going to cut it there.

I don't believe Star Trek belongs on the big screen - that goes for any of the series. You have to compromise too much of what Star Trek is to make it work there.

We're not talking about what we're likely to see, but what you (or I) would do if we had been in charge.

I also think your perspective is flawed. There are any number of films that have been smart and entertaining. Problem is most people simply assume that big budget "sci-fi" has to be inherently dumb-as-shit as well. I don't buy that. You can have smart and interesting ideas mixed in with the adventure. And just because few people try doesn't mean it can't be done.

 

[StarryEyed]

I'd like to recapture that "strange new world" and/or "where no man has gone before" sensibility. I want to get away from familiar territory and feel like we're "out there" again.

Then forget the big screen. That format is not going to be successful there - especially in a series of movies. Because of their production cost, movies have to be aimed at the mass-market and cerebral exploration is not going to cut it there.

I don't believe Star Trek belongs on the big screen - that goes for any of the series. You have to compromise too much of what Star Trek is to make it work there.

We're not talking about what we're likely to see, but what you (or I) would do if we had been in charge.

I also think your perspective is flawed. There are any number of films that have been smart and entertaining. Problem is most people simply assume that big budget "sci-fi" has to be inherently dumb-as-shit as well. I don't buy that. You can have smart and interesting ideas mixed in with the adventure. And just because few people try doesn't mean it can't be done.

Okay, I thought the hypothetical person in charge would still be bound by real-world realities. So I have a blank check, huh?

1. It would be a clean reboot; no connection with the original universe at all.

2. The ship would be much larger than the original, something like the Sovereign-class Enterprise. And it would have been powered by matter/anti-matter reactors rather than beer. I probably would go back to the TOS implication that the main reactors are integrated into the nacelles though. Consequently, the main phasers would be in the nacelle pylons as it makes no sense to channel all that power into living area of the ship.

3. The crew would be as close in spirit to the original crew as possible. Scotty would have been a real engineer rather then a clown running a brewery. There would be some definite changes though:

a) Spock would have been a pure Vulcan. A Human-Vulcan hybrid (assuming we stick with TOS physiological differences) is about as realistic as a Human-Artichoke hybrid.

b) McCoy would be much more like the movies version than the blatant racist of TOS.

c) None of the sexism of TOS, obviously. Women would be full equals but physical realities would be observed. Tonia Barrows in Shore Leave would have landed Don Juan on his ass but would not last 10 seconds against a Klingon warrior.

d) The minor characters would be fully fleshed-out as they were in TOS movies.

4. The story would be in keeping with my idea of what the core of Star Trek is: optimistic, humanistic, morality stories in a cool, futuristic setting.

 

[Myko]

I have a lot of specific things I'd change as I mentioned in the other thread, but I think the real problem is coming up with an exciting story that isn't dumb and feels fresh and new. I too would like to see the "wonder of exploration" and "isolation of space" that was present in the first half of season one of TOS, but I have no idea what that would practically be on the big screen.

Edit: I think an adaption of the plot of The Corbomite Maneuver could be good, if it was extended with perhaps some planetside action somehow. It's exciting and the ship is in peril, but has the ending which just screams Star Trek.

 

[Shazam!]

by some unforeseen chance YOU were tapped to helm the next Trek film..

Does it have to the next Trek film? In terms of what Star Trek (specifically TOS) has the potential to offer, the medium of [mass marketed, big-budget, 2 hour, summer release] film is horribly limiting outside of spectacle.

 

[Warped9]

by some unforeseen chance YOU were tapped to helm the next Trek film..

Does it have to the next Trek film? In terms of what Star Trek (specifically TOS) has the potential to offer, the medium of [mass marketed, big-budget, 2 hour, summer release] film is horribly limiting outside of spectacle.

This question was prompted by someone in another thread asking (paraphrased) what would TOS fans have liked to see if they're so down on Abrams' movie?

 

[xortex]

I liked the Lawrence of Arabia approach, one man against the crazy universe kind of thing humanizing Kirk giving him the passion and all as the youngest Captain ever to solve the mystery of the first civilized galactic ship to venture beyond the known boundries (barrier) of the universe in to the strange and unknown for the first time on a rescue mission bringing the ufp back in a sense to it's alien roots and origins - ancient civilizations and the unusually familiar. We somehow find exactly what we're looking for - the intrepid - lost in space and what lies outside the consciousness. Humanity only representing a tiny fragment of the universe.

 

[Joker]

It's been mentioned in a number of threads sporadically: what would TOS fans have preferred?

The question confuses me, as most of the TOS fans, and indeed most of the people who saw the film, appeared to like it.

You should aim the question not at "TOS fans", but at "people who didn't like the film as-is".

But then... I suspect the purpose of the thread is to put forward what you want, and to see how many people agree with those choices... if that's the case, it would be better just to come out and say it.

 

[BillJ]

Honestly...

I'd have remade either The Cage or Where No Man Has Gone Before. Both stories left plenty to expand on and would be a treat to see either of them on the big screen.

 

[xortex]

The Talosians. The mystery is still there fighting to not be discovered.

 

[Warped9]

I suspect the purpose of the thread is to put forward what you want, and to see how many people agree with those choices... if that's the case, it would be better just to come out and say it.

That's your assumption. People have put different ideas forward and no one has started an argument out of disagreement. Or are you looking to start one?