The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > A bone for the Canonites...
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-06-2010, 09:39 AM
Admiral Archer's Avatar
Admiral Archer Admiral Archer is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Foothill Ranch, CA
Posts: 746
Default A bone for the Canonites...

An idea I have had bouncing around in my head for a while was, what if they had just made "Star Trek" a flat out reboot? No time-travel, no Leonard Nimoy, no Alternate timelines. And, as big of a fan as I am of this movie, and as much as I hate to even consider it, what if there had been no iBridge? No Abramsprise? Hell, what if it was exactly what people like the Saint and Zim were imagining - TOS redone for the new millennium, brick for brick?

The question is, would it have succeeded? Obviously it would have needed a hell of a good story, and the cast would have to be just as flawless as what we have now (albeit a wee bit older, since 2258 is technically almost 7 years too early for the five-year mission to begin). But would it have worked? What could it have been about, aside from a basic origin story? Would a TMP-style entity of mass destruction have been a more interesting antagonist? Would Paramount have even considered going this route? And if they had, would the non-trekkie public have bought into it? In short, would it have made the big bucks that Star Trek XI made?

Let the theories fly! And Zim, I look forward to sparring with you again!
__________________
"To boldly go where no man has gone before"

--ADMIRAL JONATHAN ARCHER--

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-06-2010, 10:08 AM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,990
Default

I think a straight reboot without all the timetravel stuff could have worked, although they still would have made visual changes, it wouldn't have looked like TOS no matter what IMO.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-06-2010, 10:51 AM
jla1987's Avatar
jla1987 jla1987 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,483
Default

I think it would have worked too...and really don't have much more to say about it beyond that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-06-2010, 12:24 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,078
Default

If they had done it that way it wouldn't really have been a major problem for me at all, personally.

Would have worked just fine - it has done for Batman, Bond and a few other franchises along the way.

However, the suggestion it should have been done that way just to mollify some - I'm less supportive of. In terms of antagonists - well, V'Ger has different mileage for different people, I found little compelling about it myself - it's possible (if not likely) that the film would still have gone down the singular villain route for the first outing.

For the non-fan/new viewer there is nothing extra to buy into either - the idea behind this film is that you could watch only this version of Trek without having to go back and watch the others so a pure reboot has no advantage from that angle over the Nimoy/Spock linkage to TOS.

That part was specifically for the existing fanbase so as to point out that the TOS Prime universe hadn't been lost (a point which I will concede the writers didn't clearly enough spell out for some) and that's why that part was there.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist

Last edited by kevin : 02-06-2010 at 12:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-06-2010, 12:36 PM
janeway72's Avatar
janeway72 janeway72 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Federation Starship Voyager
Posts: 4,977
Default

I think it would have looked desperately dated as TOS does.
__________________

"Unless you have something a little bigger in your torpedo tubes, I'm not turning around!"
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-06-2010, 02:22 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,208
Default

The cool thing about the 'time travel' reboot, is that it was uniquely Star Trek. I can't think of any other sci-fi franchise in which you could pull that one off (Doctor Who, which I've never gotten into, already has its own reboot mechanism). If there is any reason why ST09 was the 'right' direction, it is that.

Then again, it could easily have been the wrong direction in the hands of another director who might've had a different direction he would've preferred (or perhaps no direction at all, and just took whatever assignment the studio gave him).

At best, I think the overall appeal of a flat-out reboot would be about the same... some fans would've preferred it; others would've remained hostile to the very idea of re-booting Trek. I believe Leonard Nimoy did a huge service to this movie, though. No other ST actor I know of has been more protective of his character. Paramount offered him the chance to direct ST Generations, and he declined. By just being there he was saying "Yes, ST really is back, because I said it is."

Regarding design aesthetics, I don't think even a direct prequel would look necessarily 'dated', because the studio wouldn't want that to happen. Take the bridge for example: if you wanted you could probably bring out more of the primary colors of TOS, and even the sounds of the computer 'crunching data' before it speaks (I'd love to hear that!)... but you wouldn't keep the sharp angles, the bulky chairs and panels, or the oversize plastic buttons. Whatever you do, you're basically taking the car your parents drove in 1966 and bringing into 21st century... and there are dozens of ways to do that. The 'iBridge' (use of quotation marks intentional ) being just one of them.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-06-2010, 03:24 PM
janeway72's Avatar
janeway72 janeway72 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Federation Starship Voyager
Posts: 4,977
Default

The problem with a reboot of plain reboot of TOS is that if you take away the fact we can't travel very fast yet and just look at the computers/ tech of the time, we have already surpassed most of what they saw as being futuristic. We have touch screen technology, voice recognition etc. So to make the Enterprise look futuristic it had to go many steps further than many of us were particularly happy with. Even TNG and Voyager nowadays look very dated.
__________________

"Unless you have something a little bigger in your torpedo tubes, I'm not turning around!"
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-06-2010, 03:57 PM
I-Am-Zim I-Am-Zim is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA, Earth
Posts: 3,432
Default

I think it would have worked just fine. If they had a good story that is. And a good villain. As for the "brick for brick" part, I have never said I wanted that. A 100% faithful replication of the sets and ships from TOS would have looked silly on the big screen in a 21st century movie. What I have always maintained is that the Enterprise would have looked fantastic on the big screen if it were given more detail and realistic features. Such as those rendered by Deg3d and Vektor. The TOS bridge could easily have been updated with more modern materials, controls, and displays and looked just fine on the big screen. There was no need, in my opinion, for such a radical and sweeping redesign of the entire TOS universe as we knew it. There was also no need to resort to the time travel crutch. A straight origin story would have worked just fine. They could easily have remained true to the established continuity of the existing Star Trek universe without resorting to all the rediculous contrivances in the new movie. Unfortunately, I'm not a writer, nor am I creative enough to come up with a good enough story, or I'd write one. But there are writers in Hollywood who could have. I was very disapointed with the story direction. But that's just me. Anyway, I do believe a straight origin story would have worked just fine with the right writers/director at the helm.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-06-2010, 06:57 PM
celticarchie's Avatar
celticarchie celticarchie is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 597
Default

They have Canonites in the new movie!!!

Oh my gosh, are they the orange lumpy ones with purple spots? Or the pink ones with the sky blue stripe?

Hang on, if they have Canonites in the next movie then they'll loose there treasured "family" audience. Think of the blood!!!

ooh, red matter make a gorefest comeback!
__________________

That
...is the exploration that awaits you. Not mapping stars and studying nebula, but charting the unknown possibilities of existence. - Q
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-07-2010, 12:31 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,078
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samwiseb View Post
The cool thing about the 'time travel' reboot, is that it was uniquely Star Trek. I can't think of any other sci-fi franchise in which you could pull that one off (Doctor Who, which I've never gotten into, already has its own reboot mechanism). If there is any reason why ST09 was the 'right' direction, it is that.

Then again, it could easily have been the wrong direction in the hands of another director who might've had a different direction he would've preferred (or perhaps no direction at all, and just took whatever assignment the studio gave him).

At best, I think the overall appeal of a flat-out reboot would be about the same... some fans would've preferred it; others would've remained hostile to the very idea of re-booting Trek. I believe Leonard Nimoy did a huge service to this movie, though. No other ST actor I know of has been more protective of his character. Paramount offered him the chance to direct ST Generations, and he declined. By just being there he was saying "Yes, ST really is back, because I said it is."

Regarding design aesthetics, I don't think even a direct prequel would look necessarily 'dated', because the studio wouldn't want that to happen. Take the bridge for example: if you wanted you could probably bring out more of the primary colors of TOS, and even the sounds of the computer 'crunching data' before it speaks (I'd love to hear that!)... but you wouldn't keep the sharp angles, the bulky chairs and panels, or the oversize plastic buttons. Whatever you do, you're basically taking the car your parents drove in 1966 and bringing into 21st century... and there are dozens of ways to do that. The 'iBridge' (use of quotation marks intentional ) being just one of them.
I'd agree. I think a lot of people are on board with that way of looking at it and a lot of people aren't.

Life.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:41 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.