Text 16331, 120 rader
Skriven 2007-07-31 14:11:06 av Josh Hill (2804.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: [OT] Nimoy at SDCC: "It was logical!"
=================================================
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:02:24 -0500, "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>news:5o8ta3dv0o7l65u60sq53je19q5nvale2k@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:42:36 -0500, "Carl" <cengman7@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Thunder Fantastic!" <deceptar@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>>>news:uGwri.18797$fJ5.7693@pd7urf1no...
>>>>I have to say I'm not looking forward to any re-imagining of Star Trek... 
>>>>I
>>>>was a big fan of the original and it just won't be the same for me 
>>>>without
>>>>those actors.
>>>>   I'm sure the new movie will make money and people will love it but I
>>>> intend to pass on it. For me, anyway, I think Star Trek is dead...
>>>
>>>Personally, I think the *only* way to revive Trek is to re-imagine it.
>>>
>>>Trying to go back in time is (IMO) a terrible idea; everyone knows how it
>>>ends before it starts.  Trying to go forward is difficult because you're
>>>trapped by canon.  In theory it shouldn't matter because the stories 
>>>should
>>>be based on people, but fans get distracted by any little deviation from
>>>what went before.
>>>
>>>On the other hand, if they tried a "reset" of Trek now I think they'd be 
>>>too
>>>influenced by and compared to Batllestar Galactica. They'd probably do
>>>things simply to show they're being different.  The comparison would get 
>>>in
>>>the way.  They'd need to wait a few years for it to work.
>>>
>>>If they don't do a full reboot, let it rest in piece.
>>
>> OTOH, the Bond movies have worked through many Bonds,
>
>The most recent Bond was somewhat of a reboot.  I liked Casino Royale, 
>partially because it wasn't the same old same old.  No gadgets, no Q, no 
>stolen nukes, killer satellites or plans to take over the world. No Vodka 
>Martini...shaken, not stirred. I liked it a lot more than I expected to, 
>even though I didn't care for the villian very much.

I liked it too. It was a reboot, but in a sense, it was closer to the
spirit of the books and From Russia With Love. Which in a way is what
I'd like to see happen to Trek -- recapture the spirit of the
original.

>Also, the technology changed every movie.  Fans don't demand that Bond drive 
>an Astin Martin and carry a Walther PPK.  Try designing an Enterprise 
>without 2 Nacelles and see how far you get.   There may be some, but I don't 
>hear about dozens of Bond conventions in which people walk around in a Tux 
>or dressed as Odd Job, Knick Knack, or Blofeld (they'd be mistaken as Dr. 
>Evil from Austen Powers anyway).

>> and there have been successful remakes of some pretty iconic
>> stuff, e.g., King Kong.
>
>Mostly on the strength of special effects or the star attached to the 
>project.  I have a hard time thinking big name stars could walk into the 
>role of Kirk and Spock, and I don't know what they could do

They've already chosen a Spock, it seems -- the guy who played Sylar
on Heroes. And Nemoy will be in it playing his older self.

>> I tend to think that how well they do it is more important than how
>> faithful they are to every last detail, and that the constraints of
>> reasonable fidelity to the premises of the show aren't a problem if
>> they remember three things that the later shows and the lesser of the
>> movies forgot: the galaxy is immense, varied, and almost undiscovered;
>> most of the action has to take place on a human scale; the stories and
>> characters must be, within the constraints of heroic fiction,
>> plausible.
>
>I originally wrote a fairly lengthy list of things that I don't think you 
>could
>change if you continue in the current Trek Universe.  Thinking better of it,
>I'm curious what you think you *could* significantly change and still keep
>fan acceptance?

I think you'd be safe with an Enterprise that looked like the original
done on a higher budget and with modern effects. Eliminate some of the
obvious archaisms, like the clicking of the computer or the mechanical
gauges in the sick bay. Stick with improved versions of the original
uniforms, not the ones from the movie, and avoid the new look for the
Enterprise, which didn't match the original. Keep the new look for the
Klingons if you want (I actually prefer the old one, but what the
hey), but drop the cuddly post-Worf Wookie stuff and reboot them to
their original Soviet obnoxiousness.

That's the conservative version, and I think it would be fine, because
you don't really have to change more as long as you send them to cool
new planets and new challenges and don't fall into the nostalgia trap
as Enterprise did. The Galaxy is vast and mostly unexplored and filled
with aliens that are genuinely strange, and after Next Gen they seem
to have forgotten that.

Beyond that? Well, I think you can change most anything, actually, and
if it's good the fans will forget their obsession with which direction
the transporter handle is pushed and go along for the ride. A complete
reboot would work as long as you don't forget the spirit of the show,
the essence of the show -- strong on character but not obsessed with
it, an action adventure show but with action and adventure based on
real science fiction by real SF writers in an anthology format that
addresses philosophical and political issues, plausible rather than
childish and Star Warsy, the universe is a damn big place so we are
not repeating ourselves, and we are not having six guys save the
planet or the galaxy except on very rare occasions.

-- 
Josh

"Your manuscript is both good and original. But the part that is
good is not original, and the part that is original is not good."
	-- Samuel Johnson
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)