MigBuster 2,879 Posted October 16, 2014 maybe.... http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/7/5591894/new-battlestar-galactica-movie-will-be-a-reboot Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted October 16, 2014 the Star Trek reboots were bad enough....... anytime I even hear the word reboot I just dismiss it as something I'll not watch. reboot is something directors and producers do when they are too unimaginative to work a good story into an established cannon but still want to cash in on easy money from an established fan base. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted October 17, 2014 (edited) They'll have a helluva time trying to top the reimagined series. They'ed better have some really great script and screenplay writers working OT on this. Edited October 17, 2014 by Fubar512 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,321 Posted October 17, 2014 the Star Trek reboots were bad enough....... anytime I even hear the word reboot I just dismiss it as something I'll not watch. reboot is something directors and producers do when they are too unimaginative to work a good story into an established cannon but still want to cash in on easy money from an established fan base. I have no idea how you didn't like the new Star Trek series. It's great, from the writing to the casting. It needed a reboot because it was going to fade into obscurity. BSG was just redone so I do not get why. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dsawan 624 Posted October 17, 2014 just my feelings but to me a waste of film. the original is always the best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted October 17, 2014 just my feelings but to me a waste of film. the original is always the best. Which? 1978 one? It has its moment (heck, Lloyd Bridges!) but is so childish and cheezy now. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dsawan 624 Posted October 17, 2014 78. yeah i know due to the kid in the show but minus him and its decent. It looks manmade compared to todays graphics. But i always thought richard hatch's version would have been good as it starred colicos or baltar before he died. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted October 17, 2014 I have no idea how you didn't like the new Star Trek series. It's great, from the writing to the casting. It needed a reboot because it was going to fade into obscurity. BSG was just redone so I do not get why. I loved the visuals,I loved the casting(except Chekov) but to me it wasn't Trek. they destroyed 45 years of cannon and what did we get besides eye candy? Romulans who looked like they were members of the mongol hoard? too much comic relief? A new enterprise that looked like a 5 year old designed it while the Doozers from fragle rock made the bridge and the engine room was clearly straight out of Mario World. ;) they destroyed decades of continuity simply because they lacked the imagination to redo the movies withing a few set parameters. now we have a changed timeline that has Kirk the captain years early of a ship way out of scale,no Vulcan and now nothing from any of the series,book or movie has ever happened. No unless in the 3rd movie the timeline is restored I refuse to watch that trash. I can get great special effects and witty banter in many other movies I don't need an abortion trek to get my fix. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,321 Posted October 17, 2014 Well how can they restore the timeline? Also how could they of continued? I am very interested to know. Redo the other movies? If they did that then why bother. I agree Checkov sucks, and the design of the Enterprise needs work however the stories were great. Now the series isn't left in limbo. You are right, it still lacks some aspects that made the old Trek a classic, however they are going in the right direction. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+whiteknight06604 934 Posted October 17, 2014 until the timeline is restored me along with millions of other trekies refuse to watch. ;) They could have redone the movies like they did in the second one. it was wrath of Khan redone. they didn't need to destroy the timeline to redo the movies or to add new stuff. it's nothing new in the last few movies before the reboot they were taking massive liberties with established Trek cannon.For example Zephrem Cochrain did not develope the warp drive on earth as shown in Star Trek First contact. it had previously been established he was from Alpha Centauri.The stories are fine it's the whole time travel change things crap that has been one of the only real bad sides of Star Trek from the beguiling. What they did would be no different than say a star wars reboot with sand people going back in time and things ending up with Darth Vader being a good guy and Han and luke going to the academy together with Jabba the Hut as their teacher. Imagine that outcry. there would be riots in the streets if they dared to touch that cannon. lol 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lexx_Luthor 57 Posted October 17, 2014 (edited) Han shot first, dammit. New Star Trak did time travel? Maybe outside of isolated one-offs like the cute whale movie, or to get Kirk and Picard exchanging lines on set, time travel is jumping the whale, er, shark. Even Bab~5 used time travel as a core series element , but it was used for only one purpose. To me that might be acceptable, perhaps. I found it corny for an otherwise "realistic" Bab~5 universe of characters. Anyways, always loved the original colonial viper pit. C. Viper cockpit reconstructed ~> http://www.joelowens.org/bsg/viper.html Edited October 17, 2014 by Lexx_Luthor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted October 17, 2014 (edited) I agree with White Knight about Star Trek. It's also what's going to happen to Star Wars... and to B.S.G. Edited October 17, 2014 by Emp_Palpatine Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallenphoenix1986 603 Posted October 17, 2014 Han shot first, dammit. New Star Trak did time travel? Maybe outside of isolated one-offs like the cute whale movie, or to get Kirk and Picard exchanging lines on set, time travel is jumping the whale, er, shark. Everything after the first 10 minutes in "First Contact" and then about every third episode of Voyager had time travel woven into it. That said I much prefere classic Trek to Abrams Trek... still can't look at the new Klingons wiout laughing... Craig 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted October 22, 2014 Design aesthetic choices aside, ST had to be rebooted because it had crashed and burned. After First Contact the ST films' returns cratered, and Enterprise floundered and was shot, Paramount was in way shape or form going to spend another dollar backing the "old" ST anymore. To recast the old characters with new actors but try to somehow impersonate the old actors' characters was a losing proposition. There were two choices: 1. The ST reboot we got 2. Nothing The ideal that so many Trekkies professed to have preferred lost its audience after Insurrection and Voyager. Enterprise and Nemesis flopped, and any attempt to argue it was because they had changed things a bit the wrong way is so much ancient Greek to the honchos at a studio. ST was already losing its sheen, and the attempts to bring it back with those two sunk it further and they pulled the plug. Old ST died circa 2002 because the Trekkies themselves turned away. In an analogy, ST lost the swing voters and a great deal of its base. To say they needed to appeal to the base again, when the base was NEVER enough to carry it, isn't going to jive. Instead, the decision was made to go for the far larger swing audience. Now has it changed enough to where you shouldn't call it ST anymore? That's a debatable point but it's moot. What we have now is all we have now and we won't be getting the old stuff back. All those actors are old or gone now anyway, so if you're going to do a new cast you free them up. Ron Moore stated that in his opinion (as a writer and runner of multiple seasons of ST over the 90s) ST collapsed under the weight of its own canon. Every story idea or complication they could come up with had already been solved and overcome at some point in the past, so you then needed to waste precious time coming up with plausible reasons for them to NOT work so the story isn't just "crew runs into difficulty X, remembers solution Y from N years ago, and flips switch...spends the next half hour making jokes at the bar." People demanding they stick to what was established in the previous 28 YEARS of TV series and 10 films have never tried writing a good story series before--you might have one or two at most but then you'll be against a wall. ST needed to have the slate wiped clean, and what better way than to have a time travel story change the timeline, so we see Snow White and Prince Charming's daughter and Thor have a child on a doomed starship before you blow up one of the most famous non-Earth planets in the series. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fubar512 1,350 Posted October 22, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=419hNYe2OaY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted October 22, 2014 Well... Does a franchise necessarily has to survive?! It could be left alone, to die its good and peacefull death. It is not a crime. Things end. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Brain32 265 Posted October 22, 2014 I dunno...I agree with Dave and I really like the new Star Trek. Old ones (TOS) are still great but new ones are just perfectly modernized a lot has changed and impacted our culture since the 1960's-70's even 80's so the reboot actually does a good job on implementing that fact... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RUSTYMORLEY 162 Posted October 29, 2014 (edited) Well I have to admit that I am a bit of a fan of BSG but I think I'll wait and see what it's like before I pass judgement on it ! Edited October 29, 2014 by RUSTYMORLEY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
