TOS is willing to be remade/rethought. TNG is not. How come?
TOS is willing to be remade/rethought. TNG is not. How come?
Where is a new set of actors for TNG? If a new TNG series/movie was made, who could the actors be for that?
(Prepubescent voice) Am I a joke to you, Number One?
Edit: I bet you read that in Wee Picard's voice.
Because TNG is perfect and no attempt to remake it could possibly improve it
Oh yeah, we need to follow the Code of Honor of never questioning the perfection of TNG. TNG is an Angel, One's perfection can only be imagined. Any criticism would not do the show Justice and should be put Sub Rosa. Star Trek really went Up the Long Ladder with this show.
TNG has aged well and despite some dated elements it is still within the comfort zone of modern audiences. TNG created the baseline for how following Trek shows for decades would look and operate which gives it a connection to all of those shows for people to grab onto. TOS is both older and of a significantly different wavelength. I personally love it, but a lot of people bounce off of it. That is why there is more openness to rebooting it. Also, the JJ Abrams movies have broken the seal, as it were, on the idea of recasting TOS characters, making it less of a major step. This is why people at large talk about it.
SNW also slowly and softly incorporated the building blocks for a TOS reboot spread out of time, rather than just dumping the idea out all at once. This assembly was made more palatable by fitting the process inside of a pretty good Trek show.
In terms of canon, it is much easier to introduce a TOS reboot than a TNG reboot. A lot of things in TOS have had to be explained away in convoluted ways or mostly ignored by the rest of the franchise. TOS is more ripe to be retuned with details that fit better into what Trek has become. TNG has a much tighter connection to the rest of the shows.
For what it's worth, I don't think either TOS or TNG should be remade. A new Trek show should always expand or move Trek forward in some way. I am tired of reboots, reimaginings, and rehashes.
We need Star Trek: The Nextest Generation where itâs all just horny salamanders making salamander babies that slip into the water real quick when anyone shines a palm light on them.
I prefer Star Trek: The Pepsi Generation.
How come?
Because if it ain't broke don't fucking fix it.
Further, a lot of the modern films are a lot less Philosophy Trek and a lot more Action Trek. TNG as a series is squarely Philosophy Trek, even if the TNG movies veer a little too much into Action Trek themselves.
I just don't have faith that the themes would be faithfully reproduced, even if the actors, setting, and so forth could be.
Because if it ainât broke donât fucking fix it.
If that were a matter of consideration for the entertainment industry there wouldn't be any live action Disney remakes.
If we are looking at it from the cold business angle, there has to be an acknowledgement of the different audiences and the different ways that different kinds of entertainment are monetized.
A Disney movie goes into theaters to make money on its own, then it goes onto Disney+ as part of the big lineup. The main audience is children. Children don't have the kind of demand of franchises that adults do. It is much easier to get children to accept reboots.
That 2019 live action Lion King movie that nobody ever even talks about? It made a billion and a half in theaters. Why? Simple. It had animals and loud noises in it, kids don't need much more than that.
A Star Trek show is not going to be making any theater money. All the money spent on it is in the hope that it attracts enough subscribers to make the costs worth it. That's harder math and it's with a more niche and picky audience.
I was in the middle of writing up a lot of math, but the TLDR is that a TNG reboot is not as appealing as a new show. A TNG adjacent show can cash in on TNG memberberries while having the freedom to be creative to try and pull in new subscribers.
The obvious answer for who to play Picard in the TNG remake is James MacAvoy.
James Macavoy is 45. Patrick Stewart was 47 when TNG first aired. So Macavoy hasn't got much time to get himself ready to play the most important role of his lifetime!
There are
moreequal number of actors that have played Captain Pike than Captain Kirk:
EDIT: I forgot there is a 4th Kirk actor. In the first Kelvin film Star Trek (2009), there is a young kirk actor. So 4 for Kirk and 4 for Pike.
TOS had 2 actors? I remember there was a later episode but I assumed it was the same actor? Guess I assumed wrong
Guess I assumed wrong
I guessed wrong too, which was a surprise to me when I looked this up:
"New filming took place for the framing story for "The Cage". Since actor Jeffrey Hunter was unavailable to reprise his role as Captain Pike, a look-alike actor, Sean Kenney, played the injured captain in the new scenes, although Hunter was represented in flashback footage and credited accordingly (along with the other original "Cage" cast)." source
The TOS reboot movies were a mistake
They are action movies with star trek names scattered about.
Beyond was good, and Urban as Bones was perfect casting that will never be duplicated.
By technobabblecality, there is also a case for claiming Tom Hardy playing Picard
You're right, but you shouldn't have said this out loud.
maybe in another 20 years after nu-trek fails and they want to recapture millennials with nu-nu-trek.
William Shatner was the only actor to portray Kirk for the 43 years between 1966 and 2009. TNG premiered in 1989, âonlyâ 35 years ago. I'm sure a reboot of some sort will happen one day, just be patient.
1987, not 1989
Ah, I stand corrected.
I'm wondering how many people who are so bitchy about the Kelvin movies grew up loving TOS in first run as kids. I did, and for me the new movies are like a birthday present. I can totally believe Pine and the rest of the cast are younger versions of the characters. It's like watching old home movies of close friends from before I knew them. Yes the tone of the newer movies is different - that's because younger audiences like faster paced movies. So what? The story is being retold now, not in the 1960s. If I can embrace the changes at age 70, I don't know what everybody else's problem is.
Just continue the timeline with fresh characters. ENT -> DIS -> SNW -> TOS -> TNG -> DS9 -> VOY -> Lower Decks -> PIC -> ???
I'd love a live action Lower Decks
Thr strange new worlds/lower decks crossover was done so well too!
Am/was kinda hoping for the 7/9 spinoff from picard
If they had set the upcoming Starfleet Academy series before TNG we couldâve seen a new actor play young Picard and others.
Does Orville count as a non canonical near remake?
No.
Tom Hardy also played Picard. So, there are three actors that played Picard
Is a clone the same as the original? Different lives and experiences make different people.
True, however there's this photo
of Tom as Picard, so he did at least pose as Picard.
Excuse me, you may be forgetting thepiccardmanuever@lemmy.world
What about David Tristan Birkin? He played young Picard.
Young kid, or young academy graduate? Cause there were actors for both.
Idk TOS had iconic characters that could be reprised, because the character was so strong.
TNG was focused more on the story and the setting, which you can do with any cast. Also the most iconic character was Data and I'm not sure any retake on that character (because there has to be some variation) would work well.
Maybe Paramount Global should negotiate with the TNG cast (including Patrick Stewart) for rights to their likeness and voice (kinda like they did with James Earl Jones) before any more of them die.
Ugh. They probably already have, but nothing would make me less interested in a new Trek show than some other actor wearing Patrick Stewart's CGI skin.
The dude who played Roose Bolton would make a good Kelven timeline Picard