XPost: alt.startrek, rec.arts.startrek.current, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: dtravel@sonic.net   
      
   On 6/26/2017 2:03 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:   
   > For your reference, records indicate that   
   > Wouter Valentijn  wrote:   
   >   
   >> Another Reboot. That much is certain.   
   >   
   > Just the opposite.  They announced that Discovery is supposed to be   
   > set in the classic “Prime” timeline.  That’s why doing what they’re   
   > doing is problematic well beyond any cries of racism or other   
   > intolerance.  It was problematic when they did the same thing with   
   > Enterprise.  It’s just dumb to depict things 10 or 100 years prior to   
   > Kirk as being more advanced than what even Picard had just because our   
   > tech has taken off in the present.  It certainly *should* have been a   
   > reboot.   
   >   
   > Either that or, like I’m sure I’ve said before, someone needs to sit   
   > down with all the property in the franchise and work out a fully   
   > coherent continuity.  One that they can stick to for all *future*   
   > production as well, of course.  All this piecemeal shit has become a   
   > real anchor around the neck of the Trek universe.   
   >   
   The "creative" types would hate that.  They want to be able to put their   
   own stamp on it without being "hampered" by being consistent with what   
   others have done.  Why do you think Abrams burned the whole thing to the   
   ground and started over from scratch?  Why do you think every other   
   Superman or Spiderman movie is a reboot, origin story?  Because the   
   "creatives" want it to be _their_ vision that controls.   
      
   --   
   Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation   
   instinct are running screaming.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)