XPost: rec.arts.startrek.current, rec.arts.movies.current-films   
   From: psperson@old.netcom.invalid   
      
   On Sun, 16 Nov 2025 12:09:18 +1300, Your Name    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 2025-11-15 16:11:58 +0000, Paul S Person said:   
   >> On Sat, 15 Nov 2025 13:40:28 +1300, Your Name    
   >> wrote:   
   >>>    
   >>> No actual details, but "a completely new take in the Star Trek    
   >>> universe>and is not connected to any previous or current television    
   >>> series,>movie, or prior movie development projects" ... that's usually    
   >>> an>incredibly bad sign that turns out to be a a ridiculous    
   >>> "reboot">attempt and/or an ill-fitting drivel cash-in exercise.  :-(   
   >>    
   >> Well, we already had an incredibly bad reboot [1], so one more won't   
   >> make any never-mind.   
   >   
   >Except every idiotic reboot adds its own new level of inconsistency and    
   >silliness, so further diluting and confusing the franchise.  :-(   
      
   Only if you take them seriously. The ST reboots I ignore (having seen   
   the first two or three, BTW). The James Bond reboots (now that they   
   are complete) are something I am considering ignoring.   
      
   Although if they pushed on with the 007 in the last one /and/ returned   
   to actual James Bond films instead of technothrillers like any others   
   which happen to have James Bond in them, that might be interesting.   
      
   >You just have to look at the comic books. They've have so many changes    
   >over the years that now nobody know what "Batman", "Superman",    
   >"Spider-man", etc. actually are any more.   
      
   I don't read the comics, but the graphic novel /Crisis on Infinite   
   Earths/ and some of the DCAU films that show clearly different   
   realities suggests that a lot of confusion is from someone having a   
   "great idea" and nobody in Editorial having the guts to say "no".   
      
   So we end up with a Multiverse, in which the characters are whatever   
   they need to be for the story at hand because any variant is in the   
   Multiverse /somewhere/.   
      
   >> [1] Which did, however, manage to show what "wrath" looks like,   
   >> confirming that the "wrath" of Khan was more of a temper tantrum. Or a   
   >> hissy-fit.   
   --    
   "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,   
   Who evil spoke of everyone but God,   
   Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)