Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Entertainment Weekly)   The best and worst TV reboots of all time. Was Star Trek:TNG truly a reboot?   (ew.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, TNG, Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, reboot  
•       •       •

10093 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 23 Jun 2012 at 1:21 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



242 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-06-23 03:31:36 PM  

HopScotchNSoda: texdent: HopScotchNSoda: The bigger problem is why doesn't Lars recognise C-3PO with whom he had lived for a few years between the time his father bought Schmee and when Anakin & Padme visited.

There are tons of similar droids out there and you expect an old guy to remember a specific one after so many years?

Except that his first words to Lars at the sale are "My name is C-3PO," a name Schmee, Lars, and his dad would have said routinely for a few years. "C-3PO, go fix the number six moisture pump." "Threepeeo, I can't read these Japanese instructions for the new washing machine; translate them for me." "C-3PO, keep that in your pants or I'll off with my torch."


All of Threepio's body panels were replaced when he was on Coruscant and he appeared in much better condition than when Lars last saw him. That's probably the opposite of what Lars would expect. Lars is obviously familiar with protocol droids and doesn't really like them. He's thinking of his last experience with Threepio when he's telling Threepio he has no use for a protocol droid.

Lars might also fairly assume that if it was the same droid, the droid would recognize him! Threepio not recognizing Lars means it's a different droid, or with a memory erasure might as well be. Lars himself was going to have their memory erased. He may have actually realized it was the same droids when the subject of Obi-Wan Kenobi came up.
 
2012-06-23 03:31:48 PM  

Gordon Bennett: Banacek: This might be the worst Fark thread ever.

I think it is. Nearly the entire thread is arguments about the precise definition of "reboot." A term I personally find to be incredibly irritating when used in regards to film or television.

What we should be doing here is talking about shiat TV shows made to copy earlier, less shiat TV shows. I'll start.

[www.sitcomsonline.com image 294x222]
[www.mainstreetmallonline.com image 436x600]


It was the late-80s. Syndication was just kicking into high gear, and Sony/Columbia and Universal did a whole bunch of shiat "New" shows to get product out there. There were the ones you mentioned, New WKRP and New Monkees, and there were also New Dragnet and New Adam-12.
 
2012-06-23 03:36:18 PM  
Now what DC does with its comics, that's a reboot
Crisis on Infinite Earths
Zero Hour
Flashpoint
 
2012-06-23 03:42:57 PM  
Gordon Bennett:

Wow... freaky.

Now tell me, did you consider including AfterMASH, but decide against it because it was a spinoff and not a reboot?
 
2012-06-23 03:43:38 PM  

salvador.hardin: Star Trek Phase II, Star Trek the Motion Picture, and Star Trek TNG were all reboots, despite having faithful regard for the events of TOS.


TNG is not a reboot. Calling TNG a sequel might not be entirely accurate as it's not a direct descendant of TOS, even if some of the original cast appears through-out the series. Calling it a spin-off is probably more accurate, even if it's not the same kind of spin-off we normally associate with the term. (i.e. characters on one series appearing on their own series later. i.e. Happy Days -> Joanie Loves Chachie, All In the Family -> The Jeffersons, etc.).


JJ Abrams' Star Trek is a reboot as it covers a similar timeline in TOS, but includes events that did not happen in TOS; an alternate timeline, if you will.


it's been a while since I saw Star Trek: TMP, so I can't comment on that.
 
2012-06-23 04:01:06 PM  
How can Andy Dick have been in Get Smart? He HATES Jews!
 
2012-06-23 04:16:59 PM  
Came for Michelle Ryan pics. Leaving disappointed.

/Actually liked that Bionic Woman remake.
 
2012-06-23 04:20:27 PM  

bhcompy: How can Andy Dick have been in Get Smart? He HATES Jews!


Mummmm, but he LOVES caulk and cocaine!
 
2012-06-23 04:22:58 PM  
The Twilight Zone (2002) and The Fugitive (2000). 'Nuff said.
 
2012-06-23 04:29:57 PM  

Banacek: This might be the worst Fark thread ever.


Type40: Oi! We were having a puerfectly lovely Star Trek Thread, get out with your Star Wars, go find your own thread.


This is a perfectly good thread.

farm1.static.flickr.com

/for me to poop on
 
2012-06-23 04:44:24 PM  

mcmnky: It's the same as if Lucas had gone back and made 3 movies about how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. Those would have been prequels, not a reboot..


Gotta admit, I would've liked to have seen that.
 
2012-06-23 04:52:22 PM  
I'm detecting massive amounts of Wrong particles in the vicinity.
 
2012-06-23 04:55:15 PM  

PackerWacker: mcmnky: It's the same as if Lucas had gone back and made 3 movies about how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. Those would have been prequels, not a reboot..

Gotta admit, I would've liked to have seen that.


I know what you mean, with all the CGI available now and increased street cred things like the matrix movie generated for the sci-fi community it could be pretty sweet. Though I think I'd prefer a third Terminator movie first or perhaps a shot at rebooting the startrek franchise.
 
2012-06-23 05:00:43 PM  

BumpInTheNight: PackerWacker: mcmnky: It's the same as if Lucas had gone back and made 3 movies about how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. Those would have been prequels, not a reboot..

Gotta admit, I would've liked to have seen that.

I know what you mean, with all the CGI available now and increased street cred things like the matrix movie generated for the sci-fi community it could be pretty sweet. Though I think I'd prefer a third Terminator movie first or perhaps a shot at rebooting the startrek franchise.


I see what you did there
 
2012-06-23 05:24:38 PM  
The Love Boat

Because the original was like farking Chekhov
 
2012-06-23 05:24:53 PM  
CW had an aborted reboot of "Dark Shadows".
Tim Burton's "Dark Shadows" was a reboot.
 
2012-06-23 05:25:26 PM  

HopScotchNSoda: Mugato: HopScotchNSoda: The bigger problem is why doesn't Lars recognise C-3PO with whom he had lived for a few years between the time his father bought Schmee and when Anakin & Padme visited.

And what would he say id he did recognize him?.

He'd not have bought him for starters.



3PO is a protocal droid, about as rare as a toaster. And he had entirely different coverings. There's no reason for Owen to think that 3PO was sent by someone evil.
 
2012-06-23 05:36:14 PM  

farkeruk: The Love Boat

Because the original was like farking Chekhov


It wouldn't shut up about all the letters it got from teenybopper fans in 1967 who thought he looked like Davy Jones?
 
2012-06-23 05:52:54 PM  

Confabulat: I'd call TNG a reboot. They followed the exact same formula, just not as well


HopScotchNSoda: NeoCortex42: mcmnky: dalovindj: The fact that Xavier never mentions he knows Mystique isn't really a contradiction.
Kinda like how through 3 SW movies R2D2 and C-3PO never feel the need to mention their previous relationships with Anakin, et al.
Didn't the droids have their memories wiped at the end of the Revenge of the Sith?

C-3PO doesn't. His memory was wiped by Captain Antillies on the order of Senator Organa (Jimmy Smits) at the end of Revenge of the Sith. R2D2 on the other hand always knew what was going on.

The bigger problem is why doesn't Lars recognise C-3PO with whom he had lived for a few years between the time his father bought Schmee and when Anakin & Padme visited.


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-06-23 05:58:53 PM  
Really, you think everyone who has an opinion about sci-fi got it from Mr. Plinkett, huh.
 
2012-06-23 06:02:19 PM  

GAT_00: FirstNationalBastard: Confabulat: FirstNationalBastard: Generic Space Movie doesn't count for anything.

Oh, so you still haven't gotten over it. 2009 was a long time ago, you know. I can't wait for the next one. You'll probably go see it on Opening Day and sulk the whole way through it, just like you did the last one.

Never saw Generic Space Movie, thanks. If I want to watch shiat, I'll download some German fetish films.

However, Generic Space Film 2009 was a reboot.

Honestly, there's nothing funnier in these threads than the hatred of the new movie.


24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-06-23 06:04:09 PM  
Yo dawg, I hear you like sequels in your reboots...
 
2012-06-23 06:04:41 PM  

HopScotchNSoda: He was trying to keep Luke safe and hidden (which makes the Lars ranch a dubious place to hide, what with Lars being Vader's step-brother, and Vader's mum's grave being right there, but that's another matter).


And let us not forget that they didn't even bother to CHANGE HIS LAST NAME.
 
2012-06-23 06:13:04 PM  

fusillade762: HopScotchNSoda: He was trying to keep Luke safe and hidden (which makes the Lars ranch a dubious place to hide, what with Lars being Vader's step-brother, and Vader's mum's grave being right there, but that's another matter).

And let us not forget that they didn't even bother to CHANGE HIS LAST NAME.


No one knew Padme had kids.
 
2012-06-23 06:20:07 PM  

fusillade762: HopScotchNSoda: He was trying to keep Luke safe and hidden (which makes the Lars ranch a dubious place to hide, what with Lars being Vader's step-brother, and Vader's mum's grave being right there, but that's another matter).

And let us not forget that they didn't even bother to CHANGE HIS LAST NAME.


It all made sense to me when i first saw the movies. It wasn't until Lucas tried to explain everything that i got confused.

/Except that arguement i had with this guy at work about how big a super star destroyer is. He swore up and down that it was only 3 times bigger than a normal star destroyer because the RPG manual said so, and Lucas would never let something like that slip through the editorial process. I showed him the scene in Empire when a star destroyer passes under the super's dockingbay and looked like it could fit right in there. He said it was a mistake by the film crew. Go figure.
 
2012-06-23 06:20:53 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: It wouldn't shut up about all the letters it got from teenybopper fans in 1967 who thought he looked like Davy Jones?


Ah no. I was thinking of the gay, oriental dude, Mr Solo.
 
2012-06-23 06:26:01 PM  

Mugato: fusillade762: HopScotchNSoda: He was trying to keep Luke safe and hidden (which makes the Lars ranch a dubious place to hide, what with Lars being Vader's step-brother, and Vader's mum's grave being right there, but that's another matter).

And let us not forget that they didn't even bother to CHANGE HIS LAST NAME.

No one knew Padme had kids.


Anakin/Vader and Emperor Palpatine knew she was pregnant. It seems pretty damn clear in Empire and Jedi that Palpatine knew he was lying when he told the newly christened Vader that the kid(s) was/were dead [I forgot; did they think she was only carrying one?] so that Vader would feel alone and need Palpatine's love, and that he told Vader the truth sometime before Empire.
 
2012-06-23 06:28:07 PM  
You realize you ll have been arguing about this for 4 1/2 hours?

Worst thread ever.
 
2012-06-23 06:29:48 PM  

John the Magnificent: You realize you ll have been arguing about this for 4 1/2 hours?

Worst thread ever.


Don't try to reboot this thread.
 
2012-06-23 06:41:08 PM  

John the Magnificent: You realize you ll have been arguing about this for 4 1/2 hours?


Some of us have been drinking and playing Skyrim to, so.
 
2012-06-23 06:44:24 PM  

GAT_00: FirstNationalBastard: No, TNG was not a reboot.

Was DS9 a reboot? Was Voyager? No. So why would TNG be a reboot?

I dunno, I'd call it one. TNG came out 20 years after TOS, that pretty much makes it a reboot. If you're going to argue it isn't just because it was set at a different date, then I'd like to point out all number of reboots that have done exactly that, most recently with X-Men First Class.


It's a reboot if it specifically and deliberately alters the canon of the story, so as to tell a new story based on the same premise.

TNG wasn't a reboot, since it happened in the same universe as TOS.

The 2009 movie WAS a reboot, since it happened in a completely different setting, rewriting the characters' history as well as, in some cases, their very motives and interpersonal relationships. (OldSpock gets a rare "OH shiat WRONG UNIVERSE" presence)

Likewise, see the Nolanverse Batman movies vs. the earlier movies. And the TV-show based movies before that.
 
2012-06-23 06:48:27 PM  

Gordon Bennett: Banacek: This might be the worst Fark thread ever.

I think it is. Nearly the entire thread is arguments about the precise definition of "reboot." A term I personally find to be incredibly irritating when used in regards to film or television.

What we should be doing here is talking about shiat TV shows made to copy earlier, less shiat TV shows. I'll start.

[www.sitcomsonline.com image 294x222]
[www.mainstreetmallonline.com image 436x600]


The guy on the lower right has that uh oh penis went there look. Also, when the fark did that show happen? I ain't wikiing it.
 
2012-06-23 06:49:35 PM  

dalovindj: John the Magnificent: You realize you ll have been arguing about this for 4 1/2 hours?

Some of us have been drinking and playing Skyrim to, so.


While others have been playing Lego Batman 2.
 
2012-06-23 06:51:15 PM  

dalovindj:
As far as X-Men First Class, the appearance of Wolverine makes it a prequel in my book. Also, and I may be wrong, but nothing that happens in First Class is inconsistent with the other X-Men movies. The fact that Xavier never mentions he knows Mystique isn't really a contradiction.


I have one for you:

Charles Xavier gets paralyzed at the end of First Class, during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

This happened *before*, time-wise, that we see him walking into the Grey's house in The Last Stand.
 
2012-06-23 06:52:50 PM  

HopScotchNSoda: Mugato: fusillade762: HopScotchNSoda: He was trying to keep Luke safe and hidden (which makes the Lars ranch a dubious place to hide, what with Lars being Vader's step-brother, and Vader's mum's grave being right there, but that's another matter).

And let us not forget that they didn't even bother to CHANGE HIS LAST NAME.

No one knew Padme had kids.

Anakin/Vader and Emperor Palpatine knew she was pregnant. It seems pretty damn clear in Empire and Jedi that Palpatine knew he was lying when he told the newly christened Vader that the kid(s) was/were dead [I forgot; did they think she was only carrying one?] so that Vader would feel alone and need Palpatine's love, and that he told Vader the truth sometime before Empire.


They didn't know Padme had twins, that was only discovered when she was being treated on the asteroid base just before she gave birth. Until the end of "Jedi", Vader and Palpatine only knew about Luke.
 
2012-06-23 06:58:34 PM  

Lunchlady:
This. Aside from the overwhelming lens flare and Tyler Perry I thought it was a very enjoyable movie.


You gotta problem with Madea? He only had 10 lines or so in the whole thing... or would you rather he dressed up like this when handing out the medals:
assets.nydailynews.com

instead of this:
www.inpapasbasement.com
?

What's with the cross-dresser hate?
 
2012-06-23 06:59:11 PM  

salvador.hardin: Basically, if the suits are calling it a reboot, then it is a reboot.


The problem with this is that suits are often wrong. For example, every middle-aged marketing or communications director who misuses 'viral'. Like that abortion of a campaign that won that one episode of 'The Pitch'.

The more important definition, and the one that should be applied in art crit/analysis settings like this article (and to a lesser degree, this thread), is the one Wikipedia is describing, though even it seems confused about what to call ST. Anyway, the more technical usage is the proper one here, not the buzzwords suits use. EW's article is way off and comes across as amateurish and clueless.
 
2012-06-23 07:01:57 PM  

Igor Jakovsky: Gordon Bennett: Banacek: This might be the worst Fark thread ever.

I think it is. Nearly the entire thread is arguments about the precise definition of "reboot." A term I personally find to be incredibly irritating when used in regards to film or television.

What we should be doing here is talking about shiat TV shows made to copy earlier, less shiat TV shows. I'll start.

[www.sitcomsonline.com image 294x222]
[www.mainstreetmallonline.com image 436x600]

The guy on the lower right has that uh oh penis went there look. Also, when the fark did that show happen? I ain't wikiing it.


A quick googling reveals the New Monkees was a 1987 phenomena. I was too busy with Sign O' the Times that year to care.
 
2012-06-23 07:13:24 PM  
The BSG reboot gave me my favorite obscure character fanboy crush:

www.markdermul.be
 
2012-06-23 07:17:27 PM  
I'd like to see more "retooling". Like how Roger Corman would reuse space scenes and/or music from Battle Beyond the Stars in other films.
 
2012-06-23 07:18:57 PM  

dalovindj: John the Magnificent: You realize you ll have been arguing about this for 4 1/2 hours?

Some of us have been drinking and playing Skyrim to, so.


Alchemy is way overpowered, now that I know what I'm doing. Money is almost free.
 
2012-06-23 07:22:30 PM  

vygramul: Handy guide:

Prequel: before the events of the original. (Star Wars I, II, III)
Sequel: after the events of the original. (ST:TNG)
Reboot: the same time period, but changing events (ST)
Remake: the same time period and same events (The Hobbit 1977 vs The Hobbit 2012)


Praise the heavens someone summed it up suscintly.
 
2012-06-23 07:22:52 PM  

mat catastrophe: AcneVulgaris: Mr. Coffee Nerves: TNG can't be a reboot because I remember hearing the supernova of nerd rage when it premiered.

"The Enterprise is not captained by Baldy McFrenchSurrender! The ship looks like my home care aide's office! The plots are all ripoffs!"

My problem was they never fired the goddam phasers. The all sat around and talked about their feelings.

It got better in later seasons.

Season 8 would have been amazing.


Dammit, you owe me my 45 minutes back! I lol'd at that list for way too long.
 
2012-06-23 07:33:13 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Dallas 2012... not a reboot.

90210... not a reboot.

Get Smart 1995... not a reboot.

Melrose Place 2009... not a reboot.

Does EW not know what a reboot is? When characters from the original show are in the new show, and played by the original actors, and time has visibly passed, it is not a reboot.


Pretty sure it is you that doesn't know what a reboot is.
 
2012-06-23 07:35:49 PM  

Bill Frist: FirstNationalBastard: Dallas 2012... not a reboot.

90210... not a reboot.

Get Smart 1995... not a reboot.

Melrose Place 2009... not a reboot.

Does EW not know what a reboot is? When characters from the original show are in the new show, and played by the original actors, and time has visibly passed, it is not a reboot.

Pretty sure it is you that doesn't know what a reboot is.


Do tell. I thought FNB's analysis was spot-on.
 
2012-06-23 07:36:28 PM  

vygramul: Reboot: the same time period, but changing events (ST)


No.

When they "reboot" all these superhero franchises they start the films in different time periods often (maybe starting at an earlier stage of the hero's life, whatever) but they are still "rebooting" the franchise.
 
2012-06-23 07:40:57 PM  
Posting because I can.

d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net

/Stay on target
 
2012-06-23 07:49:44 PM  
You guys are thinking about this on too much of a nerd level and not an executive level. For the industry, a reboot is trying to restart a franchise to make money. You do this either when the franchise has been dormant so long its dead or when the most recent stuff in the franchise has been so awful that you have to start from scrape to appease fans and get more money.

On that level, all of these are reboots.

Debating whether the brief appearance of an old spock makes the Lens Flare Star Trek technically a sequel or reboot or prequel or alternative take or whatever is some Simpsons Comicbook Guy nerdiness.
 
2012-06-23 07:54:39 PM  

BroVinny: Do tell. I thought FNB's analysis was spot-on.


You guys are all trying to argue over some "technical" nerd definiton of a word that isn't really defined that way. I just looked up "reboot" in several dictionaries and not one said anything about "When characters from the original show are in the new show, and played by the original actors" blah blah.

When you have to do something to restart a franchise that's a reboot for all intents and purposes.
 
2012-06-23 07:54:54 PM  

Bill Frist: Debating whether the brief appearance of an old spock makes the Lens Flare Star Trek technically a sequel or reboot or prequel or alternative take or whatever is some Simpsons Comicbook Guy nerdiness.


Begs to differ:
zerode.files.wordpress.com
 
Displayed 50 of 242 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report