22

Brent Spiner Thinks Next Generation Will Be The Next Star Trek Reboot

fb share tweet share

J.J. Abrams blew up the sci-fi world in 2009 when he rebooted Star Trek in spectacular fashion, managing to bring new fans to the series and win over old fans alike. Now that it’s getting sequelized, there’s some chatter about what Star Trek series will be rebooted next: The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Enterprise, or Voyager?

In what is probably a slightly biased interview with Trek Movie, Brent Spiner, who you all know as Data, thinks TNG is the next logical step for the series to take.

I do think it is likely they will reboot Next Generation some day. I don’t see Star Trek ever ending. I think it would be better if they went further into the future, past where we did or the original series or Voyager or Deep Space or any of them, and continues the saga. I am not that keen on going backwards because then it becomes history instead of the future.


Of course as a star of that series his opinion may be a bit slanted, but it really does make sense for that to happen next after Abrams’ series has had its run. It was the next series after the original, and there were even crossover episodes between the series, so why not make that the next stop in the rebootathon?

While this idea is all well and good, maybe it’s time to start coming up with some new ideas. Is no one interested to see an entirely new Star Trek idea bloom into a franchise rather than just repurposing old ones? Sure, Abrams’ Star Trek took us all by storm and that franchise is set for quite some time based on the youth of the cast and the film’s original success, but why not write some original content? This sort of boot-think (I made that word up, but I’m going to keep using it) is exactly the issue with Hollywood. This looks like the beginning of a world where Star Trek movies are released like Call of Duty games. There’s one every year, but the releases alternate from two competing franchises. It’s created a messy oversaturation of the market and Star Trek doesn’t need to be part of it.

Where are the long time Trek fans at? This is a contentious issue. How would you feel about multiple Star Trek universes being explored simultaneously, and would you rather see that than some new, ORIGINAL Trek content? Sound off in the comments below.

Comments

  • Pioneer42

    Abrams’ movie is all flash and little substance, and as such doesn’t really belong with the others. It would be best for the franchise if it remained the odd action movie it is, and any future television show picked up the story from where it was before that movie.

    • flashfast2000

       I liked the Abrams’ movie some. But you are correct: little substance. Star Trek was about the story, not the lense flares.

    • dalyjc

      Yes but Abram’s reboot has kept Star Trek alive and especially alive and most certainly an ambassador for future audiences borne since 2000. Abram’s reboot may not be the future of Star Trek but it will at least plant Star Trek in the minds of this new generation; who can tell what will come next?

  • Lone Star

    I would love to see a new series set in the future of Star Trek not far but just enough to not interfere with the series they have already made.

  • JJMillz

    I like the idea of a new series, maybe set another 100 years in the future from TNG/V/DS9. Could be super interesting.

  • http://www.facebook.com/danica.duensing Danica Duensing

    I’d love to see something about another 100 years beyond where Next Gen/DS9/Voyager took place. I think there is room for a few different series, especially in syndication, on cable, or online. If they want to appeal to the youth market they could do a Starfleet Academy show. ;)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=516589118 Alex Cochrane

    Trek deffo needs a new series,  there a few threads that need conclusion. e.g. what happened to Wesley Crusher., the Q. would love to see some more TNG/DS9/Voyager movies.

  • Death_midnight

    I don’t like the idea of reboots. A reboot is not forward thinking, and Star Trek is forward thinking. It won’t work. But it will be pushed becaused there’s big money involved.

  • http://www.facebook.com/briancmckinley Brian C McKinley

    A new series yes, in JJ’s universe no. Just keep going where we left off with Voyager. In the cannon universe. 

    • flashfast2000

       But keep Brannon Braga and Rick Berman away from it. Far far away!

  • Aaron_Rech1

    I think it would be interesting to have one set right after the movie first contact, and one after tng but after tng should have some even more radical technology in it and like being able to travel to other galaxys

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Davy-Bible/618118720 Davy Bible

    I’m all for moving forward with something new and different, while at the same time not escaping the concept of what Star Trek is all about… Maintain the same spirit, and move forward.

  • Lifetime SF Fan

    I enjoyed Abrams’ movie on its own merits but have a lingering difficulty with the changed timeline which renders all previous incarnations obsolete and a curtailed timeloop. I don’t want the Star Treks I have loved all my life to be a sealed off eddy in time, while the new incarnation gets itself dug-in as reality. Also, Abrams’ wobbly-camera cinematography drove me from the cinema to vomit twenty minutes before the end, so I will be VERY wary of ever going to see another of his on the big screen. 

  • Lifetime SF Fan

    Sorry, I didn’t actually answer the question below! Yes, I would love to see “Star Trek the Third Generation” or some such, a continuation of the canonical timeline with new characters and hardware. Abrams’ arc deserves to have its story told, but tie off that timeloop and reinstate canonical reality, please. (And get a bit more real on some details!)

  • whalejudge

    I’d rather see an advance from Voyager, too.  Sure–put it far enough forward to not run into massive crossovers.  But a new ship, a new crew.

  • http://www.facebook.com/pgershkoff Paul Gershkoff

    Trek the third would be awesome. but i think that a “short” foray into next gen reboot style would be ok but shake things up a bit maybe with worf as captain/ picard as engineer? they could do some interesting things here!

  • yandri

    I agree – Gene Roddenberry’s vision of what became the incredible franchise of Star Trek will be around for some time to come not only because of it’s die-hard fans who’ve been a part of Trek since The Cage, but the new fans to discover it whenever a new film such as Abrams’ comes out.  (While I was able to follow his film, the SFX got rather distracting.)  Trek and the ‘strange new worlds and civilizations’ it introduced us to, should morph forward a hundred years or so in order to close some of the loops such as those mentioned by Alex C. below – what happened to Wesley Crusher, for one, and to continue to ‘go where no one has gone before.’

  • Anonymous

    Well, you’re wrong Brent Skinner.  TOS and the movies can be rebooted because of their age, we are rolling up on the 50 year mark of TOS.  Two arguments: 1.TNG did a good job, such a good job that there is nothing to fix.  2. The reboot for TOS IS the reboot for TNG (smoke that). 
    No, if ever there was a ST title that needed a reboot it is Enterprise.  From the opening credits, they failed to follow the ST formula and IMHO failed to capture the magic.

  • byte_2702

    I would love to see a new Star Trek TNG movie again. My biggest wish is that the timeline gets restored again (Paramount travelled back in time) and that Data gets restored. I mean, it isn’t too late. Leonard Nimoy also said a few days ago that he would like to play Mr. Spock again. He should be a bit older than Brent Spiner. And it’s already known that Data had an aging program. So it shouldn’t be a problem if Brent Spiner ages. If they restore Data, they could give him a new skin color and eyes color if it should be necessary. Brent Spiner wouldn’t have the problem with the make up then. And really, if necessary, they could use special effects like in Avatar. I don’t believe that everything was make-up there. There are a lot of TNG fans outside. And about TOS: Kirk died in Star Trek VI. And he died in Star Trek VII. I would love to know how many times Paramount wants to show us the life of Captain Kirk. He must have nine lifes like a cat. And I still missed a final TNG movie where we can see the signatures of every TNG actor at the end of the movie. Who is more important: Paramount or the fans? And really: Nemesis wasn’t a real Star Trek movie. Nemesis was shit thanks Stuart Baird. I think that fans should have the right to get a compensation for that. There were a lot of errors in that film (Brent Spiner got already the long list): Data lost his emotion chip between Star Trek 9 and Star Trek 10, Shinzon died already during the whole movie (a very long procedure, I was there to see the TNG cast, they should have given Tom Hardy an own movie with the title “Star Trek – The long death of Shinzon – in 10 parts” instead) and Picard wasn’t able to kill him after that long dying then (did I miss something?), the emergency transporters didn’t work anymore after the Enterprise E got attacked (I would kill the ship designer for that), Data had only one emergency transport unit (I guess it was a very big problem in the 24th century to replicate that small device so that Data could have two or more of them), etc… The list is very long. I had already the guess that the Enterprise E was on the same level like the Enterpise A the – the part where nothing worked on the ship.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Smith/1340914747 Aaron Smith

    There’s no reason why they can’t do something completely new in the future with a few rebooted characters as well. Sisko could pop up anywhere, anytime. Voyager created how many different timelines and realities. Archer has his mysterious time travelers from the future, TNG has Q…anything is possible. I say do it all!

  • Duder

    Cannon universe, prime-timeline, 150-200 years after Voyager + Relevant to present day, original, deep storyline arc with unrelated episodes mixed in, ala DS9 + Re-imagined future technology (as PADDs, communicators, and voice activated computers are science fact now) = 7 more seasons of ST tv.

  • honestann

    Gads, what sentient being wouldn’t love to have another genuine Star Trek series?

    However, it MUST be part of the original Star Trek universe and nothing whatsoever to do with JJAbrams, who is a slimeball who loves to destroy the works of others above all else.

    I agree with much of what is said in previous comments. Forget reboots, forget going back in history. StarTrek is about the future, so any new series should pick up after TNG and DS9. While there are many good reasons to move 100 years further into the future, there are just as many good reasons to move only 20 or 30 years. For example, ALL the previous actors in TNG and DS9 can play themselves in guest appearances without anything being out of whack time-wise.

    Both kinds of StarTrek locations (starships and space-stations) have their advantages and disadvantages. So perhaps a new series could be a combo — some spiffy new replacement for DS9 but with a bit more starship episodes. Or perhaps somewhere else in the universe after someone figures out how to make another artificial stable wormhole.

    Perhaps the pilot episode could explain the new station or location — either the wormhole aliens are forced or convinced to give out their wormhole technology, or something happens to the existing wormhole that shifts the location of one or both ends.