Slashdot Mirror


What SciFi Should Get the Reboot Treatment Next?

Not long ago Wired ran their own list of which SciFi (not SyFy!) shows were in need of another go 'round in this era of the reboot. Well, it looks like many fans had their own opinions resulting in another list of reboots including everything from Firefly (please?) to The Outer Limits. Which SciFi stories could use the breath of life, and which ones might actually succeed it getting it?

93 of 922 comments (clear)

  1. Blakes 7 by WED+Fan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Blake's 7. I was in the USAF for the final 2 series. Incredible characters and stories. Horrible sets.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    1. Re:Blakes 7 by Botched · · Score: 5, Funny

      Vila: "Where are all the good guys?" Blake: "You may be looking at them." Avon: "What a depressing thought." And the best ending a show could ask for!

    2. Re:Blakes 7 by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My thought too. A great premise, good script writing, terrible acting and terrible sets. Blake's 7 with some decent actors and a budget would be great. As long as they don't try to make them into 'good guys'. The great thing about Blake's 7 was that, from a certain perspective, it was about a bunch of terrorists and thieves. From another, it was about a bunch of heroic rebels. Most of the time, the truth was somewhere between the two.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Blakes 7 by ByOhTek · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I read recently that BBC is actually considering a reboot of that one, but at the moment I can't find a reference - so it was probably word of mouth. If not, I agree, that definitely needs a reboot. I remember watching that one after Dr. Who on PBS and loved it.

      It certainly fits better than too many shows on that list that are too recent to be in reboot country IMO. Babylon 5 is definitely the most recent I would put in the reboot category. Firefly was nice, but if they can get the money to complete the movies, it doesn't need a reboot.

      Others are just way too recent IMO (Roswell, Lexx).

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    4. Re:Blakes 7 by Botched · · Score: 3, Informative

      umm, it is on DVD (I'm seeing non-US format, but that's easy to get around)

    5. Re:Blakes 7 by jameskojiro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The actors who played Avon, Vila and Blake were great actors, the rest were mediocre. Orac and Zen were also acted superbly for being machines. Oh and you cannot forget Servelan. She played hot sexy strong in a way I haven't seen yet the only person come close was the visitor leader in V the new series.

      The thing is most of the crew needs to be made up with criminals both political prisoners and otherwise. They need not be acted like they are feral animals, the original show did a good job at that, they need the "Violent Offender with Neurochip suppression" otherwise known as Gan. The team needs to be made up of a group of amoral people led by a complete Idealist (Blake). Of course in the original series when Blake left, he took their morals with it and it become a power play between all of the amoralistic bastards left in the crew, save Cally and Dayna. Though season 3 and 4 were fun as well!

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    6. Re:Blakes 7 by itsdapead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh and you cannot forget Servelan. She played hot sexy strong in a way I haven't seen yet the only person come close was the visitor leader in V the new series.

      Hot damn. Morena Baccarin as Servilan.

      Yes.

      I'll be in my bunk!

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    7. Re:Blakes 7 by FreudianNightmare · · Score: 2, Funny

      It *did* have an actual budget. Approximately 2 pence and as much cardboard as they could steal from the local dump per episode, true, but it was still a budget.

      --
      'Speak softly and carry a beagle'
    8. Re:Blakes 7 by dwye · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Originally, robin Hood stole, but did it with style.
      > The whole protect the poor thing is probably a disney thing.

      I have read several Robin Hood books from the early 19th Century and the "robs from the rich and gives to the poor" trope was firmly established then. Disney is not responsible for EVERY non-cynical idea in the world.

      Personally, I just assumed that it was obvious, tactically, just as it was later obvious to Mao in the Little Red Book. If you pay back some of your take to help the "poor" or disenfranchised (aka peasantry, in Mao), they cover for you against those who only take (landlords or their agents)(even if you only pay a few pennies of the pounds that you take). This idea also occurred to the Medellin and Cali Cartels in Columbia.

  2. against a dark background by mjwalshe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    do a BSG style multi season show based on against a dark background by Banks

  3. Reboot should get a Reboot! by SirDrinksAlot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reboot should get a Reboot!

    That was a great cartoon.

    Maybe C.O.P.S too! Fighting crime in a future time!

    1. Re:Reboot should get a Reboot! by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Funny

      Futurama. Think about Futurama reimagined in a younger, edgier style.

      Fry: Chill, Hube. I'm like translating as fast as I can.
      Leela: I'm so sick of being treated like some kind of object to be worshipped. I'm a real person with real feelings.
      Young Zoidberg: You know, I don't think Mitchell likes me any more.
      Leela: I'm pregnant.

      [Everyone]: No.

      With apologies to Stargate.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  4. Why Firefly? by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What part of Firefly do you think needed a reboot? The whole point of these reboots is to drop the decades of cruft that have dogged down a series and made it impossible to create anything new thanks to all of the baggage. Firefly has a (too) short lived TV run and a movie. There's not really any baggage to drop.

    The only thing I'd change is the dumbass execs that cancelled it before its time.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:Why Firefly? by spamking · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What part of Firefly do you think needed a reboot? The whole point of these reboots is to drop the decades of cruft that have dogged down a series and made it impossible to create anything new thanks to all of the baggage. Firefly has a (too) short lived TV run and a movie. There's not really any baggage to drop. The only thing I'd change is the dumbass execs that cancelled it before its time.

      I'll second this . . . Firefly was canceled it way to soon. If Stargate can live on like it is why can't Firefly?

    2. Re:Why Firefly? by LoyalOpposition · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The part that needs to be eliminated in the reboot is the movie. I want to see a series that includes Wash and Sheppard Book.

      -Loyal

      --
      I aim to misbehave.
    3. Re:Why Firefly? by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That movie was embarrassing. They should have just let it rest in peace.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Why Firefly? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's Slashdot, you're required by law to mention Firefly every time anything sci-fi comes up. Firefly, Firefly, Firefly.

      Personally, I'm a huge sci-fi fan, and I don't like Firefly at all. But I can't say that due to Slashdot Law. Oh crap, it's the Slashdot Police...

    5. Re:Why Firefly? by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      90% of the planets have an environment remarkably like Vancouver, WA, and a sum total of 500 human inhabitants makes sense to you? At least it's consistent, I guess. But if you're saying FireFly's mythos is sub-standard to SG1, I think you have to do a lot better than that.

      And btw: it is not really ever very clear that all of FF's planets orbit the same star. I think Joss left it purposely vague, 'cause he didn't want FTL but wanted more room to explore than a single solar system would allow. I have much less gripe with that than every environment in FF resembling So Cal a little too much.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    6. Re:Why Firefly? by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The only thing that was a bit iffy about Firefly was the large number of habitable planets and moons orbiting one star. The backstory is that humans found this star system and was able to terraform all these planets and moons, which conveniently had approx. 1g gravity.

      This setting was necessary to avoid the plot device of "warp drive". The show's creator wanted a show where people were in space, but not with technology too far more advanced that our own (though they do have some odd things like floating islands, etc.). The problem is that warp drive is theoretically impossible, and if it ever does happen, it'll require a complete change in our understanding of physics. But warp drive is a necessary plot device to have humans traveling between star systems in any reasonable time, a la Star Trek. So putting lots of livable worlds around one star is about the only way to avoid it.

      The "cowboys in space" thing is completely reasonable given these constraints. Remember, with propulsion technology like our own, even traveling between planets/moons in the same system can take days, weeks, or even months (it would currently take us months to travel to Jupiter with current technology). So Firefly's creator envisioned a system where the inner worlds were controlled by the oppressive authoritarian government, and had lots of tech, while the outer worlds were not very well controlled by this Alliance (and not as well terraformed either), and thus it was much like the "Wild West", with less tech, fewer luxuries, not many police around to protect you, etc. This was actually a genius idea IMO.

    7. Re:Why Firefly? by RealErmine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The part that needs to be eliminated in the reboot is the movie. I want to see a series that includes Wash and Sheppard Book.

      Maybe some things in the movie didn't fit the way they should have, but I don't think that the death of Wash and Book are among these. Were they likable characters? Yes. Are you supposed to be sad that they died? Yes.

      Firefly is primarily a story about Mal and his journey. At the beginning of the series he is battle-hardened and stoic while being burdened with Brown Coats' loss to the Core Planets. He is very much a closed-off person and the only glimpses we see of his humanity are his feelings for the ship and a strange sense of loyalty to his crew. He never gives any further explanation to why he protects them other than that they are his crew. There is a common theme throughout the series dealing with the stalled relationship between Mal and Inara due mainly to Mal's inability to open himself emotionally.

      The events of the movie bring Mal's humanity back. The uncovering of the atrocities performed by the Core Planets government gives Mal a sense of purpose outside what we saw in the series which was to simply stay alive and flying. The deaths of Wash and Book uncover the real reason that Mal was so protective of his crew and this is alluded to in the last lines of the movie. Mal explains to River that the secret to captaining a ship is love. He protected his crew because he loved them and he is finally able to admit it, but it cost the lives of two good friends for him to realize it. Just previous to this scene Mal expresses to Inara that he would like it if she stayed on the ship, a tacit admission of his feelings for her.

      If you don't like the movie because two good characters died, then you are selling the writing short. They died for a reason so that the main protagonist can undergo a change in character. If you felt sad that they died then the writers did their job of good writing.

      --
      Dewey, you fool! Your decimal system has played right into my hands!
    8. Re:Why Firefly? by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's Vancouver, BC, thank you very much.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    9. Re:Why Firefly? by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think the solar system in Firefly is very plausible.

      It's not, but neither is FTL travel. To have people traveling between star systems in any reasonable time (i.e., not generation ships or suspended animation taking decades or centuries), you MUST have FTL. But FTL is theoretically impossible with our current understanding of physics, so the idea of a convenient star system with dozens of planets and hundreds of moons able to be terraformed to some extent, and conveniently having nearly earth-normal gravity, is a workable plot device to avoid the overused plot device that is FTL.

      As a counterexample, look at the new Battlestar. They had FTL in the form of "jump drive", but it was really out of place, because all the rest of their technology was really not that much advanced from our own: nuclear-propelled Viper ships, machine guns just like our own, nuclear missiles for shooting at planets or enemy ships, seriously low-tech computers, etc. However, because of the nature of Battlestar's story, FTL was an absolute requirement.

      The other thing which both shows seem to have which is out-of-place is artificial gravity. But it's nearly impossible to make a TV series that doesn't have artificial gravity (Avatar had a brief scene at the beginning with zero-g, but that was a half-billion dollar movie).

      Any imagining of the future is always going to have things which require a suspension of disbelief, because there are going to be things which are necessary plot devices because of reality constraints or budget constraints, and also because we have little idea what technologies will be possible in the future (or else we'd have already invented them).

    10. Re:Why Firefly? by CompressedAir · · Score: 5, Funny

      Man, you are way off. Firefly was primarily a story about a really cool guy who wore Hawaiian shirts, played with plastic dinosaurs, married a total badass wife, made funny (ding!) informative (ding!) and insightful comments (ding!), and occasionally flew the ship.

      It is no wonder that a show without the main character would lose some appeal.

    11. Re:Why Firefly? by Labcoat+Samurai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except Book died off camera and without ever fulfilling the potential of his storyline (who WAS he?) and Wash died in a stroke of abrupt and extreme bad luck that had to be summarily forgotten because of the imminent threat. I felt like the only purpose Wash's death served was to make the audience feel like anyone was fair game at that point. It was effective in that regard, but if that's all there was, I don't think it was worth the trade-off.

      However, you bring up an interesting point, that I had not considered. I'd have to watch it again to see for sure if that comes across for me too, but I certainly didn't pick that up on a first run. The fact that he cared about the members of his crew was something I had taken for granted for a long time, and I didn't notice that he had changed appreciably at the end. I suppose he does allow the Operative to live, despite all he has done, and that could be indicative of a change, though I'm not sure that the death of Wash (or Book) was a critical part of that. Ultimately, I felt Wash deserved better than he got. My reaction was less sadness about the death of Wash than irritation with the writers for killing him so off-handedly.

    12. Re:Why Firefly? by JetTredmont · · Score: 4, Funny

      (or for the Americans in the audience, Saved By The Bell: The College Years to Saved By The Bell.)

      I do not think you are making your point as compellingly as you believe you are.

    13. Re:Why Firefly? by XDirtypunkX · · Score: 3, Funny

      Alan Tudyk, is that you?

  5. How about something new? by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd rather see the nice old b&w Twilight Zones, grainy old BSG, the 1 or 2 seasons of Firefly, than ALL NEW DISNEY PIXAR TWILIGHT ZONE 3D ON ICE !!eleventy!!!

    Lets get some NEW stuff - the enjoyment from the show should come from the plot/characters/message rather than the latest special effects or rehashes of To Serve Man.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:How about something new? by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem isn't the new shows, or the old shows. It is production companies that aren't really SciFi fans... There have been lots of good things dropped after one season because the producers did not understand the product or the market.

    2. Re:How about something new? by PapayaSF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rather than remake something, or have some ignorant Hollywood producer create some new but clichéd and/or stupid story, why not go look to the great science fiction writers and put them on the screen (suitably updated)? Now that special effects are no longer any sort of obstacle, how about something based on Cordwainer Smith's stories of the Underpeople? E.E. Smith's classic Lensman series? Why not a TV series based on Pohl's Heechee stories? Maybe an Iain Banks novel, as someone mentioned above. How about Heinlein? Asimov? Charles Stross? Larry Niven? Keith Laumer's Retief (sort of a tongue-in-cheek James Bond-ish diplomat dealing with various troublesome alien species) could be huge, and there are enough stories for a dozen films. Any sf fan could list more.

      It's annoying when all Hollywood seems to consider is remakes, "original" stories that aren't often good science fiction, and maybe things by Philip Dick. There are literally hundreds of great sf stories that could make fine films and TV series.

      --
      Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
  6. The Matrix and Highlander by oldspewey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because the original set of sequels did so much damage to the original (awesome) films, that a series reboot could go nowhere but up.

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    1. Re:The Matrix and Highlander by frankmu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What Matrix sequel?

      --
      Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
  7. How about none? by Dirtside · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about none? There's a million* SF ideas out there that have never gone much beyond the printed word. Why do we have to keep rebooting old franchises? How about turning the Vorkosigan saga into a miniseries? Or something by Cory Doctorow or Charlie Stross, if you want to be a little more up-to-the-minute? How about a miniseries based on Hyperion, or A Deepness in the Sky?

    Or even just forget about things that have already been written -- commission Doctorow or Stross (or someone) to create a TV miniseries based on new SF material.

    * Not precisely 1 million.

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:How about none? by 0racle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Seriously, this. How about trying something new.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:How about none? by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How about a miniseries based on Hyperion

      I was recently reflecting on Simmons' Hyperion myself, as I read it several times in my teens. I know there's long been talk of making a film or television adaptation of it, but I now see a number of obstacles to trying to bring this book to a more mainstream audience. One is that it's just a bit too nerdy. I mean, one of the major structural points of the book is the life of the early Romantic poet John Keats, and people want explosions instead of sensitive young men who write verse. Also, the subplot of the cruciform or the Jewish man drawn to sacrifice his daughter might offend religious sensibilities.

      Hyperion is a decent work of science-fiction (though I think of it more as a young-adult choice than a universal classic), but it might just not be right for Hollywood.

    3. Re:How about none? by Kemanorel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can I get a Snow Crash movie or mini-series here?

      --
      Mess not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
    4. Re:How about none? by Jawn98685 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Amen.
      So when, oh when, will someone do "Neuromancer" on the big screen? Maybe the whole trilogy, even? So OK, Johnny Mnemonic was a mess, but Gibson's vision, done well, would be glorious to see.

    5. Re:How about none? by spun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cory Doctorow? Really? Stross is a solid, workmanlike writer, but Doctorow? He's a hack. I could name a half dozen current Science Fiction writers better than Doctorow and Stross combined. Greg Bear. Stephen Baxter. John Barnes. Iain Banks. Peter Hamilton. Greg Egan. And that's just current authors, off the top of my head.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    6. Re:How about none? by OverZealous.com · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Worse than talk, supposedly they are planning on making a single movie out of both Hyperion and Fall of Hyperion. There are at least 6 or 7 tales told in those two books, each one would almost be capable of filling 2 hours.

      I think the only way the Hyperion Cantos could make out of book form would be a long-running serial. Something with a really decent production team, that allowed each character time to build up the story.

      Of course, one major problem with that is these stories are fairly depressing. Especially the 5 framed stories in Hyperion. Nothing good happens to anyone, really.*

      (And then they are apparently planning on making a single movie out of Illium and Olympos, probably two of the most confusing [and amazing] stories I have ever read. I truly don't understand how that book could be made into a movie.)

      -----
      * I just received Hyperion and Fall for Christmas, and I'm currently re-reading Fall of Hyperion. I had completely forgotten how the end of the first book just hangs there!

    7. Re:How about none? by JackDW · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wasn't Gibson one of the producers of Johnny Mnemonic? I remember being very shocked to see that in the credits, as in "how did this go so wrong?"

      --
      You're an immobile computer, remember?
  8. Twilight zone by flogger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well this got a reboot in the 80s with the movie, maybe a re-reboot is in order?

    There are too many sci-fi stories out there that need to hit the screen before we get reboots of old ones. Where is? Ender's Game, Antares Dawn, Startide Rising, Fire in the Deep, Armor?

    I'd love to see Ender's Game in 3d. "The enemy's gate is down..." and our orientation would switch appropriately....

    --
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    "First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
    -- The Doctor, "Doctor
    1. Re:Twilight zone by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where the hell is Asimov's Foundation series? Where is Zelazny's Lord of Light? We have well over a century of science and speculative fiction that has barely, if ever been touched, and yet all anyone can ask for is retreads of Star Trek.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Twilight zone by frogzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you read the Foundation series as an adult? It's not really very good. There are certainly some good ideas but the writing is trapped in the 1950s. It seems really awkward in places and overall (in my opinion) it hasn't aged well. It's nice to have classics in whatever genre but don't live in the past. There is a lot of fine writing now.

      The movie and TV business is risky and they want to minimise their losses so they rehash what has worked in the past.

    3. Re:Twilight zone by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I reread it about seven years ago, and enjoyed it as much as I did when I was first read it at 15. Yes, some of the ideas are caught in the "atomic age" notions of the period, but the main plot line, of a Foundation preserving technology in a fading empire, and of a Second Foundation of psychics, along with an extraordinary antagonist like the Mule, well, that's a damned good set of stories. Modernize it a bit, and you're on your way.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Twilight zone by pavon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I read the Foundation series for the first time last year and I thought the books were very good, up until the "Scooby-Doo" ending of some of them (The Gods Themselves had the same problem). I don't think they would make a very good movie or miniseries though.

  9. Misfits of Science by dmomo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh wait. That'd be Heros.

  10. Maybe by daveime · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe screenwriters and filmmakers could come up with an ORIGINAL idea for a change. Getting tired of inferior remakes, all they do is cause me to download and watch the original again.

  11. Buck Rogers in the 25th Century by Artifex · · Score: 4, Funny

    Princess Ardala, Col. Wilma Deering, and little robots that want to be your best friend.
    What more could any nerd boy want?

    --
    Get off my launchpad!
    1. Re:Buck Rogers in the 25th Century by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Funny

      What more could any nerd boy want?

      The second season not to have happened?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  12. they should turn 'land of the lost' into a movie by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    maybe anchor it with a hip contemporary comedian?

    i'm sure it would make lots of money

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  13. The Tripods by HebrewToYou · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...although supposedly a movie is in development, slated for a 2012 release. I think a series/mini-series might be a better fit for the subject matter.

    --
    I'm not popular enough to be different.

    Homer Simpson, The Simpsons

  14. Max Headroom by Mashhaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The original was prophetic in more ways than I can count, and groundbreaking in many ways while being entertaining. I would love to see what they'd come up with this time.

    1. Re:Max Headroom by Hatta · · Score: 2, Informative

      The entire run of Max Headroom is available for torrent via dapcentral.org if you're unable to wait.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  15. How about Honey I Shrunk the Kids? by greenguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd love to see that done with darker, grittier feel.

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  16. Ringworld by foobsr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Would make for a couple of life injections.

    CC.

    --
    TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  17. Is This What They Mean By "Mash-Up Culture"? by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The mind boggles: We are reading an article about another article about which TV Shows should be re-done. Is there not one self-respecting Creator of Original Stuff left? Is this why Young People Today are so angry about the length of copyright?

    1. Re:Is This What They Mean By "Mash-Up Culture"? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      New doesn't always mean good. There are things like the original Battlestar Galactics, where the premise had a lot of potential, but the execution was terrible. Then there are things like Babylon 5, where the setting left a huge amount of unexplored scope. There's nothing wrong with taking a good idea from a poor execution, and producing something good from it, and there's nothing wrong with expanding existing good shows (although not like B5 Crusade). There's no reason to abandon good ideas just because they aren't new or original.

      That doesn't mean that original ideas are bad, and that you shouldn't create them, but some people consider the reimagined version of The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet to be one of the greatest works of English literature, so you shouldn't discount recycled ideas.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  18. Re:what? by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You are seriously "just making a childhood memory better than it really was". I watched it through a few months ago. Honestly it is best left in your treasured childhood memories. For me, Star Trek the Animated Series wins hands down as worst piece of crap that I liked when I was a kid.

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
  19. How about Rebooting Reboot? by hguorbray · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A canadian animation that took place initially inside of a game console, although the second series also included the internet. A bit like Tron, but with a richer world inside the computer hardware.

    Bob the guardian, his girlfriend Dot and the great villains Megabyte and Hexadecimal.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReBoot

    Actually it looks like they are reviving it already, so -asked and answered as they say.

    -I'm just sayin'

    1. Re:How about Rebooting Reboot? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd be happy just to get a boxed set of the whole series on DVD. Some friends and I actually looked into how much it would cost to buy the rights and produce/sell the DVDs. Didn't get very far. :-(

    2. Re:How about Rebooting Reboot? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 2, Informative

      A canadian animation that took place in

      I agree on the sentiment...

      But it was inside a Computer, not a game console. The "User" just happened to like playing the occasional game.

      I believe they said it out right in an episode, plus one day they were all impatiently waiting for a new upgrade.

      Then again I could be wrong.

      Fun series. They continued via a Comic a little later, but I hadn't heard of a revitalization.

  20. There is only one worthy by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Far Out Space Nuts

    You know you want it.

    But, seriously, I agree with others who say "Do something new".

    How about some retro space opera? Lensman or Perry Rhodan? Maybe a Stainless Steel Rat series?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Rhodan

  21. Why Firefly? Here's why... by IBitOBear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That and un-kill Wash and Sheppard Book.

    Oh, and get rid of the whole Miranda bullshit. The people who ply the lanes of space would neither "overlook" nor "forget" an entire main planet over the course of less than 20 years. Nor could such a thing be hidden as, outer-most or not, it would show up on everybody's orbital computations as a huge perturbation in their plots. Let alone one ten-year-old with binoculars.

    Oh yea, and drop that whole "all the planets orbiting one sun" nonsense since it isn't workable. Miranda would have been frozen ice-ball _or_ the "inner planets" would be molten slag.

    Don't get me wrong, I loved the show. The movie needs to be declared out-of-cannon before the series would be workable.

    I could have come up with a better "reason for the reavers" in my sleep. The original one from the series (mental erosion from facing the emptiness of space etc) was good enough. Hell, the movie contradicted the series directly. If the Pax caused reaverdom, the the episode where the one guy got tortured and became a reaver himself woudln't have worked unless the reavers carry a supply of the otherwise secret Pax around and deliberately pre-expose potential recruits to it before deciding who to kill, rape, and eat (in that order, if you're really lucky).

    So yea, it needs a reboot.

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
    1. Re:Why Firefly? Here's why... by chrysrobyn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Agreed, un-kill Wash and Shepard Book. Although, honestly, a 7 year run could take place in the intervening year between the end of the series and movie. Not sure a sane genius class River would improve a continued show any.

      Miranda is easy to accept, though. She's not a planet that's forgotten or overlooked, not a perturbation on plots or anything. She was a young colony that was still new to people's minds. Mal even knew "terraforming didn't take or somesuch". She was publicly known to be a failure, and even the mangnitude of the failure was known. The nature of the failure was the only unknown.

      Human history is filled with similar misdirected failures.

    2. Re:Why Firefly? Here's why... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed, un-kill Wash and Shepard Book. Although, honestly, a 7 year run could take place in the intervening year between the end of the series and movie.

      Yeah, I gotta disagree with this one. I don't want a series where nobody can die (and wanting to undo their dramatically significant deaths suggests this desire). Especially in the "movie is still canon, and this happens before it, so you know exactly who is still alive and when," sense. That would be the worst.

      Not sure a sane genius class River would improve a continued show any.

      Yeah I have to agree with you there.

      I'm going to be honest here. While it is truly a shame that the series was cut short, I think it's best left alone outside of some supplementary filler like the comics and whatnot. I don't think you could just hop right back in and recapture the magic. Hell, I even have a sneaking suspicious that in some ways the short run of the series was a godsend, since the end result is that pretty much every episode is a home run. But that's only a suspicion... If I had a time machine and a Fox-exec-calibrated-clue-stick, I'd go back and ensure that it wasn't taken off the air.

      But barring that? Let's just let Firefly stand on its own.

      She was publicly known to be a failure, and even the mangnitude of the failure was known. The nature of the failure was the only unknown.

      And nobody cared to find out, because to do so you had to go through Reaver territory.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    3. Re:Why Firefly? Here's why... by IBitOBear · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree that Miranda would have been fine in a system where they weren't all orbiting one star.

      And I would give you Reavers being the result of Pax if it were said that, perhaps, Pax was or caused a prion disease of the brain like Mad Cow disease etc. Easily done there.

      Then again, the less-than-twenty (and likely less than ten) year timescale would belie Reavers being an old wives tale.

      Draw out the time scale on paper sometime. Reavers would have been absolute fact, and a new fact at that, if the movie is cannon. They'd have exploded across the whole star system pervasively, and been hunted to extinction. They just wouldn't have the longevity (what with unshielded reactors and having to replenish their ranks and food supplies, since there isn't a 'reaver farmer' growing grain and we know food is scarce in that reality etc. In the absence of a reaver economy the would have been starved out of orbit at Miranda in like a month. etc.)

      The whole thing reeks of vampire fan-boy logic. Hundereds of vampires inhabit 1840 Paris/Moscow/New York/New Orleans (as they have for hundreds of years etc), each one draining the blood from one human each night, year in and year out. So even in WWII where people die and go missing all the time 365.24 * 100 is, on average 36,524 people gone missing from one city each year. The numbers just don't work if you even glance sideways at the math.

      To fix the problem with least effort: Keep the Pax, but try it on a cruise ship or a space station (e.g. "The Miranda" instead of "The Planet Miranda", or hell on a couple dozen people in a lab. Start with a smaller population. Make it properly contagious like the aforementioned prion disease (raver decides to rape you first, or feed you some of his flesh or blood, and _maybe_ you convert if you live long enough or get left behind) instead of a mystically repeatable experience that somehow has a predictable morphology, common enough for Mal to know the exact progression well enough to narrate it 8-). Same evil government, same evil plot, harder to come up with an armada of Ravers granted, but workable. Hell you even get to cut a word and some "look at the nothing" computer interface mock-up CGI from the script. Everybody wins. 8-)

      --
      Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
      --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
  22. B5: Crusade by happy_place · · Score: 2, Informative

    I always wanted to see this series completed. never happened. and the series had issues, like the music, and the main actor was Mr. Brady from the Brady Bunch movies, but it had potential until TNT execs tried to turn it into "Wrestlemania/Sexromp in Space"... ironically, SyFy channel has since been plagued by the meme of the same execs. :)

    --
    http://www.beanleafpress.com
    1. Re:B5: Crusade by Flounder · · Score: 2, Informative

      B5 is one of my all-time favorite TV shows, and I've been introducing my fiancee to it. Half-way through S1 right now, and a lot of the storylines really do hold up. Sure, the CGI is dated, and the acting is a bit stilted (but does get better), but the stories are still superior to a lot on TV today.

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

  23. Star Wars by wizardforce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which SciFi stories could use the breath of life

    Starwars. Episodes 1, 2 and 3 especially.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    1. Re:Star Wars by Narpak · · Score: 2, Funny

      Starwars. Episodes 1, 2 and 3 especially.

      Lets let Uwe Boll remake them, should be an improvement.

  24. Logan's Run by Eglembor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Logan's Run could use some reboot loving it was a fairly entertaining serie with potential for some good "revival"

  25. Reason for Reavers by IBitOBear · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here were my ideas.

    1) from the series, yep, some people go crazy when they spend too long on the edge of that much nothing.

    2) in the series it was mentioned that, despite the rumors, there have never actually been any aliens or alien artifacts found. What if there were something so alien way, way out there, but attractive enough to draw people in, that was so alien that it broke the mind. (Would have dove-tailed in with River being prescient and mad, suppose the blue-hands were working from "the only reliable evidence" ever beamed back, trying to unlock the secrets and abilities of the thing without bringing on reaver madness.)

    3) Evil government experimentation, version "not-dumb", something infectious. Call it Pax if you want. Give it the same reason and history, but instead of a "chemical" or in _addition_ to it being a chemical have raverdom be an Infectious Prion form of the original chemical (see mad cow disease). Still need to drop Miranda and the one central sun, but now being force-fed a little reaver flesh would maybe make you one of the family. Hell, "The Miranda" could have been a freaking cruise ship and the thing would work, but not a planet.

    At a minimum, some serious retcon needs to take place to repair the plot damage the movie inflicted on the franchise.

    I just wish they would ask me about this stuff before the script goes into production. 8-)

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
  26. Re:Depends on how the "reboot" is done. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Isn't it just a split timeline in the multiverse? That's how I see it. The original continuity exists but a few Planck distances away... I generally don't like time travel stories, but I have to admit using it to reboot a series *was* sort of an interesting idea. I just wish the villain had more reasoned motivations.

  27. Let's have something original instead by roc97007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For God's Sake, can't we have something original? Reboots are for tired old franchises that have a diminishing following and need a kick in the pants to get going again. Otherwise, it's a remake, not a reboot, and I'm frakking (reference intended) sick and tired of seeing stories from 30 years ago rehashed yet again. So just stop it, ok? We all act like there's only 10 or 12 properties in all of science fiction.

    That said, I would have to vote for Firefly returning. A reboot is absolutely not necessary -- I do not need to see the same stories with different actors -- just continue the story, perhaps as a limited series of 6 to 13 episodes once a year, like they do in England.

    I think the problem with Heroes was that they just plain ran out of story. The first two seasons worked because they had a preplanned story arc. The last seasons are floundering because they don't. Rebooting will not help -- it'll just move the problem to a different set of actors. Let Heroes die and allow us to remember the first seasons -- when it was still good -- with fondness.

    In the case of Star Trek and James Bond, a reboot was necessary if we were going to have more of these franchises. Not having more of these franchises was -- in my opinion -- an acceptable alternative, but the idea of a reboot was interesting, and proved fruitful. Continuing with increasingly elderly actors and every film trying to be exactly like the previous film was clearly not working.

    Here, I'll give you an idea for free that combines a story that hasn't been done yet with a current franchise, making it simultaneously new and marketable. Make a series from Andre Norton's "Star Rangers", but make it part of Trek canon. It's thousands of years in the future, and a old limping spaceship from the broken fragments of a federation crash lands on a planet that used to have a high level of technology. The survivors of the crash attempt to survive from the remnants of old technology found in the dead cities. At the end of the story, (first season) they stumble upon Star Fleet Headquarters and realize they've found Earth.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  28. Star Blazers by Tepar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Used to race home from school to watch this. I wanted them to fire the wave motion gun in every episode. :-)

    http://www.starblazers.com

  29. ALF! by SlappyBastard · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've said it before, but I'll say it again -- the darker re-imagined ALF would be a blockbuster (I'm seeing this version of ALF as a movie, just to be clear).

    We could establish with the big effects piece: the destruction of Melmac. We could shock the audience right away by killing off Lucky. Pretty soon it's a hunted man movie -- this year's District 9 -- and away we go!

    We'd do all the big character surprises, too. Willie would be a female, maybe a hard-drinkin' fighter pilot with a bit of the reckless sex streak. The nosy old lady next door could be a transvestite (very edgy). Before the first act is done, ALF is halfway across the country -- a vast break from the original series, I should add -- and has left a trail of broken lives and broken promises behind him. There would the climactic fight. Willie avenging her dead cat. Lots of dialogue -- total ripoff of Kill Bill's climax. And the final blow. ALF is dead.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
  30. Starship Troopers by cthulu_mt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do it right this time; the world is ready for power armor.

    Do it for the Lieutenant!

    --
    Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
    1. Re:Starship Troopers by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Come on, the book was about two things:

      1. The politics
      2. The powered armour

      Just because both those things were missing from the movie... oh, wait, I see your point now.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    2. Re:Starship Troopers by olman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The movie caught pretty damn well the fascism is all right, m'kay theme and made serious fun about it.

      Pretty hilarious, unlike the book which was just serious about it all, really.

  31. Star Wars Christmas Special by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 2, Funny

    On Naboo with JarJar. George Lucas needs to outdo his last Christmas Special.

  32. Slashdot by Zarf · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... no seriously. Slashdot needs to have a reboot with a younger cast. The cast of Slashdot had too little diversity. I'd like to see some more female leading characters... maybe a range of ages and some interesting quirky characters. The whole "Evil Bill" thing got old too. Perhaps we could make a new enemy?

    --
    [signature]
    1. Re:Slashdot by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 2, Funny

      The whole "Evil Bill" thing got old too. Perhaps we could make a new enemy?

      I nominate kdawson...the biggest advantage is that it has that whole, evil but insider to the good guys' organization twist going for it.

    2. Re:Slashdot by coaxial · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The whole "Evil Bill" thing got old too. Perhaps we could make a new enemy?

      You're right. Hating Microsoft is like hating the Ottoman Empire or Prussia today. They're irrelevant. The real threat today is Larry and Sergie.

  33. Dune....Definitely Dune by CodeBuster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would really like to see the definitive version of the Dune saga done right ; without the sort of budget and casting constraints that have crippled previous outings (i.e. "the original" which was a David Lynch 80s style film and the SciFi channel remakes which, while better and more ambitious, still suffered from obvious budget constraints). The Dune saga really deserves better treatment than it has received at the hands of previous studios and directors. The success of Avatar has proven the market for high-quality 3D "epic" Science Fiction films and Dune would look really great if it was done in a similar fashion; with the budget and length required to do justice to the story. IMHO, either James Cameron or Steve Jackson would be good choices to direct, but others may have different opinions. If Lord of the Rings can be done well, then so can a sophisticated and high-brow SciFi epic like the Dune saga.

  34. A similar writing style- Harry Harrison by Botched · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The Stainless Steel Rat could be a lot of fun.

  35. You smell like bacon... by Lilith's+Heart-shape · · Score: 2, Informative

    The only Star Wars movie that didn't suck, The Empire Strikes Back, was written by a woman named Leigh Brackett.

  36. Sliders by lyinhart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What about Sliders? Fun show, great ensemble cast, interesting concept that postulated about alternate Earths. The first couple of seasons were great, but then they changed the tone to become a lot more dark and dreary. They whacked John Rhys-Davies, added Kari Wuhrer and started ripping off various sci-fi films for plots. Cleavant Derricks's character became serious and less of a comic relief character. They started fighting an unnecessary recurring antagonist, the cro-mags. Sabrina Lloyd was written out, Jerry O'Connell got his brother on the show and then they had some weirdness about two Quinn Mallories merging or something.

    --
    Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
    1. Re:Sliders by D+Ninja · · Score: 2

      I second this. Sliders is a very excellent idea which went haywire due to various reasons (as stated by the parent). I just got brought back into this series due to the fact that the first three seasons are now available on Hulu. But, I do agree - after John Rhys-Davies was yanked, the show just continued to go downhill from there. Plus, while I realize the show needs a plot, can it stop being from the standpoint of, "Quinn decides to be dumb and save a damsel in distress and gets everybody into a heap of trouble" and instead have something more imaginative.

  37. Geeky/nerdy can work if done right by syousef · · Score: 3, Informative

    This show is a sit com in which Schrodenger's cat was explained.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Bang_Theory#U.S._standard_ratings

    The reason most sci-fi tanks is that it's so poorly done.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  38. UFO - No Question by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I imagine most of you have never seen this excellent British SF Series but you should. Despite those elements which date it horribly, it was still far far ahead of its time. This was my favorite show as a kid without doubt and in many ways its still an excellent show and aged well. It deserves a reboot if anything does.
    However, it needs to be redone by the British, not Americans, or at least a co-production. Letting American writers and producers loose with it would ruin the show I think - it had an air of understatement that American TV shows and Audiences seem unable to maintain. A US production would be totally over the top and I think that would be a mistake.
    By far the best show in the entire list - and amazingly ignored in all the comments I read.

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  39. Varley's "Titan" series by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Titanides from the Titan series by Varley are the perfect application for the motion-capture and facial animation technology developed for Avatar.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  40. What about Alf? by HikingStick · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just think--the graphics in the dream scenes where Alf fillets the family cat would be killer!

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  41. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  42. Re:Depends on how the "reboot" is done. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Had they stuck with the Trek story, and had the Temporal Integrity Commission go back and set things right, again, great movie.

    No, that would have been awful, because it would have meant we're stuck with the forty years of canon that has been bogging the series down so badly. The series was toppling under its own weight, but trekkies wouldn't let go of a single scrap of that history. Such that their opinion of any Star Trek media is based almost entirely on how well it sticks to that history to a tee. Ugh.

    Splitting off the timeline, freeing the series from that history while simultaneously respecting it, was the best thing that could have happened to Trek. And if doing that means going against Trek's standard temporal theory where time is linear and the Time Cops come around and "fix" it whenever someone mucks with it, then so be it. Actually, expunging that piece of Trek canon was in and of itself a great move by itself. Because when your sci-fi series shares the same theory of time travel as a Van Damme movie, that's a hint that your theory is dumb.

    Thank God JJ Abrams came along and saved the series from the Trekkies.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are