View Single Post
Old January 7 2013, 03:50 AM   #17
Xhiandra
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xhiandra's Avatar
 
Re: My view on a new Trek series.

Darkwing wrote:
Nice ground rules, not enough about the actual plot.
Part of it is intentional: I wanted to create a framework, but leave the canvas blank (initially); so as to highlight the importance of said framework, at least to my eyes.

The idea is very much to enhance storytelling, make the setting more believable, more "real" and limit clichés as much as possible; but what stories are told within that framework is still very open.
I mentionned writers being confined by some of the "ground rules" as you call them, but in many other ways, they'd be more free: got an interesting story that only involves admirals? Fine, that can make a good ep.
An ep that doesn't involve the Federation at all? Sure, why not?
... the possibilities aren't endless (cliché avoided ), but quite open.

Part of it just is how my brain works: I've never had much imagination, so I tend to abstracise everything; my mind is better suited for analysis than creative endeavours as a result.

But you make a fair point, I included no real premise.
I'll try to at a later venture (too tired right now).

Darkwing wrote: View Post
Another point I'd like to see: Have an upper and lower ensemble. We need to see the leaders dealing with situations, but they should NOT be the ones going in. This has been a weakness of all Trek series. So in this new series, if the captain orders a landing party, instead of cutting to Scotty beaming down Kirk/Spock/McCoy/Ens Ricky, we now cut to Ens Ricky, Chief Bobby, Petty Officer Timmy, and Crewman Baker beaming over. This also eliminates redshirt syndrome. Ensign Ricky has a better chance to live.
Upon first reading, I agreed it was a good idea.

Upon reflection, I'm not so sure anymore: essential to the nature of Trek (in my view) is the notion that when they beam to a planet, they're not expecting a firefight.
They do plan for the worse somewhat (phasers, presence of Tac officer(s) in away missions); but for the most part, they expect a rather peaceful contact, in which case it makes sense to involve higher-ranked officers.

In either case, the redshirt syndrome is irrelevant: point 4 eliminates it entirely.

Darkwing wrote:
We can also change out lower ensemble members easier than upper ensemble. If Patrick Stewart had left, TNG would have been over. But if half the junior crew cast are on other shows, we simply hire other actors, change the names, and film, so Ensign Ricky is replaced with LTjg Matty in this week's script, and the actor playing Ricky will be available some other episode.
The idea is to have several main characters in the lower ranks, but easily supplemented by other actors in similar roles when needed.
Remember that point 4 establishes they all change pretty regularly anyway.
Indeed, not being shackled by the actors' schedules or desires to depart from the show is an advantage.

@BillJ: I'm not continuity-obsessed either; I write of settling the continuity arguments so that they can... well, end.
They end up being huge distractions from the actual content: haven't you witnessed some episodes or movies be entirely dismissed as drivel by some fans because of an inconsequential contradiction to previous continuity? I have, with baffling frequency.
Also, while I'm not obsessed about it, having an internally consistent show can only enhance it.
Xhiandra is offline   Reply With Quote