View Single Post
Old January 12 2014, 02:01 AM   #62
Hober Mallow
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Captain of the next Trek series

Sran wrote: View Post
Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
They could... but then the question becomes why? Why try to get the audience to care about new characters when there are already characters people care about in the public consciousness?
My point is that I think creativity and originality are important.
Well, if what you want is originality, then why would you want Star Trek? Why wouldn't you want an original production.

Recycling characters that already exist doesn't always have desired effect- on the contrary, it can cause audiences to devalue the characters they once cared about if they're portrayed poorly.
Wouldn't that be equally true of any poorly-portrayed characters, whether original or existing?

My reason for wanting to see a series that follows up on the events of TNG and DS9 has to do with me wanting to see how events I've already witnessed have impacted the fictional galaxy the people of the twenty fourth century live in.
Fair enough, and like I said, I think most people around here probably agree with you. But I don't think the general audience gives a shit about it. Berman-Trek had its day, but that day is over. Just as the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes movies had their day, and they eventually had to end and make way for new versions of Conan Doyle's character.

Do I believe these events and people are real? Of course not. But I like the idea of seeing a process through to conclusion, as there are many loose threads that could be explored in the context of a new series. And as I've said before, I'd also be okay with a series set between 2265-70 if it focused on characters we've met before but don't know as much about. What else was happening in the Federation while Kirk was commanding the five-year mission?
Personally, I'd like the producer of the next Trek reboot to go back to the source material and realize a lot of what modern Trek fans take for granted had nothing to do with the original series. There's no evidence from TOS that Trek took place in the 23rd Century, so the 2265 setting date can be safely tossed out the airlock. Ron Moore's Klingons didn't yet exist; we could get a totally different kind of Klingon from the ones that developed in the later movies and in TNG. There's plenty of room for an interpretation of Trek vastly different from what we got in the Berman-produced years. The source material should be respected -- the Enterprise and her crew on a mission of exploration -- but all of the details that came in later movies and spinoff series may be dropped.
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote