53 Reasons Why We Need a New Star Trek TV Series

[Sector 7]

Bry_Sinclair wrote:

---

The time to make a statement about a gay character on Trek passed long ago. When one is included, it shouldn't be used to define the character (it shouldn't appear in any press releases, etc), but just be one small facet of who they are. So that when he/she has a same sex partner, it is done so in a non-hyped manner. Its just a person engaging in a healthy, happy relationship.

I agree, Bry_Sinclair, Trek lost out on being cutting edge in relation to gay people long ago.

NOTE: While it's always nice to be quoted, I did not write the article. I enjoyed it and reprinted it here.

[Methos]

Sector 7 wrote:

---

Finally a Star Trek show about crime scenes and lawyers?

CSI: Starfleet?

SCIS (Starfleet Criminal Investigative Service)?

M

[Methos]

T'Girl wrote:

---

There has been some conjecture (some by me) that the reason we don't see gays in Star Trek is because they are in some way being "suppressed" by the Federation's overall society. Think America sixty years ago. So having a Captain who make the decision to be openly gay would be one way of introducing gays into the Star Trek world.

The story line could mirror the historical gay coming out that actually occurred in our society, but set in the Star Trek universe, a on going B-story, or C-story that is one aspect of the series, but not the only subject of the series.

The Captain could meet with acceptance from some, but rejection, resistance and condemnation from other in Starfleet and the Federation on general. And even those aboard his (her) own ship.

This would be an alternative to suddenly showing gays and saying oh yeah "they" were alway here, and alway accepted.

The Federation is all inclusive, please don't ask too many questions.

I really don't see this as a viable way for them to bring homosexual relationships onto the screen... Starfleet obviously doesn't have a problem with mixed race / species relationships... as evidenced by the amount of half whatever characters around... and it's perfectly logical to assume that there are aliens in the Trek universe who have more than one sex... male, female, whatever else... i'm sure at one point it was said the Andorian's had 4 sexes... so limiting relationships to male / female wouldn't really work for an organisation like Starfleet...

I'd rather just have it included and passed as just part of the character... doesn't need to be any big fuss about it or anything, in 300 years or so, i damn well hope we're over homophobia and ignorance... if not then i really hope the first alien culture we come into contact with, blows the hell out of this planet for it's continued stupidity

M

[Temis the Vorta]

TiberiusMaximus wrote:

---

He spelled Khan wrong.

Just sayin'.

He failed the test. Warsie spy in our midst.

[Sector 7]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

He failed the test. Warsie spy in our midst.

[TiberiusMaximus]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

He failed the test. Warsie spy in our midst.

Prepare the airlock.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Anji wrote:

---

But we need a new Star Trek series to critique our culture and make us examine what we have become. And that will force us to become something better.

No television series has ever done anything even approaching this.

[tafkats]

Gary7 wrote:

---

There's only really one good reason why we need another Star Trek series:

Because there are plenty of fans just waiting for one, sufficient to produce ample viewer turnout.

However, you have to remember that it's not just about revenue and profit in a vacuum ... it's about opportunity cost.

A network might be able to make money running a new Star Trek series, but with the number of hours in the day being finite, they'd have an opportunity cost problem if something else would have brought in more.

[T'Girl]

My Name Is Legion wrote:

---

No television series has ever done anything even approaching this.

Force us to become better? No never. But a mere television show can be a platform for criticism and examination of our culture (and other cultures), and science fiction - with it's aliens and monsters - can be very good at this.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer was (initially) about the difficulty of teenagers in the environment of High School, and not actually about real monsters, it dealt with the matter through metaphors.

Star Trek through the years has been used for social commentary and also advocacy, sometimes with hit or miss results.

Gene Roddenberry created the prime directive as a statement about America's involvement in the Vietnam War. But some of his efforts in that direction backfired, A Private Little War comes off a more of a endorsement of American involvement, rather than a advocacy for withdrawal.

[Temis the Vorta]

TiberiusMaximus wrote:

---

Prepare the airlock.

You're up, Jon.

[CaptainMatt]

Hey what is this? Can't Star Trek and Star Wars fans get along? Whatever happened to the concept of IDIC?

[gazomg]

What would a new trek series offer......?

We had the ship boldly going out in adventure on most accasions, enterprise covered the early period, DS9 the stationary show, dont think a mirror universe series would be any good as its only ok for an odd episode.
We had voyager doing the lost elsewhere scenario, the movied covered time travel along with numerous episodes of trek, so what exactly would the premise be for a new trek series. ?

Would i like a new trek ? of course but it would have to ne right or risk diluting everything else

[GSnail]

I think it's a silly idea to think the WHOLE ENTIRE FRANCHISE will be 'diluted' or somehow messed up by a new series if it's a flop. New material can only enrich the universe.
There are tons of possible angles to explore the star trek universe. Things like, what's going on on Earth, a show set in the academy, or what people do all day in a world where they don't need money. Not everyone works in space do they?
Maybe follow a colony. Maybe follow an alien colony. An alien ship? Enemies of the Federation?
The 25th century, when they finally leave the galaxy?

[GemHaters]

I only need one reason. Because a world without Star Trek is not a world I want to be a part of. When I was just a child I'd stay up late just to watch The Next Generation, and now we have nothing but this blaspheme that JJ Abrams is pumping out...It's not right. I don't care what other people say about a "watered down series". I refuse to hear anything negative anyone has to say about it.

17. At this point there should be an entire channel dedicated to Star Trek. Channel 780 should be all Star Trek, all the time.

^This. My life would seriously be complete if that ever happened.

[Brolan]

I always chuckle when I hear people talking about "too much Trek". Apparently too much is bad for Trek but good for CSI, Law & Order, and NCIS.