RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,889
Posts: 5,476,380
Members: 25,049
Currently online: 699
Newest member: RikersBeard

TrekToday headlines

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Future of Trek

Future of Trek Discussion of future Trek projects.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 4 2013, 12:52 AM   #361
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
^I agree.

But don't forget to add 'new writers' and 'new story' to that. Otherwise, some people will assume going back to the Prime timeline only means repeating the new alien of the week theme.
Good points about the necessity of new writers and new stories. I'd also add to that new ideas and concepts would be necessary too. Though, there does have to be some balance in a new tv series between a series and/or seasonal arc and standalone episodes as well as a balance between "seeking new life and new civilizations" and seeing familiar species such as Romulans and Klingons. Exploring new directions for 25th century Romulans, Klingons, etc. to take could be just as interesting to viewers as exploring whole new alien civilizations so a good variety of different types and styles of episodes would be essential. Also, there's the danger of just becoming Star Trek: The Next Next Generation to be avoided, but despite some similarities being unavoidable the general trope is avoidable.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 10:48 AM   #362
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
I agree with the rest of your post, mostly, but...
Belz... wrote: View Post
That's ridiculous. Into Darkness has almost NONE of the story of any other Trek movie.
Explain that.
You want me to explain the absense of something ? I'm not sure how I'd do that. Rather, why don't you explain why you think I'm wrong ?
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 10:48 AM   #363
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Kirk the Jerk wrote: View Post
Almost NONE? I suggest you watch TWOK again if you're to stand by that comment.
Same comment: if you want to show that I'm wrong, you're going to have to put some effort into it. As fas as I know, the discovery of Khan and the bit with Spock and Kirk in the engine core are the only portions of the story that are similar in any way. There's nothing else in the story that's lifted from any other Trek story.

I don't ever recall watching an episode or movie that didn't have at least some sort of back story. Please tell me if I'm wrong.
That's not what you said. You said Trek is ABOUT a story, not that it has one.

I can think of hundreds of unexplored ideas etc.
In any timeline. What's special about the old one ? Bear in mind that they already made retcons about the old timeline in TNG and First Contact, Enterprise, etc.

Well done, I'm not saying we have to learn specific facts in a documentary way, I'm saying they could have done a great back story, introduced us to something different other than the action we were watching on screen. It felt hollow to me and if it didn't to you then that's great but I'm just giving my opinion.
Well in that case we have nothing to argue about. We simply disagree on that question.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 12:22 PM   #364
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Location: comfortably residing in the meat packing district
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Belz... wrote: View Post
There's nothing else in the story that's lifted from any other Trek story.
Beaming torpedoes into a enemy ship and then exploding them inside is lifted from a Voyager episode, except the Voyager epiosde just used one.

T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 12:28 PM   #365
Shazam!
Rear Admiral
 
Shazam!'s Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Belz... wrote: View Post
As fas as I know, the discovery of Khan and the bit with Spock and Kirk in the engine core are the only portions of the story that are similar in any way. There's nothing else in the story that's lifted from any other Trek story.
This is almost a parody post.
Shazam! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:49 PM   #366
anh165
Commander
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Shazam! wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post
As fas as I know, the discovery of Khan and the bit with Spock and Kirk in the engine core are the only portions of the story that are similar in any way. There's nothing else in the story that's lifted from any other Trek story.
This is almost a parody post.
Rubbish.

Belz is correct, the warp core scene is about the only clear remake / tribute of previous Trek movie, the rest of it is about as original as it gets.

Any similarities are unintentional and purely co-incidental etc
__________________
No animals were harmed during posting ...
anh165 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:54 PM   #367
Kirk the Jerk
Rear Admiral
 
Kirk the Jerk's Avatar
 
Location: Nottingham
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Same comment: if you want to show that I'm wrong, you're going to have to put some effort into it. As fas as I know, the discovery of Khan and the bit with Spock and Kirk in the engine core are the only portions of the story that are similar in any way. There's nothing else in the story that's lifted from any other Trek story.
You were the one who challenged my comment in the first place so surely it's you that has to put in the effort to prove me wrong? Not just say I'm wrong by saying its about a younger Kirk and Spock etc.

Wow, So as far as you know SECTION 31 has never been mentioned in any other trek story? Thats just one example, there are many many more. The whole KHHHAAANNN line was certainly lifted... Badly.

Well in that case we have nothing to argue about. We simply disagree on that question.
I don't particularly come on here for an argument.
Kirk the Jerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:55 PM   #368
bbjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bbjeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Belz... wrote: View Post
Kirk the Jerk wrote: View Post
I'm all for going back personally, rather than sitting through another Into Darkness, which basically used the same story and just switched characters when it came to 'Who dies of radiation poisoning' and piled in a load of CGI explosions etc.
That's ridiculous. Into Darkness has almost NONE of the story of any other Trek movie.
I liked Into Darkness. I took it as a homage movie for seasoned trekkies and a catch up for newbies. With that said, you say it has almost NONE of the story of any Trek movies, as if NuKirk wasn't following TOS Kirk's style, or that Klingon/Human relations weren't shaky, or that section 31 didn't exist, or that Carol wasn't standing up there, or that Starfleet Headquarters wasn't in San Fransisco, or that the Admirals weren't using the same Admiral outfits we've seen before, or that Spock didn't do a mind meld, or that they didn't quickly bring up Harcourt Mudd and that Mudd incident (I caught that in theaters, me and another.). I can go on but hopefully you get the point.

Last edited by bbjeg; September 4 2013 at 04:44 PM.
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 04:06 PM   #369
Kirk the Jerk
Rear Admiral
 
Kirk the Jerk's Avatar
 
Location: Nottingham
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post
Kirk the Jerk wrote: View Post
I'm all for going back personally, rather than sitting through another Into Darkness, which basically used the same story and just switched characters when it came to 'Who dies of radiation poisoning' and piled in a load of CGI explosions etc.
That's ridiculous. Into Darkness has almost NONE of the story of any other Trek movie.
I liked Into Darkness. I took it as a homage movie for seasoned trekkies and a catch up for newbies. With that said, you say it has almost NONE of the story of any Trek movies, as if NuKirk wasn't following TOS Kirk's style, or that Klingon/Human relations weren't shaky, or that section 31 didn't exist, or that Carol wasn't standing up there, or that Starfleet Headquarters wasn't in San Fransisco, or that the Admirals weren't using the same Admiral outfits we've seen before, or that Spock didn't do a mind meld, or that the didn't quickly bring up Harcourt Mudd and that Mudd incident (I caught that in theaters). I can go on but hopefully you get the point.

There you go, there's the 'many many more' I was talking about
Kirk the Jerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 04:15 PM   #370
KaraBear
Captain
 
KaraBear's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
I guess you missed "Journey to Babel", "Yesteryear" and the entirety of Star Trek: Enterprise?

Name one full-blooded Vulcan that exemplifies IDIC. Even Sarek shunned his own son for eighteen years. Why? For daring to explore a little of that infinite diversity rather than stay on Vulcan.
Tuvok. He might have been annoyed when the likes of Neelix and the EMH poked him about being so logical, but he accepted and advocated diversity.
When Tuvok was young he was going to abandon the ways of logic because he fell in love with a girl in his class
KaraBear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 04:57 PM   #371
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Kirk the Jerk wrote: View Post

Wow, So as far as you know SECTION 31 has never been mentioned in any other trek story?
Hang on. Using a pre-established piece of the Star Trek universe doesn't mean you're just rehashing an old story. By that reasoning, Trek is merely repeating itself every time it brings in the Klingons or the Romulans or the Prime Directive . . . .
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 05:05 PM   #372
Kirk the Jerk
Rear Admiral
 
Kirk the Jerk's Avatar
 
Location: Nottingham
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Kirk the Jerk wrote: View Post

Wow, So as far as you know SECTION 31 has never been mentioned in any other trek story?
Hang on. Using a pre-established piece of the Star Trek universe doesn't mean you're just rehashing an old story. By that reasoning, Trek is merely repeating itself every time it brings in the Klingons or the Romulans or the Prime Directive . . . .
No I was simply replying to the comment that Into Darkness hasn't Lifted ANYTHING other than Khan or the Core scene.
Kirk the Jerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 05:49 PM   #373
Kirk the Jerk
Rear Admiral
 
Kirk the Jerk's Avatar
 
Location: Nottingham
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

My whole point was about it being lazy. They could still have paid homage to older trek fans but not by recreating those scenes and recreating Khan. They did it well in 2009 at least. It could have been a completely different Villian and it would have felt better to me at least. That's what I was getting at in the first place.

Last edited by Kirk the Jerk; September 4 2013 at 05:59 PM.
Kirk the Jerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 09:02 PM   #374
Brainsucker
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Beyerstein wrote: View Post
I'm just mostly wondering since they just rated Star Trek Into Darkness the worst of all the Trek movies at the Vegas con.

And, it also feel somewhat that when they did the '09 reboot, they wanted to to a big coming together of the original crew origin story, but even the writers had no real plans of what to do or where to go after that.
A dangerous statement for the survival of Star Trek Franchise. If the majority of Star Trek Hardcore fans want that way, then it is the time for Star Trek to move on.
Brainsucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 09:17 PM   #375
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

That silly Vegas poll by no means represented the majority of fans. It was a hundred people at the convention attended by thousands. (Just to put things in perspective, there are currently over five hundred fans online at this very board.)

And the "Hardcore Fans" are only a tiny segment of the movie-going audience to begin with . . .
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
prime trek

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.