Future Trek vs New Star Wars

[fireproof78]

The thing is, the prime universe is broken. Transporters can beam anywhere by 2387, they had commbadge-sized transporters several years earlier in Nemesis... unless some catastrophe puts Trek back in it's own equivalent of the stone age, we'll just have muppets not using the stuff at their fingertips (which admittedly has already been an issue since TOS and TNG... but is now 100x worse)

Of course, they could run with it and make humans into technologically-assisted proto-Q's. Transporter pips (Nemesis) linked to mind chips (Endgame), beaming anywhere (ST'09) and curing ageing and illness each teleport (Unnatural Selection), and even add in drug-assisted telekinetic powers (Plato's Stepchildren). Time travel or universe hopping via manipulation of the transporter units (Past Tense, Broken Mirror) and hey presto! Post-human Godmode Trek. I'd watch a show about the first generation adjusting to a new way of life.

NuTrek is broken too. They can beam across the quadrant, a handheld communicator can transmit across multiple sectors, warp drive gets you from Earth to Vulcan in around a minute, shields are about as useful as a chocolate fireguard, death has been cured, and the temporal event in the 2230s has somehow rippled back through time and changed events from before it ever happened.

If they decided to make more Trek then they should just wipe the slate clean and do a proper reboot.

You do realise that this means no more Trek, right ?

Then I’d be happy with the proper Trek we got and can forget about the twaddle coming out from the cinema in recent years. Besides, there are a lot of fanfilms doing some pretty great story-telling (I am more interested and enthused about Axanar than NuTrek 3).

Not necessarily. Back to the Prime 23rd century, still plenty to be explored there, or the lost era between TUC and TNG, lots of story fodder to be taken advantage of

Yes, being restricted by future events is always such a great idea.

See response to the other post above to avoid this.

A minor quibble-death is not cured, so much as they were able to save Kirk. There is no indication that Khan's replicated cells would be an endless supply, without the original host. Also, Trek has cured death before and then forgot about it, so I don't imagine Khan's blood mattering for too long. Heck, Kirk and company went to the edge of the galaxy and the center of the galaxy in their travels, as well the fact that Picard and Co. went to another galaxy, so I don't mind other technological changes

I don't mind going back to TOS, but I think that the 25th century basis would provide a more open frontier type mentality, which would be back TOS's roots as a Western type show.

 

[Dukhat]

But without Voyager, the sexy looking Nova and Prometheus class might've never been made, and the Enterprise-E might've looked significantly different (if she was invented at all).

Not seeing the logic here. First of all, the design of the Enterprise-E had nothing whatsoever to do with whether VOY and ENT existed or not. And as for the Nova and Prometheus, we saw them each a total of two times, the second being the last episode before the show ended. Hardly a measure of the need for the show to have existed. Also, "sexiness" is in the eye of the beholder.

And not only did Enterprise have it's moments, but I felt that Scott Bakula made an excellent Trek captain, and the series was starting to hit it's stride when it was cancelled!

And if it had worked straight out of the gate, then it probably wouldn't have needed to be cancelled. But it didn't. And honestly, televised Trek was already on a downhill slope. I honestly don't think that even the best Trekkie nerdage-packed series would have survived a network that hated spending so much money to produce a show that catered only to a relatively small percentage of viewers.

And Scott Bakula sucked as captain. Connor Trineer would have worked much better in the role.

So you'll have to forgive me when I say: I resent that statement!

You're welcome to resent it. However, I stand by what I wrote.

 

[mos6507]

Ever since someone postulated Christopher Nolan taking over Trek I have come to believe this would be the best outcome. Full reboot via Christopher Nolan.

 

[Orphalesion]

I'm sick of all this rebooting that's going on everywhere. Go forward, not back! And I'm no fan of the TOS characters, they don't interest me.

 

[JES]

But without Voyager, the sexy looking Nova and Prometheus class might've never been made, and the Enterprise-E might've looked significantly different (if she was invented at all).

Not seeing the logic here. First of all, the design of the Enterprise-E had nothing whatsoever to do with whether VOY and ENT existed or not. And as for the Nova and Prometheus, we saw them each a total of two times, the second being the last episode before the show ended. Hardly a measure of the need for the show to have existed. Also, "sexiness" is in the eye of the beholder.

So you wouldn't of cared if the Nova or Prometheus ever happened.
Come to think of it, the Sovereign might've influenced the Nova and Prometheus, not the other way around.

Well, they do matter to me, seeing as how they have influenced my designs.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm sick of all this rebooting that's going on everywhere. Go forward, not back! And I'm no fan of the TOS characters, they don't interest me.

A reboot doesn't mean you go back to the TOS characters, necessarily. You can reboot the franchise and just establish everything new, without being beholden to prior continuity or history, including characters. Now, some may argue that Abrams Trek did that, but its just an alternate history (however you interpret that) where we still have characters from the Prime Time line existing, and some events and relationships still unfolding in particular ways.

A full reboot would be the original concepts of TOS (i.e. positive future, frontier of space, multi-cultural crew, technology as a beneficial tool, etc) without any history.

 

[Orphalesion]

^ As long as we don't go back to Kirk and Spock, I might actually be interested, though I'd prefer if they also leave out the bright red/yellow/green coloured sweaters/mini dresses as uniforms.
And that they include species that were around after TOS. As much as I like the Andorians I also like the Bolians and Bajorans, the Betazoids and the El-Aurians, the Ocampas, the Trills, the Cardassians etc. etc.
A real reboot could include many/all of them as the history would be re-written. And they could use that opportunity to give some of the very human-looking species (particularly Betazoids, Trills and El-Aurians) a more alien look.

 

[JES]

I imagine that many die-hard fans would be against that however.

"Why not just simply make it separate from Star Trek completely" they'd probably say.

 

[BillJ]

I imagine that many die-hard fans would be against that however.

"Why not just simply make it separate from Star Trek completely" they'd probably say.

Pretty much where I stand. If it isn't going to be Star Trek, why call it Star Trek?

 

[T'Girl]

I'd prefer if they also leave out the bright red/yellow/green coloured sweaters

What sweaters?

 

[Orphalesion]

Pretty much where I stand. If it isn't going to be Star Trek, why call it Star Trek?

Star Trek isn't just TOS.

I'd prefer if they also leave out the bright red/yellow/green coloured sweaters

What sweaters?

The horrid things that the men wore as "uniforms" in TOS.

 

[T'Girl]

The horrid things that the men wore as "uniforms" in TOS.

Here in the Americas (where the show was made) we refer to those type of garments simply as "shirts."

 

[fireproof78]

Pretty much where I stand. If it isn't going to be Star Trek, why call it Star Trek?

Star Trek isn't just TOS.

I'd prefer if they also leave out the bright red/yellow/green coloured sweaters

What sweaters?

The horrid things that the men wore as "uniforms" in TOS.

At least they look far more comfortable than the TNG ones, though the DS9 was not bad

A reboot would a fine but the Trek idea of more positive future would be something to be more of cornerstone, more than any thing else. It's not about Kirk or Spock, or Picard and Data, Archer and T'Pol. It's about the idea of humanity and other races coming together to solve problems, and explore something new.

That's why I say that a reboot could work, but is not necessary. Just like it really isn't necessary to reboot Star Wars-you just move the timeline.

With Trek, I think a new series would really need to be in the future, away from known history, known characters so that the Kirk vs. Picard, my Trek vs. your Trek, debates don't happen at the drop of a hat.

I really think any new series needs to look at some of the inspiring material for TOS to build a new series from, and see how it impacted the story. Start there, with the basics-new frontier, action adventure, positive technological advancement, and cooperation among different groups of people. Great bits to start from

 

[Orphalesion]

Here in the Americas (where the show was made) we refer to those type of garments simply as "shirts."

Isn't that subjective? Shirt can be almost any type of top. In my eyes the TNG thins are long sleeved and thick-looking enough to pass as a sort of sweater.

A reboot would a fine but the Trek idea of more positive future would be something to be more of cornerstone, more than any thing else. It's not about Kirk or Spock, or Picard and Data, Archer and T'Pol. It's about the idea of humanity and other races coming together to solve problems, and explore something new.

That's why I say that a reboot could work, but is not necessary. Just like it really isn't necessary to reboot Star Wars-you just move the timeline.

With Trek, I think a new series would really need to be in the future, away from known history, known characters so that the Kirk vs. Picard, my Trek vs. your Trek, debates don't happen at the drop of a hat.

I really think any new series needs to look at some of the inspiring material for TOS to build a new series from, and see how it impacted the story. Start there, with the basics-new frontier, action adventure, positive technological advancement, and cooperation among different groups of people. Great bits to start from

I agree. As I always say move ahead not back.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I'm sick of all this rebooting that's going on everywhere. Go forward, not back! And I'm no fan of the TOS characters, they don't interest me.

If you really want to "go forward," that should mean leaving the Berman crap in the dust, too. His reign of (largely) dreary hackwork pushed the franchise to the brink of irrelevance (hence the need of a reboot). If ST moves in a new direction, let be a new direction, as the Berman series wore ST down to flaccid, finger wagging nonsense that pushed audiences away.

 

[Dukhat]

So you wouldn't of cared if the Nova or Prometheus ever happened.

It has nothing to do with whether I care about a ship design nor not, as ship designs don't influence whether I'm going to watch the show or not. If it did, I would never have watched the Abrams films because I hate the nuEnterprise design.

 

[BillJ]

I'm sick of all this rebooting that's going on everywhere. Go forward, not back! And I'm no fan of the TOS characters, they don't interest me.

If you really want to "go forward," that should mean leaving the Berman crap in the dust, too. His reign of (largely) dreary hackwork pushed the franchise to the brink of irrelevance (hence the need of a reboot). If ST moves in a new direction, let be a new direction, as the Berman series wore ST down to flaccid, finger wagging nonsense that pushed audiences away.

If someone really wanted to move forward, they would move forward towards a new property. Not rehashing Trek elements again and again and again. Some people treat Star Trek like a security blanket.

 

[BillJ]

Pretty much where I stand. If it isn't going to be Star Trek, why call it Star Trek?

Star Trek isn't just TOS.

But Star Trek: The Original Series is the core material and will heavily influence anything done going forward. For one simple reason, it still has the most relevance to general audiences. The one's you need to have a successful series/movie.

Any one that thinks CBS is going to spinoff from a series or movies that were roundly rejected by audiences at the end, isn't thinking clearly. That doesn't even take into account the fact that Trek ratings immediately began a long descent immediately after TNG went off the air.

 

[Orphalesion]

If you really want to "go forward," that should mean leaving the Berman crap in the dust, too. His reign of (largely) dreary hackwork pushed the franchise to the brink of irrelevance (hence the need of a reboot). If ST moves in a new direction, let be a new direction, as the Berman series wore ST down to flaccid, finger wagging nonsense that pushed audiences away.

Yes. That's what I want. On what occasion have I said I wanted TNG/DS9/Voy/ENT: the remake?
Let all fade into history, and move on. A new ship, a new crew, a new century.

If someone really wanted to move forward, they would move forward towards a new property. Not rehashing Trek elements again and again and again. Some people treat Star Trek like a security blanket.

I basically want a scifi show, any scifi show with aliens and planets and things. Yet the general audience and Hollywood the way it works atm is more likely to accept a spin-off of an existing property than a new one (sadly) and ST is possibly the best known SciFi television property.

But Star Trek: The Original Series is the core material and will heavily influence anything done going forward. For one simple reason, it still has the most relevance to general audiences. The one's you need to have a successful series/movie.

Any one that thinks CBS is going to spinoff from a series or movies that were roundly rejected by audiences at the end, isn't thinking clearly. That doesn't even take into account the fact that Trek ratings immediately began a long descent immediately after TNG went off the air.

So now I'm not thinking clearly, wow that's very nice of you.

Influence is good and fine, eternally being chained to the TOS crew because "they were the first" is not.

I know ST wasn't very good at the end, Voyager was abysmal (although the concept was very good), ENT never found its direction (and that temporal cold war idea was just stupid)
But I would still prefer if it had moved on to the next century than strand us back with the gold shirted redneck.

It is a general, and very negative, trend in our society atm that we tend to look back rather than forwards. Everything gets rebooted, everything gets taken "back to its roots", ignoring everything good that has been told since because "it's not the original".

As for the ratings, TOS had to contend with much less competition in networks or other scifi shows (wasn't it pretty much the only space drama that ran during its time?) The later ST series simply were not the big fish in the small pond anymore and especially DS9 and VOY did not only compete with other properties for viewers, but against one another for a while.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

It is a general, and very negative, trend in our society atm that we tend to look back rather than forwards. Everything gets rebooted, everything gets taken "back to its roots", ignoring everything good that has been told since because "it's not the original".

The difference with Star Trek as a franchise is that the Berman series all looked forward, with few references to TOS. Each series to follow added more distance than the last, to the point where the last (Enterprise) reimagined/retconned, etc. so much, that it sent a clear message that the jewel of the ST crown was not so welcome.

On that note, I do not consider the TOS-themed "In a Mirror, Darkly" evidence of TOS love, as it seemed to be the end result of an attempted ratings grab for a series that strayed as far it desired--and suffered for it. That should tell anyone that the advocates of Berman's aggressive world changing were wrong, otherwise we would be on TNG film #7 and finally seeing DS9 & Voyager films going into production.

As for the ratings, TOS had to contend with much less competition in networks or other scifi shows (wasn't it pretty much the only space drama that ran during its time?) The later ST series simply were not the big fish in the small pond anymore and especially DS9 and VOY did not only compete with other properties for viewers, but against one another for a while.

If you mean competition as in sci-fi drama no matter the timeslot, then there were other sci-fi series to compete for audiences receptive to the genre. Between '66 & ''69, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, The Invaders, The Time Tunnel, Land of the Giants, and even Lost in Space were all on the air, but if one sought serious sci-fi, TOS was the winner. Occasionally, The Invaders produced strong stories, but it fell into a formula robbing it of greater story opportunities.