Trek Returning to TV in 2017!

[martok2112]

I can respect one's opinion as long as they do not try to go on the campaign to make me feel stupid for liking what I (or any others who feel as I do) like. Once you go down that road, well....it's gonna be a motherfucker of a ride for you.

I've said it before, I felt that the first JJTrek was an entertaining popcorn flick with little substance. I haven't seen much of Social Commentary, aside from some emotion at the loss of Vulcan. I can handwave the physics, the transwarp beaming and red matter as being Rule of Plot, although it really doesn't hold up to major scrutiny. What I felt really ruined the movie was the complete lack of character development - Kirk was on the verge of being expelled from the Academy, and is jumped to command of the flagship; with no prior experience, no indication of his command abilities...and the rest of the ship is crewed by his former classmates. Kids. It doesn't make any sense from a real world or fictional perspective. I don't hate the films, i just couldn't care less.
The fact that someone else enjoyed it where i nitpick doesn't bother me in the least.

Completely agree. Nitpickery doesn't bother me at all. I know for some it's fun, for others it's a way of life, but it doesn't phase me at all because of my simple philosophy:
Martok's Law of Storytelling: Logic and physics go out the window when it comes to the needs of dramatic storytelling.

I think, in order for a new Trek series to thrive, it needs:
-Sometimes quick and witty banter... perhaps ala Aaron Sorkin style.

Picard: "The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based! And if you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform! I'm going to make this simple for you, Mr. Crusher: Either you come forward and tell Admiral Brand what really took place, or I will."

Wesley: "The truth? You can't handle the truth! Captain, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know, that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"

Picard: ENSIGN CRUSHER, DID YOU ORDER A RED ALERT?!!!

 

[Squiggy]

Too bad it's rating were worse than 'Enterprise's'

Cable will do that.

 

[martok2112]

I would not mind seeing a Trek series with that cute pixie blonde redshirt chick that was seen all too briefly in Into Darkness when Kirk was pleading with Adm. Marcus, and she had one line after the Enterprise was saved from freefall.

 

[Campe]

I'm creative, not a suicidal lunatic.

"Threshold" was a nihilistic challenge to Roddenberry's utopian vision of human advancement, showing that, no matter how hard we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity, in a million years we're just going to end up as a bunch of giant salamanders.

Kor

I just about spit out my water.

Completely agree. Nitpickery doesn't bother me at all. I know for some it's fun, for others it's a way of life, but it doesn't phase me at all because of my simple philosophy:
Martok's Law of Storytelling: Logic and physics go out the window when it comes to the needs of dramatic storytelling.

As it should! Which is why if Kurtzman takes that one in a billion shot of going back into the Prime Universe, he probably will ignore 90% of canon in order to tell good stories. And that'll make the purists' heads explode.

Wait a minute. Kurtzman, if you're reading this: Prime Universe!

 

[Nerys Myk]

One idea I've booted around in the past is something I jokingly call "Star Trek: Sliders".

Every episode takes place in a different universe anyway, no chance for canon issues there, eh?

They did that already. These days it's called TOS.

 

[Jedman67]

Kirk was on the verge of being expelled from the Academy, and is jumped to command of the flagship; with no prior experience, no indication of his command abilities...and the rest of the ship is crewed by his former classmates. Kids. It doesn't make any sense from a real world or fictional perspective.

You're taking the wrong perspective. Hollywood wants youthful demographics - not a real world command and crew age and experience distribution of a fully armed and operational battleship. As Uhura says, "this is fantasy." It makes perfect sense from the reality of the cynical Marketing department.

I can respect one's opinion as long as they do not try to go on the campaign to make me feel stupid for liking what I (or any others who feel as I do) like. Once you go down that road, well....it's gonna be a motherfucker of a ride for you.

I've said it before, I felt that the first JJTrek was an entertaining popcorn flick with little substance. I haven't seen much of Social Commentary, aside from some emotion at the loss of Vulcan. I can handwave the physics, the transwarp beaming and red matter as being Rule of Plot, although it really doesn't hold up to major scrutiny. What I felt really ruined the movie was the complete lack of character development - Kirk was on the verge of being expelled from the Academy, and is jumped to command of the flagship; with no prior experience, no indication of his command abilities...and the rest of the ship is crewed by his former classmates. Kids. It doesn't make any sense from a real world or fictional perspective. I don't hate the films, i just couldn't care less.
The fact that someone else enjoyed it where i nitpick doesn't bother me in the least.

Completely agree. Nitpickery doesn't bother me at all. I know for some it's fun, for others it's a way of life, but it doesn't phase me at all because of my simple philosophy:
Martok's Law of Storytelling: Logic and physics go out the window when it comes to the needs of dramatic storytelling.

I think, in order for a new Trek series to thrive, it needs:
-Sometimes quick and witty banter... perhaps ala Aaron Sorkin style.

Picard: "The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based! And if you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform! I'm going to make this simple for you, Mr. Crusher: Either you come forward and tell Admiral Brand what really took place, or I will."

Wesley: "The truth? You can't handle the truth! Captain, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know, that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall. We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "thank you", and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"

Picard: ENSIGN CRUSHER, DID YOU ORDER A RED ALERT?!!!

 

[Ryan8bit]

Not all action-adventure is about punching and blowing things up. It's about pacing and movement and character interaction.

Well duh, that's not what it's all about, but those things you talk about were still all very present in the spinoffs. And none of it was any more obligatory than it was in TOS, which was arguably the most obligatory in their action scenes.

The pacing and movement isn't going to be like the movies, and the character interaction will hopefully be much better given more time to develop.

The spinoffs had obligatory action scenes, but many times they seemed to be an afterthought or filler.

And there was never any risk.

That counts TOS too. Status quo by the end of the episode. There is nothing unique about the spinoffs in this regard, nor even really in Abrams' movies.

 

[E-DUB]

Zombie Cheerleader: IT is hardly fair to hold a show produced half a century ago to the standards of today. TV back then was far more episodic than today. You saw a show once, maybe again in "summer reruns".

If you had told the folks making and starring in TOS that their work would still be being watched, not to mention analyzed, fifty years down the road, they would have proclaimed you fit for commitment.

As an example, "The Fugitive", a rough contemporary of TOS was widely regarded as one of, if not the, best drama of the time. They had three different actors play the main characters brother-in-law over the course of the series run. No way that would fly today.

 

[Cinema Geekly]

I thought "Into Darkness" had plenty to say about terrorism, foreign policy, pre-emptive strikes, militarism, etc.

But maybe we're so used to such issues in real life that we don't notice them when they appear in fiction.

To me, ST09 was about aspiring to be more. So many people are content with mediocrity. You certainly know plenty of people like this in real life, branded as "losers" (whether deserved or not).

Pike: 'Cause I looked up your file while you were drooling on the floor. Your aptitude tests are off the charts, so what is it? You like being the only genius-level repeat offender in the Mid-west?
Kirk: Maybe I love it.
Pike: Look, so your dad dies. You can settle for less than an ordinary life. Or do you feel like you were meant for something better? Something special?

TNG's perfect people lectured ad nauseum about human betterment, advancement, enlightenment, etc.
But ST09 showed an actual human being working toward something better.

Kor

I think a lot of the "social commentary" thing has become a little passe and a lot of people don't seem to realize it.

The prevalence of the internet has allowed everyone to have a social commentary largely unfettered and they can do it in real time.

I agree with you, STID did a great job of addressing these topics in the form of it's fictional story. But everyone had already talked those things to death on forums, twitter, and facebook years before this movie existed. Do you think this could be why people fail to see social commentary in the new films?

 

[Campe]

And there was never any risk.

That counts TOS too. Status quo by the end of the episode. There is nothing unique about the spinoffs in this regard, nor even really in Abrams' movies.

Admiral Pike would disagree with you.

 

[Amaris]

And there was never any risk.

That counts TOS too. Status quo by the end of the episode. There is nothing unique about the spinoffs in this regard, nor even really in Abrams' movies.

Admiral Pike would disagree with you.

Indeed. When Pike was murdered, that was a sock to the gut for me, because I loved the character. Hell, that whole scene was brilliant.

 

[Mudd]

Too bad it's rating were worse than 'Enterprise's'

Cable will do that.

Yeah, within its venue BSG was quite a bit more successful than Enterprise. That's why the latter is remembered as a failure and the former is not.

And, BTW, "I don't like the way it ended" does not equal "this was a bad show."

 

[Jedman67]

Hmm, George R.R. Martin should write for the new trek series. No one is safe!

 

[Mudd]

They had three different actors play the main characters brother-in-law over the course of the series run. No way that would fly today.

Except on Game Of Thrones.

 

[Ryan8bit]

And there was never any risk.

That counts TOS too. Status quo by the end of the episode. There is nothing unique about the spinoffs in this regard, nor even really in Abrams' movies.

Admiral Pike would disagree with you.

He's not, nor was ever, meant to really be a main character though. I'm talking Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Picard, Data, Worf, Riker. It doesn't matter, these guys mostly all make it out. There is no functional difference there.

 

[Mudd]

Yeah, I think we all suspected that Pike was a dead man walking from his first introduction in that Iowa bar.

Of course, the writers were able to use that to good effect when Nero captured him, so WIN!

 

[Shaka Zulu]

I came across a petition at change.org to ask CBS to set the new series in the prime universe.

Link: https://goo.gl/TEGISi

My response to this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Squiggy]

And there was never any risk.

That counts TOS too. Status quo by the end of the episode. There is nothing unique about the spinoffs in this regard, nor even really in Abrams' movies.

Admiral Pike would disagree with you.

He would, but he'd just end up beeping.

 

[JWPlatt]

As an example, "The Fugitive", a rough contemporary of TOS was widely regarded as one of, if not the, best drama of the time. They had three different actors play the main characters brother-in-law over the course of the series run. No way that would fly today.

Yeah, and Samantha Stevens was a polyandrist. Oh, wait, that might fly today.

 

[Campe]

That counts TOS too. Status quo by the end of the episode. There is nothing unique about the spinoffs in this regard, nor even really in Abrams' movies.

Admiral Pike would disagree with you.

He's not, nor was ever, meant to really be a main character though. I'm talking Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Picard, Data, Worf, Riker. It doesn't matter, these guys mostly all make it out. There is no functional difference there.

If you're going to mention the Next Gen characters, then you're completely wrong. He was meant to be a main character. THE main character, in fact. See "The Cage." Plus he was a pretty significant player in making Kirk who he was in the reboots. I'm with Rainbow Dash. It was a fucking punch in the gut.