I've long thought that a good variation on the basic exploration premise would be to minimize the scale...set it on a roughly Millennium Falcon-scale scout ship where the main cast were the entire crew.
I think David Gerrold made a similar pitch in The World of Star Trek.I've long thought that a good variation on the basic exploration premise would be to minimize the scale...set it on a roughly Millennium Falcon-scale scout ship where the main cast were the entire crew.
Stargate tried that already, even had an entire series dedicated to inter-galactic travel and exploration.... didn't work out so well.
Only show that came close to doing it well without becoming overwhelming and a mess was Andromeda.
Really? I LOVE "Andromeda," but my biggest peeve with the show was that I felt it didn't utilize the three galaxies concept. It felt no different than all the other sci-fi shows that took place in one galaxy. I don't recall the three galaxies being distinctive from each other in any way. Maybe I missed something though.
That is an awesome idea. The producers and writers would be able to do so much with a premise like that.95% of Star Trek takes place within one galaxy. It's a big universe. The next Trek series ought to embrace the exploration aspect. Take the first two seasons to do a reverse Voyager, with the ship getting further and further from Earth. Gradually we see less and less of the Star Trek universe we love, until eventually we are gone. The Milky Way Galaxy and the Quadrants with Vulcans, Klingons, Borg, and Kaizon are distant memories. Season 7 of this new show, all communications are lost..........
........
.......
......
.....
....
...
..
.
.
.
No, you're correct. I guess in thinking back, they really didn't showcase just how different three galaxies could (should?) be. The ease with which they traveled between them also felt no different than any travel between star systems. I suppose my memory of that show wants it to be better than perhaps it was.
Just out of curiosity, why the strong ant-Klingon sentiment?I used to be against the idea of leaving the galaxy. But, if it gets rid of the fucking Klingons, bring it on!
Just out of curiosity, why the strong ant-Klingon sentiment?
Good point.Because they've been used to the point that they are a joke. They were overused in the spinoffs and the first thing Discovery does is give us even more Klingons.
Because they've been used to the point that they are a joke. They were overused in the spinoffs and the first thing Discovery does is give us even more Klingons.
I'd love to see something like that, with a small scout ship (something akin to the Archer-Class) out reconnoitring the area, blazing a trail for others to follow. It would be a great way to get to know a small crew, see how they play off against one another and get themselves out of tough situations without being the biggest, most powerful ship in the fleet with lots of resources and personnel at their disposal.I've long thought that a good variation on the basic exploration premise would be to minimize the scale...set it on a roughly Millennium Falcon-scale scout ship where the main cast were the entire crew.
While it would be false to say there's nothing more to learn about the Klingon, to a large extent they (as a group of characters) are some what played out. Better to bring into existence a new species with different attributes to explore and have our hero characters interact with.Just out of curiosity, why the strong ant-Klingon sentiment?
Millennium Falcon might be too small, but it would be a interesting idea to not have anyone who was a no dialog background extra walking around. Everyone aboard would be either a major or minor character.It would be a great way to get to know a small crew
Because they've been used to the point that they are a joke. They were overused in the spinoffs and the first thing Discovery does is give us even more Klingons.
But Abrams and "Discovery" just seem to use them because "Klingon" is a "classic Trek" word, and retro is in now. There is no reason the aliens that appeared in "Into Darkness" or "Discovery" had to be called "Klingons." They were a brand new race.
Not really. It set the larger backdrop of the state of the universe, and DISCO is further exploring Klingon culture.And for no reason beyond the name, if you ask me. I mean, '90s "Star Trek" had Klingons to further develop them as a fictional species for the franchise. But Abrams and "Discovery" just seem to use them because "Klingon" is a "classic Trek" word, and retro is in now. There is no reason the aliens that appeared in "Into Darkness" or "Discovery" had to be called "Klingons." They were a brand new race.
Also, if Abrams used them "because Star Trek" shall we equally condemn "red shirts" as well?
The whole "Engineer Olson" bit in ST 09 was done as a nod to the red shirt trope on an away team.to what? getting shot? - honestly i don't deem that to be necessary.
The whole "Engineer Olson" bit in ST 09 was done as a nod to the red shirt trope on an away team.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.