STAR TREK: PIKE

[RobertScorpio]

As I have said, over and over, I am against any new series...BUT..I know there are many who do want a trek TV show. I have a compromise, and maybe I am stepping on toes and someone already suggested this, so I am sorry if I am repeating an idea..

STAR TREK : PIKE. This show would, yes, have to take place in TREK XI's universe, and would have to be produced by JJ and his dudes. It would show us Pike's career in the past (Narrated by Greenwood) and ..well..thats it. This is THE ONLY trek series I would actually watch..any show that takes place at the same time as TREK XI, on another ship or something like that, would be A VERY bad idea....IMO.

PIKE, if done right, with class, would be good and cool and could even help set up the next movie.

Rob

What do you think?

By the way, I voted for the one where it says I am such a smart guy...how could I not?

 

[Ward Fowler]

The Cage is one of my favorite episodes and I've always been interested in the character of Pike so I think that could be a great show if the idea were executed properly. Production design would be important. Since it would be set in the past the bridge could look a lot different from the newest one (which I didn't care for). An expensive-looking sleek retro-future look could work on that sort of show. Writing would also be important. Avoiding the mistakes of Enterprise would help. Rather than sexing it up and dumbing it down the writers could develop a mix of smart science-fiction and real action-adventure. If that's how it were done I'd love to see it. The only thing I would feel iffy on is the narration. Captain's Logs aside, I don't know how well that would fit within the framework of Star Trek.

 

[RobertScorpio]

The Cage is one of my favorite episodes and I've always been interested in the character of Pike so I think that could be a great show if the idea were executed properly. Production design would be important. Since it would be set in the past the bridge could look a lot different from the newest one (which I didn't care for). An expensive-looking sleek retro-future look could work on that sort of show. Writing would also be important. Avoiding the mistakes of Enterprise would help. Rather than sexing it up and dumbing it down the writers could develop a mix of smart science-fiction and real action-adventure. If that's how it were done I'd love to see it. The only thing I would feel iffy on is the narration. Captain's Logs aside, I don't know how well that would fit within the framework of Star Trek.

Love it Ward..and yes, retro look, but which could easily be seen as tech maybe 20 years before TREK XI...and I agree TOTALLY on the writing. JJ would have to get some serious damn writers that go highbrow. And, this may sound strange, but avoid being too preachy. Inspire the masses with new ideas, and they will watch...

Rob

 

[regemet]

Seams like a goiod idea. One thing they must include is Cmdr Margo Chapple (No One) and yoeman Janet Colt

 

[Ward Fowler]

And, this may sound strange, but avoid being too preachy. Inspire the masses with new ideas, and they will watch...

It doesn't sound strange to me at all. I think in this day and age writers can get their "message", if they have one, across with more subtlety than in the past. Plus being too preachy can really turn an audience away. Smart and fun should be the mantra when writing such a show.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Steer the good ship Enterprise back to the Prime Universe... with its TNG future and ENT history

...but keep Bruce Greenwood as Christopher Pike.

All that Nero altered/nu universe crap, just ignore it. Let JJ Abrams and his writers have that all to themselves. A place without Vulcan (breaks my heart) and its pick n' mix replay of stolen moments.

I'll make believe whatever revisions are made to The Cage-era look, as the way it was always supposed to look. Repeat after me: We just weren't examining those sets from 1964 close enough.

Please fix all that for me, somebody...

 

[RobertScorpio]

Steer the good ship Enterprise back to the Prime Universe... with its TNG future and ENT history

...but keep Bruce Greenwood as Christopher Pike.

All that Nero altered/nu universe crap, just ignore it. Let JJ Abrams and his writers have that all to themselves. A place without Vulcan (breaks my heart) and its pick n' mix replay of stolen moments.

I'll make believe whatever revisions are made to The Cage-era look, as the way it was always supposed to look. Repeat after me: We just weren't examining those sets from 1964 close enough.

Please fix all that for me, somebody...

Sorry Chris..but leaving that bloated mess of a universe for this new one was the best thing they could ever do...you have 600+ hours of that universe to entertain you..not me.

Pike..in this new universe..or not at all..

Rob

 

[ChristopherPike]

Sorry Chris..but leaving that bloated mess of a universe for this new one was the best thing they could ever do...you have 600+ hours of that universe to entertain you..not me.

Pike..in this new universe..or not at all..

The new film could easily have been a prequel, since all audiences seem to have been clamouring for was a return to Kirk and Spock... even at the expense of not actually telling an origin story.

Bloated mess? Or just too much of a creative challenge to keep old fans like me happy? Harve Bennett didn't seem to think so back in 1990. That past has always been a joy for me to see being pieced together, or with enough wiggle room to allow theories to arise which explain contradictory references.

Abandon that rich and rewarding continuity and quite frankly, I'm out.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Sorry Chris..but leaving that bloated mess of a universe for this new one was the best thing they could ever do...you have 600+ hours of that universe to entertain you..not me.

Pike..in this new universe..or not at all..

The new film could easily have been a prequel, since all audiences seem to have been clamouring for was a return to Kirk and Spock... even at the expense of not actually telling an origin story.

Bloated mess? Or just too much of a creative challenge to keep old fans like me happy? Harve Bennett didn't seem to think so back in 1990. That past has always been a joy for me to see being pieced together, or with enough wiggle room to allow theories to arise which explain contradictory references.

Abandon that rich and rewarding continuity and quite frankly, I'm out.

You're out..but much of fandom was out too by the time Enterprise and Voyager could barely get 2million viewers, and Nemesis and Insurrection tanked...numbers are numbers, and anyway you count them, XI was exactly what the doctor ordered..

Rob

 

[Captaindemotion]

Bloated mess? Or just too much of a creative challenge to keep old fans like me happy? Harve Bennett didn't seem to think so back in 1990. That past has always been a joy for me to see being pieced together, or with enough wiggle room to allow theories to arise which explain contradictory references.

Abandon that rich and rewarding continuity and quite frankly, I'm out.

Bennett had only to contend with 3 seasons and 1 movie which were generally quite vague on the past - even to the extent of contradicting when exactly Star Trek was set. Different matter when you're expected to factor in a further 9 movies and 4 tv series, spanning 25 seasons. I don't think that allows wiggle room, it's a straitjacket.

I would have loved to see the origins of the 'real' ST universe - an origin story predating WNMHGB etc. But that was never going to happen. So left with a choice, I'd take what we did get over no ST at all. I thought the plot device used was a novel way of re-starting the franchise and allowing them to tell new stories, unencumbered by continuity and canon issues but whilst still recognising the intricate backstory that had come before.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Bloated mess? Or just too much of a creative challenge to keep old fans like me happy? Harve Bennett didn't seem to think so back in 1990. That past has always been a joy for me to see being pieced together, or with enough wiggle room to allow theories to arise which explain contradictory references.

Abandon that rich and rewarding continuity and quite frankly, I'm out.

Bennett had only to contend with 3 seasons and 1 movie which were generally quite vague on the past - even to the extent of contradicting when exactly Star Trek was set. Different matter when you're expected to factor in a further 9 movies and 4 tv series, spanning 25 seasons. I don't think that allows wiggle room, it's a straitjacket.

I would have loved to see the origins of the 'real' ST universe - an origin story predating WNMHGB etc. But that was never going to happen. So left with a choice, I'd take what we did get over no ST at all. I thought the plot device used was a novel way of re-starting the franchise and allowing them to tell new stories, unencumbered by continuity and canon issues but whilst still recognising the intricate backstory that had come before.

I'd argue the situation is absolutely no different than in 1990. The only care and attention that needed to be paid was to references in 80 episodes and 6 movies about the personal histories of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest, with some retrospective referencing to the dating system established for TNG onwards. Modern Star Trek did its own thing well over a century after, or before and was exceptionally careful not to contradict the show to which it owed its existence.

Only two things made the makers of the movie abandon the original continuity:

1. an unwillingness to plot landmark events in these characters' pre-Original Series lives and then weave a story around that. This led to the main flaw of the film... an issue of too much too soon... squeezing their first adventure into a bite size action-movie chunk and devoting the plot (such as it was) to bit part villain Nero, burning away many of those unseen events which formed the characters I knew and loved, Kirk being the prime example. A person is the essence of the life he's led (even the formative stages), and when that changes that they cease to be who they were.

2. a lack of imagination in some sections of the fanbase, having already decried Enterprise for looking too advanced (a fallacy for the most part), the producers felt the need to explain every god-damn change... instead of remembering that the look of the sets especially in the films (where gaps in production often spanned years) was never particularly consistent when examined closely. Whatever the Enterprise's appearance in a traditional prequel tale, it could've been explained in the final part of a film trilogy, a refit after Kirk's first trial by fire and closing out with him earning his historic 5-year mission and it under going a refit into the WNMHGB look. Making the audience wait for that golden moment, the last piece in a puzzle slotting into place, as Star Wars did for the Vader character to arise.

The love for the finer true to Star Trek details were absent in the film I saw. Although I won't deny they made an effort, it was just directing towards defending their own decisions to throw out important aspects, in order to do it their way... instead of sticking to the ground rules in somebody else's playground. It's makers delighted in taking away everything I loved about Star Trek, replacing it with a something that just went through a shopping list of trademark moves and catchphrases. It felt like a completely souless Frankenstein's monster of a movie... The fact it made so much money can now be used as an excuse to make several sequels based on this hollowed-out formula.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Pike's a generic space cowboy type character. There's no particular reason to build a show around him.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Pike's a generic space cowboy type character. There's no particular reason to build a show around him.

Ummm..sure there is. If its based on the one we saw in the movie. I have friends, non-trek fans, who thought he was the best part of the movie. He's the one character in that movie, if told restrospect, could do quite well where ENTERPRISE felled...bridge any new show with what is now one of TREK's greatest successes..XI.

The logic is all there; as it should be, since I thought of it.

Rob

 

[RobertScorpio]

Bloated mess? Or just too much of a creative challenge to keep old fans like me happy? Harve Bennett didn't seem to think so back in 1990. That past has always been a joy for me to see being pieced together, or with enough wiggle room to allow theories to arise which explain contradictory references.

Abandon that rich and rewarding continuity and quite frankly, I'm out.

Bennett had only to contend with 3 seasons and 1 movie which were generally quite vague on the past - even to the extent of contradicting when exactly Star Trek was set. Different matter when you're expected to factor in a further 9 movies and 4 tv series, spanning 25 seasons. I don't think that allows wiggle room, it's a straitjacket.

I would have loved to see the origins of the 'real' ST universe - an origin story predating WNMHGB etc. But that was never going to happen. So left with a choice, I'd take what we did get over no ST at all. I thought the plot device used was a novel way of re-starting the franchise and allowing them to tell new stories, unencumbered by continuity and canon issues but whilst still recognising the intricate backstory that had come before.

You hang in there demotion..TREK fans love to hold up that continuity, while ignoring the fact it was all hosed up by some elements of the movies, AND, Enterprise...But, as I said before XI, I will say it now; Paramount is willing to lose those who cling to that mess in order to attract new fans. And by jettisoning that old continuity he will do just that..and..already has.

Rob

 

[CaptainStoner]

Would we have shouting Spock in Star Trek: Pike?

I can see it more as an Anime mini-series kind of thing. Probably without Spock shouting. But a lot more tense, having a lot harder time with the human elements.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Pike's a generic space cowboy type character. There's no particular reason to build a show around him.

One could say the same about James T. Kirk.

Would we have shouting Spock in Star Trek: Pike?

No, because Spock wasn't a part of Pike's crew on his other ship in this continuity. And that 'other ship' cant be Enterprise, since Pike was established as having gotten her in the movie.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Pike's a generic space cowboy type character. There's no particular reason to build a show around him.

One could say the same about James T. Kirk.

Would we have shouting Spock in Star Trek: Pike?

No, because Spock wasn't a part of Pike's crew on his other ship in this continuity. And that 'other ship' cant be Enterprise, since Pike was established as having gotten her in the movie.

Exactly..all of the bloated continuity was, thankfully, erased for a leaner universe ready to tell new adventures. And, if you like the old universe, you have 11 movies and 600 hours of TV episodes. If that can't satisfy you old farts, then talk to the hand.

Rob

 

[GhostFaceSaint]

Quinto would have to be on the show to satisfy me and a lot of the other fans.

 

[Captain Pike]

Needless to say, I like it!

 

[RobertScorpio]

Quinto would have to be on the show to satisfy me and a lot of the other fans.

I would be against QUINTO being in it. It will do exactly what the later trek movies did, delute the product since the movies/tv shows were taking place at the same time. Just made the movies, in the general public's perception, just two-hour episodes at the movies. And who could blame them since the TV sets were often used in those movies...and the finished product, movie product, wasn't even as good as an average TREK episode..

Rob