• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Should the next Star Trek series have a major war?

If a war storyline develops naturally from the events in the series over multiple seasons, then sure.
 
If a war storyline develops naturally from the events in the series over multiple seasons, then sure.

DS9 did the same, and I really cannot find it any place with re-runs. True, I really do love to watch DS9. Still, with re-runs the shows come on Monday till Friday with nothing on the weekends. So, if you miss a day or a few you miss a great deal the background going into the building of a war.

I just do not see natural will work. It is fine going the 7 years the series runs as the show comes on once a week.
 
War is all action and battles and glory and honour and sacrifice--which has been done in Trek and loads of other TV shows.

I think the next series should be set after a war, where the focus is on rebuilding planets, ships, relationships; dealing with the fallout of conflict, the devastated aggressor having to accept help from their adversary for help, the tensions that causes between and among both sides.

Its not the big flashy NuTrek-esque style, but the hard work, dedictation and resiliency of the characters that drive storylines and plot, making it a series of substance.

War is all action and battles and glory and honour and sacrifice--which has been done in Trek and loads of other TV shows.

I think the next series should be set after a war, where the focus is on rebuilding planets, ships, relationships; dealing with the fallout of conflict, the devastated aggressor having to accept help from their adversary for help, the tensions that causes between and among both sides.

Its not the big flashy NuTrek-esque style, but the hard work, dedictation and resiliency of the characters that drive storylines and plot, making it a series of substance.

I agree. Add everything Bry said to my initial post and that's my series.

Yawn. :rolleyes:

Are we always going to be hearing the same old whine about the Abramsverse all of the time? Or, are we going to accept the fact that this had to happen, and CBS/Paramount had to do this?
 
War is all action and battles and glory and honour and sacrifice--which has been done in Trek and loads of other TV shows.

I think the next series should be set after a war, where the focus is on rebuilding planets, ships, relationships; dealing with the fallout of conflict, the devastated aggressor having to accept help from their adversary for help, the tensions that causes between and among both sides.

Its not the big flashy NuTrek-esque style, but the hard work, dedictation and resiliency of the characters that drive storylines and plot, making it a series of substance.

I agree. Add everything Bry said to my initial post and that's my series.

Yawn. :rolleyes:

Are we always going to be hearing the same old whine about the Abramsverse all of the time? Or, are we going to accept the fact that this had to happen, and CBS/Paramount had to do this?

I like NuTrek and all but leave that flashiness and lens flare for the movies. I want a series with a story. Something that builds a history instead of redoing old stories.
 
Yawn. :rolleyes:

Are we always going to be hearing the same old whine about the Abramsverse all of the time? Or, are we going to accept the fact that this had to happen, and CBS/Paramount had to do this?
Yup. I paid good money to watch it, so I want to make sure it was worth it--by voicing my dismay at NuTrek.

Also I'm not sure it had to happen. It could have been rebooted fresh, that I would've preferred (so long as it wasn't by JJ).
 
Are we always going to be hearing the same old whine about the Abramsverse all of the time?

You can probably count on people having Opinions That Are Not Yours about NuTrek -- and no doubt many other things -- pretty much in perpetuity, and talking about them whenever they please. Just as they have them about every other element of Trek. Guess you just have to decide for yourself if you're always going to be unable to cope with that.
 
There is a lot about NuTREK that I would've done differently - surely! But what's equally certain is that the audiences in theatre for both films were very well-pleased with the experience. And despite the elements that I did not care for being contained within both of them, these movies have been imparted with a genuine desire to entertain. Not to be believable. Not to be consistant with logic, even its own. But just to be ... entertaining. So far, it's been 2-for-2 on that score. They both succeed wildly. And it wasn't all so bad. The acting alone, is far superior to anything we ever saw in The Original Series. They have their charm and despite my reservations about them both, I have to tell you - it's even better than the "real" thing ...
 
It could be about both, obviously.
Just as TNG, DS9, VOY & ENT are.
However, enough already with the
"It's a threat to the very existance of the Federation itself!©" plot device.
 
I don't ever want to see Star Trek serialized to any greater degree than, oh, Moore's Battlestar Galactica or Doctor Who. If they can't tell me a story that's worth watching and that has a beginning, a middle and and end in an hour or so then I'm not going to invest week after week in the damned thing.

OldTrek is dead and gone. Future versions of the thing will borrow from nuTrek and oldTrek and probably go on to do some third and fourth and fifth versions of it.
 
I think you can have a well-written series in a serialized format just as you can have a well-written series in an episodic format. For me the format is secondary. I just want well-written imaginative stories.
 
I think you can have a well-written series in a serialized format just as you can have a well-written series in an episodic format. For me the format is secondary. I just want well-written imaginative stories.

I've never been a fan of serialized TV. Too little payoff for too much investment of time.
 
Αu Contraire!

OldTrek is dead and gone.

I could not respectfully disagree more.
I'll make this quick so as to not stray to far off from the OP.

Conventions, now, command and get face-value $1000 tickets.
In fact, I'm led to understand that those are always the first group of tickets to sell-out cosistantly each & every year.
And not sold-out to ticket scal-- um .... ticket brokers, either,
but to fans who are gonna attend.
Would this be going on if, as you say, "oldTrek is dead and gone"?

"OldTrek", as you call it, is, if anything, stronger than ever.
And IMHO, I think a lot of this has to do with the fan backlash to this "nuTrek" garbage.
"Star Wars" fans have much to worry about ....

Or maybe you mean "oldTrek is dead and gone"
as far as a new TV show is concerned. lol
 
Last edited:
Re: Αu Contraire!

Or maybe you mean "oldTrek is dead and gone"
as far as a new TV show is concerned. lol

As far as TV/movies go, the Prime timeline is gone. It continues on in the novels by Pocket books.
 
Re: Αu Contraire!

"Star Wars" fans have much to worry about ....

Oh, I don't know about that. Star Wars is close to JJ's heart, Trek was done on assignment. Look at that shuttle chase in STID: it's like he was practicing to do Millennium Falcon scenes. If anything, SW fans are fit to benefit from half-a-decade of prep work.
 
Re: Αu Contraire!

OldTrek is dead and gone.

I could not respectfully disagree more.
I'll make this quick so as to not stray to far off from the OP.

Conventions, now, command and get face-value $1000 tickets.

The money that a few promoters make with conventions is a pittance compared to what the studio is making from nuTrek. They know what returns they were seeing from oldTrek in its final decade, and that's why J.J. Abrams is making Star Trek movies now.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top