• 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!

David Foster Preparing to Pitch New ‘Star Trek’ Series

Just watched Corbomite on MeTV. Very Trekkish. Kirk goes to help Balok in distress. Reminds crew of mission to explore and assist. Very Trekkish.

JJTrek very profitable, not very Trekkish, despite familiarly-named characters in a ship named Enterprise.

Like it if you like it.
 
I think the characterisation was more memorable than say Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Space 1999, Lost in Space, the original BSG etc...
I've never actually seen Gilligan's Island...

Did you watch anything other than "sci-fi?"

IYes lots. But I'm comparing it with other sci-fi shows and would have thought that this was apparent from the fact that I only named sci-fi shows.

Does the characterisation hold up to the likes of Mad Men, The Sopranos, NYPD Blue, The West Wing or nuBSG? No. But for its time, for its genre, it was pretty good.

And I'm not going to waste any more time in a 'debate' which is basically you throwing out snarky one-liners. You're capable of more.
 
Yes, he is, but this is his standard procedure, and with him being a cranky old fart, you can't really expect him to change tactics at this late date, do you? :D
 
JJTrek very profitable, not very Trekkish, despite familiarly-named characters in a ship named Enterprise

Interestingly, "trekkish" is a made-up word that means...nothing, really, beyond reinforcing a kind of cliquishness. Its supposed absence, therefore, can't be taken to suggest that Abrams's movie lacks anything important. :)
 
Does anyone know what Harlan thought of it or didn't? I could use a good laugh.

Oh by the way, there's alot to be said for nothing. Hence the phrase Here goes nothing.
 
Last edited:
JJTrek very profitable, not very Trekkish, despite familiarly-named characters in a ship named Enterprise

Interestingly, "trekkish" is a made-up word that means...nothing, really, beyond reinforcing a kind of cliquishness. Its supposed absence, therefore, can't be taken to suggest that Abrams's movie lacks anything important. :)



Yes, it is. There's a good side of nothing and a bad side.
 
The only TRUE Star Trek out there is the initial scribble that a drunken Roddenberry made on a cocktail napkin back in '63. Everything else is pure fanwank.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top