"The warrior, the priest, the doctor... Kirk Spock McCoy."
That made me shaking my head for several days.
I wonder why JMS didn't accuse Abrams of stealing his TOS reboot idea. He did it with DS9.
details on Singer's Trek pitch
- Thread starter Temis the Vorta
- Start date
"The warrior, the priest, the doctor... Kirk Spock McCoy."
That made me shaking my head for several days.
I wonder why JMS didn't accuse Abrams of stealing his TOS reboot idea. He did it with DS9.
^ I kind of liked that.
Trek's in good hands for now, so no worries - I'm much happier to have Kirk and Spock back in recognizable form than a 30th century excursion or a B5-ish repurposing of Trek.
I agree. I used to want JMS to write Trek or Superman, and we all know how the latter turned out.
Except the hands that are currently holding Star Trek only intend to give you two hours
of content every third year, nothing about that worries you?
A series would give you about sixty to seventy hours of content in the same time period,
wouldn't that be just a little bit better?
KIRK: Too much of anything, Lieutenant, even love, isn't necessarily a good thing.A series would give you about sixty to seventy hours of content in the same time period, wouldn't that be just a little bit better?
^ Quality over quantity.
KIRK: Too much of anything, Lieutenant, even love, isn't necessarily a good thing.A series would give you about sixty to seventy hours of content in the same time period, wouldn't that be just a little bit better?
Definately too much TOS. 3 seasons and 6 1/2 movies was enough. Why the hell did they need to do a remake?
Not necessarily, no. I prefer the quality of the current version to a great percentage of the quantity we had a decade ago. It's a more than reasonable trade off.
To improve immensely upon most of the TOS-based movies, for one thing.
I'm not worried about the state of the franchise either. Eventually we'll get a television series again. This is just a holding period while Paramount and CBS monitor gage the theatrical reboot. To be honest I'm not hungry for another series. I do want to see Trek return eventually but not unless it's a well thought out, planned, and executed pitch.
Honestly I don't think movies released every few years that earn the studio hundreds of millions of dollars are any kind of "holding period" - they constitute a healthy franchise, perido.
Because they knew what would be popular with both fans and casual moviegoers alike?
Call it 20/20 hindsight if you want, but from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_(film):
That's over $2.50 back for every $1.00 spent. Isn't that a good enough reason?
I just read the JMS reboot treatment and while his planned arc didn't capture my interest, the whole proposal really doesn't sound that bad. My only thought was that the original concept doesn't really need a new angle to make it interesting. Also, I couldn't help but think that Abrams' Trek idea was lifted from this, with the "Universe B" and the "simply Star Trek" stuff. First DS9 and now this. 
And that arc seems to have elements of Stargate Universe with the signature embeded in DNA.
And that arc seems to have elements of Stargate Universe with the signature embeded in DNA.
Seems no scifi show can be made without that tiresome cliche of finding mysterious ancestors who left clues.
If any of this was any better than generic, accusations of borrowing might make some sense. It's not, and they don't.
No accusations of stealing, but Singer's idea sounds too much like "Andromeda".
As for the Abrams version being "recognizable", I guess if that means cynical caricatures based upon the misconceptions held by non-fans...
As for the Abrams version being "recognizable", I guess if that means cynical caricatures based upon the misconceptions held by non-fans...
That was a long time ago - too long to be relevant now. But with HBO doing Game of Thrones and apparently interested in American Gods, that's a good sign that space opera shouldn't be entirely off the table. No reason to think high fantasy is somehow easier to pull off on premium cable than a Star Trek series would be.
That's because Abrams made a summer popcorn flick. Of course it's all flash and action, there isn't time for anything else. Characterization and substance like you remember from TV can only be delivered by TV. That's why even the best Trek movie can't ever really hope to deliver what was best about Trek. At best, any movie will feel like "Trek-lite" because it is a movie.
Non-fans are where all the money is - TV and movies, both.
Similar threads
