Does a new show need to feature the Enterprise?
- Thread starter poundpuppy29
- Start date
Some great responses everyone I think it could be yes or no depending on the series
If the show were set in the 33rd century?
Hell yes you'd need to come up with "wild technology". Technology and science are moving at a fast pace; today, we are already ahead of the Federation in some ways, comparing real technology to what was depicted on-screen through the first four Trek series. You're talking about nearly a thousand years after the TNG era. The way humans even interact with the environment around them would probably be radically different from what we are used to.
Unfortunately, I have to agree. Personally, I would much prefer to see a new entry in the franchise that doesn't feature the Enterprise, but the reality - for the time being anyway - is that any major Trek production that wants to be successful would be wise to focus on a ship with that name.
Even if "just" the 25th century, the depicted technology might be too advanced for many of the audience to relate, if set several centuries beyond Voyager the writers would have to somehow explain the lack of technological development.
Perhaps a Andromeda type civil war, a military conquest of the Federation, or a plage.
I have a feeling that with the way things have been going in the entertainment media, people would like to see a version of Star Trek closer to our reality. Something that they can relate to, instead of an esoteric future of idealism.
"Enterprise" tried to do this... but in short order it pretty much became a TOS rewrite and beyond. Heck, they even countered the Borg!
I like the idea of doing a prequel to "Enterprise". But unfortunately, there wouldn't be a lot of extraterrestrial interaction. Early warp speed ships would be even more limited than the NX-01. It would be hard to come up with sufficiently compelling stories on a weekly basis. Maybe a mini-series?
However, I really don't think there will be a new TV show for some time to come, USS Enterprise and Kirk's crew not withstanding. It hasn't all been done, but so much has, that it may take another decade before we see anything based on the Star Trek franchise again.
"Enterprise" tried to do this... but in short order it pretty much became a TOS rewrite and beyond. Heck, they even countered the Borg!
I like the idea of doing a prequel to "Enterprise". But unfortunately, there wouldn't be a lot of extraterrestrial interaction. Early warp speed ships would be even more limited than the NX-01. It would be hard to come up with sufficiently compelling stories on a weekly basis. Maybe a mini-series?
However, I really don't think there will be a new TV show for some time to come, USS Enterprise and Kirk's crew not withstanding. It hasn't all been done, but so much has, that it may take another decade before we see anything based on the Star Trek franchise again.
DSAGREE. 'D RATHER HAVE A SERES THAT TAKES PLACE WTHN THE FEDERATON. GVE THE NEW CREW A NEW MSSON EACH WEEK. OR LET THEM MEET PEOPLE AGAN AND AGAN FOR THE SAKE OF NTRGE OR DRAMA.
You can have both, exploration and Federation. Have the ship on the edge of the Federation, to quote the series monologe, it's primary mission is to seek out new and new civilisations, to bodly go where no one has gone before. But it also has regular contact with a starbase that serves as the administration centre for that particular sector(s).
^^Have to disagree with Gary7, ST to a certain extend has been about portraying humanity in a positive light. That we can be better, we can put aside our more base insticts, such as hate, greed, etc..
The problem with ENT or at least one of the problems with ENT is that they didn't really hold true to the premise of the show. S4 of ENT is often regarded as ENT best season, so what was different about this season than the previous seasons, could it be they actually began to start telling stories about how disperate alien races came together to become one.
But this rest is good for the franchise as a whole, with a movie coming out every few years. Will ST return to the small screen at some point, I think it will but perhaps 2015 would be the earliest it will.
^^Have to disagree with Gary7, ST to a certain extend has been about portraying humanity in a positive light. That we can be better, we can put aside our more base insticts, such as hate, greed, etc..
The problem with ENT or at least one of the problems with ENT is that they didn't really hold true to the premise of the show. S4 of ENT is often regarded as ENT best season, so what was different about this season than the previous seasons, could it be they actually began to start telling stories about how disperate alien races came together to become one.
But this rest is good for the franchise as a whole, with a movie coming out every few years. Will ST return to the small screen at some point, I think it will but perhaps 2015 would be the earliest it will.
Does it need the Enterprise? No. As many have stated, Deep Space Nine and Voyager pretty clearly proved that you can do Trek without the Enterprise. Should it have the Enterprise? Yes. Any new Star Trek series would clearly be an attempt to reboot the TV franchise (not in the "erasing previous continuity" sense, but in the "start it up again" sense), and in the public's eye, the name Enterprise is part of Star Trek. It was as much a character in TOS and TNG as any human character. And I think it would be very valuable for a new show to have an Enterprise.
Very good point there
For me Star Trek is about loving the wonderful characters and the story they have to tell, rather than the actual Sci-Fi science and the ships even though they are very important
Perhaps a look at the shows.
TOS were it all began used it's setting to explore certain isses that faced humanity at that time (not in all episodes mind you. ie. "Let That be Your Last Battlefield" was about racisim.
TNG also set onboard the Enterprise ran to generally good reviewes. Maybe it didn't tackle as many issues as it's predecessor did, but could that be an indication of were we where in the 60's compared to the 90's?
DSN not set onbaord the Enterprise, ran to fairly general critical aclaim. Perhaps this was because it was TOS spiritual successor. Whilsit it generally portrayed humanity in good light, I think to a certain extend it used the non Federation races as a mirror to were we are today. In terms of we still have room to improve.
VOY not set onboard the Enterprise, now some people loved this show which is great, but to me it wasn't as good as what came before. At times it seemed to be about anomoly of the week (yes other shows had it as well).
and last but not least ENT, Perhaps it would have been better if they had mapped out some sort of arc, rather than seemingly going down the VOY route.
At the end of the day the episode must be about the characters and not supsace whirly thing.
TOS were it all began used it's setting to explore certain isses that faced humanity at that time (not in all episodes mind you. ie. "Let That be Your Last Battlefield" was about racisim.
TNG also set onboard the Enterprise ran to generally good reviewes. Maybe it didn't tackle as many issues as it's predecessor did, but could that be an indication of were we where in the 60's compared to the 90's?
DSN not set onbaord the Enterprise, ran to fairly general critical aclaim. Perhaps this was because it was TOS spiritual successor. Whilsit it generally portrayed humanity in good light, I think to a certain extend it used the non Federation races as a mirror to were we are today. In terms of we still have room to improve.
VOY not set onboard the Enterprise, now some people loved this show which is great, but to me it wasn't as good as what came before. At times it seemed to be about anomoly of the week (yes other shows had it as well).
and last but not least ENT, Perhaps it would have been better if they had mapped out some sort of arc, rather than seemingly going down the VOY route.
At the end of the day the episode must be about the characters and not supsace whirly thing.
Just speaking personally I would like there to be an Enterprise in a Star Trek show... It's just managing to do something unexpected with that. An angle no other spin-off has been able to, but keeping that familiar icon somehow.
I mean you could have a series centred around space fugitives on the run, and occasionally recurring characters aboard the Enterprise in hot pursuit. Like a bunch of Gerard figures chasing Richard Kimble types. Starfleet as the law making authority figures, and some renegades accused of a crime and they manage to flee their accusers in stolen a prototype ship. There's no other I can think of, that would mean they'd be able to out run a flagship vessel week after week.
Perhaps the other important question, is whether or not exploration should be the focus of the series. That's really what fans complained about a lot. Aimless wandering as a mission, which is hard for viewers to wrap their heads around, living in a world where everything from the ocean floor to the Solar System has been mapped. The Star Trek Universe became a lot like that. Joining the dots. Rather than creating new dots. Even now, the possibility arises of the 2009 divergent one basically rehashing elements there since TOS, now all their key players have been hastily reassembled. Next stop Klingons all over again. Or worse, Khan. There was a sense the longer TNG and DS9 went on, that it was just keeping the neighbourhood in order. Galactic politics and all the players involved in that. Occasionally they might have something unexpected happening but on a planet and to a people we basically know everything else about. VOY couldn't get home quick enough for some and exploration was almost an inconvienence. ENT had some wide eyed wonder to begin with, but most fans were either too jaded to notice and didn't find the characters interesting enough to care about their POV. Or perhaps, what a 22nd Century crew could encounter could never be much of a surprise. Old fans deciding to move onto other things, and not enough of a fresh influx of fans covering the shortfall, and renewing the cycle.
I mean you could have a series centred around space fugitives on the run, and occasionally recurring characters aboard the Enterprise in hot pursuit. Like a bunch of Gerard figures chasing Richard Kimble types. Starfleet as the law making authority figures, and some renegades accused of a crime and they manage to flee their accusers in stolen a prototype ship. There's no other I can think of, that would mean they'd be able to out run a flagship vessel week after week.
Perhaps the other important question, is whether or not exploration should be the focus of the series. That's really what fans complained about a lot. Aimless wandering as a mission, which is hard for viewers to wrap their heads around, living in a world where everything from the ocean floor to the Solar System has been mapped. The Star Trek Universe became a lot like that. Joining the dots. Rather than creating new dots. Even now, the possibility arises of the 2009 divergent one basically rehashing elements there since TOS, now all their key players have been hastily reassembled. Next stop Klingons all over again. Or worse, Khan. There was a sense the longer TNG and DS9 went on, that it was just keeping the neighbourhood in order. Galactic politics and all the players involved in that. Occasionally they might have something unexpected happening but on a planet and to a people we basically know everything else about. VOY couldn't get home quick enough for some and exploration was almost an inconvienence. ENT had some wide eyed wonder to begin with, but most fans were either too jaded to notice and didn't find the characters interesting enough to care about their POV. Or perhaps, what a 22nd Century crew could encounter could never be much of a surprise. Old fans deciding to move onto other things, and not enough of a fresh influx of fans covering the shortfall, and renewing the cycle.
Last edited:
So there should be another Sci-Fi or Star Trek show where war plays the most part of the story and Earth or the Federation is under threat by some new powerful bad guy? , well to me this has been done so many times over and over again where humanity or Earth is under threat and the show is about fighting the good cause against the evil, I mean look at DS9, B5 and BSG to name a few, this kind of story line has been done over so what is there else left??? because I do agree with you on the exploration point but what can the writers do???? you go explore find your self in a bit of a pickle with some strange alien race and a war breaks out : you get my point
because these criteria are what most Sci-Fi shows provide:
1) giving the audience new technologies and alien races to look at which TNG did mostly and regarding the tech side, Enterprise did opposite and went backwards which was one of it's downfall
2) Federation is under threat and War is the big Arc story like DS9 and ENT and other sci-fi shows the list is big
3) Focusing mostly on the characters and the story they have to tell I would put BSG in this area simply because I see it as more of a character drama which is set in space rather than a Sci-fi show
4) is there a fourth and I am missing something or maybe more criteria??????????
I just think it needs a complete overhaul on the type of writing of not just Star Trek but any Sci-Fi show to come. Think out of the box story writing, especially if it is set like way after the present trek universe timeline
At this point, after a major war, technological advances, encountering different aliens and scenarios, it hard to imagine a trek series in the present or even future.
There's nothing left to do or to fascinate. Maybe the last Treks did too much during their run?
I have a strong feeling they might go the reboot direction- it's a fad now, all types of movies and tv shows are being rebooted.
They may simply redo TOS or TNG.
There's nothing left to do or to fascinate. Maybe the last Treks did too much during their run?
I have a strong feeling they might go the reboot direction- it's a fad now, all types of movies and tv shows are being rebooted.
They may simply redo TOS or TNG.
No easy answers and I feel for any team taking on the Star Trek franchise. I liked all the shows and I liked all the tropes I mentioned actually. Enterprise did something everything the previous four shows did, while having a crew that tried to be a little more contemporary (cussing, space suits, NASA flightsuits) and a little less high tech (easy going Southern Engineer, warp reactor not core, welding sections of the ship). I liked that, but a lot of others didn't. It might've turned out better after a few years absence of a regular show. Listening to the criticisms down the years, especially during the last few years of TV Trek's life... just leaves you with the inescapable conclusion - they'll be damned by the fanbase anyway. I'm sure TNG was for several years until able to prove its own worth. It's just ratings. What a channel broadcasting the next Star Trek will expect. That'll kill it again and probably even sooner.
Last edited:
-A Starfleet-like organization would serve the same story purpose as Starfleet. If you mean some predecessor to Starfleet, with the same values, then fine. Same wine, different bottle. But if for instance, the Klingons suddenly got it into their heads to mimic Starfleet, that would be bizarre, and why bother with that, when you can accomplish the same thing by just shoving Starfleet out there again?
-A show just prior to the advent of the Federation is fine by me (and didn't I say that already?) The point is that the Fed is the focus of the show - the characters needing to create a Federation, then the Federation being created, and then what happens after it's created. What doesn't work is not having the Fed in the picture at all.
-As for humanism vs secular liberalism, I think that's just a quibble over terminology. Earth seems to be officially atheist, but other Fed members are not. The secular part means that there's no official religion for the Federation, not that everyone is atheist.
-Maybe "some of the best episodes have taken place on the "interior" of the Federation" but other than Homefront/Paradise Lost, I'm blanking on just what those episodes might be. When I list my favorite episodes, very few happen on Earth or on major Federation worlds. The best Vulcan episodes were on ENT, by definition pre-Federation.
-DS9 didn't engage in exploration but the series didn't take place in the Federation. DS9 just substituted war for exploration as the excuse for stories not to happen in the Federation.
-Without the Federation, Kirk and Picard would have had no moral weight. The Federation molded their ideals and both referred to those ideals at crucial junctures. The MU gave us a little glimpse of what Kirk might have been like, if he'd been born in a society where those ideals were not instilled in him. That Kirk is a psychopathic monster, which drives home the message that Kirk wasn't born being a nice guy and could just as easily turned out a villain (which is the larger message of the MU episodes - everyone is the product of their environment).
-Sisko didn't lack morals in any egregious manner. He was confronted with situations where the writers didn't step in and artifically save his ass, they way did with TNG. The difference between DS9 and TNG is honesty, not morality. It's not plausible that a Starfleet captain would never be confronted with a situation where "doing the right thing" can be expected to result in catastophe.
-The difference between Sisko and Kirk can't be innate, because MU Sisko was no more psychopathic than MU Kirk. (We were never treated to seeing MU Picard - the TNG writers wouldn't have had the guts for that.
) So at worst, we could say that Sisko fell asleep during Federation Ethics 101.-The immense suckitude of TATV cannot be ascribed to it depicting the founding of the Federation, when there are so many other sucky elements in that episode, namely, everything else about it. (The Federation founding was sorta touching, I guess - but like everyone else, I was in a pretty cranky mood by that point.)
-What killed ENT was not the founding of the Federation, but the boring, derivative writing for the first two seasons, which caused the ratings to tank. Plus UPN was transitioning to the CW and changing their business strategy to shows that appeal to young females, and Star Trek couldn't possibly be part of that, since space opera is presumed (justifiably) to be a male-skewing genre.
Good point (and different from the question of whether Star Trek needs certain elements in order to be Star Trek). For marketing reasons, the next series should be one of these two things:
1. The live-action adventures of a Starfleet starship going boldly in the 23rd C, in the same cosmos as Abrams' movie series but with new characters and a new ship. Beyond that, it needs to be customized to the audience where it is shown. Showtime vs TNT vs FX vs CW would all result in very different shows. I hope and pray SyFy isn't even an option.
2. The animated adventures of the Enterprise gang from Abrams' movies. Not the sucky TAS animation, but something more like The Clone Wars, with good representations of the actors, and either the movie actors or sound-alikes doing the voice acting. Most likely would air on the Cartoon Network and be pitched to kids and adults alike (again, like The Clone Wars.)
Option #2 is definitely the more financially feasible of the two.Option #1 is a very long shot.
