• 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!

How desperate are you for a new Trek TV series?

Again, the continuity is not the essence of Trek. It's the basic concept that matters.

Much respect, Greg, but it depends on who you ask. Concept matters. But the continuity, while not the "essence" of Trek, also matters to me. It's part of what made that universe feel so real for me growing up. It helps create a unity among the shows and films. Yes, they made mistakes large and nitpicky alike, but the attempt at this continuity over the course of an unparalleled amount of TV and film content is absolutely unique to the Trek franchise and is to me something of an achievement which I embrace. I embrace and others deride it or just wave it off. We all have our reasons. Hey, we're a big tent party. I feel the love already in the responses yet to come. ;)
 
Why bother calling it STAR TREK if you have a new continuity? Because it's still STAR TREK if it looks and sounds like STAR TREK. Again, the continuity is not the essence of Trek. It's the basic concept that matters.
Agreed. It this point it's gotten too large, or large enough. I've also gotten tired of the canon and continuity arguments and debates. Start with a clean sheet.
 
Why bother calling it STAR TREK if you have a new continuity? Because it's still STAR TREK if it looks and sounds like STAR TREK. Again, the continuity is not the essence of Trek. It's the basic concept that matters.
Agreed. It this point it's gotten too large, or large enough. I've also gotten tired of the canon and continuity arguments and debates. Start with a clean sheet.

I agree. The problem with "continuity" fights is that it creates a sacred priesthood of Star Trek who are responsible for preserving the "vision" of Gene Roddenberry. This same priesthood is also responsible for kicking out anyone who dares interfere or (heavens no!) CHANGE the "canon" in a way they find unacceptable. Let's take key elements of the Trek franchise and use them in a NEW story!
 
Why bother calling it STAR TREK if you have a new continuity? Because it's still STAR TREK if it looks and sounds like STAR TREK. Again, the continuity is not the essence of Trek. It's the basic concept that matters.
Agreed. It this point it's gotten too large, or large enough. I've also gotten tired of the canon and continuity arguments and debates. Start with a clean sheet.

I agree. The problem with "continuity" fights is that it creates a sacred priesthood of Star Trek who are responsible for preserving the "vision" of Gene Roddenberry. This same priesthood is also responsible for kicking out anyone who dares interfere or (heavens no!) CHANGE the "canon" in a way they find unacceptable. Let's take key elements of the Trek franchise and use them in a NEW story!

 
Agreed. It this point it's gotten too large, or large enough. I've also gotten tired of the canon and continuity arguments and debates. Start with a clean sheet.

I agree. The problem with "continuity" fights is that it creates a sacred priesthood of Star Trek who are responsible for preserving the "vision" of Gene Roddenberry. This same priesthood is also responsible for kicking out anyone who dares interfere or (heavens no!) CHANGE the "canon" in a way they find unacceptable. Let's take key elements of the Trek franchise and use them in a NEW story!



Somewhere in Alabama a "Christian conservative" just died.....

Great pic :rommie::rommie:
 
I'm not desperate for a new series at all. If one shows up before I die of old age, I'll watch it (if I ever buy a tv that picks up digital signals). In the meantime, I've had my own fictional sci-fi universe to play in the last 16 years, which has faster than light ships, jumpgates, robots, ray guns, and no transporters.
 
I think Star Trek's continuity was a sort of house of cards, and shows like Enterprise really made it topple. In some ways I think a reboot was necessary. Or at the very least some severe retconning.
And Enterprise just had to retcon stuff and insert stuff because...? You can't deride one series' continuity issues because a new show decided to wreck it decades later.
Is one line about (for example) cloaking devices being "theoretical" in "Balance of Terror" worth scrapping several planned episodes over? What makes the odd line in some episodes sacred when others (like the many names used prior to "Starfleet" and "Federation" were settled upon, or how antimatter works in Trek's world - is it a universe destroyer, or common starship fuel?) are freely ignored? I think it just comes down to what people like, they'll accept and what they don't, they raise hell as if someone defecated on the bible.
I can only assume you're referring to Enterprise episodes I haven't seen.
 
The closest Enterprise ever got to defecating on anything, was a beagle taking a leak on a tree.
 
Agreed. It this point it's gotten too large, or large enough. I've also gotten tired of the canon and continuity arguments and debates. Start with a clean sheet.

I agree. The problem with "continuity" fights is that it creates a sacred priesthood of Star Trek who are responsible for preserving the "vision" of Gene Roddenberry. This same priesthood is also responsible for kicking out anyone who dares interfere or (heavens no!) CHANGE the "canon" in a way they find unacceptable. Let's take key elements of the Trek franchise and use them in a NEW story!


YES! You win the internet! :techman:
 
Agreed. It this point it's gotten too large, or large enough. I've also gotten tired of the canon and continuity arguments and debates. Start with a clean sheet.

I agree. The problem with "continuity" fights is that it creates a sacred priesthood of Star Trek who are responsible for preserving the "vision" of Gene Roddenberry. This same priesthood is also responsible for kicking out anyone who dares interfere or (heavens no!) CHANGE the "canon" in a way they find unacceptable. Let's take key elements of the Trek franchise and use them in a NEW story!

Why is he only carrying 2 Episode Lists?
 
I agree. The problem with "continuity" fights is that it creates a sacred priesthood of Star Trek who are responsible for preserving the "vision" of Gene Roddenberry. This same priesthood is also responsible for kicking out anyone who dares interfere or (heavens no!) CHANGE the "canon" in a way they find unacceptable. Let's take key elements of the Trek franchise and use them in a NEW story!

Why is he only carrying 2 Episode Lists?

Because only those episodes are True Canon.
 
OTOH, they also acted like that whenever an established race showed up. ;)

Well, people didn't like the idea of established canon being cast aside in favor of new information. My friend had a fit when the Borg made an appearance.
Star Trek has been doing that since the beginning. Very little continuity or canon is written in stone. James R Kirk, UESPA, Vulcanians, the conquest of Vulcan (by humans?), the 23rd Century setting, Data's Academy graduation date, Spot's sex and breed, the look of the Trill, the A's deck count, Saavik's appearance, the Klingon's appearance, the Romulan's appearance and the Hansen's discovery of the Borg are all changes in or from continuity. ( "Canon" just being the collected works currently accepted by TBTB)
 
Star Trek has been doing that since the beginning. Very little continuity or canon is written in stone. James R Kirk, UESPA, Vulcanians, the conquest of Vulcan (by humans?), the 23rd Century setting, Data Academy graduation date, Spot's sex and breed, the look of the Trill, the A's deck count, Saavik's appearance, the Klingon's appearance, the Romulan's appearance and the Hansen's discovery of the Borg are all changes in or from continuity. ( "Canon" just being the collected works currently accepted by TBTB)

And you know what? Most of those changes don't bother me. The whole idea of suspension of disbelief is grounded in the notion that a work of fiction is exactly that, and so any discrepancies or deviations from previously established norm can be chalked up to differences in interpretation of the characters and series material.
 
Star Trek has been doing that since the beginning. Very little continuity or canon is written in stone. James R Kirk, UESPA, Vulcanians, the conquest of Vulcan (by humans?), the 23rd Century setting, Data Academy graduation date, Spot's sex and breed, the look of the Trill, the A's deck count, Saavik's appearance, the Klingon's appearance, the Romulan's appearance and the Hansen's discovery of the Borg are all changes in or from continuity. ( "Canon" just being the collected works currently accepted by TBTB)

And you know what? Most of those changes don't bother me. The whole idea of suspension of disbelief is grounded in the notion that a work of fiction is exactly that, and so any discrepancies or deviations from previously established norm can be chalked up to differences in interpretation of the characters and series material.
None of them bother me and neither do the Borg and the Ferengi showing up on Enterprise or the existence of the NX-01. Nothing to throw a fit over.
 
Why is he only carrying 2 Episode Lists?

Because they're only listing the episodes where he got a writing credit.
Oooh, I like this answer better.

Why is he only carrying 2 Episode Lists?

Because only those episodes are True Canon.
This was kind of what I feared, but, I like Melakon's "Out" :devil:

(Just to set the record straight, to me it's all Canon, and none of it throws anything else out, I enjoy parts of all the Series and Movies, and don't hate any... Though, it took a second run through VOY and ENT as a more mature man, to get over my own Preconceived notions disappointments, and instead enjoyed what I liked of what they did give us. :alienblush:)

It doesn't matter to me what someone declares as "counting" :shrug: :alienblush:

In the Immortal Words of Billy Joel...It's All Trekkin' Roll To Me :devil::devil:
 
Last edited:
OTOH, they also acted like that whenever an established race showed up. ;)

Well, people didn't like the idea of established canon being cast aside in favor of new information. My friend had a fit when the Borg made an appearance.
Star Trek has been doing that since the beginning. Very little continuity or canon is written in stone. James R Kirk, UESPA, Vulcanians, the conquest of Vulcan (by humans?), the 23rd Century setting, Data's Academy graduation date, Spot's sex and breed, the look of the Trill, the A's deck count, Saavik's appearance, the Klingon's appearance, the Romulan's appearance and the Hansen's discovery of the Borg are all changes in or from continuity. ( "Canon" just being the collected works currently accepted by TBTB)

Exactly. Star Trek is not an encyclopedia. It's a story being made up as it goes along. And sometimes the writers change their minds when a better idea comes along.

That's just how it works.
 
Why even bother to call it Star Trek if you're redoing everything? That's just borrowing a famous name and riding its coattails. As for a "reclusive" Federation that doesn't want to go anywhere... it's a pretty big part of space. Are you saying that nobody goes beyond the Federation boundaries, or nobody goes much of anywhere within the Federation itself?

What? It's still Star Trek. By this logic, why call the New Doctor Who, Doctor Who? What I was describing is no different than the Time War, or setting TNG nearly a century after TOS. It would be the backdrop to establish a new world and to get the show off on the right foot for new and old audiences. Without having to do a hard reboot or to go into an alternate reality. It would creatively free the writers to do whatever they want, as they would have a hundred years between them and previous continuity, they could reinvent anything in anyway they saw fit. You want to turn the Klingons into a race of mystics who have turned away from their violent warrior culture? Go ahead, you have a hundred years to establish why that could have happened, and give the show an entirely new future-history. :) That's just one example, of course. You could do anything you wanted.

All the key races are there. Time and devastation have changed them dramatically enough that a sense of surprise and mystery is in the air when our heroes go out to meet them again. The old can still be referenced, but the audience does not need to be in the know about 50+ years of Trek canon to understand things.

Reclusive in the sense that Starfleet, the defensive and exploratory arm of the Federation, does not venture much further beyond patrolling the Federation borders and policing Federation planets. That the cataclysmic events (whatever they were) may have even been the fault of Starfleet itself, and as a result the modus operandi was changed from deep space penetration and exploration to defending our own borders.





Regarding ENTERPRISE and the FUTURE:

I only ever had an issue with introducing major/key player races that we never heard of before especially when there were entire species barely explored since TOS (like the Andorians/Tellarites/Vulcans)

There were unneeded changes made to old ones. IE the stupid bumpy foreheads given to the Andorians. If someone wants to say they needed it then I shall raise you the entire Orion Race. The Andorians had blue skin and antennae. I was able to catch that they were aliens based on those two facts.

Beyond that it was the mediocre-to-terrible writing. Enterprise had some good moments, but it had mostly bad ones. If the show had started with the identity present in season 4, or had started off with a mysterious attack on Vulcan via the secretive Romulans, and immediately we were seeing how this effected the young space-fairing Earth society and it's soon-to-be-allies, that would have been more compelling. The first two seasons are primarily meandering around stories we've had told to us in each preceding series and often to better effect.

The biggest problem for Enterprise is that the writers were running dry creatively, and the show itself lacked a really solid identity.

Let's look at the first episode to feature the Andorians. They utterly ruin their reveal. There is no build up. Just "TA DA." They try to have some build up to it when Archer, Trip, and T'pol show up, but we already saw the Andorians in the teaser. There's no sense of mystery. I would have had the teaser start with Archer and Trip talking, and then they pick up a distress call from P'jem. There are no Vulcan ships in the area so they set a course. When they arrive things seem to be normal, and then you reveal the Andorians in bits and pieces. (A shadow, a fuzzy reflection, until finally we see them in full.)


For a new show the writers need to have a good reservoir of creative energy ready to unleash. There needs to be thought put into the plotting. Not just the outline, story, or "general idea." Things need to be handled to give us maximum excitement, drama, mystery, and intrigue. Being as pedestrian as the latter days of Voyager, and the majority of Enterprise just will not cut it, imo.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top