Ideas You Hope To NEVER See In The New Films

[Saxman1]

No Borg. EVER. No Khan. Ever. You can't top TWOK. No going back, move forward. If the so called true fans hate it, too bad. Star Trek is now alive and well in films thanks to Abrams and Company. Godspeed to them!

The "true fans" that hate the last film perhaps would wish Berman was back in charge of the film franchise? He made 4 frankly awful TNG films, although he was quite a good television show runner for the franchise.

 

[ChristopherPike]

I don't think anyone wants Rick Berman back in overall control of the franchise. I wouldn't mind if he were a consultant, with about as much input as Gene Roddenberry had between from Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country. The guy is a major living link to the Great Bird and like him or loathe him, he knows more about the moral heart of Star Trek than anybody working on it right now. Even a fool wouldn't at least listen to him, and get a perspective on what GR would've done. Or the values he was trying to hold onto right until ENT got snatched off the air.

Actually between RB and say D.C. Fontana, you've basically got the viewpoint of a younger risk taking GR, in addition to his more idealistic older self.

 

[Broccoli]

I don't think anyone wants Rick Berman back in overall control of the franchise. I wouldn't mind if he were a consultant, with about as much input as Gene Roddenberry had between from Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country.

So, none at all then?

Even a fool wouldn't at least listen to him, and get a perspective on what GR would've done.

GR would have done anything to make more money. Seems like the current crew is doing that perfectly.

 

[ChristopherPike]

So, none at all then?

GR would have done anything to make more money. Seems like the current crew is doing that perfectly.

I think there's something to said for a point of view, coming from somebody whose career prospects aren't exactly riding on saying yes to everything. If that voice isn't listened to, fine. But at least, it's been heard and its merits debated.

I'm not sure about the money issue myself. Roddenberry once remarked, "I had to get some money somewhere. I'm sure not going to get it from the profits of Star Trek." From his association being credited with it, he got money perhaps. But creatively? Money rolling in from everything that followed its revival? Clearly not enough for him to say that. He'd want his way until the bitter end. Who knows if those creative differences held back Nicholas Meyer, Harve Bennett or whoever just enough from turning Star Trek into something it wasn't? Insisting on no product placement? Or removal of No Smoking signs? Arguing against racism among Starfleet Officiers. He seemed like a man of principle, protecting what he thought was true to his ideals.

He probably would've had a blue fit about Uhura telling Kirk he's a hick who has sex with farmyard animals. The writers would then maybe have realised a line had been crossed and improved the whole scene as a result.

 

[Timewalker]

In this forum, most of the time discussions about movies go like this:

Poster 1: It was awesome!
Poster 2: It was great!
Poster 3: Amazing!!!
Poster 4: I didn't like it.
Poster 1: Why?
Poster 2: Why?!
Poster 3: WHY??!?!
Poster 4: Because [insert reasons]
Poster 1: You didn't get it.
Poster 2: You're in the minority.
Poster 3: You are totally uninformed.
Poster 5: You suck!
Poster 6: Leave him alone.
Posters 1, 2, 3, 5: Shut the hell up, 6!

And then a moderator comes in and either goes on a banning spree or closes the thread, and sometimes even both. Which doesn't help, because the very same thread gets reposted one or two weeks later and then the same thing happens all over again.

But this is the general way many topics go on lots of different forums. It needn't be only movies that generate such discussions.

In my OPINION, the nuTrek stuff, what I've seen of it,

Which is very little as you admit (you're really devoting more time into this film just so you know.)

At least I'm honest enough to admit how little I've seen of it. And it's my time.

Therefore, if any more Star Trek movies are ever made, I would not like to see ANYTHING remotely like the Abramsverse stuff.

You haven't even seen anything remotely like the Abramsverse stuff, you haven't seen it.

Not true. I've seen enough. It doesn't need to have been on-screen to make that decision.

I would, however, be open to something that was closer to the original material set out in TOS.

Is that better?

No.

Whatever. *shrug*

The Abrams flick was poorly written! Whether you're pro-reboot or anti, that should not be a controversial opinion. It was just plain bad. The engine room was a fucking brewery. It had lame dialogue. It had poor characterization. It had lens flares. It was bad enough to be on MST3K! I refuse to jump on the "any new Trek is better than no new Trek" bandwagon, and this means I'm arrogant and/or have no taste? Fascinating. Guess I better get busy drinking the Kool-Aid---AbramsTrek 2 is on its way! TOS, TNG, and DS9 were smart TV----some of the Trek films were smart, too. AbramsTrek simply feels dumbed down, and I will not apologize for disliking that fact. Period. Have a nice day.

Bravo!

And you don't see anything wrong, or at least close-minded, with judging all possible future AbramsTrek on the merits of one film?

Would you judge TNG on the merits of Encounter at Farpoint?

Of course not. I liked the character of Tasha Yar from the get-go. I couldn't stand the character of Deanna Troi from the get-go. In this case, it might be fairer to ask about the TNG novels, since Diane Carey's adaptation of "Encounter at Farpoint" was one of the most atrocious ST novels I've ever read.

The "true fans" that hate the last film perhaps would wish Berman was back in charge of the film franchise? He made 4 frankly awful TNG films, although he was quite a good television show runner for the franchise.

As far as I'm concerned, ALL the TNG films were awful. First Contact was a little less awful than the others, but not by much (yes, I saw all of them).

I don't think anyone wants Rick Berman back in overall control of the franchise. I don't think anyone wants Rick Berman back in overall control of the franchise. I wouldn't mind if he were a consultant, with about as much input as Gene Roddenberry had between from Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country. The guy is a major living link to the Great Bird and like him or loathe him, he knows more about the moral heart of Star Trek than anybody working on it right now. Even a fool wouldn't at least listen to him, and get a perspective on what GR would've done. Or the values he was trying to hold onto right until ENT got snatched off the air.

Actually between RB and say D.C. Fontana, you've basically got the viewpoint of a younger risk taking GR, in addition to his more idealistic older self.

Subtract Rick Berman and add David Gerrold, who had some terrific ideas for stories that never got made.

 

[Greg Cox]

The guy is a major living link to the Great Bird and like him or loathe him, he knows more about the moral heart of Star Trek than anybody working on it right now. .

"a major living link to the Great Bird" . . . are we talking some sort of apostolic succession here?

It may be worth remembering that STAR TREK was a classic tv show, not a religion, and that GR, for all his accomplishments, was not a prophet . . . .

The last thing STAR TREK, or any series needs, is some sort of ideological watchdog protecting the "moral heart" of the franchise. That sounds like a recipe for stagnation and orthodoxy to me.

 

[Mr Silver]

"a major living link to the Great Bird" . . . are we talking some sort of apostolic succession here?

It may be worth remembering that STAR TREK was a classic tv show, not a religion, and that GR, for all his accomplishments, was not a prophet . . . .

The last thing STAR TREK, or any series needs, is some sort of ideological watchdog protecting the "moral heart" of the franchise. That sounds like a recipe for stagnation and orthodoxy to me.

Well said, despite Star Trek being a cultural identifier for many people (myself included), it is just a TV show that spawned a franchise and not an actual way of life.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Fair enough. Not sure why I invoked the name of "The Great Bird". I'm an athesist afterall.

 

[Broccoli]

But at least, it's been heard and its merits debated.

I think you are giving GR too much credit there. He would give his two cents, and Bennett and Co. would nod nicely and go back to what they were doing. GR was ignored and his ideas went unused.

He probably would've had a blue fit about Uhura telling Kirk he's a hick who has sex with farmyard animals. The writers would then maybe have realised a line had been crossed and improved the whole scene as a result.

Doubtful given the context of the scene and line.

Whether you loved or hated the film, that's fine. There is nothing wrong with that.

However, it makes no sense if people start making claims on whether or not GR or whoever else would have like it or what they would have done. Chances are no one here ever knew the man. We didn't know what he was like or what his thoughts on things were beyond his public statements. It is nothing more than fan presumption to declare such things. His family said that he probably would have liked the film. I'll take their word over what fans say on the internet.

It may be worth remembering that STAR TREK was a classic tv show, not a religion, and that GR, for all his accomplishments, was not a prophet . . . .

Everyone knows that's Ben Sisko.




And Capt. Robau.

The last thing STAR TREK, or any series needs, is some sort of ideological watchdog protecting the "moral heart" of the franchise. That sounds like a recipe for stagnation and orthodoxy to me.

Yup. That seemed to be the major complaint during Voyager and Enterprise.

 

[Greg Cox]

Fair enough. Not sure why I invoked the name of "The Great Bird". I'm an athesist afterall.

And so was he.

 

[Irishman]

Time travel
Khan

I think I could live with almost anything else, topic-wise.

 

[Saxman1]

Time travel
Khan

I think I could live with almost anything else, topic-wise.

I agree with both (I mentioned Khan above, too). NO MORE TIME TRAVEL, especially to correct an alternate future where the Federation doesn't exist. That has been used in every single Star Trek series (with TNG it was in First Contact). ENOUGH!!!!

 

[NSTrekfan]

Time travel

I think I could live with almost anything else, topic-wise.

Uh, you realize that the entire plot of the movie depended on time travel, don't you?

 

[M'Sharak]

Time travel

I think I could live with almost anything else, topic-wise.

Uh, you realize that the entire plot of the movie depended on time travel, don't you?

I'd imagine he remembers that, yes, and that it's part of his reason for saying that he'd rather not be seeing time travel again in the very next movie.

Or so I'm guessing.

 

[NSTrekfan]

You must be guessing since the only thing in his original post I edited was the single word "Khan"

 

[MANT!]

No Sargasso Sea in Space..
No gnomes
No clowns (they are creepy)
No Berman (he tried to make the TNG films into mindless action flicks instead of THOUGHTFUL action films..ruining the characters we knew and loved.
No TNG characters as children.
No bubble wrap as spacesuits
no microscopic budgets..

No actors giving plot influences.

 

[Irishman]

Time travel

I think I could live with almost anything else, topic-wise.

Uh, you realize that the entire plot of the movie depended on time travel, don't you?

I'd imagine he remembers that, yes, and that it's part of his reason for saying that he'd rather not be seeing time travel again in the very next movie.

Or so I'm guessing.

You are correct, sir! (in his best Ed McMahon voice)

 

[ChristopherPike]

Don't worry. No time-travel ever again.



From now on, it'll be replaced with multiverse travel instead!

 

[Pauln6]

How about a remake of the Xena episode, Here she comes, Miss Amphipalis, where Uhura, Rand, Chapel, and Kirk in drag have to enter an intergalactic beauty contest being run by Harry Mudd?

 

[CommanderRaytas]

No more Spock temper-tantrums. He needs to channel his inner Old-Spock.

You do know that in classic Trek Spock beat up Kirk, like, six times?

Ooh, I love a forceful man.