Pitfalls the new series should avoid
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
Point taken. But there's no harm in, let's say, a string of episodes out of a 15 year franchise where characters don't arc that much. You have to know how to pace it, which is not easy. There were a lot of self-contained Trek episodes that were about themes or issues more than the character development of the leads (semi-anthology like Gunsmoke). I'm all for character development but it is not the be all end all on TV. It's just a cycle we're going through with TV series kind of having a novelistic or extended mini-series feel.
But on a given stretch of Cheers episodes, there wasn't really any appreciable movement. Sam and Diane were the equivalent of the irresistible force and the immovable object. It's similar to Moonlighting. It's not supposed to have a resolution and only casting changes force the issue.
But you also have Jeannie and Major Nelson eventually marrying on I Dream of Jeannie, which effectively killed the ability to do the show, or transformed it more into Bewitched.
That's why they call them "situation" comedies. The situation you put the characters into. If you shave off the rough edges of the characters (like the ongoing normalization of Sheldon Cooper) then, while it's pleasing to long-time fans to see the gradual maturation, it works against week-to-week conflict.
NO screwing-up of established Trek history, like they did in ENT and the latest movies. Stick to what's been established in TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY.
Follow continuity.
Not so many M-class planets. Let's see some away teams in spacesuits on planets with no or unbreathable atmosphere.
Not so many aliens wo basically are humans with adjusted foreheads. Use today's technology by creating other sorts of aliens.
Follow continuity.
Not so many M-class planets. Let's see some away teams in spacesuits on planets with no or unbreathable atmosphere.
Not so many aliens wo basically are humans with adjusted foreheads. Use today's technology by creating other sorts of aliens.
The WORST example of that is still in Nemesis, Picard beams over, console goes poof ... that's it, the transporters are down.
All of them, even the ones on the yacht and the shuttles, they all have a kill switch that got triggered by a bridge console releasing sparks.
Concerning character arcs, I believe that as a result of having whatever experiences these people are going to have that Lt. Z should not be the same person he or she was when the show began. Every episode focused on a single character does not have to be a heavy handed Barge of the Dead type scenario.
Obviates all justification for having created the Abramsverse. I like it.
Outside of a Romulan cloaking device, the only thing Enterprise violated was fan assumptions about the time period. The Abrams movies were done in a fashion to not be slaves to continuity.
Just tell the best stories possible. If they're doing anything else, they've already failed.
I don't get that about continuity being an anvil around Trek's neck. How much stuff would any show or movie set in the Prime universe even have to acknowledge? Set it 100 years later and only the big stuff like the Dominion war or hostilities with the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians and so on ever needs to be mentioned and only in passing if relevant. TNG managed to hardly mention TOS for most of its run.
DS9 and Voyager were set during the same era so they were obviously going to have a lot of crossover continuity. Enterprise created its own problems and continuity was the least of them. The JJVerse created a new timeline so they could play with the same characters, set it during TOS and not worry about continuity issues. Of all the branches of Trek the JJVerse has played it the most safe by reusing character, settings and storylines we're already familiar with. It invites lazy writing in my opinion and they proved that with Into Darkness.
DS9 and Voyager were set during the same era so they were obviously going to have a lot of crossover continuity. Enterprise created its own problems and continuity was the least of them. The JJVerse created a new timeline so they could play with the same characters, set it during TOS and not worry about continuity issues. Of all the branches of Trek the JJVerse has played it the most safe by reusing character, settings and storylines we're already familiar with. It invites lazy writing in my opinion and they proved that with Into Darkness.
Transporters are too much of a deus ex machina in Trek. You need something to break/block transporters to get characters into a proper sense of danger. To a lesser extent, shields and warp-drive.
Not only that, but people take technology for granted already to such an extent that it's hard for them to accept the idea that technology breaks down, but you lose that sense of Apollo 13 or Columbus style adventure if everything works too reliably.
I think from TNG onwards space travel was portrayed as too routine, and in nuTrek with the fast warp-times and long-range beaming it just made it worse.
Not only that, but people take technology for granted already to such an extent that it's hard for them to accept the idea that technology breaks down, but you lose that sense of Apollo 13 or Columbus style adventure if everything works too reliably.
I think from TNG onwards space travel was portrayed as too routine, and in nuTrek with the fast warp-times and long-range beaming it just made it worse.
There's been 726 Star Trek episodes, and 11 movies. It's gonna be pretty hard to avoid cliches.
I think the show should take place after 2400. This way, we have no idea what's coming, and the writers aren't tied to continuity as much. They'll need to update technologies IMO, so it makes sense it would take place post TNG/DS9/VOY, as opposed to taking place between TUC and TNG as some have suggested.
I think the show should take place after 2400. This way, we have no idea what's coming, and the writers aren't tied to continuity as much. They'll need to update technologies IMO, so it makes sense it would take place post TNG/DS9/VOY, as opposed to taking place between TUC and TNG as some have suggested.
No magical characters. TNG may have gotten away with Q in the 80s, but I think modern viewers expect more believability from a science fiction show.
Were the Ferenghi villains? I'd say not. They were a society with values different to the Federation's. Cultural clashes are a part of what Star Trek does. Your proposal to "fix" this sounds like another Khan retread.
To be fair, the Enterprise had just rammed another ship and lost most of its front end. They were lucky anything was working.
NO RESET BUTTONS!!! Minimal time travel and when/if it does happen there should be consequences.
We need to see Borg assimilated Jem'Hedar from the mirror universe in the pilot though.
Which is an oxymoron. I don't understand that. You said it yourself. it's a SCIENCE FICTION show. That right there tells you it's about things we don't have in our world.
