Same sentiment. This weekend I reread this entire thread and came away with same feeling. I know I wrote these posts, but it's almost like reading someone else's words. Weird.Yesterday I was curious and started re-reading this thread. I'm presently finished reading to the end of page 25 and wrapping up Season 4.
It makes for interesting reading. In some respects it's weird reading something you know you wrote and yet it could almost be like reading someone else's words.
TNG-R isn't drastically different than TNG. It looks cleaner and more vivid, but not drastically changed. So it would still come done to the stories themselves.
"Too Short A Season" **
A Starfleet Admiral takes a rejuvenating drug to face an old enemy.
This could have been a somewhat interesting tale, but I was constantly distracted by Admiral Jameson's thoroughly bad makeup and equally bad performance. Maybe if he hadn't been so focal to the story...maybe.
I've heard a rumor that this episode was intended to possibly feature William Shatner returning as an aged Kirk, trying to regain his youth to deal with a mess of a situation from his past (specifically, Tyree and A Private Little War) and would have allowed Kirk to regain his (real life at the time) age in the 24th century, but that the producers felt it was too soon to be relying on TOS and wanted to stand on its own feet. I think it could have been phenomenally done with Shatner.... comments?
The crew of the ISS Enterprise, NCC-1701/C
JEAN LUC PICARD - The illustrious commander of the Terran Imperial Starfleet's last great Galaxy-Class Dreadnought. Where our Picard is warm and gentle, this one is cold and hard, where ours would quotes Shakespeare, this one quotes Machiavelli.
Maybe his uniform could have some nifty Napoleonic accoutrements. It would go smashingly with one of those gold sashes.
COMMANDER SHELBY - Just as ambitious as the regular Shelby. This one decided to upstage Riker with a knife, instead of with her service to the ship and crew.
LORE - Operations officer. Because it's the mirror universe. Having Data wouldn't be as cool.
TASHA YAR - Less dead. Way way more extreme and violent. Generally regarded to be the captain's personally groomed killing machine.
GENERAL WORF - Picard's archnemesis, leading a pack of Alliance ships. Wheras our Worf is a centered being with a sense of duty and honor, this Worf is narrow-minded and ill-tempered. His ruthlessness and vision would prove integral to his ascension to Regent.
DEANNA TROI - Political officer. Obviously. With all the backstabbers and greedy self-serving crewmembers, somebody's gotta keep them in line. Who better than a telepath (she's been artificially augmented with implants and training to pick up more than the usual empathy stuff).
BEVERLY CRUSHER - Gettin' horizantal with the captain after-hours.
GEORDI LA FORGE - Abandoned by his parents when they learned he was blind. Not living a good life, and definitley not on the Enterprise.
REGINALD BARCLAY - The Enterprise's neurotic, dangerously paranoid chief engineer.
JANE SMITH (RO LAREN) - A Bajoran infiltrator disguised as a Terran officer, inserted by the Alliance. As the Enterprise's navigator, she has access to some veeeery interesting stuff.
"Too Short A Season" is one of my personal favourites, just the way it is. I wouldn't want to see William Shatner involved, especially in a story like that. It wouldn't have worked! Shatner's demands and involvement in the story would've ruined the idea. I'm so glad that Shatner never guest starred on the TV series.I've heard a rumor that this episode was intended to possibly feature William Shatner returning as an aged Kirk, trying to regain his youth to deal with a mess of a situation from his past (specifically, Tyree and A Private Little War) and would have allowed Kirk to regain his (real life at the time) age in the 24th century, but that the producers felt it was too soon to be relying on TOS and wanted to stand on its own feet. I think it could have been phenomenally done with Shatner.... comments?
You could start a new thread including a link to my old one citing it as the source for your new discussion.
Phoenix219, you raise a valid issue, a real conundrum for we moderators. There are no rigid rules that we can follow and each person's logic may differ. If someone replies to an old (and how old is old?) thread with a one word remark or an emoji, it will certainly not be received well. If, as in the case of this thread, genuine discussion is generated, my feeling is to let it have a new life. From forum to forum, your mileage may vary.
