Trek Returning to TV in 2017!

[Terok Nor]

I don't think many people will complain if the aliens look a little different. TOS Klingons and TOS Movie Klingons got by just fine without anyone's head exploding. Similar arguments can be made for the Romulans, Borg and Trill who all underwent an image overhaul. We all know it's fiction at the end of the day. It would be nice if it was all set in the same universe so it all "matters" though. It was nice knowing TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager were part of the same continuity even if there was stuff that didn't mesh with previous continuity. I'd hate to see that shared universe replaced with the JJ Abrams one or a rebooted one entirely (though I could cope with a reboot if I had to).

 

[LLAP]

 

[Mudd]

But those of us who were Trekkies for decades before TNG showed up are always going roll our eyes at the notion that STAR TREK didn't matter until Jean-Luc Picard first appeared on the scene.

Exactly so.

TNG and the entire "modern Trek" production run was neither the beginning nor the zenith of Star Trek as a property. It was a phase, successful but derivative and peculiar to its era.

It also pretty thoroughly wore out its welcome by the early years of this century.

The next version of Trek needn't and shouldn't be an elaboration on it but a new thing of its own.

 

[Squiggy]

And this assertion is flatly wrong because the Trek franchise existed concretely and indisputably before TNG existed. The repeated assertions and wishful thinking otherwise don't change that.

Thanks for the breaking news there.

No one is saying that Trek didn't exist before TNG, just that what came after TNG was more closely related to TNG than TOS.

You could argue that Enterprise was the most direct descendent of TOS, right down to the studly Captain, mysterious vulcan, and plucky southerner trio at the core - but since that series was mostly garbage you might not want to claim it.

The next version of Trek needn't and shouldn't be an elaboration on it but a new thing of its own.

This might shock people, but I'm going to agree with Dennis here. People saying that S6 should follow up on the aftermath of the Dominion War, Borg threat, yada yada forget that no one really cares about the Dominion War, the Borg, or anything else having to do with the last 6 or 7 seasons of post-TNG Trek. The answer to all those unanswered questions are "Don't care. Let's have some fun."

Ratings sucked then and it was 15 years ago. Ratings sucked in syndication. Ratings sucked on network TV. A show based off that would have even sucker ratings now on yet another delivery platform.

Asking for more of the same is nothing but fanwank and would kill the franchise - again.

 

[Yanks]

So here's a thought. There was no new Star Trek on TV for 28 out of the 49 years since TOS started. More than half. Trek aired: 1966-1969; 1972-1973; 1987-2005. The two longest gaps: 14 and 12 years. The only fan made show of broadcast quality was Axanar, but I'm not counting that.

RAMA

You're kidding right?

Star Trek Continues?

I wish those guys nothing but good thoughts, and there has been some fun moments and good material out of it, but in terms of being ready for broadcast in all aspects of production, only Axanar would make the cut for a CBS executive.

RAMA

Maybe production wise, but trek wise it's not even close.

 

[Greg Cox]

Repeat after me: the primary purpose any new series is NOT to wrap up loose ends from the previous incarnations, flesh out blank spots in the original timeline, bring us up to speed on the current state of Bajor and Cardassia, and to preserve the "canon" at all costs. It's to attract viewers new and old, and to create compelling television that (ideally) will appeal to the hardcore fans, casual fans, and people who have never a STAR TREK TV show before.

 

[Yanks]

Repeat after me: the primary purpose any new series is NOT to wrap up loose ends from the previous incarnations, flesh out blank spots in the original timeline, bring us up to speed on the current state of Bajor and Cardassia, and to preserve the "canon" at all costs. It's to attract viewers new and old, and to create compelling television that (ideally) will appeal to the hardcore fans, casual fans, and people who have never a STAR TREK TV show before.

Agree.

.... and stay away from the dystopian stuff...

 

[Squiggy]

Repeat after me: the primary purpose any new series is NOT to wrap up loose ends from the previous incarnations, flesh out blank spots in the original timeline, bring us up to speed on the current state of Bajor and Cardassia, and to preserve the "canon" at all costs. It's to attract viewers new and old, and to create compelling television that (ideally) will appeal to the hardcore fans, casual fans, and people who have never a STAR TREK TV show before.

Agree.

.... and stay away from the dystopian stuff...

Trek has never been dystopian.

 

[Greg Cox]

Repeat after me: the primary purpose any new series is NOT to wrap up loose ends from the previous incarnations, flesh out blank spots in the original timeline, bring us up to speed on the current state of Bajor and Cardassia, and to preserve the "canon" at all costs. It's to attract viewers new and old, and to create compelling television that (ideally) will appeal to the hardcore fans, casual fans, and people who have never a STAR TREK TV show before.

Agree.

.... and stay away from the dystopian stuff...

But don't make it too squeaky-clean and "utopian" either.

Optimistic, but far from perfect, with flesh-and-blood characters who still have flaws and weaknesses and make mistakes sometimes.

 

[Tim Walker]

.

.

But don't make it too squeaky-clean and "utopian" either.

Optimistic, but far from perfect, with flesh-and-blood characters who still have flaws and weakenesses and make mistakes sometimes.

That was a mistake made with TNG, the utopian thing stifled drama.

It should be possible to have a strand of optimism while still having characters be imperfect.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

I disagree - I don't know where this received wisdom came from, probably things members of the writing staff wanted - but TNG was probably the best series and had huge viewing figures. It also, arguably, presented a more inspiring vision than most sci-fi. Note that TNG got bored with itself after Gene died, not before. For dark n gritty, you can go anywhere - but its rare indeed for such a bold argument in favor of the enlightenment.

 

[Greg Cox]

I disagree - I don't know where this received wisdom came from, probably things members of the writing staff wanted - but TNG was probably the best series and had huge viewing figures. It also, arguably, presented a more inspiring vision than most sci-fi. Note that TNG got bored with itself after Gene died, not before. For dark n gritty, you can go anywhere - but its rare indeed for such a bold argument in favor of the enlightenment.

No one is saying that we need a post-atomic holocaust where computer-controlled zombie gorillas have brought humanity to the brink of extinction. STAR TREK has always been one of the few SF series that presented a future that one might actually want to live in--and that's always been a big part of its appeal.

But, as every other episode of TOS reminded us, as did DS9 later on, progress isn't easy and humanity still has a long way to go. You can't just sweep human nature under the rug by declaring that, "Well, in the future, people are much more enlightened and have left all that bad old stuff behind."

There's a point where idealism crosses over into escapism and wishful thinking. Maybe best to stay on the other side of that line. "We're not going to kill . . . today."

You also get more drama and conflict and grueling emotional dilemmas that way.

 

[Tim Walker]

Yeah, that utopian stuff in early TNG was dull. It tended to make the characters dull, too.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Rumour cropping up that the new series is based on Harve Bennett's early 90's Star Trek: The Academy Years movie premise. Click(bait).

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

I disagree - I don't know where this received wisdom came from, probably things members of the writing staff wanted - but TNG was probably the best series and had huge viewing figures. It also, arguably, presented a more inspiring vision than most sci-fi. Note that TNG got bored with itself after Gene died, not before. For dark n gritty, you can go anywhere - but its rare indeed for such a bold argument in favor of the enlightenment.

No one is saying that we need a post-atomic holocaust where computer-controlled zombie gorillas have brought humanity to the brink of extinction. STAR TREK has always been one of the few SF series that presented a future that one might actually want to live in--and that's always been a big part of its appeal.

But, as every other episode of TOS reminded us, as did DS9 later on, progress isn't easy and humanity still has a long way to go. You can't just sweep human nature under the rug by declaring that, "Well, in the future, people are much more enlightened and have left all that bad old stuff behind."

There's a point where idealism crosses over into escapism and wishful thinking. Maybe best to stay on the other side of that line. "We're not going to kill . . . today."

You also get more drama and conflict and grueling emotional dilemmas that way.

But I wasn't arguing against this, or your comments, I was arguing against the idea that TNG was mindlessly utopian and dull.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

Rumour cropping up that the new series is based on Harve Bennett's early 90's Star Trek: The Academy Years movie premise. Click(bait).

Strong rumors, eh.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

Rumour cropping up that the new series is based on Harve Bennett's early 90's Star Trek: The Academy Years movie premise. Click(bait).

I hope, and think, thats a joke.

 

[Mudd]

Worldofoddballs is a completely worthless, trash clickbait site.

 

[Warped9]

Rumour cropping up that the new series is based on Harve Bennett's early 90's Star Trek: The Academy Years movie premise. Click(bait).

Done that. It was called ST09.

Besides which the official CBS announcement was that the series involved all new characters.

So this is (I hope) b.s.

 

[Greg Cox]

I think we can probably expect a new "rumor" every week for the next few months at least.

Most of them will be nonsense, wishful thinking, false assumptions, outright hoaxes, or, at best, a garbled version of something that may or may not have a grain of truth buried somewhere beneath a ton of wild speculation . . . .

"The producers met with a dark-haired actress yesterday. Ohmigod, the next captain is going be a female Vulcan, probably a rebooted version of Saavik!"

"Don't be silly. It's obviously going to be a sequel to ENTERPRISE starring T'Pol and Tripp's daughter . . . ."