hmmmm....equipped with a new form of propulsion (quantum slipstream, a new kind of warp, maybe "hyperwarp," whatever) that allows the ship to travel further than any other ship to bear the name
hmmmm....equipped with a new form of propulsion (quantum slipstream, a new kind of warp, maybe "hyperwarp," whatever) that allows the ship to travel further than any other ship to bear the name
It's likely an extremely unpopular opinion here due to how many people have simply gobbled up Discovery and now Picard because it has the name "Star Trek" on it, but they're no more Trek than "Man of Steel" was a Superman movie.
... with three feet of snow falling and blowing sideways.My tolerance for this becoming a backdoor Man of Steel thread is, like, 20 below zero.
Aaaand that's where you lost me.but they're no more Trek than "Man of Steel" was a Superman movie.
Yeah, it sucked when TOS pushed Gene's politics on usPicard will be less about Trek and more about his political views on Brexit and Trump
Man of Steel is a Superman movie. Discovery and Picard are no less "Star Trek" series than TNG was, DS9 was, VOY was, ENT was. Each reflected the era in which they were produced.
I'd love to see Redstone fire Kurtzman and his ilk, wait three years, and then launch a new show that airs on one of the CBSViacom networks. The new series ignores STD and Picard and is set 75 years after Nemesis. There hasn't been a new Enterprise in 33 years (the Enterprise-E doesn't count)
The Enterprise - (pick your letter; I'm fond of H) is equipped with a new form of propulsion (quantum slipstream, a new kind of warp, maybe "hyperwarp," whatever) that allows the ship to travel further than any other ship to bear the name. The Enterprise-H can reach nearby galaxies but is a long-range explorer on a ten year mission. In past iterations of Trek outside of TOS, we got wrapped up in politics and conflicts and war. This show is about true exploration and what it means to possibly never return home. We used to visit a strange new world at the beginning of an episode and then leave at the end. This series would perhaps spend three episodes or more on that new world, though this would be balanced with bottle-shows due to budget. This would lend itself to compelling stories that explore characters and relationships aboard the ship. If it takes three weeks to get somewhere, that could be three episodes.
The argument that "the tech would be too advanced" is creative bankruptcy. Consider how advanced our tech is today and the issues that arise from its overuse. How might 25th century beings (humans and aliens alike) deal with advanced technology? What about species that are cybernetic? There's a lot of potential to explore these issues we face today via Trek, among others.
Sums up a lot of fan theories, including my ownWow.
That sounds awful.
The 20 year period takes us from 9/11 to Covid 19.I like the 20 year time jump over 100 too. It gives us time for society to have moved on from the Dominion war without it having become an abstract historical event. It's 9/11, not World War 2.
I favor both for different reasons. If it was going to "skewer" either, it wasn't apparent.I hope PIC skewers Brexit and Trump politics through its own lens.
have a series (or a couple) with one philosophy, and another with a different point of view. this would certainly please some viewers (me for one), while exposing some to the outrage of nonconformity.if the series secedes from CBS All Access and embraces a more libertarian philosophy I'm sure that turn of events will please some viewers.
I guess what I am saying is: I would like to see the social and political climate of the next century, the progress. prequels are nice, but we need more. Who agrees?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.