Will they ever "boldly go" again?

[Franklin]

I blame it on the success of Khan. After that, except for TVH, the movies were Kirk v. "the villain." It was even Picard v. "the villain" in the TNG movies. Now, it was Nero. It's getting old. It's a rut. "City" had no villain at all. Even in "Balance of Terror", it's hard to call the Romulan commander a true villain. The "evil villain" cycle has to be broken.

It scares me that Abrams even thinks for a fleeting minute about using Khan. Of course, I don't doubt for a minute that Abrams and his gang could come up with an even more vile villain than Khan if that's the type of story they want to tell. But, it's becoming a shopworn premise.

Break the rut, Mr. Abrams. The slate is blank, so let's see some real creativity in the next story. Seek out new life and new civilizations. Pay that credo more than lipservice. Take us on an adventure like we've never been on before. If it can't be done, then maybe Trek wasn't worth bringing back.

What about the rest of you? Are you with me? Or agin' me? Either way, thanks for the rant.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Yeh I say we take the Enterprise into a new dimension. Something like fluidic space.

 

[Ovation]

I'm with you. I don't want a "villain intricately linked to Kirk" scenario AT ALL. As I've said in other threads--"seek out new life and new civilizations". Do some friggin' exploring for crying out loud.

(of course, I don't pretend to think my views will carry the day, but I will be disappointed in another "grudge match" story)

 

[Silent_Bob]

Agreed. I'm tired of seeing rehashes of The Wrath of Khan as well. And to actually use Khan in another film would just be too much- well to be frank it would just be lazy. Nero may have been a five minute wonder, but at least he was a new character, albeit a nonsensical one.

Im hoping they will go for something different too. If they are going to reuse TOS story elements, then go for something big like the Planet Killer.

And if they really have to bring back an old school villain, i say let it be one of the original Klingons. If Kirk must have a nemesis, give us Kor.

 

[CorporalClegg]

With you 100%.

This has pretty much been my position on all the films since joining the board.

Every time I bring it up, someone inevitably says "Well, an adventure/exploration film simply can't be successful." But, I have yet to hear one reasonably sound explanation as to why it can't.

It also never fails that I have to point out TMP and TVH are the two most successful films to date.

 

[John Picard]

Yeh I say we take the Enterprise into a new dimension. Something like fluidic space.

Fluidic Space was one of the dumbest plot scenarios ever devised.

 

[urbandk]

Well, Abrams is really into mysteries... so perhaps a mystery could be the key to breaking away from the villain cycle.

 

[Islander]

You'll get not dispute with me either. I've stated it before and I'll say it again, this movie opens a very nice opportunity for a political crisis bringing the Federation to civil war. Fresh idea for Trek, great dramatic plot. I would call it "The enemy within". No megalomanic super villain, no doomsday machine. Just pure cerebral terror and Trek action!

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

I don't think the next film should be about Kirk and crew reacting to a threat to the Federation, but rather they should be out exploring and happen to come upon something that turns into a threat -- and the threat does not need to be to the entire Federation/Earth/Galaxy.

I do get tired of the "save the entire galaxy from an evil-doer" plots.

 

[Cakes488]

I'm with you all the way baby...but I just don't have much hope that they'll come up with a compelling and engaging story that doesn't revolve around us vs. evil villain type of scenario. This formula has proven too successful in the past...so I have a hard time believing that they'll stray from it. Even just talk of using Khan in the sequel is disheartning....was Trek rebooted so we could revisit the same foes -- and RIGHT AWAY....for cripes sake!!

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Yeh I say we take the Enterprise into a new dimension. Something like fluidic space.

Fluidic Space was one of the dumbest plot scenarios ever devised.

Are you kidding, I friggin loved it. It was well different. I don't actually want fluidic space again but I certainly want to see something as different and unique.

 

[maryh]

For me this film feels like TOS is being painted on the TNG canvas. It had lots of the elements that turned me off to TNG.

Its feels more political than like "exploring strange new worlds" - like TNG was.

Its got those inter-ship subtle romantic relationships (picard-crusher, troi-riker, and now Spock-Uhura)

PC'ness replacing good character interactions (Uhura as a main character instead of McCoy - more PC than fun)

Stories will be about war, political situations and entanglements, cultural comparisons or villains vs Kirk.

Wish TOS authors were more involved. They might understand what made TOS so different thasn the spin-offs than these authors.

 

[John Picard]

I don't think the next film should be about Kirk and crew reacting to a threat to the Federation, but rather they should be out exploring and happen to come upon something that turns into a threat -- and the threat does not need to be to the entire Federation/Earth/Galaxy.

I do get tired of the "save the entire galaxy from an evil-doer" plots.

I agree, and your last comment falls in line with this thread I started in the General Trek Discussion.

Yeh I say we take the Enterprise into a new dimension. Something like fluidic space.

Fluidic Space was one of the dumbest plot scenarios ever devised.

Are you kidding, I friggin loved it. It was well different. I don't actually want fluidic space again but I certainly want to see something as different and unique.

Meh. I didn't care for it, but like you I'd like to see something different and unique.

 

[Islander]

Yeh I say we take the Enterprise into a new dimension. Something like fluidic space.

Fluidic Space was one of the dumbest plot scenarios ever devised.

Are you kidding, I friggin loved it. It was well different. I don't actually want fluidic space again but I certainly want to see something as different and unique.

There's 3 state: gas, fluid and solid. I don't think solidic space would be very interesting on screen (kind of slow pace...)

 

[TheArsenal]

it would be interesting to show space itself - even in that advance day and age - as treacherous and dangerous so that the external forces around space travel become part of the threat. We've seen this in Apollo 13, for example. The primary difference being, it is far more difficult to create a credible threat of conditions when, by definition, any solution will not be real world based like Apollo 13, but magical. But its done is scifi movies all the time.

Whether it is conditions or a more typical villain, I do like the idea up thread to make the threat something other than reactive, and not so large in scale. These guys are Federation officers, not the Justice League. We care about these characters; danger to their ship and lives is large enough.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I think if the scripts start asking the audience to give a fuck about nonsense like the politics or survival of "the Federation" then the movies will tank. This is the sort of nonsense that diminished viewership for the modern Trek shows.

 

[maryh]

I think if the scripts start asking the audience to give a fuck about nonsense like the politics or survival of "the Federation" then the movies will tank. This is the sort of nonsense that diminished viewership for the modern Trek shows.

Yes but already the questions being asked on Trekmovie involve "The survival of Vulcans and their culture", "Who has Surak's katra", "Will Spock marry Uhura", "Will an alliance between the remaining Vulcans and Romulans happen".

Wish we could go back to an unexplored galaxy, brave, professional shipmates, science fiction etc.

 

[TheArsenal]

I think if the scripts start asking the audience to give a fuck about nonsense like the politics or survival of "the Federation" then the movies will tank. This is the sort of nonsense that diminished viewership for the modern Trek shows.

Agreed. That "Trade Federation" political nonsense wasn't too popular in Star Wars either. There's a lesson in there.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I think if the scripts start asking the audience to give a fuck about nonsense like the politics or survival of "the Federation" then the movies will tank. This is the sort of nonsense that diminished viewership for the modern Trek shows.

Yes but already the questions being asked on Trekmovie involve "The survival of Vulcans and their culture", "Who has Surak's katra", "Will Spock marry Uhura", "Will an alliance between the remaining Vulcans and Romulans happen".

Those of us who hang out here and there and fuss over such things don't drive the box office success of the movies. Let 'em ask away.

 

[gastrof]

Well, Abrams is really into mysteries... so perhaps a mystery could be the key to breaking away from the villain cycle.

Oh please.

All we need is an Enterprise landing party getting stuck on a planet that's traveling thru time.