6 Rules for Rebooting a Star Trek TV Show Comments - Mania.com



COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 21 - 30 of 96
<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 6 >  >>  
DarthDuck 12/7/2009 10:33:58 AM

Section 9, talk about going against Gene's vision.  Not that it would be a cool idea Chris, I'm just saying.

The "science" of shows like TNG and VOY is a leap of faith.  I thought TNG was extremely character driven, I loved that crew as I watched TNG growing up.  Sure the main deflector disc can solve almost any problem, except the Borg in BOBW, but that's what made that two-parter so great.

Sure, Data playing the part of Pinocchio might've been heavy handed at times, but also was a great aspect to that show.  And really to all the shows, there was always the character trying to learn what it meant to be human.  Those were the great episodes and movies.

keithdaniel 12/7/2009 10:44:45 AM

I have no idea why the hell ST:TNG,ST:DS9,and ST:V did so well for so long! They weren't bad shows mind you but I think they could've been so much better. The three series I mentioned above were too sanitized,had average tv effects,lacked intrigue,lacked action,and in general just played it safe far too often. The original Star Trek series had stronger stories,more intrigue,much better action and had much better characters! The relaunch of Battlestar Galactica from 2003 in general is the way to go if they were to do another Star Trek tv series(although it doesn't have to be as sexually raunchy). Shed the sanitized mentality and create stronger characters,more intriguing stories,better action and raise the bar on special effects. It may cost more per episode(so just have fewer episodes!)to do so but it would be worth it. Going back and making another Star Trek tv series in the same tired,sanitized manner as in past other tv series is not true progression! Having said that,I agree with those that say they should wait a while before doing another Star Trek series. There has been too many in my opinion,epecially since 1992 with St:DS9,in 1994 with ST:V and in 2001 with ST:E. Give it a rest for some time and allow the new JJ Abrams film franchise to florish now that the latest film has taken off.

Gideon 12/7/2009 10:45:50 AM

While the ”old universe” was a good ride, by the end, it had grown a bit stale, as they were too trapped by the weight of their own history to be allowed to attempt anything innovative. For this alone, the J.J. reboot was exactly what Star Trek needed and I would enjoy a new series in this vein/ universe. However, they really should wait. If you want to suck the success out of the reboot as quickly as possible, a new series that over-saturates the renewed/ newly discovered interest in this franchise would do it (and that's assuming that its not poorly done). Worse a rushed series in the “old universe” would have this same effect, plus also serve to confuse the “newer” fans …and all while suffering from residing in the same quagmire that killed the previous run. .

If they finally do go the TV route, please be contemporary, cutting-edge and make it matter! Star Trek should be more like a BSG in its impact, than just another genre show lost in the air-waves somewhere between SG-1 repeats and Doll house.
 

karas1 12/7/2009 11:09:37 AM

killerville, who is Tom Joad?  Never heard of him.

LooneyBinJIm 12/7/2009 11:10:48 AM

An idea I have been kicking around was Star Trek: Starfleet Chronicles or Star Trek: Cronicles. The basic ideas would be to tell different "untold stories" from any of the different time periods.

For example, go into more detail of what happened to the crew of the ship that was desroyed prior to the Enterprise arriving (as seen in almost every episode). What exactly did they try that failed. Focus on another ship and crew, revisit the result of planets previously visited etc.

When a certian crew or period latches on, you can make a new show centered around that.

VicDeZen 12/7/2009 11:16:35 AM

Love these suggestions.  Everything about them rings true especially the reference to repspecting the characters.  The Next Generation had that rule down. and it became the formula to use for the better part of the 90's with DP9 and Voyager.  I wouldn't mind watching a new Star Trek show.

VicDeZen 12/7/2009 11:17:30 AM

Love these suggestions.  Everything about them rings true especially the reference to repspecting the characters.  The Next Generation had that rule down. and it became the formula to use for the better part of the 90's with DP9 and Voyager.  I wouldn't mind watching a new Star Trek show.

mbeckham1 12/7/2009 11:58:34 AM

Deep space Nine as definitelyn he best of the Next eneration Universe series.  Maybe the best seris, it was well ahead f t's time, gbvng uscomplex moral delimas and complex charaters, it took the Genben Roddenberry concept and challengedit,  making it more ambiguous an more fascinating because to really took the conscept somewhere new.  Making a univere where the right choices weren't always easy or clear or even possible.  In some ways making the challenge more complex and viceral made the high ideals and the will to uphold them as best as possible seem even more noble and strong and the characters better for it.

Taking cultures seen as barbaric in other Trek series and really seeing what makes them tick and the context of their choies, giving eve enemies a certain nobility and respect.  Because they could always find something interesting too wth their excellent cast of charactes and cultures and histories of their races, they always camre up with strong orginial stories up until the end of their seven year run.  I think Ron Moore reall set  a strong foundation that the franchisde owners should have built on, instead they took a few steps back, with Voyger, their rah, rah Federation are the good guys approach seemed a little off putting after the more inclusive Trek Universe that Ron Moore created. 

Redshirt1 12/7/2009 12:17:29 PM

You know a lot of people comment on how this new movie has some how warped Rodennberry vision of the future.  The Great Bird of the Galaxy's personal dream in which we all live in harmony with everyone everywhere, peace on earth and all that.  It's a load of crap.  Yes Roddenberry showed that all the people of the earth finally came together to stop blowing the hell out of one another.  However, to paraphrase Q, we went out into the stars to find all sorts of new enemies to blow the hell out of.  The Klingons, Romulans, Tholians, Gorn, Cardassians, and a host of other peoples in which to fire phasers at.  The philosophy behind Star Trek is great, but don't kid yourself it is the action and sex which ultimately drives the stories.  When I was a kid I pretended to be Kirk, because he was the action hero.  I fought against the evil Klingons with my toy phaser.  When I grew up I saw Kirk as the skirt chaser looking to score with anything with boobs and a hoohah.  Which brings us to the protrayal of women.  In the 23 century the most practical uniform for women to put on to go exploring strange new worlds is of course the mini-skirt.  Women, who in the original series were not allowed to become captains of starships.  Women were used as sex symbols and while some might argue that it was simply a product of the times; I would point to the addition of 7 of 9 to counter that argument.  The only reason she was introduced was because they needed to draw in the target audience of males 17 to 32.  So they found an actress with big boobs and put her into a skin tight outfit.  Hardly very forward thinking in its protrayal of women.  Rodenberry described Star Trek as the wagon train to the stars.  Esentially he made a western in space replaced the "savage Indian" with the savage Klingon.  Star Trek is a series based upon a wonderful philosophical concept, but considering all the violence that has occured in the original time line one cannot simply argue that the new movie was in fact any different than what has happened before in terms of presenting a valid take on the Trek universe.  

G671 12/7/2009 12:34:02 PM

Good suggestions. But, I'd still like to see another movie or two, first, regardless of what timeline they use for TV.  Let the new movie cast run with the momentum they've built and see where it takes us.

You'll notice, when watching the Next Generation, and then Voyager.. the Next Gen had some cheesy looking Borg, then they did a movie with a big budget, and the Borg looked a lot cooler and more advanced. Then, Voyager came along, and they were able to borrow from the "movie-quality" Borg effects and makeup for the TV show.

I think we would be expecting a lot now as far as the special effects (on a new 24th Century Star Trek TV show) after seeing the new movie (23rd Century "iBridge", for example).  Let the movies run a few more years, and then see what technology and FX can be applied to a new TV show.

<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 6 >  >>  

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.