STAR TREK: What happens now?

[FireStormTrooper]

So, STAR TREK:ENTERPRISE just went off the air. And for the first time since 1987, there is no on-air Trek series next season.

Thank God.

I firmly agree with whomever said that the franchise was suffering from fatigue. I think the whole concept is exhausted right now and has clearly run its course for the forseeable future. STAR TREK X was a box office disaster (and not coincidentally, the only Trek movie since the STAR WARS prequels hit the screen). ENTERPRISE never did anything for me from the first season, which is when I stopped watching. VOYAGER was PC in age where PC is dead. DEEP SPACE NINE was good but got too mystical in the end. NEXT GENERATION was the only worthy successor to the original series.

So what happens now? I say let it rest. For a while.

NEXT GENERATION was so fresh in part because it has been a very long time since new STAR TREK was on the air. And it was a logical upgrade (story-wise, timeline-wise, acting-wise) over the original. It was right idea, right time.

So let there be no more Trek for at least five full seasons. 2010 or so, if Paramount wants to revive it, let them do it big and do it right. Either as the Next Next Generation (maybe fast forward another hundred years?) or as a big summer/holiday tentpole theatrical movie event.

I feel like most casual viewers are worn out on STAR TREK. I know I am.

Thoughts?

[Kwick22a]

I liked the first two seasons of Enterprise, but when they tried to add more action and sex in the third season I really started to lose interest. And, except for a few episodes, the last season wasn't all that great either.
I say let it sit on a shelf for a few years, don't put out another movie or series just to have one. Wait until they have a really, really good idea and then bring it back.

Some ideas I wouldn't mind seeing:

A Star Trek series set in the 29th century, dealing with the time travel branch of Starfleet.

A movie or series set in the evil Star Trek universe. Time frame after Kirk, but before the fall of the empire shown on DS9.

Maybe the New Frontier book series translated to the screen, but I'm not sure how well it would work.

One thing I know I would like to see is the Borg returning to the ultra scary, unbeatable enemy they were on TNG and First Contact and not the wimpy, castrated version from Voyager. Seriously, it used to be a Borg invasion was just a few inches short of armageddon. They lost forty ships at Wolf 359 and who knows how many during First contact. Then Voyager, a tiny little ship lost in the middle of freaking nowhere, were outsmarting and escaping them at every turn. It always bugged the hell out of me.

[D.K.HOOD]

This franchise is dead, dead, dead and it should stay that way. It was just exhausted and had to be put out of its misery. You started seeing the same stories being done in each series, the musical score of the shows starting sounding like a synthesize orchestra in a can around the 5th season of Next Generation, and its been pretty much the same for the later series. There's absolutely nothing left to do with Star Trek unless they make a series with no humans, just completely alien, and that's not going to happen. Trekkies or trekkers need to let it go. The franchise had an amazing run: Five different series, ten movies. comic books, and a cartoon show. You have nothing to complain about. Angel/Buffy fans or Babylon 5 fans have more to be upset about than trekkies.

I'd suggest gravitating over to the new Battlestar Gallactica if you need a sci-fi fix, but its not as family friendly as Star Trek was so I wouldn't recommend watching it with a 10 year old.

[DarrenJSeeley]

While I'm sad to see Star Trek wind down (at least for the time being) I didn't like Enterprise until the last two seasons. I think Trek can be brought back within time, although the rumored next movie "Romulan War" pre- TOS idea isn't much of a stunning thought.

Next movie I would like to see the NG crew (perhaps with Q) pass the torch to a new Enterprise crew- one made up strictly for the films.

If there were another Trek series? I'd like to see one based on or around either Gary Seven or The Outrageous Okuna :)

[FireStormTrooper]

I like the idea of the next Trek venture being a strictly threatical release-only idea. I say put a five-year moratorium on all things Trek. No new TV series or movies or cartoons or anything from now until 2010. I'm sure their convention circuits will keep hope alive for that time being. I also think that someone new should be in charge of the whole Trek franchise. Rick Berman, Gene Roddenberry's "successor" has clearly lost his touch (unlike Lucas, who recently regained it) and needs to step down. Let someone else have a turn at the wheel, with fresh ideas and a new outlook. Maybe someone like, like ... hell, someone'll take the job.

So to any Trek viewer out there, casual or otherwise, assuming that STAR TREK should continue at all, what is the proper course of action.

Me? I say in five years time, bring on the next next generation to the big screen. Fast forward to the late 25th century, a hundred years after the exploits of Capt. Jean-Luc Piccard's crew. A brand new Enterprise (the NCC-1701-H) and her crew deal with the galaxy as it is in the far future. Give them a new villian that is as awe-inspiring as Khan Noonian Singh and the Borg Queen were. Give the whole thing a LORD OF THE RINGS epic feel.

STAR TREK is not beyond redemption.

[imported_Thom]

I love Trek. But it's just been scraping the barrel for the past 10 years. 3-4 overlapping TV series and a film franchise is just a bit much, and the most recent attempts have been made only to entertain pre-existing Trekkies... Just not a good idea, from a creative nor business standpoint. (One could draw a lot of similarities to the comic industry.)

I say, wait about 10-15 years, then consider a reboot. Yeah, a reboot. Whether or not you'd be dealing with the same Cptn. Kirk of the 23rd century or not, is beyond me, but there's just too much "dogma" and backstory built up for the existing continuity. There's just no appeal for outsiders or mainstream audiences... Find a way to inject such an appeal while remaining true to the fundamentals of the Star Trek universe, and the franchise will have life again.

[Jakerman]

Star Trek died a long time ago. It died towards the end of DS9. TNG was good because it had interesting characters, DS9 was good because it had action and the crew didn't always get along real well, Voyager and Enterprise were pathetic attempts to milk the franchise. Paramount needs to leave it dead for at least five years then bring it back with good writers (that means not the guys from Enterprise) and focuss on stories and people not special effects. And just to get it out of my system: HOW BAD WAS THE ENTERPRISE FINALE?!?!?! (spoilers ahead) The entire concept was retarded. I mean watching a holodeck program, and focusing on Riker instead of the people the show was about? And they should have fed off Nemesis and had Riker and Troi on the Titan because they looked stupid in those TNG uniforms trying to look young. And the worst part was they killed off the only cool and interesting character in the crew, Tucker. And they killed him in such a lame way and then didn't show him die you just have to figure it out when Archer and T'pal are talking. They really showed why the show got canceled and why Paramount wouldn't take the trekkies 3 million to keep it going.

[FireStormTrooper]

To me, it seems that, above all else, a rest is needed. These next 5 years or so should be a "dark age" for STAR TREK, much like the mid-70s were for the franchise (in between the end of the animated series and the start of production for the first movie). For the next 5 years, STAR TREK only exists in syndication and convention circuits.

During this time, I believe STAR TREK head honcho Rick Berman must step down/retire/just plain leave the franchise. He was responsible for DS9, VOYAGER and ENTERPRISE. While DS9 had some merit, the last two series were flat-out stinkers. He should hand the reins over to someone else.

That someone else should spend a couple years just working out a good outline and game plan for the future of STAR TREK. Clearing away the clutter and streamlining would seem to be good themes to go by. Learn the lessons from other sci-fi franchises, like STAR WARS (which is more like fantasy in a sci-fi setting), ANDROMEDA, BABYLON 5, STARGATE, etc. STAR TREK is the daddy of all sci-fi franchises. When the time is right (and it won't be for at least 5 years from now), unleash a brand new big-time STAR TREK that is at once accessible and intelligent. I like the movie-only approach for a next next generation crew of the USS Enterprise.

[DarrenJSeeley]

HOW BAD WAS THE ENTERPRISE FINALE?!?!?! (spoilers ahead) ... had Riker and Troi on the Titan because they looked stupid in those TNG uniforms trying to look young. And the worst part was they killed off the only cool and interesting character in the crew, Tucker...

I happen to agree with the Enterprise finale. Was it really needed? Just milk the episodes with guest star Peter Weller a bit more (he did make an interesting adversary, but while the character 'lived', you never had another scene with him. You get the scene with the 'spy', which comes from nowhere. But about that "offical" finale.

Why is it a Holodeck program? According to the ep, Enterprise had no real significant adventure for seven years, but just patrolled and...collect data on anomolies I suppose. But imagine if they didn't "tell us" Tripp was going to die* then, when Tripp does sacrifice himself for Archer, it has better impact.**

:arrow: Would'nt it be more involving, in fact, if Riker or Troi had some young Starfleet cadets with them, (a POV camera, "us" being one) and are shown the Holodeck events unfold before them as part of a history lesson? Sure beats a tie in with "Pegasus" and it would have solved the Riker wrinkles issue. Or how about an appearance by the Temporal agent?



*In the Mirror universe, records indicated Sato had passed away about this time.

**Since it was on the Holdeck, and Riker had "assumed" the identity of one of the away team, how accurate are the records? Was the chef confessional made up for the Holodeck? And since when did Riker want to slug Picard?

I think Manny Coto, who was party to the best Enterprise eps the last two seasons, should inherit the mantle. Instead of bailing out the Titanic, he should just find a better boat...

[fadexero]

How about a Star Trek Series all About Klingons...with 2 Actual Federation Officers on board..."Star Trek: Klingon Space" Something sappy like that. Basically something that isn't 'goodie tooshoes' like all the Start Treks are...a little violonce...A change of culture...something Star Trek Fans want...Klingons.....KLINGONS....and Khan...KHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!...thank you

[FireStormTrooper]

There's an idea. Did anyone else kinda notice how you could always draw parallels to present-day politics and Trek races/alliances?

Like

Federation = United States / NATO countries (tolerant and powerful)

Romulans = USSR / Eastern European countries (militaristic)

Klingons = Islamic countries (fundamentalistic)

Borg = communist China (sleeping superpower in waiting)


Anyway, just an idea ... what if the captain of the next Enterprise crew is not human? That's the last barrier left: first white man (TOS), then racial equality (DS9), then gender equality (VOYAGER). Seems the next logical step would be to have the captain be non-human. Maybe a very thoughtful Klingon or an action-oriented Vulcan. Something different. Well, whatever. Lots of time before anything becomes reality.

[fadexero]

That does make sense...but I see the Klingons as more the German type.

What about if they Go with a show based of the Federation Schools...Like a bunch cadets being tained, etc etc. That would be nifty. That way you can get Cameos from almost anyone. Cause you know the director would want to do it.

[D.K.HOOD]

Ok, I understand how the Romulans are Russians and the Federation is the US/NATO, but please explain how the Klingons are Islamic or German. Ok, maybe the singing was taken from the Germans, but that's the only thing I can think of. To me it always seemed clear that the Klingons were Japanese Samarai/Vikings in outer space, especially the Next Generation Klingons.

[Znluvx]

Anyway, just an idea ... what if the captain of the next Enterprise crew is not human? That's the last barrier left: first white man (TOS), then racial equality (DS9), then gender equality (VOYAGER). Seems the next logical step would be to have the captain be non-human. Maybe a very thoughtful Klingon or an action-oriented Vulcan. Something different. Well, whatever. Lots of time before anything becomes reality.

I had the same idea. I think it would be a great shift in the direction of the Star Trek franchise. It would certainly be interesting to see the reactions of another culture (albeit a manufactured one), especially in the current climate we (Americans) live in (the "If you don't believe like I believe you're unAmerican" rhetoric).

[Jakerman]

Yes the captain should be a Pakled. Haha just kidding.

[FireStormTrooper]

The Klingons are very much like the fundamentalistic Islamic culture of the Middle East. Honor is everything to both societies, both are male-chauvinistic and excessively macho, both look forward to dying in battle, both are given to exaggerated anger at the slightest grievance, both obsess about obtaining glory and being warriors.

The Borg are very much like the Communist Chinese. The Collective and the State. Borg multiply and assimilate other distinct cultures, China has over a billion people and is forcibly engulfing Tibet and Taiwan. The Borg care nothing for human rights, neither does the Chinese government. The Borg despise individualistic expression, so does communist China. The Borg present a gigantic potential threat to the Federation, China could start a nuclear war with America.

I think if there's going to be a theme to how to approach the next Trek, it's got be "Big-Time". Enterprise always seemed kinda backwater to me. It didn't grab me from the start, so I never really watched. Unlike the Next Generation, Enterprise always seemed like "a" new STAR TREK, not "the" new STAR TREK, just another Trek spinoff. I think the next Trek should be the one and only undisputed carrier of the torch, no competing series or movies or other Trek lines around at the time. Clear the clutter and burn the dead weight (overused continuity, in this case)

[imported_Thom]

I think I've gotta agree with D.K. The Klingon breed of "honor" is much more similar to the Japanese culture, especially to imperial Japan, the Samurai and what not. It's more about personal honor than "glory to God/Allah", and the gender roles are less strict. This goes mostly for 24th century Klingons... In TOS and the first run of movies, Kingons were actually more similar to Russians than the Romulans were, IMO.

But early Klingons weren't very well fleshed out, and their culture could probably be adapted fairly easily to create some strong allusions to Arab/Islamic culture.

How much, if any, of a presence did Klingons have in Enterprise? If they were to do a Klingon series a few years down the road, I think it'd be interesting for them to do the earlier years, pre-Kirk, so that they could lead up to being the "great", unified Klingon empire. (Sure, it's sorta what Enterprise was to do with the Federation, but the concept wasn't faulty--just the implementation.)

[D.K.HOOD]

Thom explained the Samurai parallels better than I could've. Thanks! There also seemed to be some Viking traits to TNG Klingon's, like their behaviours (drinking bloodwine and searching for a good battle), the burly women who looked like very mean opera singers, and all the references to Klingon mythology like Kahless (sort of like Thor) and the final resting place for warriors called Stovoqor which is like Valhalla.

Really, if I had to choose a group from Star Trek that represented Islamic fundamentalists it would be the Bajorans resistance, or the Maquis as they were referred to. The Bajorans had deep religious beliefs, so much so that their religious leaders were the ones with all the power in Bajoran society. Plus, they often used terrorism against the Federation as a way of getting attention to their cause.

[FireStormTrooper]

Quick question ... how many chronological years passed from the beginning of the first episode of NEXT GENERATION to the end of the movie NEMESIS? I know that in real life it's Sept. 1987 - Dec. 2002 ... which is 15 years. Did the same amount of time transpire storywise? And what years did the NextGen crew have their adventures?
A.D. 23xx - ???? Just curious.

[Sonic1002]

From what I've heard, they are going to make another movie....

But NOT based on any of the shows. And if I remember correctly, somewhere between Archer and Kirk's time.

[FireStormTrooper]

OK, so here we are in the first full calendar year of No Trek (NT). No new episodes airing , no new movies filming, no nothing.

All I can say is that I feel better already just thinking about that.

Not that I hate STAR TREK. Just the opposite. I found THE NEXT GENERATION to be hands-down the most re-watchable sci-fi series ever. Didn't care so much for its more political siblings DEEP SPACE NINE and VOYAGER, nor for its "cousin" ENTERPRISE.

Honestly it was just too much. Too many trips to the well, too many retreads, too many uninspired stories. It was time for STAR TREK to withdraw for the public stage for a while.

That said, I doubt this Age of No Trek will last forever. It's simply too much of a historical sci-fi phenomenon and cash cow (to Paramount) to never be revived. But everyone knows that after a franchise burn-out, there's going to a long rebuilding process. See the time in between the dreadful BATMAN & ROBIN (1997) to the awesome BATMAN BEGINS (2005). It took 8 years to clear away the garbage and create something fresh and good. I think STAR TREK is looking at downtime along those lines.

They need to shake things up first. And that has to start in the creative department. Executive producer Rick Berman has to step down or otherwise be made to leave so someone else can take the reigns. No more TV series or movies planned to appear any earlier than 2011 (ST's 45th annivarsary) and no later than 2016 (ST's big 50th).

Let's get to the point where we're actually missing Trek, instead being glad that there's no more Trek, which is where most of America is right now.

[Gustvoc]

Let the franchise to rest for some years, or dont do more Treks, let people miss star trek.

[knack]

There's no doubt about it, Trek needs a lengthy break and a good rethink about the franchise.
I'd like to see it come back first as a movie- I think Trek fans at least deserve a movie that looks epic and cinematic and not look like an extended tv episode. The Trek movie should return as a blockbuster event movie with new characters. It should have A-list talent in there too. Trek has relied too much on its fanbase to carry it along and that is why it has become complacent and brought about its own demise.
Trek will need to create a new generation of fans, so while not ditching continuity it should try to start its own and if it is successful then bring in the Klingons, Romulans etc. for the 2nd or 3rd movie.
And Paramount should also be smart about the franchise too. I'd say, by the second movie they should create a tv spin-off that would build upon and weave into the movies whilst existing in its own right, again with new characters, but within the same time frame as the movies.
Also the tone has to be right for the franchise too. Here I go back to the original which managed to be fast-paced on the whole and they had good accessible adventures. Kirk and co were very pro-active and had a good mix of characters and interplay that I found lacking in the subsequent Treks.
Also, Paramount shouldn't feel the need to have a new Trek on whenever possible because overkill...well, kills. Trek became very cosy and bland. Face it, all the recent Treks started to look and sound alike, regardless of when or where they were set. No one is saying that the show should look like Reservoir Dogs or anything, but they shouldn't be afraid to shake things up a bit.

[The Xenos]

Well, I'm happy watching reruns of The Next Generation. Would like to eventually get the DVD box sets, though there are a ton of series I can say that about.

[Jakerman]

Brace yourselves for rioting Trekkies! Phasers to kill! :evil:

According to Variety.com a new Trek film is in the works under J.J. Abrams. The film is set to be a prequel to the original series. Centering around Kirk and Spock's first meeting at the Academy and their first mission into space. I'm not a big Trek fan, I like it, but even I know recasting Kirk and Spock is a bad idea that will never work.

[FireStormTrooper]

from www.cnn.com


STAR TREK SET FOR '08 REVIVAL

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- More than three years after the last "Star Trek" movie crashed at the box office, the venerable sci-fi franchise is being revived by the director of the upcoming "Mission: Impossible" sequel, Daily Variety reported in its Friday edition.

The as-yet-untitled "Star Trek" feature, the 11th since 1979, is aiming for a fall 2008 release through Paramount Pictures, the Viacom Inc. unit looking to restore its box-office luster under new management, the trade paper said.

The project will be directed by J.J. Abrams, whose Tom Cruise vehicle "Mission: Impossible III" will be released by Paramount on May 5. Abrams, famed for producing the TV shows "Alias" and "Lost," will also help write and produce.

Daily Variety said the action would center on the early days of "Star Trek" characters James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock, including their first meeting at Starfleet Academy and first outer-space mission.

The paper described "Star Trek" as Hollywood's most durable performer after James Bond, spawning 10 features that have grossed more than $1 billion and 726 TV episodes from six series.

The 10th film, "Star Trek: Nemesis," bombed at the box office on its December 2002 release, earning just $43 million in North America. Last year, Viacom-owned broadcast network UPN pulled the plug on the low-rated series "Star Trek: Enterprise" following a four-season run.

Aaargh. So much to not like about this development. Young Kirk and Spock??? Re-casting younger actors in old roles? Whatever happened to moving forward? Why is Star Trek stuck in reverse? I hate prequels, and I know a lot of other trekkers do too. If too much baggage is the problem, don't re-boot, just do what TNG did; jump ahead far enough in time where you can make up brand new rules and don't need to have followed what came before. Screw it. Guess I'll just have to make up my own sci-fi saga.

[Jakerman]

I agree. There's plenty of stuff they could do without going backwards. I bet if this is scrapped we get like Son of Kahn or something. :roll:

[Pod]

Never really liked Star Trek...This movie will probably be never seen by me like that last one.

[FireStormTrooper]

Never really liked Star Trek...This movie will probably be never seen by me like that last one.

Look, BearPod, you seem like a nice kid and all, so let me ask you this: since you don't like even STAR TREK in general and have no interest in the topic, then why even post in this particular thread?

It's kind of rude to let people know how boring you find their topic. I can assure you, no one cares that you don't care about what they're talking about. We don't need to know.

No, that's just in regards to topics you have no interest in. If you genuinely do have an interest and merely are disagreeing, that's different. Everyone's entitled to express their opinion, after all. It's dissing the subject as a whole that I find uncool.

[Pod]

Never really liked Star Trek...This movie will probably be never seen by me like that last one.

Look, BearPod, you seem like a nice kid and all, so let me ask you this: since you don't like even STAR TREK in general and have no interest in the topic, then why even post in this particular thread?

It's kind of rude to let people know how boring you find their topic. I can assure you, no one cares that you don't care about what they're talking about. We don't need to know.

No, that's just in regards to topics you have no interest in. If you genuinely do have an interest and merely are disagreeing, that's different. Everyone's entitled to express their opinion, after all. It's dissing the subject as a whole that I find uncool.

If I got something to say, I say it. That's what a message board is for isn't it? To talk about stuff. And if my opinion is "dissing" this topic then so be it. It doesn't affect anyone does it? :roll:

[The Xenos]

GET OUT YOUR PHASERS! KILL THE UNBELIVER! DURKA DURKA! He probrably likes Star Wars too! KILL!

Just kidding.

Acutally, I'm a Trek fan since like middle school. Hells, I even dressed up as Data one Halloween. Yet even I didn't go see that last Trek film. The last one wasn't that great either. It was a generic episode only longer.

[FireStormTrooper]

Ah, kids will be kids. :roll:

Anyway, instead of this STARFLEET ACADEMY prequel direction they're currently leaning toward, they should do the opposite.

Boldly go where no TREK has gone before. Even further into the future.

Blow it all up the way TNG (Next Gen) did when it arrived. There was next to no connection to TOS (Orig Series). A cameo by an ancient Adm. McCoy was it.

Same deal here. Jump a hundred (or two hundred years even) ahead of when TNG, DS9 (Deep Space Nine) and VOYAGER all ended. Brand new cast, brand new characters, brand new technology, brand new enemies, brand new life and new civilizations. Key word here is new New NEW.

Keep it fresh and original. We don't need a retread ... if we even still need STAR TREK at all.

[Dark Pickle]

This Kirk/Spock movie is a bad idea. I wouldn't mind seeing a Series with Riker in command, something that might update us on Q and whatever happened to Wesely Crusher... (maybe this would be better as a movie or mini-series) But I can see where the five year rest followed by a movie or series set a century or two ahead would be preferable. This prequel dosn't sound appealing at all.

[darth_paul]

Well, a while back, around the time the first Mission Impossible movie came out, DC made a deal with Paramount to publish a line of "Paramount Comics" which were really just a way to repackage newer Star Trek comics that DC already had the rights to. (They were probably really just renewing their contract). So, they published somenew Star Trek comics, can't remember the exact titles, but I believe that there was one for each show: TOS, TNG, DS9, and Voyager, as well as one for Mission Impossible (which nobody bought and was cancelled quickly). Well, there were two more Star Trek comics also, and they were one based upon the adventures of original Enterprise Capt. Pike and his crew before Kirk & Co., and another title called Starfleet Academy . I never really picked up any of these titles, but I did read some and they weren't bad. They had some interesting concepts. The Academy book didn't have anything to do with Kirk or Spock or any other established characters, but IMO instead of being a comic book should have been a tv series a long time ago, with or without new characters.

[The Xenos]

Actually, at least one moron bought that Mission Impossible comic. I belive it had a Rob Liefeld cover or something to boot.

As for those Star Trek comics, I belive I got the Early Voyages with Capt. Pike one and the Star Fleet one. I think Quark's nephew was in it, so it was set in a post-TNG/DS9 time setting. I really liked the Early Voyages one. It showed the Star Trek series that never was.

Actually, I think it was Marvel who got the Paramont Comics as DC used to have the rights to Star Trek. I used to have a bunch of those too. They were some of the first comics I collected. There was also one Star Trek Unlimited which had stories from various series.

Aha. Wikipedia knows all:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramount_Comics

They also published the X-Men/TNG crossover. I belive the X-Men / Orginal series crossover was just under the Marvel imprint.

Wow. There's a funny little story about Tom Cruise getting pissed over looking "too gay" in the MI comic. Seems it wasn't just South Park he and Paramount censored. Talk about paranoid. Hmm.. as if he was hiding -censored by Paramount-.
http://www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com/rage/9662400571306.htm

[darth_paul]

Actually, at least one moron bought that Mission Impossible comic. I belive it had a Rob Liefeld cover or something to boot. :lol:

Sorry to hear that, man, very funny. Anyway, I checked your link to Wikipedia and thanks to that and your own clarifications, I can say that you are correct. Just one thing though, I did buy the Star Trek/X-Men crossover because I thought that it was an interesting experiment. That story was with the original crew of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, etc. and the X-Men that I remember distinctly being in it were Cyclops, Wolverine, & Archangel, but there were a few others. The book ended with a cliffhanger and continued in a novel where the same X-Men meeting the Next Generation Crew. I never read the novel, but I did see it in a bookstore and kind of skimmed through it. I don't know why they went this route, would've been better to continue it as a comic.

[Jakerman]

Teaser poster for the new film:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a247/Jake-/Trek.jpg

Looks like the Kirk Spock movie is a go. Bad idea IMO.

[Pod]

It's kinda like the spider-man teaser poster...Hmm, I guess the logo of the characters is a really good way of showing a teaser.

Oh and I totally won't be seeing this movie when it comes out. Trekkies might kill me if they see a non-fan in the seats. :wink:

[WC]

What's this new Star Trek film about and when is it set? Which characters will be in it?

For a new TV series, they should perhaps consider something like a cross between JAG and NCIS. Both would lend itself to the Starfleet aspect of Star Trek. They could have a greater variety of adventures rather than purely exploring all the time like they did with the other series (except DS9). They could have stories set at the Starfleet Starbase (perhaps legal issues), or stories investigating murders, other Starfleet or alien crimes etc, and some just purely exploration. JAG had a variety of stories during its 10-year run, some pure action and adventure, some courtroom drama. Star Trek could learn from one of these Bellasario series.

[Jakerman]

What's this new Star Trek film about and when is it set? Which characters will be in it?

The idea is a prequel to the original series with Kirk and Spock on their first space mission.

[WC]

What's this new Star Trek film about and when is it set? Which characters will be in it?

The idea is a prequel to the original series with Kirk and Spock on their first space mission.

Yeah, I just read about that. JJ Abrams apparently wants Matt Damon to star as Captain Kirk. :shock:

Apparently William Shatner has given his approval too.

Well if Damon's good enough for that role, surely he would be good enough for Namor the Submariner too. :mrgreen:

But somehow I don't really see Damon as Kirk. :?

[FireStormTrooper]

I, for one, think that the "creative" minds currently in charge of STAR TREK have run out of ideas and so they're going to recycle old concepts and stories. This latest and dumbest idea for the next STAR TREK movie sucks, flat-out.

I always thought STAR TREK was immune to the youth-obsessed culture of Hollywood. Maybe I was wrong. Either way, re-casting Kirk and Co is sci-fi blasphemy ... but seeing as Superman himself has been now been remade into a deadbeat dad, it's clear that no icon, no matter what genre, is safe from defilement.

[darth_paul]

I, for one, think that the "creative" minds currently in charge of STAR TREK have run out of ideas and so they're going to recycle old concepts and stories. This latest and dumbest idea for the next STAR TREK movie sucks, flat-out.

I always thought STAR TREK was immune to the youth-obsessed culture of Hollywood. Maybe I was wrong. Either way, re-casting Kirk and Co is sci-fi blasphemy ... but seeing as Superman himself has been now been remade into a deadbeat dad, it's clear that no icon, no matter what genre, is safe from defilement.

They've been recycling old concepts and stories since Voyager. After Roddenberry passed away it was all downhill from there.

[Znluvx]

Holy George Lucas!

Exclusive! "New" Star Trek Is Set on Stunning (http://tvguide.com/News/Insider/default.htm?rmDate=08312006)

http://online.tvguide.com/news/insider/images/060831insider1pop.jpg

[Pod]

http://online.tvguide.com/news/insider/images/060831insider1pop.jpg

This is wierd because the first thing that popped in my head when I saw this was the word "cute". :? :? :? This looks like a toy to me because my brain thought of the word cute...Wierd.

[darth_paul]

I can't wait to see this! :shock:

[Pod]

I can't wait to see this! :shock:

I can! :shock: :shock:



:lol:

[darth_paul]

I'm just curious to see how much they either actually do enhance it or how much they actually screw it up. Set phasers on "Modernize"! (It seems to be the Hollywood catch phrase nowadays with Transformers getting so screwed up, so why not bastardize yet another beloved franchise. :( :wink: :lol: )

[Sonic1002]

hoepfully it won't be on the level of bad like Insurrection and whatever that one was with the whales... Colorful metaphors could poor from my mouth

[darth_paul]

hoepfully it won't be on the level of bad like Insurrection and whatever that one was with the whales... Colorful metaphors could poor from my mouth

Insurrection was pretty bad, not a great way to end the TNG films. You didn't like Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home? And I thought that even numbered Trek films weren't supposed to suck? :lol: BTW, what number would this new one be? 11? 12? 13?