I find it odd that they'd throw two different concepts that have been kicking around for years into one movie.
But what ever happens, happens.
So, everyone is assuming that this will be the daily events in cadets at Starfleet, I assume.
What if they did it from the perspective of the teachers, and administration...so more of a comparison, since that seems to be the thing to do...it would be more of a Boston Public (but college) thing. Does that make it any better? I dunno, just wondering.
I am willing to hear more about it before I make a full judgement.
--------
"Yes, madam, I am drunk. But in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.
-- Winston Churchill
(Picture Main Street Salt Lake City UT, Circa 1900)
-
If they have to do this academy idea, why not set it farther into the future? This fanbase needs a wiff of something NEW! Stir things up, not retread ideas in time periods that box in the creative process. What could possibly be in peril in a pre-Kirk time period? We all know how it ends up.
People want to know what happens next. Have you ever read a book backwards? Enterprise and Star Wars have both shown that prequels don't really energize the fanbase.
Somebody needs to take this franchise where no one has gone before. Enough of these retread ideas, come up with something original for goodness sakes!
--------
If we wanted to read political opinions, we wouldn't be coming here.
in Trek's coffin. Noone wants to see StarTrek:90210 especially in a movie format. Again going back in time(noone is really intrested in a prequel..hint..enterprise rating woes), unknown cast, unpopular concept along with B&B(coming fresh from a massive B.O disaster Nemesis) would surely crash and burn star trek for good. I would wager the movie wont even crack the first five at the B.O on its release and would make Nemesis look like a hit. I think they are doing it purposefully to bury star trek off for once and for all.
If there's a god out there; we Trekkies need some serious divine intervention to save our beloved franchsie from the harbingers of doom B&B
-
...or Starship Troopers. It will turn out to be one or the other.
I liked both, and with good writing it will be a good movie.
But they have to, have to, HAVE TO get rid of Berman and Braga, or at least turn back the clock to 1995.
My name is Brannon and I approve of time travel within your own lifetime.
--------
"With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations."
"This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we cant, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people-Yes We Can."
"Yeah, I don't do cowering."-Barack Obama
It's been obvious for quite a while now that Paramount has been chasing two different audiences with regards to Trek:
1. The "mainstream" audience.
2. The 18-49, young person, Spiderman 2 demographic.
Let us look at each one:
1. The mainstream audience - Trek is never going to appeal to a wide audience the way traditional dramas can because it will never completely shed it's stigma of being entertainment for overweight, acne-ridden 35-y/o virginal losers living in their parent's basement. People who don't already like science fiction & fantasy aren't going to just suddenly decide one day to start watching Trek, no matter how many cool explosions, decon chamber rub-downs and brief glimpses of T'Pol's buttcrack Bermaga throw at the screen. Dumbing Trek down by stripping the show of it's social messages and higher-concept sci-fi ideas in favor of standard action-adventure fare, essentially turning it into Andromeda Lite, isn't going to bring in a new audience. All it will do is alienate the old audience, which are the only ones keeping Trek alive. If I wanted to watch cheesy genre crap I'd tune in for the aforementioned Andromeda or Stargate. Trek is supposed to be something more meaty, more substantial.
2. The younger audience - this is no longer the 60's. Trek is no longer cutting edge (funny to think of TOS in terms of being cutting edge, but it was back then). Space flight is no longer science fiction, but a reality that has become so commonplace that a space shuttle launch no longer merits news coverage. Today's kids grow up in an age of home video game consoles, digital television, movies with CG effects undreampt of just 10 years ago, computer games of every conceivable sort, and of course the internet with it's neverending supply of porn. What is there about Trek in 2004 that is supposed to be compelling to the average 15 year old? T'Pol's boob? They can see that any day of the week by logging on and surfing the net. Explosions? Been there, done that.
Add to that the aforementioned stigma of un-cool nerdiness that has always surrounded Trek, and it's no wonder kids not only don't watch, they no longer even know what Trek is.
Starfleet Academy will bring in younger viewers? What makes you think so? That 15 y/o can tune in to see the OC for his weekly dose of trashy soap opera, and he'll get more exposed skin, naughty behavior and soft-core hijinks than Trek could possibly provide.
LOL! Isn't it amazing in light of the taudry exploitation of T'Pol that the fans once complained about Seven? Seven now seems downright demure by comparison, and her character Shakespearean in retrospect. As I've said in the past, let's give Jeri Ryan some credit for taking a juvenile exercise in female body part oogling and creating a half-way decent character that actually had some development over the years.
-
that's why it's time to ditch the name "Star Trek". i've always wanted to call Next Generation movies as thus:
Generations
Generations: First Contact
Generations: Insurrection
Generations: Nemesis
and of course if i had my way all of TNG's 7 seasons would be packaged in one big package (yes similar to the UK one) in a Borg Cube and then called, "The Collective".
--------
LET THEM DIE!!!
I dont know if anyone has this pathetic game, but back in 1996-97 Paramount released a PC game called Starfleet Academy!! Is this what the movie will be???
By the way...Shatner, Koenig, and Takei played themselves in this game. Their dialogue was pretty interesting, but the cadets acting was horrible and boring.
If this is what the movie is...WE'RE DOOMED!!!
Can someone please tell me why Paramount is so afraid too get rid of Berman?
From ScreenRant.com:
It has been reported in recent days that Rick Berman has been tossing out comments concerning an 11th Star Trek film, despite the abysmal performance of Star Trek: Nemesis. The word is that it would be a prequel to the original series, but take place long enough after Star Trek: Enterprise that none of that series' cast would be in it.
Now... how would you revive what was once a beloved (revered, even by some) franchise? One which was responsible for redefining Sci Fi in film and on televison? Wouldn't you maybe think that it was time to stop messing around and bring in some big guns as far as writing and directing talent? Give Berman, Braga, and Frakes a pass and go find yourself maybe a David Hayter to write it and someone along the lines of Brian Singer, Sam Raimi, or some other really good director to take the helm?
Naaaaaaaaaaaah.
How about if we team up a movie executive who's entire production resume consists of executive producing the pilot to Miami Vice and the recent made-for-TV movie Homeland Security (Kerry McCluggage), and the producer of such recent classics as Inspector Gadget (I & II), Snow Dogs, George of the Jungle (I & II), and three of the Mighty Ducks movies (Jordan Kerner).
Yeah! That's the ticket...
Sad, isn't it? It would be funnier to me if I wasn't a long-time Star Trek fan. But what can you expect from the people who blamed the poor performance of Nemesis on us instead of the fact that it was a terrible film?
-
"The word is that it would be a prequel to the original series" PLUS "but take place long enough after Star Trek: Enterprise that none of that series' cast would be in it" EQUALS The crew of the S.S. Enterprise! In a TNG ep I saw recently it says five starships have had the name "USS Enterprise" so there's still room for an "SS Enterprise". Hell, even a "US Enterprise" if you want to really milk the name dry!
--------
"Outer Space: The Last Frontier.
These are the trips of the Star Trek Enterprise. Its five year plan calls for us to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly fly where no man has gone in space. Live long, and be happy."
Patrick Stewart--SNL, Stardate 9402.05
Harve Bennett's STARFLEET ACADEMY was shunned by fans and Paramount when it was written but the fact is it could work very well right now.
The movie opens and climaxes with William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy at Starfleet and the rest of the film is a long flashback to their younger days (to be played by younger actors of course). It was supposedly moving, action-packed and nostalgic and actually showed how Kirk and Spock met and how the latter dealt with bigotry and assorted obstacles and how Kirk fell in love and lost the lady.
If this was made today it could be great. You could incorporate new fans who are seeing the film for the younger actors and you could bring in the nostalgia crowd who grew up with TREK and who left the franchise more or less during ENTERPRISE'S first run.
It could be a great film if in the right hands and you could also have appearances by Scotty (a beautiful way for James Doohan to bid farewell during these tough times for him). Sulu, Checkhov and Uhura would also be featured.
I think Bennet's film could work now.
-
I kind of liked the idea of casting a young Kirk and Spock, but the problem is that by that time period, Vulcans were part of the Federation (rather, a founding member) so I would find it a little hard to believe that the humans at the Academy would harbor bigotry against Spock. Although I think throughout the series they did make reference to how Spock, being half human and half Vulcan, was never fully accepted by either. But out and out bigotry? That's probably not gonna jive with the way Roddenberry set up the universe circa Kirk and Spock.
Some others also mentioned that they didn't meet at the Academy anyway, and that that could be a continuity problem.
--------
It's a rip-off. / We're stepped on, and cheated! / We're flat, stone-cold lied to / But we're not defeated / No!
Halen. "The Dream is Over."
-
Quote:
Some others also mentioned that they didn't meet at the Academy anyway, and that that could be a continuity problem.
Spock and Kirk did attend the Academy around the same time, so they could have met once or twice during their time there.
--------
"Take a Romulan chill pill and have some faith!"
-Erik Jendresen, writer of Star Trek: The Beginning
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
-General George S. Patton Jr.
"I am NOT Scorned."
-Scorned as Gage/Gage_2
The Starfleet Academy idea was a bad one in the 1980s for Star Trek V, and it's even worse now.
Star Trek is about moving FORWARD. How about a movie(s) set 100-200 years past Voyager? Let's see how the Federation looks in another day. Maybe one of the hostile species (Romulans, perhaps?) are a part of the Federation. Or maybe the Federation is a shell of its former self from a Borg invasion and it is just starting to rebuild again.
Like Gene Roddenberry did with TNG, make it similar enough to old Trek but different enough to intrigue another generation of fans. Then if the movie(s) did well, spin them off into the next Star Trek series.
And I'd gamble and not use the name Star Trek at all. Market the heck out of the movie as just a cool futuristic movie. The hardcore fans would know, but the non-Trekker might get hooked without even realizing its Star Trek.
Let's face it. If a movie had come out called Star Trek: The Maxtrix, or Star Trek: The Lord of the Rings, the movie would be lucky to do $90 million at the box office. People who have decided they don't like Star Trek will never go watch a Star Trek movie. So don't call it Star Trek.
--------
If we wanted to read political opinions, we wouldn't be coming here.
-
I agree wholeheartedly with you. Star Trek needs a different look- perhaps a darker one. Right now, the general image of Trek is one of 'Gilligan's Island in Space'.
From 'Wagon Stars in Space', the show has degenerated to this. B&B have nothing left in the tank. The franchise needs to try new things, and just keep the framework as a shell. Here is one idea I proposed in the past. Move the show 1000 years forward. The Federation has become a suffocating bureaurcratic and ruthless force in the galaxy, having forgotten/lost the ideals of its founders (perhaps in a cataclysmic event like a great war).
Have the characters and the show evolve over the seasons as they realize how far they have drifted from the original ideals of the Foundation. Put a real twist on it and make the current 'bad guys' the good guys in the future.
Try anything to shake up the foundation before Star Trek becomes permanently known as 'Gilligan's Island in Space' .
--------
psp1
What do I think of a Starfleet Academy series? Well, let's see...how has Trek handled it's teenage characters in the past:
Wesley - nuff' said.
Jake - an improvement, but still not a strong character. His "look, I'm a Starfleet reporter!" Jimmy Olsen act in seasons 5-7 was ludicrous. Frankly, Nog was a more interesting teenage character.
Naomi - the passive-aggressive little bitch from Voyager with the horns on her head - lame lame lame lame lame.
Icheb and the Borg brats - Icheb was boring bordering on catatonic, the girl was boring, and the twins never even spoke.
Sooooo, does any of this give me any confidence that they can pull off a Trek:90210? Not at all. An entire series populated with perfect, spotless little Starfleet drones with flawless smiles and soft, supple skin? Yawn.....
-
I keep hearing people slam me for my "honest" opinion. I hear people say that I would never say anything of this in "person". Let me tell you this, my opinions of Trek are same on here, on another website or in the real world.
Whenever I give an opinion I try and back it up. The case in point is your pointing out all the "teenagers" depicted in Trek. All of which have been done pretty badly. So I would agree that StarTrek: 90210, StarTrek: Dawsons Creek, Star Trek:Saved By The Bell, Star Trek:OC will be a flop.
For those of you who wish to live in the dark and give me that excuse of denial by saying "if done right". I would like to ask you when has it done right before and what makes you think it will be done right NOW? How do you expect a masterpiece from hacks?
I've been reading all of the posts about this "Starfleet Academy" idea and I am seeing what I thought I'd be seeing - tons of rejection. I agree. I don't like the idea. But I think that's what Paramount wants.
I think Paramount knows that the established fan base is expendable. If you're old enough to have watched TNG on television and definetely if you have fond memories of watching TOS on NBC, then, like me, you're getting too old for Paramount to care about what you want.
One of the posters below hinted that the powers that be want a young audience. I think that is what they're after. A younger audience who has never watched Star Trek will accept something not acceptable to the established base. They know we'll see it. If we don't like it, they won't care. They want these young kids to like it so that they can grow a new fan base that will some day be as dedicated to the show as we are. They are done with us.
You know who DOES care about what we want? Priceline.com. And we're completely buying into it! Why are they giving us Shatner & Nimoy? Because we love it and we have a lot more money than kids to spend at Priceline.com. I like what they've done and I have no problem with it. It's good marketing.
I wouldn't doubt if the producers of Star Trek XI will have half naked girls, potty jokes, and cursing in their new flick. Kids love that. It could be an intergalactic "Road Trip III". They might not even call it Star Trek XI, because that title would be a movie for US. This is Starfleet: The Motion Picture. And may the ride begin again. Most of us are just too old for the amusement park this time.
But maybe they'll suprise us. In the meantime, I just bought the first two seasons of the West Wing to see what I missed all these years. My goodness! I missed some amazingly good television. Did I just enter a new and different fanbase? It sure satisfies much more than Voyager. And, kinda like TNG, I actually feel smarter after watching it.
-
...with everything you said. We are ceasing to be relevant
Btw, get to "Two Cathedrals" yet? One of the finest hours of TV I've ever seen. I love WW.
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
-
Yes, Two Cathedrals is, by far, some of the best television ever produced. THat show is like a long, quality, fast-paced movie. And what sets! I ahte to say it, but I am seeing faults with Enterprise in terms of writing and story lines having watched the West Wing. I should have taped ENT and watched TWW! At least on DVD there are no commercials.
-
Quote:
THat show is like a long, quality, fast-paced movie. And what sets! I ahte to say it, but I am seeing faults with Enterprise in terms of writing and story lines having watched the West Wing. I should have taped ENT and watched TWW! At least on DVD there are no commercials.
Very true. Everyone is a 3-D individual. They are consistent in their beliefs and actions. The plot is written around them. Too often in VOY and ENT characters are written to get the plot from point A to B with little thought for, "Would this person really do/say this?"
Sharp dialogue, and good "issue" shows too. I never feel condescended to by WW as I have lately with Berman Trek
--------
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of our culture." ---Pastor Ray Mummert speaking of those who favor Darwinian Evolution over Intelligent Design.
"If this is your God, he's not very impressive. He has so many psychological problems; he's so insecure. He demands worship every seven days. He goes out and creates faulty Humans and then blames them for his own mistakes. He's a pretty poor excuse for a Supreme Being." ---Gene Roddenberry
First, I have to say that I really enjoy reading Scorned. He's a man after my own heart - angry, inflammatory, and without the slightest notion of subtlety. Keep going for the jugular buddy, it's damn entertaining!
Now, to the issue at hand - The Death of Star Trek.
Like poor Scotty, Trek has suffered from Bermaga-induced Alzheimer's for several years. Voyager sucked for 7 years, Enterprise has sucked for 3 years - that's 10 years of watching Trek slowly swirl down the bowl, leaving a big skid mark in the process. It's sad, maddening, and finally laughable to watch Bermaga and their Paramount overlords flog this bloody corpse to the point of unrecognizability.
I realize that Trek stopped being just a television show a long time ago for a lot of people (Braga's 4 million or so that still tune in faithfully for Ent. every week), and started functioning as some kind of quasi-religion with the The Great Bird as it's spiritual guru, but even these spaced-out zombies have to admit that Bermaga's creative tank has been out of gas for years.
Has anyone from Paramount ever read this bbs? Or TrekBBS? Does anyone there care that fan sentiment is so overwhelmingly negative toward these two men at this point that nothing they do - NOTHING - will be embraced by fandom, regardless of premise? This isn't about Trek per se anymore - it's about fandom's collective hatred (richly justified) of these doofuses who hijacked Trek and systematically destroyed it.
How many years now have fans been consistently pleading for Paramount to wake up and get rid of Bermaga? And how long have our pleas been ignored? What kind of Faustian bargain has Bermaga struck to remain in power this long? Who do they have scandalous pictures of that they can keep their jobs despite such a long track record of creative and ratings failure?
I have said before that I will never watch another episode of first-run Trek as long as Bermaga are in charge, and I'm sticking to my guns. I now expand that boycott to include any future feature film that has Berman or Braga's name attached to it in any way. I don't care if they're only the gaffer or some actor's water-boy. Until they are gone, totally and completely, Trek is dead to me.
As for Braga, you really have to wonder about this gimp. All these years involved with Trek...other people would have wanted to jump to something else long before now, to stretch their creative legs and explore new challenges. But here remains Braga, attached to Trek like a tick. Does this man have any other credits to his name? Anything else on his resume besides Trek?
-
Quote:
As for Braga, you really have to wonder about this gimp. All these years involved with Trek...other people would have wanted to jump to something else long before now, to stretch their creative legs and explore new challenges. But here remains Braga, attached to Trek like a tick. Does this man have any other credits to his name? Anything else on his resume besides Trek?
Check The Internet Movie Database and you'll find that Braga's only credits involve Star Trek in some form or fashion. Same with Berman, for the most part, except for a kiddie show he did in 1974 called "The Big Blue Marble."
Without any experience outside Trek, how can anyone write good Trek?
--------
A generation which ignores history has no past and no future. -- Robert Heinlein
PCLinuxOS
falcon
-
Quote:"First, I have to say that I really enjoy reading Scorned. He's a man after my own heart - angry, inflammatory, and without the slightest notion of subtlety. Keep going for the jugular buddy, it's damn entertaining!"
I don't "do" groupies!
Quote:"But here remains Braga, attached to Trek like a tick."
Funny!
Quote:"Does this man have any other credits to his name? Anything else on his resume besides Trek?"
He is incompetent and a hack writer. What little talent he had many, many years ago is dead. If he was so great he would of been doing other offers. But no other show or project would want him. Nobody wants to invest in lousy writer. Had he got off the Trek train and done other projects maybe fans would be excited to see the occasion script by him. But he is just a guy who "stayed at the party too long/ doesn't know that it is time to go home". How sad! For those of you who are going to start "crying" about how great he is. I have 2 things to say 1) his BAD trek outweighs anything good that he did and 2) Voy Episode "Threshold".
RIP Star Trek!
-
Where did I say I was a groupie? I'm just another bitter, misanthropic fanboy lamenting the downfall of a pop culture behemoth commiserating with my fellow brethern. ;)
Quote:
Quote:"First, I have to say that I really enjoy reading Scorned. He's a man after my own heart - angry, inflammatory, and without the slightest notion of subtlety. Keep going for the jugular buddy, it's damn entertaining!"
I don't "do" groupies!
..if they EVER make that stupid Starfleet Academy movie it will TANK at the boxoffice. Nobody gives a shit about that!
Star Trek needs a LONG deep sleep. Just stop making the shit for a few years and try again later with some people who have talent and lack of burnout.
But, I guess they are going to keep making it until people begin not only show disinterest but geniune DISLIKE for Star Trek.
Gotta bludgeon that cash cow don't we?
--------
Quack!!!
I don't have a problem with a prequel set at Starfleet Academy. With the right cast of twenty somethings it could work but would real world twenty somethings go to the movies to see these actors in anything with STAR TREK in the title?
Still, that Paramount is revisiting the idea of a Starfleet Academy movie hows Paramounts willingness to try something different to keep the franchise alive (and keep in mind that this is viewed as a new idea -- no one in power there today was there 15 years ago). This is either a hopeful sign or simply a sign of desperation.
Launching something entirely new in a feature film may be the way to go. Something unfamiliar is what may be needed to draw fans into theaters. Sure, there may be a lot of bitching and moaning but most people may want to check it out. It could be the first true Star Trek movie event in a very, very long time.
Rather than admit that the relentless dilution of the Star Trek concept has resulted in disinterest, it seems they're going to abandoned everything the show was about. The only shows that have been successful in a large way (TOS and TNG) did not stray from the timeless formula of exploring strange new worlds. None of the the spinoffs since TNG, despite the protestations of their supporters, have generated substantial mass appeal. DS9 was a very good show, but had little to do with Star Trek's basic concept. You can have phasers, uniforms and starships and not have Star Trek, because Star Trek was about certain ideals and human impulses and not space battles. And what is all this stuff about "darkness"-- anybody who wants to be trendy thinks that dark clothing, dark lighting or gross out plots make something modern? They know they can save money doing Trek on the cheap with unknowns, no planets and fewer effects. There are a million ambitious stories that would make a terrific movie, but those will not be considered. We don't need a Beta-5 computer to know this will not work, simply because people expect something from Star Trek, that's why the concept is so perfect, the name says what it's about. Not anymore.
-
DS9 was provided a much needed alternate look at the Star Trek universe. As Steve said, ST is about exploring the human condition, and DS9 was able to expand this tremendously, delving into issues merely hinted at in TOS and TNG.
-
If you think DS9 was about space battles then you don't get it.
I feel just the opposite: the TREKs that have most copied TOS and TNG -- VOY and ENT -- have been the least successful. TREK isn't about a ship exploring space. It's about exploring the human condition. This notion that STAR TREK can be nothing but a crew going around exploring every week is incredibly myopic. And in fact the performance of the spinoffs has proven that clearly audiences have tired of that formula.
--------
It's a rip-off. / We're stepped on, and cheated! / We're flat, stone-cold lied to / But we're not defeated / No!
Halen. "The Dream is Over."
-
Quote from Steve Krutzler to Postdoc:
TREK isn't about a ship exploring space. It's about exploring the human condition.
The ability to travel great distances to unexplored (alien) domains, almost instantaneously, is a pretext for storytelling. A writer can first conceptualize a morality play, for example, and then devise a backdrop for it with few human limits, possibly involving an entire alien society. A starship can then take our heroes to whatever fantastical context is used. In the case of SG-1, a wormhole takes the characters from Earth to alien worlds in a single step through a Stargate, but the pretext of using distant and foreign civilizations is essentially the same as when traveling by starship.
--------------
NX-01 Model Kit
-
I try not to, but I'm stalling before working. Anyway, here goes;
--I didn't say DS9 was about space battles, but I do remember something called a Dominion war arc in that show. Didn't they add the Defiant, a warship designed purposely for fighting near the end?
--There's a difference between myopia and recognition of what a concept is about. Star Trek is about exploring space and the human condition-- that's what it is. Putting uniforms on people and calling it Trek is not freshening anything, it's a lack of creativity. If you want something new, make something new. Exploration is a timeless concept-- the uncovering of the new. Star Trek Space Marines, Star Trek Temporal Explorations, Star Trek Intergalactic Shuttle, Star Trek Federation Translator, heck why not Star Trek: Orbital Crime Scene Investigation or Starfleet JAG. Just add a tunic, arrowhead, criminals and stir into a galactic whirlpool. Voila, you're a genius!-- they may be new, but they ain't Trek. People want to see the ship in space and the popularity of TOS/TNG prove it. Anything that's been done has only shifted this formula so much. The problem is not that the formula is stale it's that it's not being done correctly.
--Check out Star Trek New Voyages to see how to do Star Trek right.
--If they want to be new, take away the phasers, communicators, warp drive, the Enterprise and make another show.
-- Star Trek has survived all these years because of the concept, not in spite of it, for it to continue you build on those strengths, not rip it apart needlessly.
-- This is the same thing that's happening with everything else-- six kinds of Cheerios, ten kinds of Coke, it's not surprising.
--They should do a series of miniseries, but they're not going to do it that way.
--Star Trek was and is a brilliant concept, few of the variations are.
-
If you aren't familiar with DS9 I don't have the time to review it for you. Perhaps Jadzia-Dax can.
But suffice it to say I disagree. I have little interest in seeing another ship and another crew exploring yet more aliens-of-the-week. Exploring the different facets of the STAR TREK universe is a perfectly valid way to attack the series. Again, VOY and ENT have tried sticking to the formula you mention and people have tuned out. So why is there any reason to believe that people want another TOS/TNG clone?
STAR TREK is about exploring the human condition with optimism, set in space. But the show doesn't have to be the captain, the first officer, the engineer, the doctor, the helmsman, the token alien out exploring space in the umpteenth starship. The original and TNG did that as good as it is going to be done. What's to be gained by continuously repeating it and trying to outdo the originals? DS9 won critical and fan adoration by going its own way and exploring all the tough questions that STAR TREK is supposed to explore in a different style.
--------
It's a rip-off. / We're stepped on, and cheated! / We're flat, stone-cold lied to / But we're not defeated / No!
Halen. "The Dream is Over."
-
Quote from Steve Krutzler to Postdoc:
STAR TREK is about exploring the human condition with optimism, set in space. But the show doesn't have to be the captain, the first officer, the engineer, the doctor, the helmsman, the token alien out exploring space in the umpteenth starship.
TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT all have characters (human and alien) ranked within a formal command hierarchy. The one thing that all Trek seems to require is Starfleet (Academy or no), which demands such a hierarchy.
Reality check: Unlike TOS and TNG, VOY and ENT suffer from being fatigued Berman Trek.
Quote:
The original and TNG did that as good as it is going to be done. What's to be gained by continuously repeating it and trying to outdo the originals? DS9 won critical and fan adoration by going its own way and exploring all the tough questions that STAR TREK is supposed to explore in a different style.
It can be argued that DS9 writers had to focus more on character development, and story arcs, because of the fixed space-station setting. However, there's no reason that the same can't be done for the regular crew aboard a starship, because the common story element is "Recurring characters interacting in an unusual place that they all call 'home'."
It can also be argued that an easily-bored TV populace prefers the greater variety of new-frontier stories afforded by (well-written) starship adventures, thus accounting for DS9's unspectacular ratings despite quality scripts.
--------------
Classic TOS Phaser 1 + 2
-
Quote:
It can be argued that DS9 writers had to focus more on character development, and story arcs, because of the fixed space-station setting. However, there's no reason that the same can't be done for the regular crew aboard a starship, because the common story element is "Recurring characters interacting in an unusual place that they all call 'home'."
But that's the very point. DS9 from the beginning took its own path by being set on a space station. That is what even before Ira Behr brought his stamp to the show set DS9 apart and didn't even attempt to copy TOS or TNG, intentionally. Yet both VOY and ENT sought to copy TOS and TNG.
Quote:
It can also be argued that an easily-bored TV populace prefers the greater variety of new-frontier stories afforded by (well-written) starship adventures, thus accounting for DS9's unspectacular ratings despite quality scripts.
Perhaps, but I wonder why are so many people stuck on this idea that they want another crew on another ship doing the same old thing? I am sorry but I am a huge STAR TREK fan (the fact that I have run this site for 8 years attests to this), but I would love to explore the other realms of the STAR TREK universe, like a show set on Earth, or a show from an all alien perspective, or a show about Section 31 and perhaps a special team meant to combat them, or who knows. The last thing I want is yet another Captain character, yet another first officer character, yet another engineer, doctor, etc. etc. DS9 did a great job of shaking things up by making the first officer an alien liasion, rather than a Starfleet character; making the Sec chief an even more-more alien official; a main character a damn bartender for heaven sakes! They even made Sisko a commander and had him doing a lot of admistrative duties rather that stereotypical "captain of a starship" duties. Not to mention the whole Emissary angle. That, to me, is how new TREK should be done. By taking the formula and putting a literal spin on it.
But both VOY and ENT have done the same old Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, Chekov copying.
As a fan, I am sick of the same character archetypes. I am sick of the engineer calling the bridge and saying the engine is about to blow up. I am sick of the same damn scene where they're all huddled around the conference table, the captain makes an anology of the situation to an Earth figure of speech, the alien crewmember looks confused, and the captain with a smile on his face explains what is meant by the analogy and how it relates to their current situation. It is so stale. TOS and TNG did it to perfection. I have no need to see others try and copy it.
I want something new.
--------
It's a rip-off. / We're stepped on, and cheated! / We're flat, stone-cold lied to / But we're not defeated / No!
Halen. "The Dream is Over."
-
Very well put! I agree 100%.
(Although a show based on Earth or from an alien perspective is not, I believe, the way to go. It would have to center in some way around humans, and it would have to be somewhere in outer space. But at this point I really wouldn't be against doing a show about some non-Starfleet people or anything wild like that.)
-
Quote:
Perhaps, but I wonder why are so many people stuck on this idea that they want another crew on another ship doing the same old thing?
Because the idea still works, Steve, regardless of the apparent failures of VOY and ENT. Apparently the makers of Farscape and Andromeda didn't seem to think it's a "played out" concept. Farscape certainly has as devoted a fan base as does Trek. Hell, even LEXX had its cadre of fans. And obviously Sci-Fi believes there's enough interest in a new Battlestar Galactica series (yet another "crew on a spaceship" idea) to give it a green light.
It's all about execution, Steve. The difference is both VOY and ENT could easily have been ratings winners, IF they had been written with a modicum of intelligence and some respect for Trek's fan base, IF they had used the "crew on a ship" concept to tell interesting stories about people we care about. (You know, like TOS did).
Quote:
I would love to explore the other realms of the STAR TREK universe, like a show set on Earth, or a show from an all alien perspective, or a show about Section 31 and perhaps a special team meant to combat them, or who knows.
As interesting as these concepts may be, it wouldn't be "Star Trek," and here's why: STAR (a celestial object that generates heat and light due to the constant fusion of hydrogen atoms), and TREK (a journey to a distant place). See, the core concept is implicit in the show's title. "Star Trek" is about people going to distant planets and having adventures, and through those adventures, commenting on humanity and its ideals.
That's what Gene Roddenberry created in the 1960's. It was a good idea then, and it's just as good an idea now.
BTW, GR attempted an earth-bound "Trek" style series in the 70's called "Genesis II" that never got beyond the pilot stage, and it got respectable ratings, but CBS, in their "infinity wisdom," chose to go with the "Planet of the Apes" series instead. Then again, this is the same network that chose "Lost In Space" over Trek in 1964.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that there is also a new "Doctor Who" series on the way. As any good sci-fi fan know, Who pre-dates Trek by two years, and featured travels in both space and time. In fact, I would argue that Who's "Cybermen" and "Daleks" are the (unintentional?) prototypes for Trek's "Borg."
Again, this is yet another "space based" series, and I'd hazard to say that Who's fan base is almost as fanatical as Treks.
--------
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, cigar in one hand, favorite beverage in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming WOO HOO - What a Ride!"
-
I don't think the concept is invalid but I think there's plenty of room to do something different, as DS9 proved.
BG is not just a ship out exploring the galaxy. It's a group of ships the contain the last remnants of the entire human race in a fight to survive the turmoil of space and various other obstacles. FARSCAPE, from what I've heard, was also very serialized and not simply a crew out exploring a new planet or space phenomena each week.
I just don't agree that the only way to do STAR TREK is with a ship and a crew out exploring. It's far too narrow and I don't buy it. Give them some other purpose, give it some spin, make it more than just a copy of what has gone before. I do agree that after so many years a totally fresh group of creative talent may yield much different results than we've witnessed with VOY and ENT, however, I don't think the answer is to keep trying the same formula over again. I think STAR TREK is much larger than simply the plot in which it unfolds.
--------
It's a rip-off. / We're stepped on, and cheated! / We're flat, stone-cold lied to / But we're not defeated / No!
Halen. "The Dream is Over."
I've been dying to see the Romulan Wars ever since I first saw Balance of Terror. However, this is NOT a feature film story. If anything, it should be a mini-series. I mean honestly - who will go see it? The hard-core fans? The same people who saw the last Trek film, which bombed? No, the next featue film NEEDS to be huge. Not something that could ever be done in an episode (a la the last two films). I agree somewhat with the first poster about a Borg film. Trouble is, the Borg are tired. The Klingons are boring these days. No more time travel - uggh. The Cardassians are too obscure as far as the casual Trek fan or the rest of the world is concerned.
I think we need one more TNG film, and with Q as the natural adversary. We generally LIKE and KNOW Q. He's a sympathetic villain, so we could avoid a cookie cutter baddie like the last two. ANYTHING is possible, plotwise, when he's involved. He was there at the beginning, he SHOULD be there at the end. Bring a few new writers. Bring in a GOOD director. Market it correctly, and don't release it a week before the biggest film of the year (al la The two Towers - still, what were they thinking?). We can have one last, proper Trek film, but the one being pitched isn't it. This idea, if it comes to fruition, will truly be the last death knell for Star Trek. It WILL bomb.
This is my first ever post about anything trek so please be gentle.
I’m curious, why would the producers of star trek make a successful star trek movie like First contact and then go on to make flop after flop, then another flop??
Would it not make sense to bring back the Borg for another movie? And when I say bring back the Borg I don’t mean the watered down pansy ass Borg from voyager, I mean the relentless, unstoppable Borg we all loved. And not just one piddley cube either. Why not inject some reality and have the Borg fully invade the alpha quadrant with hundreds of cubes assimilating entire “well known” planets? Why not have the federation and all alpha quadrant planets overrun?
The way I see it is that Trek is about to die anyway, at least they could go out fighting in one last, very dark movie, they could even pull a series out of the ashes focusing on a small armada of surviving ships as they struggle to escape, assuming the film did well!
Perhaps this wouldn’t work because voyager already watered down the Borg to much?
I personally don’t think Trek is out of steam just yet, but the “federation and all the goody goodyness of it” is. It is time to shake up what is left of the franchise and bring back that edge of your seat feeling that you can only have by popping off loads of well know actors/ships/planets. You need to be worried for the characters that are left, not knowing who will be killed off or assimilated next, in my opinion anyway.
I say Trek needs to get very very dark in an un prequel way, this prequel crap already takes the edge off the whole thing because you already know earth, humanity aren’t destroyed. I find it impossible to be worried for the characters because you always know they will be okay at the end of the episode. It is the same fate as star wars, people want to see what happens NEXT, not before. The slogan says, boldly go where no man has been before, after all.
Quote from Dave McNary, Variety:
Par wants a "re-imagining" of the concept, meaning there won't be any of the characters that peopled the TV shows and movies.
The TV/movie characters are just the writers' instruments, they aren't the root of Star Trek's rot. ENT is evidence that new onscreen faces (and a prequel setting) aren't a formula for success. Paramount bosses should consider that serious "re-imaging" begins at the management level: Berman and Braga are like vampires sucking at the franchise neck; if they aren't removed then an infusion of fresh creative (writer) blood isn't likely to revive the withering cash cow.
Quote:
In an era where $200 million is now the benchmark of success and with Paramount espousing a "swing for the fences" mantra, another "Trek" movie may not arrive before Halley's Comet returns.
Star Trek XI could be a documentary by then! Comet Halley's next perihelion passage will be in 2061, just two years before Zefram Cochrane's first warp flight. ;-)
--------------
NX-01 Model Kit
The franchise's appeal alone isn't enough to guarantee a good gross, especially without familliar faces, so they need A-list talent. If it's going to be 'Starfleet Academy,' then they'll have to take a page from the glorious or infamous tradition of films such as 'SWAT,' 'Remember the Titans,' 'The Mask of Zorro' and 'Top Gun.' Up and coming (and likely very attractive) young stars mentored by at least one older veteran actor, preferrably with the star wattage of Anthony Hopkins and not Tom Skerritt.
You didn't pay enough attention, Steve. Frakes said this a few days ago:
"And I also hear there’s a prequel in development – Starfleet Academy. I’m actually having dinner with all those guys tonight, I’ll get all the dish for you and tell you what’s really happening with Star Trek."
There can only be one reason why he knows about this and why he's having dinner with the producers. I'd be surprised if they didn't ask him to get involved and possibly direct, and I'd be equally surprised if Frakes said no.
Jan S.
Who knows, this could be a blessing in disguise. If they are doing a Starfleet Academy movie set during the Romulan Wars, then they probably won't cover the major events. If done right, it could be a coming of age story about a group of Starfleet Academy cadets fighting against the odds for survival after a routine training mission goes awry. True, that guy Jordan Kerner did produce such atrocities like the Inspector Gadget and George of the Jungle movies and Snow Dogs, but he also produced A Wrinkle in Time, Uprising, and Less Than Zero, so he's not that bad. Besides, when you really think about it, he could be a great choice for a movie that would have an ensemble of young actors. Plus, there he could be a clue to a possible director of the movie. This guy named Jon Avnet who has directed Uprising, Red Corner, Up Close & Personal, The War, and Fried Green Tomatoes (all Kerner productions). He also co-produced a ton of other Kerner production movies, other movies he produced were Risky Business, Tango & Cash (cheesy, but classic), Steal this Movie, the TV series Boomtown, and most recently Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. So I wouldn't mind him directing, though he's just speculation on my part. As for Kerry McCluggage, all I could find at imdb.com is that he was executive producer of Maimi Vice's pilot episode and a TV movie Homeland Security so I don't know about him, but I am confident in Kerner's ability to help produce a good-maybe even great Star Trek film. I'll be even more glad if Jon Avnet jump onboard to at least co-produce if not to direct Star Trek XI. Again, I am cautiously optimistic. Don't judge a movie by its producers.
--------
"Take a Romulan chill pill and have some faith!"
-Erik Jendresen, writer of Star Trek: The Beginning
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
-General George S. Patton Jr.
"I am NOT Scorned."
-Scorned as Gage/Gage_2
-
Quote:" Who knows, this could be a blessing in disguise."
My god are you kidding me? If you think this idea has any merit you are insane. Spare me any of that "we don't know enough" attitude either. This idea sounds horrible! How could you possibly think it is a blessing?
Quote:" If they are doing a Starfleet Academy movie set during the Romulan Wars, then they probably won't cover the major events."
Then you should be furious if the "90210/.Dawsons Creek" theme over rides your war mongering desires.
Quote:" If done right, it could be a coming of age story about a group of Starfleet Academy cadets fighting against the odds for survival after a routine training mission goes awry.
"If done right". The ultimate "physchological defense mechanism" by Trek fans in denial. Whenever I see any of you fans say "If done right". I know that your opinions are worthless and that you would swallow anything. For Gods sakes man have a little backbone.
Quote:"True, that guy Jordan Kerner did produce such atrocities like the Inspector Gadget and George of the Jungle movies and Snow Dogs, but he also produced A Wrinkle in Time, Uprising, and Less Than Zero, so he's not that bad.
By your standards "half" of what he has done is an "atrocity". Another case of the wrong people doing Trek.
Quote:"Besides, when you really think about it, he could be a great choice for a movie that would have an ensemble of young actors.
Yeah so? It doesn't make this movie sound any better.
Quote:"Plus, there he could be a clue to a possible director of the movie. This guy named Jon Avnet who has directed Uprising, Red Corner, Up Close & Personal, The War, and Fried Green Tomatoes (all Kerner productions). He also co-produced a ton of other Kerner production movies, other movies he produced were Risky Business, Tango & Cash (cheesy, but classic), Steal this Movie, the TV series Boomtown, and most recently Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow.
All shit!
Quote:" So I wouldn't mind him directing, though he's just speculation on my part.
That's too bad.
Quote:"As for Kerry McCluggage, all I could find at imdb.com is that he was executive producer of Maimi Vice's pilot episode and a TV movie Homeland Security so I don't know about him,
He is another "suit" with NO experience. Another incompetent person on Trek.
Quote:" but I am confident in Kerner's ability to help produce a good-maybe even great Star Trek film.
BASED ON WHAT? HE has done NOTHING! What makes you think this is beyond reason!
Quote:"I'll be even more glad if Jon Avnet jump onboard to at least co-produce if not to direct Star Trek XI. Again, I am cautiously optimistic. Don't judge a movie by its producers.
I am judging this mess by the people involved and the possible story. As of right now. It sounds like a disaster. HOW you don't see this with this self proclaimed name of "The Man Who Knows His Trek" really makes me wonder how you can call yourself a fan of Trek. It is very clear you are not. And I don't care if you have watched a lot of trek or bought a ton of merchandising. My opinion of you means nothing to you but I would just like to let you know that after reading this I think your views and opinions are a joke.
It is quite humorous how so many are so afraid, scared to death even of "re-imagining" Star Trek. Folks, it's time to grow up and accept the little changes in life and learn to cope.
--------
-
What, you mean like how Enterprise was a "re-imagining"? I don't like Enterprise, millions of Star Trek fans don't like Enterprise (I use the piss poor ratings to back up my assertion). TNG was a "re-imagining" and it was done right because of the actors and stories. I know Berman was involved in TNG at that point but he did not create TNG; he inherited it.
While it is possible the next 'Trek might be good I find neither a Romulan Wars movie nor a Starfleet Academy movie or television series appealing. It is possible-even likely!-that I am no longer the target demographic and that the SA concept is being directed at a younger crowd. That's good business, I understand that. But I think that if they go back to the basics-namely good actors and good stories-then they can still draw old school 'Trek fans back despite the average age of the cast (they still need "old fogies" to play teachers, y'know.).
--------
"Oh, I'll wake up
To any sound of engines,
Ev'ry gull a seeking craft..."
Kate Bush, And Dream of Sheep
-
I wouldn't have a problem with a re-imagining of STAR TREK as long as those doing the re-imagining actually had an imagination. I'd bet that the other two individuals involved will be doing the actual brain work, and that B+B will contribute their destructive influence on yet another STAR TREK product. It's really sad that Roddenberry had built himself a nice little legacy in STAR TREK, and these two a$$40735 spend two decades + tearing it apart and making it into lizard food.
I think that if someone else did some re-imagining of STAR TREK, even if I hated it I would be able to accept it a little better than the same clueless jerks tapping away at their keyboards like a million monkeys, perpetrating this sham of the concept of STAR TREK.
These guys really aren't qualified to oversee production of STAR TREK, they simply don't really seem to get what it is supposed to be about.
For better or for worse, STAR TREK needs new talent, and the old guard should retire from TREK permanently. Berman and Braga are hated by multitudes of people for what they've done to TREK, they've caused major dissension among the fans, and instead of just giving the people what they want, B+B are on an ego trip with something to prove, either that or they really just want revenge on the fanbase for being too analytical of a TV show that they (B+B) seem to think they've invented.
Berman and Braga should have identical epitaphs on their gravestones which would read: "Here lies a formerly untalented jerk, he's much better now."
This news about a possible STARFLEET ACADEMY themed movie is really lame, I can only expect something retarded based on my past experience of watching what the whithered hands and minds of TPTB have foisted upon the fanbase. However, I will be fair when this is released, and if it is good, I will reference my position from the past and acknowledge that I was wrong... but somehow I really doubt that's gonna happen. It might, but... naaaah!
--------
"Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here."
After reading this mess I still can't believe it. I would like to know what DICKHEAD at Paramount is green lighting any of this mess thinking that it will sell? What Star Trek fans did they talk to thinking that they would like this idea? I can't believe Paramount thinks the Trek fans are going to actually swallow this mess.
Quote:"Following recent revelations from Rick Berman that an eleventh STAR TREK feature film is in the early stages of development despite the 2002 franchise-low performance for STAR TREK: NEMESIS; the fact that it is yet another "prequel" concept with no relation to the television series ENTERPRISE; and Brannon Braga's offhand remark that the project involves the historic Romulan Wars (story), industry trade Variety is stirring the pot further.
So this means Braga lied? Wow, why I am not surprised!? It is typical of Braga.
Quote:"According to the trade, Berman and Braga are working with Jordan Kerner and Kerry McCluggage are developing a new project -- presumably the same -- as a "Star Fleet Academy" concept."
So what is it? Star Trek:90210 or the Romulan war arc(aka Episode II: Battle of Geonosis)? What the hell is wrong with these people? They are grasping at straws and are clearly showing us how incompetent and out of touch "suits" are. I think that STXI and Star Trek as a whole is going in the same direction as the so called new Superman film.... NO WHERE!
Quote:"Par is being surprisingly cautious about hopes for an 11th feature film.
If they are cautious then I would hate to see them when they are "inpatient".
Quote:"A new installment isn't on the horizon anytime soon. Par wants a 're-imagining' of the concept, meaning there won't be any of the characters that peopled the TV shows and movies. It hasn't yet hired a writer."
So that means they want a whole new cast of "nobody's" so they can pay them nothing and hope the fans will swallow this piece of shit. Allowing them to make some more money. Hence the theory of "getting water from a stone"! How pathetic!
Quote:"Berman has previously indicated that he is working on the prequel project with two other producers. Kerner's credits include two MIGHTY DUCKS films and two INSPECTOR GADGET films. McCluggage is a Paramount studio executive.
So let me get this straight. The next movie is going to be made by 1)Berman, A completely and useless tit. A man who has almost single handily destroyed Star Trek, 2) Jordan Kerner, Who the hell is this guy? The two "MightDucks" and Inspector Gadget films?? HAHAHAH IS THIS A FUCKING JOKE? Paramount is scraping the bottom of the barrel that hard? and 3) Kerry McCluggage: Another "suit"!!! That is exactly what Star Trek DOES NOT NEED IS ANOTHER SUIT LIKE BERMAN ruining Star Trek. Just what the hell has McCluggage done? What movie/TV shows has he made?
This whole thing sounds F'ing RIDICULOUS! That has to be a joke!
Quote:"Braga has previously disavowed any involvement with the new feature project, including at his recent ArcLight Hollywood appearance, in which he stated that he was not involved.
That is the only good news about STXI, Braga is NOT involved. Lets hope that stays true.
Quote:"Former TREK producer Harve Bennett, who produced STAR TREK II through STAR TREK VI, has stated in numerous interviews that he pitched a STARFLEET ACADEMY idea for a future STAR TREK movie while at Paramount in the 1990s. The idea was rejected at the time.
Harve Bennett has played such a major part in making Star Trek a huge franchise. Paramount has treated this man like shit. I don't need to hope this movie bombs because that is already a given. But I hope Bennett is able to go Paramount and LAUGH in their faces when this mess bombs at the theaters.
WHY on Earth with Bennetts track record of making great Trek would you deny his idea and then later STEAL it and let some idiot like Berman with a HORRIBLE track record record for Trek do this project? This again, makes NO sense!
I hope to God that Bennett sues the ass's off of EVERYONE involved with this project!
There is no way in the world I would support this mess. They will not make one dime from me. It is so sad to see Trek become a big joke. A cool concept ruined by stupidity and greed. To all the fans of Trek, when people ask you years from now when and who is responsible for Star Trek's death. You tell them it was in the year 2004 and its name was Rick Berman.
-
Isn't it amazing? It never ends! The stupidity of Rick Berman knows no bounds!
What I'm really baffled about is Paramount. Why would they possibly think this movie could do well? At this point nobody cares about Star Trek, so in what way are they going to make this movie appealing to people? First they have to get over the negative sentiments toward Star Trek that have been developing ever since the height of TNG, and THEN they have to go out of their way to advertize this as something which would actually have mass appeal beyond simply calling it "Star Trek." I really don't understand.
And I think the funniest part is how much of a hypocrite Braga is. He, the co-producer of Enterprise, assessed what he believed to be the reason nobody was watching the show. The only explanation he gave was that there's been too much Star Trek over the years.
So why the HELL would they then go and make ANOTHER movie!!
It's so obvious how greedy, hypocritical, and just plain moronic these people are.
maybe some people can get together and put out a full page ad. i think the "Par" folk are just as frustrated with B&B as we are. i just wish they would step down. they're both fairly intelligent individuals, they should see that maybe it's time to make an exit. Berman was a Roddenberry favorite, but I think he's been tapped dry. Braga seems to have so much contempt for the viewership, i feel like he refers to us as "those people."
the idea itself sounds like it could work out, but I just don't know if these two have any more in them.
i guess time, and S4 of ENT, will tell...
--------
"A billion robot lives are about to be extinguished! Oh, the Jedis are going to feel this one..."
-Hubert Farnsworth (Futurama: Crimes of the Hot)
----
"The Andorian Mining Consortium runs from no one!"
-Shran (ENT: Proving Ground)
-
Quote:
maybe some people can get together and put out a full page ad. i think the "Par" folk are just as frustrated with B&B as we are.
Lemmiwinks, I think you are onto something. In the same way that The Enterprise Project (or whatever it was called) took out a full page ad in the trade publications supporting ENT, I think that those of us who would like to see B+B leave the franchise permanently should write a well constructed, not overly emotional call for B+B to step down and to please let someone else come in and try their hand at producing a TREK film or series.
If this doesn't work, there's always a boycott of the sponsors of ENT.
--------
"Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here."
-
You know, I was just making a joke, but it's so crazy it just might work. I should think that the "Save Enterprise" project had at least some effect on those Par folks, one thing fans of The Franchise have always had is some pull.
Anybody else like the idea? Maybe I'll start a new thread.
--------
"A billion robot lives are about to be extinguished! Oh, the Jedis are going to feel this one..."
-Hubert Farnsworth (Futurama: Crimes of the Hot)
----
"The Andorian Mining Consortium runs from no one!"
-Shran (ENT: Proving Ground)
It sounds TERRIBLE. Period!
My only question is simply - WHY? Why Starfleet Academy? I know, let's redo Friends with 6 new people (SINGS - I'll be there for you-hoo....cause you're there for me too, Kirk. I can see you. Can you see me?), redo Cheers at a different bar in a different city with different characters (BORG!! Want a beer?) and then do Seinfeld in Houston with 3 cowboys, a waitress and a bothersome neighbor named 'Pahk-chu.' People would love it.
However, maybe they just liked the old characters and the way THEY told the story through THEIR acting and THEIR charm and THEIR personality...or we could just redo them all for whatever reason.
I got it - STARFLEET ACADEMY!! That's going to bring them all back!! Yes!! "Brannon - get to it!! And hire that dude from Mighty Ducks - My grandson LOVES that movie!!"
There were TWO Inspector Gadget films? Did they not learn their lesson the first time?
--------
****************************************
"Don't use Nutscrape. It's fucked."
Smoking Astronaut's unique contribution to the Browser debate.
"If women all have ovaries, why do so few men have underies?"
Smoke ponders the BIG questions.
"Gitch is having my babies, and Ro is their Godfather."
A surprising but touching proposition from Smoke.
Words of Wisdom from the one and only Smoking Astronaut.
You will be missed Sir.
OK, so now it's Star Trek meets Mighty Ducks and Inspector Gadget. Does that mean will be treated to lines like "Go Go Gadget Phasers"? For those who are going "This would be really cool", you're probably too young to remember that when Harve Bennett threw an idea like this out it was squashed. Not that what we got was much better (ST 5:TFF). The fact that the "creative team" or lack of creativity team as I refer to them, are having to fall back to old, passed over concept documents just shows that these people need to be fired. It's so frustrating to see the talent that B&B chased away (Moore, Behr, Pillar) have success after repeated success (not that I don't enjoy these shows) while Paramount and UPN for some reason think that B&B can produce a quality show. I'd love to see some of the "old school" (no slam on age) names come back and produce a quality show and movie. I think if the right script was developed for a movie it would really revitalize the franchise. If the right concept was developed with a truly creative team in place, then a new series (or perhaps a currently running series) would be great. But until Paramount and UPN jettison Berman and Braga, we're just stuck with mediocre (at best) Trek.
Oh my... I don't think I like this idea. I speak for myself when I say I'm soooo not interested in seeing a movie with no famaliar characters. I have no idea with whats going on with TREK these days. It's sad.
-
I am FAR more interested in a movie without known characters. The Star Trek Universe deserves to be bigger than 30 or so people.
That said, having a guy from Mighty Ducks and Inspector Gadget sends chills down my spine. (Not that I didn't like the Mighty Ducks back in the day. I mean, who didn't?)
THAT said, I think Variety is dead wrong about it being an Academy concept. They're probably just picking up from where AICN left off.
--------
The supervisor is Verizon!
-
I smell a teen comedy. Purhaps Cadet Joey has to fix the replicator before his dad gets home because he burned it out replicating a thousand pizzas.
Maybe there'd be a Romeo-Juliet-type romance plot as well... having something to do with Andorians and Vulcans.
Honestly, other than the Enterprise crew, there really isn't much left to pick from for sequel movies because the TNG folks are getting a little old, and DS9 and VOY are probably a little difficult to continue now.
So, other than an ENT movie, anything else isn't going work well from the other series. So, the other choice is to make something unrelated. Starfleet Academy? I'm nervous.
(1)
| 
