(OT) Star Trek Nemesis

[Ranger REG]

He's also a half-Prophet, currently with his other heritage in the Celestial Temple (i.e., Bajoran Wormhole), now that his "mortal shell" has been charred in the fire cave.

Personally, I do not want Sisko to emerge from the Wormhole to help Picard & Co. It is something that should be crucial for a DS9 movie.

As a Trek fan, I find a lot of holes in NEMESIS that needs explanation, such as.... how can an undesirable caste of the Romulan people (i.e., Reman) take control of the entire Romulan government and military? One would expect this to plunge the Romulan Empire into a terrible civil war.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Originally posted by "Hand of Evil"
I always thought they should do Captain Logs. X number of shows with this character, maybe following his moving up the ranks. It would also be interesting to see shows based on different captains from some of the different races, think about seeing the same same battle from each captain's view.

This is an interesting idea...
It would be something like Outer Limits - a series without main characters, with the added advantage of a (hopefully) consistend background universe...

I wonder if series without main actors/characters are more expensive than series with main actors/characters?

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[Hand of Evil]

This is an interesting idea...
It would be something like Outer Limits - a series without main characters, with the added advantage of a (hopefully) consistend background universe...

I wonder if series without main actors/characters are more expensive than series with main actors/characters?

Mustrum Ridcully

Even if they went with 7 shows a crew, 3 new crews a season. I think they could keep cost down by using same sets but rearanging them. Think about guest shots/writers, you have the option of killing off an Captain (at least once)! How may shows are made each year that are cancelled after 9 or 13 shows to be replaced by another group.

 

[Black Omega]

Nemesis is a fun movie to watch but more so than many ST movies, there is alot you really don't want to think about.

Like what purpose was served by the mental assault on Troi, other than it setting up her using Worf as a ouiji board later on to find the ship while cloaked.

Or why were none of those fighters actually used in combat. Their only apparent purpose in the movie was to let Picard and Data escape.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

Personally, I think it would be a good idea. The franchise is getting stale.

I just watched Nemesis, and though I was entertained, I agree with you completely. I'm currently of the opinion that only one thing could save the Star Trek universe from utter stagnation:


The Collapse of the Federation

.
.
.
I'm sick of the Federation being a perfect utopia where humans have solved all of their problems. I'm sick of the Federation being a happyland where everyone gets along. No money. No plagues. No internal strife or conflict.

Each storyline is a repeat of this plot: The bad guys are always a new alien with different makeup who goes to war with the Federation, but then eventually realizes the error of their ways and joins the Federation. Rinse. Repeat.
.
.
.
I realize that this isn't going to happen. No one is going to alter the grand vision of Roddenberry. They have a good thing going, why change it? Any alteration in the formula is as likely to succeed as it is to fail, and the Star Trek merchandising and media juggernaut will not allow for the possibility of failure. Bleh.
.
.
.
Star Trek needs to be dynamic again. Star Trek needs to be shaken at a fundamental level. The Earth can only be saved from destruction so many times before that plot becomes cliche.

I want to see the Federation crumble, the Earth distingrated, and a new phoenix rise from the ashes. Then maybe, just maybe, I will be enraptured with Star Trek again.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

They already did this, at least partially.

In Insurrection, it was a Starfleet Officer who was trying to violate Federation Laws.

In Deep Space Nine, Starfleet Officers (and cadets) were declaring martial law, nearly destroying the Earth they wanted to protect.
A "undercover" section, unknow to most authorities, was performing illegal acts to ensure Federation and Starfleets might.
(Section 31 (?) )

If it wasn`t for the intervention of some alien beings (the prophets of the wormhole - they destroyed a whole Jem`Hardar fleet passing the wormhole)), the Federation would probably have been seized, followed up by Klingons and Romulans...

Star Trek needs to be dynamic again

Dynamic again? Startrek was never dynamic in a way you describe it. The Federation and the Starfleet Officer were always the best - maybe they did err sometimes, but eventually, they succeeded. This is a Startrek Constant. Actually, it is a constant in many Science Fiction Settings - Starwars, Babylon 5, Andromeda, Stargate

Settings that didn`t use this concept seem to fail very fast - see - unfortunately - Space 2063.
(Though I think there are some settings who succeeded with this way - I just can`t remember one )

Back to Startrek
But I am willing to agree that it might be very interesting to see the Federation destroyed - but doing this is not only a commercial question, its also a "creational" problem - may writers and producers established a Universe, created a complicated setting - would you like to abandon, destroy this? Even if this seems a bit to dramatic: Would you abandon your family, your house, and your job, just because if you did something else your life might become better (maybe just a little bit, but maybe you lost everything?)
Perhaps an interesting twist would be to allow for an alternative Startrek Universe - but at this moment, commercial problems might occur. (Maybe, to stay within our dramatic context, it would be something like a "double-life" - nothing that is officially appreciated or easy to manage..)

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[EarthsShadow]

maybe a series of movies set in a alternate reality, like a trilogy of sorts, would be pretty cool. Possible example could be to take someone in the mainstay or traditional star trek universe, somehow get transported to a alternate reality and spend a trilogy to rebuild a already depleted federation, or arrive where war is just beginning, and somehow during the trilogy figure out a way to get back to where they came from, or something.

I think if they went totally fresh with the intent of doing a three series movie that is its own trilogy in the Star Trek universe, and its a good story with its own continuity, then that could work.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

They already did this, at least partially. *snip examples*

My point exactly. We have been on the brink of disaster forever. How many times has the Earth been "almost blown up?"

Dynamic again? Startrek was never dynamic in a way you describe it.

Not dynamic for the show, but dynamic for me.

Explanation: When I was first watching the show, I was entralled with the idea of the Federation, the characters, the aliens, the ships...

Those ideas were new. They had a sense of Dynamic Quality.

But now, after watching the the original Star Trek, TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, and all of the movies, I have come to the point where the Earth "on the brink of disaster" for the fiftieth time just doesn't cut it anymore.

A new stylish ship and new uniforms and new aliens with new makeup just doesn't cut it.

The Federation and the Starfleet Officer were always the best - maybe they did err sometimes, but eventually, they succeeded. This is a Startrek Constant. Actually, it is a constant in many Science Fiction Settings - Starwars, Babylon 5, Andromeda, Stargate

I'm not saying I want this hypothetical new show to focus in on negativity. I'll gladly watch heroes battle foes and win all over again. I'd just like to see radically different conflicts. I think we have stretched the Federation to its creative limit. (I'd really like to see a Foundation/Asimov thingy happen with Star Trek.)

Settings that didn`t use this concept seem to fail very fast - see - unfortunately - Space 2063.
(Though I think there are some settings who succeeded with this way - I just can`t remember one )

True. Concepts that don't understand that the hero is supposed to win in the end generally fail. We like our escapism to have a happy ending, afterall.

Back to Startrek
But I am willing to agree that it might be very interesting to see the Federation destroyed - but doing this is not only a commercial question, its also a "creational" problem - may writers and producers established a Universe, created a complicated setting - would you like to abandon, destroy this?

Well, yes and no. Yes: break apart the Federation. No: keep humans, vulcans, romulans, klingons, holodecks and space ships. I don't want the writers to fully abandon everything that has gone on beforehand. I would instead like them to break our expectations. To do this, you need to shake things up a little. Well, maybe not a little, but a lot.

Even if this seems a bit to dramatic: Would you abandon your family, your house, and your job, just because if you did something else your life might become better (maybe just a little bit, but maybe you lost everything?)

RL is completely different from entertainment. I look for as little conflict as possible in reality. (That's why life is inherently boring. *grin*)

However, conflict is what makes entertainment so dang neat. (Also, the tidy little bow of a happy ending doesn't hurt either.)

 

[ninthcouncil]

I find a lot of holes in NEMESIS that needs explanation, such as.... how can an undesirable caste of the Romulan people (i.e., Reman) take control of the entire Romulan government and military?

I'm glad someone else was bothered by this.

The other thing that really stank was the whole downloading Data's memory into B4 thing.

"Why are we doing this, Geordi?"
"It's necessary for the subsequent plot, Commander Riker, that we do something extremely stupid and utterly useless, like filling an obviously planted android with high security StarFleet knowledge. I'm sorry, but that's the best explnation I can give."
"What's this thing on the back of B4's head, Geordi?"
"It's a plot device, Commander. Now go away before you make me act sensibly."

 

[Ranger REG]

I'm sick of the Federation being a perfect utopia where humans have solved all of their problems. I'm sick of the Federation being a happyland where everyone gets along. No money. No plagues. No internal strife or conflict.

But it is not. And it has already been touched upon. In TNG, an admiral uses a convicted starfleet officer who is a Bajoran to find a Bajoran criminal (aka revolutionary) for the Cardassians. Also in TNG, the border treaty between Federation and Cardassian prompted Enterprise to remove colonies against their will. Of course that resulted in the mistreatment of former Federation colonies that prompted the rise of the Maquis.

In DS9 the Dominion Threat prompted martial law on Earth, nearly installing an Admiral Leyton(sp?) to become President of the Federation.

In the bombed Insurrection, an admiral conspired with a race whose agenda is to acquire a planet and its people, in exchange for not producing the ketracel-white needed for the enemy's Jem'Hadar soldiers, also to acquire cloaking technology from them if not from the Romulans.

Even before that, in The Undiscovered Country small factions on both sides of the Federation and Klingon do not want the peaceful exchange between the two, so conspired to keep the status quo as enemies, ironic as it is.

And let us not forget Section 13, a rogue agency who will do anything (even to bloody their own hand) to keep the Federation civilization alive. It is because of them they used lethal biological weapons against the Dominion, and despite pleas, the rest of the Federation Council chose not to help the enemies, even though this is not part of their doctrine to use biological weapons against threat.

Federation, a utopia? Right, but at what cost?