ST: From 007 to ... NCC-1701???

[qstor]

Phooey. I was hoping they'd continue a storyline that Enterprise never finished... the Romulan war....

Me too! But I'm pretty sure from what I remember, they "junked" that script in favor of an idea by JJ Abrams.

Mike

 

[qstor]

If you're going to do a film about a young Kirk, you need a young McCoy. Either Matthew McConaughey or Josh Lucas (both have distinguished Southern accent) can fit the role.

I think that would be fine. But for *me* we have to see what date the movie is set in. Matt Damon might be to old if the movie was set right after the Academy where Kirk was supposed to be around 22. It could be 2264-2266 before the TOS dates?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Star_Trek

I'm thinking that Abrams will junk the dates and make up other stuff like Berman and Braga

 

[Silver Moon]

(if neccessary, also taking Voyager into account, but I prefer to forget most of it)

Around two months back a friend loaned us the DVD's of the whole Voyager series. My kids had never seen it and my wife and I hadn't watched it since it was being aired on the original run. We're now around half-way through the series and I can honestly say the episodes have improved with age. My prior complaints about the series are minimized, in part because I know what to expect. And when you watch it in three or four episode blocks the stinker episodes can be quickly ignored in favor of the better ones. I have some newfound respect for that series.

 

[Vigilance]

But then there were other disappointments in the film area, such as the back-to-back INSURRECTION and NEMESIS. At this point, we fans pretty much lost confidence in the franchise's leadership (Rick Berman, who's more of a "social" producer than a creative one ... he knows who to schmooze in the Paramount lot).

Yeah, if you listen to Ron Moore's stories about how Michael Piller and Ira Steven Behr got things done, you really needed a producer with a lot of vision and drive who could stand up to Berman and convince him their way was right.

Once you DID that, Berman was really really good at organizing things and making the show run smoothly, but he had very bad instincts for what should actually go into the shows creatively.

When paired with a milk toast like Braga... things went bad.

I mean, let's not forget Berman didn't want Nog to lose both his legs, or even a WHOLE leg (he was ok with a loss of leg below the knee) because it was "too depressing". That's the way the man thought. Half of one leg? Ok. A whole leg or two legs? Depressing.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

I hate to sound negative but I think any new star trek movie would have to attract new fans to be successful.

Star Trek fans are far far far too finicky for anything new to be successful. When Enterprise came out it was disowned by many fans just because it didn't have perfect continuity or because it didn't match their view of what early Trek would be like or just because there were words in the theme song.

I've been to the Star Trek boards during that time and I couldn't believe how fans were turning away from what was a good show for no real reason (in my opinion).

Very few producers will look at Enterprise's failure as "we did it wrong" - they'll look at it as "Star Trek failed lets leave it alone". For fans this is a loss.

Perhaps some well-known talent from other non-trek sources would attract fans. Perhaps if it were just a very good sci-fi starring well know actors that just happen to be playing characters named Kirk and Spock then perhaps it would be accepted by the general public and be successful.

For example, some fans would like it to be darker in atmosphere while others want it to be bright and positive. What would sadden me is that if the movie were either, some fans might refuse to see it thereby cutting the fan base in half - and eliminating any producer's interest for years to come.

If you're not going to do it right, don't do it at all. If they do it badly, and it's a big hit, that just means we'll get more bad Trek. (Of course, how you define bad may not agree with my definition, or someone else's.)

 

[Ranger REG]

Once you DID that, Berman was really really good at organizing things and making the show run smoothly, but he had very bad instincts for what should actually go into the shows creatively.

Actually Ira Steven Behr was glad that Berman was focusing on VOYAGER to meddle with DS9 development.

As for Nog's legs, meh. 24th-Century Medicine would have given him both cybernetic legs anyway. But his story after having lost his leg shows one of the few "human" images of a very lengthy Dominion War.

That and the baseball episode between Sisko and a rival Vulcan captain.

 

[Ranger REG]

Around two months back a friend loaned us the DVD's of the whole Voyager series. My kids had never seen it and my wife and I hadn't watched it since it was being aired on the original run. We're now around half-way through the series and I can honestly say the episodes have improved with age. My prior complaints about the series are minimized, in part because I know what to expect. And when you watch it in three or four episode blocks the stinker episodes can be quickly ignored in favor of the better ones. I have some newfound respect for that series.

I'd rather watched the episodes BEFORE Jeri Ryan/Seven of Nine joined the cast.

And episodes spotlighting either the Doc or B'Elanna.

 

[Elf Witch]

I am so sick of these new hot shot producers coming in and remaking old shows. How about something new? If they want to do a new Trek do one but how about setting it in the future or in an era not really covered already. Why do we need another Kirk or Spock story?

If they are going to go into the past how about covering the Romulan War that could be an awesome movie on the big screen.

Or if they want a dark and gritty Trek how about a movie set in the Mirror universe.

As a Trek fan from the time it first showed on NBC when I was six I will not go see a movie or watch a new Trek if they take it and make it dark and gritty ala Battlestar Galatica (unless it is set in mirror universe or Romulan War) One of the things that always attracted me to the Trek universe was the message of hope. That we do evolve as a species.

I also have to wonder how many of these restarts and remakes have been that succesful? Lost In Space sucked, Starksy and Hutch awful, Bewitched stank, BSG dying in the ratings though it had a great start.

The only two I can think of are the Batman and Bond movies but both of those have always had different actors playing the rolls.

I know people compare Kirk to say Sherlock Holmes or James Bond and say how many other actors have played those rolls and it was fine.

I guess my problem with that is simply that those characters originated in fiction the personality coming from the author.

Where as the personality and mannerism of Kirk and Spock had a lot to do with the actors who created the rolls.

As far as I am concerned William Shatner is James T Kirk.

The Trek universe is huge I can't believe that it is impossibe to come up with a new part of it to explore and if they can't then maybe it is time to just let it go.

 

[DonTadow]

I"ve always wanted to see another ship, I'd suspect that if the enterprise d/e was the flag ship, but a family ship, they'd have had to have a "war" flag ship too. Even a 23rd century new crew would be cool.

DS9 would be cool to show up some wear, but I'd love it if they left the best star trek alone and let me have good memories. Probably the only series that didn't use time travel too much.

 

[Aaron L]

One of the things that always attracted me to the Trek universe was the message of hope. That we do evolve as a species.

That whole message of hope thing was pretty much retconned in by Roddenberry in the 80's with TNG after he started believing the hype people were saying about Star Trek. The Original Series was about guys in ripped shirts killing evil aliens. The aspect of a better future was kinda there in TOS, but it played second fiddle to fight scenes.