ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

new star trek series?

blee

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3

Report this Aug. 28 2010, 8:14 pm

is there a rumor of a new series?


 

kmb035

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 91

Report this Aug. 29 2010, 6:37 am

No, trekkies hope for a new series but I dont. I love reading the novels and watching the movies.

prabhakarm

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 8

Report this Sep. 08 2010, 11:30 am

i agree bring on the new series let it be in the future..star trek is all about science,exploration and future..lets not get caught into the past too much...also the characters frm previous series should be brought in frequently with the new cast...


Live long and Prosper

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Sep. 08 2010, 3:55 pm

Quote: prabhakarm @ Sep. 08 2010, 11:30 am

i agree bring on the new series let it be in the future..star trek is all about science,exploration and future..lets not get caught into the past too much...also the characters frm previous series should be brought in frequently with the new cast...



Characters or actors? Trek has a history of giving actors new roles im sure that would continue in a new series. I think frequently having the characters from old series somehow in a story line would get old

megan512

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1324

Report this Sep. 08 2010, 4:09 pm

I'd like to see a new series.

"Captain, life is not a dream." - Spock "Can you please continue the petty bickering? I find it quite intriguing." - Data

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Sep. 08 2010, 7:53 pm

Quote: prabhakarm @ Sep. 08 2010, 11:30 am

>

>i agree bring on the new series let it be in the future..star trek is all about science,exploration and future..lets not get caught into the past too much...also the characters frm previous series should be brought in frequently with the new cast...

>
I couldn't disagree more. Star Trek is all about the human condition, characters, relationships, and adventure. The science-fiction was just a vehicle to tell an interesting story.


I also strongly disagree that characters from other series should be brought in. Crossover stuff is mainly fanwank. I think a new series should be done RIGHT and shouldn't rely on (or bother with) breadcrumbs trying to please the thin and inconsistent fans of the various spin-off series. I'm a fan of ALL the Trek series, but I have NO desire to see "special guest stars Dr. Crusher, Neelix, and Malcom Reed." No...let the new Trek stand tall on its own.


If they're going to make a new series...(which they are NOT right now, by the way...every 3rd post out here seems to be some kind of speculation)...it needs to be done BALLS-OUT. It can't just be another VOY or ENT, which were basically just copies of a copy. It needs to be fresh, new, and it needs to challenge the fans and the audience the same way that TOS and TNG did by being a SIGNIFICANT departure from the norm.


I still say that I don't want a new Star Trek series for at least another 5-6 years. Let the movie series finish up...and then spend 2 years in intense development. Cast it RIGHT. Staff it RIGHT with producers, writers, and directors who care about making an awesome television series and don't care what "the fans" want to see, and are more interseted in challenging audiences than pleasing "the fans." Build a NEW fanbase by making something amazing...like the original series did back in the 60's. Anyway, that's my rant.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Sep. 09 2010, 7:18 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Sep. 08 2010, 7:53 pm

Quote: prabhakarm @ Sep. 08 2010, 11:30 am

>

>i agree bring on the new series let it be in the future..star trek is all about science,exploration and future..lets not get caught into the past too much...also the characters frm previous series should be brought in frequently with the new cast...

>
I couldn't disagree more. Star Trek is all about the human condition, characters, relationships, and adventure. The science-fiction was just a vehicle to tell an interesting story.


"WAS" It wasnt about technology in the 60s but now we have so much technology around us its almost as important as the drama. The new fanbase you talk about is growing up with cell phones, texting, facebook, twitter, ect. Technology will have to play a large part if a new series is to succeed.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Sep. 09 2010, 6:02 pm

Quote: UNTRugby @ Sep. 09 2010, 7:18 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Sep. 08 2010, 7:53 pm

Quote: prabhakarm @ Sep. 08 2010, 11:30 am

>

>

>i agree bring on the new series let it be in the future..star trek is all about science,exploration and future..lets not get caught into the past too much...also the characters frm previous series should be brought in frequently with the new cast...

>
I couldn't disagree more. Star Trek is all about the human condition, characters, relationships, and adventure. The science-fiction was just a vehicle to tell an interesting story.

"WAS" It wasnt about technology in the 60s but now we have so much technology around us its almost as important as the drama. The new fanbase you talk about is growing up with cell phones, texting, facebook, twitter, ect. Technology will have to play a large part if a new series is to succeed.


Based on what? Battlestar Galactica was a well-received modern sci-fi series that didn't even TOUCH technology as a theme or key element of the show. Why does Star Trek need to be different? I'm not saying that they can't do some fun and interesting things with technology...but that is not what makes the show go. In fact, one of the major criticisms of the later incarnations was too heavy a focus on technology.


And you're right...technology is in our every day lives, but I think that has the OPPOSITE effect on audiences. Cool technology is actually "ho-hum" at this point. It's just business as usual.


I think audiences care more about gritty, realistic storytelling and dynamic, relatable characters. Look at the series that are really popular on the various cable stations. 


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Sep. 09 2010, 9:42 pm

>>Based on what? Battlestar Galactica was a well-received modern sci-fi series that didn't even TOUCH technology as a theme or key element of the show. Why does Star Trek need to be different? I'm not saying that they can't do some fun and interesting things with technology...but that is not what makes the show go. In fact, one of the major criticisms of the later incarnations was too heavy a focus on technology.

BSG didnt have a lot of tech in it but the main story revolved around what happened when a society had too much technology. Look at the popular BSG spinoff caprica it has lots of tech in it.

>>And you're right...technology is in our every day lives, but I think that has the OPPOSITE effect on audiences. Cool technology is actually "ho-hum" at this point. It's just business as usual.

In a modern day setting tech is boring but people always wonder whats gonna happen in the future. It will turn people off if a show set 300 years in the future are using communicators less advanced than their cell phones.

>>I think audiences care more about gritty, realistic storytelling and dynamic, relatable characters. Look at the series that are really popular on the various cable stations. 

All of the popular dramas have an equal balance between drama and what ever genre they are set for. Both are just as important to their success.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Sep. 10 2010, 4:43 am

Quote: UNTRugby @ Sep. 09 2010, 9:42 pm

>>Based on what? Battlestar Galactica was a well-received modern sci-fi series that didn't even TOUCH technology as a theme or key element of the show. Why does Star Trek need to be different? I'm not saying that they can't do some fun and interesting things with technology...but that is not what makes the show go. In fact, one of the major criticisms of the later incarnations was too heavy a focus on technology. BSG didnt have a lot of tech in it but the main story revolved around what happened when a society had too much technology. Look at the popular BSG spinoff caprica it has lots of tech in it. >>And you're right...technology is in our every day lives, but I think that has the OPPOSITE effect on audiences. Cool technology is actually "ho-hum" at this point. It's just business as usual. In a modern day setting tech is boring but people always wonder whats gonna happen in the future. It will turn people off if a show set 300 years in the future are using communicators less advanced than their cell phones. >>I think audiences care more about gritty, realistic storytelling and dynamic, relatable characters. Look at the series that are really popular on the various cable stations.  All of the popular dramas have an equal balance between drama and what ever genre they are set for. Both are just as important to their success.


I disagree, and I think that if a new Trek series decides that highlighting "technology" should be a crucial part of the structure and theme of the show, I doubt it will capture the audience it would need to be successful. It would be falling directly into the trap that made VOY and ENT decline in popularity so quickly.

I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Matthias Russell

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 7705

Report this Sep. 10 2010, 5:01 am

One of my biggest complaints about voyager is it seemed to too often rely upon tech than wit or mental aspects (although I plan to rewatch series once done with ds9 to modernize my opinion). There is a double edged sword however. A story can't rely on tech to make good plots but high tech is part of trek like light sabers are part of wars. One of the things trek has done for mankind is inspire new technology, it should continue to inspire innovation.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Sep. 10 2010, 5:18 am

Quote: Matthias Russell @ Sep. 10 2010, 5:01 am

One of my biggest complaints about voyager is it seemed to too often rely upon tech than wit or mental aspects (although I plan to rewatch series once done with ds9 to modernize my opinion). There is a double edged sword however. A story can't rely on tech to make good plots but high tech is part of trek like light sabers are part of wars. One of the things trek has done for mankind is inspire new technology, it should continue to inspire innovation.


VOY definitely fell into that trap. It was not JUST the fact that they had too many "technology-based solutions," but it was the fact that those solutions would present themselves about 3 minutes before the closing credits. So, not only did you get some garble-dee-gook about temporal spatial anomolies being sealed with inverse particle beams emitted through the deflector dish combined with a stream of tetryon particles...but then after the "solution," you basically just got a quick Captain's Log wrap-up or some lame "moral of the story" scene with 7 of 9 or The Doctor.

Any new Star Trek series needs to be a complete departure from the 80's and early 90's mentality that was used on TNG through ENT. Otherwise, it's just more of the same, and you'll be stuck with those same 2 million viewers who closed out ENT.

I AM KEE-ROCK!!

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Sep. 10 2010, 9:16 am

>>I disagree, and I think that if a new Trek series decides that highlighting "technology" should be a crucial part of the structure and theme of the show, I doubt it will capture the audience it would need to be successful. It would be falling directly into the trap that made VOY and ENT decline in popularity so quickly.

It doesnt have to feature technology but the technology has to be updated and have some new ideas. Like the padds in trek they never were centered on an episode but it was a cool gadget which we actually now have

>>VOY definitely fell into that trap. It was not JUST the fact that they had too many "technology-based solutions," but it was the fact that those solutions would present themselves about 3 minutes before the closing credits. So, not only did you get some garble-dee-gook about temporal spatial anomolies being sealed with inverse particle beams emitted through the deflector dish combined with a stream of tetryon particles...but then after the "solution," you basically just got a quick Captain's Log wrap-up or some lame "moral of the story" scene with 7 of 9 or The Doctor.

all of that was due to awful writing not the fact the had technology. It was used poorly becuase the writers were to lazy to think up a coherent ending.

>>ny new Star Trek series needs to be a complete departure from the 80's and early 90's mentality that was used on TNG through ENT. Otherwise, it's just more of the same, and you'll be stuck with those same 2 million viewers who closed out ENT.

If it gets stuck on CW or a cable network 2 million is a hit show now. ENTs downfall was it was set in the past but somehow its ship looked more advanced than voyager. Pretty much the problem that will happen if a new show has to adapt to 23rd or 24th century treknology. It was also on a dying network in which the execs never wanted the show to begin with and forced the tpol sex suit on the producers.

>>I don't think technology should be a major part. The crew should win a situation because of their brains and their skill not becaose of some fancy doo-dad they have to save the day.

I dont think anyone is asking for that. Im just asking for some new gadgets and maybe a communicator that could beat out a cell phone.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Sep. 10 2010, 9:55 am

Quote: UNTRugby @ Sep. 10 2010, 9:16 am

>>I disagree, and I think that if a new Trek series decides that highlighting "technology" should be a crucial part of the structure and theme of the show, I doubt it will capture the audience it would need to be successful. It would be falling directly into the trap that made VOY and ENT decline in popularity so quickly. It doesnt have to feature technology but the technology has to be updated and have some new ideas. Like the padds in trek they never were centered on an episode but it was a cool gadget which we actually now have >>VOY definitely fell into that trap. It was not JUST the fact that they had too many "technology-based solutions," but it was the fact that those solutions would present themselves about 3 minutes before the closing credits. So, not only did you get some garble-dee-gook about temporal spatial anomolies being sealed with inverse particle beams emitted through the deflector dish combined with a stream of tetryon particles...but then after the "solution," you basically just got a quick Captain's Log wrap-up or some lame "moral of the story" scene with 7 of 9 or The Doctor. all of that was due to awful writing not the fact the had technology. It was used poorly becuase the writers were to lazy to think up a coherent ending. >>ny new Star Trek series needs to be a complete departure from the 80's and early 90's mentality that was used on TNG through ENT. Otherwise, it's just more of the same, and you'll be stuck with those same 2 million viewers who closed out ENT. If it gets stuck on CW or a cable network 2 million is a hit show now. ENTs downfall was it was set in the past but somehow its ship looked more advanced than voyager. Pretty much the problem that will happen if a new show has to adapt to 23rd or 24th century treknology. It was also on a dying network in which the execs never wanted the show to begin with and forced the tpol sex suit on the producers. >>I don't think technology should be a major part. The crew should win a situation because of their brains and their skill not becaose of some fancy doo-dad they have to save the day. I dont think anyone is asking for that. Im just asking for some new gadgets and maybe a communicator that could beat out a cell phone.


Agreed, I think we were just missing each other's points!

I AM KEE-ROCK!!

jamesspock1

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 461

Report this Sep. 10 2010, 9:58 am

I would like to see further, future Star Trek movie or series, with a new catch like maybe a Transwarp drive, to be able to further reach the rim of the Galaxcy, maybe even other galaxcies.

I think were done with the past, been there, done that, lets move on.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: JOYOFVGR

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum