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

FINALLY, I'm putting it on the line

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 03 2012, 7:45 pm

I've spent enough time telling people why I don't think their ideas are great ideas for a new movie or tv show or whatever, right? I'm not saying that these ideas are not intersting...I'm just saying that I don't actually believe that anyone would actually put them into action becuase I don't believe anyone would actually watch them except for a few of us diehard detail-loving hardcore fans of the franchise.


 


So, I'll play the game and throw my hat in the ring to be stomped on or otherwise for what I think would (and in my own happy limited mind SHOULD) be how a network approaches a new series sometime in the future. I'm sure this will stick in a lot of people's craws...because it's not about a Horta captain in the year 3498 exploring the outer reaches of the Andromeda galaxy all while trying to prevent a war between the Federation, the Remans, and Species 8472 who have just all gone through a terrible political shake-up since the Dominion conquered the Cardassians and the Tholians. (Oh, with special guest appearances by cloned Capt. Picard and cloned Neelix).


I kid...I kid...


 


The scenario is that I have only one shot to get Star Trek back on the air as a regular TV show. They're giving one writer a shot...and if he/she succeeds at convincing them, they'll order a season's worth of episodes. If he/she fails, they're dumping the idea of returing Star Trek to TV altogether. So, this pitch in my made-up scenario is for all the marbles. .


Here's what I, if I were honestlly invited into a studio executive's office to pitch a Star Trek idea, would present:


 


1. Completely re-imagine the original Star Trek televison series, in much the same way that Ronald D. Moore did with Battlestar Galactica. No alternate universes, no tie-ins, no crossover guest appearances, and no acknowledgement of anything that came before or since. Start from GROUND ZERO with the characters and fundamentalelements that made up the original series as foundational elements, and start anew from there.


2. The general idea would be Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Uhura, and Checkov aboard the Federation Starship USS Enterprise on a 5-year deep space mission. After that...I'd abandon just about every other thematic tie or sacred element of the existing franchise (with excptions that I will elaborate upon).


3. The show should primarily focus on the exploration of space, the protection / check-up of Federation colonies, investigation into various mysteries, first-contact with unknown life etc. I would have it be episodic in format, but with an over-arching background plot arc that would change every season or so. That way, you can watch it casually and not worry about not knowing what the hell is going on, but at the same time loyal viewers are rewarded with elements of an ongoing storyline that carrys through. So, not as episodic as TOS and TNG, but not as arc-driven as DS9 was in the later seasons.


4. The characters would be based on the original characters, but would be drastically updated for modern audiences with complex relationships, backgrounds, and motovators. I think about shows like Mad Men and Walking Dead and how character-driven and dramatic they are. It would be a very different feel from the kind of underdeveloped or cliched characters of the last 2 Trek series.


5. I would NOT "darken" the show meaning that it would still be about a humanity which has survived to thrive in the future as one unified, diverse people. It would still be optimistic and hopeful, but it would portray humans as having all the flaws and weaknesses that we have today...but it would emphasize the tremendous inner strength, wisdom and courage humanity draws upon to overcome those weaknesses and ultimately prevail. So, it would not be sticky-sweet like some of Trek has been...but it would still maintain the core Trek ideals at it's base.


6. I WOULD however, emphasize more uncertainty and realism. I like how shows like "24" kind of broke the mold by doing risky and unexpected things. I would stress that main characters or other sacred cows could be drastically altered or even killed off if it serves drama and the story appropriately. I think these are important elements in modern drama, and help the audience cherish the characters (or other sacred cows) even more becuase they know they don't automaticlaly win every week. Seeing how fans have reacted to character deaths and planet distructions over the last 25 years or so...I'd say this would be a huge risk, but one that will ultimately differentiate the show from the safe and secure predecessors.


7. As a big risk (and difference from other modern Trek productions, which are more science-fantasy than science fact) I'd take would be to present space travel in a more accurate and scientific way without taking away from the storytelling. So, to be clear, I am NOT talking about technobabble and crap like that. What I do mean is that I wouldn't portray space travel in the cartoonish fantasy way that Trek has kind of portrayed it in. I'd give it a little bit more of a NASA / 2001 feel, with some realism. Cold, quiet space. 3-dimensional viewpoints (rather than every ship meeting up iwth others on the same plane), planets that aren't like Earth every week, etc. I'd want to make space travel feel special and thrilling again...not like it's just another day at the office.


8. I'd downplay the background / over-arching universe stuff. I wouldn't get all involved in the affairs of the Federation, the organizational politics of Starfleet Command, etc. I'd literally make the show more about a 5-year deep space probe mission where the ship and crew are essentially on their own. The focus would be more on the ensemble cast, some secondary characters, and the floating community of the USS Enterprise. I wouldn't eliminate those elements...but I would severely downplay them.


9. More "alieness" to the aliens. I'd make humanoid-like alien life a more rare encounter. So many stories can be done about alien cultures / ways of life just by making them different (I mean, REALLY different, not just dudes with some forehead make-up). I'd make encountering a new alien race a dangerous and spellbinding experience...not just a "open hailing frequencies...hi there I'm Captain So-and-So" experience. Think "Contact" or "Close Encounters" or even "Darmok" where there was something different and truly alien to overcome in making first contact. 


10. One thing that I would stress is that, leveraging all of these elements, I'd push the envelope of television "norms" in much the same way the Original Series did. I'm not saying "be shocking or controversial just for the sake of it..." but I'd make sure that the themes of the show were challenging and thought-provoking for the audience.


11. NO preaching. NO holier-than-thou human superiority lessons. NO "evloved sensibilities." Our characters mean well, and they are dedicated to doing the right thing and making good choices...but they are not out there to lecture the galaxy. In fact, they are more likely to learn from their mistakes than they are to correct the mistakes of others. I'd rather present some ambiguity and allow the intelligence of the audience draw it's own conclusions about "right" and "wrong" than have Captain Kirk spell it out for everyone in a bloated speech.  


12. I'd retain the Klingons and Romulans, but I'd COMPLETELY re-imagine both races...maybe even making one of them fairly non-humanoid (probably the Klingons, because I like retaining the idea of the Romulan connection with the Vulcans). But, I'd greatly alter and update / mature their social structures, motivations, behaviors etc.


13. I'd make sure tha life aboard the Enterprise is an important plot element. I'd design the series so the ship itself has its own challenging elements etc. Think about how the new Battlestar Galactica and was portrayed (or how VOYAGER could have been if they had taken more risks). I'd explore stories about the community of a diverse crew and how they face challenges together, how their lives are different being aboard this ship in deep space, etc. It would be the "anti-TNG" in terms that it would not be a living room in space (whoich doesn't necessarily mean it would look like the Millenium Falcon or the Serenity either!) I would write the interior environment of the Enterprise in such a way that it not only has an impact on our characters...but it IS a character.


14. I'd get into the backstories of each main character much more deeply than any other Trek incarnation by taking an ensemble approach and also by utilizing flashbacks, allowing us to see how each character was at the academy, when they were growing up, when they were junior officers on other assignments, etc. Think LOST's first season, where you learned information relevent to the current episode and gained insight into the characters through those flashbacks (before they became part of the time-twisting storyline and were there mainly to give more info on the characters.)


 


So, that's basically it. That's honestly, in my heart-of-hearts, what I would do / shoot for if I were allowed ONE shot with the network executives. I'd $hitcan a lot of what Star Trek had built up and held sacred in favor of starting all over again using only the basic original foundation (the basic characters, ship, mission, and setting). I'd make sure the scripts focused on the people, their relationships, and their choices as they encounter unknown forces in the vastness of space. I'd make the idea of space exploration dangerous, scary, and exciting again...and not like taking a ride to the beach and "ho-hum, set a course for our next mission" at the end of every episode. And, I'd downplay (if not completely eliminate) complicated macro-plot elements like what the Federation is doing in relation to other powers, etc. The complexities and intrigue would exist, but be on a more micro-level.


 


So, love it or hate it, that pitch is actually what I TRULY believe would have the best chance at succeeding as a network pitch for a weekly series.


 


Comment away. I fear no reprisal.

OneDamnMinuteAdmiral

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1401

Report this May. 03 2012, 8:31 pm

[quote]


Folks, folks, folks. There is nothing being planned right now in any official capacity. Nothing. At all. Period. 


 


Please, not another "we need a new series" thread! I thought we had gotten over this!  



[/quote]


Thought I'd give you your own words to these kinds of threads.


 


Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 03 2012, 8:35 pm

Quote: OneDamnMinuteAdmiral @ May. 03 2012, 8:31 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>Folks, folks, folks. There is nothing being planned right now in any official capacity. Nothing. At all. Period. 

>Please, not another "we need a new series" thread! I thought we had gotten over this!  

>

>

Thought I'd give you your own words to these kinds of threads.

 


Isn't that the WHOLE point of why I posted this????


Did  you even read anything that I wrote, or did you just dive in like a jackass looking to take a shot?


The entire basis for my post was to say "hey, I know I've criticized these posts through the history of my membership here...so I'm throwing my hat in the ring in a "cant beat em so join em" kind of way.


Wow, man.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

OneDamnMinuteAdmiral

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1401

Report this May. 03 2012, 8:37 pm

So when you get that posted back to you you don't like it. Hmm interesting.


Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 03 2012, 8:44 pm

Quote: OneDamnMinuteAdmiral @ May. 03 2012, 8:37 pm

>

>So when you get that posted back to you you don't like it. Hmm interesting.

>


I didn't say I didn't like it. I said that you are a jackass for missing the entire point of my post. I stand by that. 


I actually could care less about what you wrote, because it doesn't apply. The whole point of what I posted is an admission that I have something to say on the topic (albeit, different than what most people post on these scenarios) and that I've recognized that I've grated against similar (but diffferently structured) scenarios in the past 


Are you here to contribute to the discussion or are you here to take shots at my personal character? It would be nice for you to move on if you're just here exercising your "I feel like being a dink" muscles.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

OneDamnMinuteAdmiral

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1401

Report this May. 03 2012, 8:56 pm

And you've resorted to name calling just because you didn't like seeing your own words used in the same kind of post. So yeah you now have a point to make too, well so did all those other people that started these kinds of threads and you don't mind telling them that quote, or a variation, at their opinions, so I thought your post needed it too. Maybe you shouldn't be so negative at others when they want to speculate at some future unrealized series.


For the record since you think I did not read it, I actually like points 5, 9, 11, & 14 the best.


Are you sure it isn't time for a colorful metaphor?

Blockman

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 520

Report this May. 04 2012, 3:26 am

lol we know.


You only bring it up in your posts like every other thread. Somehow always finding a way to work it into a discussion and give your heated thoughts about the Star Trek fan base. (And you've admitted that, So at least it's all in one place now!


Basically, I agree that Star Trek shouldn't be about Technobabel, but it's not entirely the Technobabel that's the problem, It's the easy solutions that the technobabel provides. Yet things like beaming nuKirk half-way across the galaxy by Spock is the same sort of easy solution from 15 years ago, but this time just without the babely words! So less of that in the future.


 


My suggestion to you is; put that stuff in your sig and just refer it to anyone everytime one of their threads/posts pisses you off.


but be warned, on these boards you're going to find a majority of people who SPECIFICALLY come on here to discuss those inter-political, space war battle, crossover, Kirk vs Q, Borg vs Star Wars, What's Kiras uniform color and how-could-it-look-better Threads.


I never bother to bump their topics, but I guarantee you this, in just a few weeks there will be another New Trek Series Thread right here.


OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this May. 04 2012, 5:26 am

ok I'm going to try this again -- not sure if it's my browser or these boards, but...


 


Talking honestly, I'd rate your chances of getting that pitch through as roughly average, depending mostly on what kind of person was listening to it. Can't say it's gotten me super-excited, but I'd watch it if it came on that way.


Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 04 2012, 5:30 am

Quote: OneDamnMinuteAdmiral @ May. 03 2012, 8:56 pm

>

>And you've resorted to name calling just because you didn't like seeing your own words used in the same kind of post. So yeah you now have a point to make too, well so did all those other people that started these kinds of threads and you don't mind telling them that quote, or a variation, at their opinions, so I thought your post needed it too. Maybe you shouldn't be so negative at others when they want to speculate at some future unrealized series.

>For the record since you think I did not read it, I actually like points 5, 9, 11, & 14 the best.

>


 


I always thought the purpose of posting things in public forum was to receive honest unfiltered feedback (what ELSE would you expect). That's the reason why I posted this here. I don't take positive or negative reactions personally...I simply view it as "debate."


If people don't want the honest, unfiltered feedback...what DO they want? I didn't realize that everyone needed defending.


Also, I love how I get blasted for being "negative" yet there's a bunch of people raging on and on in Ten Forward assulting and challenging each other's personal belief systems every day...and that's fine. But, criticize someone's nerdy Star Trek fantasy....FOR SHAME!


???


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 04 2012, 5:37 am

Quote: OtakuJo @ May. 04 2012, 5:26 am

>

>ok I'm going to try this again -- not sure if it's my browser or these boards, but...

>Talking honestly, I'd rate your chances of getting that pitch through as roughly average, depending mostly on what kind of person was listening to it. Can't say it's gotten me super-excited, but I'd watch it if it came on that way.

>


OK, that's fair. So let's say YOU'RE the executive I'm talking to OtakuJo. And let's say you're considering putting it on the air, but you have some reservations / stipulations / whathaveyous.


What changes / edits / contrary thoughts / advice / demands would you make on the format?


Are you "meh" on it becuase you're not really a fan of the Original Series...or is it because you'd rather have the classicly Trekkie elements (politics, war, alien captains, technobabble etc)?


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Treknoir

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1784

Report this May. 04 2012, 7:43 am

Quote: Vger23 @ May. 03 2012, 7:45 pm

>

>1. Completely re-imagine the original Star Trek televison series, in much the same way that Ronald D. Moore did with Battlestar Galactica. No alternate universes, no tie-ins, no crossover guest appearances, and no acknowledgement of anything that came before or since. Start from GROUND ZERO with the characters and fundamentalelements that made up the original series as foundational elements, and start anew from there.

>2. The general idea would be Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Uhura, and Checkov aboard the Federation Starship USS Enterprise on a 5-year deep space mission. After that...I'd abandon just about every other thematic tie or sacred element of the existing franchise (with excptions that I will elaborate upon).

>3. The show should primarily focus on the exploration of space, the protection / check-up of Federation colonies, investigation into various mysteries, first-contact with unknown life etc. I would have it be episodic in format, but with an over-arching background plot arc that would change every season or so. That way, you can watch it casually and not worry about not knowing what the hell is going on, but at the same time loyal viewers are rewarded with elements of an ongoing storyline that carrys through. So, not as episodic as TOS and TNG, but not as arc-driven as DS9 was in the later seasons.

>4. The characters would be based on the original characters, but would be drastically updated for modern audiences with complex relationships, backgrounds, and motovators. I think about shows like Mad Men and Walking Dead and how character-driven and dramatic they are. It would be a very different feel from the kind of underdeveloped or cliched characters of the last 2 Trek series.

>5. I would NOT "darken" the show meaning that it would still be about a humanity which has survived to thrive in the future as one unified, diverse people. It would still be optimistic and hopeful, but it would portray humans as having all the flaws and weaknesses that we have today...but it would emphasize the tremendous inner strength, wisdom and courage humanity draws upon to overcome those weaknesses and ultimately prevail. So, it would not be sticky-sweet like some of Trek has been...but it would still maintain the core Trek ideals at it's base.

>6. I WOULD however, emphasize more uncertainty and realism. I like how shows like "24" kind of broke the mold by doing risky and unexpected things. I would stress that main characters or other sacred cows could be drastically altered or even killed off if it serves drama and the story appropriately. I think these are important elements in modern drama, and help the audience cherish the characters (or other sacred cows) even more becuase they know they don't automaticlaly win every week. Seeing how fans have reacted to character deaths and planet distructions over the last 25 years or so...I'd say this would be a huge risk, but one that will ultimately differentiate the show from the safe and secure predecessors.

>7. As a big risk (and difference from other modern Trek productions, which are more science-fantasy than science fact) I'd take would be to present space travel in a more accurate and scientific way without taking away from the storytelling. So, to be clear, I am NOT talking about technobabble and crap like that. What I do mean is that I wouldn't portray space travel in the cartoonish fantasy way that Trek has kind of portrayed it in. I'd give it a little bit more of a NASA / 2001 feel, with some realism. Cold, quiet space. 3-dimensional viewpoints (rather than every ship meeting up iwth others on the same plane), planets that aren't like Earth every week, etc. I'd want to make space travel feel special and thrilling again...not like it's just another day at the office.

>8. I'd downplay the background / over-arching universe stuff. I wouldn't get all involved in the affairs of the Federation, the organizational politics of Starfleet Command, etc. I'd literally make the show more about a 5-year deep space probe mission where the ship and crew are essentially on their own. The focus would be more on the ensemble cast, some secondary characters, and the floating community of the USS Enterprise. I wouldn't eliminate those elements...but I would severely downplay them.

>9. More "alieness" to the aliens. I'd make humanoid-like alien life a more rare encounter. So many stories can be done about alien cultures / ways of life just by making them different (I mean, REALLY different, not just dudes with some forehead make-up). I'd make encountering a new alien race a dangerous and spellbinding experience...not just a "open hailing frequencies...hi there I'm Captain So-and-So" experience. Think "Contact" or "Close Encounters" or even "Darmok" where there was something different and truly alien to overcome in making first contact. 

>10. One thing that I would stress is that, leveraging all of these elements, I'd push the envelope of television "norms" in much the same way the Original Series did. I'm not saying "be shocking or controversial just for the sake of it..." but I'd make sure that the themes of the show were challenging and thought-provoking for the audience.

>11. NO preaching. NO holier-than-thou human superiority lessons. NO "evloved sensibilities." Our characters mean well, and they are dedicated to doing the right thing and making good choices...but they are not out there to lecture the galaxy. In fact, they are more likely to learn from their mistakes than they are to correct the mistakes of others. I'd rather present some ambiguity and allow the intelligence of the audience draw it's own conclusions about "right" and "wrong" than have Captain Kirk spell it out for everyone in a bloated speech.  

>12. I'd retain the Klingons and Romulans, but I'd COMPLETELY re-imagine both races...maybe even making one of them fairly non-humanoid (probably the Klingons, because I like retaining the idea of the Romulan connection with the Vulcans). But, I'd greatly alter and update / mature their social structures, motivations, behaviors etc.

>13. I'd make sure tha life aboard the Enterprise is an important plot element. I'd design the series so the ship itself has its own challenging elements etc. Think about how the new Battlestar Galactica and was portrayed (or how VOYAGER could have been if they had taken more risks). I'd explore stories about the community of a diverse crew and how they face challenges together, how their lives are different being aboard this ship in deep space, etc. It would be the "anti-TNG" in terms that it would not be a living room in space (whoich doesn't necessarily mean it would look like the Millenium Falcon or the Serenity either!) I would write the interior environment of the Enterprise in such a way that it not only has an impact on our characters...but it IS a character.

>14. I'd get into the backstories of each main character much more deeply than any other Trek incarnation by taking an ensemble approach and also by utilizing flashbacks, allowing us to see how each character was at the academy, when they were growing up, when they were junior officers on other assignments, etc. Think LOST's first season, where you learned information relevent to the current episode and gained insight into the characters through those flashbacks (before they became part of the time-twisting storyline and were there mainly to give more info on the characters.)

>So, that's basically it. That's honestly, in my heart-of-hearts, what I would do / shoot for if I were allowed ONE shot with the network executives. I'd $hitcan a lot of what Star Trek had built up and held sacred in favor of starting all over again using only the basic original foundation (the basic characters, ship, mission, and setting). I'd make sure the scripts focused on the people, their relationships, and their choices as they encounter unknown forces in the vastness of space. I'd make the idea of space exploration dangerous, scary, and exciting again...and not like taking a ride to the beach and "ho-hum, set a course for our next mission" at the end of every episode. And, I'd downplay (if not completely eliminate) complicated macro-plot elements like what the Federation is doing in relation to other powers, etc. The complexities and intrigue would exist, but be on a more micro-level.

>So, love it or hate it, that pitch is actually what I TRULY believe would have the best chance at succeeding as a network pitch for a weekly series.

>Comment away. I fear no reprisal.

>


I'm with you almost all the way except we disagree on darkening and politics. I think one of the reasons why ST veered into camp in the past is because the future was a little too bright. Make no bones about it, space exploration would be dangerous. This also ties in with realism. Re: politics/Federation, I think it plays  a vital role in shaping the crew and their perceptions and why they chose to be in SF. As noble as the Federation seems, almost assuredly there are dark elements hinted at in other series, but not really well done, IMO. I would certainly think it should be a consistent background element.


As for my own ideas, I don't need the original crew or the 23rd or 24th centuries.  Just the ST universe, good stories about exploration, relationships, conflict, etc. A huge dose of realism. Minimal technobabble and humans are damn near perfect plots. And, like Vger, I would overhaul the aliens. Especially the big three: Romulans, Vulcans, and Klingons.


It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want. - Spock

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2159

Report this May. 04 2012, 8:30 am

Remember that episode in TNG when most of the crew were transformed into their images as children, although they retained their knowledge as when adults?


That could be an interesting premise for a series, whichever Trek series you might choose its characters from.


Var Miklama--Zakdorn, engineer. "A sound mind in a FULL body!" "Time, like latinum, is a limited quantity in the galaxy."

Mitchz95

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1830

Report this May. 04 2012, 9:36 am

^ A group of kids running a starship? No thanks.


 


Now, on Vger's idea:


1. Completely re-imagine the original Star Trek televison series, in much the same way that Ronald D. Moore did with Battlestar Galactica. No alternate universes, no tie-ins, no crossover guest appearances, and no acknowledgement of anything that came before or since. Start from GROUND ZERO with the characters and fundamentalelements that made up the original series as foundational elements, and start anew from there.


Sure.


2. The general idea would be Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Uhura, and Checkov aboard the Federation Starship USS Enterprise on a 5-year deep space mission. After that...I'd abandon just about every other thematic tie or sacred element of the existing franchise (with excptions that I will elaborate upon).


I think that if they're going to completely reimagine Trek (per point #1), they should change the characters and central starship as well.


3. The show should primarily focus on the exploration of space, the protection / check-up of Federation colonies, investigation into various mysteries, first-contact with unknown life etc. I would have it be episodic in format, but with an over-arching background plot arc that would change every season or so. That way, you can watch it casually and not worry about not knowing what the hell is going on, but at the same time loyal viewers are rewarded with elements of an ongoing storyline that carrys through. So, not as episodic as TOS and TNG, but not as arc-driven as DS9 was in the later seasons.


That sounds cool.


4. The characters would be based on the original characters, but would be drastically updated for modern audiences with complex relationships, backgrounds, and motovators. I think about shows like Mad Men and Walking Dead and how character-driven and dramatic they are. It would be a very different feel from the kind of underdeveloped or cliched characters of the last 2 Trek series.


Okay, but as I said I'd prefer new characters and a new ship.


5. I would NOT "darken" the show meaning that it would still be about a humanity which has survived to thrive in the future as one unified, diverse people. It would still be optimistic and hopeful, but it would portray humans as having all the flaws and weaknesses that we have today...but it would emphasize the tremendous inner strength, wisdom and courage humanity draws upon to overcome those weaknesses and ultimately prevail. So, it would not be sticky-sweet like some of Trek has been...but it would still maintain the core Trek ideals at it's base.


I like this.


6. I WOULD however, emphasize more uncertainty and realism. I like how shows like "24" kind of broke the mold by doing risky and unexpected things. I would stress that main characters or other sacred cows could be drastically altered or even killed off if it serves drama and the story appropriately. I think these are important elements in modern drama, and help the audience cherish the characters (or other sacred cows) even more becuase they know they don't automaticlaly win every week. Seeing how fans have reacted to character deaths and planet distructions over the last 25 years or so...I'd say this would be a huge risk, but one that will ultimately differentiate the show from the safe and secure predecessors.


I'd love it if Trek was more suspenseful.


7. As a big risk (and difference from other modern Trek productions, which are more science-fantasy than science fact) I'd take would be to present space travel in a more accurate and scientific way without taking away from the storytelling. So, to be clear, I am NOT talking about technobabble and crap like that. What I do mean is that I wouldn't portray space travel in the cartoonish fantasy way that Trek has kind of portrayed it in. I'd give it a little bit more of a NASA / 2001 feel, with some realism. Cold, quiet space. 3-dimensional viewpoints (rather than every ship meeting up iwth others on the same plane), planets that aren't like Earth every week, etc. I'd want to make space travel feel special and thrilling again...not like it's just another day at the office.


Agreed.


8. I'd downplay the background / over-arching universe stuff. I wouldn't get all involved in the affairs of the Federation, the organizational politics of Starfleet Command, etc. I'd literally make the show more about a 5-year deep space probe mission where the ship and crew are essentially on their own. The focus would be more on the ensemble cast, some secondary characters, and the floating community of the USS Enterprise. I wouldn't eliminate those elements...but I would severely downplay them.


As a hardcore DS9 fan, I'm not really sure about downplaying the background universe. It does sound intriguing, however.


9. More "alieness" to the aliens. I'd make humanoid-like alien life a more rare encounter. So many stories can be done about alien cultures / ways of life just by making them different (I mean, REALLY different, not just dudes with some forehead make-up). I'd make encountering a new alien race a dangerous and spellbinding experience...not just a "open hailing frequencies...hi there I'm Captain So-and-So" experience. Think "Contact" or "Close Encounters" or even "Darmok" where there was something different and truly alien to overcome in making first contact.



I couldn't agree more on this one.


10. One thing that I would stress is that, leveraging all of these elements, I'd push the envelope of television "norms" in much the same way the Original Series did. I'm not saying "be shocking or controversial just for the sake of it..." but I'd make sure that the themes of the show were challenging and thought-provoking for the audience.


Agreed.


11. NO preaching. NO holier-than-thou human superiority lessons. NO "evloved sensibilities." Our characters mean well, and they are dedicated to doing the right thing and making good choices...but they are not out there to lecture the galaxy. In fact, they are more likely to learn from their mistakes than they are to correct the mistakes of others. I'd rather present some ambiguity and allow the intelligence of the audience draw it's own conclusions about "right" and "wrong" than have Captain Kirk spell it out for everyone in a bloated speech.  


Subtlety is good.


12. I'd retain the Klingons and Romulans, but I'd COMPLETELY re-imagine both races...maybe even making one of them fairly non-humanoid (probably the Klingons, because I like retaining the idea of the Romulan connection with the Vulcans). But, I'd greatly alter and update / mature their social structures, motivations, behaviors etc.


I dunno about this...I kind of like the Klingons and Rommies the way they are. It's also easier for viewers to relate to humanoids, since they're very similar to us.


13. I'd make sure tha life aboard the Enterprise is an important plot element. I'd design the series so the ship itself has its own challenging elements etc. Think about how the new Battlestar Galactica and was portrayed (or how VOYAGER could have been if they had taken more risks). I'd explore stories about the community of a diverse crew and how they face challenges together, how their lives are different being aboard this ship in deep space, etc. It would be the "anti-TNG" in terms that it would not be a living room in space (whoich doesn't necessarily mean it would look like the Millenium Falcon or the Serenity either!) I would write the interior environment of the Enterprise in such a way that it not only has an impact on our characters...but it IS a character.


I like this idea. The Enterprise-D always seemed more like a hotel than a starship.


14. I'd get into the backstories of each main character much more deeply than any other Trek incarnation by taking an ensemble approach and also by utilizing flashbacks, allowing us to see how each character was at the academy, when they were growing up, when they were junior officers on other assignments, etc. Think LOST's first season, where you learned information relevent to the current episode and gained insight into the characters through those flashbacks (before they became part of the time-twisting storyline and were there mainly to give more info on the characters.)


Character development would have to be a priority in this kind of show. i'm in.


"The future is in the hands of those who explore... And from all the beauty they discover while crossing perpetually receding frontiers, they develop for nature and for humankind an infinite love." - Jacques Yves Cousteau

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 04 2012, 9:42 am

Quote: Treknoir @ May. 04 2012, 7:43 am

Quote: Vger23 @ May. 03 2012, 7:45 pm

>

>

>1. Completely re-imagine the original Star Trek televison series, in much the same way that Ronald D. Moore did with Battlestar Galactica. No alternate universes, no tie-ins, no crossover guest appearances, and no acknowledgement of anything that came before or since. Start from GROUND ZERO with the characters and fundamentalelements that made up the original series as foundational elements, and start anew from there.

>2. The general idea would be Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Uhura, and Checkov aboard the Federation Starship USS Enterprise on a 5-year deep space mission. After that...I'd abandon just about every other thematic tie or sacred element of the existing franchise (with excptions that I will elaborate upon).

>3. The show should primarily focus on the exploration of space, the protection / check-up of Federation colonies, investigation into various mysteries, first-contact with unknown life etc. I would have it be episodic in format, but with an over-arching background plot arc that would change every season or so. That way, you can watch it casually and not worry about not knowing what the hell is going on, but at the same time loyal viewers are rewarded with elements of an ongoing storyline that carrys through. So, not as episodic as TOS and TNG, but not as arc-driven as DS9 was in the later seasons.

>4. The characters would be based on the original characters, but would be drastically updated for modern audiences with complex relationships, backgrounds, and motovators. I think about shows like Mad Men and Walking Dead and how character-driven and dramatic they are. It would be a very different feel from the kind of underdeveloped or cliched characters of the last 2 Trek series.

>5. I would NOT "darken" the show meaning that it would still be about a humanity which has survived to thrive in the future as one unified, diverse people. It would still be optimistic and hopeful, but it would portray humans as having all the flaws and weaknesses that we have today...but it would emphasize the tremendous inner strength, wisdom and courage humanity draws upon to overcome those weaknesses and ultimately prevail. So, it would not be sticky-sweet like some of Trek has been...but it would still maintain the core Trek ideals at it's base.

>6. I WOULD however, emphasize more uncertainty and realism. I like how shows like "24" kind of broke the mold by doing risky and unexpected things. I would stress that main characters or other sacred cows could be drastically altered or even killed off if it serves drama and the story appropriately. I think these are important elements in modern drama, and help the audience cherish the characters (or other sacred cows) even more becuase they know they don't automaticlaly win every week. Seeing how fans have reacted to character deaths and planet distructions over the last 25 years or so...I'd say this would be a huge risk, but one that will ultimately differentiate the show from the safe and secure predecessors.

>7. As a big risk (and difference from other modern Trek productions, which are more science-fantasy than science fact) I'd take would be to present space travel in a more accurate and scientific way without taking away from the storytelling. So, to be clear, I am NOT talking about technobabble and crap like that. What I do mean is that I wouldn't portray space travel in the cartoonish fantasy way that Trek has kind of portrayed it in. I'd give it a little bit more of a NASA / 2001 feel, with some realism. Cold, quiet space. 3-dimensional viewpoints (rather than every ship meeting up iwth others on the same plane), planets that aren't like Earth every week, etc. I'd want to make space travel feel special and thrilling again...not like it's just another day at the office.

>8. I'd downplay the background / over-arching universe stuff. I wouldn't get all involved in the affairs of the Federation, the organizational politics of Starfleet Command, etc. I'd literally make the show more about a 5-year deep space probe mission where the ship and crew are essentially on their own. The focus would be more on the ensemble cast, some secondary characters, and the floating community of the USS Enterprise. I wouldn't eliminate those elements...but I would severely downplay them.

>9. More "alieness" to the aliens. I'd make humanoid-like alien life a more rare encounter. So many stories can be done about alien cultures / ways of life just by making them different (I mean, REALLY different, not just dudes with some forehead make-up). I'd make encountering a new alien race a dangerous and spellbinding experience...not just a "open hailing frequencies...hi there I'm Captain So-and-So" experience. Think "Contact" or "Close Encounters" or even "Darmok" where there was something different and truly alien to overcome in making first contact. 

>10. One thing that I would stress is that, leveraging all of these elements, I'd push the envelope of television "norms" in much the same way the Original Series did. I'm not saying "be shocking or controversial just for the sake of it..." but I'd make sure that the themes of the show were challenging and thought-provoking for the audience.

>11. NO preaching. NO holier-than-thou human superiority lessons. NO "evloved sensibilities." Our characters mean well, and they are dedicated to doing the right thing and making good choices...but they are not out there to lecture the galaxy. In fact, they are more likely to learn from their mistakes than they are to correct the mistakes of others. I'd rather present some ambiguity and allow the intelligence of the audience draw it's own conclusions about "right" and "wrong" than have Captain Kirk spell it out for everyone in a bloated speech.  

>12. I'd retain the Klingons and Romulans, but I'd COMPLETELY re-imagine both races...maybe even making one of them fairly non-humanoid (probably the Klingons, because I like retaining the idea of the Romulan connection with the Vulcans). But, I'd greatly alter and update / mature their social structures, motivations, behaviors etc.

>13. I'd make sure tha life aboard the Enterprise is an important plot element. I'd design the series so the ship itself has its own challenging elements etc. Think about how the new Battlestar Galactica and was portrayed (or how VOYAGER could have been if they had taken more risks). I'd explore stories about the community of a diverse crew and how they face challenges together, how their lives are different being aboard this ship in deep space, etc. It would be the "anti-TNG" in terms that it would not be a living room in space (whoich doesn't necessarily mean it would look like the Millenium Falcon or the Serenity either!) I would write the interior environment of the Enterprise in such a way that it not only has an impact on our characters...but it IS a character.

>14. I'd get into the backstories of each main character much more deeply than any other Trek incarnation by taking an ensemble approach and also by utilizing flashbacks, allowing us to see how each character was at the academy, when they were growing up, when they were junior officers on other assignments, etc. Think LOST's first season, where you learned information relevent to the current episode and gained insight into the characters through those flashbacks (before they became part of the time-twisting storyline and were there mainly to give more info on the characters.)

>So, that's basically it. That's honestly, in my heart-of-hearts, what I would do / shoot for if I were allowed ONE shot with the network executives. I'd $hitcan a lot of what Star Trek had built up and held sacred in favor of starting all over again using only the basic original foundation (the basic characters, ship, mission, and setting). I'd make sure the scripts focused on the people, their relationships, and their choices as they encounter unknown forces in the vastness of space. I'd make the idea of space exploration dangerous, scary, and exciting again...and not like taking a ride to the beach and "ho-hum, set a course for our next mission" at the end of every episode. And, I'd downplay (if not completely eliminate) complicated macro-plot elements like what the Federation is doing in relation to other powers, etc. The complexities and intrigue would exist, but be on a more micro-level.

>So, love it or hate it, that pitch is actually what I TRULY believe would have the best chance at succeeding as a network pitch for a weekly series.

>Comment away. I fear no reprisal.

>

I'm with you almost all the way except we disagree on darkening and politics. I think one of the reasons why ST veered into camp in the past is because the future was a little too bright. Make no bones about it, space exploration would be dangerous. This also ties in with realism. Re: politics/Federation, I think it plays  a vital role in shaping the crew and their perceptions and why they chose to be in SF. As noble as the Federation seems, almost assuredly there are dark elements hinted at in other series, but not really well done, IMO. I would certainly think it should be a consistent background element.

As for my own ideas, I don't need the original crew or the 23rd or 24th centuries.  Just the ST universe, good stories about exploration, relationships, conflict, etc. A huge dose of realism. Minimal technobabble and humans are damn near perfect plots. And, like Vger, I would overhaul the aliens. Especially the big three: Romulans, Vulcans, and Klingons.


 


Great feedback, thanks Treknoir!


I didn't so much mean that by avoiding "darkness" that it would be all happy-slappy. I just mean that it wouldn't be like nuBSG and be very depressing. I'd want conflict and tragedy to be more a part of the show than most incarnations of Trek. Probably closer in character tone to DS9 than TNG or VOY were.


I think DS9 had a nice formula of having some very good secondary characters to draw on (Eddington, Garick, Nog, Kai Winn, Dukat, Martok, etc) and that formula could be leveraged more than TOS ever did to create some sparks and dramatic tension amongst the crew / community.


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this May. 04 2012, 10:02 am

Quote: Mitchz95 @ May. 04 2012, 9:36 am

>

>^ A group of kids running a starship? No thanks.

>Now, on Vger's idea:

>1. Completely re-imagine the original Star Trek televison series, in much the same way that Ronald D. Moore did with Battlestar Galactica. No alternate universes, no tie-ins, no crossover guest appearances, and no acknowledgement of anything that came before or since. Start from GROUND ZERO with the characters and fundamentalelements that made up the original series as foundational elements, and start anew from there.

>Sure.

>2. The general idea would be Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Uhura, and Checkov aboard the Federation Starship USS Enterprise on a 5-year deep space mission. After that...I'd abandon just about every other thematic tie or sacred element of the existing franchise (with excptions that I will elaborate upon).

>I think that if they're going to completely reimagine Trek (per point #1), they should change the characters and central starship as well.

>3. The show should primarily focus on the exploration of space, the protection / check-up of Federation colonies, investigation into various mysteries, first-contact with unknown life etc. I would have it be episodic in format, but with an over-arching background plot arc that would change every season or so. That way, you can watch it casually and not worry about not knowing what the hell is going on, but at the same time loyal viewers are rewarded with elements of an ongoing storyline that carrys through. So, not as episodic as TOS and TNG, but not as arc-driven as DS9 was in the later seasons.

>That sounds cool.

>4. The characters would be based on the original characters, but would be drastically updated for modern audiences with complex relationships, backgrounds, and motovators. I think about shows like Mad Men and Walking Dead and how character-driven and dramatic they are. It would be a very different feel from the kind of underdeveloped or cliched characters of the last 2 Trek series.

>Okay, but as I said I'd prefer new characters and a new ship.

>5. I would NOT "darken" the show meaning that it would still be about a humanity which has survived to thrive in the future as one unified, diverse people. It would still be optimistic and hopeful, but it would portray humans as having all the flaws and weaknesses that we have today...but it would emphasize the tremendous inner strength, wisdom and courage humanity draws upon to overcome those weaknesses and ultimately prevail. So, it would not be sticky-sweet like some of Trek has been...but it would still maintain the core Trek ideals at it's base.

>I like this.

>6. I WOULD however, emphasize more uncertainty and realism. I like how shows like "24" kind of broke the mold by doing risky and unexpected things. I would stress that main characters or other sacred cows could be drastically altered or even killed off if it serves drama and the story appropriately. I think these are important elements in modern drama, and help the audience cherish the characters (or other sacred cows) even more becuase they know they don't automaticlaly win every week. Seeing how fans have reacted to character deaths and planet distructions over the last 25 years or so...I'd say this would be a huge risk, but one that will ultimately differentiate the show from the safe and secure predecessors.

>I'd love it if Trek was more suspenseful.

>7. As a big risk (and difference from other modern Trek productions, which are more science-fantasy than science fact) I'd take would be to present space travel in a more accurate and scientific way without taking away from the storytelling. So, to be clear, I am NOT talking about technobabble and crap like that. What I do mean is that I wouldn't portray space travel in the cartoonish fantasy way that Trek has kind of portrayed it in. I'd give it a little bit more of a NASA / 2001 feel, with some realism. Cold, quiet space. 3-dimensional viewpoints (rather than every ship meeting up iwth others on the same plane), planets that aren't like Earth every week, etc. I'd want to make space travel feel special and thrilling again...not like it's just another day at the office.

>Agreed.

>8. I'd downplay the background / over-arching universe stuff. I wouldn't get all involved in the affairs of the Federation, the organizational politics of Starfleet Command, etc. I'd literally make the show more about a 5-year deep space probe mission where the ship and crew are essentially on their own. The focus would be more on the ensemble cast, some secondary characters, and the floating community of the USS Enterprise. I wouldn't eliminate those elements...but I would severely downplay them.

>As a hardcore DS9 fan, I'm not really sure about downplaying the background universe. It does sound intriguing, however.

>9. More "alieness" to the aliens. I'd make humanoid-like alien life a more rare encounter. So many stories can be done about alien cultures / ways of life just by making them different (I mean, REALLY different, not just dudes with some forehead make-up). I'd make encountering a new alien race a dangerous and spellbinding experience...not just a "open hailing frequencies...hi there I'm Captain So-and-So" experience. Think "Contact" or "Close Encounters" or even "Darmok" where there was something different and truly alien to overcome in making first contact.

>
I couldn't agree more on this one.

>10. One thing that I would stress is that, leveraging all of these elements, I'd push the envelope of television "norms" in much the same way the Original Series did. I'm not saying "be shocking or controversial just for the sake of it..." but I'd make sure that the themes of the show were challenging and thought-provoking for the audience.

>Agreed.

>11. NO preaching. NO holier-than-thou human superiority lessons. NO "evloved sensibilities." Our characters mean well, and they are dedicated to doing the right thing and making good choices...but they are not out there to lecture the galaxy. In fact, they are more likely to learn from their mistakes than they are to correct the mistakes of others. I'd rather present some ambiguity and allow the intelligence of the audience draw it's own conclusions about "right" and "wrong" than have Captain Kirk spell it out for everyone in a bloated speech.  

>Subtlety is good.

>12. I'd retain the Klingons and Romulans, but I'd COMPLETELY re-imagine both races...maybe even making one of them fairly non-humanoid (probably the Klingons, because I like retaining the idea of the Romulan connection with the Vulcans). But, I'd greatly alter and update / mature their social structures, motivations, behaviors etc.

>I dunno about this...I kind of like the Klingons and Rommies the way they are. It's also easier for viewers to relate to humanoids, since they're very similar to us.

>13. I'd make sure tha life aboard the Enterprise is an important plot element. I'd design the series so the ship itself has its own challenging elements etc. Think about how the new Battlestar Galactica and was portrayed (or how VOYAGER could have been if they had taken more risks). I'd explore stories about the community of a diverse crew and how they face challenges together, how their lives are different being aboard this ship in deep space, etc. It would be the "anti-TNG" in terms that it would not be a living room in space (whoich doesn't necessarily mean it would look like the Millenium Falcon or the Serenity either!) I would write the interior environment of the Enterprise in such a way that it not only has an impact on our characters...but it IS a character.

>I like this idea. The Enterprise-D always seemed more like a hotel than a starship.

>14. I'd get into the backstories of each main character much more deeply than any other Trek incarnation by taking an ensemble approach and also by utilizing flashbacks, allowing us to see how each character was at the academy, when they were growing up, when they were junior officers on other assignments, etc. Think LOST's first season, where you learned information relevent to the current episode and gained insight into the characters through those flashbacks (before they became part of the time-twisting storyline and were there mainly to give more info on the characters.)

>Character development would have to be a priority in this kind of show. i'm in.

>


 


Thanks, Mitchz95!


Just so you know, I am a HUGE DS9 guy too...but for me, I think that's why I tend to shy away from "politics and war" ideas in a new incarnation of Trek. I think DS9 did those things and did them very well, and I wouldn't want to re-hash that or try to re-create it. I think I'd purposefully try to seperate this (in much the same way Gene tried to intentionally differentiate TNG from TOS) type of series from much of what has gone before to not only give it it's own identity, but also out of respect for the other shows that have already done certain things very well.


As to a new crew and a new ship...I think that essentially that's what we're talking about here, but we're reusing the names and basic character elements to create the intrigue and "audience-catch" factor. You have to admit, most casual fans and audiences would be far more likely to pay attention, out of curiosity and/or nostalgia, to the classic characters and ship which are immediately identifiable.


To ServalanFan's question...I'd even be completely open to change the genders of the main characters.


So, I think the controversy of those types of moves could be a good way to generate initial interest.  


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

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