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

The Next Star Trek Television Series

Anomalous Readings

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 55

Report this Oct. 28 2012, 9:10 am

Quote: Jproulx74 @ Oct. 20 2012, 4:13 am

>

>Star Trek : TITAN

>      Rikers ship after STAR TREK NEMESIS, it would make a great show.

>


Jonathan Frakes is a bit too old to do it.


Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Oct. 29 2012, 5:28 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>Possibly but don't hold your breath. Does nobody remember how many years passed by between original series and TNG?

>


Not as many as you think if you count the film series about one decade after TOS...True, still a long wait but, who's fault is that?



I don't think it's anybody's fault -- it just happened that way. Also, I'm not sure if I would count the first round of movies, because then by extension you would have to count the JJ Abrams movie, which would then leave no cause to worry about when more Star Trek would come out.


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

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Oct. 29 2012, 5:31 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>What most people dont or didnt realize is just what happens when a new timeline is started erasing the entire history (of Trek). A new series cannot mention any characters or situations after Kirk because of the new timeline.

>


Nothing has been erased it's just an alternate universe -- and goodness knows the series had plenty of those without necessarily encroaching on the Prime Universe. (For better or worse... But it was never implied that the Prime Universe winked out of existence.)


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

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Oct. 29 2012, 8:35 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>Possibly but don't hold your breath. Does nobody remember how many years passed by between original series and TNG?

>


Not as many as you think if you count the film series about one decade after TOS...True, still a long wait but, who's fault is that?

What most people dont or didnt realize is just what happens when a new timeline is started erasing the entire history (of Trek). A new series cannot mention any characters or situations after Kirk because of the new timeline. Does Tuvok exist or was he born before Nero's red matter crap? Some technology is not yet there on that timeline while other new and different ones are, but which ones are which? Q is the one who brought the Borg into the Star Trek world but, that happens to Picard's Enterprise which in a new timeline could be Enterprise-C or B, or even Enterprise J but, not Enterprise-D like in TNG because the new timeline demands a new history and perhaps Picard only made it to lieutenant like in that one 'Scrroge' episode with Q taking Picard on a time trip to see what life would have been like having not made 'that' one mistake...

My point is obvious, and anyone who didnt think of these things is a phony or a rookie Trekker or Trekkie, as well as a rookie film artist. Luckily I am here...and you will all just have to wait until I can work out a contract...


 


Only a "rookie / phony Trekker" would make the blatant error that you've made here actually.


Nothing was "erased." The Nero incursion created an alternate (ie; running concurrently) reality to the reality we had come to know. The events of the new movie are isolated to a new and seperate universe from that which the past stories and characters existed in.


 


Also, only a "rookie / phony Trekker" would fail to recognize that this is fiction, and they can do whatever the heck they want with the timelines, universes, characters, etc. If they want to do a series set in the "prime" universe, there's NOTHING stopping them from doing so.


 


 


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

LieutenantHill

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1

Report this Oct. 29 2012, 1:49 pm

Quote: Jproulx74 @ Oct. 20 2012, 4:13 am

>

>Star Trek : TITAN

>      Rikers ship after STAR TREK NEMESIS, it would make a great show.

>


I agree, they need to hurry though. Jonathan Frakes isnt getting any younger. They should have started production after Enterprisee was cancelled, which I hated they did

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 5:46 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>Greetings OtakuJo..."...but who's fault is that?" is an American expression and means there is nobody or no one to blame because it was a team oversight, for whatever reason. I was not literally asking who is at fault.

>
Tell me OtakuJo, I bet you are either Irísh or Scottish, or more likely Australian...am I right?

>


Cheers. That's one I didn't know. Kiwi actually, but close.


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

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 5:49 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Oct. 29 2012, 8:35 am

>

>Also, only a "rookie / phony Trekker" would fail to recognize that this is fiction, and they can do whatever the heck they want with the timelines, universes, characters, etc.

>


No way! Star Trek is real! It's REeeeAL, i tell you!!!


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

DS9_FOREVER!

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 200

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 6:55 am

Quote: OtakuJo @ Oct. 30 2012, 5:49 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Oct. 29 2012, 8:35 am

>

>

>Also, only a "rookie / phony Trekker" would fail to recognize that this is fiction, and they can do whatever the heck they want with the timelines, universes, characters, etc.

>

No way! Star Trek is real! It's REeeeAL, i tell you!!!


 


I just found this great Star Trek MB!!  photo ac1685424929087bf1b7e7e0d734f861.jpg

Pooneil

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1023

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 9:35 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>Also, only a "rookie / phony Trekker" would fail to recognize that this is fiction, and they can do whatever the heck they want with the timelines, universes, characters, etc. If they want to do a series set in the "prime" universe, there's NOTHING stopping them from doing so.

>

Something is stopping them otherwise they would have years ago with the fans and the production staff in an uproar having to wait so long. Now who's fault is that and what are they waiting for? You're okay? Of course not. Wanna bet it has to do with the troubles of creating a new timeline...


I doubt the "new timeline" is stopping anyone. Studio and network executives probably weighed the cost of making a Star Trek show against the failure of the last one and the marginal ratings of the others -- major networks are notoriously finicky about investing in expensive science fiction shows, unless they're instant successes like Lost.


A fanwanky "prime universe" show would only succeed on the SyFy channel, and it would be cheap; for the show to be a big hit it would need a bankable star (i.e. not Frakes) and a big name behind it -- Abrams or Bryan Singer, for example. I'm sure the last thing on the studio's mind is which universe the show would be set in. I think they should just split the difference and reboot the whole shebang once more.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 10:59 am

Quote: /view_profile/ @

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>

>

>Also, only a "rookie / phony Trekker" would fail to recognize that this is fiction, and they can do whatever the heck they want with the timelines, universes, characters, etc. If they want to do a series set in the "prime" universe, there's NOTHING stopping them from doing so.

>

Something is stopping them otherwise they would have years ago with the fans and the production staff in an uproar having to wait so long. Now who's fault is that and what are they waiting for? You're okay? Of course not. Wanna bet it has to do with the troubles of creating a new timeline...


 


Nobody's in an uproar. Maybe a small, vocal, over-zealous percentage of the fan base, but they're not enough to sustain a long-running series. Everyone else realizes that Star Trek oversaturation was not good back in the 90's and CERTAINLY wouldn't be good now.


The "new universe" movie created more general interest and was more successful (critically, financially, and with the general fan population) than the prior 2 movies combined (and then some). Just because a few hardcore fans feel like their continuity has been viciously violated doesn't mean that anyone else really cares, quite frankly.


 


So the answer to "whose fault is that?" is "NOBODY." There is no fault to assign blame to. It is a calculated business decision.


The answer to "what are they waiting for?" is "NOTHING." There's no rush or urgency to get a Star Trek television series produced. Why would there be? The last 2 TV series failed progressively, even with the broad fanbase. The last movie, on the other hand, was arguably the most successful (critically and financially) Star Trek movie ever, including when you adjust for inflation. So, why would you go back to a failed formula (television) at the expense of focusing on a medium that seems to be winning people over right now (new universe movies)??


 


The bottom line argument is that the "prime universe" is not fertile ground to re-build a franchise that nearly collapsed under its own weight, and especially not on television. There aren't enough casual viewers to carry an expensive weekly series who are going to follow the type of series most fans like you (and perhaps even me) would be interested in. The general viewing public would need to be watching this series for it to be viable...not just the hardcore fans...and the general viewing public doesn't care about Riker aboard the Titan or about the Galactic-Political climate in the post-Nemesis era or about the exploration of fluidic space or whatever other proudly creative setting and plot we think would work just great.


So, until such time as more casual viewers / fans are viewed as wanting to engage in a new show (and that pump is not yet primed...maybe it will be if there are 2 more equally successful movies), you won't see one.


 


And I for one am 100% fine with that. I'd rather they wait for the right time than have them put something out and have it fall flat on its face. That would be the final death of the franchise. So, I'm MORE THAN WILLING to be patient.  


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 11:09 am

By the way...the "fans" are always in an "uproar" about something...so I don't think anybody cares or listens anymore. It' just doesn't hold any weight.


And I don't blame them for not listening. We don't deserve to be listened to. We can be like the "little boy that cried wolf" too often becuase we gripe, complain, and whine about everything.

randy kerr

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 425

Report this Oct. 30 2012, 3:11 pm

so do i.

DS9_FOREVER!

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 200

Report this Nov. 01 2012, 8:13 am

Quote: Vger23 @ Oct. 30 2012, 11:09 am

>

>By the way...the "fans" are always in an "uproar" about something...so I don't think anybody cares or listens anymore. It' just doesn't hold any weight.

>And I don't blame them for not listening. We don't deserve to be listened to. We can be like the "little boy that cried wolf" too often becuase we gripe, complain, and whine about everything.

>


Sad but true I'm afraid.


I just found this great Star Trek MB!!  photo ac1685424929087bf1b7e7e0d734f861.jpg

Jeffe525

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Nov. 01 2012, 6:48 pm

Vger23 has some good points; I also don't mind waiting for a better show. However, I don't believe the length of the hiatus is necessarily proportional to quality or success of the next spinoff.


True, the 24th Century was starting to get a bit overgrown. I think VOY was a creative way to stretch the writers' legs, but the Alpha Quadrant was becoming a bit too restrictive for new material.


And I think that ENT worked well, in spite of the fact that I originally thought they were kind of painted themselves into a corner regarding stories and set design.


But I think one big factor in ENT's failure was that it had to compete with other Sci-Fi favorites like Stargate SG-1. 


I have no doubt that there will be another Star Trek show, but it probably won't happen until the Abramsverse runs its course.


I like the idea of the Titan spinoff, but like others have said; Frakes, Sirtis, and Russ aren't getting any younger.


I haven't read the books, but the Acadamy idea also presents an interesting concept.


In all honesty, I am not at all fond of Bryan Singer's Federation concept; skipping 600 years seems a waste of a lot of potential history and runs a risk of seeming too disconnected from from our civilaztion's potential.


The best scenario I can think of for the next series: Jump ahead of ST Nemesis by about 25 years. This would allow the producers to redesign or keep as much as they want. It would also allow guest stars from TNG, DS9, and VOY without difficulty (assuming they have no plans to make any more TNG movies). 

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16362

Report this Nov. 01 2012, 10:21 pm

Some really good points above.


The 24th century series (Voy., TNG, and of course DS9) are among my favourites. However having them all at once did lead to some degree of over-saturation.


Methinks the question comes down to this:


Would fans rather have a new series next year to whinge about, or a well thought out new series in twenty years that we can love?


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

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