Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

olePigeon · Mar 31, 2008, 01:40 PM

If Paramount wanted to revive the Star Trek genre, here's how to do it:

A 4- or 5-day mini series once a month, featuring a different captain, crew, and ship each series, with possible recurring stories from the more popular crews.

The writers can dream up nearly anything. They're not constrained by the time, place, crew, or ship. With each new mini series, it can take place during a completely different time period with a new ship and crew. Original series, movie period (with the red suits), TNG, DS9, and Voyager. It doesn't even have to be the Federation, it could spend a few series on a Klingon, Romulan, or maybe even a Maqui ship. Learn more about the politics of the other major races. They can give different points of views from famous Star Trek battles like Wolf 359 or First Contact (i.e. bring back Kelsey Grammer as Captain Bateson, do the First Contact battle from the Bozeman's perspective, or do a series about the Melbourne during Wolf 359.)

They can also break some Roddenberry rules, like killing off main characters and really showing off the darker sides of the Federation. Could do a show about Section 31 dealing with kidnapping suspects, torture, assassinations, etc. Make it more edgy, like Babylon 5, Firefly, or Battlestar.

----

What would be a mini-series you'd like to see? I already listed a few, but I'd like to see:

Battle of Wolf 359
Eugenics Wars with the rise of Kahn
At least 1 story with Captain Sulu and the crew of the Excelsior=
Enterprise C and its last fight with the Romulans at the Klingon outpost

Dakar the Fourth · Mar 31, 2008, 01:44 PM

Taking 10 years off would be a good start.

olePigeon · Mar 31, 2008, 01:52 PM

OK, so after that...

Dakar the Fourth · Mar 31, 2008, 02:08 PM

Set-up a new plot, advancing the timeline some 30 years. For the love of god, no Borg.

I like the mini-series idea (I had similar type thoughts before Voyager was even thought of). A fleshing out of ancient history has potential, thought less-so after seeing Enterprise.

BadKosh · Mar 31, 2008, 02:10 PM

ALL the stories have been done.
All the stupid time travel ideas exhausted.
All the concepts have been lame so far.
They have copied all the other sci-fi story lines, and concepts, and done it poorly.
Face it, Trek is too middle-of-the-road to ever be very good.

BlueSky · Mar 31, 2008, 02:14 PM

osiris · Mar 31, 2008, 02:14 PM

What if the new Star Trek starts off in 20,000 bc, and the crew has to build a new Enterprise out of leaves, twigs and animal bones.
Yeah, that would work.

Mrjinglesusa · Mar 31, 2008, 02:35 PM

Why would anyone want to "save" Star Trek. It's time has passed.

Don Pickett · Mar 31, 2008, 03:09 PM

Throw out everything we've had so far and start from scratch, a la Battlestar Galactica, and I mean everything. Forget about Kirk, Spock, the Federation and the bad guys as we know them and populate the series with new characters. The new character should be very different than what we're used to. Keep the shell of it so we know we're in the Star Trek universe, but that's all.

But, more importantly, the ghost of Roddenberry's universal advancement and mechanistic positivism has to be gotten rid of. Star Trek was a radical show when it ran because it contrasted to the times. In the midst of some of the most tumultuous times in recent U.S. history the show had a fully-integrated, multicultural crew, a world which had gotten beyond racism, sexism and war and an entire new frontier to be explored. It was an entirely optimistic show.

We don't think like that any more. The last vestiges of our post-WWII sky high optimism are gone: there will be no hovercraft, no people living on the moon (at least not in the near future) and no perfect human society. The world is often dangerous, risky and plain ****ed up. I think a show which addresses that, like the new BG, would be much more interesting than watching a frankly outdated idea of a perfect future.

Eug · Mar 31, 2008, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by BlueSky

They already tried that with Enterprise. Didn't work.

osiris · Mar 31, 2008, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Don Pickett

Throw out everything we've had so far and start from scratch, a la Battlestar Galactica, and I mean everything. Forget about Kirk, Spock, the Federation and the bad guys as we know them and populate the series with new characters. The new character should be very different than what we're used to. Keep the shell of it so we know we're in the Star Trek universe, but that's all.

But, more importantly, the ghost of Roddenberry's universal advancement and mechanistic positivism has to be gotten rid of. Star Trek was a radical show when it ran because it contrasted to the times. In the midst of some of the most tumultuous times in recent U.S. history the show had a fully-integrated, multicultural crew, a world which had gotten beyond racism, sexism and war and an entire new frontier to be explored. It was an entirely optimistic show.

We don't think like that any more. The last vestiges of our post-WWII sky high optimism are gone: there will be no hovercraft, no people living on the moon (at least not in the near future) and no perfect human society. The world is often dangerous, risky and plain ****ed up. I think a show which addresses that, like the new BG, would be much more interesting than watching a frankly outdated idea of a perfect future.

Yep. That's why my Star Trek: 20,000 BC show would work.

(you forget to mention flying cars and ignored warnings of despotism)

MacosNerd · Mar 31, 2008, 03:51 PM

Start with some good story lines.

Start Trek enterprise was primed to be a success. Good cast, good special effects. Poor plots and storylines killed it. Practically the whole series was about enterprise dealing with people (aliens) traveling in time to mess with them. I mean is that the best they could come up with between the time span of voyager and enterprise?

Doofy · Mar 31, 2008, 04:04 PM

Maybe they should boldly go and explore more of the universe instead of pansying around inside the alpha quadrant all the time.

Don Pickett · Mar 31, 2008, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Maybe they should boldly go and explore more of the universe instead of pansying around inside the alpha quadrant all the time.

Hmmm. Star Trek: Coming to the Delta Quadrant to Beat Your Ass!

Doofy · Mar 31, 2008, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Don Pickett

Hmmm. Star Trek: Coming to the Delta Quadrant to Beat Your Ass!

There ya go, see, it works already.

And since they've now got those quantum torpedo thingies Janeway bought back from the future, the baddies will have to be really, really interesting.

Doofy · Mar 31, 2008, 04:41 PM

Oh, and they should have Summer Glau in it.
Unless they want it to last more than one season

Don Pickett · Mar 31, 2008, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

There ya go, see, it works already.

And since they've now got those quantum torpedo thingies Janeway bought back from the future, the baddies will have to be really, really interesting.

Star Trek: BFG

Oneota · Mar 31, 2008, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Oh, and they should have Summer Glau in it.

Everything should have Summer Glau in it.

cjrivera · Mar 31, 2008, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

those quantum torpedo thingies Janeway bought back from the future

You mean these warheads?

ghporter · Mar 31, 2008, 06:17 PM

I'd like to see a lot about the formation of the Federation-that the producers of Enterprise sort of teased that they'd show us and then cheezed out on. I'd like to see what happened in any number of other settings outside the parameters of TOS and TNG-before Pike, after Kirk and before Picard (including the exploits of Harriman on the B and of the career of the C). I'm more interested in things like how people like Harry Mudd manage to get along than about the high-falutin' folks we've seen plenty of; the scalawags, misfits and rule breakers, especially in the time around TOS.

And since Kirk and company seem to have impressed the ever lovin' socks off of everyone in the Federation, I'd like to see his contemporaries run into interesting situations and have to show their own stuff.

The existing Star Trek shows are past their time. But the concept of a future that CAN be immensely positive but still challenging to humans is full of endless possibilities. Roddenberry didn't say that his universe was all sunshine and flowers-he said that the parts he wanted to talk about were. I want to see stories outside of what Gene was interested in telling.

ajprice · Mar 31, 2008, 06:22 PM

Yes those warheads, both barrels!

Andrew Stephens · Apr 1, 2008, 05:32 AM

I do remember seeing an episode of Next Gen where thousands of enterprises were popping into existance all over the place from different realities. One ship came from a reality where the Federation were toast and the Borg had taken over.

The crew were all pretty shabby, the ship was f**ked and there was no limitless access to technology to solve every problem. I always wanted to see more of that world. Maybe not a borg future because that would get tired quickly, but one where the Federation was in terminal decline and everything was worn out. Some ships trying to stick to the ideals of a fading past while others had effectivley gone rouge.

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by Andrew Stephens

I do remember seeing an episode of Next Gen where thousands of enterprises were popping into existance all over the place from different realities. One ship came from a reality where the Federation were toast and the Borg had taken over.

The crew were all pretty shabby, the ship was f**ked and there was no limitless access to technology to solve every problem. I always wanted to see more of that world. Maybe not a borg future because that would get tired quickly, but one where the Federation was in terminal decline and everything was worn out. Some ships trying to stick to the ideals of a fading past while others had effectivley gone rouge.

*nerd alert*

<comic book guy>I believe the episode you are referring to is Parallels, from the seventh and final season.</comic book guy>

ghporter · Apr 1, 2008, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth

*nerd alert*

<comic book guy>I believe the episode you are referring to is Parallels, from the seventh and final season.</comic book guy>

Yes it was, and Riker looked like he hadn't bathed in a long time. His ship still had plenty of lights though...

Andrew Stephens · Apr 1, 2008, 08:10 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth

*nerd alert*

<comic book guy>I believe the episode you are referring to is Parallels, from the seventh and final season.</comic book guy>

Yeah that's the one. They should also add women only crews of super hot chicks and make all the air conditioning break down all the time. And the turbo lifts too! And the airconditioning in the turbo lifts. And the crew should catch that excellent sex virus. And they should all be super super hot.

That should fix it.

BasketofPuppies · Apr 1, 2008, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth

Taking 10 years off would be a good start.

Exactly. I don't understand why Paramount refuses to let Star Trek rest. The franchise has been suffering from overexposure for about a decade now. If Star Trek were to disappear for an extended period of time, people would forget about the decline in quality and that they grew tired of it and be excited when it returned several years later.

It worked for James Bond.

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 10:25 AM

Not that it was on purpose. That was all about Dalton's contract.

Doofy · Apr 1, 2008, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by BasketofPuppies

It worked for James Bond.

No it didn't. While Daniel Craig has the potential to become a great Bond, the writing is now so rife with political correctness that Bond essentially no longer exists. He's just another average run-of-the-mill secret agent now.

BasketofPuppies · Apr 1, 2008, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

No it didn't. While Daniel Craig has the potential to become a great Bond, the writing is now so rife with political correctness that Bond essentially no longer exists. He's just another average run-of-the-mill secret agent now.

I meant the six years between License to Kill and Goldeneye.

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 10:38 AM

In your face, Doofy!

(I kid)

zro · Apr 1, 2008, 10:38 AM

Easy. Bring back Kirk and Spock.

YouTube - KIRK & SPOCK: Star Trek AD 1973

Doofy · Apr 1, 2008, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by BasketofPuppies

I meant the six years between License to Kill and Goldeneye.

Brosnan was crap too.

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Brosnan was crap too.

April Fools!

Doofy · Apr 1, 2008, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth

April Fools!

It's *way* past noon here.

/Mutters something about game show hosts and used car salesmen.

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 10:43 AM

That's supposed to end at noon?

exca1ibur · Apr 1, 2008, 11:52 AM

NO MORE PREQUELS. Keep the universe in the same timeline as the other Star Treks. (24th century) What I liked about Deep Space 9, Voyager, and Next Generation is they all could cross over, as far as story and characters. You can always have a new crew on a new starship, new alien races, etc. By staying in the present timeline as the others, they had the ability to create something new we hadn't seen before as far as technology and races of aliens. There was room for more imagination and creativity.

The thing I didn't like about Enterprise, we lost that. Old technology and characters we have all seen before. There was nothing really 'new' that could be done, and you could only go so far when you technically know the history of the Enterprise. This is kinda why I'm hesitant on the new Star Trek film as well. I'm tired of going back in time.

Doofy · Apr 1, 2008, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar the Fourth

That's supposed to end at noon?

Yup. Traditionally, if you pull an April Fool on someone and it's after noon, *you're* the fool.

And I agree with exca1ibur - no more bleedin' prequels.

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Yup. Traditionally, if you pull an April Fool on someone and it's after noon, *you're* the fool.

I wonder if this is a european tradition or a relic of a time when April Fools might have been bearable.

cjrivera · Apr 1, 2008, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Yup. Traditionally, if you pull an April Fool on someone and it's after noon, *you're* the fool.

Interesting. Learn something new everyday.

ɥʇɹnoɟ ǝɥʇ ɹɐʞɐp · Apr 1, 2008, 01:05 PM

I would like everyone to know that I'm a huge nerd and that I have an opinion about this.

lizard777 · Apr 1, 2008, 01:14 PM

ONLY IN AMARAKA

all caps

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by ɥʇɹnoɟ ǝɥʇ ɹɐʞɐp

I would like everyone to know that I'm a huge nerd and that I have an opinion about this.

This is priceless.

Laminar · Apr 1, 2008, 01:15 PM

And over.

I mean...what?

Dakar the Fourth · Apr 1, 2008, 01:16 PM

Now I'm praying it gets big enough that the mods have to issue a memorandum.

Laminar · Apr 1, 2008, 01:17 PM

I'd keep it going but I have to be back at work...now.

əuoqʍɐɾ · Apr 1, 2008, 01:19 PM

Sorry I'm late everyone, I was busy praying to Christ.

Laminar · Apr 1, 2008, 06:45 PM

Funniest freaking post all day.