Takei Trashes Paramount, Enterprise and DS9 November 20, 2007
by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TOS , trackback
Before you can say “oh my” there are more frank opinions from George Takei (see previous article). In the second part of iF Magazine’s interview with the original Sulu, the actor lets loose on his opinion of post Roddenberry Trek. Regarding why the ‘Star Trek Excelsior’ Series never happened, Takei claims that Paramount ignored what the fans wanted, saying:
There was a flood of letters from every corner of the world advocating for this Excelsior series and then Paramount suddenly decided they didn’t want fan advice or participation and went ahead and did what they wanted to anyway with ENTERPRISE; which was a disastrous failure.
Takei went on to talk about changes in Paramount after Roddenberry’s time:
The people that really understand and love STAR TREK are no longer there. When Gene Roddenbery passed, that really was the end of STAR TREK, as we knew it. The series that came on immediately after was DEEP SPACE NINE, which was the polar opposite of Gene’s philosophy and vision of the future, so STAR TREK lost it’s way then and now the people at Paramount are all new people.
But Takei says that, if called he is ready to serve:
My love for Sulu is there and if someone comes up with a wonderful approach to Sulu given the passage of time and given the aging process we all go through I would be up for it. In the crew of the Enterprise, Chekov was supposed to be the youngest, but Takei was actually the youngest if you get my meaning. [Laughs] I think it is still credible that we could get Sulu into some vigorous drama.
Although Takei may have a long wait for a return to Trek, he did return to Heroes in Monday night’s episode
Read the rest at iF Magazine.
Loading ...
Comments»
I disagree with his assessment of DS9, *but* …
“Star Trek: Excelsior” could have been a far better show than “Star Trek: Voyager.”
I’m still kinda surprised they didn’t make that one happen.
Yeah, DS9 was great. It blows me away each time I catch it on tv.
But yes, a show about the Excelsior with Sulu at the helm would’ve been something awesome. There was so much potential there.
I also disagree. DS9 is definetly one of the best series ever made. It was about a better mankind too, but getting that is not as easy as it is in TOS or TNG.
Oh my.
And it’s easy to trash ENT after it failed. Who can really say what had happend to an Excelsior-Series… Maybe it would have failed too? No-one knows…
An Excelsior show would rock the boat, but alas, such is life.
We could have had a great turn of the 24th Century show on board a beautiful ship with a dynamic cast and an established universe.
We got Enterprise.
I used to like George Takei now he sounds like a poor man’s William Shatner. Once they start talking, they don’t shut up.
Star Trek Excelsior would’ve been a great series, especially if it would’ve took place in that time right after Kirk was lost on the Enterprise-B, although there’s no telling how it would’ve done after they did everything they had wanted to during the first season, at this point it’s likely any proposed series would’ve looked better after Enterprise. And as for DS9, it’s my favorite series (after TNG)…i loved the ben sisko-jake sisko father/son relationship, the spiritual tie-ins, the coverage of a federation-dominion war, the exploration of the klingons, etc…not to mention one of the best assembled casts ever…meeting Avery Brooks has been one of my all time favorite memories, and a DS9 movie to explore what happens to Sisko, who knows what would’ve happened, although that’s for a different discussion…and god bless george takei and his generosity to trek (video games, voyager appearance, etc.)
as always george is right, well just have to settle for the xbox game and the new voyages episode (WHICH IS HEARTBREAKING!!!).
unless some billionaire like mark cuban has got some money to spare!!
i just love georges opening monologue ” where none have gone before!”
berman hated everything to do with old trek and im glad hes out of a job, as the saying in hollywood goes ” s#$@ eventually floats!”
Two things:
First – I loved DS9 best when it was called Babylon 5. Favorite show of all time, as a matter of fact.
Second – Though an Excelsior show could have been a truly remarkable thing, Enterprise is actually my second favorite Post TOS Trek series, right after Next Generation. I believe that what killed Enterprise was that it followed the craptastic Voyager, and it was stuck with a doomed network. I’d love to see where it would have gone in seasons 5 – 7 if Manny Cotto had stayed at the helm.
#6. I don’t think it’s fair to compare Takie to Shatner. This seems to be part 2 of the same interview, where as Shatner has done many of these types of interviews.
oh and herb solow is a proffesor in WALES, not WHALES!
star trek iv wouldve been a totaly different movie if they came back to save wales!!!
ds9 was a great show, but I think that I can see where takei is coming from. Enterprise was definitely crap, they used far Too many hostage situations. (like every episode). I can’t wait to see what shows are possible after this new movie(s).
I love George Takei, but he was terrible in that Voyager episode.
Not helped by a weak script, but he overracted badly. His eyes were virtually popping out of his head at every moment.
I dont think the Excelsior series would have fared much better than what we got to be honest.
Takei doesn’t have the charisma to carry a series. That’s why an Excelsior show would not have worked.
Though Enterprise was just as bad.
I guess george takei aims to the dominion war, which was really really really to long.
so it was more difficult to bring in other interesting stuff.
I disagree about everything except Enterprise.
As much as the fanboy in me would have liked to see an Excelsior show, the fact is that George Takei doesn’t have the acting chops to make an effective series lead. He’s good in small doses and with good writing and direction (which is why he was so good in ST6) but he could not have carried a series the way Shatner, Stewart, or Avery Brooks did. As much as I loathe Rick Berman, he made a good call there.
I understand Mr. Takei’s point of view on DS9, but I disagree. With TNG, Roddenberry went ridiculously overboard with his optimistic view of the future and made it hard to write realistic stories with good conflict. DS9 was a good reality check. It said “sure, 24th century Earth is a paradise, but it takes work to maintain”. I didn’t agree with the idea that it was dependent on Section 31 do do its dirty work, though.
I think DS9 and Enterprise were a lot better than any Ecelsior show could have been. They’re proabably my two favorite Trek shows. They had more interesting plots and character development than TNG and Voyager did combined. I would have loved to have seen a Sulu show instead of Voyager though…
Bless you, Sulu, but who could have known? Enterprise found its footing in the third season and became a great show in its own right in its fourth. It was too late at that point, sadly, but “Sulu: Master of Navigation” could just as easily have failed, depending on the quality of writing. I’d still like to see it, but its unlikely now. Personally, I think Star Trek could spawn some great miniseries’. Excelsior adventures, admitedly should be a series of its own, but a mini would be good too at this point.
Firstly I love all the Star Trek series!
DS9 was a great series and I think it’s a shame that George Takei feels the way he does about the it.
Enterprise was not a ‘disastrous failure’ as George puts it. There were a combinations of things that resulted in the show being cancled. In fact I think that the fourth season was one of the best that Star Trek has ever seen.
An Excelsior series would not have been as good as Enterprise.
And George it’s never gonna happen so just let it go!!!!
have to admit also that i’m sad that he’s going all shatner and being a sour-pus about trek after him. life goes on. the first 6 trek flicks were the best, but cheese louise, don’t bash what failed commercially just because you can. be grateful to have been a part of the golden years. golden decades, actually.
and DS9???!!! that was the best. the uneasy frontier politics made it great, and after the dominion war began, it became unique in the trek world as a realistic saga of the need to defend utopia. as much as war sucks, its always going to exist, and it shouldnt be avoided in trek.
I agree with Takei, after Roddenberry’s death Trek really started its nosedive into crap.
#19. exactly, brother
I gotta chime in here. DS9 was a f__ing excellent show. It wasn’t TOS. It wasn’t TNG. It dared to be something else, and still it was great Star Trek.
DS9 had a ton of weirdness in it that I couldn’t buy (aliens possessing Sisko’s mom to make the dude a prophet) and much of the dialogue seemed like it was being written by high school amateurs. I totally see where Takei is coming from.
Long time lurker to these forums, first time poster :-)
The problem with Paramount and their tight-fisted hold of the Star Trek franchise, is that they NEVER listen to fans when it comes to plotlines or story ideas. The only reason the Excelsior series never came to fruition is because fans demanded it! Fans had far better ideas for a Kirk-meets-Picard story, but Paramount never listened and we got Generations instead. When they DID decide to listen – even a little bit – it was during the 4th season of Enterprise, but by then it was too late. (Incidentally, Enterprise season 4 is the best season of that entire series)
Another thing fans had wanted is Star Trek TV movies. In this way stories don’t have to be confined to one crew or one century, but could focus on various aspects of Trekdom. Again, fans want it so badly they ain’t gonna get it…
I disagree with ol’ George, DS9 was even better than TNG :-)
you simply cannot play to the fans in any series. fans want picard and crusher to get together and riker and troi to get back together from season one. if the fans had their way, it would have happened and all the waiting and awkward chemistry would be lost. FANS WANT ONE THING. WHATS BEST IS ALMOST ALWAYS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. look at any other series too. half the reason people tune in each week is to see if their FAN DREAM came true.
TO JJ AND CO.: DO NOT PLAY TO THE FANS. SURPRISE US WITH WHAT WE DIDNT EVEN KNOW WE WANTED BUT CANT IMAGINE BEING WITHOUT WHEN ITS DONE!
#24 I couldn’t agree more. As long as they stayed away from the mumbo jumbo it was great. But I never bought the whole Prophet crap. I mean really… how can an evolved society still believe in the superstitious narrow mindedness of religion knowing full well they were “worm hole aliens”?
I signed on to see the Federation build in Enterprise, to see the “where no one has gone before” and “seek out new civilizations” part that the show promised. I signed on for the wonderous ride of humanity into space. I did not sign on to see an uncritical reanactment of the US war on terror that in real time had already gone sour with events in Abu Graip and turned into a forseeble mess. I stopped watching Enterprise when it became a piece of pro-war propaganda. Star Trek has most of the time been at its best when it took a critical eye on the human codition with the hope always firmly in place that we can learn to be better than that. When I heard the show was back on track, I gave season 4 another chance. The needless death of Trip that served absolutely no point which even Braga admitted to after a time did it for me. I’m done with Enterprise.
As much as I like George Takei, I don’t think he could have carried a series. But at least he has a love for Trek and an understanding what it is about. And with the right supporting cast, who knows. I mostly disagree with him on DS 9. That show was underrated except for the last season.
lets avoid politics here please. there is no right or wrong. only opinions
I love the TOS movie period. I love the Excelsior and its design. Sulu was an interesting character. But I have to wonder if Excelsior as a series lacked any concept of depth. The only reason people wrote to Paramount, or at least petitioned for a Star Trek: Excelsior series is because of George. And kudos for him for being a pain in the ass for Paramount. But frankly, his assertion that post-Roddenberry Star Trek was simply not good enough is ridiculous.
These kind of comments come from actors, many of whom have not followed these series as fans. I’ll always be interested in his views on TOS, TAS and the movies, but when it comes to TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT, it’s best just to ignore them. Takei is probably experiencing some great fan love from his work on Heroes, but he has become a broken record in regard the Excelsior series. It’s time has passed, and he failed to get it made. Deal with it and try not to be bitter over the success of the other series.
and religion for that matter. isnt trek about acceptance?
#10
I am just sick of former Trek stars lamented their Trek past. Bashing other Trek shows for their own benefit just seems low to me.
Shatner says Trek XI isn’t going to be good without him.
Takei says an Excelsior series would of been better than Enterprise.
It just seems a case of boo hoos to me.
and DS9 was an AWESOME show!
The Sulu show would’ve been great had someone with Nick Meyer’s sensibilities produced, but if Berman produced it I can guarantee it would’ve been as flat and lifeless as that Voyager episode in which Sulu appeared.
Sour Grapes…Who cares if Takei didn’t like DS9 or ENTERPRISE, he has a vested self interest to propagate.
ENTERPRISE was killed off by Paramounts disarray when it split up and UPN’s change of demographic and bad marketting. I loved ENT particularily the last 2 seasons. And I like TNG, DS9 & VOY and was born in the 50’s so I grew up with TOS. It’s was my favorite show of all time until TNG.
I’m equally excited about a re-boot or re-start to STAR TREK in the JJ Movie. Having followed it for over 40 years I think I have a better appreciation of Star Trek then some of the grumpy old men who worked on it.
I’ll grant you guys DS9 even though I thought it blatantly ripped off B5, but I find it hard to sympathize with Voyager and Enterprise fans, those shows were just crap and no thanks to Berman and his cronies.
#32
As STXI concerns TOS, Shatner isn’t exactly bashing an “other” Trek show for his own benefit. We should differenciate between Takei’s lament and Shatner’s reasoning.
What a tool!
A Takei anchored show would have been just as bankable as any of the other shows during the TNG era. There was plenty of room for ‘’something different” during an age of endless tech-talk gibber-jabber.
Enterprise was a victim of the ‘’studio machine”, not the actors. The ”bait and switch” tactic about Enterprise and how it was going to be a ”fresh vision” ended up being just more of the same and the cast was lured onboard. It was a desperate move to wring yet more revenues out of a twenty-year-old aging ”TNG vision”, and even in their final desperate move somehow tricking Coto onboard to ‘’save the franchise” was too much too late. No matter what, I always have a warm spot for Enterprise and especially the actors, who poured their heart and soul into it, and like a band, ”played wonderful music on the deck of the Titanic”, but alas it was April 12th…
I figure we have to take what he says with a grain of salt, and maybe Dr. McCoy’s salt creature girlfriend can take care of him ;)
Seriously, he probably watched little or none of the show and is going by what others have told him. You notice he had nothing bad to say about Voyager because he was on it, maybe if he did a guest spot on Voyager he would have seem what the show was about and saw it in a better light.
Sorry I meant to say if he did a guest spot on DS9, he would have possibly seen the show in a better light. Trying to rush before I go to work.
His guest spot on Voyager obviously gave him a good feeling about that show.
#35 DS9 blatantly ripped off B5?? I am amazed that myth still perpetuates.
Why would Ira Behr want to rip off a show like that when he and several other really GOOD writers could do just fine on their own?
George should maybe WATCH the show before he trashes it. DS9 had more diversity than any other, a fact I’m sure a guy like him can appreciate.
It;s also a myth about Coto being a savior. He was a scapegoat.
And #29- Sorry to be the one to tell you, in this world, there IS, right and wrong, and there IS crap Trek and good Trek. Just my opinion.
The guy really has an inflated sense of his importance.
He was the helmsman who in many episodes had about 3 lines. In the movies, he had a very minor presence as well.
I have no problem with him criticizing Enterprise, but his reasoning appears to be more jealousy motivated than anything for not getting “his show.”
He really likes to play that Roddenberry card for all its worth, too.
And, just to impersonate Mr. Dennis Bailey for a moment, I’d really like to know how many letters constitutes a “flood.” Let’s have some figures on that :)
#36
Shatner isn’t an innocent. lol. His put downs are legendary.
How did Shatner become a sacred cow? lol
4. Sebi – November 20, 2007
“And it’s easy to trash ENT after it failed. Who can really say what had happend to an Excelsior-Series… Maybe it would have failed too? No-one knows… ”
A matter of history: Fans were trashing “Enterprise” while it was on the air, hence the bad ratings and the clawing and scratching for dear life move of injecting Coto in an attempt to save what should have never existed in the first place, so I agree with Mr. Takei.
If you get past the obviously humorous moments in the TV special “How William Shatner Changed the World,” it was spot on about the direction of DS9–and how it was the opposite of the vision set by TOS . Although DS9 had a couple of compelling story arcs, still, it was a show that could not keep Trek fandom alive on its own. Consider this: Imagine if DS9 was the next Trek series in 1987 instead of “The Next Generation”; I think a great many things about the show would have contributed to either: A) Early cancellation, or B) the death of the franchise, when the series nature was another animal fans may not have warmed to at all, especially coming in the wake of Trek movies of the period.
Amongst certain Trek fans, DS9 still get the love…or like, but years after its end, it did not turn into any sort of cultural phenomenon like TOS, or even enjoy the appeal of TNG. DS9 was trying to be many things during the course of its run, but genuine “Star Trek” was not one of them–at least if its post-cancelleation fandom (or lack of) is any evidence.
So again, I agree with Mr. Takei.
Whether or not an “Excelsior” series would have worked is anyone’s guess. I will say that for any claiming Mr. Takei could not carry a show, I say he would have brought more than a shuttlebay’s worth of magnetism to a series–certainly more than the dry Brooks, Mulgrew or Bakula. Moreover, any producer worth his title would surround Takei with other strong performers to aid in making the the oveall product better (which did not help “Enterprise”, “Voyager” and to a certain degree, DS9).
We already have history–the last three Trek series (and most of TNG movies) to tell us that it was largely a failure which pushed fans from the franchise in legion (hence the J.J. reboot), so Mr. Takei’s particular views appear to be correct.
There’s no doubt that on the surface, DS9 and B5 have similarities (I love them both), but there are also differences. There’s a lot of back and forth about which came first, who ripped off whom (and I won’t just go by Strazynski’s word on that), etc, but ultimately it doesn’t really matter. Both series were great, and were different enough to stand on their own.
As for “Gene’s vision” – which seemed to change if you read his comments over time, some of which contradict what he actually produced earlier – I can’t believe he really thought that the Federation could exist with no conflict and everyone loving each other, while all conflict came from outside it. For that to happen, everyone would have to have the same view of everything, with the only dissent being outside the Federation (a point about the Federation made by DS9’s Maquis arc). If that were the case, then it’s a fairly communistic view of the future, isn’t it? And I don’t think that’s what he had in mind – TOS mentions wars, and has conflict (and nearly another war with the Klingons too). Heck, they had to have a summit at Babel to keep races who’d been in the Federation since the beginning from overheating. So I wish folks would stop using “Gene’s vision” as a thin excuse to bash DS9 and the other series. It doesn’t hold water.
Deep Space Nine was the best written of all the modern Treks. All you have to do it look at the success of all the writers and producers after the series ended.
Excelsior was just a pipe dream and I don’t think George could’ve carried it. .
It’s not too late for a couple of direct to DVD Excelsior movies, IMO
I find it strange that your audience tend to like DS9. I find it , along with Enterprise, one of the weakest story lines in the Trek world. Too much emphasis on stupid background stories like Klingon bloodline, Bejoran religious fanatics and wormhole aliens… I really could not care for any of the characters nor the plot. The love story between the Major Kira character and the guy that looked like Spy Vs. Spy was awful.
Dave
P,S, Terry Farrell was the only good thing in the series.
It always confounded me why Paramount didn’t at least make a trilogy of Excelsior TV movies, starring Takei. Minimal risk, minimal loss.
#41. just meant to say that just because one person saw some phantom pro-war propaganda in enterprise doesnt mean that was the intent or the result. in fact, i seriously doubt that it was intended.
DS9 was okay, but overall, I agree with Takei. An Excelsior show would have been far better than Voyager or Enterprise. And rather than having to sell the fans on an all-new crew, Sulu’s participation would have been beneficial.
Oh well.
I’m wondering just how long it will take before this thread gets out of hand and is closed for comments. Seriously, so many of the debate and arguments above, like the DS9/B5, Enterprise faults, Manny Coto’s influence and the others have simply been done to death.
Now, the Enterprise pro-war thing I never really heard. Seems kind of ridiculous to even entertain that debate.
The real crux of the problem is really George Takei harping on about the non TOS Star Trek series and his feelings on it. Were he a hardcore fan who followed each episode on a weekly basis, or even a viewer of DS9 or TNG, or whatever, his opinion might be interesting. Sadly, as evidenced in some of the threads, we’ve just gone into bashing the different series rather than discussing whether George Takei’s comments merit anything.
I guess when the interview itself seems so badly disjointed and full of errors, one wonders if the interview is of any consequence. It felt more like a random conversation between a fan and Mr. Takei while taking an elevator ride.
I’d love for more comprehensive interviews with the cast and crews of the various Star Treks that take a deeper look at their time in the franchise.
I also think it is rather trite to continuously attack a company like Paramount for trying to make money out of Star Trek. In fact, what George fails to recognise, had Star Trek: Excelsior looked like making a bucketload of cash for the studio, they would have taken a harder look at its merits. Maybe blaming a studio’s greed is easier than taking a hard look at oneself.
– In the crew of the Enterprise, Chekov was supposed to be the youngest, but Takei was actually the youngest if you get my meaning. –
Honestly, I don’t get it.
Can anyone clue me in as to what it means?
Is it a self-deprecating, Gay reference?
That’s my best and only guess. And, if that’s what it is, I still don’t get it, really.
I have a feeling that George never even watched DS9 or Enterprise, and he’s just going on what he heard. I think the same thing can be said of similar comments that have come from William Shatner.
Plus there’s a pride thing going on there — our Star Trek was better than your Star Trek, na na na na naaa na!
And like how some have already posted, he wouldn’t have been a strong enough actor or persona to carry a TV series. It only would have worked if he was in a supporting role, perhaps as an Admiral who visits the ship from time to time for important Federation business.
Paramount really did drop the ball when it came to not producing the Excelsior. DS9 at best was nothing but soap opera with decent characters but how exciting can it be with everything centered on a Space Station outside a supposed worm hole? They had endless possibilities yet we continued to see the same characters always doing the same thing – standing around as if they expected something great – new or wonderful to happen and it never did. Enterprise finally came into its own during its final season but by then Paramount just didn’t care. Bring back Enterprise as it was in its final season and you’d have a winner. With a miracle from Heaven Excelsior could still work but only IF Paramount really put forth their best effort and that won’t happen.
I think there are many things that an Excelsior series would have benefited from. It would have been a nice bridge between the Original movies into the TNG timeframe. That in between seemed very interesting than going further back like Enterprise did. Enterprise basically took the foundation of the Original Trek series and shit on it. There was much potential there than what became the worst of Trek. Season 4 should have been how they did the show throughout and then build upon those first season story arcs. As for an Excelsior series, rather than pick up in between its mission or something like that. They could have started when the ship started its mission. Then as the series continued, they could have tied in the events from Star Trek 6 and 7 into the storyline. Regarding his comments on DS9, I kind of disagree with his opinion. It does have strong character driven story arcs. The serial nature of the episodes is also far more refreshing, continuity within your own show is important. That’s one concept Berman and Braga found absolutely hard to grasp. I will admit that not all the story arcs on DS9 were ompelling though, some were somewhat campy… The Dukat/Kai Winn story arc. The Dukat/Sisko story arc especially in the final season was really bad. I hate the series finale because its too neatly tied up. No residual bits for a future story to explore. Its like the X-Files series finale… basically throwing red paint all over the whole thing. In the end, these and many of your own ideas are probably far more better than what was decided by those in charge.
^45 Granite Trek
“As for “Gene’s vision” – which seemed to change if you read his comments over time, some of which contradict what he actually produced earlier – I can’t believe he really thought that the Federation could exist with no conflict and everyone loving each other, while all conflict came from outside it. For that to happen, everyone would have to have the same view of everything, with the only dissent being outside the Federation (a point about the Federation made by DS9’s Maquis arc). If that were the case, then it’s a fairly communistic view of the future, isn’t it? ”
Lol!
The Big Rod could see this future of Love, Love, Love! but he never solved the Munchies problem.
Picard/Marcus 2008
“Because Scientists R2Kewl”
Chekhov was the youngest character. Takei was the youngest actor, and was younger than Koenig.
I have to chime in, too, to say that Takei could never carry a series, and Paramount knows that. I don’t have any problem with the guy, but he is just not a series lead.
where did Takei say “oh my” — it seems to be a signature now, but I can’t remember where I first heard it.
#48: “The guy that looked like Spy vs. Spy”? What on earth are you talking about? Did you ever actually, you know, watch the show?
#54: You stole my thunder. I was going to say, if I thought for a moment Takei had also ever watched DS9, I’d give him the benefit of an educated opinion.
I’ve never entirely understood exactly what the “Captain Sulu” fans think they would have gotten out of an Excelsior series that they didn’t get from DS9, VOY, and ENT. A familiar face in the center seat, that’s about all I’m seeing.
I agree with Mr. Sulu. They ( Berman and his cronies)should have done aseries with Sulu as captain, Checkoh as First officer , Dr. Chapel, and so on. Buthey made a conscious choice to put TNG, DS9 and voyager so far out into the future that you could not have realistic recurring appearnces by the TOS cast. Even then they streched it with McCoy showing up on the TNG in the pilot, Scottie being in a Transporter loop,on TNG, and they brought back Sarek and Spockin DS9. As they realized that their plan was not working well. In DS-( they did the remastred ( lack of a better teword) to Trouble with tribbles ands they used the same concept in Voygaer when Janeway and Tuvock appered on Sulu’s Exclesior.
I hope J.J. fix this wrong by Parmount or more specifically berman and his cronies.
I join the chorus in support of DS9, which remains my favorite post-TOS series. For an actor like Takei, who should understand the workings of drama and conflict in successful TV, I’m surprised that he would speak against DS9. No, it wasn’t exactly a fit with Roddenberry’s vision, but in many respects that was the point. It was interesting to watch the Starfleet characters struggle with their Federation ideals in settings that were often very different from that culture. DS9 was definitely a writer’s show, with a much broader canvas for story creation.
And at the risk of starting a different, possibly angry, chorus … I’ve grown quite weary of all the dissing of Enterprise. I admit it was probably the weakest of all the Treks, with a lot of things that needed fixing but never were. But come on, it wasn’t THAT bad. I think the writers and the actors put in every effort to make it a solid TV series, and it’s disrespectful to them to keep slamming it. There were some good stories in that series.
George couldn’t have carried a weekly series as dramatic lead, but, how awesome would it have been to have a couple of made-for-tv movies for a few years? Bigger effects budget, no rush, original cast guest-stars, increased viewer anticipation, DVD sales, it would have been awesome. But noooooo, we had to get a series nobody wanted, and movies that flopped.
Thanks, suits at Paramount.
In the above post I meant st say, a couple of TV movies per year, for a few years.
Takei is correct when he says Enterprise and DS9 were distrous failure’s.
I also notice he didn’t mention Voyager. Voyager was every bit the failure the other series were. The difference was that Takei was on Voyager. Thus, it was not a failure in his eyes.
Everybody beings their own agenda to an interview. It doesn’t matter if it’s Takei trying to get a Sulu tv series or if it’s Shatner trying to land one last major paycheck from S.T. in the new film.
Not that there is anything wrong with that, but you have to take what these people say with a grain of salt.
A Sulu series would have effectively been a continuation of TOS. Rick Berman openly admits he never bothered to watch all of TOS: it wasn’t his show and he’d have been ill-suited to run it. As long as Paramount kept the TNG-era team running Trek, the Sulu show never had much chance. Better it was made by people who knew and cared about TOS or not at all.
Sadly, I think the time for a Sulu show or any kind of series continuation of TOS with the original cast is gone. Maybe they could persuade JJ Abrams to oversee a miniseries or something, but I think the new Trek film is about a restart and revitalisation of Star Trek. A Sulu show would be about getting older: a subject already amply covered by the TOS films!
Right on, #64….
I understand Takei being disappointed/upset at having a potential starring role in a TV series not materialize (what actor wouldn’t), but he needs to let it go. Sour grapes aren’t helpful.
The idea that because people from all over the world wrote letters suggesting a Sulu series means it was a great idea is absurd. (I love TOS and would certainly have watched an Excelsior series). But, there were very good economic reasons for not making a Sulu series.
Remember, TNG was at it’s absolute height of popularity when DS9 was conceived (and was arguably more popular at that time than TOS). Plus Paramount was transitioning away from TOS due to this and the ages of the TOS actors (and Shatner, Nimoy salary demands), so it made PERFECT sense for a new TV series to be based upon the TNG era, rather than making a TOS Sulu series.
And anyone who thinks (including Takei) that Enterprise got cancelled because it was a creative failure simply isn’t aware of the long-running trend in modern Trek ratings declines (which really started with TNG’s 7th season not building an audience anymore).
Enterprise was almost certain to either get cancelled, or be very close to being so, even before it began. Remember, due to years of ratings declines there was question as to whether another series should even have been greenlit after Voyager.
I think a mini-series (6-hours or so) of Star Trek Excelsior with Takei would have been an excellent vehicle for him and that point of Star Trek lore. Right after the death of Kirk would have offered some great dramatic moments.
Too bad for missed opportunities.
I don’t agree with Takei on anything. DS9 was good, and Enterprise was sold short. I do agree that some of the spirit of Star Trek started to change after Roddenberry’s death, maybe a bit of “quality control”, but overall the writing kept up thematic and ethical consistency throughout the post-TNG series.
This is not to say that an Excelsior show wouldn’t have been good….
Also, Babylon5 was a right-wing piece of junk. The visual effects sucked compared to DS9. I stopped watching B5 after the anti-labor episode in season 1. Compare that with the DS9 two-parter about Gabriel Bell, with concentration camps for the homeless. Which future do you think is more consistent with Roddenberry’s vision of the future: one in which strikes are broken, or one in which the oppressed poor are liberated?
Whether you like it or not, politics does come into play when discussing these shows.
I always wondered what a Star Trek miniseries or tv movie would be like. I kind of wondered mostly if they could afford it. Maybe now, with the massive DVD market and online sales, they could make a hell of a lot out of it. But when you had 2 series on air for most of the 90’s and movies after 2 years or so, adding another piece of Star Trek to the mix would have been overkill. Just look at the whole CSI franchise and the Law and Orders. People can only watch and consume so much. I might be able to watch hours of television a week, but the average viewer is lucky to make it through an episode of The Simpsons.
I agree with #67 Dom, that the Sulu series would have inevitably dealt with the subject of his age. We’ve already seen the TOS and TNG crews deal with this. It’s perhaps why the movie seems more refreshing because the characters have so much life in front of them.
Has anyone here ever listened to the Sulu audio adventures. I remember thinking how cool they were when I was a kid, mostly because they were about a different ship and crew. Listening to it now I cannot help but feel that Sulu is not that interesting as a captain. In all the other Star Trek series, the captain is easily a standout character with a detailed background. Sulu always felt like a competent officer, but I never really bought how he ended up a Captain in the movies.
I completely disagree with Takei about DS9.
War has been part of the Human history since the first cave man launched a rock on the other cave man.
#14 you nailed it there.
The Voyager episode “Flashback” was Paramount’s testing-the-water for a Sulu series, and it failed miserably. Takei is a good supporting actor (he was very good in last night’s “Heroes” for example) but he is not lead actor material. Paramount has struggled with the “weak lead” problem since TNG, when they happened upon Patrick Stewart almost by chance. Brooks, Mulgrew and Bakula were all disappointments to one degree or another. There is absolutely no reason to believe a Sulu series would have fared any better. By the point in time that the Excelsior series was being pushed by (some) fans, Berman & Braga were clearly burned out on Trek. Unless Takei came in with an all-new creative team, “Star Trek: Excelsior” would have been just as doomed as “Enterprise”.
They still can make a Star Trek Excelsior show that could probably air on CBS or The CW
Enterprise, DS9, Voyager had some awsome stories but had nothing to say as artwork. They were businesses. Franchises to milk the cash cow. Sell outs and its a shame because a lot of talented people put heart and soul into them!!!!
TNG was about a rational, Technocratic future that is achievable right now, if people would stop being selfish. The Bay comes close to this today and that’s why our population is growing. People want our vision for the future.
TOS really doesn’t fit into the Trek universe. It’s emotional, irrational, bigoted (it reflects aggressive American imperialism) and it doesn’t have a consistent vision. Gene and Braga ignored it during TNG. It was too flawed to fix. The reboot is what saved Star Trek from itself.
Picard/Marcus 2008
“Because Scientists R2Cool”
71… “Also, Babylon5 was a right-wing piece of junk.”
I guess you didn’t stick around long enough for the episodes in which the B5 heroes stood up against a dictatorial Earth government which had taken over the press. Some of those “defense of freedom” episodes were damned powerful… and hardly right-wing. People rallying against the Patriot Act today would feel a strong connection with B5’s middle seasons.
#43
I already knew that Shatner is legendary for everything he does.
#50.” just meant to say that just because one person saw some phantom pro-war propaganda in enterprise doesnt mean that was the intent or the result. in fact, i seriously doubt that it was intended.”
I’m used to seeing things doing an analysis on a topic that others often don’t and I’m comfortable with that since it tends to get me A’s for my academic papers. That aside, Enterprise did a jump on the bandwagon of public opinion after 9/11. There are probably polls out there on the internet that detail the decline of public support for the Irak war/war on terror over time if one wants to look them up. At the time the producers decided to go for a storyline that fictionalized the events of 9/11 and following it in a scifi setting, support was at an all time high and a trauma that was on everybody’s mind. Fictionalizing such events is a way to deal with them and to come to terms with them. But because a TV series takes time to produce, Enterprise was always a year late for its fictionalized portrayal of real life events. While Enterprise’s heroes fought a heroic, moral superior war, pictures from Abu Graip made the news. I do not see it as a coincidence that the series resolved it’s war stat and swiftly did a roll-back to it’s original premise after 2 years of declining viewer ship in its fourth season, which we all seem to agree looked very promising. Please take notice: I do not say that this was the only reason Enterprise failed or even an important one, but they were out of sync with what people saw on their TV screens at the time of broadcast in the news. I agree with you Harlan, that what can be perceived as an element of propaganda (and there is no war without propaganda accompanying it in disguise or not) was not intended but an accident in timing. But at the time it turned me off.
Don’t get me wrong, I just can’t watch him act for more that 5 minuets.
I have to disagree with the idea that DS9 was against Gene’s philosophy of Star Trek. His idea was that by the 23rd or 24th century, humans would have gotten past most of their more petty or destructive tendencies. He had no problem with aliens being portrayed as petty or destructive.
And so, DS9 was about much more than just humans. As a matter of fact, it centered around the Bajorans, an alien race. Several other alien races also played key roles in the series.
You could say that part of DS9’s theme is “how can all of these different species (humans included) get along?” Much of the time, the answer was “they can’t, at least not until they fight it out for a while.” And along the way, they told stories that related to our present situation in the real world. That’s not much different from TOS’s approach.
Now, it is true that DS9 introduced some corrupt or misguided humans into the mix. But, I think that they were simply showing a realistic reaction to the events that were taking place. If people are threatened, people want to fight back. And the way some people fight back is going to be more questionable than others, even if they wouldn’t ordinarily be petty or destructive. And again, that’s not much different from TOS. The original series also had some humans who were going off the deep end and used questionable tactics.
The big difference on DS9 was that Starfleet was living on someone else’s turf, rather than being in one of their own starships. So, they weren’t comfortable all the time. That’s just a difference in the setting. Does a difference in the setting mean that it’s being contrary to the core philosophy of Star Trek?
An Excelsior series produced by Harve Bennett or Nimoy would’ve been a more than welcome breath of fresh air.
Sadly, had it come to pass it would have been cranked out by the Berman’s Automated paint-by-numbers Trek factory and would have left me just as unsastisfied as all of his other shows. Trek has been on auto-pilot for years. In light of this, the fact that a Captain Sulu series never materializes isn’t such a bad thing.
#32 “Shatner says Trek XI isn’t going to be good without him.”
Wrong. He NEVER said that. He said he felt it’d be wiser to include him, a sentiment shared by many fans. He also praised JJ and his team as wonderfully talented storytellers, and said we’d all just have to wait and see what they came up with. Which is true.
#54 “he’s just going on what he heard. I think the same thing can be said of similar comments that have come from William Shatner.”
Shatner has also never bashed any of the other shows! Picard, Janeway, and elements of DS9 have all figured prominently in his novels. He was in talks to appear on Enterprise. Where are you folks getting your information??
Of course, if Manny Coto had had seasons 5 to 7 to work with of ENTERPRISE…. I’m rather certain we would have seen George Takei turn up in a 2-parter either as Hoshi Sato’s father or grandfather Hikaru Sato (in a Mr Miyagi-esque role).
And, add to that a 2-parter Mirror Universe revisit, where Empress Sato had to enlist the assistance of her Samurai Warlord Hikaru Sato to subdue the Earth….
Then George would just love ENTERPRISE….
Of course, he’s still odds on for Nogura in Star Trek 2008.
eh, I doubt he’s watched DS9. these comments are in the same vein as Sirtis’ “Deep Sleep Nine” slams… :rolls eyes:
every once in a while some of these non-Niner Trek alumnis come up and bash DS9. no news there. the reason he didn’t mention VOY was because he was ON it; and in a pretty forgettable episode no less.
Ok, who wants to launch another probe into Takei’s deep space?
Sorry guys, I’m with George on these counts.
DS9 had an audience, and I don’t deny that many loved it. But was it Star Trek? I don’t think so. It went out of its way to abandon early Trek conventions and kill off any number of characters from the earlier shows. It came off as the first attempt to sweep what was Star Trek under the rug in place of a new paradigm: internal strife and struggle…a mistake carried through Voyager and into Enterprise. Who is to blame is probably another thread. Instead of the struggle mostly being about our “heroes” against the vast universe and it’s diversity…it became about their struggles with each other. TOS and TNG had a sense of family…DS9, Voyager and even Enterprise were a dysfunctional family at best.
As for the comment someone made about it being easy to take shots at Enterprise after it failed, well..uh..yeah. That’s kind of how it works. If your favorite football team loses the game, it doesn’t change history to point out they lost once it’s over. Enterprise failed. Herculean effort on the part of the cast and crew, but it failed.
Don’t get me wrong, I like dark. I’m a Battlestar Galactica fan and I love where Ron Moore and crew have taken it…but if you slapped federation jargon on the show and changed the Galactica to U.S.S. Galactica that wouldn’t make it Star Trek.
A show about Excelsior and Crew might have had a chance to keep Star Trek from needing “re-invigorated”.
Lavish all the praise you want on the last 3 series, but ask yourself why so many people think the franchise was almost dead. Ask yourself why so much of the fanbase looked elsewhere for Sci-fi. Ask yourself why there has been such a resurgence of interest in TOS. It’s because somewhere along the line the “soul” of Star Trek got misplaced with last season’s uniforms…
George never said whether or not “DS9″ was a good show. He just said that it got away from Gene Roddenbery ’s vision. One does not equal the other.
He also didn’t necessarily dis “Enterprise”. He just said it was a failure, which it was from a viewership standpoint. Note: I liked “Enterprise” and feel it was underrated.
I think it’s unfair to just jump on him as if he were attacking the Star Trek universe. He’s actually going after the business people at the studio who don’t give a sh*t about Star Trek, other than the money it represents. If George didn’t love Star Trek, he would have never been on “Star Trek: New Voyages”, nor would he even care about talking about Trek with such passion. So you’re basically attacking an ally, here. He’s on our side, folks.
I understand from people who’ve dealt with Takei that he’s a wonderful guy. Never a bad word about him.
That said, there’s no good reason to take an interest in his opinions about how the Trek franchise ought to be run. That a groundswell of support existed for “Captain Sulu” of the kind that would have translated into sustainable ratings is a fantasy of his and nothing more.
An Internet-based petition and write-in campaign organized by a self-selected group of crazies is as relevant to making successful television as is a left-handed smoke turner.
Sorry… I didn’t like DS9, nor did I like Enterprise.
I’m not sure why I didn’t like DS9… I can’t quite put my finger on it. And, I got so angry with Enterprise doing all kinds of things that didn’t quite fit.
I watched it all of course because of my love for Star Trek.
Star Trek Excelsior would have been AWESOME!
Very much looking forward to the new Star Trek movie.
I’ll have to respectfully disagree with Takei about DS9, because it is in my opinion the best of the Trek spinoffs. And Avery Brooks is my favorite captain.
Enterprise was really on the money in the 4th Season, but of course “the suits” canceled it. The concluding episode was a slap in the face to fans everywhere.
But it is obvious to me in conversations with even casual Trek fans that a Sulu “Excelsior” series would have been HUGELY popular and successful, far more so than Voyager and the first seasons of Enterprise.
I just watched “World Enough and Time” last night and was really impressed by Takei’s acting and the whole production.
# 6 – Exactly. As always, tacky, George.
I totally agree with Takei regarding DS9. Its clearly was the polar opposite of Gene’s philosophy and vision of the future, thus it is the worst Star Trek series ever. It was okey Si-fi series aka to B5 nothing more and is very OVERRATED. It also had worst crew.
However i find Enterprise failure not entirely heir fault. DS9 & VOY rating were dropping fast when it was on the air and failure of Nemesis didn’t help Enterprise either. I found the cast best since TNG and i genuine did like the Enterprise series.
I am not sure Star Trek Excelsior series would have been success as Takei believes. I don’t know. Personally i find Takei poor actor and cant see him as leading actor in tv series.
Takei is totally wrong. He was great as a captain in ST:VI, but to carry a series or a movie would have been a disaster. Star Trek, as any show, has to have to have different approaches to storytelling and not the same old. Now, saying that JJ’s project is different because of recasting and it’s prequel basis.
I love all Star Trek. DS9 was the best series, period, and it never got the respcet it deserved!
I just got one of my friends started on Trek, and I startred him with Enterprise, and it’s interesting to see the reaction of a newly formed fan who has no preconception of Enterprise or Star Trek in general. He loves it and we’re only on the 2nd season, and he doesn’t even realize how good it’ll get later on in other seasons and eventually the other spin offs. Enterprise, like the other treks was shaky its first two seasons, but Enterprise was becoming a truly great series before it got cancelled.
#79 Thorny — yes, well, I admit I had a knee-jerk reaction to that one episode and quit in the middle of the first season, so I can’t speak to what B5 was like later on. Let’s just say it rubbed me the wrong way in a number of departments — visual effects, acting, writing — and I decided it wasn’t worth my time.
I maintain, however, that it is not fair to compare DS9 with B5 because the two shows had such different foundations and aims. I would say that DS9 definitely kept up a number of Roddenberry values. This is one of the ways in which I disagree with Takei. I do feel that DS9 held onto Star Trek’s original moral compass, at least a lot more so than Voyager or Enterprise did. (It is to be expected that the more time that passed after Roddenberry’s death, the original vision may get diluted or reinterpreted by those who had taken the reins in his place.)
Takei is totally correct about DS9 going off-vision from Roddenberry’s intent. Moreover, it was a mediocre show that only got truly entertaining towards the end of its run—and then only because it went for the easy “war in space” format—something which was always going to excite the fans a bit—what’s more fun than seeing all that high-tech shoot-em-up, after all? But underneath that, DS9 had nothing, and neither did Voyager. What little I saw of Enterprise was even more of a turn-off. Totally off-base from what Roddenberry had envisioned originally.
But the problem is also with Roddenberry’s vision, and the fact that Roddenberry himself lost control of it over time. The 60s Roddenberry vision was simply that this state of endless injustice, crime, poverty and war–that mankind had been indulging in for the last 5000 years or whatever–couldn’t last; that at some point in the future we would grow up and grow beyond the need for treating each other like shit. The exploration of space would then become an adventure that humanity–with its priorities now straightened out–could devote itself too fully.
This vision always had holes in it, if you pressed it too far, but the advantage of it was that it never really gave out specifics. It never said “this this and this” has to happen, or “political system X will win out” or anything of that nature. It ONLY said that the future will come and we will not be the same—we will move way beyond the petty miseries we’ve subjected ourselves to in our “infancy” and “adolescence.”
It was simply a belief in the better side of mankind and the faith that we can and will someday work to put everything right. Pretty elegant and simple, really, and something people needed to believe in at the time, and still need, I think.
But in time even Roddenberry got this vision mixed up with a sort of politically correct laundry list of what the “good future” must have and must look like… and so we got the odiously “correct” and “just so” Star Trek the Next Generation, which turned the original series simple faith (the faith, after all, of what was always just a big adventure series) into a big hunk of embarrassing cant. All very sophomoric and earnest…. the kind of utopian future a particularly grim 14 year old would come up with. The original series wisely never got that deep into the details and never explored the perfect little world that had been created back home—why? Because of course we couldn’t KNOW how all this would come to pass—and it would therefore be unwise to examine it. But by the time of TNG, Roddenberry had forgotten his own caution and went for it. And we got the interminably dull and sickeningly prissy crew backing up Picard.
Certain minds who picked up the creative material after Roddenberry’s death wanted to rebel against the final form of his “vision,” and so we got DS9, et al—even more off from the original thrust of Star Trek and what it was supposed to be about—because they just tossed most of the faith in the vision out the window and basically tried to tell futuristic stories about the kind of world we pretty much have today. That’s not Star Trek. Star Trek isn’t the modern world simply carried into the future. Star Trek is supposed to be something better and more fulfilling. We just weren’t supposed to come out and say HOW it had got that way.
If the new movie or a new series could return to the original simplicity—remembering that this is an iconic adventure story told in front of a backdrop of a better future (and that’s all) then it would be highly successful. If it doesn’t—then Star Trek will continue to spiral down into miasma.
But if we see something with no more PC, no more cutesy-ness, no more rehashes and no more “diversions into the dark side”—then Star Trek might still have a chance to survive.
I would have to agree with Takei on a few points. I wasn’t a fan of DS9 (only watched a few eps here and there), same for VOYAGER. I’ve seen some excellent ones in the mix, and some not so excellent ones, and some really bad ones. ENTERPRISE I never really got on board with, though I’m a big Scott Bakula fan and wanted to see it work. I’ve rented a few of the Season 4 discs and now I’m sorry it got canned.
Still, I think STAR TREK: EXCELSIOR could have been a big hit for the studio, either as a weekly series or even an “often movie” kind of series — maybe a 2-hour ep every few months (syndicated, Sci-Fi channel, etc.). I don’t think it could have carried a film series, though.
I’ve been viewing the STARSHIP EXETER episodes with my kids recently; they’re a lot of fun. The kids love them because of the “made by fans and we could do that” angle, I like them because they harken back to the TOS feel.
Which is what I’m hoping I’ll feel again next December.
Gotta get my 2 cents in. I think DS9 is the only Trek that ventured into uncharted territory.
Classic is Classic
TNG is the long awaited extropolation of classic
DS9 shows us a different side of the TNG universe
Voyager – largely a rehash but not awful
Enterprise – ill conceived from the start. (season 4 was okay)
I have to ask how much of DS9 did George Takei actually watch, I’ll wager not much. I think there are at least 4 seasons of DS9 that rival any quality show on TV.
Excelsior was perhaps a missed opportunity, but have to agree, I wasn’t overly impressed with his voyager appearance either.
Doug L.
I’d love to see a fan-fic or even a big budget version of Excelsior, with this proviso: Get Takei in as contemporary Sulu and a younger actor in as Sulu of TOS or slightly before or after.
As for DS-9, I think it expanded Rodenberry’s universe. The acting was better than much of TOS and the plot-lines far more complex. I don’t pick fav Treks, but DS-9 has my complete respect.
^ I mean “more” of them. World Enough and Time was pretty dang good.
#62 – Obviously you misses the Spy Vs. Spy joke….
http://www.kennedyshipyards.com/productimages/odo%203.JPG
#98 – Randall – I think you make a very strong case, but I don’t quite see it that way. I think even the TOS series puts forward a fairly rosy vision of the future as a jumping off point for a message something like this, “even when humanity *thinks* its got all its problems solved, there is yet more work to do; if nothing else, we have to struggle to maintain our gains.” The TOS episodes I have downloaded recently all back this up: Errand of Mercy, Space Seed, Devil in the Dark.
In this light, TNG, DS9, and even Voyager and Enterprise to a certain degree, are saying the same thing, only in more concrete terms. What you criticize DS9 for — being more a projection of our modern dystopia than TOS’s utopic vision — is arguably a means of showing that behind every seeming utopia is a difficult and incessant struggle to maintain it. It is inevitable that certain gains are lost and regress and have to be regained, and in a way, in fighting to regain them, we keep ourselves honest by knowing what we have to lose.
bah, DS9 was a stolid bore, Voyager was filled with even more technobabble than Next Generation (if that’s possible) and Enterprise… well let’s just say between the stupid theme song, the ugly looking Akira-prise and the clunky, awkward, badly-written dialogue I would have to say that an Excelsior series would have been welcome. We could have had guest spots from all our favorites without having to explain how they survived for ninety years, or making them look so old that they were almost unrecognizable. The Next generation in my opinion was the only Trek series beyond the original that had any real substance to it.
Yeah, DS9 was a bit removed from Roddenberry’s vision. That was part of the point. An attempt to do something that was a little different from previous Trek. It was a great series as far as I’m concerned. It had terrific acting and characters that felt real. The stories were more complex and character driven. It’s actually aged better than any other series.
An Excelsior series would have been cool, but as I recall there were also a lot people writing and calling for a prequel series set before TOS. There were even series of books written about the Earth Romulan wars.
Wow, thank god you’re not working in Hollywood, Heywood Jablomee.
DS9 was fundamentally more optimistic than TNG. It had people resembling actual human beings making choices instead of people who were just magically ‘more enlightened.’
“In the future, things will be better” doesn’t mean shit all if its some magical fairyland with no connection to suffering now. TNG skirted the issue entirely, with the Post-Atomic Horror being some mysterious distant past event that the human race just ‘got over.’ The characters from the 20th century were easily-dismissed and pitiful backward caricatures, like the Vaal-natives, appeased and made comfortable with the simplest demonstrations of 24th century technology. Past Tense managed to show part of the human race *actually* trying to deal with the shit it had created.
Okay, here are my opinions, in a nutshell: a Star Trek: Excelsior series would have been absolutely unwatchable, DS9 was the best Star Trek series, and with all due respect I think that Takei needs to shrink his ego a bit.
Sulu was a cool character, but Takei as an actor is not someone I respect all that much; Nimoy is just a darn cool guy, and DeForest Kelley sounds awesome, but I don’t tend to really care what most of the other actors have to say. You did a great job with Star Trek, but I’ll form my own opinions, thank you.
The the premise and characters on Enterprise was great. Just because he didn’t feel those two show doesn’t make it was crap. Kind of funny how he didn’t diss Voyager. Was it because he was on that show.
I would have liked to see a Sulu Excelsior show, it would have been great. But other than that Takei is way off. DS9 was a great show. ENT was finally becoming the show it should have been when it was axed. Takei shouldnt really comment on quality since you know he doesnt really watch. But then acting is all about ego isnt it?
I expected the DS9 defenders to roll in, but why–years after its end is it nowhere near the popularity of TOS or even TNG? If it was so great–beyond a couple of compelling story arcs–why no DS9 movies as the series was winding down or after? Why no Trek reboot featuring the DS9 cast or era or major plotlines?
Fandom is one thing, and its yours to like. However, reality is another thing. DS9 is not the general public’s (or average Trek fan’s) first thought when they hear the title “Star Trek.”
DS9 Sucked Balls!
I have said this many times that it would have been a better move to make Star Trek Excelsior.
Paramount screwed up that one…
Never to late…
See what Bill has been putting up with all these years!!!!
Agree with the genisus(pardun the dumb pun) of what he is saying but he is picking on the wrong show. DS9 is THE ONLY Spinoff Trek I enjoyed. I loathed all the rest and would have loved to have seen a Captain Sulu show rather than any of them. But I think DS9 was the only spinoff with rich characters full of emotions and human frailties where as all the spinoffs had these cold, austere people who cold only remove there venier on a holodeck??? Lame. Love DS9 though and compelling characters full of foolish human emotions and frailties and strong bonds of friendship is what Gene’s (Roddenberry and Coon) original vision was all about. DS9 was the only one to get it right after Kirk , Spock and McCoy.
Frankly I hated both DS9 and Enterprise. Neither held up the Original tradion. Maybe IF they had different actors the Enterprise captain was too much of his original charactor Sam Becket for me.
Remember Quantum Leap? That was a good show, I liked him there, but he was not ready for space or they needed new director for him. I kept waiting for the Admiral or gushie to show up ya know? As for the DS9 it was a bust from the beginning, I could handle TNG but heaven save me from DS9. My kids gave me all the series for Christmas, both DS9 and ENT are still unopened and unviewed! DVD’s can sit, can’t get rid of them cause it would hurt the kids feelings other wise I would have tossed them in my last garage sale!
#112. “DS9 Sucked Balls!”
Quoted for truth.
As for Takei lacking charisma, he had bags of it as Sulu. Just look at him kicking ass in Trek III and commanding the Excelsior in VI.
I’m going to say this very simply. While I respect his opinions about his working relationship with Shatner and the others (they are after all his opinions and point of view), I believe that is comment from time to time are catty and back handed. He’s often made catty comment in regard to “Sulu not getting his due.” His comment on the other shows are no exception. I think is opinion about Deep Space Nine is valid and I understand where he is coming from although I don’t agree with it.
Lastly, I’ll say this he call Enterprise a failure, obvously because it was canceled. Star Trek was cancecled, was it a failure?
#103 “4 8 15 16 23 42″:
Look… it isn’t what you say is wrong; of course you’re on to something about the “meaning” of DS9 and so on.
But the point is, that’s not “Star Trek.” It’s not what made the *original* series the cultural icon that it is. Even if you think DS9 was a good show (I happen to not think so, but that’s irrelevant) the point is that DS9 didn’t follow from what made the original series the important thing it is in our “zeitgeist” or whatever the hell you want to call it.
The original Star Trek echoes with all the deeply mythic hero/adventure stuff that we know from Edgar Rice Burrough’s Tarzan and John Carter stories, Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories, Ian Fleming’s James Bond, etc. etc. going all the way back to the King Arthur and Robin Hood legends—what all these creations have in common (including the original Star Trek) is this deeply and profoundly mythic connection to the Heroic motif, and to I guess what you’d call the “grand adventure.” One could argue that the original Star Wars film had that, too, certainly, and maybe the Harry Potter series will be thought of as having it, someday.
TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise do NOT have it however; one can see that easily… and the reason is that they are firstly nothing more than continuations of a “franchise” and don’t stand as entities on their own, and secondly, they each, in their own way, abandon the simple “vision” of the original series…. which was basically a great future of exploration as the backdrop for the Heroic Adventure. And for characters you had these classic heroes, fully in the mode of the earlier examples (John Carter, Tarzan, Doc Savage, The Shadow, Batman, Superman, Sherlock Holmes, James Bond). Whereas in TNG you had comparatively lame redrawings whom you may or may not like as “dramatic” characters, but certainly didn’t rise to the same iconic heights at the originals.
It’s not that the original Star Trek was something profound and “important,” either—when you look at the company I’ve placed it with, above—you realize it’s really a lot of crap. :-) It’s the “good bad” books and stories—entertaining and fun, because they touch some deep need in us for heroes—but not great literature or anything like that.
The mistake is when they try to make Star Trek too important and profound—which is something all the latter series did, from TNG on…. and when they fail to recognize the simple tradition of adventure that Star Trek comes out of.
You know, George never said he “hated” DS9. All he said was that it was the opposite of Gene’s philosophy and vision of the future, and that he felt STAR TREK lost it’s way because of that. He never said he hated the show or thought it as bad; he just says it was the opposite of what Star Trek started out as. He has a point. Nevertheless, DS9 is still my personal favorite Trek show :)
The fact is that they should have made TNG, a Sulu Captain era show. With promotions for all of the TOS minor characters ( Dr. Chapel, Lt Cmd. Rand, Cmdr. Checkov,) and had guest appearnces from Adm. Kirk, Amb. Spock, Capt. Scott. while atthis late date we cannot fix what Berman and his cronies have done.
All we can now hope for is that JJ and his group can fix the damage done by Berman and his cronies.
Off all the post TOS Trek series, TNG may have been the closest. DS-9 was ok, but Brookes should have played it alot more like his Hawk Character. As For Voyager it was Brutal.
ENT was ok, the lastseason was the best, I was kind of hoping it would go the route of Stargate, that it would get pickedup by theScifi channel and they would make new episodes, and undo that crappy ending.
Takei doesn’t have the acting chops to carry a show. He’s right about the spin-offs,though.I found them unwatchable.
There are things I wouldn’t state as emphatically as Takei, but overall, I agree with him.
For me, though, Trek basically ends a bit earlier, when the credits roll on Wrath of Khan. Everything after that is just expensive fanfic (and like fanfic, sometimes brilliant, often not, but either way not part of what makes Trek great for me).
I have no strong feelings on Enterprise one way or another; the only episodes I watched in full were the Babel/Andorian trilogy in the last season, and I liked those just fine, but not fine enough to go back and watch the whole series.
I still think STAR TREK: EXCELSIOR should be made into 5 or 6 Direct-to-DVD movies. Thats the best way to get the show done. Throw in characters look Uhura and Chekov and you have a bonafide hit. TOS fans will eat it up!
Outside of us, here, we Trek fans, I believe that NOBODY would have given a rat’s arse about an Excelsior series. Cool perhaps. Fun for us definitely. Ratings bomb.
My personal opinion of George is that he is a neat guy, but like anyone else, he has opinions that get grouchier with age.
I like all the Star Trek series to some degree. TNG was fun and did new things on TV at the time. But too much techno-babble. DS9 explored some of the darker aspects of 24th century life. But for me, it just wasn’t “trekkie” enough (I mean that in the sense that the exploring part was kind of lost, not the fan term). Voyager seemed to want to go in the right direction of exploring the unknown but the characters didn’t inspire us to get behind them. And Enterprise would have been great if it had nothing to do with Star Trek. Seemed like that one tried to make a point of contradicting TOS at almost every opportunity.
And of course, TOS reigns supreme. Without it, there would be none of this. And by “this”, I mean the last 40 odd years of Star Trek
#116. “Lastly, I’ll say this he call Enterprise a failure, obvously because it was canceled. Star Trek was cancecled, was it a failure?”
Star Trek was *good*. Enterprise was bad.
You know, I’d be willing to bet deep down inside, the OS actors are like: “Give it a rest! Quit bugging me about Star Trek!”
It’s no wonder they have the odd outburst like Shat and Takie….hmmm, Shat and Takie, sounds like a great cartoon title.
Anywho, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I gotta say, while I’m a huge fan of Star Trek, I think we need to back off and let the new guys do their work.
and…oh yeah, Bring Back Kirk.
;-)
The idea of a Captain Sulu series did get me excited back in the mid-90s when it was bandied about…but the main problem with Trek back then was the iron grip that Berman and Bragga had on the franchise.
They reportedly hated TOS for one thing and add to that the fact that their writing skills had clearly deteriorated as evidenced by how mediocre (at best) Voyager was…Well…let’s just say that I don’t think that the Sulu series would have been very good with Berman and Bragga at the writing helm…
Everyone is sharing their opinions fairly well. Here are mine:
TOS – Nothing needs to be said. It is the touchstone.
STTNG – Trek reborn. We finally get something new. Not perfect, but as close as your gonna get
DS9 – Not much of a “trek” on a stationary space station. (Bab 5 was better)
Voyager. Great premise, but they should have been more “beat up”, and rag tag by the time they made it home. They still looked like they left space dock for God sake.
Enterprise – Another great concept that got lost for a couple of years, but found itself in the end. Too bad it couldn’t have made it one or two more years.
Excelsior??? I’m glad it didn’t get made, but it would be better to have it now than nothing.
DS9 was a mostly well thought out series, and a joy to watch…but I don’t think Enterprise was even part of the Star Trek universe with it’s multiple science and continuity blunders. It was mostly lazy writing. The only thing that made it worthwhile was the Vulcan catsuit.
# 125-”and…oh yeah, Bring Back Kirk.”
Kirk has been brought back. He is being played by Chris Pine.
I think Excelsior would have been good, but only if produced by another team.
#80- i see what you mean. that makes sense actually. an unfortunate side effect of life imitating art i suppose. too bad, too, because even within the seaon-long xindi conflice there were some gems of stories.
truth be told, when word of a prequel got out i was actually hoping for the romulan war which is supposed to have occurred only a few years after the events of enterprise. with leads or at least appearances by members of Enterprise, it would have made sense, as the charactors had already been developed quite a bit. i understand why they didnt go that route, though, with the percieved commercial failure of the series.
I agree with George Takei regarding Gene’s creation of the original trek. This is part of the reason I went off trek. Don’t get me wrong DS9 was a good show but it was not Gene’s trek.
Another reason I went off trek was all the damn techno babble. I sure do feel sorry for all the those actors that had to learn all that crap.
111. Compassionate God… “I expected the DS9 defenders to roll in, but why–years after its end is it nowhere near the popularity of TOS or even TNG? ”
DS9 is very much a serialized drama along the lines of “Lost”, “Alias”, and “24″, all hit shows but “Lost” has not even been put in syndication (reruns) and “24″ and “Alias” are not much of a hit in syndication. DS9, especially years 3-7, had very few standalone episodes (and those they had were rarely examples of the show at its best.) Babylon 5 is very much in the same situation. Both shows would have fared better on DVD, like “Lost” and “24″ today, except that Paramount and WB very badly overpriced them for the first several years of DVD sales ($80-$100 per season compared to $40-50 for “Lost” or “24″).
TNG was a hit at least partly because of its standalone nature… you don’t need to see Episode 37 to enjoy Episode 38. “Stargate SG-1″ is another syndication success thanks partly to its standalone, casual viewer-friendly nature.
Oh and that dog shit season 2 of the show “Heroes” is something not of a disastrous mess? Enterprise was fine and Sulu’s show never happened. It should have been a movie, a miniseries or a series but Sulu’s show wasn’t and won’t be. Sucks, but Jesus dude get a grip. TOS cast now and then needs to be bitch slapped. You don’t hear any of the other non TOS cast being so high and mighty as often as these douche bags. So we see your old 60’s show again all remastered, good for you now hit the bricks and stand in the picket line because it’s for damn sure none of you or the writers got or are getting jack -n- shit for 2.0 or the awful glued together HD / DVD combos that are atrociously littering video shelves soon across America. And yes, Paramount is doing crappy things as is Universal and Fox and all of those dirtbags. That’s Hollywood. Go back to Stern’s show and let them lauff and lauff with you being the “straight man” about all their jokes concerning mens sexuality.
#111. ds9 found its fanbase and played for them. it became a serial and lost fans because the occasional watcher had no idea what was going on from episode to episode. loyal ds9ers loved this though, as it allowed more complex plots to play out over time. tos and tng, great shows, but at the end of the day everything was wrapped up and the next episode could start fresh. so in syndication you can see them in any order and its a self contained story, which is fine, but to say ds9 wasnt on par is rediculous.
It seems to me that George doesn’t like any Star Trek that he wasn’t in. DS9 is my favorite Trek series, frankly, but they all have a lot of very bad or just average episodes. I would have loved an Excelsior series, and it would have been great to see Sulu in action again. The best episode of Voyager ever done was the one with him in it.
yes enterprise was a terrible horrible show, except for first flight and a mirror darkly.
Excelsior? Captain Sulu? oh c’mon, stop kidding. Takei made a good Sulu but thats all, not enough actor to fill a captain shoes.
#117
Very well put.
I mostly agree to what you said, but I still think that one reason for TOS raising to the iconic heights was it being the only series that dared to touch political and social issues in a day when it was particularly inconvenient to do so. Much has been said about characters such as Uhura, the black woman on the bridge, as well as Sulu, the Asian and Chekov, the Russian. We had Dr. Daystrom, the black scientist, and I remember reading about how particularly “shocking” it was for the public that Kirk addressed him as “Sir” during that episode. Not to mention the references to the cold war, views on war and peace in general that were not in line with the policy then (and which mostly have remained topical), racial reconciliation, international (interstellar) understanding, respecting the foreign/the alien, introduction of IDIC, etc., etc.
You’re surely right – we should not mistake ST for some sort of great literature, but TOS surely was and still is important as it implemented ideas and concepts into pop culture that transcended a scifi show and the heroic adventure by far and, thus, imparted enduring values. IMO, the persisting success of TOS cannot be explained otherwise.
#132 – haha. you beat me to it. now i feel repetative
I still love to see a Sulu tv movie or two.
Takei was ***amazing*** in last night’s episode of “Heroes”. That performance was Emmy-worthy.
Its not too late for Star Trek: Excelsior!!! The opening line of the series should be “Good Morning, Captain.”
Can we at least all agree that Voyager was uniformly terrible? Seriously.
I think Takei is awesome. After coming out of the closet a couple years ago and then making regular appearances on Howard Stern’s show, Takei is finally coming into his own. Good for him and good for him for speaking his mind. Agree or not agree – the man is entitled to his opinion.
for the record…i loved DS9, and I thought the latter half of Enterprise was pretty good too.
oh and I added a poll on ‘post GR’ Trek (see right column)
This bit about Gene’s Philosophy and vision is really going a bit overboard. He wasn’t a prophet, he just wanted to tell a good story. Having said that, I don’t see where so many posters find DS9 such a deviation. It’s the only show in the series that dared venture off formula and they should get credit for that!
DS9 took our standard federation style player and dropped them into a darker corner of the universe, challenging the precepts that we typically expect from them. This is very relevant to the climate we live in now and I think this makes it all the more meaningful when the characters succeed.
If Trek wasn’t an allegory for social and political climate of the day, then I missed Gene’s vision entirely.
re 112 and 115 – seriously, why even bother commenting.
Doug L.
Anyone remember the Voyager episode that was a Tuvok flashback to Sulu’s Exelcior? It wasn’t that good.
But then again, it was an episode of Voyager, and Voyager wasn’t the best either.
What have you all got against Voyager?!
I will always have an appreciation and fondness for the TOS cast, but boy are some of them a bunch of whiners.
For years, I’ve been hearing George Takei whine and complain about how Paramount turned down the Excelsior series. It’s time to give it a rest. He’s probably upset that Paramount chose to go ahead with other series including the great DS9 instead of Excelsior. Are he and I emphasize, some of his fellow cast mates really starving that much for additional fame and money?
I met Walter Koenig this past weekend at a New York comic book convention. Granted, I don’t want to make any assumptions about what’s going on/not going on in this guy’s life right now, but when I got there Sunday, he had his arms crossed, head down, looking depressed and in a bad mood.
My point is: these guys will always be remembered as legends from Star Trek. I’m sure they’ve made plenty of money from the series, the movies, and convention appearances among other things. Then why the bitterness?
If I were Takei and Koenig, write a book. I’m sure it will make money and will provide us with some insight on why they feel so bitter.
Excelsior George.
#129
The BBK movement has been running since 1994. Although BBK is not a protected term, it can claim customary right. It refers to bringing back Capt. Kirk after his death as shown in Generations, i. e. bringing back Kirk post Nexus.
Consequentially, BBK can only be accomplished by William Shatner, not by Chris Pine.
ds9 = protracted klingon space opera (yawn)
start trek: lost in space, er, i mean voyager = neelix laff romp (retch…)
enterprise = trek good again a blend of the best (tos + tng all in one)
takei is a bit of a pretentious git, but excelsior would have been a good series, too. i would have rather seent that than ds9 or voyager (except the captin proton episodes which were great! and jeri ryan was as good an actress as she looked. coulda done without captain hepburn, though)
they should recast cap’n sulu and rand and launch a new series after the new motion picture.
ds9 might not have ripped off bab5, but bab5 did it better, and notice how after bab5 got popular that ds9 started making a few changes, most notably a more active opening titles sequence, suddenly there were more starships coming and going and technicians working on the stations surface, etc… where before it was a sleepy comet flyby, wiche matched the shows content perfectly… snore.
more tedious klingon rituals? more forced silly bajoran spiritualism? more wooden banter between quark and odo? the doc and that tailor? etc… and blah blah blah…? zzzzzzz…..
ENT wasn’t a disastrous failure, but Excelsior would have been.
If Takei could have his way we would get Excelsior instead of DS9. All I can say is thank god that didn’t happen.
I agree with Mr Takei – it would have been better bet than Ent….
Fans would come out of their DS9/Voyager induced exile to see Takei take the helm of the Excelsior once again…..and fall in love Trek VI style with trek once again….cameos from Shatner Nimoy etc could have been done and Takei could have got his own back pushing Shatner around…cutting his scenes, stealing his lines and facial expressions, staying in his trailer and refusing to interact with his co stars etc etc…(ok i joke..)
Also Walter Konig could have been 1st Officer once again eh? shades of Wrath of Khan there….in fact they could have done a nice Khan story with Pavel and Sulu going back to visit Ceti Alpha V and had another actor as young Khan in flash backs charting from when he was set on there after Space Seed right up till WOK – where Ricardo Montoban could have appeared…(basically an adaptaion of the superb To Reign in Hell novel)
Could have been set post Trek VI (to allow for the all important Shat cameo) then post Trek VII after Kirks demise…
In Fact i think they should cancel the new Abrams thing and make Captain Sulu: The Movie
I want it…Takei wants it…and so do you……
Frankly, I have little to no attachment to the so-called “message” of Star Trek. Most of it was just a bunch of liberal sermonizing about the evils of war, and how in the future everybody’s a Prius-driving Atheistic commie… No thank you, Mr. Roddenberry!
Trek is at it’s best when it’s focusing on the successes and failures of humanity, on the universal themes of religion, morality, and character; from these quite ‘un-Roddenberrian’ themes we get such poignant episodes as “Yesterday’s Enterprise,” “In the Pale Moonlight,” “What You Leave Behind,” and many more. On the other hand, when Trek tries to fit in with Roddenberry’s vision of spandex-wearing, immoral socialists, then we get “Justice.”
So DS9 doesn’t fit with Roddenberry’s ‘vison’…in my opinion, that’s a plus, not a minus. And you can quote me on that, too.
#117- bravo.
The spin-offs were all cut from a VERY different cloth. So much so that they are Star Trek in name only. The new Trek team got so full of themselves and were so adament at proclaiming “This is how we do Star Trek NOW”, that they never really made anything close to the original. it circled the airwaves on auto pilot for years until the orbit finally decayed.
Hopefully what we get from Abrahms will be FAR away from the pretentious storytelling that drove away the mainstream and bring back the spirit, adventure and fun that is TOS.
The content doesn’t need to move mountains it just needs to be fun.
I’ve always been far more interested in the “vision” of folks like D.C. Fontana and Gene L. Coon than Roddenberry himself.
Fontana, in particular, always found the heart in things. I’m big on heart :)
#158 star trackie: Yeah, that pretty much sums up what I was saying. Thank you.
#139 Iowagirl: Yes, you’re right, Star Trek exploited the events of the times to tell stories—it was a way of making commentary on what was happening, without facing censorship. Rod Serling did the same thing with the Twilight Zone. This explains the resonance of Star Trek to some extent.. but I don’t feel it touches on how and why Star Trek became the iconic thing it is. THAT, I think, goes back to what I was saying—that it is in a tradition of adventure/hero tales that get at us, deeply.
I sometimes think the reason it worked for Roddenberry the first time out, and never again, is also because he came from that WWII generation… like Serling (and, in fact, like my father)… and I think, in a sense, less than 20 years later he was still working on bringing a sense of fun adventure, along with a message, to TV, having lived through that war and—as many veterans like him felt–he didn’t want to see a war like that ever repeated. He succeeded in creating these heroes, and this vision—with a lot of help from like-minded people—the first time out… but couldn’t recapture that spirit… and the like-minded people weren’t there, in the end, to affect much of TNG… (Gene Coon, for example) and by that time, Roddenberry had become nothing more than another sophomoric philosophizer from California… and forgot the heroic fabric from which he’d stitched together his original idea.
DS9 was awesome because it was real. They took a good idea and made it actually work. Gene Rodenberry came up with a great idea but had no idea how to make entertainment out of it. Every time he touched it it went to poo. ST1 uniforms, TNG starting seasons. Every time someone else took it in a more military and human direction (ST2, DS9,) it was gold. Every time someone trys to “Recapture” what he wanted it fails too. Its like the whole remastered thing.
“Were trying to do what gene would have done if he had todays technology.” No, your redoing the limitations that he had. If he had this technology, he have 200 federation ships in huge battles, relying on effects as a crutch like voyager did.
Thanks for the start Gene, but well take it from here.
#102: I’m still missing it, I guess. I see no resemblance at all between Odo and Prohias’ iconic Spies. It’s all in the eye of the beholder, I guess.
I love DS9, best of the Trek shows because of its edginess. It was different than the preious shows and gave us a different look into the Trek universe while still boldly exploring new worlds and people (weather the crew visited them or they – like the Wadi – visited the station).
Enterprise I also liked, thought it had real potential apart from some bad writing and a dreadful finale. An Excelsior series would have been great though.
#150-
It was sappy.
#157
Amen bro!
George Takei was 80 hundred million years old in the 1990’s! Even Starfleet captains are meant to retire and DIE!
i think george has a point. i dont think Enterprise was a good series but it wasnt a disaster either. i would have loved to have seen this propsed series he mentions. i wonder if trek might have faired better by having takei as the caption of the excelsior with a new crew under his command.
i thought that was going to happen having seen him with his own ship at the end of trek 6. the great experiment as kirk said in trek 3.
i think that each series seems to have got further and further away from roddenberries vision of star trek. funny now that star trek has come home again after all these years.
cheers
greg
united kingdom.
I like George Takei, but voicing sour grapes is, in my opinion, not classy. I like the stars that stick to the positive things, and if they don’t have anything nice to say, then don’t say it. Sadly, there aren’t that many like that.
I’ll give one kudo to Walter Koenig, he acknowledges that he is not on good terms with Shatner, but he doesn’t talk about it.
I’m pretty sure Takei could have carried an Excelsior series. It’s really not too late. At least for maybe a two hour movie or something. He still looks great. He could play 60’s, and I think it’s reasonable to assume that in the 23rd century, lifespans are such that you see starship captains in their 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s.
TOS was, is, and always shall be, the best!!!
TAS was inspired
TNG had it’s moments
DS9 was craptacular!!! the most interesting character was Morn. Only good episode was “The Visitor”.
VOY was mediocre
ENT was cut short in it’s prime.
Excelsior series would have been crap, just like DS9, because the B&B regime would have ran it into the ground too.
RE:157 It’s ironic that Gene Roddenberry (unwittingly?) became a cult leader by putting out a naive, humans are good ,socialist view of the future.Que up ‘Somewhere Over the Rainbow’.
169. Xploding… “Excelsior series would have been crap, just like DS9, because the B&B regime would have ran it into the ground too.”
B&B had very little to do with DS9 (they were busy ruining TNG with its endless “long lost family member” stories in Season 7, and then inflicting Voyager on the world.) The main show runners were Ron Moore, Ira Steven Behr and Rene Echevarria. That’s why it is so much better than Voyager and Enterprise.
Just because you liked DS9 doesn’t mean its Roddenberrys Star Trek, because it isn’t!
^ Agree, except for DS9. Voyager, Enterprise and DS9 were all very different, and all very good in their own respects.
But an Excelsior series? I don’t think a lot of people are interested in that period of time (aside from the Enterprise and Kirk). Besides, the had crappy uniforms and ugly ships :D
Oh, and Takei… I don’t think your a good enough actor to hold your own show together. Its just… that voice…
I would have rather seen Star Trek: Excelsior than Voyager! I won’t even put the Star Trek in front of it :)
However, I LOVED Enterprise. And I feel really weird saying that here but I loved the show; esp. the 4th season mirror universe episodes.
I think Takei has always been a bit vocal in his opinions. I don’t think he had nice things to say when TNG first came out.
I like the way Takei conveniently left out criticism of the uber-wretched Voyager. Hmmm…might that be because he was IN that series as opposed to the others.
I agree with him on Enterprise, but that’s an easy target.
He’s absolutely wrong about DS9 though.
DS9 was very good, Voyager was okay, Enterprise was horrible until the 4th season. I think an Excelsior series probably wouldn’t have generated much interest. However, I would have liked to have seen it as a mini-series or something. It’s funny, every time the fans are vocal about Star Trek, and Paramount doesn’t listen, the result is a failure.
#31
No, Roddenberry was an atheist and pretty much opposed religions vand the way people use it to get the masses to do things that are bad for society.
i gotta disagree w/ george’s assessment of DS9 and – to a degree – ENT, but i am in complete agreement with him, and many previous posts here, that a “star trek: excelsior” series woudl have been a far more interesting and valuable addition to the canon than the worthless car-crash that was VOY (”flashback” included).
i remember reading the very first press release, in the fall of 1993, for the series that became VOY. i was expecting the announcement of an excelsior series; instead, what was announced sounded like an ill-conceived bastard child of “lost in space” and “battlestar galactica.” my reaction after reading that press release was
“what the HELL is this CRAP?”
…which is pretty much my reaction to VOY to this day.
Sour Grapes, I say. Takei has 20/20 hindsight. Excelsior might have worked; the only problem would have been it had the same showrunners that the first 2 years of Enterprise had. Once Coto came on board, the quality of Enterprise took a quantum leap upward, especially in season 4 excluding the final episode.
Paramount had already made the decision to pull the plug on Enterprise after season 4. It’s not coincidence that the season was 22 episodes long and planned that way from the get-go, for a grand total of 100. Just enough for syndication.
Too bad no one was really interested.
BTW, Takei did a wonderful job on the fan series episode. His work appears to have affected the quality of some of the others’ acting. It was actually somewhat watchable.
All this talk about Roddenberry. He actually didn’t have that much to do with Trek anyway. He pretty much left TOS after the second season. He helped work on TMP but had very little to do with the movies after that. He didn’t like STII and he hated STV (but then again, who didn’t besides the Shat). It’s even said that he had problems with STVI.
He may have created TNG but after the second season his participation was very limited (which was also when TNG started to become popular).
Maybe they should have(or eventually do ) a series called Star Trek:Starfleet.
There is still time to do a Sulu series. He’s not dead. I want a series of one offs. Xmas 2010 Sulu on Excelsior battleing the Romulans with help from an old enemy Klingon and the Ent B. Easter 2010 Riker on the Titan visits DS9 and foils a Cardie plot, and Thanksgiving 2010 Enterprise discovers TRIP is NOT dead! There are so many one off ideas. TV movies are cool…and with ST not saturated, just after the movie release would be a great time to bring it back. People would watch it and there would be money to be made. BUT it wont happen becuase Paramount / Viacom / NBC suck. Ass.
151 M-5: “If I were Takei and Koenig, write a book. I’m sure it will make money and will provide us with some insight on why they feel so bitter.”
Well, they both wrote a book some ten years ago:
George Takei: To The Stars (1995)
Walter Koenig: Warped Factors (1998)
————–
DS9 was entertaining and fun. But it wasn’t really Star Trek. Voyager and Enterprise were just crap.
#183
Simon and Schuster got permission from the studio to reverse Trip’s death in the final episode. This is the first time they’ve authorized something that contradicts something that happened on film. Apparently he left the Enterprise to go into covert ops, and it wasn’t until much, much later that this information was declassified.
I’m satisfied with that since he was probably the most interesting character on Enterprise and his death was as pointless as Tasha Yar’s/
Nzorak: “his death was as pointless as Tasha Yar’s”
The whole series was pointless, wasn’t it?
I think DS9 is a better expression of Gene Roddenberry’s vision than all the other series, including TOS. I remember how when DS9 was being prepared, its creators talked about how they were going to KEEP the Star Trek message exactly the same and true to Roddenberry’s vision. Everybody remembers that, right?
I mean, TOS had space battles, cool explosions, and lots of fights. That was Roddenberry’s vision. But DS9- Now there, the amount of hatred and fights and explosions was so much greater. Yes, DS9 really understood what Star Trek was all about.
I hope everybody kills each other in the new movie. That would be even better than DS9!
Oh, and Nathan, #157- I agree completely. I hate Justice. Justice is for anti-American commies. “No Justice in our Time!”
DS9 also spoke of the hopelessness of Justice. That’s why I found it so true to Star Trek and sooooo inspiring!
#186
On the whole, yes, the series was pointless. I would have liked to see something set in the TNG era.
That said, once you get past the fact that they didn’t need a prequel series, the episodes themselves were mostly pretty good. Some were exceptional. I feel like they actually captured what it was like when Trek was fun again, which is something they missed entirely with Voyager.
If they never do another 24th century series or movie that’ll be fine with me. :)
I love George but he just comes off sounding bitter he never got his own show. I agree with him on DS9, one of the worst Trek’s of all-time. I disagree with him on Enterprise, that show lasted 4 seasons, which was more than TOS, so I can’t see how he can say it was a total disaster (Jolene Blalock was enough for me to watch it, plus it was nice to see the old Andorians running around).
BTW the TOS era still my favorite. I am keeping faith in JJ Abrams and the re-birth of Star Trek, December 25, 2008!
187 – Gary, it’s hard to say what Gene would have thought. He contradicted himself often. However, he was very vocal in displaying non-violent solutions. Although he was no fan of organized religion, he was willing to write about them on the show, alluding to it. I think he would have been fine with DS9 and Voyager and Enterprise in part. However, the Enterprise’s Xindi arc, Voyager’s unbelievably boring Borg and species 8472 nonsense, and DS9’s Alpha vs. Gamma Quadrant war likely would not have agreed with him. I personally thought that bringing Worf on DS9 was the jump the shark moment. I love Worf as a character, but he was not written the same way as on TNG.
DS9 was abysmal imo. Avery Brooks was as uninteresting and opaque an actor to ever helm a ST series and maybe any series not starring Jerry Van Dyke.
That said, I would have loved an Excelsior series with Sulu–unless it was written and acted like DS9.
My Trek’s better than your Trek……
Welcome to devolution… we’re all back on the playground.
I know what I like and it dam well DOES NOT have to be culturally significant to be found enjoyable, nor does it have to spawn a movie, a book series or a breakfast cereal.
Some people get so righteous in their opinions they believe theirs is the only valid point.
If Paramount did a Sulu show, they would have made it a mess too.
#187 Um…you do know I was talking about the first season TNG episode “Justice,” right?
It’s funny, because I’ve been rewatching “Flashback” (the Takei Voyager episode), and his style of line delivery in it is actually very similar to Avery Brooks’ style.
I didn’t like DS9 at first (okay, I hated it), but it’s really grown on me and now it’s one of my favorites…funny how that happens. I wonder if Takei ever really gave it a chance?
“Consequentially, BBK can only be accomplished by William Shatner, not by Chris Pine.”
Then it is my contention that they change the name of their movement to “BBS” as that would appear to be the goal that they are actually trying to achieve.
Xai, I think a lot of the attitude goes back to my thoughts that Trek fans are a posessive bunch. I feel the same way about my wife’s spaghetti sauce.
Bring Back Orion Slave Girls.
#31 Harlan… I knew the religion “taboo” would be said the minute I posted that. But since it was such a KEY plot thread throughout the series, then it’s a valid discussion in the world it was represented. If there is one thing religion has demonstrated is intolerance and ignorance. People simply can’t have it both ways if we are to mature and evolve emotionally. I for one no longer need a father figure to dictate what is common sense right and wrong. Can you tolerate that? ;)
29 – Harlan states:
“lets avoid politics here please. there is no right or wrong. only opinions”
31. Harlan – November 20, 2007
“and religion for that matter. isnt trek about acceptance?”
Hey Harlan!
Star Trek was about politics – there is no doubt about it. Think about “A Private Little War.”
Also Harlan, Trek was never about acceptance – that’s why Kirk destroyed Landru. That’s why Kirk tried to bring Spock back. Kirk didn’t just accept things. Nor should anyone just adopt a policy of unbridled acceptance. Sure, many things which are odd or unusual to us ought to be accepted, but we shouldn’t accept anything at all – including that which is downright wrong.
And Harlan, it’s just not true that “there is no right or wrong. only opinions.” Some opinions are right and others are just wrong, and there are many opinions that lie somewhere in the middle. In fact, your claim is self-defeating. When you state that there is no right or wrong, only opinions, you are making an assertion. But if your assertion is true, then it cannot be right, as it says itself.
I hope you don’t take any of this as an attack. I just strongly disagree with you, and wanted to state why.
what made tos so great was that it spoke to an audience that was receptive to its message. to those who claim that all the spin-offs are blasphemy i can only suggest that the original formula might not work as well in todays markets. would be a bit preachy. like 7th heaven in space. that said, i cannot deny that tos was fantastic. but it also had the advantage of being the first and therefore free of comparison.
Ok here we go, the Trek version of a “d*&ck measuring contest”.
I have alot of respect for George and his opinions. He has voiced what he feels would have been a better path for Trek, this is not complaining or going for more fame, it is his opinion. I would love to see an Excelsior show as well, I think it would be great! But I absolutely loved DS9, why? Because humanity will NEVER be perfect and just because Gene had all humanity get along does not mean everyone in the galaxy gets along, the edgier side of DS9 was it’s greatest strength. I also loved ENT, why? Well it was fun and adventurous in my opinion. And TNG was the Trek I grew up with and I loved it. I agree with Xai and I AM THX-1138 – SOME Trek fans are far to possive for their own good at times. All trek has good and bad points.
I don’t agree with the slam on Enterprise. That show takes a beating that it doesn’t deserve. It certainly improved with time.
Takei could have pulled off the lead if they had done Excelsior. It would have been nice to see a pilot at least.
Check out his work in this fan film -> World Enough and Time
Available here-> http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/
# 185. i didnt know that. thats pretty cool. i am getting a bit tired of star treks tendancy to cheapen death. seems that over half the time somebody dies they end up reversing it somehow. which brings me back to kirk. let him remain a hero of the highest caliber, who gave his life to save so many others.
#199. of course. rereading some of my posts i can see why i may have seemed pompous or something. not my intent at all. only wanted to show the opposite and suggest that there are different opinions, so, my bad. thanks for pointing that out
#200. fair enough
Yayy #13 (jon1701) and #14 (Wrath of Khan) and #19 (Chris M):
I didn’t read all of the previous messages so this may have been said already. In my opinion, George Takei is one of the worst actors in Star Trek, yea, Hollywood. I do believe if there had of been a series about the Excelsior with Sulu (Takei) as captain, it would have been disastrous. The way he overacted in ST:XI and Voyager (although that was a bit better) you’d think his name was Shatner (in importance only). Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t there more “Enterprise” episodes than the original series?!?!? If he was that good an actor (as he indirectly claims he is through his whining) believe me, Hollywood would have jumped to take advantage of it. They didn’t. Go figure. Sorry guys, I’m a HUGE Trekkie but I’m glad no one gave the man air time. Besides, the way he acted on the Shatner Roast (among others there) was embarrassing. He was REALLY trying desperately to be funny or trying to out-gross everyone there… If I had the luck they did in getting to be in such a fabulous “world”, I would be very thankful. Yes there were some very big egos but GET OVER IT! Why does he think people become actors and want to go to Hollywood? Few do it for the love of the craft. (My opinion again.)
Better go. The hole I’m digging is getting deep and if I go any longer I won’t be able to climb out. Bottom line, let it go, George!!
from now on i’ll qualify my statements with an “in my opinion” so as not to be a hypocrite.
#204
Leonard Nimoy says that in science fiction character death is only permanent if you have a body, and sometimes not even then. So just for the fun of it (and not for the purposes of dogpiling you), let’s look at major character death in Trek.
1. Spock – The most obvious example of non-permanent death. Of course he was intended to come back from the dead the moment he died. Even so, I’m of the opinion that resurrected Spock was a bit off from Trek III to Trek V. He finally seemed back to his normal self in Trek VI.
2. Tasha Yar – Pointlessly killed, brought back in an alternate timeline. Though she dodged death once, she still bought the farm shortly thereafter.
3. Kirk – Officially dead, unless you count the Shatnerverse novels.
4. Sisko – Not really dead, but more or less. I’m not sure about the DS9 reboot books, but as far as I know, he remains out of commission.
5. Harry Kim – Killed but instantly replaced by his doppleganger from a parallel universe.
6. Data – Dead and no plans to resurrect him that I’m aware of.
7. Trip – See above.
So really there’s only one character who was killed, left dead for more than an episode and then brought back as a major character – Spock. Personally I can live with them resurrecting Trip through the books.
Re: #201 (Harlan)
“…but it also had the advantage of being the first and therefore free of comparison.”
Good point — I hadn’t really thought about that. (Contrary to popular belief I do have a life). Hindsight is 20/20. It’s easy to look back on something after it’s done and say “well, if I were them, I would have done this or that”.
I’m just enjoying the ride.
I would add to that list:
Worf- died during surgery for his spinal injury, only to come back due to his genetic redundancies.
Troi- who was intentionally killed so that a telepath would break his link w/ her, only to revived a few minutes later.
Wesley- brought back from the dead with Riker’s Q powers.
Those people who cryonically froze themselves.
Vedek Bareil- died and brought back, only to die after taking a deadly drug and replacing all of his organs.
The entire crew of the Enterprise D- Killed in a causality time loop over and over again, until Data figured out that the number three which he sent to himself was to signify the number of pips on Riker’s collar.
The entire crew of Voyager- died a couple of times I think.
Walt Disney- okay, we haven’t brought him back… YET.
#209. all true. i think though that data was supposed to be more or less resurrected through b-4 in the planned sequels. i could be wrong, but the end of nemesis seemed to suggest it.
I always thought it was funny that the stars say they have never watched the other shows, I’m sorry but i think that a huge lie. Maby Shatner didn’t watch DS9 every week but you know that he has watched it or read about it to create his books?
Robert Beltran I’m sure has watched Enterprise and Leonard Nimoy watched Voyager to see how crappy his role was written LOL!!!!!
Takei has watched all the shows but doesen’t and is likely pissed that Garrett Wong/Wang? had alot more character development than him and that was a crappy role…….
Darth “Takei is close Behind” Ballz
#198
Again, the movement wants to bring Kirk back post Generations – this can only be done by Shatner. Pine is to portray young Kirk, i. e. Kirk pre Generations.
Disagree with DS9.
DS9 still followed Roddenberry’s path, but on an other way. TNG showed how mankind should be.
DS9 showed how mankind is, but in a socialcritical way. And it greated at least as many “moral” episodes as TNG.
It just was different than TNG.
And that was important. Coz VOY and ENT weren’t different, always the same. They should have done it as DS9 did it, create something new, instead of copying the old!!
A Excelsior serie would have been great, there i agree.
My take on TV Trek:
TOS
- one third amazing (City on the Edge of Forever, Arena)
- one third good (Corbomite Maneuver, Spectre of the Gun)
- one sixth mediocre (Wolf in the Fold)
- one sixth horrible (The Empath)
TNG
- way too much technobabble
- the first two seasons were pretty bad (much worse than TOS seasons one and two)
- Picard was an idiot until he got Borgified (remember his fear of children early on?)
- but Picard got cool later on
- and there were plenty of great episodes (Inner Light)
DS9
- ok
- departed from traditional Trek in the sense that you couldn’t just watch one episode and get the whole story … this makes it less re-watchable
More of my take on TV Trek:
VOYAGER
- ugh
- worst Trek ever
- I wish the other actor they had for Janeway would not have quit
- I liked Chakotay (although I didn’t buy him as a leader of the Maquis)
- Paris and Kim were ok
- Janeway’s ethics were incredibly simplistic and childlike
- Janeway was preachy and irritating
- Janeway murdered Tulix
- Janeway thought the Prime Directive was God, unlike Kirk, who overruled it when it was appropriate to do so
- Voyager wholeheartedly adopted the philosophy of ethical relativism – which is self-contradictory and illogical
- The Sulu episodes of Voyager sucked – but this had more to do with the stupid story than with Takei
- aka Star Trek: Gilligan’s Island – stupid idea from the get-go
- We never had a real payoff episode – they find their way back to Earth and we didn’t get to see what happened next
- WORST ST series ever!
ENTERPRISE
- Stupid stuff going on from the start, like … why does the ship really need to be called the Enterprise? That’s so dumb. When Picard smashed the glass case in First Contact, I didn’t see Archer’s ship there!
- They got the Vulcans all wrong. So very wrong. Vulcans are not supposed to be emotional. They succeeded in eliminating emotion hundreds of years in their past. But in Enterprise, the Vulcans seem to be perpetually irritated. They seem to be bubbling with so much animosity that they can hardly control themselves and are almost ready to snap – except that their so-called logic keeps them from doing so. Now, someone might respond and say that this fits with Vulcan history, since in their past they were violent and almost ready to destroy themselves. But that is a lame excuse. Vulcans purged emotions from their lives centuries ago. They are not super-emotional beings that are held back by logic. They are logical beings who are not emotional. I was watching an episode the other day where T’Pol gets really irritated at Trip and his pal because they are chatting during a movie. Spock, on the other hand, was just moments away from death in The Corbomite Maneuver, and unlike everyone else who was getting stressed, he was fascinated by the alien craft. If Vulcans are be portrayed with any passion at all, it should not be irritation, but CURIOSITY. I hope they get this right in the JJ movie. Remember in one of the first TOS episodes, Spock says, “Ah yes, one of your human emotions.” Well, this shows that Spock did not really understand emotions. He was somewhat unfamiliar with them. Vulcans should be almost computer-like, or at least as computer-like as humanoids can get. For further evidence, remember that in the pilot of TNG, McCoy compares Data to a Vulcan. Incidentally, just as Riker and the empathic Troi (the Betazoid) were based on Decker and the empathic Ilia (the Deltoid), it stands to reason that the Data character was essentially filling the Spock/Xon role.
- In addition to the emotional lives of Vulcans, Enterprise (and probably Voyager) did not seem to have a grasp on what logic is. The Vulcans in Enterprise, for example, seem to have non-interference as their highest value. But non-interference is not always a good thing, or the most-logical thing. Logic dictates that the decision to interfere should be made on a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances. A university class on introductory logic would have helped.
- Enterprise still wasn’t as bad as Voyager, though.
EXCELSIOR
- this could have been a good series
- Takei could have pulled it off – he was great in the New Voyages episode (that was the best fan Trek ever)
- Takei sucked in Voyager, but I think it was the writing and not him
- Koenig is the only member of the TOS main seven that I have doubts about in terms of his acting ability – Takei is a lot better, I think
- and Sulu would not have been the only character – he would have had some interesting crewmates to make things interesting
Battlestar Galactica is putting out a two hour movie this month. I see no reason why Star Trek couldn’t plan to do a few of their own. One could follow the Excelsior, one could be about the Titan, one could adapt Shatner’s The Return novel and undo Kirk’s pitiful death. There are a lot of cool Star Trek stories that could be done really well if they didn’t have to conform to these two criteria:
(1) The TV series criterion – that nothing important can change – at the end of the story the important crew members must be as they were before, ready for their next adventure
(2) The Movie criterion – the movie must amazing enough to make 100 million dollars or else you have FAILED!!!
If they did a series of TV movies, there would not be the pressure to make a huge production – leave that to JJ. And if they are TV movies, rather than a TV series, it would be okay to make changes, tell big stories, and have important characters die – because you wouldn’t be relying on the crew to deliver 170 more episodes.
New Shatner comment:
http://www.livevideo.com/video/ShatnerVision/A3249AA2F28F47F1B643D9D6050C6277/shatner-s-thoughts-on-the-new-.aspx
See! Shatner’s not so bad!
220 Damage control
I’m sure glad this place exists. Where else could I read people complaining about TV shows and movies?
#221
To assume damage control would imply that any damage has been done. There’s no proof of this theory.
Shatner didn’t say anything that contradicted his earlier statements. He said before that he had talked to Abrams at an earlier date but hadn’t been contacted in a while; that he hadn’t been informed officially about the ongoing project STXI and its status and he also said before that he considers the people involved “ knowledgeable people and wonderful entertainers”.
Obviously, Nimoy called Shatner to tell him that filming has just started. This is also in line with what Shatner said before, as he stated that it was also Nimoy who called him to tell him that he’s not (yet) in the movie. Also, this is probably the cause for this interview. In either case, Shatner just stresses what he stated before.
And although there has been much speculation going on, the question why Abrams contacted Shatner at the initial stage of STXI, and still he isn’t in the movie yet, hasn’t been answered so far.
#222-AICN for starters.
#214-The speculation about the new movie leads us to believe that the bulk of the storytelling is to take place in the period prior to TOS. That would seem to leave a minimal amount of time to devoted to William Shatner’s characterization of Kirk, which he has stated would be unsatisfactory to him as it would be a cameo. TPTB seem intent on not exploring the 24th century as of now.
Of course, they all could be lying (Abrams, Shatner et al) about the “no part for Shatner” stuff. But that just doesn’t seem likely. I’m not trying to put down the BBK movement, but I think that it is a losing battle. Sort of like the United States conversion to the metric system. Great idea. You can teach it in schools. Universally accepted (well, kind of).
Guess I’ll drive 4 miles to the store to buy a gallon of milk and a pound of hamburger and put ten gallons in the car since I like to drive eighty miles per hour.
177. Greg2600… “DS9 was very good, Voyager was okay, Enterprise was horrible until the 4th season. I think an Excelsior series probably wouldn’t have generated much interest.”
I liked Voyager better than Enterprise, especially after Seven came aboard, replacing the dull-as-dirt Kes. Jeri Ryan provided a much better actress for Mulgrew and Picardo to play opposite, and the writing got better from about this point on (after reaching its nadir in Season 2.)
Enterprise was good in its third and fourth seasons, although both had horrible episodes in them. The third season’s year-long storyline was very, very good, but it really should have been the Klingons or Romulans they were up against, instead of the never-heard-of-before-or-since Xindi.
Voyager wanted to do a year-long storyline, too, but was vetoed by UPN (”Year of Hell” instead became a two-parter.)
#224
I see your point and it‘s quite possible that this is Abrams’ point, as well. But you’re also right that there’s a lot of speculation going on leading us to believing things.
But we were talking about the BBK movement and this movement has been existing much longer than the plans for STXI. You’re right – with STXI, the premises have changed, but that doesn’t mean that the claim to BBK will transmogrify into a desire fulfilled, just because it isn’t considered timely or appropriate or people keep suggesting that it just doesn‘t “fit in“ or doesn’t make much sense based on speculation about a script they haven’t read.
And Abrams never said that there is “no part for Shatner”. We wouldn’t discuss here if he had ever said that. In fact, the only concrete statement would be Abrams saying: We do not want to BBK post Generations as we do not want to deal with that issue in STXI – no Kirk post Generations, no Shatner. Period.
At present, I haven’t heard that statement, nor have you.
After reading more of the comments it seems that there is a pattern. Some of the series have HORRIBLE episodes and some have OUTSTANDING episodes. Personally I’m glad all five ST series were made. In each one some of the stories were so poor I’m surprised that they were accepted. Maybe it was because the selection was poor for that week. Regardless, there are some wonderful characters that have sprung from what Gene Roddenberry started.
Some of the stories looked like they were just vehicles for the beliefs/politics of the writers, not a science fiction adventure. Maybe I’m looking at it all too simplistically but that’s how it appears to me. Still have to admit that I am in awe of the imagination that can come up with such an incredible universe with characters, cultures, science, languages…
Amazing. Just wish the actors wouldn’t sully it with petty comments and actions. Oh well. They’re only HUMAN!!
Iowagirl, you and the rest of the BBK’ers (if you include yourself among their ranks) keep fighting the good fight (there, I said it). I wish you the best, but I also hope that it doesn’t lessen your enjoyment of the new movie if things don’t turn out the way you wish. For the record, my only disappointment comes when I hear people saying that this film will be a disaster without Shatner’s inclusion. That just kills the hope for those of us who want this to be the rebirth of Star Trek. To me, that supercedes the necessity to inlude actors that we are familiar with. It doesn’t mean I don’t like the actor, it just means I want Trek to come back.
I guess that makes me a BBST’er.
Sorry Georgie, but DS9 was an excellent show and showed a side of Trek that was missing from TNG. DS9 was gritty and new. I really enjoyed.
Enterprise had some good moments. The last season was an improvement but by then it was too late. The entire Xindi season was a total waste.
A Sulu/Excelsior show might have been interesting but Takei, while enjoyable as Sulu in TOS and the movies, just doesn’t have it for his own series.
How about “Bring Back Star Trek”?
IMO, One actor, one character is not what any of the five series is about.
Very true Xai so why the rehash? Seems they are going for a half arsed semi-safe familier yet not so much detached character bastardisation. And in that I have absolutely no confidence in this story. If so great they wouldn’t need the old TOS folk… plain and simple.
Crap or get off the toilet already. ;)
#230
Exactly, Xai, that’s why we want old Kirk alongside old Spock.
I always felt DS9 was my favorite of the sipnoffs from TOS, but for a long time I never really understood why I felt that way. Then it struck me one day–compaired with TNG, VOY or ENT, DS9 best captured the tenor, the “feel” of TOS… even if ENT’s, TNG’s and VOY’s ship-centered concepts were a better fit conceptually with TOS; DSN best captured the energy, intensity, excitement and unpredictability of the original.
As for those who claim DS9 was “too dark” for the ST universe, I credit that sentiment to revisionist history. At its core, TOS was a gritty, down in the dirt action packed series, where the charaters sometimes shot first and asked questions later–just like DS9!
Takei et al. have deleveloped a romaniticized but inaccurate memory of what the TOS universe consisted of and bequeathed to its spinoffs, just like older leftist Baby Boomers often have a romanticized but inaccurate recollection of life in “Camelot” during JFK’s presidency.
I could easily see Kirk fitting into the DS9 universe…. and Sisko fitting into TOS… Not so for the Janeway, Archer or even Picard characters. And 1960’s sexual stereotypes aside, the characters of either Kira or (either) Dax would easily fit in on the bridge of NCC-1701, and Scotty or McCoy would be right at home on Terok Nor.
Treasure TOS and DS9… they were the best Trek ever made.
T
Wow! This seems to have sparked some very vocal fans to express their opinions.
All these people that were involved in Trek that are obviously not involved anymore seem a little bitter. That is a little disappointing. Sure, some good ideas got passed on. But, some pretty bad ones were passed on, too.
I am also sick and tired of people trashing “Deep Space Nine” because it was “the polar opposite” of the original series! TOS purists blasted it for taking place on a space station instead of another starship.
“They don’t go anywhere!”
“The adventure always has to come to them!”
What a bunch of freaking babies!
But when the idea came up to do a motion picture based on Kirk, Spock and the rest of the original series crew during their Starfleet Academy days, they all loved it! Last I heard, San Francisco is a stationary place — even in the Trek universe!!!
I was so glad that they passed on that idea! I feared that in the wrong hands that it would turn into Star Trek 90210…Luke Perry as young James Kirk? “Spock’s Brain” becomes “Spock’s Prom”!!!
The only way Trek is really going to continue as a viable franchise is for it to continue to push the envelope. They need to try new things. Inserting new characters into the same situations is not going to do it, Captain Sulu.
“The Next Generation” was good because it reintroduced us to the franchise we loved, but dropped us in a new time period. The Federation and the Klingons as allies? Who’d have thought?
“Deep Space Nine” was good because it built on what “TNG” statrted but pushed the envelope out a bit further. It was still an optimistic view of the future, but there were new conflicts to work through. Why does everyone think that the Federation-Klingon conflict of “TOS” worked but the Federation-Dominion one didn’t?
“Voyager” was good because it took the best of what had come before it and put it into one show. The “boldly go” attitude of the “TOS”, the exploration and discovery of “TNG” and the new conflicts and struggles of “DS9″.
“Enterprsie” is one that I do have a hard time with. I thought that it was cancelled just as it really started to have a real chance. It almost seemed doomed from the get-go because they always seemed to try to satisfy those TOS purists and bring them back into the fold. Still, I thought that it was a very worthy show…a helluva lot better than most anything else on television and one that the Trek faithful should embrace even now.
Now we face an uncertain future in the hands of J.J. Abrams. Since it does seem like a reboot of the franchsie by packing in as many characters as they possibly can from the original series I can only hope that Abrams handles it with care. He could upset a lot of fans or could jumpstart a franchsie that was put on life support by the very people who say that they care so much about it.
I will see the new film when it comes out next year. I cannot imagine that Abrams could do anything to the franchise that could really upset me. I love the franchise, but “all good things…”
I found DS9 to be more interesting than a lot most post TOS Trek because it was willing to go in a different direction than TNG’s uber-optimistic (and unrealistic) version of the future. While it wasn’t perfect, none of the other Trek shows were either. They all had parts that people would like or dislike.
As for an Excelsior show, I’m not sure it would have worked. Maybe as a series of TV movies, but a series could have caused as many continuity problems as Enterprise did, depending on the production team. Besides, Trek needed a break for a while. Paramount spamming TV with Trek shows probably did more damage than anything, since it didn’t allow the production teams to get new ideas or make Trek fans really want a new show.
You know what? Takei may not regard non-TOS trek very highly, and apparently a good deal of people hated DS9 & ENT. But for my part? I hate ALL of you.
All of you are lucky to have Trek at it’s 40th anniversary, and what do you do? Bitch and complain how spin offs weren’t TOS, that they were some thing different. Well, don’t you think that more of the same might gave gotten tired after awhile? Take something like M*A*S*H for example. Show was so popular, that it ran for more than a decade. And whereas it was loved, when that final episode aired it was over. Plated out. Spin offs failed, and no one’s dreaming up new novels about trapper and Hawkeye.
But original trek, while laying the groundwork for future shows, was cancelled which in turn spawned a fanbase so massive, it is still around 40 years later. And contrary to popular belief, ALL the spi offs wereawesome because they kept star trek alive for years. Years in which the original cast and crew were busy with other things, or were busy writing biographies about how much they hated trek.
Sure an excelsior series might have been ok, but what we all are failing to understand here is that Takei wants money & fame, star trek has become a franchise, and the fanbase while starved will eat anything up because theyhaveno choice. So, at the end of the day Takei isn’t in it for Roddenberry’s vision, Star Trek as a series will continue to try and makemoney however it can, and TOS is only having a resurgence because ofgimmicks and aforementioned money making tactics.
So everyone who hates the spin-offs, thank your lucky stars that there is Trek. And everyone trying to argue their merits, don’t bother. These people won’t listen. Much like me,all they want to do is hear themselves talk.
Shut down this comment thread now before things start getting really nasty.
~jyh
Looks like someone may need a refill on their Ritalin perscription.
This turned out more random than I planned.
Deep Space Nine became a war story. It had no real starship. It was stuck on one planet most of the time. It should not have worked.
But it did, and I liked it.
The story is the thing. They recycled some old Star Trek episodes, but they did it so cleverly, they were nearly invisible.
Gene Roddenberry created the Star Trek Universe. He insisted on good stories and believability. If you have those, you cannot fail.
The rub is Star Trek also has a history. To be believable to most fans that history cannot be violated.
I always said with good writing they could have spun off Vic (the holigram played by James Darrin.) On the other hand perhaps good writing can only take you so far…
I would have liked to seen Captain Sulu and the Excelsior as a series. However I also wanted Voyager to be better- which never happened.
Never even gave Enterprise a chance. Whenever I channel surfed by it all I could gather is that Captain Archer had an anger management problem.
All I can say about the future is that the USS Enterprise better look like the
Enterprise or I am hitting the escape pod.
Also, I really wish the people on these blogs were a bit more sensitive to the feelings of others. Star Trek was about tolerance, diversity and keeping an open mind. All the things that are now being destroyed in the world, especially in America.
Live long and Prosper.
And be excellent to each other.
Excelsior would have been good, and maybe it still can. But I don’t like his take on Enterprise. If Takei’s would-be series had been doomed to the same network(where so many could not even watch), it would have been cancelled as well.
Wow. This really generated some responses.
A) anything that B&B produced would have failed. Enterprise may have been good if it was actually a prequel. Excelsior would have been good if Michael Piller, Jeri Taylor and others stayed on board for it. (I am aware Michael Piller passed away).
B) I don’t understand why people, including some producers, don’t understand Utopian literature. Perhaps the best thing for them is to actually read some Utopian literature and compare it with Star Trek. Star Trek was Utopian, Star Wars as Distopian. Any person with a hint of literary understanding can comprehend this. Gene’s ‘vision’ was a Utopian future of humanity. Where did the conflict come from? Outside. Ira Behr decided that the Trek Utopian future was stupid (either because he just didnt understand Utopian literature or disdained it). Granted DS9 has some of the strongest and deepest storylines of any trek series, and the continuing arcs were a first for the series. I am not disdaining DS9, however I am saying that people need to understand the type of society that Rodenberry was envisioning.
GOOGLE: Utopian literature
124. Enterprise was NOT a bad show. Most can agree that the finale was not what it could have been but it was a good show and getting better. Perhaps you should watch more of it before you judge it.
To everybody that says DS9 is the polar opposite of what Trek was supposed to be, listen to these words – Harcourt Fenton Mudd. By all indications a human, a thief, a scoundrel and general no-goodnik. How does he fit in with Roddenberry’s utopian society? Why does TOS get a pass when DS9 is panned for being about a war. If Kirk wasn’t screwing aliens he was punching them or firing on them. Why is it that this supposed “enlightened society” that Roddenberry created hasn’t had much screen time? Because it’s boring. Who wants to see a show about how everybody gets along? There’s no drama in it. DS9 was great and besides TOS, it was the only Trek show that really asked us to examine ourselves. There is no room in television for perfect societies, unless they’re hiding something.
Sour grapes make the BEST whine!!!! :-P Heh, heh. Just kidding. How can you all take this sooo seriously? I admit it is fun to mull over though. Would Excelsior made a good series? Who knows for really, maybe in an alternate reality, it WAS made. ;-) Frankly, I NEVER liked the Excelsior; was immensely happy when Scotty gummed up it’s ugly ass plumbing. Yuck. Captain Sulu on a regular basis? I don’t know. I guess I mostly agree that Takei while a decent actor, doesn’t have the charisma necessary for that.
The dissing on DS9 is in some ways understandable, even at times, I had some hate for that show, but really, it did have more character depth, even if some of it led to excessive scenery chewing. This war of ideologies will never end I suppose, so I just vow to never take it too close to heart. If I espoused that Enterprise failed totally because of Bakula, I’m sure someone’s screw would come loose… Heh, heh. Let me be clear on that; I’m not, although, I did feel Trip was more interesting than Archer, lil doggie not withstanding.
Anyhoo, George Takei is entitled to his opinion, and my opinion is Excelsior was doomed for the various reasons already stated…
Been an interesting read… carry on. ;-)
Gee, and here is me thinking this was “Star Trek” fan site.
Apparently its a “Criticise the Star Trek Series You Don’t Like” fan site. Maybe I don’t belong… I like ‘em all. Still it is an interesting read… terrans are so passionate.
Living briefly and going broke.
Oy…not this again!
George HAD a Excelsior show in the PS2/XBOX game Star Trek: Shattered Universe, in which you play a starfighter pilot on board the Excelsior as it travels through the Mirror Universe kicking butt all the way to a dimension point that will take the Excelsior back to the late 23rd Century. The game-which I did play, and get SOME enjoyment out of-was not that great, and didn’t do well (maybe the makers should have got Chris & Erin Roberts to port over the game engine used in Starlancer, or maybe just make over Starlancer into Shattered Universe.) As for DS9 not being really Star Trek-like: I’m sorry, but Gene had too much of a Pollyanna vision in his declining years, and this made Next Generation a bit too silly for most fans, resulting in DS9.
Frankly, I think Gene should have just contributed the basic outline for Next Generation, and left the funning of the show to David Gerrold, Dorothy Fontana, and Michael Piller, settling for an older statesman role overseeing the show-it would have saved his health considerably.
XU1MHt eeeerrrffddgggggggccccc