Should Star Trek Come Back to TV? An Objective Evaluation | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Should Star Trek Come Back to TV? An Objective Evaluation October 2, 2012

by Joseph Dickerson , Filed under: CBS/Paramount,Editorial,Trek on TV , trackback

Op-Ed guy Joseph Dickerson joins us again, this time to talk about Trek’s role on the small screen. Fans were informally surveyed by Larry Nemeck at the official Star Trek convention in Las Vegas last August as to what they wanted from Trek. The overwhelming response was that the fans want Star Trek back on TV. “Star Trek started on TV, and Star Trek is best suited to be a TV show,” one fan said. But does the idea of a new Star Trek TV series make sense for CBS-Paramount? Joe gives us a bit of perspective on how to answer this question from both a business and creative perspective.

 

Does the idea of a new Star Trek TV series make sense for CBS-Paramount to bring
Trek back to the small screen?

There are two ways to look at this question: From a business perspective, and from a creative perspective.

From a business perspective, you have to start by looking at the recent history of the franchise and the current marketplace. Star Trek on TV was losing more and more viewers as time went by, until the final series Enterprise was canceled. Was this an indication of declining interest, quality, or both? I won’t debate the quality question, but will say that viewership for almost ALL shows was declining in the last years of Enterprise, and has continued to decline since (even hit shows have less “eyeballs” than even five years ago).

So, you have declining viewership to deal with. Home video sales of TV seasons, once a fat profit center for studios, has become far less so as well (with the advent of streaming and a weak economy, many fans skip buying the series of DVD or bluray). Star Trek as a licensed property (for books, games, toys, T-shirts, etc.) is still pulling in a nice “annuity” for Paramount… would a new series provide for additional licensing opportunities? Sure, but licensing fees won’t cover the production cost of a show (unless it’s incredibly popular or the show is very cheap to produce).


Licensing alone isn’t enough to support a new TV show

That last point is key: Even if you take advantage of standing sets, costumes, and props, a Star Trek show is very expensive show to make, and requires a big investment… and because of the many reasons cited above, Hollywood is in a very “risk averse” phase right now. If a TV producer has to choose between an expensive SF show or a three-camera sitcom, a cop show, or a reality show… they’ll pick the cheap show. One can make an
argument that Star Trek has a built-in audience, one that will show up week after week… but the counter argument is a very blunt one: when Enterprise was on the air, the ratings weren’t there… and the ratings have not been there for other SF shows such as Fringe or Terra Nova.

And not just ratings, but demographics: Are Star Trek fans in that desirable 18 to 35 demographic? Based on my research, the JJ Abrams 2009 Trek movie brought a LOT of new fans to the franchise… and many of them are in that coveted group. Will they tune in to a TV show every week, though? That’s a big question.

So, is there a business reason for Star Trek to be on TV again? Maybe, if the numbers work out. How can they? The obvious solution is an animated series, a la Star Wars The Clone Wars. It would be cheaper to produce, it would allow the producers the opportunity to do scenes and aliens that would be difficult to do in live action, and if it strikes the right tone it could appeal to adults and kids alike. And the upside to an animated series is it would help grow the fan base in a different way than a new film does. It wouldn’t be prime time Star Trek like we’ve had before, but it would still be Trek on TV again.

Let’s assume business is good. Can we have Trek on TV now?
Now, the creative question: Are there any more stories to be told? Can a new Star Trek series again take us to where no one has gone before? It depends on the talent involved. A good example when it comes to this is the other famous SF TV franchise, Doctor Who. The show has had various show runners over the years, and many episodes were really bad… But even some of the best creative people can have a bad day. The deeper problem occurs when you have bad SEASONS, not just the occasional episode. This happened on Doctor Who, and this decline in quality led to declining viewers and the halt in production for several years.

I bring this up as a case study of what to avoid. If you get the wrong show runner and writing staff behind a new Star Trek show, then you will sabotage the notion before it even begins. There are always possibilities, Spock said… possibilities to tell good stories with interesting characters in the Star Trek universe. Go forward thousands of years past Kirk and Spock, do an anthology show with different ships and crews on different missions, do a Starfleet Academy show, do a Starfleet Black Ops show… There’s lots of “space” to play in.

If you don’t have the talent to tell such stories, though… then you shouldn’t even try.


Right now Trek belongs to JJ, but who is right to take the reigns for Trek on TV?

 

More Joseph!

Like these posts by Joe? Then check out (and support!) the Kickstarter for his new book, UX101: A Primer on User Experience Design

 

Joseph Dickerson is a writer, User Experience Architect (and Star Trek fan) focused on designing effective and innovative on-line and mobile applications. For more from Joseph visit josephdickerson.com or follow him on twitter: @josephdickerson.

 


Comments

1. dalek - October 2, 2012

I’m up for a Next Generation reboot. With TOS on the big screen, and the next successful branch of the franchise on TV will be good.

Set the Next Gen in the Abrams Universe and make a lot of creative changes. Christina Hendricks for Beverley Crusher!

2. Toni Galvez - October 2, 2012

I hope to see a new Star Trek series on the TV soon, but is difficult due to the crisis we are involved now, producers likes to embarc on a cheaper action, romance, drama series. Bad times for Sci-Fi.

3. Jim, London - October 2, 2012

But for every failure there is a success – just look at the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica which did very well

4. Jim, London - October 2, 2012

But for every failure there is a success – just look at the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica which did very well

5. cultspider - October 2, 2012

Animated series would be the best platform to tell interesting stories, probably best set in the new universe, and if you could have it set on Enterprise with the movie cast’s voices fantastic – if that’s not an option I’m sure there’s another ship and crew with stories to tell, and the movie cast could make the odd cameo for continuity with the new movie universe.

Orci and Kurtzman have done well overseeing Transformers Prime, and it’s a great show that’s gone places the movies simply could not go. Whilst aimed at kids it has great writing, action, humour and character development that hold up with an older audience.

Other than that, a live action option would be to utilise the movie sets (if they’re standing unused between Into Darkness and Movie Number 3) to tell an Academy based youth-oriented Star Trek show that could be less effects-heavy and capture the 18-35 demographic needed for a successful show.

6. CmdrR - October 2, 2012

Kayla rules!

7. WriterJWA - October 2, 2012

I certainly think it’s possible for Trek to come back to television. It will all come down to story … if the story lacks, ratings lack, and the series will not live long (by and large…).

If Battlestar Galactica and Doctor Who can get updated for a modern television audience, and both of which are great series with devout fanbases, the sky is the limit, so to speak, for Star Trek.

The one key aspect to doing, though … it cannot be niche marketed. It HAS to be accessible to a broad audience. That can only happen through well-developed story telling.

I’m excited to see what happens!

8. Toonloon - October 2, 2012

Great article. I don’t think the time is right for a new tv show, but I would go with an animated series in the JJ verse with the current cast voicing. I’d even try to get nimoy to reprise his Spock prime role and Shatner as George Kirks father Tiberius.

9. Kirk, James T. - October 2, 2012

Its an interesting time for Star Trek.

I think it’s too early to tell whether or not new Star Trek on the TV would work.

I think first and foremost Star Trek Into Darkness has to do big box office to prove that the franchise has legs and is a viable business for Paramount/CBS to invest in other areas of production (TV, online, gaming etc..)

My take on this is that an animated series would be better to begin with. Paramount CBS seem to want Star Trek to appeal to a younger generation, what better way than to appeal to that demographic as well as keep the long-time fans is to do an animated series.

This would work just as the article said, A Star Trek animated series done like Star Wars The Clone Wars would hopefully appeal to the younger market as well as the fans, keeping the Trek alive between movies.

Live action in my opinion will work but not yet. I’d like to see JJ Abrams direct a third and final movie tying up loose ends and seeing the movie crew out. From where Abrams decides to leave Star Trek, Paramount/CBS can then start discussing the opportunity of bringing Star Trek back to TV.

I do agree though, Star Trek’s home is on TV. More time to tell complex and in-depth stories, building each character slowly and over the course of a year than just in a 2 hour movie. Whilst I do believe that the best place for Star Trek at the moment is in the cinema, when Star Trek does return to the TV it won’t just be a new Star Trek series, it’ll be pioneering as the first, space-based, true Sci-Fi series since Battlestar Galactica.

History is definitely repeating itself though, After several TOS big-screen adventures in the 80′s Trek returned to TV rejuvinated and refreshed and did amazingly well. Time will tell whether or not Star Trek Into Darkness launches the long term aspirations of a franchise still with much to prove.

10. P Technobabble - October 2, 2012

Clearly, Joseph reaffirms the big problems with bringing Trek back to tv. The biggest problem, as usual, is the almighty $. Everything pretty much takes a back seat when it comes to $. That’s just the world we live in.
Creatively, I agree with him. What stories haven’t been told yet, in terms of a weekly show? Stories about enemy aliens, dangerous space anomalies, life-threatening viruses, Nazis and gangsters… all told. I could go on.
I think Star Trek on the big screen is an entirely different animal than a weekly series. There’s more time, there’s more money, etc. doing a film. A weekly series is a fast-paced, short-on-money endeavor.
I do like the idea of an animated Trek — one using the very latest in CG technology, staying far away from the typical cartoon look of TAS.
It will be interesting to see what happens to Trek after the next film. It seems there are a number of people who are interested in getting Trek back on tv. I’d be interested to hear what Bob Orci thinks about Joseph’s comments as he is one of the people who would like to see Trek return to tv. Oh, and I am talking about the REAL Bob Orci, not one of those wannabe frauds.

11. The Keeper - October 2, 2012

I would rather not see Trek on TV for the soul sake of putting Trek on TV for a few disgruntled fans who need their weekly TV fix to make it thru the week.
Be it an off shoot of the original, a continuation of current movies or re mage of any of the series it’ll all boil down to ben there, done that again.
I rather have a good solid movie appeal to a wider range of the population every few years presented as an event film rather then go back to the same old rehashing of spent ideas, stand still drama and stagnate characters to which most of the spins off are extremely guilty of.

LEAVE IT ALONE ALREADY.

12. The Keeper - October 2, 2012

I would rather not see Trek on TV for the soul sake of putting Trek on TV for a few disgruntled fans who need their weekly TV fix to make it thru the week.
Be it an off shoot of the original, a continuation of current movies or re mage of any of the series it’ll all boil down to ben there, done that again.
I rather have a good solid movie appeal to a wider range of the population every few years presented as an event film rather then go back to the same old rehashing of spent ideas, stand still drama and stagnate characters to which most of the spins off are extremely guilty of.

LEAVE IT ALONE ALREADY.

13. Kirk, James T. - October 2, 2012

Also speaking business wise, if Star Trek Into Darkness is a huge success, I think that will prety much convince Paramount/CBS that if JJ Abrams wanted it, Star Trek is his to take on a TV series. All this talk of Bryan Fuller, Ronnald D. Moore, Brian Singer et al. Is moot, the keys to the franchise are with Abrams and his team at Bad Robot – I can’t imagine with the track record Abrams has on TV as well as movies, Paramount/CBS wouldn’t offer him the gig first.

And even if Abrams declines, there’s nothing from stopping Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman creating a TV show – possibly then I’d look at bringing in Ron Moore but personally speaking, even if Abrams role is just as executive producer, or just producer, I hope Bad Robot do Star Trek on TV.

14. Kirk, James T. - October 2, 2012

I think #12 has a point.

There are only so many stories out there to tell. Even for a show set in space where possibilites seem endless, every story has to be grounded in something relatable to the audience. A new Star Trek TV series would have to do more than any of the previous TV Trek’s but how you’d do that and in what form a new Star Trek series would take is anyones guess.

Certainly the point of Star Trek is to go where no one has gone before but is there anywhere left to go where dosens of other episodes of Star Trek have already been before? And if you were to take Star Trek, where would you take it that a) it shows something original and b) remains at it’s core, Star Trek and all that those two words mean beyond the litteral.

The creative problem seems huge but no one thought that reimagining Captain Kirk and Mr Spock would work either, how wrong were they.

I think whatever the future holds for Star Trek it is important that it continues to develop stories that inspire the young rather than the old.

15. David Moss - October 2, 2012

Star Trek on TV is a must. Star Trek as a regular web series is also something that should be discussed seriously. And I do not buy the argument any longer that cost is a factor.

Look at what Star Trek Phase II has done. And there is another one on the way with Star Trek Continues. These shows are done on shoe string budgets and while some of the acting is in question, from a story and special effects standpoint they are as good as anything on TV today.

Why couldn’t CBS financially sponsor one or two of these productions to product a good 13 episodes per year for either TV or paid for web series? The cost would be minimal, and the advertising revenue I believe very profitable.

CBS along with other media outlets have to understand that their monitization of productions are changing and it is not all about being produced in Hollywood at multi-million dollar budgets any longer.

Star Trek is about the future. Let Star Trek lead the future in changing the way quality entertainment is produced at reasonable costs with strong profits.

16. EvilSean - October 2, 2012

I think one of the biggest issues with a new ‘Trek TV show, is the fact that audiences today are less likely to take the “perfect world” view of the future that ‘Trek has always put forward. The reason BSG worked so well was because, IMHO, the environment it portrayed was “real”. It was flawed, it was imperfect, it had reality in it, which is saying something for a sci-fi show. What is Star Trek without the values that the Great Bird of the Galaxy imagined back in the 60s.

If you then bend ‘Trek to conform to today’s audiences’ preferences, then it won’t really be Star Trek anymore. Even tho Star Trek down through the ages had some very compelling story-lines, it never REALLY took itself too seriously. I don’t think there is a market for “light” sci-fi. Not without some VERY skilled ideas and writing.

I think of it as the first attempt The Machines made of The Matrix. They built a perfect world, but human’s wouldn’t except it. Entire crops were lost!!

17. Trekboi - October 2, 2012

I find it frustrating that he doesn’t consider that Voyager & Enterprise were not on a real station with an audiance like CBS.
Instead it was on UPN which never had viewers in general.
Dispite this Enterprises ratings stayed fairly consistant- it was canceled more because upn lost the merchandising dollars once the companies split & CBS got the rights to Star Trek on tv & Paramount only had the rights to the films.

18. Trekboi - October 2, 2012

Oh By The Way- DR WHO!
That was supposedly dead till someone did it right.

19. RAO - October 2, 2012

JJTrek works on the big screen but it’ll never work in TV format. An SFX heavy action movie every 3 years is great, but a TV series needs solid plots and character development. Personally, I’d love to see Manny Coto be the showrunner on a series based in the early 24th century on the Ent-B with Harriman’s successor. For Trek to work on TV, it has to be real Trek. But with the state of Hollywood today, we’ll be lucky to get Star Wars in Trek clothing.

20. Alf, in pog form - October 2, 2012

As a personal opinion, to me “Star Trek: The Animated Series” would have about as much appeal as “Star Trek: The Hand Puppet Show” or “Star Trek: The Collectible Lunch Box Set”.

Unless of course it’s a cheesy and poorly executed animation like the one I made at goanimate a few years ago…… http://goanimate.com/videos/0uell3qbprj8/1

21. AJDCzar - October 2, 2012

Love to see Joss Whedon and/or Eric Kripke involved somehow.

22. ME!! - October 2, 2012

“Go forward thousands of years past Kirk and Spock,”

That’s an interesting idea, but the problem lies in figuring out how to present a technological society that far into the future and still have your audience be able to relate to it. If they don’t, the show fails.

“do an anthology show with different ships and crews on different missions,”

By FAR the best idea so far. If a Trek show were done ala Twilight Zone style with self contained stories featuring new characters and situations each week, you could keep it fresh for the audience and it would be exciting each and every week to see where the next story takes you. We wouldn’t be getting to know any characters and watch them grow, but we didn’t with Twilight Zone either and that worked great….plus, there really wasn’t much growth in the last years of Trek on TV, so perhaps a new take like this one would work out best for both viewers and the show’s creators. Stories could be done by sci-fi authors just as the Original Series had, as well.

“do a Starfleet Academy show,”

Do the words ‘miserable failure’ mean anything to you? Personally, I can’t see this working. It may have worked (ratings-wise) for Superman (which I never watched, even as a comic fan), but that doesn’t mean it would work for Trek. J.J. may have pulled off a decent Starfleet Academy sequence in the 2009 film, but for years fans rejected, overall, the concept of a Starfleet Academy dedicated film and, in my opinion, would do the same for a series. Writing for it would be a chore since fans would also expect certain things from any series with “Star Trek” in the title and one based on this idea would suffer in that department.

“do a Starfleet Black Ops show”

Interesting concept….and I think that’s about as far as it gets with that one as well. It would bring an interesting perspective to Trek, but we’ve had that with the various ‘Section 31′ episodes, so one would have to look at the ratings of those episodes to get an idea of how well a full series of them would do. Personally, I believe with this concept, one would be limiting the series’ potential. Sure, you could have covert missions into the various ‘factions’ of the Trek universe which would be interesting, but how many times could you tell that story and get away with it? I think both this idea and the Academy idea would end up canceled by season 3, if not sooner.

23. Dear Leader - October 2, 2012

Excelsior!!! (or something post ST VI that picks up before TNG but after K/S and fills in the gaps. And no “new” JJ timeline, please…cause that would suck buttermilk.

24. AJ - October 2, 2012

An animated show, properly done, would usher in a new generation of fans, and keep the property valid for a long time.

25. Shhh.. it's a secret... - October 2, 2012

JJ and company would keep a TV show so secret, we wouldn’t know it when it was on, no one ( not even the stars ) would know they are cast, and no actual filming would be done..

We would just see endless quote after quote of how great JJ is to work with.

26. Other Guy - October 2, 2012

Viewership is declining because of the Flouride in the water!

IQs are down 15%

And if you don’t believe me, then I’ve probably proved my point!

: 0

: )

27. Thorny - October 2, 2012

3. Jim… The relaunched Battlestar Galactica did not do well. It was a media darling and a critical favorite, but aside from the first season it didn’t do particularly well in the ratings.

28. USSEXETER - October 2, 2012

@19 YES!!! Would love to see 1701-B Excelsior Class sans Ferris Buller’s buddy as Captain.

29. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

No desire for an animated series. I love the old one but feel weve moved passed that.

My only thought with a series is that while ST can survive a bad movie I fear a television cancellation would be a death knell. Probaly the worst best case scenario would be a under performing film and Paramount deciding to go back to the tv route.

On a side note; are the Enterprise sets still in storage? I seem to remember they were dismantled and shipped to canada ?

30. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

No desire for an animated series. I love the old one but feel weve moved passed that.

My only thought with a series is that while ST can survive a bad movie I fear a television cancellation would be a death knell. Probaly the worst best case scenario would be a under performing film and Paramount deciding to go back to the tv route.

On a side note; are the Enterprise sets still in storage? I seem to remember they were dismantled and shipped to canada ?

31. T'Cal - October 2, 2012

My hope is for an animated series with all of the opportunities it offers its creators. I wouldn’t mind if it took place in the Abramsverse although I would prefer it took place in the “real” one instead. I doesn’t have to be CGI but I wouldn’t tune it out if it was made in that medium. I’ve been watching Batman:TAS reruns the last couple of weeks and I’m still impressed 20 years later. Intelligent stories, excellent character development, and a unique look make for a show that appeals to a broad market including children, which manifested itself in huge sales of toys and games. Trek needs to appeal to such a broad audience or risk losing the next generation.

32. Adam Cohen - October 2, 2012

At the core of its soul, STAR TREK is a TV series. TREK benefits from the TV format in telling philosophical, experimental stories that bring out character and ideas that have made it so beloved. What other show could give us CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER or THE INNER LIGHT? Yes, the movies have their place in TREK lore, but we don’t get thoughtful science fiction at that level. TREK needs to spread out again and tell stories about exploration again, and that will only happen on TV.

33. TrekMadeMeWonder - October 2, 2012

:”Right now Trek belongs to JJ, but who is right to take the reigns for Trek on TV?”

ME!!!!! Pick ME!!!!

My concept of the new Trek.

Just freakin’ redo the ohe original series!

Perhaps use the new timepline as an excuse to redo all the old shows. The old Trek had all the class of any of the other series combined. It was written as well as any Greek play. Add to the fact that if you take the $s earned from the original investment you will see that the show has earned 100xs its orignal cost.

Think of it, we redo every popular movie to make a buck off of it. Why not remake all the Trek classic episodes!? Only more perfect (and way better than the Total Recall remakes and the like)

Just redo the series and fix the little things that really brought the production down at times. Eliminate some of the poorly written episodes and give the whole show that new look it needs!

The fans will go wild! And everyone else will finally have a chance to see the greatness of Star Trek!

Anyhow, if you all need any inspiration, just give me an email at: startrekthemovie@gmail.com

34. William Kirk - October 2, 2012

Star Trek – YES. JJ-Trek – NO.

35. Spuhura Addict - October 2, 2012

I am sorry. I am not watching an animated version of Star Trek. I fall within the specified demographic and I have watched syndicated Trek, TNG, etc, since I can remember. But, I cannot agree to just throw something out there just to have Trek on the screen again. If Trek needs its core audience more now than ever before, don’t alienate us by changing its format. After a long day at work, I am not going to plop down and watch a cartoon. Really? I want grit and thought provoking allegories about the human condition. That message gets lost in translation when I am watching something that slightly resembles the Backyardigans.

If you are going to do Trek and want to keep its core audience, do it correctly and with the upmost respect for its original format. The animated series should serve as a companion piece to the franchise not its only lifeline.

36. David - October 2, 2012

Personally, I was deeply offended by JJ’s movie. I think it was an entire failure as far as Star Trek goes, copping out by using time travel and alternate universes. So you travel back in time and destroy a single scout ship that just so happens to have the fetus of a galactic savior aboard. So what? He survived. That doesn’t automatically give you rights to turn Star Trek in to Star Wars. I’ve never been a fan of reboots, I think they’re insanely stupid, uncreative, and a good ol’ kick in the crotch to the original writers and staff as a whiw

37. Mark Lynch - October 2, 2012

Great article Kayla, thanks very much.

38. Just Sayin' - October 2, 2012

@36

How does an attempt to breathe life back into a franchise that was in a downward spiral constitute an “entire failure”? JJ and his team put Trek back on the map. The team has opened a door to create new adventures utilizing the original characters that made Star Trek special to begin with. Just because you don’t like a story line does not mean that a movie was a failure. Bottom line, people went to see it, people liked it, people will come back. Also, this now opens doors to discuss things like the thread we are on now. What about the idea of a tv series. Before this reboot, this was not even in consideration. If you don’t like a story, fine. But call it what it really is, you just don’t like a story. Not “entire failure”.

39. Kirk, James T. - October 2, 2012

I’ll be honest I’m glancing at these posts but its beggers belief in how some fans think….

David Moss: Sta Trek Phase II is a fan-boy show, hardly professional and so so irrelevant to anyone but the die-hard fans. It by no means is in the same league as a PROPER Star Trek TV series.

If your going to do Star Trek do it right and done right, professionally, it’s going to cost a mint.

Whilst I wouldn’t watch an animated Star Trek series, I can see the benefit from having one done.

I think fan boys tend to be very selfish in how they want the thing they love the way they’d like to see it but ultimately Star Trek is much more than a show for the fans. What comes next needs to continue appealing to that broad audience, just as Doctor Who does, as Star Wars does, as all the other franchises do it.

Now…. Redo the Original? The trouble with that is its a show of it’s time. The messages and ideas promoted in TOS have, in part due to TOS, become reality… Ok i’m generalising but the taboos played with on TOS just don’t have the same impact that they would to a modern audience.

Any new Star Trek would need to be commenting on the taboos of today, the issues of today and the events of today. Star Trek today if done the way Roddenberry did the original back in the 60′s, would look more like Battlestar Galactica than TOS.

The thing is for Star Trek to get back to basics, it would have to be a riskier show, commenting on delicatesocial and political topics of the day that would perhaps be a little too risky for CBS or Paramount to green-light.

40. samesq - October 2, 2012

If it comes back to TV it should be on AMC. AMC clearly commits to shows of a wide variety of themes and styles. An entire show about zombies, anyone! That’s awesome. I’m not sure Trek would thrive on one of the major broadcast networks. They cancel great shows constantly, especially genre shows. Trek deserves better than that!

41. noleknight - October 2, 2012

So this sounds like a shot in the dark…but why can’t Dr. David Marcus be alive and well as David Kirk in the new timeline? Why can’t he follow in his father’s footsteps and be the main character in a new Star Trek TV series as Captain of an Enterprise or some other ship? Why can’t James T Kirk be alive and well as an 82 year old admiral? We all know that William Shatner brings in viewers…and he’s expressed interest in still being a part of Star Trek in some way shape or form. With Spock Prime interfering in the timeline…James T. Kirk can be well aware that he died in a different timeline and the Enterprise B accident is avoided…The possiblities are endless in the new timeline…and can have repercussions on the Next Generation era.

42. Spock - October 2, 2012

Example; Spock says: “I agree with #11, however, I disagree with #12.”

12 says: “But I’m identical in every way with #11!”

Spock says: “Yes, of course. That is exactly why I disagree with you. Because you are identical.”

*12 goes offline*

Spock says: “Fascinating.” /:-)

QED: Even though you’ve seen this before in ‘I Mudd’, it’s still funny. So bring back Trek!

43. Tapng Gagamba - October 2, 2012

I’m up for Star Trek Chronicles, where each episode (or 2-ep arc story) involves different casts. Any era. Any character, well-known or not. Can have Riker and Troi in one Titan episode, a Maquis story the next, a mirror universe peek, or a story in Kronos in another ep. If they want a regular character, they can have a temporal agent be the protagonist and the rest of the cast per ep can be anyone (ala Slider or Quantum Leap).

But most importantly the stories should be good.

44. TrekMadeMeWonder - October 2, 2012

36. David

I agree. But it WAS fun to watch a few times. That’s entertainment, but not pure Trek.

45. TrekMadeMeWonder - October 2, 2012

36. David

I agree. But it WAS fun to watch a few times. That’s entertainment, but not pure Trek.

46. noleknight - October 2, 2012

Captain David Kirk takes over for Captain (now Admiral) Harriman as the Captain of Enterprise B…the Federation is a completely different entity with Vulcan being destroyed. New adventures…newand same allies and enemies…but still based on the essence of what Star Trek is about…exploration and to boldly go…. but with a lot more action involved. This would bring in old school viewers and younger viewers. You can even bring back original old series characters occasionally.

47. rm10019 - October 2, 2012

43 – I agree, I think that would be fun as an animated series.

Only potential problem it, it wouldn’t afford continuity for the kids/gen audience to really get into the characters…. Then again with attention spans the way their are, might be the perfect format.

Bring on Star Trek Chronicles!

48. SoonerDave - October 2, 2012

As a practical matter, Trek has spent its “reboots.” I just don’t think there’s enough underlying clamoring to have a retelling of Capt Picard et al in the same vein…unless, of course, we could have an episode where Picard just says “to heck with this,” and shoves Wesley out an airlock.

The idea of an animated Trek just does nothing for me personally. I remember that nasty animated Trek from the 70′s and wishing, “gee, why couldn’t they just get all those guys together and make REAL new shows.” If there’s skepticism about the potential core audience for a new TV show, I can’t see there being confidence in the notion of an even *larger* audience for an animated version.

I guess part of me will always wonder how Trek would have evolved had Paramount’s *original* fourth-network concept, with Trek II at its core, come to fruition. Success there would likely have meant a Trek “alternate reality” all its own, with few or no movies, but a pretty decent TV legacy. Obviously, we’ll never know.

As for me, I just wish we could have had *one* scene in a Trek movie where strategy is hashed out in the old briefing room. That “thinkers element” to Trek has been conspicuously absent, but I guess that doesn’t make for scintillating sci-fi….alas…

49. trekwho - October 2, 2012

While an animated series could be used as a ‘filler’ of sorts in between the movies, it would lack that critical human element that a cartoon simply cannot offer. Star Trek is about watching people in dramatic and amazing situations.

In my opinion, Joseph comes across as too negative about the possibilites of such a series. If there are interesting characters and good writing, people will watch.

50. Gary S. - October 2, 2012

How about an an anthologly series set in different Eras of Trek History ?
It could cover the entire gamut of Federation history,
Including its future .
Just a thought.

51. AJ - October 2, 2012

When I was 9, I watched TAS on Saturdays. While it looked like crap, it was considered ‘intelligent TV’ at the time. An “intelligent’ animated series would be great for kids and adults alike.

52. Firehawke - October 2, 2012

I’d like to see a weekly TV series. Peter David’s Star Trek: New Frontier books are incredible and should have a series based on them. The problem with Enterprise was that the first three seasons were not well written. The fourth season was really good, but by that time, people stopped watching it. Another problem with that series was that several of the characters rarely got to do anything — it was mostly just Archer and T’Pol.

53. AJ - October 2, 2012

What was a shame about ENT is that it wasn’t available everywhere. I used to live in Ithaca, NY and the nearest market it was shown in was Rochester.

That whole business model died quickly.

To do a live action ‘Trek’ I agree with those who see a move to HBO as a way to get it back to greatness

54. jamesingeneva - October 2, 2012

Another great article kayla!

55. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 2, 2012

As long as they stay out of the prime universe and keep it fresh, there is every possibility of attracting the coveted 18-35 demo they seek.

56. Chancellor Gowron - October 2, 2012

Just make another live action series. Or finish Enterprise.

57. MJ - October 2, 2012

Kayla, great piece — thanks! I think a new TV show would work best to kickoff the fall after the final movie in this trilogy opens. My preferred option would be a high-end version of Trek on HBO or Showtime closely aligned with the new movies, and including much of the current cast….i.e. take the production values of Game of Thrones and apply it to Trek, and have a 10-episode story arc be the focus of each season. Also, while it would be OK to have JJ be Exec. Producer, bring in some new blood to do the writing.

BTW, I have sent Anthony an email suggesting that he turn over control of this site to you.

58. Chris Doohan - October 2, 2012

15

If we had backing / funding, we would likely triple our output. At this point, we’ll be lucky to get one or two episodes a year.

BTW, our new vignette came out yesterday at http://www.startrekcontinues.com

59. Former Trekologist - October 2, 2012

First of all, kudos on this article. This is the kind of stuff we come to this site for. Even when news is slow, throwing things out for discussion helps pass the time.

Secondly, there is only one way to revitalize Trek for the small screen. Make it risky. My biggest pan on all Trek series is a lack of believable risk. If anyone were ever killed (or mutated into a hyper-evolved slug after breaching the Warp 10 barrier), they would be restored and back to normal in five tidy minutes at the end of the episode.

One reason I think Enterprise tanked is because, as a prequel, we knew that a lot of Trek canon was set in stone. There was only so much that could happen.

Abrams hit genius stroke with the altered timeline bit, because any character could die (and stay dead) in the next movie. One of my favorite SF movies (Serenity) killed off two of my favorite characters in the first installment. That’s gutsy. It makes me even more invested in the other characters, and makes me want to see more.

If you want to see a Trek series work, it need to be set beyond the TNG/DS9 timeline (possible events are a blank slate), and stay away from cheesy character immortality. Risk a little!

Start the series with the destruction of Earth or the collapse of the Federation. Put the characters in a dangerous situation. Experience them feeling out morality and survival from the ground floor up.

Oh, to dream.

60. Worf - October 2, 2012

Star Trek killed itself by having too much of the “Star Trek Franchise” going on at the same time back in the late 1990′s and early 2000′s. At one point you had the TNG movies at the theaters, and two Star Trek shows DS9 and Voyager running at the same time. Not including all the novels, video games, comics and other merchandising going on. Since the debut of the TNG, too many of story lines, plot themes, even the props and special effects were reused, reused, and reused throughout the franchise and people just got bored and turned off from it. Hence that is why Star Trek Nemesis bombed at the box-office and the poorly executed and often boring Enterprise show was canceled because of poor ratings. Rick Berman got the axed and was fired as the “Boss” of the Star Trek universe because he (and his creative team as well) exhausted all their good ideas over time and started to over recycle their material throughout the franchise.
The only thing that saved Star Trek was to reboot the franchise with the right creative team. Bring in JJ Abrams and company whom are younger and brought something new and fresh to a dying franchise. They saved Trek. They made a Star “Wars” Trek style movie reboot with younger actors, a fresh plot, fast paced action, and kick ass special effects. They made it cool again and brought in new audiences that shunned the franchise before or didn’t even know it existed.
Getting to my point, the Star Trek Franchise and producer JJ Abrams and the leaders at CBS/Paramount should focus on the movies for the time being. They are the bread and butter of the franchise. Stay away from making a new Star Trek shows. TV networks and cable stations are very iffy when it comes to science fiction shows because they are expensive to make. Often because they require large casts and crews, use of many extras, several shooting locations, constructions of sets, props, and very expensive special effects. Lot cheaper to make TV reality show than a $4 million dollar episode sci-fi-show. Even if the show is a quality show like Terra Nova or Firefly, if the ratings are there the show will be luck to make it a full season. Also adding another show could affect the success of the new reboot movies. Having too much Star Trek at once is what killed the franchise a decade ago. Sometime less is more.

61. justai meai - October 2, 2012

I DEFINITELY invite a dedicated studio, NOT the Big Three – they do NOT know how to commit to creative sci-fi programming, to bring ST back to the small screen. BUT…if it is under the control or even consult of JJ Abrams, I won’t be watching it. I know the 20-something crowd things Abrams did such a whiz-bang job on the 2009 reboot, but he really didn’t. Abrams is all about chasing the money and I don’t view him as a particularly good steward for the ST universe. But objectively speaking, there is PLENTY of storylines to be written for a new ST series. Whether it be an academy setting or a black-ops setting, like someone mentioned earlier. I would NOT go for a reboot of TNG, but a similar Voyager-like would do great. By far-flinging a UFP ship so far away to another quandrant, you can create all new worlds and creatures and races that there are unlimited possibilities there. BUT..it has to be done right!! No more of this using a brewery to look like the engineering section of the Federation’s premier flagship.

62. ronburgeny - October 2, 2012

Star Trek killed itself by having too much of the “Star Trek Franchise” going on at the same time back in the late 1990′s and early 2000′s. At one point you had the TNG movies at the theaters, and two Star Trek shows DS9 and Voyager running at the same time. Not including all the novels, video games, comics and other merchandising going on. Since the debut of the TNG, too many of story lines, plot themes, even the props and special effects were reused, reused, and reused throughout the franchise and people just got bored and turned off from it. Hence that is why Star Trek Nemesis bombed at the box-office and the poorly executed and often boring Enterprise show was canceled because of poor ratings. Rick Berman got the axed and was fired as the “Boss” of the Star Trek universe because he (and his creative team as well) exhausted all their good ideas over time and started to over recycle their material throughout the franchise.
The only thing that saved Star Trek was to reboot the franchise with the right creative team. Bring in JJ Abrams and company whom are younger and brought something new and fresh to a dying franchise. They saved Trek. They made a Star “Wars” Trek style movie reboot with younger actors, a fresh plot, fast paced action, and kick ass special effects. They made it cool again and brought in new audiences that shunned the franchise before or didn’t even know it existed.
Getting to my point, the Star Trek Franchise and producer JJ Abrams and the leaders at CBS/Paramount should focus on the movies for the time being. They are the bread and butter of the franchise. Stay away from making a new Star Trek shows. TV networks and cable stations are very iffy when it comes to science fiction shows because they are expensive to make. Often because they require large casts and crews, use of many extras, several shooting locations, constructions of sets, props, and very expensive special effects. Lot cheaper to make TV reality show than a $4 million dollar episode sci-fi-show. Even if the show is a quality show like Terra Nova or Firefly, if the ratings are there the show will be luck to make it a full season. Also adding another show could affect the success of the new reboot movies. Having too much Star Trek at once is what killed the franchise a decade ago. Sometime less is more.

63. rod - October 2, 2012

Star Trek killed itself by having too much of the “Star Trek Franchise” going on at the same time back in the late 1990′s and early 2000′s. At one point you had the TNG movies at the theaters, and two Star Trek shows DS9 and Voyager running at the same time. Not including all the novels, video games, comics and other merchandising going on. Since the debut of the TNG, too many of story lines, plot themes, even the props and special effects were reused, reused, and reused throughout the franchise and people just got bored and turned off from it. Hence that is why Star Trek Nemesis bombed at the box-office and the poorly executed and often boring Enterprise show was canceled because of poor ratings. Rick Berman got the axed and was fired as the “Boss” of the Star Trek universe because he (and his creative team as well) exhausted all their good ideas over time and started to over recycle their material throughout the franchise.
The only thing that saved Star Trek was to reboot the franchise with the right creative team. Bring in JJ Abrams and company whom are younger and brought something new and fresh to a dying franchise. They saved Trek. They made a Star “Wars” Trek style movie reboot with younger actors, a fresh plot, fast paced action, and kick ass special effects. They made it cool again and brought in new audiences that shunned the franchise before or didn’t even know it existed.
Getting to my point, the Star Trek Franchise and producer JJ Abrams and the leaders at CBS/Paramount should focus on the movies for the time being. They are the bread and butter of the franchise. Stay away from making a new Star Trek shows. TV networks and cable stations are very iffy when it comes to science fiction shows because they are expensive to make. Often because they require large casts and crews, use of many extras, several shooting locations, constructions of sets, props, and very expensive special effects. Lot cheaper to make TV reality show than a $4 million dollar episode sci-fi-show. Even if the show is a quality show like Terra Nova or Firefly, if the ratings are there the show will be luck to make it a full season. Also adding another show could affect the success of the new reboot movies. Having too much Star Trek at once is what killed the franchise a decade ago. Sometime less is more.

64. Curious Cadet - October 2, 2012

@17

First, although creatively Paramount may have an interest in Trek, CBS owns the property lock, stock and barrel. So including Paramount in this story is actually erroneous. If CBS wants to produce a series, Paramount will have nothing to do with it, unless CBS wants them to, or wants to rent Paramount’s sets and costumes.

Second, Enterprise was not cancelled because the UPN lost merchansdising dollars. The UPN only ever saw advertising revenue from it, while Paramount and CBS were paid licensing fees from those dollars. The studio subsidized the cost of producing the show because the UPN could not afford the actual licensing fee, which was fine by the studio which owned the ancillary rights and would make it up in syndication. When Paramount and CBS split, CBS got all the revenues from Star Trek, including the films (to the extent they were paid any royalties for the licenses), as well as control over the UPN, so they lost nothing, except Paramiunts operating revenu to help produce the series. Enterprise was cancelled because it was a very expensive show to produce which was intended to be an anchor for the UPN, but since the UPN only had about 86% coverage in the US, and the affiliates could not afford to go it alone, many sold out to Fox and other entities to become secondary sister stations, whose programming was often time shifted out of the usual national schedule to accommodate local affiliates needs. This happened to Enterprise as well, in part resulting in lower ratings, along with declining viewership in general. This is why the CW was folded, and CBS partnered with Warenr Bros. who was in a similar situation. Expensive subsidized programming like Trek was not in the interest of either company, so CBS cancelled it before moving ahead with the new and financially risky venture.

65. MJ - October 2, 2012

Worf / ronburgeny / rod

Dude, you intelligent thoughts are lost to all of us with you obnoxiously posting the same long post 3 times. Get you act together, man — shape up!

66. DiscoSpock - October 2, 2012

“I think a new TV show would work best to kickoff the fall after the final movie in this trilogy opens. My preferred option would be a high-end version of Trek on HBO or Showtime closely aligned with the new movies, and including much of the current cast….i.e. take the production values of Game of Thrones and apply it to Trek, and have a 10-episode story arc be the focus of each season. Also, while it would be OK to have JJ be Exec. Producer, bring in some new blood to do the writing.”

I could see this working! This gets Trek out of the network TV nonsense and also gives it higher quality and better production budgets.

67. SuperBat - October 2, 2012

My opinion: save money for a new series by using existing sets, props, and costumes from the NuTrek films. Start working on the series bible, designs, and primarily, CHARACTERS now, and launch the show after Abrams’ third film is done.

Also, don’t go forward into the future of this new timeline. Set the show in the NuTrek timeframe but on a different ship than the Enterprise (obviously) and with a different mission. Make it a show purely about exploration. Focus on characters and having “new” stories won’t be as important.

68. Ensign Ro- (Short for Roland) - October 2, 2012

I must admit, I am all for Trek coming back to television as a quality (and preferably in a classic 2D style) animated series. I fancy myself a pretty good amateur animator and have been developing my own Trek webisode series. Also, just being a fan of the medium is reason enough for me to enjoy Trek in 2D space.

Make it so….please. :-)

69. fallguy - October 2, 2012

yes, there should be a new star trek show in the works.
a show that has an original theme,that holds interest
for all viewers.

70. fallguy - October 2, 2012

yes, there should be a new star trek show in the works.
a show that has an original theme,that holds interest
for all viewers.

71. Phil - October 2, 2012

NEW SHOW Based after Voyager!
TOS on the big screen is cool!

72. Jake Cannon - October 2, 2012

Even though as a fan I’d love to see Trek back on TV, I’m kinda ok with it being a movie franchise for the time being (and foreseeable future). We have something like 700 episodes in the back catalog. A high budget, well-done feature film every couple of years makes it more of an “event.” I’m 23, which means I was born in TNG’s 2nd season. When Enterprise went off the air it was the first time in my lifetime Star Trek wasn’t on TV – I’m guessing a lot of fans are like me, and it’s a bit of an adjustment to make.

But I also know my Trek history. I think we’re going through a period not unlike the late 70′s/early 80′s, when the TOS feature films were the only new productions in the pipeline. My only concern is whether or not this new Trek movie franchise will have long legs, or if they’ll do two and call it a day. Of course, in this industry, you kinda live movie to movie. It was the same back in the day too – remember that pretty much every Trek movie the original cast did they expected to be their last.

73. Jai - October 2, 2012

Re: #39:

“The thing is for Star Trek to get back to basics, it would have to be a riskier show, commenting on delicate social and political topics of the day”

Re: #48:

“As for me, I just wish we could have had *one* scene in a Trek movie where strategy is hashed out in the old briefing room. That “thinkers element” to Trek has been conspicuously absent”

Re: #57:

“My preferred option would be a high-end version of Trek on HBO or Showtime closely aligned with the new movies, and including much of the current cast….i.e. take the production values of Game of Thrones and apply it to Trek, and have a 10-episode story arc be the focus of each season. Also, while it would be OK to have JJ be Exec. Producer, bring in some new blood to do the writing.”

I completely agree with all of the above, apart from the feasibility of Pine, Quinto etc being involved.

One way to take a very different slant on the “Star Trek universe” and avoid the pitfalls described in #10, #14 and #22 would be to focus on the real centres of political and military power right at the top of the Federation.

Make the show like “The West Wing in the 23rd century”: focus on the Federation President, the Federation Council and Starfleet Command. Cast a suitably charismatic, commanding actor as the President (Bruce Greenwood, now “President Christopher Pike” ?), depict him trying to do the right thing in an Alpha Quadrant experiencing huge turmoil, include plenty of contemporary allegories and complex philosophical situations that the viewers will recognise, and there’s your show.

And target the show at sophisticated, intelligent adults – like Game of Thrones and Mad Men are. It needs to have that level of nuance and intellectually-demanding psychological complexity. Ideally, get some of the writers from those shows involved too.

74. Phil - October 2, 2012

As much as I’d like to see it, Trek back on TV, in the traditional sense isn’t going to happen, because of cost. What might happen is animation, and maybe a mini-series or short story arc on cable somewhere. And if Trek ends up on cable, don’t expect grand effects laden adventures, it will look more like the Battlestar reboot – story driven, which, if you think about is where Trek needs to be.

75. Elvis Shatner - October 2, 2012

Wish CBS would give J. Michael Straczynski and Bryce Zabel a shot at it like they wanted… or Seth MacFarlane.

Having the right team in place is everything.
Berman and Co. showed what happens when the creative team runs out. of. steam… but… sticks around anyways…

Need… young minds… fresh ideas!

76. Phil - October 2, 2012

No idea who #71 is…

77. Phil - October 2, 2012

No idea who #71 is…

78. Kev-1 - October 2, 2012

I think people will watch a good show, whether it’s Trek of not. It was too “easy” (they thought) to do Trek right after TNG; find a Captain actor with experience; rearrange Matt Jefferies’ designs; construct yet another William Theiss uniform variation; field various merchandising contracts; shoot the obligatory TV Guide (not now) and magazine covers; gleefully watch rating bucks roll in. Star Trek is like a hamburger (as an example); you can only go so wrong. But if done right it can work in a big way. Don’t think the super action route; drawn-out mystery Trek; sexy soap opera route, or “extreme hipster” version will fly for long on TV, though. Not long term. There’s always room for good stories.

79. Craiger - October 2, 2012

Noel Clark might be cut from the sequel?

http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/s7/doctor-who/news/a409601/noel-clarke-i-may-get-cut-from-star-trek-2.html

80. David Moss - October 2, 2012

Not meaning to span a debate, but I really think that shows like Star Trek Phase II, Of God’s and Men and a select few others are much more than fan boy efforts.

They have won Hugo awards, and even caught the attention of Hollywood in many ways. And no, I have absolutely zero association with any of them.

My only comments center around what I believe to be the need for a major fundamental change needed in the financing of entertainment. Long term the spend for an hour of television can not continue to escalate to what it is. All you’ll have is reality shows if that is the case. Plus television itself is no longer medium that can effectively distribute the content.

Didn’t Data give a date for the end of television to be early in the 21st century! I think that was prophetic.

81. WillH85 - October 2, 2012

The idea of an animated series makes me cringe. I’d rather just not have Trek back on TV at all than have it turned into a joke like that. I think a huge part of the declining viewership was that they just kept making one Star Trek right after the other, hell DS9 was overlapping. Seems like had they just waited a few years in between series it might have faired better. There would of been more time for fresh ideas, looking back on what worked and what didn’t, and most importantly fans would have anticipated the arrival of a new Trek series instead of just lining up to watch what ever they stuck us with next.

I also say forget network TV. Take a page out of Ronald D. Moore’s book and go to a cable network like Sci Fi to do the series. On a network Star Trek could be struggling to make it, but on a cable network it could shine. Hell, for that matter see if they can get RDM to make it. If the next Star Trek series were half as good as BSG we’d be in good shape.

82. visitor1982 - October 2, 2012

No Animated Series!!! I’d rather have no Star Trek at all.

No one will be watching this. In Europe animated series aren’t popular at all and even in the States there simply will be no audience for something like this. Mark my words. An Animated Series will fail big time.

Give Star Trek the ‘Lost treatment’… A live action series with 13 to 20 episodes a season, continuing storylines and know how it all will end when you start it. Make it about people, not just about action or the alien of the week.

83. Thomas - October 2, 2012

While I understand the appeal of the anthology format, it seems like it would be the least likely possibility for a new Trek series for a few reasons:

1. Anthology series are highly expensive to produce, which is a big reason why the anthology format is pretty much dead. Even in the late 1950s and early 1960s, The Twilight Zone was a very expensive show for CBS (thus the short-lived, and ultimately even more costly, experiment with videotape, as in such episodes as “The Whole Truth” and “The Night of the Meek”). However, Twilight Zone’s format allowed it to tell a variety of stories in a variety of setting and styles, including dramas, period pieces, westerns, and present-day settings with a sci-fi or fantasy bent. Sure, there may be the occasional anthology mini-series that turns up on cable, but they’re just that, mini-series. Couple that with the fact that high-quality sci-fi requires a fairly high degree of financial investment, a Trek anthology series seems unlikely based on simple economics alone.

2. Someone previously mentioned Quantum Leap. While it certainly shares some elements, QL is not a pure anthology series, what with the recurring characters of Sam and Al. No matter to what time they travel (again, a fairly limited range, for storytelling and economic purposes), the action centers around what they do in the course of the story; while the stories are compelling, the main thrust of QL as whether Sam will ever fully remember who he is, and if he’ll ever be able to return home. So, there is an ongoing dilemma built into Quantum Leap’s storytelling, a problem for the main character that the audience can invest in. That kind of ongoing investment in characters and plot can’t really happen in an anthology series.

84. Elias Javalis - October 2, 2012

Whatever the outcome…i ll watch!!

85. Praetor Tal - October 2, 2012

How about a series from an alien perspective? I would love to see a series set in Romulan space. Or maybe in a totally different part of the galaxy that has never heard of Earth or any of the traditional Star Trek races. Go bold or go home.

I love these updates from Kayla. I load this site every day, and have been for five years, and it’s so disheartening not to have an article for weeks at a time. New articles mean new topics for us visitors to talk about and build community over. Trolls notwithstanding.

86. Praetor Tal - October 2, 2012

Or maybe I should have said “boldly go,” haha.

87. Gene's Ghost - October 2, 2012

No more Trek on TV. Just make movies.

88. sean - October 2, 2012

#17

“Dispite this Enterprises ratings stayed fairly consistant”

Actually, this isn’t true. The ratings dropped by more than half 2 seasons in. By the end, they were barely pulling 2.5 million viewers. You can make the argument that putting it on UPN was a mistake (and that UPN as a whole was something of a botched operation), but the reality is the ratings really did decline rather dramatically.

89. sean - October 2, 2012

An animated series seems like the only reasonable choice right now. Animated shows are taken more seriously now, despite the fact that there will always be folks who say, ‘Oh, animation is for kids!’. For one, it would mean we could see more alien worlds then would ever be possible on a live action budget.

90. TrekMadeMeWonder - October 2, 2012

The funny thing about the headline query is that Star Trek NEVER left TV.

91. CJS - October 2, 2012

I think they should do a miniseries, eight or ten hours (a 2 hour premiere followed by eight weekly episodes) that tell a single big story that you can’t do in the films. You could set it during the TNG, DS9, VOY time-frame and use some of those characters, or choose another period of Starfleet history to explore (Romulan War anyone?). It the ratings are good they could do one a year, with different characters a la American Horror Story.

92. rm10019 - October 2, 2012

Trek as an animated series is a no brainier. Wish it happened this year instead of next. At least we have the narrative and gameplay of the 2013 game coming. Looking forward to that! to me, that counts as a Trek Animated adventure.

93. David S - October 2, 2012

I seriously believe that if you make a solid series with great actors and great writers and producers (read Manny Coto, Eric Kripke, Joel Surnow, etc.), call it simply “Star Trek”, then you will have an audience.

94. David S - October 2, 2012

I seriously believe that if you make a solid series with great actors and great writers and producers (read Manny Coto, Eric Kripke, Joel Surnow, etc.), call it simply “Star Trek”, then you will have an audience.

95. Vultan - October 2, 2012

I find it a little odd that some fans are so against a new animated Trek. I mean, because they are fans they obviously can handle a great deal of suspension of disbelief, but when the topic of animation comes up—THE LINE MUST BE DRAWN HERE!

In whatever medium (and remember animation is a medium, not a genre), it’s the stories that matter most.

96. TrekkerChick - October 2, 2012

(/sarc)

Solutions..

“Star Trek: The Risa Shore”
“Here Comes T’Pol Boo Boo”
“Dancing on the Stars” (OUCH!)
“The Weakest Great Link”
“T’Seinfeld”
“Survivor: Taurus II”

97. et - October 2, 2012

“Go forward thousands of years past Kirk and Spock, do an anthology show with different ships and crews on different missions….”

Respectfully submitted: That idea miss the heart of what made Star Trek popular, and that’s the characters. Yes, it’s the moral center. Yes, it’s the optimistic universe. But Star Trek was never more popular when it nailed the lead characters. TOS hit a home run, TNG only had a base hit — Picard is really the one character who made his way into the pop culture pantheon — and every show after that never quite came up with iconic figures the public wanted to see week after week. (And I say this as a big fan of Commander Sisko.) Has anyone out there ever said, “That is *so* Captain Archer!”

“…do a Starfleet Academy show…”
Respectfully submitted: A show stuck in the academy loses that “Frontier” element of what made Star Trek so popular. Even DS9 had the “edge of the wilderness” aspect to it. Star Trek isn’t “Felicity” in orbit. It’s “Buck Rogers” grown up.

“…do a Starfleet Black Ops show… There’s lots of “space” to play in”

Respectfully submitted: A Black Ops show would lose out on the moral center / optimistic future that’s so much a part of the Star Trek experience, too. “We’re Star Fleet’s inglorious bastards, getting our hands dirty when those namby-pamby Prime Directivists won’t.” Sounds good on paper, but really…?

So to boil down what I’m saying: “You’re wrong! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!!!!”

(Kidding. In all honesty, this is a great article. I just think mounting a concept for a new TV series is more complicated than it at first seems. Personally, I think an animated version of the JJ-verse is probably the surest bet at this point.)

98. MJ - October 2, 2012

@73 “And target the show at sophisticated, intelligent adults – like Game of Thrones and Mad Men are. It needs to have that level of nuance and intellectually-demanding psychological complexity. Ideally, get some of the writers from those shows involved too.”

Exactly. I just can’t get my head around the kiddie elements and perceptions of a cartoon Trek. I don’t not want a cartoon trek…period…exclamation point!

99. TrekkerChick - October 2, 2012

Better… (or worse) a fictional Federation Entertainment Channel series that has 23rd Century citizens living a recreated 21st Century Los Angeles lifestyle for 2 months — with Lindsey Lohan and Paris Hilton.

100. Leech - October 2, 2012

Make Manny Coto and Seth MacFarlane the new show runners and you’ll have a quality product.

101. rm10019 - October 2, 2012

@98- If you have kids, or spend any time with young children you should see how enthusiastic an animated show makes them about a franchise.

They are the future fan base for more adult Trek. semi-colon…. ampersand! :)

This won’t replace Trek or preclude another live action show, just expand the brand.

102. K-7 - October 2, 2012

rm10019, the kids already have their tons of sf and genre animated shows to watch…don’t turn my Trek into another show for the kiddies please. We adults need more intelligent sci-fi. Trek never has been a kiddie show, and it never will be if we stick together as fans and demand better than this silly animated series idea floated by Orci, and supported by his pal, Anthony, and Anthony’s staff member, Kayla. They all mean well, I am sure, but “hell no” is my response to an animated Trek.

103. Jack - October 2, 2012

I wish we had shows that followed the British (and HBO) model — each series (season) is a dozen episodes or so, not 22. It’s tough to make 22 really good episodes of any series, let alone a sci-fi show.

I always find it pretty incredible how detailed and epic some of these shorter seasons can be.

The original BSG miniseries covered way more ground, arguably, than the longer seasons later on…

104. MJ - October 2, 2012

“If you have kids, or spend any time with young children you should see how enthusiastic an animated show makes them about a franchise.”

The goal of a new Trek series should be to reenvision TOS for an adult audience, not for kids. A new Trek TV show should bve a modern and more intellecual and intense version of Trek, that will appeal to both adults and the key demographic of 18-30. Thus it should be an adult show on a high-end pay network like HBO or Showtime, along the model of Game of Thrones.

Star Trek shoud never be dilluted into a kids show like Transformers or Star Wars. Star Trek is more than a commodity to me.

105. James - October 2, 2012

leave jj out of it he wrecked star trek bring back Ronald D Morre etc coz they are trek

106. Daniel Craig Is My Wookie - October 2, 2012

I have never heard of this guy Joesph, he doesnt have any experience in the movie/television industry. So his thoughts and opinon on if it makes business or creative sense to make another trek series, really have no real weight to them. I would actually put more weight and value on some of the posters on this site, a few of which have actually worked in the industry and actually have more insite into what the business models would be like.

And I was really rather annoyed with the plug for his kickstarter book at the end as well.

107. Phil - October 2, 2012

@104. Problem is, TV is a commodity. To get the widespread audience you will end up needing to reach the kids – animation isn’t the only way to reach young people, anime has an adult following. I don’t see the attraction, but my 17 year old does.That’s the under 30 audience needs to reach.

A live action show, to borrow on the Mad Men/Game of Thrones referrences is going to have to overcome the limitations of canon. A lot of the suggestions thrown around already (new ship, 1000 years later, etc..) won’t work because they have already been done. To pull this off writers are going to have to have free reign to create some new, adult aspect of Trek not seen before. Without something compelling going on, it’s the same old Trek with new sets. There are enough people commenting that the upcoming movie might be dropping back into ‘Trek villian’ formula, more evidence that the problems of the franchise are more obvious then it’s attributes.

108. Daniel Craig Is My Wookie - October 2, 2012

Oh and Joesph TREK doesnt belong to JJ

just cause JJ is the person who is producing right now doesnt me it belongs to him

109. Horatio - October 2, 2012

#88 – Most people seem to forget that Enterprise premiered with stellar numbers and was considered a solid hit its first year. Its viewership did drop off dramatically when it became obvious that it was just a rehash of TNG/Vger and DS9.

Enterprises 2nd season killed it. I think many fans gave it its first season to find itself but grew impatient quickly. A case can be made that the Xindi arc season (season 3) was pretty decent SF television and barely bought the show a 4th season. Season 4 rocked and should have been the first season.

I still watched Enterprise faithfully but still shake my head on the opportunity lost on that series.

110. Horatio - October 2, 2012

#88 – Most people seem to forget that Enterprise premiered with stellar numbers and was considered a solid hit its first year. Its viewership did drop off dramatically when it became obvious that it was just a rehash of TNG/Vger and DS9.

Enterprises 2nd season killed it. I think many fans gave it its first season to find itself but grew impatient quickly. A case can be made that the Xindi arc season (season 3) was pretty decent SF television and barely bought the show a 4th season. Season 4 rocked and should have been the first season.

I still watched Enterprise faithfully but still shake my head on the opportunity lost on that series.

111. MJ - October 2, 2012

@107. “Problem is, TV is a commodity. To get the widespread audience you will end up needing to reach the kids.”

Well, you will need to reach teenagers – Star Trek has always had elments for them, and live action adult Trek has always appealed to teenagers.

But to say that we need to market Trek to 7-year olds on the Cartoon Network like Star Wars does — well that to me would just be a complete sell out Trek. No thanks.

112. Vultan - October 2, 2012

The setup for Star Trek is pretty simple, and it’s right there in the opening narration:

“…to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before.”

From there any number of creative directions can be taken, which can either succeed or fail. It all depends on the execution. But as long as the-powers-that-be stick to exploring “strange new worlds” they’re already halfway there in making something great.

113. MJ - October 2, 2012

“I have never heard of this guy Joesph, he doesnt have any experience in the movie/television industry. So his thoughts and opinon on if it makes business or creative sense to make another trek series, really have no real weight to them. I would actually put more weight and value on some of the posters on this site, a few of which have actually worked in the industry and actually have more insite into what the business models would be like. And I was really rather annoyed with the plug for his kickstarter book at the end as well.”

Well said!

114. Curious Cadet - October 2, 2012

@ 104

Wow, MJ. I don’t necessarily disagree about Trek being a commodity, but I don’t think creating an animated version for kids would either be such a bad thing, nor dilute the value of the franchise (or turn it into Transformers).

Literally, children are our futures. When NBC put Trek back on the air on Saturday mornings, it wasn’t for adults, it was for kids. Kids who were proving NBC was wrong to take it off the air in the first place by rediscovering the original series in syndication. While I have no evidence of this Roddenberry was probably hoping for the exact same thing I am going to propose: make an intelligent, compelling animated series, which allows for much more interesting plot lines and action than a live production due to cost (TAS did some things that would have never been possible in live action, and as a result created canon problems), which would grow a new audience for Trek movies and live action series in a few years. Simply based on the work I have seen in the Comic Book series Orci is consulting on, I have to cast my vote for an animated series, particularly since it would have the power to recruit a future audience for the PG-13 movies and keep building interest in Trek from childhood. Not only that, but such series help drive an ancillary toy market which in turn creates more revenue and helps keep the money flowing year round for future spectacular feature films, and prime time live action TV series.

Granted this example is primarily anecdotal, but a younger friend of mine could not wait to see the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie when it came out, as he had been a huge fan of the franchise since watching Saturday morning cartoons as a child. I can’t imagine that franchise ever having evolved to produce a live-action feature film if not for the come-of-age adults that were captivated by the animated series as kids and were willing to plunk down their hard earned cash out of a feeling of nostalgia alone.

Also, Trek represents some important values for kids in today’s world rocked by constant moral quandaries. Would you really deny its message to today’s children?

Granted, animated Trek might not be for you or me, but it absolutely serves a purpose whether we chose to watch it or not. And you know what, it might just become a guilty pleasure for me if it’s done as well as the comics, which incidentally, I’m not a comic book kinda guy, rarely read them even as a kid, but for $1.99 on iTunes, they have become a guilty pleasure which keep Trek alive and interesting during these long hiatuses between movies. Kids today have so many distractions and other choices, that a whole generation of kids who went to see Trek but weren’t quite old enough to go exploring the previous shows, or perhaps did and found them too campy, are now being assaulted by any number of other interesting films, video games, and TV, and not being given an opportunity to have Trek imprint on them to pull them in more tightly to the franchise.

All things considered, I think an animated series would be a good thing for Trek, in fact it might just be the thing that builds up a new audience for a live-action series in three or four years, after Abrams finishes his third installment of the film series.

115. Peter Loader - October 2, 2012

Forget past incarnations of Trek. They’ve had their day and any new Trek show should go back to the roots of Trek and begin anew, and not draw upon anything already established. Time for a completely fresh set of heroes to boldly go where no one has gone before…

116. MJ - October 2, 2012

“just cause JJ is the person who is producing right now doesnt me it belongs to him.”

Well I will beg to disagree with you on that. Once these Exec Producers/Creators get a hold ot Trek, they tend to possess it for decades….e.g. Rodenberry, Bennett, Berman, and now JJ. I suppose CBS could theoretically make a play for the TV space with another name, but I would bet instead that they would defer to JJ to Exec Produce it.

So, yea, I think that JJ probably does own Trek at this point in time. And the old saying, Possession is 9/10 of the Law, fits here as well.

117. Basement Blogger - October 2, 2012

@ 112

Thanks Vultan, that was nice. That is the message of Star Trek. I’ll paraphrase the PBS special on Star Trek. It was the show that had something important to say.

118. MJ - October 2, 2012

Curios Cadet, you make some compelling arguments. I guess if it was not and either/or proposition (either animated/kids or adult/live action) as most make it out to be, I could live with a secondary Trek animated show that is for kids. But if all the Trek we get after the new trilogy is completed is a kiddie Trek on the cartoon network., well…no thanks!

Any animated Trek show for kids should be SUPPLEMENTARY to live action Trek, and not be the only form of Trek we get for several years after they are done with the movie series. I would assume we all can agree on this, right?

119. Toonloon - October 2, 2012

OT love the new vignette! Just brilliant!

120. Vultan - October 2, 2012

#117

Right on.

And to elaborate on my previous point: to have a ship that goes to a different strange planet or dimension every week is genius in its simplicity. And for a show to do that, plus have a largely positive spin on man’s future, AND give some food for thought and social commentary on the side, would send television viewers into shock from the sheer difference of it all—again!

No vampires or post-apocalyptic teenage pouting? How dare they!

121. Curious Cadet - October 2, 2012

@118
Absolutely.

Either/or makes no sense. I definitely see animated as a means to an end. But animated series should start with the next film, assuming they are not ready to bite the bullet on live-action, and prime the pump for the live action version which would need to start as soon after the third film premiers if not before. The animated series would continue on its own assuming it is pulling its numbers. But under no circumstances should it be the kind of tripe they serve up with transformers and Star Wars kids fare. And should the live action version be green lit first, then as I outlined, there’s more than enough reason to still do an animated series for the next generation.

There is an argument to be made that doing an animated show first the wrong way could kill the potential for a live action series if it is not done well, or fails to draw an audience. And Hollywood is so full of superstitious, narrow visioned executives, that might be true. However with Orci at the helm, I’m sure such pitfalls would be expertly navigated and avoided, or mitigated, whether an animated series flys or not.

122. MJ - October 2, 2012

“However with Orci at the helm, I’m sure such pitfalls would be expertly navigated and avoided, or mitigated, whether an animated series flys or not.”

Well there in lies the problem. I see the current Trek to be heavily influenced by JJ’s and Lindelof’s restraint of Orci and Kurtzman, who in my mind, would be happy doing Star Wars-like Trek animated series and video games…i.e, the Cowboys and Aliens and Transformers mess type of stuff.. With Trek, JJ and Damon restrain them, but also utilize their energy and action to benefit and infuse Trek with more excitement — so this team of the four of them work out well for Trek.

Howeve, if Orci were to get the reigns of an animated Trek series — and I do see him wanting to do that — who would restrain him from going “full Star Wars” on us? I mean, did you see that ridiculous trailer for his Trek video game? I don’t trust him in an “unrestrained role” on Trek.

123. K-7 - October 2, 2012

Good point, MJ. I remember the Orci-Kurtzman Star Wars Planking episode here a couple of years ago that gave us all the chills. Yea, I don’t think I would trust Orci in a leaership role on a Trek series.

124. K-7 - October 2, 2012

Plus, Hawaii Five-O is tanking in the ratings now, so I don’t see a good track record from Orci on leading a successful TV series.

125. Commodore Redshirt - October 2, 2012

I like the idea of a limited run HBO style series. Perhaps a dozen episodes per season with higher production values than the syndicated shows like Voyager or Enterprise. I have always liked the idea of an anthology show set in the prime universe with perhaps a sub-plot thread that links them together.

126. LizardGirl - October 2, 2012

An animated series would do the job. Today, The Cone Wars, Avatar: The Last Air Bender, even as earlier mentioned, Batman the Animated Series would be considered intelligent animation.

Start off by cutting down on how many episodes per season so you can focus on quality, get people who maybe worked on other successful animation projects, get a “look” together. Preferably a more sophisticated, realistic “look” and be consistent with that. Get a good composer (aka Michael G.) to create a brilliant scores for it.

And here’s the most important thing with casting an animation series…get VOICE actors! There is a difference (you can here it, literally). Seasoned voice actors treat their characters the same way a film actor would treat his/hers–it’s exactly the same to them! They don’t see it as silly or childish–it’s their profession.

The really good ones have trained their voices to breathe real emotion into their characters, making them more 3 dimensional. Also, because most voice actors do animated series (not movies), I believe they’ll have a better handle on what’s required of them on any given schedule. Verses a movie actor…you may have to work with THEIR schedule.

I will agree with Joseph on this point. Set the timeline many many years beyond what we’ve already seen. There will always be comparisons, but at least there won’t be any concerns about messing up established characters. Some could be descendants of famous characters though.

As mentioned earlier, the subject matter would have to be relevant to today’s audience (esp. that 18-35 age target group). I vote for sticking to ideals more than current events pushing the stories along. Honor, Sacrifice, Loyalty, Teamwork, Courage, Justice, etc. Anything else could be just a medium to showcase those. Current events in a Trek setting may cover more social aspects than political (i.e. bullying, lack of justice for some, you know more social things).

I really don’t want a “kiddie” cartoon myself. For an animated sereis, I’d watch something that would fit right in on Adult Swim, an after midnight program suited for the 16 or 17+ age (it showed Star Trek TNG episodes at one point), or at the least Toonami (11 or 12+ tweens).

127. Commodore Redshirt - October 2, 2012

I’m sorry… I should have said UPN… NOT syndicated..

128. Sebastian S. - October 2, 2012

I think they should wait until the current cycle of movies are finished (around the year 2037 at this rate) before they create any new live-action ST series. They have to be careful about market saturation and lack of fresh input (what happened in the early 2000s). As Kirk would say, “Too much of anything, even (ST) isn’t necessarily a good thing.”

But an animated series (ala “Clone Wars”) could be interesting as a side diversion. You could even set in the Abramsverse (you wouldn’t need the movie’s cast; just sound-alikes). My only concern is that in the animated format, spectacle could easily overtake substance (one of my chief nits with the Clone Wars…. and the live-action SW prequels, for that matter). I think art thrives on restrictions. Sometimes, the worst thing you can give to a creative team is anything they want.

Another reason to hold off on a new series is that after 700+ hours of TV episodes (and 11 movies) to pick and choose from, thousands of books and even fan-films, pretty much any ST story you can imagine has probably been told already.

Before a new ST series is given a green light, it needs to have a long, loving gestation period. And it needs to be born ‘idea-first’ this time, and not born of cash registers and marketing deals. But even as a longtime ST fan? I’m OK if it continues as a movie franchise for a longer time; it makes each ST movie more of an event….

129. Check The Circuit - October 2, 2012

Does it have to be weekly? What about a 13-episode season stretched out over Sept-May? (I’m not a fan of short, weekly seasons….a la Walking Dead. It’s off the air for 8-9 month chunks.)

That way we get a steady diet of quality Trek on an on-going basis without having to wait more than a couple of weeks at a time.

130. Saiyan - October 2, 2012

Star Trek mini series based on the earth-romulan war??

131. Starbase Britain - October 2, 2012

I say no to a new TV series. I think the whole thing has been done to death on TV. Its looked like its run out of ideas for a long time now. TV has been saturated with Trek over the years and a lot of it wasnt good.

I think this should be looked at again after the propsosed trilogy of films is completed, then see.

Greg
UK

132. Will Geer's Moustache - October 2, 2012

Am I alone in wanting The Waltons back on TV? Indeed, I am not opposed the rebooting it. Get Patrick Stewart in the role of Granpa. Justin Bieber as John Boy. The Kadassians as the Baldwin Sisters. Two words: SMASH HIT!!!

This is definitely the sort of thing Orci should be writing…

133. Daniel Craig Is My Wookie Bitch - October 2, 2012

124 Hawaii 5-0 just started its 3rd season strongly, its a popular series holding its own in the 10pm slot on Monday nights.

I actually think Orci and Kurtzman have a done a great job with 5-0

134. EricAD - October 2, 2012

There is no doubt that eventually, Star Trek will return to television in some form. Right now though, the new movie series is thriving (so far) and there is no need to have a television series on the air right at this moment. A few short years will make all the difference though…each year, the cost of special effects goes down and becomes faster to make. That’s one reason to wait. The other reason to wait is for the perfect time to strike in the pop zeitgeist, which would probably be 2016, Trek 50th Birthday.

A new Trek series will be fundamentally different in many ways though from the Berman years. The days of 26 stand alone episodes (or even 22) are over. Think 12/13 episodes, with a continuing story. It will almost certainly be on cable (pay cable or basic) as the networks have no use for expensive high concept shows these days, especially ones with as much built in baggage as Star Trek.

As for when this will happen, my guess is 2016. Paramount and CBS will no doubt want to take advantage of Trek’s Golden Anniversary. I’d bet money right now that the third and final part of the JJ Abrams trilogy will release that year, and that Star Trek will also relaunch as a tv series following. But they are going to let the appetite build just a little longer.

135. sean - October 2, 2012

I think an overly adult Trek would be a misstep. Trek has always been a family property, and while I agree a new show should tackle difficult ideas, I don’t think we necessarily need an HBO/Showtime treatment for it. I do think if we ended up with a live-action show that a 12/13 episode season would be a good idea, as I think it would encourage a tighter narrative and waste less time on filler episodes.

136. EricAD - October 2, 2012

I don’t think it needs to be “adult” like Boardwalk Empire or Dexter, but I think it needs to be more complex and challenging and sophisticated. TV had already started to change by the time Enterprise came on, and one of the biggest failures of that show was that it was still doing Trek in the 80s/early 90′s way.

137. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

Anyone else remember the Sunday mystery Movie….or even the Hardy Boys/ Nancy Drew mysterys. Star Trek and one or two other shows sharing a rotating 2 hour time slot. Two hours allows for better stories, one epsisode a month allows for more production time. Remember those one hour tos episodes were made when an hour show was 53 minutes. Now it clocks in at about 45 (even less on cable). Question is which shows share the spot…Star Trek Sci Fi theater to s.sttng,ds9,voyager,ent. And maybe somthing totally new my thought would be Tos, Sttng (featuring the shows from that timeline) and an original series. Or……STTOS,Quantum leap,Bg. ?.anyone else have choices??

138. cgrest - October 2, 2012

Star Trek is first and foremost a TV franchise. Its so much more based on story and character development that you just can’t establish in a 2 – 2.5 hour movie. While the movies for the most part have been successful, they’ve never had the deep impact as the long running TV series. Not that the movies are bad, but they just don’t compare.

139. cgrest - October 2, 2012

Star Trek is first and foremost a TV franchise. Its so much more based on story and character development that you just can’t establish in a 2 – 2.5 hour movie. While the movies for the most part have been successful, they’ve never had the deep impact as the long running TV series. Not that the movies are bad, but they just don’t compare.

140. dmduncan - October 2, 2012

TOS was an inspired production with innovative features that the subsequent series failed to improve on.

The different-planet-every-week premise was implemented in TOS as stand alone episodes that didn’t reference other episodes, with the exception of Harry Mudd’s two adventures, which acted as a robust defense against soap-operitis.

TOS also hinted at a better future while clearly exploring themes meant for viewers of the 1960′s, so it cleverly dangled a carrot while addressing current reality.

Latter series introduced soapy material which to me appeared as a cover for weak storytelling.

Now there is something to be said for risking soap-operitis, and I believe that the Battlestar Galactica reboot said it eloquently.

You may have 4 seasons that you must but can’t possibly stretch a great story to fill, which forces you to accept the incursion of soap into an otherwise beautiful panorama of events, but in the end it’s that beautiful panorama that tells an epic story, which the TOS paradigm never managed to tell, which we remember it for, and makes it worth the risk.

So, Star Trek on TV? Sure. Which way do you go with it?

I would say not the way that TNG went, and not exactly the way that TOS went.

It would be great to see a new Star Trek series go in its execution where the original one did: Where no one went before.

How about an epic story like Battlestar Galactica that follows a tale to its conclusion, but which explores strange new worlds in the process and where each new adventure ALSO contributes something to the telling of the epic itself?

141. Jonboc - October 2, 2012

I don’t think a live action television series is really an option in this day and age, the numbers just don’t support the financial risk. Trek on Television, in the new JJ era, has not been tested and is a gamble while the decaying numbers of those watching Berman-Trek is fresh on the entertainment world’s collective mind. A brand new, expensive, live action series, at this point, is just bad business.

The amazing success and reboot of Trek in 2009, however, makes an animated series, based on the characters in that movie, not only a safe one, financially, but an obvious choice creatively. To expand on that new universe that JJ and company have crafted, would attract all the newcomers to Trek, who, after those initial two hours, we’re left hungry for more. It would also, most certainly, bring in all the existing Trek fans who loved the movie and are being sustained by comics. Personally, I’m a hard core TOS fan and I would embrace, with open arms, a smartly written animated series that would take me on adventures of Kirk and his crew. Since the movies are limited to giving us only 2 hours of character development every 3-4 years, a weekly visit with the enterprise crew, even in animated form, would be most welcome!

It makes perfect sense Bob Orci, make it so!

142. Denny McMullen - October 2, 2012

Well there are plenty of stories, the steady stream of ST books and comics demonstrate that. As Kayla pointed out it is of course a business decision, produce the equivelent of 1/2 of 26 Sci Fi moves a year, with CGI, and expensive sets and costuming. Or do a 18 min commedy set in the same apartment, bar, and office. Personally I keep involved in the ST universe with books and comics.

143. astrodem - October 2, 2012

I strongly agree with the folks who think Star Trek’s best home would be HBO or Showtime. It needs to look and feel a lot more like a typical HBO or Showtime series anyway: 10-12 episodes a season, continuous plot lines, strong casting, character-driven, with VERY adult themes.

I think that last part — adult themes — is absolutely critical. Star Trek needs to grow up and push the envelope if it wants to appeal to modern television audiences. The updated Battlestar Galactica, Game of Thrones, and the Walking Dead are all reasonable models for the darker thematic direction Star Trek needs to pursue. The show can retain its idealism, but that idealism has to be very very hard won with difficult, emotionally wrenching choices made by the main characters. If the next Star Trek tries to be an after-school special or an action-show set in space, it will fail and it will DESERVE to fail.

In terms of creative specifics, I’d suggest several possible plot directions some of which are mentioned or alluded to in earlier posts:

1) The West-Wing in space, possibly set during the early days of the Federation, or during some major period of crisis.
2) A very specific and meaningful mission of some kind (e.g. the first crew to explore the interior of the Great Barrier, a space >3000 light years across, and to visit the super black hole at the center of the galaxy). Whatever the mission, it leaves them cuts them off from the Federation and results in a series of major season-long calamities for the ship and crew.
3) A Federation civil war or secession crisis.
4) If the show goes the direction of a fairly typical Star Trek series, the captain MUST be an alien. A significant part of the show’s dramatic tension comes from the fact that this alien captain must (in a sense) speak for humanity and human values even though those values are not always his or her own.

There are plenty of other good ideas out there. As long as the writing is super-high caliber, it will be a show worth watching.

144. MJ - October 2, 2012

Jonboc :”A brand new, expensive, live action series, at this point, is just bad business.”

As with other folks, you are completely ignoring pay cable TV. Game of Thrones, Homeland, Boardwalk Empire, etc. etc. etc.

DM Duncan: “How about an epic story like Battlestar Galactica that follows a tale to its conclusion, but which explores strange new worlds in the process and where each new adventure ALSO contributes something to the telling of the epic itself?”

Exactly — you broke the code, DM. A true 5 year mission on HBO with both individyual season story arcs and an overiding series story arc — covering 50 high production value episodes over 5 years — this is grand vision Trek in a new way as we’ve never seen it before.

We don’t need to settle here for “sloppy seconds” with a kiddie animate series folks. Let’s be bolder and think bigger than an Orci-Cartoon channel series.

145. Battle-scarred Sciatica - October 2, 2012

Star Trek on TV before I am dead please.

146. MJ - October 2, 2012

“I don’t think it needs to be “adult” like Boardwalk Empire or Dexter, but I think it needs to be more complex and challenging and sophisticated. TV had already started to change by the time Enterprise came on, and one of the biggest failures of that show was that it was still doing Trek in the 80s/early 90′s way.”

Exactly. It can be cutting edge on pay cable as you describe without having to resort to stuff like frontal nudity and Kirk throwing out an F-bomb.

147. Magic_Al - October 2, 2012

Star Trek TV was always most successful in syndication, first-run or otherwise. UPN was a crappy network. Where is it today? Exactly. UPN wouldn’t have lasted as long as it did except for Voyager and Enterprise.

How does the first-run syndication market look today?

148. Vger23 - October 2, 2012

This thread of messages actually illustrates the GREATEST reason that a Trek show will never return to television.

Let me explain:

The “fans” would really be required to be a strong, united foundation to ensure consistent viewership…and then you’d need to market it to the broader audience to make it relevant and worth the price tag. Since the “fans” are as splintered and un-united on what they want and how they think Trek should be handled, they cannot be counted on to carry an expensive television series on a weekly basis.

Now, if you have to make sure the series is being developed and marketed for a broader audience too…you’ll lose even more of the “fans” because there’s nothing the hardcore fan hates more than their beloved series being “dumbed down for the masses” (which, by the way, I think is as arrogant and elitist an attitude as there is…but that’s just my opinion). So, anything risky or sensible for a 21st century audience would even further splinter the fan base.

What so many Trek fans fail to recognize is that WE killed Star Trek on television. Our own arrogance, nit-pickyness, exclusivity, and elitism made it impossible to market to us as a core foundational audience…and impossible to try to market something more broad (Enterprise, anyone?).

Star Trek fans are not a viable group to base a strategy on. That’s why JJTrek was so brilliant. They basically said, in many ways, “F-you” to those types of fans. It was a “you can either be with us or get the hell out of our way” attitude…and it paid off because they succeeded in grasping that new audience and burying the malcontents.

But, that won’t work with an expensive sci-fi weekly TV show.

Star Trek won’t return to TV. At least, not for a long time. There’s no audience to universally sell it to. Look at the posts here. There are as many ideas (most of them bad, by the way) as there are people posting.

149. Curious Cadet - October 2, 2012

@ 143

Lets not cut them off from the federation. Have we already forgotten Voyager? I don’t hate that show the way others do, but being cut off just didn’t work on a weekly basis, and the Battlestar Galactica model (where they lose more and more people and resources as they go on), just doesn’t work for Trek. Thats not what it’s about.

@ 122

MJ, I don’t know enough about Orci’s other helm-ing jobs to speak to your comment. I was mainly speaking to his work as consultant on the comics, and now that you mention it, my one major complaint is that in re-telling the familiar episodes from TOS, it strikes me that they have overreached and tried to make each story more epic than it ever could have been on TV. The result is that the re-telling fails to satisfy in the same way the original stories did, despite their shortcomings. In some ways this is what happened to TAS as well. But, the attitude of the comics is the correct one, so let me amend, as long as someone with experience and the right vision is in charge, the pitfall of an animated series performance damaging the chances of a future live-action series should be easily avoided, whether the animated series success or not.

150. Nephron - October 2, 2012

I hope not. I like ST, but at what point do we get something new? It’s all remakes, reboots, rehashes, reinterpretations, and reimaginings.

Star Trek is so thoroughly bogged down with canon, continuity and “brain worms” there’s nothing interesting that can be done with it.

Not to mention that too many of the things taken for granted on ST are concessions to budget & effects technology that need not apply today. Examples: bumpy-headed human “aliens”, the transporter, lame “parallel earth”, holodeck & time travel stories (can’t afford costumes and sets? use the studio’s other sets & costumes and write a parallel earth/time travel/holodeck story).

They can do much better than yet another Star Trek.

I want something new. Something better.

151. Craiger - October 2, 2012

What about the Romulan War with a Band of Brothers style? Would that appeal to both audiences?

152. MJ - October 2, 2012

@148 “The “fans” would really be required to be a strong, united foundation to ensure consistent viewership…and then you’d need to market it to the broader audience to make it relevant and worth the price tag. Since the “fans” are as splintered and un-united on what they want and how they think Trek should be handled, they cannot be counted on to carry an expensive television series on a weekly basis.”

Give me one other example then of a major science fiction or fantasy franchise where you will find fan web sites where the fans are united, agree on most stuff, and don’t argue, and I will cede to you this point?

LOL

PS: Case-in-point, the ongoing “war” between the old star wars fans (who prefer the original trilogy and despise Lucas) and the younger star wars fans (who prefer the new trilogy and like Lucas) has certainly not hurt the bottom line for that franchise. Stat Wars is the most fractured sf franchise of them all.

153. MJ - October 2, 2012

@150. Why are you here, dude? Did you accidentally get stuck on this website?

154. Craiger - October 2, 2012

I do agree however that Trek is the most expensive show to put on TV. TV Networks are trying to save money would they want to take a chance spendng millions on a Trek pilot and it fails the first time out? The next Trek TV series will have to appeal to both the Trek fans and the general audience. TV Networks cancel a show only after a few episodes of low ratings. Would they want to waste millions on just a couple of episodes?

155. MJ - October 2, 2012

BTW, this article, and this type of fan discussion, point out how interesting and great this site can be when somebody (i.e. Kayla) who runs it really cares to provide good material in the original tradition of “THE source for everything new in Trek.”

I would urge everyone to join me in sending emails to Anthony suggesting that he consider handing the reigns of this site over to Kayla. I sent my email this morning.

156. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

Hey Bob Orci…..
Making a bet right here….since para has no winter tentpoles…Im guessing a worlwd premiere for STID’s trailer during the Superbowl.

157. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

Hey Bob Orci…..
Making a bet right here….since para has no winter tentpoles…Im guessing a worlwd premiere for STID’s trailer during the Superbowl.

158. Craiger - October 2, 2012

MJ, agreed! That’s what I miss about this site Trek fans discussing articles like this and when people involved with Trek chat here about the articles.

159. Craiger - October 2, 2012

MJ, I did get an email from Kayla and she couldn’t comment on Anthony’s status but said she does this site as a hobby and only posts when she can. I think Anthony is now treating this site the same way as just a hobby and not The Source For Everything New In Trek.

160. CmdrR - October 2, 2012

I’ve said it before. I truly think Trek would thrive on the same schedule as a Breaking Bad or Walking Dead. Fewer eps, sure… but high quality… and with the chance of radical plot changes (hopefully not killing of main characters, but still..)

Trek belongs on TV.
Trek helped pull TV from the bland 50′s into the socially conscious 70′s.
TV (with its un-real reality stars and focus on empty calorie, forgettable shows) NEEDS Trek, now more than ever.
America needs to have ideals, now more than ever and Trek is all about the optimism of surviving our own mistakes.

YES. Let’s do this!

161. Commodore Redshirt - October 2, 2012

I think the HBO format of a dozen shows per season and higher production values would boost the value of the whole franchise.
I agree that there is no need for graphic violence or for Kirk to drop the F-bomb or for them to show nude green dancing Orion slave women …
er …wait
… forget that last part.
…Nude green Orion women would be okay. ;-)

162. MJ - October 2, 2012

“I think Anthony is now treating this site the same way as just a hobby and not The Source For Everything New In Trek.”

Then he should either:

(1) Remove the banner tagline: “THE source for everything new in Trek;” or

(2) Donate all advertising revenue he is getting from this site to a charity of his choosing.

I have a problem with someone providing a bold proclamation like that, who is not at all serious of living up to that proclamation, and who is also making money off the fans who support the visit the site.

163. Craiger - October 2, 2012

Should they just reboot TOS for the small screen also? Recast Kirk and crew again for TV? Or maybe reboot TNG for TV and recast Picard and crew or just a whole new Enterprise crew in the 24th Centrury but it would just be the Enterprise in the 24th Century? No bloody A, B, C, D or E.

164. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

Re 156,157 should be”worldwide”………even if we do get something else first it is unthinkable (or to quote fetzig “inconceivable”) that St not be represented at the Superbowl.

165. porthoses bitch - October 2, 2012

Re 156,157 should be”worldwide”………even if we do get something else first it is unthinkable (or to quote fetzig “inconceivable”) that St not be represented at the Superbowl.

166. Vultan - October 2, 2012

If not a series from the get-go, they could always go the TV movie route to test the waters. If successful enough, do a series. If not, then… don’t. Sell a two-hour block of advertising, some special 50th anniversary Trek TV movie DVDs, and cut your loses (if any). Animated or live-action, it seems a reasonable path.

It worked for BSG.

167. Red Dead Ryan - October 2, 2012

I think an animated show is a must. We need to get more kids into Trek, so the franchise can remain relevant for decades to come. But that doesn’t mean it should be “SpongeBob Squarepants In Space”, or something dumb like that. I think “Star Wars: The Clone Wars”, and “Batman: The Animated Series” really hit the nail on the head perfectly. Those were cartoons, but with grown-up storytelling.

But I think they should wait until after the third J.J Abrams film before going back to live action television. And have that show air on AMC or HBO. They’ll make it epic, and very compelling.

168. Craiger - October 2, 2012

I could go for and animated series if it had Clone Wars SFX and great acting.

169. Hat Rick - October 2, 2012

Kayla, thanks for keeping us informed. I posted a laudatory message in your other recent thread, but it got lost in the ether.

Very interesting article, and I will consider it further.

170. Peter Loader - October 2, 2012

In all seriousness, I don’t think a live action Trek series will be affordable. A mini series perhaps. I think short-term mini series are the future of Sci-Fi, not shows that run for two or three seasons (if their lucky!) and die before their time due to poor ratings alone. Keep it short and sweet. That’s the way to go.

171. Red Dead Ryan - October 2, 2012

#95.

“…but when the topic of animation comes up—THE LINE MUST BE DRAWN HERE!”

Wait, was that a pun? :-)

172. Craiger - October 2, 2012

Also put a new Trek animated series on the Cartoon Network that way both adults and kids could tune into it and watch it at the same time. Imagine promoting the new Trek animated on the Cartoon Network like they do the Clone Wars.

173. Vultan - October 2, 2012

#171

Me making bad puns? Perish the thought.

;-)

By the way, RDR, I agree with you on Batman: TAS appealing to both kids and adults. I’ve never heard Nolan admit it, but his Bat trilogy seemed to take a lot of cues from that series. Here’s Kevin Conroy (Batman/Bruce Wayne) talking about Christian Bale’s attempt to do “the voice”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3zJxF-0N3Y

174. Bucky - October 2, 2012

there needs to be a live-action TV series because Star trek is a TV series at heart. But one has to figure out how to count the beans properly with the new viewership model that is rapidly arising to make a Trek TV show work, which is way above my pay-grade.

175. Dylan Hunt - October 2, 2012

Star Trek is a TV show. Period. It has never been exceptionally strong in the film department. The original movies were hit and miss, and the Next Gen. films were atrocious!! JJ Abrams hasn’t done the franchise any favors, either. I am 20 years old – I have been watching Trek since I was four years old, when Voyager was still on air. All my friends are trekkies, and would love to see a new series on television. The audience is there!!! We don’t need a cheesy cartoon with bad animation…just get a good writing team that won’t screw the show over like they did with Andromeda.

176. Ahmed - October 2, 2012

I find it interesting that an article about brining Trek back to TV, completely ignored what Ron Moore just said last week about this very issue in his long interview with “Wired”:

“To create Star Trek in the form that people are familiar with requires another television series, and I think it will be successful again in that medium. You have to spend some time talking about its form and structure, and how to update it again for a new audience. You still want the “boldly go where no one has gone before” part with a ship, crew and ongoing mission. That’s part and parcel of the franchise.

But you have to be able to tackle big ideas, which are larger than chasing the villain of the week. That’s really not what the series was very good at. I mean, you could look back at the original Star Trek series or The Next Generation and find some cool action-adventure episodes with space battles, but the show is about so much more than that. If you were trying to do that flavor of Star Trek on television every week, it would just fail.”

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/09/star-trek-tng25-ron-moore/all/

I can’t help but thinking that Trekmovie.com in their covering of Trek TV related news, is pushing for JJ Abrams idea of an animated TV series.

Obviously, I’m not thrilled by the talks of animated Trek, a live action series should be the focus of any new plan.

177. workforkirk - October 2, 2012

wrong showrunner = Brannon Braga – spawned multiple terrible seasons of enterprise..

right showrunner -> Manny Coto – he went to trek’s core and wrote some amazing episodes and arcs! He also had a passion for trek, vs braga had “franchise fatigue” unfortunately it was too late to save the show. I would have loved season 5!

178. DonDonP1 - October 2, 2012

Fascinating. I cannot wait for “Star Trek” to return to TV in the near future in any form. It can be either a live-action, hour-long primetime series to air in the United States on either CBS or the CW; or a kid-friendly (or family-friendly) half-hour animated series (whether 2D or computer-generated 3D) that would air on Nickelodeon. It can be set in either in the prime universe or the alternate reality.

179. sean - October 2, 2012

#148

“What so many Trek fans fail to recognize is that WE killed Star Trek on television. Our own arrogance, nit-pickyness, exclusivity, and elitism made it impossible to market to us as a core foundational audience…and impossible to try to market something more broad (Enterprise, anyone?).”

This is absolutely ridiculous. Star Trek fans have NEVER been a homogeneous group with one voice. My god, TOS fans absolutely despised the idea of TNG and did nothing but piss & moan about it. Yet the show succeeded and became a pop culture phenomenon in its own right.

Enterprise failed for many reasons, including being on a network no one watched, coming in the wake of 3 successful spinoffs that oversaturated the market with Trek, and blatantly retreading TNG/VOY episodes for a good 2 years. There’s no reason to blame fans for that.

180. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 2, 2012

175.

Liar, liar. Pants on fire.

181. sean - October 2, 2012

And I’ll say this again – an animated show need not be ”for kiddies’ nor does it need to be cheesy or poorly made.

182. Bender Bending Rodriguez - October 2, 2012

I’ll throw one in….

When ST:TNG came to TV, the creators took it to syndication instead of pinning their hopes on a network. That was a gutsy move and it worked well.

Well, why not make another bold leap? Skip the TV: make the series completely web based. Or maybe, if they do stick with the tube, how about every OTHER week? Fewer episodes means lower production costs, creates interest….

183. Aaron Bone - October 2, 2012

Yawn, skip the article. It’s very simple – yes, there should be good Trek on TV because that’s where it belongs.

But it’s a safe bet that it won’t be any good. Especially not with these clowns being within a country mile of it.

184. Bucky - October 2, 2012

Maybe if Netflix’s “Arrested Development” revival works then they can tackle a biggie like “Star Trek”.

185. MJ - October 2, 2012

I am just not a big fan of animation. Never have been. And there are a LOT of people like me who have this preference, right or wrong, agree or disagree.

186. K-7 - October 2, 2012

@175 “I have been watching Trek since I was four years old, when Voyager was still on air.”

Jesus Christ, dude, you need a shrink to fix that. If my Trek upbrining was started with Voyage at age 4, I’d be as messed up as you. So I certainly won’t hold you responsible for your strange opinions on Trek.

187. Montreal_Paul - October 2, 2012

In my opinion, there are a couple of different avenues they can take with a new series.

1 – Wait until the JJ trilogy is done and then bring something back on the air. Could be a reboot series with new kirk and a new Spock (recast more than likely.) But skip network TV. Go back to direct to Syndication like they did with TNG. If TNG was on a network, it would have been cancelled within the first year before they got their legs.

or

2 – If they want to go the Clone Wars route, an animation series with a little darker tone/ This would be to their advantage because you have all the toy tie-ins for that extra cash advantage.

Or there could could be a third option:

Set back in the prime universe about 100 years after TNG. This way they have the option of changing a few things, have a different perspective on things.

With any option, I have to agree with what Moore said, they won’t be all action. That is not feasable for a wekely TV series. They would have to be more story oriented like TOS and TNG told so well.

188. Montreal_Paul - October 2, 2012

Oh – how about Joss Whedon at the helm for a new Trek series? Just finished watching Firefly for the first time and found the entire season great. I found that it almost had a Trek feel to it.

189. Daniel Craig Is My Wookie Bitch - October 2, 2012

187
I would agree about syndicating
Except the syndication business model of today is not the same as it was back in 90s. There hasnt been a succesful hour long first run syndicated Drama since the turn of the century

I like your third option set in the prime universe about 100 years after TNG

190. Daniel Craig Is My Wookie Bitch - October 2, 2012

187
I would agree about syndicating
Except the syndication business model of today is not the same as it was back in 90s. There hasnt been a succesful hour long first run syndicated Drama since the turn of the century

I like your third option set in the prime universe about 100 years after TNG

191. Daniel Craig Is My Wookie Bitch - October 2, 2012

I know this would never happen and perhaps not a lot of people would be intersted in it. But for me I wouldnt mind seeing a trek series that involved a real time element through out an arc of a certain number of episodes each season.

what ever form of trek on tv comes next it needs to be set on the enterprise and ideally in the prime universe.

192. sean - October 2, 2012

#188

He’ll be too busy doing the SHIELD TV show.. He’d definitely do a good job, though.

193. Horta Hamburger - October 2, 2012

How about just doing excellent TV specials, like Columbo did?

194. Horta Hamburger - October 2, 2012

How about just doing excellent TV specials, like Columbo did?

195. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

First, may I congratulate Kayla on an outstanding subject and the posters for intriguing comments. You have given us much to discuss and think about.

I refer everyone to one of the best books ever written about our favorite show, “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry. In it, time and time again, it was stressed that this was first and foremost a television show, designed to make money for the studio, but that was based on two things…1) a “Wagon Train to the Stars/Captain Hornblower” adventure program and 2) a show about mankind in a futuristic setting and life on the frontier as we tried to deal with the unknown, through the eyes of 1960′s cultural sensibilities.

The original triad of Kirk, Spock and McCoy created the heart, mind and soul through which the audience could relate to all these strange and wonderful adventures that the crew was experiencing. Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them, but cumulitively, TOS, during its first-run and subsequent syndicated airings, began to have its impact affect not only the viewer, but also the country and later the entire world as well. Technobabble, while present in TOS, was a means to an end and not a crutch to lean on as later incarnations were often wont to do.

Any future Star Trek series would do well to keep these lessons in mind, albiet updating the viewpoint to the present culture. If this means abandoning or disregarding some of the episodes in the ’90′s that weigh down the telling of a ripping yarn, so be it.

This era has a lot in common with the tumultuous 1960′s, up to and including a new space race (with commercial interests playing a major part in the future of manned spaceflight) that could allow a new crew [Daedulus class?] to throw caution to the wind and set sail for parts unknown as they head out over the next horizon. I, for one, would happily set my DVR to watch that.

196. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

First, may I congratulate Kayla on an outstanding subject and the posters for intriguing comments. You have given us much to discuss and think about.

I refer everyone to one of the best books ever written about our favorite show, “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry. In it, time and time again, it was stressed that this was first and foremost a television show, designed to make money for the studio, but that was based on two things…1) a “Wagon Train to the Stars/Captain Hornblower” adventure program and 2) a show about mankind in a futuristic setting and life on the frontier as we tried to deal with the unknown, through the eyes of 1960′s cultural sensibilities.

The original triad of Kirk, Spock and McCoy created the heart, mind and soul through which the audience could relate to all these strange and wonderful adventures that the crew was experiencing. Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them, but cumulitively, TOS, during its first-run and subsequent syndicated airings, began to have its impact affect not only the viewer, but also the country and later the entire world as well. Technobabble, while present in TOS, was a means to an end and not a crutch to lean on as later incarnations were often wont to do.

Any future Star Trek series would do well to keep these lessons in mind, albiet updating the viewpoint to the present culture. If this means abandoning or disregarding some of the episodes in the ’90′s that weigh down the telling of a ripping yarn, so be it.

This era has a lot in common with the tumultuous 1960′s, up to and including a new space race (with commercial interests playing a major part in the future of manned spaceflight) that could allow a new crew [Daedulus class?] to throw caution to the wind and set sail for parts unknown as they head out over the next horizon. I, for one, would happily set my DVR to watch that.

197. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

First, may I congratulate Kayla on an outstanding subject and the posters for intriguing comments. You have given us much to discuss and think about.

I refer everyone to one of the best books ever written about our favorite show, “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry. In it, time and time again, it was stressed that this was first and foremost a television show, designed to make money for the studio, but that was based on two things…1) a “Wagon Train to the Stars/Captain Hornblower” adventure program and 2) a show about mankind in a futuristic setting and life on the frontier as we tried to deal with the unknown, through the eyes of 1960′s cultural sensibilities.

The original triad of Kirk, Spock and McCoy created the heart, mind and soul through which the audience could relate to all these strange and wonderful adventures that the crew was experiencing. Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them, but cumulitively, TOS, during its first-run and subsequent syndicated airings, began to have its impact affect not only the viewer, but also the country and later the entire world as well. Technobabble, while present in TOS, was a means to an end and not a crutch to lean on as later incarnations were often wont to do.

Any future Star Trek series would do well to keep these lessons in mind, albiet updating the viewpoint to the present culture. If this means abandoning or disregarding some of the episodes in the ’90′s that weigh down the telling of a ripping yarn, so be it.

This era has a lot in common with the tumultuous 1960′s, up to and including a new space race (with commercial interests playing a major part in the future of manned spaceflight) that could allow a new crew [Daedulus class?] to throw caution to the wind and set sail for parts unknown as they head out over the next horizon. I, for one, would happily set my DVR to watch that.

198. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

First, may I congratulate Kayla on an outstanding subject and the posters for intriguing comments. You have given us much to discuss and think about.

I refer everyone to one of the best books ever written about our favorite show, “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry. In it, time and time again, it was stressed that this was first and foremost a television show, designed to make money for the studio, but that was based on two things…1) a “Wagon Train to the Stars/Captain Hornblower” adventure program and 2) a show about mankind in a futuristic setting and life on the frontier as we tried to deal with the unknown, through the eyes of 1960′s cultural sensibilities.

The original triad of Kirk, Spock and McCoy created the heart, mind and soul through which the audience could relate to all these strange and wonderful adventures that the crew was experiencing. Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them, but cumulitively, TOS, during its first-run and subsequent syndicated airings, began to have its impact affect not only the viewer, but also the country and later the entire world as well. Technobabble, while present in TOS, was a means to an end and not a crutch to lean on as later incarnations were often wont to do.

Any future Star Trek series would do well to keep these lessons in mind, albiet updating the viewpoint to the present culture. If this means abandoning or disregarding some of the episodes in the ’90′s that weigh down the telling of a ripping yarn, so be it.

This era has a lot in common with the tumultuous 1960′s, up to and including a new space race (with commercial interests playing a major part in the future of manned spaceflight) that could allow a new crew [Daedulus class?] to throw caution to the wind and set sail for parts unknown as they head out over the next horizon. I, for one, would happily set my DVR to watch that.

199. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

First, may I congratulate Kayla on an outstanding subject and the posters for intriguing comments. You have given us much to discuss and think about.

I refer everyone to one of the best books ever written about our favorite show, “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry. In it, time and time again, it was stressed that this was first and foremost a television show, designed to make money for the studio, but that was based on two things…1) a “Wagon Train to the Stars/Captain Hornblower” adventure program and 2) a show about mankind in a futuristic setting and life on the frontier as we tried to deal with the unknown, through the eyes of 1960′s cultural sensibilities.

The original triad of Kirk, Spock and McCoy created the heart, mind and soul through which the audience could relate to all these strange and wonderful adventures that the crew was experiencing. Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them, but cumulitively, TOS, during its first-run and subsequent syndicated airings, began to have its impact affect not only the viewer, but also the country and later the entire world as well. Technobabble, while present in TOS, was a means to an end and not a crutch to lean on as later incarnations were often wont to do.

Any future Star Trek series would do well to keep these lessons in mind, albiet updating the viewpoint to the present culture. If this means abandoning or disregarding some of the episodes in the ’90′s that weigh down the telling of a ripping yarn, so be it.

This era has a lot in common with the tumultuous 1960′s, up to and including a new space race (with commercial interests playing a major part in the future of manned spaceflight) that could allow a new crew [Daedulus class?] to throw caution to the wind and set sail for parts unknown as they head out over the next horizon. I, for one, would happily set my DVR to watch that.

200. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

First, may I congratulate Kayla on an outstanding subject and the posters for intriguing comments. You have given us much to discuss and think about.

I refer everyone to one of the best books ever written about our favorite show, “The Making of Star Trek” by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry. In it, time and time again, it was stressed that this was first and foremost a television show, designed to make money for the studio, but that was based on two things…1) a “Wagon Train to the Stars/Captain Hornblower” adventure program and 2) a show about mankind in a futuristic setting and life on the frontier as we tried to deal with the unknown, through the eyes of 1960′s cultural sensibilities.

The original triad of Kirk, Spock and McCoy created the heart, mind and soul through which the audience could relate to all these strange and wonderful adventures that the crew was experiencing. Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them, but cumulitively, TOS, during its first-run and subsequent syndicated airings, began to have its impact affect not only the viewer, but also the country and later the entire world as well. Technobabble, while present in TOS, was a means to an end and not a crutch to lean on as later incarnations were often wont to do.

Any future Star Trek series would do well to keep these lessons in mind, albiet updating the viewpoint to the present culture. If this means abandoning or disregarding some of the episodes in the ’90′s that weigh down the telling of a ripping yarn, so be it.

This era has a lot in common with the tumultuous 1960′s, up to and including a new space race (with commercial interests playing a major part in the future of manned spaceflight) that could allow a new crew [Daedulus class?] to throw caution to the wind and set sail for parts unknown as they head out over the next horizon. I, for one, would happily set my DVR to watch that.

201. Tony Whitehead - October 2, 2012

Sorry about the double-post.

202. Captain_Conrad - October 2, 2012

Get another series like DS9 and it will do fine!

203. Jack - October 2, 2012

“Most viewers never even understood the various morality plays that washed over them”

I wonder whether that might not be true. There wasn’t much subtlety to them, and morality plays had dominated TV drama for years. I think viewers were generally a lot more savvy than we sometimes assume now, looking back (and more savvy than than advertisers, censors and executives assumed back then).

204. Daniel Craig is My wookie Bitch - October 2, 2012

I am sure there wont be an article about this on here so thought i would post it here

over on the digital bits there is an article that references a interview where the possibilty of seeing DS9 remasterd after TNG is completed
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/100212_0100#.UGvP0inpp08.facebook

“In other news today, we highly recommend that you Trekkers check out this radio story from KPCC’s Off Ramp program – it’s a feature on CBS’ Star Trek: The Next Generation Blu-ray remastering effort. And you’ll definitely want to stick with it right to the end, because for the first time in public (to our knowledge) there’s the suggestion made that – provided demand is there and the TNG Blu-rays all sell well – CBS may continue their BD remastering/upgrade effort on to Star Trek: Deep Space Nine! Cool news indeed. This jives with what we’ve been hearing from our own industry sources. Keep your fingers crossed.”

205. Thisguy1313 - October 2, 2012

Okay.. I’m just going to state it: as a Trek fan my whole life, as long as it is legit sci-fi and the characters are likeable, there will be the fans. I’m so tired of ratings being held over the heads of the fans when it comes to “Enterprise” and the performance of that show. As a long time and dedicated fan I will say that Enterprise sucked. It sucked big ones. Bakula was the worst captain ever, and the show did nothing except try and rehash the formula from the other successful Trek series makeups and it didn’t work for the premise at all. I could understand T’pal being there, but Phlox wasn’t a very good character, and judging from the fact that the series was set pre-TOS, it wasn’t believeable for the fans to be set in that era. Holding the poor performance of Enterprise over our heads everytime there is consideration of a new series is folly. I dont even have to get started on the fact that they started it out on a backdoor network for 3 seasons. If it was on a decent channel like the Syfy channel, ot would garner more viewership than their current popular shows like Warehouse 13, which is very appealing to viewers and they watch it every week. Trek, a decent and fresh take on Trek would blow those other shows out of the water. Just dont pull an Enterprise with the show and it will do fantastically.

206. MJ - October 2, 2012

@204. Finally, Daniel Craig. you provide me a legitimate reason why I should overpay for TNG Bu-Rays….to support and end-game to get my beloved DS9 series remasterd on Blu-Ray — yea, that works for me!!!

207. LizardGirl - October 3, 2012

It will be very difficult to do any new Trek series without revisiting at least SOME ideas from past Trek. Very difficult indeed, especially if the consensus is to go with a reboot or spinoff of TOS–JJ style. We would have Kirk, Spock, McCoy–but not expect similar story elements from the same timeline? Tricky.

I would like to see a story arc where our crew (new or old) explores the Mirrorverse, more like stuck in it. To survive, long treasured ideas would have to be suspended. Of course they make it back to their own timeline, but the lingering effects of their experience has changed them. For the good and for the worse.

But the Mirrorverse is nothing new. And that arc would be best for second or third season anyway. It may confuse many who have NO idea what that is. Which leads to the idea of a new series set in TNG. We’re assuming that the majority of new-Trek-series audience has at least seen or heard of the new movie. Is it safe to assume they’re familiar with TNG? I, for one, will not assume that!

Also, I don’t agree with a new Star Trek series on Showtimes or HBO, in any format. When I think HBO, I don’t think family entertainment–which Trek has always been. Even the new movie, despite increase in action, can still be enjoyed by the family. Also, not everyone has HBO. Not saying that everyone would watch Trek on TV anyways, but some wouldn’t have the opportunity to see it.

208. Dr. Cheis - October 3, 2012

They should just re-amimate the original animated series, and replace some of the voice acting (a lot of it sounds like Scotty), music, and sound effects. Then gauge how well that performs and decide whether to make another animated series with the new crew.

209. Nano - October 3, 2012

Not fond of the Animated idea unless done like Beowulf, but again don’t think that would be cost effective.

BSG didn’t contend with Aliens or Societies each week keeping cost low, BSG Rocked imagine Voyager done in that style.

I purpose a series of made for TV or webcast movies, anthology in nature. 4 to 6 a year 6 hours in length.

Then again Bob & company could donate a unused script to ST new voyages, just saying…

210. Dr Beckett - October 3, 2012

A full on Trek series will not be viable, that’s the sad reality. However I am sure that if done properly, a TV movie or two, or a mini-series would definitely pull in some numbers.

211. Michael - October 3, 2012

If a new series was just another rehash of TOS (again) I doubt I, or fans of similar inclination, would watch it for long. TNG only really became the cultural icon it is when it began to take on it’s own identity, and even it rapidly declined in seasons 6 and 7 when the idea well began to run dry. DS9 at least justified it’s existence by trying to be fresh and taking chances; even if it never caught on to popular culture in the way TNG did. VOY, ENT, even the TNG movies seemed “safer” sure, but looking at the numbers I’d say I wasn’t the only one getting sick of recycling the same cliches over and over, and I’d argue they only diminished the franchise, like the prequel trilogy did for Star Wars. Some things are better left alone. It would take a truly faithful yet ambitious reinterpretation of Star Trek to catch my interest, and thus get my money. Not a nostalgic cash grab or a Star Wars movie with Star Trek nouns (and verbs). I don’t see that happening, though, as I imagine there’s more money to be found in the action audience than in persons like myself.

212. captain Nick - October 3, 2012

@ 38
I agree entirely. Any attempt to put Trek back on any screen is a bonus, besides I thought JJ’s attempt brought it right up to date.

213. J - October 3, 2012

Won’t happen. They can’t chase Nero and blow up Vulcan and Narada in every episode. And apparently there is no market for real sci-fi nowadays. So, no, I don’t see it happening.

214. Nomad - October 3, 2012

I suspect Enterprise failed partly because by that time, with 4 previous incarnations, Star Trek had too much baggage behind it to pick up new viewers. It had be come too ‘cliquey’ to attract a new audience, and the old audience – myself included – were dropping off because we’d had our fill. Also because it wasn’t that good.

215. Billiam - October 3, 2012

One thing I started to dislike about the TV shows was it being the same crew, day in, day out; even on the same starship you have different shifts of personnel that can include deep characters that reappear every month. Look at Chief O Brien, one of my favorites. Even take it to the next level and jump between ships every week.

I always wanted to see action unfold, especially in combat situations, where when a captain barks over the intercom to “get that port nacelle back online!”, I want to SEE that engineer doing the work instead of panning about the bridge some more. As the engineer works, have the audience listen in on his intercom from the torpedo bay; etc. Move the story through the decks and give us some crewmen you want to like when they are killed for no reason two seasons later. Have entire episodes exploring these ships that are supposedly the size of football stadiums. So prove it, I don’t believe this giant CGI spaceship has any guts.

So much of the Enterprise-D went unseen, and I’m still sore about that.

216. T'Cal - October 3, 2012

As for the anthology idea, it makes me think of the old “Police Story” series from the 70′s and 80′s, which was a great show. IIRC, all of the episodes concerned employees of the LAPD – patrolmen, detectives, civilians, etc., and each week it told a story from different characters’ perspectives. Occasionally, they would bring back some characters but usually it was new actors playing new roles all set on the job in present day LA.

For Trek, the downside would be that you would get little to no character development aside from what the 60 minute episode offers unless they were to make some two- or three-part episodes. In addition, stories could be told from different perspectives – command level officers, security officers, medical officers, enlisted men, civilians, even aliens. Also, the locations could be aboard a ship, on a space station, at Starfleet Medical, at Starfleet Command, at some Federation facility, or just is a home. The entire Trek history would be there for the writers to choose from. Being a live action series would likely prove costly but modular sets could be redressed and reused. As an animated series, much of these concerns disappear but at the risk of turning off some viewers.

217. David C. Roberson - October 3, 2012

In many ways, I don’t want a new Trek series. I think I’d rather have a couple of direct-to-DVD/BLU mini series or movies that tied up TNG/DS9/Voy characters. -shrugs- Just my two cents.

218. Holger - October 3, 2012

A ‘Black Ops’ show – so much for boldly going. Yes, there are many possibilities, and so there are also many possibilities of taking up any concept and slapping the title “Star Trek” on it.

219. David C. Roberson - October 3, 2012

It is clear to me (painfully clear) that there would be no point in making a new Star Trek TV series. The fans would just whine about it regardless of how good it was. It could literally be the best-written television show of all time, and people would whine if it wasn’t some variation on the formulaic “let’s go explore” concept that we’ve seen (and if Enterprise was any indication) and grown tired of. Whine about it being different, whine about it being the same. Idiots. Star Trek was ALSO about exploring inwardly. Ya know, the human condition? My GOD Star Trek fans can ironically be the most narrow-minded people in the world.

220. Desstruxion - October 3, 2012

I’d like to see an animated series that takes place in the prime universe. Maybe 50 years past Next Gen. Wouldn’t necessarily have to be on a ship called Enterprise but a ship as the primary setting would be a must. I like the animation used in the Clone Wars series. If done well, a whole new generation of Trekkies could come about and the cool toys that we’d all be able to buy would be worth it.

221. SoonerDave - October 3, 2012

@179 “My god, TOS fans absolutely despised the idea of TNG ”

We did? I was one of the “one-off” Trek fans who picked picked up on the series as a kid when it went into strip syndication in the early 70′s. And I had no problem with TNG at all, although I lamented the fact that we never got the TOS crew back on TV where it might have actually been more successful.

Did I criticize TNG as a Trek fan? Absolutely, and if you don’t think some of those first three or so years of TNG didn’t deserve criticism, you’re fooling yourself. Some of it was patently awful, and often because they were nearly complete script retreads of TOS episodes. TNG became good, VERY good, as it started to find its own stride – the Borg, the Cardassians, and some “self-contained” episodes, too, all worked to make TNG very, very good at times. But this unilateralist notion of “TOS fans hated TNG” is silly. From a sentimental point of view, TOS will always be my favorite, and Kirk will always be “the” captain, but that’s just how things go.

There was a time when Trek’s return to TV would have been a great thing, and arguably a monumental thing in terms of TV history (particularly had TOS returned in the 70′s, which would have been all-but unheard of in that era). In all honesty, I think the time for a successful return of Trek to TV has passed. The concept of brave folks exploring the universe in a legitimate way, rather than a one-eyeballed “kill the aliens with a ray-gun” way, has, quite frankly, passed. Just my opinion.

222. Admirmal_Bumblebee - October 3, 2012

Actually I don’t know if I would watch another Star Trek TV-series. I think my preferences for watching a TV-series has changed over the years.
A new Star Trek-series would have to be fundamentally different from all the former Star Trek-series for me to watch it.

223. Perplex - October 3, 2012

With the same people from the 2009er movie at the helm? No.

224. Aaron - October 3, 2012

I fall in the “desired” demographic and have been loyal to trek throughout. I can see the fiscal point of an animated series but I have no interest in watching one. Star Trek is about the human condition, understanding others and in turn ourselves. This is done best in my opinion with a human cast.

I have also see some of these new animated shows created from resent reboots. They don’t hold my attention and seem very cheesy with slapped together stories. I entered the “desired” adult demographic and I would like to watch grown up shows, I am done with cartoons.

225. Sisko for President - October 3, 2012

I’ve seen some really good ideas tossed out here, but my favorite would be the anthology set in the TNG DS9 VOY time period. There are many stories left to be told.

226. astrodem - October 3, 2012

@149

Voyager had a lot of problems, but none of them had anything to do with being cut off from the Federation. Voyager’s biggest problem was the piss poor writing and the lack of compelling creative vision for the show. Same goes for Enterprise. Both of those shows, conceptually, had extraordinary potential that the show-runners failed to fulfill.

Whether the next Star Trek series is set in the Federation or not doesn’t make a bit of difference as long as the writing is good. You can tell good stories anywhere. The same goes for putting the characters through the ringer BSG style. There’s no reason Trek couldn’t do this extremely well with a strong team of writers.

@ 146

When I said “adult” themes, I wasn’t talking about nudity and cursing, although I don’t have any particular objection to those things if they are well justified within the narrative context. I meant sophisticated writing aimed at intelligent, forward-thinking adults. You and I both want the same thing, we’re just characterizing it differently.

227. sean - October 3, 2012

#221

Dave, I should have phrased that differently as my entire point was that fandom has never been a unified collective consciousness (har har). Many TOS fans were quite vocal in their distaste for the idea of another show with different characters (and some still moan about it, just read the comments section here or on any other Trek site and you’ll see folks that seem to think TNG is where it all went wrong, despite its incredible popularity with the culture-at-large). The whinging was palpable! :) But obviously, many TOS fans were okay with the idea (you & me, clearly). And over time, the show won over its audience. As did many of the follow-ups. Including the original cast, which also did their fair share of whinging!

Enterprise, however, just didn’t manage it. And to say that’s because fans were ‘elitist’ and ‘arrogant’ is just ridiculous. As you point out, TNG had a bad habit of recycling some TOS plots in its first 2 seasons, but they also did some unusual and original stuff during that time period (the pilot, Where No One Has Gone Before, The Battle, Conspiracy, Datalore, Symbiosis, The Measure of a Man, etc.). They quickly learned that doing old TOS plots wasn’t going to work.

TNG also came 20 years later. Enterprise came fresh of the tail of Voyager, and felt very much like that show (which also had a bad habit of plundering old TNG scripts – heck, in some cases, they plundered their own scripts!). So it was like watching a redo of a redo of a redo. I think it was too much, too soon, one Trip to the well too many.

228. MJ - October 3, 2012

@213 “And apparently there is no market for real sci-fi nowadays. ”

How in the hell do you explain the huge ratings success of Falling Skies then? Explain that one to me? I would argue that no one has done any GOOD sf lately…which is why Falling Skies is hugely successful — it is great scifi.

@219 It is clear to me (painfully clear) that there would be no point in making a new Star Trek TV series. The fans would just whine about it regardless of how good it was.

Yea, they’d whine about it after they watched it five times, and whine about it still after the bought it on iTunes, and then whine further about it after they bought it on blu-ray. Your point???

@224 “Trek is about the human condition, understanding others and in turn ourselves. This is done best in my opinion with a human cast.”

EXACTLY! No Orci Star Wars….err, I mean Star Trek show on the Cartoon Network please!

@227 “Many TOS fans were quite vocal in their distaste for the idea of another show with different characters (and some still moan about it, just read the comments section here or on any other Trek site and you’ll see folks that seem to think TNG is where it all went wrong, despite its incredible popularity with the culture-at-large). The whinging was palpable! :) But obviously, many TOS fans were okay with the idea (you & me, clearly). And over time, the show won over its audience. As did many of the follow-ups. Including the original cast, which also did their fair share of whinging!”

TNG was a passable Trek series. As far as they go, TOS and DS9 stand about the rest, and rate #1 and #2, respectively. I would put TNG 3rd, and then the dreggs, Enterprise and Voyager, tie for 4th/5th. You seem to infer that TNG is an iconic show; I don’t agree with that. TOS was the only Trek series that achieved iconic status, and 100 years from now, it will likely be the only one of the bunch that most of popular culture will still recognize.

229. sean - October 3, 2012

#228

Respectfully, TNG is iconic whether you personally enjoy it or not. Nowadays, people are more likely to have grown up watching TNG than TOS. Yes, original Trek will always be remembered as the first. But TNG was iconic in its own right, and established itself outside the parameters of its parent program. I love DS9 and it is my favorite Trek show, but it does not have the recognition that TNG does.

230. Smike - October 3, 2012

TOS and TNG both achieved iconic status. They together ARE Star Trek. VOY and ENT just tried to copy the formula…DS9 tried to be different but seized to be true Star Trek that way.

If a new Trek show should succeed, it has to be a new-universe reboot of TNG… Let the nuTrek TOS crew continue for a decade on the big screen (even if they have to recast some of the increasingly expensive actors) and do a new version of TNG with 13 episodes a year like Doctor Who.

That’s the way Trek works best. Let Kirk fight Klingons, Romulans and other villains in action-packed adventures while Picard does real SciFi with intelligent stories about the human condition and the essence of existence.

231. Smike - October 3, 2012

And no, PLEASE, NO ANIMATED SERIES! I loath Clone Wars. It was the final nail to Star Wars’ coffin. Now they can only mock themselves in Detours…because Star Wars has been turned into a joke. Animation doesn’t work for me… It NEVER does. Even if it’s well written it fails to impress me. It just doesn’t work for me. Not even for comic book characters.

232. Smike - October 3, 2012

230. ceased, not seized… sorry!

233. Thomas - October 3, 2012

229. Sean

When I was younger (late 80s to early 90s), I know I was definitely more familiar with TNG than TOS. You could even put TAS over TOS, since our local library had some VHS tapes of the animated series. Yes, I had seen a few of the movies; TVH stands out above the others for that time. However, at that time, TNG was still in first-run syndication, and I never saw any TOS episodes except for the occasional marathon. Nowadays, depending on where you live or what cable/satellite service you subscribe to, TOS is on five days a week again.

234. Vultan - October 3, 2012

#229

Plus, TNG is about the only Trek show you can still find in reruns. Several years ago, DS9 and Voyager were being shown on Spike on a daily basis. Enterprise was on SyFy. And TOS was on TV Land for a short time. But TNG is still hanging in there on BBC-America, though now it’s down to just a couple of days a week.

It may be different in other areas. I think TOS is being shown on some local stations still.

I hope the new movie brings the other series back into rotation. A daily shot of Trek is good for what ails you.

235. ME!! - October 3, 2012

Another interesting concept….

Set somewhere after the events of Nemesis in the Prime Universe, say, 50 years or so.

Someone has finally broken the “Warp Barrier” and Starfleet is prepping for the first ever intergalactic voyage to explore the Andromeda Galaxy. The brand new Enterprise has been built specifically for the voyage, outfitted with the latest tech and the new engines.

Reps from each of the governing planets of the Federation are aboard for the trip.

The time it would take to get there could be determined later as stories are developed. Likely seasons 3, 4 or 5 would see them through to their destination.

One point would be that the space in between galaxies turns out to not be as empty as Starfleet assumed. Encounters with some of the strangest beings/races/ships/etc would be the focus of the initial season.

Season 2 would deal with more personal issues amongst the crew as they deal with the concept of quite possibly being on a one way trip. This would be occasionally broken up by various other concerns as well as more encounters with alien civilizations and ships of exploration.

Seasons 3 & 4, the ship could arrive at the Andromeda Galaxy only to find they aren’t wanted….an empire of conquest greets them upon arrival.

Further seasons would be developed as the show progressed.

236. Vultan - October 3, 2012

As for iconic status, I think you can judge a show by how it affects an actor’s career.

Are the TOS actors icons? Yes. No doubt.

Is Patrick Stewart an icon? Oh, definitely yes. And without TNG he most likely wouldn’t be. He was the show, and the show was him.

237. Vger23 - October 3, 2012

@152

Sure, as soon as you show me a current sci-fi television franchise (NOT a movie franchise, which is completely different) that is successful and mainstream (meaning not some obscure BBC show or Sci-fi channel original).

LOL

238. Vger23 - October 3, 2012

I also think it’s ironic that the subtilte of the article is “An Objective Evaluation” which is followed by approximately 200 decidedly UNobjective responses.

“ARRRHHHH!! OF COURSE STAR TREK SHOUD BE ON TV!! BEST SHOW EVER!!!! PUT IT ON EVERY HOUR OF EVERY DAY! IT SHOULD TAKE PLACE IN THE 45TH CENTURY AND BE EXPLORING THE HUMAN CONDITION IN A WAR WITH SECTION 31 AND THE BREEN AND BORGIFIED-PAKLEDS!!!! WE NEED THIS!!!! MAKE IT SO!!! HAVE IT BE AN ANIMATED ANTHOLOGY WITH LIVE-ACTION ELEMENTS AND PUT IT ON AFTER THE WALKING DEAD!!! YES YES YES!!!!”

Really?

239. Phil - October 3, 2012

@235. So, Voyager on steroids, then?

240. Nano - October 3, 2012

I enjoyed TNG but TNG, Voyager even Ent became to sterile. Too much tech babble and federation or Star Fleet Protocol Voy had the right idea but misfired.

Here’s my suggestion feel free to critique:
The Crew of the Starship ??? mutinied and fled the Battle of Wolf 359 to save their own skin! Capt Dunsel and loyalist were dumped / marooned on a planet while the remaining crew and ship fled into darkness :) hiding. The series stems around the Hunt for this renegade Ship & Crew. Now you have two simultaneous story lines going.

241. Nano - October 3, 2012

I enjoyed TNG but TNG, Voyager even Ent became to sterile. Too much tech babble and federation or Star Fleet Protocol Voy had the right idea but misfired.

Here’s my suggestion feel free to critique:
The Crew of the Starship ??? mutinied and fled the Battle of Wolf 359 to save their own skin! Capt Dunsel and loyalist were dumped / marooned on a planet while the remaining crew and ship fled into darkness :) hiding. The series stems around the Hunt for this renegade Ship & Crew. Now you have two simultaneous story lines going.

242. Nano - October 3, 2012

I enjoyed TNG but TNG, Voyager even Ent became to sterile. Too much tech babble and federation or Star Fleet Protocol Voy had the right idea but misfired.

Here’s my suggestion feel free to critique:
The Crew of the Starship ??? mutinied and fled the Battle of Wolf 359 to save their own skin! Capt Dunsel and loyalist were dumped / marooned on a planet while the remaining crew and ship fled into darkness :) hiding. The series stems around the Hunt for this renegade Ship & Crew. Now you have two simultaneous story lines going.

243. Nano - October 3, 2012

Oooo Mirrored posting?

244. Khan was Framed! - October 3, 2012

I gotta agree with the angle here: Animated anthology style series all the way!

Like it or hate it, Enterprise was onto something great in their fourth season with the multi-part story arcs.

I really hope for an animated series of 2-4 part enclosed story lines from all over the Star Trek universe.

This would allow producers to take full advantage of the voice talents of former & current Trek stars. They could do story lines leading up to the next movie, etc.

Considering all the above mentioned & very accurate observations on the current state of TV, I think animation is the only logical course for now.

Right now we’re about to further this new generation of Trekkies experience with the upcoming sequel. This will build and enrich the audience for Star Trek, just as TWOK did.

Which led to TNG being received well, because there was a built in audience of multiple generations hungry for Star Trek on TV.

Following up “Into Darkness” with an animated series will pave the way for a third movie & an eventual live action series on whatever format TV shows are being broadcast over by then.

245. Khan was Framed! - October 3, 2012

I gotta agree with the angle here: Animated anthology style series all the way!

Like it or hate it, Enterprise was onto something great in their fourth season with the multi-part story arcs.

I really hope for an animated series of 2-4 part enclosed story lines from all over the Star Trek universe.

This would allow producers to take full advantage of the voice talents of former & current Trek stars. They could do story lines leading up to the next movie, etc.

Considering all the above mentioned & very accurate observations on the current state of TV, I think animation is the only logical course for now.

Right now we’re about to further this new generation of Trekkies experience with the upcoming sequel. This will build and enrich the audience for Star Trek, just as TWOK did.

Which led to TNG being received well, because there was a built in audience of multiple generations hungry for Star Trek on TV.

Following up “Into Darkness” with an animated series will pave the way for a third movie & an eventual live action series on whatever format TV shows are being broadcast over by then.

246. Vultan - October 3, 2012

#238

Come on, man, would you go to Boston and expect a largely objective view on the Red Sox?

247. bytesaber - October 3, 2012

As long as it’s not a reboot universe. Just add to the real one we already have established and love.

248. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 3, 2012

No universe is any more real than any other. It is just a matter of what someone is used to and familiar with. I find the tone of these kind of comments a bit offensive. What if such alternate universes do exist alongside our own? For all we know, this may actually be the case. What makes one being in a familiar setting any more real than a similar being in a slightly different, less familiar setting?

What happened to IDIC, goodwill and an open, generous heart?

249. Bored, Bored, Bored with Star Trek. - October 3, 2012

Oh come on. Been there, done that. Come up with something original with Trek. All these ideas are dull, dull, dull.

**yawn**

250. K-7 - October 3, 2012

What is with all these morons who are double and triple posting???

I am not even going to bother reading their posts given how irritating this practice is. I recommend others join me.

251. K-7 - October 3, 2012

#231 “TOS and TNG both achieved iconic status. They together ARE Star Trek.”

No, TNG is simple not iconic. It has not pervadued pop culture much at all.

252. K-7 - October 3, 2012

#237. Stewart doesn’t even scratch the surface of the iconic status of Shatner. Shatner’s Kirk will stand the test of time and will be remembered 3-4 generations from now; Stewat’s Picard won’t stand the test of time.

253. Craiger - October 3, 2012

Check this out first Iron Man 3 teaser trailer Oct. 23rd and that isn’t out until 2013. Come on give a sequal trailer.

http://collider.com/iron-man-3-trailer-release-date/199906/

254. Bored, Bored, Bored with Star Trek. - October 3, 2012

You’re one to talk K-7. 3 posts about nothing that hasn’t been said before. Nice name calling, by the way. Classy.

**yawn**

255. Craiger - October 3, 2012

Reboot Kirk, Spock, Scotty and crew on the Enterprise and could they be set either in the 23rd or 24th Century?

256. Kyle R. - October 3, 2012

Just thinking off the top of my head here.

20 episodes/5 season series. Air 2-3 years after the last Trek movie.

Takes place prior and leading up to TWOK.

257. Jack - October 3, 2012

BTW, a recent-ish article criticizing Abrams’ Trek

http://whatculture.com/film/15-blunders-that-ruined-j-j-abrams-star-trek-and-destroyed-the-franchise.php

258. K-7 - October 3, 2012

“You’re one to talk K-7. 3 posts about nothing that hasn’t been said before. Nice name calling, by the way. Classy.”

Huh? What name-calling? People are posting the same posts multiple times. That IS the DEFINITION of moronic.

I am making a factual statement — that is not name-calling. There is a diference.

Sorry if my comments on TNG hurt your feelings.

259. sean - October 3, 2012

#251/252

Sorry, but I disagree. And so does pop culture.

260. Bored, Bored, Bored with Star Trek. - October 3, 2012

K-7

You didn’t hurt my feelings with your comments, you put me to sleep. And yes, calling someone a moron IS name calling.

261. Vultan - October 3, 2012

#258

Those people aren’t posting multiple times on purpose. Check the other pages. There’s been gremlins in trekmovie’s system lately.

262. kirktrip - October 3, 2012

why not just have shorter seasons ala HBO !! it would help for the quality of each show and at the same time lower the cost of a season! If they can have good shows for almost nothing with Startrek on the internet ( not all of them ) why not do it on CBS ?

263. Bored, Bored, Bored with Star Trek. - October 3, 2012

I am the real ‘Bored, Bored,Bored’ and I did not post in this thread at all.

Someone is a imposter. Probably Captain whatshisname…

For the record, I think Trek on TV is a good idea, and I ‘d love to see it again.

this thread and post was NOT boring

264. jamesingeneva - October 3, 2012

Maybe when the guys over at the TNG Bridge Restaurant group are done, someone can put together a few other sets and make a TNG fan film/show.

My problem with the current TNG fan films is the acting could use a lot of improvement and less dependence on CGI for scenes. The two combined devalue what are otherwise good scripts. And I want to clarify on the acting comment, it’s not even that they’re acting is necessarily bad, it’s just not as fluid. There’s long pauses, a lot of standing still, etc etc that make it less lifelike. I’m nowhere near qualified to decide if that’s bad directing, production, etc..

Realistically, if these guys can do what they do with virtually no money, I see no reason why someone with a little bit of money couldn’t put together a really good web series.

Also, the comment that Trek would be great on HBO I have to agree. That’s right up their ally in terms of production value. 10 simple episodes, really good sets, really good scripts, adult themes, and BAM it would be huge! It would be a TREK nobody’s seen but can appreciate. A cable network could do it too. Look what they do with Sons of Anarchy. I’m not a biker fan nor am I a gang banger but my god can put they put together 10 great episodes a season! 27 episodes a season is simply too much trek in a universe that’s had nearly every type of story told.

265. Christopher Roberts - October 3, 2012

Interesting move Captain. What technique was that?

The techinque of a desperate man.

266. Christopher Roberts - October 3, 2012

Interesting move Captain. What technique was that?

The technique of a desperate man.

267. Christopher Roberts - October 3, 2012

Looks like a bad case of the Manheim Effect, all over this thread.

268. Montreal_Paul - October 3, 2012

Up here in Canada, SPACE network runs TNG, TOS & Voyager daily. The thing that seems to increase is the Technobabble on the shows. TOS had some, but not a lot. TNG had a lot. But I find that Voyager has more. I think that that is one thing that has to change – lighten up on the technobabble.

269. The Troubled Tribble - October 3, 2012

It’s not coming back – not now, not ever.

It’s dead Jim. The JJ movies a shadow of the ethos of Trek.

270. Vultan - October 3, 2012

#265-267

Ha! Good one. You win the internet for today, Mr. Roberts.

271. K-7 - October 3, 2012

@263 “I am the real ‘Bored, Bored,Bored’ and I did not post in this thread at all.”

Thanks for clarifying that. The name-calling criticism from you seemed weird. Yea, I think Captain Ransom/Stunkill has another sock-puppet at work here.

Good to know that those comments above towards me by your imposter are complete B.S. I will ingore that moron….whoops, there I go again! LOL

272. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

I am beginning to think that this Bored, bored, bored guy and the Captain guy and stunkill are all the same person. There is a pattern there.

But onto the article at hand. How about someone like Whedon or Seth Macfarlane to inject some new blood and vision into Star Trek?

273. Bored, Bored, Bored with Star Trek. - October 3, 2012

@271 K-7 – you are welcome.
@272 – Mike Jones… I am not the Captain Guy… he is a name caller that simply was rude to me without cause in another thread.

I have NOT posted in this thread because of the lively comments, and some good insight that I thought was certainly worth reading.

Captain whatshisname is an imposter…

274. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

Well, there are some very rude and domineering personalities on here. I guess that’s the reason I am always afraid to post anything. I’m afraid someone will jump down my throat. On this thread alone, I have seen about 5 or 6 people down talk to posters. It’s a little intimidating to be honest. You don’t really see that on other boards. Not sure why. But it sure makes for some interesting reading to be sure! LOL.

As for this article, my feeling is that they will wait until after the third movie is done. I think Bob Orci said that they were planning for a trilogy? Perhaps Star Trek will return to TV after that. Maybe stay off the silver screen for about 5 or 6 years and then the TV Trek will transfer to movies. Kind of like coming full circle again.

275. xai - October 3, 2012

I did not have time to read all the posts above, so forgive if I repeat.
Take Enterprise, the most maligned of the Series family. In my opinion the show got better as time went on, especially the final season (except the finale). Enterprise’s problem, other than a bad start, was that it was on a network (UPN) that about half the USA could get. You did not have the “critical mass” audience that is needed to see the show to make it go. Yes, there were other issues, including canon problems, but overall, I liked the show. Some of the story arcs could have been done away with (alien space Nazis?) and filled with stories that stretched the Trek universe.
I do think a show could be revived, given a large enough opportunity at a larger audience. Also I think a Gary Seven spin-off SHOULD be done. There is a huge opportunity for that type of show to succeed, with a Trek audience or beyond it. Go for it

276. Shilliam Watner (Click for Trek Ships Poster) - October 3, 2012

This is the worst thing about Anthony being gone – there is nobody to police the posters, and unfortunately it is needed. When he’s gone the trolls take over and identity theft increases and overall maturity plummets.

I think Anthony is tired of babysitting. Running this site takes a lot more work than just posting some links and writing a bit about them. The comments sections need rampant and thorough policing. It must be exhausting.

So I’ll come back if Anthony comes back. Right now I’m just not interested in the way things are going here. So I’ll see you some time. Be well, everybody.

277. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

@276. Your explanation doesn’t provide the excuse about why Anthony provides only 1 to 2 articles a month now. What does that have to do with the comments section???

278. LizardGirl - October 3, 2012

@252
Hmm, I can see Shatner remembered by my generation but not so much for ST, more likely for Priceline than anything else (no joke). Four generations from now? Hmm… maybe…hopefully for something more than that.

**********
Now, I wasn’t around when TOS was on television in the 60s-70s. And there seems to be different styles and standards for television for each decade. This decade has different standards, as we know. This generation isn’t as patient or as forgiving with TV. Everything as to be done to the best of its ability. Also, while the stories need to be compelling, they should be simple, streamlined and needs to take baby steps with its audience. Remember, some may not be familiar with television Star Trek.

Yet, I can see the dilemma in this. The core fan base were around most of Trek history. To go through all of that again in a new series no less, well, I’d imagine it’ll be painful. But how else to pass the interest down? My gen seems to think anything made 5 years ago is too old too invest their time in–well, besides a small category (I cannot honestly look you in the virtual eye and say that I’m in that small category myself). -_- That’s why there are so many reboots.

Despite my wanting a completely new crew without an Enterprise ship set waaay into the future of any franchise…that won’t work. JJ Abrams brought ST to this generation in a different form, using TOS characters, etc. It’ll have be consistent with that–up to a point. It’ll have to be a new series, set firmly in the past.

279. Joseph Dickerson - October 3, 2012

Wow, lots of comments on my article! Thanks Kayla for posting it and thanks for all the feedback.

Oh, and just an FYI: Kayla can only post stuff under her name (and I don’t have admin rights) so this and the other articles I have written for TrekMovie are listed under her name as the author…In case you couldn’t tell from her intro, she’s graciously put these up on my behalf.

Hopefully Anthony can go back and update the credit for these posts in the future. More stuff from yours truly at my blog, listed below.

280. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

@274 “Well, there are some very rude and domineering personalities on here. I guess that’s the reason I am always afraid to post anything. I’m afraid someone will jump down my throat. On this thread alone, I have seen about 5 or 6 people down talk to posters. It’s a little intimidating to be honest. You don’t really see that on other boards. Not sure why. But it sure makes for some interesting reading to be sure! LOL.”

I would argue that the problem is that folks like you and Watner let these people bother you, and you take them way too seriously. This is just an internet message board on a Trek web site with some anonomous poster. You both should lighten up a bit and not take it all so damn seriously. So there are some trolls and sock-puppets…so? This ain’t your living room, for goodness sake.

281. Curious Cadet - October 3, 2012

@226

Astrodem, I don’t disagree that the show runners failed both shows. But Voyager wasn’t all bad. “Year of Hell”, I think it was called, comes to mind. There was a compelling episode with a great message, which completely underscores my point about not setting the series outside of the federation. In order to tell that story, everything had to be reset, or the series was done. There is no way Voyager could have ever come back from the damage and losses it sustained.

And that’s the problem — there is no real jeopardy. At a certain point, you can’t kill anybody else, or damage certain parts of the ship, and still be able to keep going. And if you can’t do that, then your stories have their teeth cut out of them. This was Ron Moore’s main criticism about Voyager, and I think he was correct. Such a series necessarily becomes dark, a la Battlestar Galactica, which is essentially Voyager done correctly. But BSG demonstrates very clearly that such a series cannot continue indefinitely. And that’s fine too.

But moreover, if a new series is cut off from the federation, then not only are its stories limited, but also the message of Trek cannot be disseminated properly if the crew is constantly running and hiding, and battling enemies, rather than exploring, broadening our understanding of the universe, and its cultures, and bringing the message of peace and tolerance to other species, something you can only truly do with the backing of a “federation” to support you.

In fact Voyager was a perfect series to run counter to the programming that came before it, and DS9 which was simultenously running with the core formula, had the producers had the balls to take it down the road to a limited run, meanwhile developing and introducing another Trek to carry on the traditional role at its conclusion. How great would it be to have watched the Federations principles in the face of what is essentially a no win scenario? Voyager had no business exploring anything it didn’t have to except to collect supplies it needed. In the end, how great would it have been to watch Voyager resign itself to the reality they would have to settle somewhere in order to survive, after watching a couple of seasons where central characters were lost and the ship damaged beyond repair. That’s the kind of thing that keeps audiences coming back. But it’s also the kind of thing that can’t be sustained, nor is able to deliver the overwhelmingly positive messages that made the original successful.

Abrams has brought us some of this by tossing out Canon, which is essentially what Voyager sought to do without leaving the universe. A if I had to assign the most blame, it’s that the premise and the goals of Voyager were at odds, and that ultimately is what led to poor stories.

Taking a new series out of the federation and completely isolating them would be exactly the wrong thing to do if the goal is to bring the elements that made TOS and its current reboot successful. Not to mention that there is absolutely no need to do so if the new series is set in the alternate universe.

282. Mikey1091 - October 3, 2012

Star Trek should indeed return to TV! I’d love to also see a Star Trek: Enterprise and a DS9 movie made, but I doubt the “powers that be” will care enough to do either. As for TV, I’d like to see a Star Trek: Titan series, but I’m not sure Frakes would want to to it, as he’d need to reprise his role as Riker, and Ross as Tuvok, and also Sirtis as Troi. The best we can hope for at this point is a “maybe we’ll think about doing something in 5-10 years” respose from CBS/Paramount. They’re too interested in JJ Trek right now as it is to care about making a new Trek series.

See? Told ya all I wanted to be more active. Not as active as I’d like but still, I’m trying, lol.

283. Nano - October 3, 2012

K-7 have you ever consider its glitch or do you come from a perfect world? Please boycott, spend more of your time staring or listening to yourself. I know your type the only time you get the be somebody substantial is with a keyboard… Sorry I’ll take my lumps least I won’t have to listen to K-7 Suck (_!_)

284. Captain Dunsel - October 3, 2012

“I’m sorry, Mr. Cooper, but all the Indian stories have been written.”

(Allegedly said to James Fennimore Cooper when he was seeking a publisher for “Last of the Mohicans”)

“Are there any more stories to be told?”

[walks away shaking head]

285. K-7 - October 3, 2012

@283 ??? Huh? Anybody got a Universal Translator that I can borrow here?

286. K-7 - October 3, 2012

Meant @284 /Nano

287. Craiger - October 3, 2012

What about series that was set when Starfleet was first founded and Earth vessels first ventured out in space. No I am not saying do Enterprise again. Throw out canon with this type of series. You could have a new date when Starfleet was found and do a new Earth history before Starfleet was founded. You could have a Captain that see the Universe that is dangerous and not unified and he would have a dream of unifying the Universe and everyone coming together to work and live in peace. However if you throw out canon you could have new dates for those and even have different types of ships maybe even start with the Constitution Class ships and those could be redesigned.

288. Craiger - October 3, 2012

Sorry I said throw out canon and new dates twice.

289. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

Agree with K-7 in trying to figure out what Nano is talking about. What kind of slang is the term “its glitch”? Never heard that slang term before? Is that a hip-hop thing?

290. MJ - October 3, 2012

Guys, he’s using a drug user slang term:

glitch
(verb): an slang word meaning “methamphetamine” used in various, certain, and/or specific circles of users of the drug methamphetamine;
“Hey man, do you wanna do some GLITCH?”
“What’s up? I got some GLITCH if you want to do some.”
“I’m aching for some GLITCH man. Can you help me out”

So I think he was trying to infer that K-7 is on drugs. LOL

291. K-7 - October 3, 2012

MJ, that is hilarious. Like who on this board would evey use a term like that? :-))

292. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

So K-7, is this really true:

“I know your type the only time you get the be somebody substantial is with a keyboard.”

Well, let me translate it from 5-year old to adult first:

“I know your type. The only time you get to be somebody substantial is when you have a keyboard.”

293. Craiger - October 3, 2012

Glitch, Glitch and Glitch what is Glitch? LOL.

294. K-7 - October 3, 2012

Red Shirt,

Judging by his writing, it sounds like he could certainly use my keyboard. ;-)

Yea, feeling pretty substantial right now! LOL

295. K-7 - October 3, 2012

Craiger, that was a substantial post. I know your type — you are one of those keyboard evil types, right? :-)

296. MJ - October 3, 2012

@288 “What about series that was set when Starfleet was first founded and Earth vessels first ventured out in space. No I am not saying do Enterprise again. Throw out canon with this type of series. You could have a new date when Starfleet was found and do a new Earth history before Starfleet was founded. You could have a Captain that see the Universe that is dangerous and not unified and he would have a dream of unifying the Universe and everyone coming together to work and live in peace. However if you throw out canon you could have new dates for those and even have different types of ships maybe even start with the Constitution Class ships and those could be redesigned.”

Interesting idea!

297. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

Hello Red Shirt Diaries,

This was what I was talking about. You, MJ and K-7 jumped on Nano because he made a grammatical error. I know that us Trekkies are nitpickers, but do you not feel that this is a little school yard bully-ish?

I do hope that you are just joking around not knowing what a “glitch” is as in a computer glitch.

Like I was suggesting above in my comment, I feel that quite a few people are apprehensive about posting comments because they feel they may be made fun of because they make a grammatical error or just do not share your opinion.

You had told me in a reply to my post that it is the fault of people like me and others like me that people are like this. That we should just ignore when people are rude and show no respect. Well, I do miss when Mr. Pascale was more active on the boards because he would tell people when they were stepping out of line. It truly is unfortunate that we cannot just all get along without down talking.

Would it not be more proficient to just agree to disagree and not be mean or rude? In my day, respect for your fellow man meant a lot. Perhaps it is just the way of this younger generation. Well I have said my piece and now I expect quite a bit of flack from several posters. So be it.

298. Craiger - October 3, 2012

Thanks, MJ.

299. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

Mike, for my part, with all due respect, it looks to me like he is using a term I was unfamiliar with, “it’s glitch.” In reading it again, I still see that context.

By your response here though, you, in turn though, have kind of proven my point that people are way too sensitive on these boards. Lighten up!

300. Larry - October 3, 2012

I say to wait and see how Star Trek Into The Darkness goes. If it does as good as or better than Star Trek 2009, the time is right to bring it to TV. Not an animated series. It should be in the new timeline, but, after Kirk and Spock. Keep Kirk and Spock in the movies. It should not be a reboot of the next generation but a different ship. A ship with some new technology due to the new timeline like slip stream drive, better shields and weapons. Star Fleet developed all this new technology earlier that the original timeline. And it can still follow the original mission: to seek out life and new civilizations. Instead of only exploring the Alpha and Beta Quadrants, like TNG, they can also explore the Gamma and Delta Quadrants as well.

301. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

“Like I was suggesting above in my comment, I feel that quite a few people are apprehensive about posting comments because they feel they may be made fun of because they make a grammatical error or just do not share your opinion.”

If true, that is really sad. These people should probably not be posting at all then if they are that thin-skinned. This is not the real-world; this is just a time-passer with anonymous people sharing banter on Trek. If people are going to be wusses about it and afraid to post, well, I find that ridiculous. If people are worried and losing sleep because someone cracks on them here, well, that person probably needs some help.

Again people, lighten up! This is not the real world here, folks!

302. MJ - October 3, 2012

I basically agree with Red Shirt. Why do some of you take everything you read here by others so fracking seriously? I don’t get that?

The level of seriousness that some of you ascribe to others’ posts, and the perceived grievances that you think you have against others’ here, are not only completely unwarranted, but are in fact, laughable.

303. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

Red Shirt Dairies,

It is one thing for some harmless ribbing, it is quite another to be rude. You do not have to tell me to “lighten up”, I am just pointing out the basis for my earlier post. If you read through the comments following Nano’s, you would see that they are not light ribbing. You were all making fun of a person. My guess that Nano’s first language is not English. I believe that you should follow your own advice and lighten up as well. Perhaps a little more decorum and respect can be given to your fellow posters. You are entitled to your own opinion on things, but perhaps do so without the rudeness. I hope that you do not make any grammatical errors in the future because I am sure the usual cast on here will be fat to jump on it. Please take your own advice, sir, please lighten up on the lack of respect on here. Perhaps the lack of a monitors perpetrates this kind of thing. I do hope that Mr. Pascale will return in the near future – his daily presence is indeed missed here and not just in the area of articles. I am sorry, gentlemen, that is the way I see it. If you feel it is because I need to “lighten up” or too sensitive, perhaps you should take a few minutes and reread your comments. Your tone certainly isn’t playful. Gentlemen, I am 62 and have seen quite a bit. I come here because I love to see people’s different take on things. I love to see lively debates on different subjects. But I just feel it wasn’t nice. An apology to Nano would be a nice gesture, although that is completely up to you. I am not your Father nor your Grandfather.

304. MJ - October 3, 2012

Mike Jones,

Unintentionally, your latest post seems to fully confirm what Red Shirt was saying about you taking this banter way too seriously.

K-7 is a bit of an a-hole, and he would probably be the first to admit that. Nano’s post in response certainly was rude as well, but you seem to give him a free pass?

305. Andrew Thomas Clifton - October 3, 2012

Section 13 would make an excellent show idea, like a whole show just about the formation and missions and the ideas of how they do things that are bad alongside things that are good. necessary evil and the like

306. Andrew Thomas Clifton - October 3, 2012

Section 13 would make an excellent show idea, like a whole show just about the formation and missions and the ideas of how they do things that are bad alongside things that are good. necessary evil and the like

307. sean - October 3, 2012

Folks, just follow Wheaton’s Law and we’ll all be fine.

http://ruleoftheinternet.com/

308. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

@303. If Nano’s post was a result of him not understanding English and being from a foreign land, then sure:

I apologize, Nano.

309. K-7 - October 3, 2012

#304. Yea, MJ, Mike Jones, I can be a bit of an a-hole, but it is all in good fun, and if you take me too seriously, well, that is your problem, not mine.

Nevertheless, if this Nano is really a person from a strange land trying to work his way through English as you seem to have some special knowledge of, then sure, I offer him my apology!

310. Michael Ormes - October 3, 2012

Start a TREK show at the very beginning.What I mean beginning is to start at the point of the discovery of FTL and the building of the first engines and STAR SHIPS and go from there.We want it in the future and we want it to involve space exploration so why not make a STAR TREK show that we truly haven’t seen,and start at the very beginnings of our first steps into deep space and our first encounters with other beings.I truly believe that this is where we should go with STAR TREK,and give it a true beginning.This is something STAR TREK has never really had and I believe that if we build it from the ground up we will enjoy it more and it will be more exciting.Give STAR TREK its scientific and mechanical origin and the rest will develop from this.

311. Craiger - October 3, 2012

#305 – I think you mean Section 31.

312. Craiger - October 3, 2012

Michael I suggested something similar earlier.

313. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

Thank you gentlemen, that was very gracious of you to offer an apology. I do not know in fact if English is not his mother tongue, but you can see from the way he writes, it is not native English, and I commend Nano on coming to an English language board and trying to communicate in English.

I am all for good fun. I do not mind some honest to goodness ribbing – but it must be done with respect. K-7 it is not that you are being taken seriously for some good natured fun – in your own words, you were truly being an a-hole. No offense to you. But thank you for the apology to that gentleman.

On another subject, I would like to thank Joseph Dickerson for his article that was posted by Kayla. I do hope Mr. Pascale will grant you admin status so we can see more article from you. It was a very interesting point of view. Thank you for contributing.

314. Michael Ormes - October 3, 2012

Call it STAR TREK ; EVOLUTION

315. name - October 3, 2012

Please don’t do a reboot. Reboots display a lack of creativity and a disrespect for established canon. People are sick and tired of reboots. It seems like there have been a hundred reboots in the past decade.

316. Jonboc - October 3, 2012

#274. “Well, there are some very rude and domineering personalities on here. I guess that’s the reason I am always afraid to post anything.”

Are you kidding me? Mike, if you’re a regular, you know MJ and his stooges are always like this, they just can’t help being offensive! lol. No one who comes to this site should be afraid to say anything…ESPECIALLY just because MJ and his band of merry miscreants play their little gang-up game. Your thoughts are just as valid as anyone else who come here, including MJ et al, so post to your heart’s content!

(cue the predictable responses by MJ, Red Shirt, Read Dead and K-7…whom I’ve never seen in the same room with MJ…just sayin’ :) )

317. DiscoSpock - October 3, 2012

Mike Jones,

How do we not know that Nano isn’t your typical teenager who is just typing as fast as possible with his index finger on his smart phone without regard to typos and proper sentences? I teach High School, and this post looks suspiciously to me like a teenager on a smartphone rather the a legit person trying to learn English as you suggest.

In any case, I don’t like folks making presumptions like this and then insisting the others’ apologize. It comes across nearly as condescending as the practices of some of the usual blowhards here.

318. Red Shirt Diaries - October 3, 2012

#316. Jonboc, please keep me out of your fued with MJ and Ryan. If you had cared to read my post #301 above, you would have seen that I basically agree with you that no one should be intimidate or afraid to post here because of any perceived intimidation here by others:

“If true, that is really sad. These people should probably not be posting at all then if they are that thin-skinned. This is not the real-world; this is just a time-passer with anonymous people sharing banter on Trek. If people are going to be wusses about it and afraid to post, well, I find that ridiculous. If people are worried and losing sleep because someone cracks on them here, well, that person probably needs some help.”

This is basically along the sames lines of what you just said, and I agree furthermore with you saying, “your thoughts are just as valid as anyone else who come here, including MJ et al, so post to your heart’s content!”

319. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

Hello DiscoSpock,

As a teacher, you should be able to tell from the syntax. I was a linguist in my younger days and to me, anyway, it seems that English is not their first language. Either way, as a teacher, do you not feel that the comments following were not a little mean spirited and a touch bully-ish?

In terms of being condescending, I am not. I was just pointing out what I was reading. And I believe that K-7′s comments that had sparked Nano’s comments were also very rude towards posters as “morons” a little out of line?

Anyway, I believe people should act with a little more decorum and respect. It is something that is lacking right now with Mr. Pascale’s absence.

320. Stunkill - October 3, 2012

Give em hell, Jonboc. You have my backing 100%. Enough of Ryan’s and MJ’s F’ing with us all the time. Damn straight, my friend.

DAMN STRAIGHT!

321. Phil - October 3, 2012

@317. Most teen agers are Star Wars fans….

322. Phil - October 3, 2012

@317. Most teen agers are Star Wars fans….

323. DiscoSpock - October 3, 2012

Hi Mike Jones,

There was certainly inappropriate posting going on which I do not approve on; no doubt about it. But the text looks like a typical example to me of what I see teenagers typing quickly on smartphones. Look closely and you will see simply that a couple of words are left out — just like fast-typing to generate IM’s between kids these days.

Also, in my first read of Nano’s post, my first impression was that he/she was interjecting the druggie slang term, “it”s glitch” as well as a very negative attack on K-7.

We really don’t know who Nano is or what he/she meant in that post, and so it is a bit presumptuous in my opinion for you to show up to try to discipline people. That is what I was trying to point out here. No worries!

324. Captain Ramsom - October 3, 2012

Jonboc, Stunkill,

You both have my full support as well in battling these douchebags.
Enough is enough!

325. Mike Jones - October 3, 2012

DiscoSpock,

Considering he was commenting on why people were having problems with multiple posts, you would have to look at the context. He was trying to say that the multiple posts were due to a glitch. Interjecting a slang term for drugs as a reason for multiple posts doesn’t make sense. It it were any other context I would tend to agree with you. But context and syntax lead to my deduction. You have to look at the whole picture and I don’t feel I was being to presumptuous really. But thank you for explaining your take on it.

326. Josh - October 3, 2012

If time is not right for a tv series, I think it would be a good idea to have one or a series of TV mini-series with different themes. Oversaturation was Trek’s problem in the recent past. Make us want more by teasing the audience with an occasional 3 part series set in different place or time.

327. Captain Ransom - October 3, 2012

That would be RANSOM… not RAMSOM. But then again, that was probably MJ, Ryan or Dead Red posting that.

I think Jonboc is right though. I have often suspected that Ryan and MJ were the same person. No wonder that they (he) always suspects that of other people.

They do like to gang up on people that don’t agree with them along with Red Shirt and K7. Someone mentioned school yard bullies – I tend to agree.

328. Captain Ransom - October 3, 2012

If you are going to post as me, at least spell my name correctly. I have never passed myself off as someone else and I don’t find it right in the least.

329. K-7 - October 3, 2012

Well played, Captain. You misspell your name differently a 4th time, and now we are supposed to believe it is someone else? And once again, Stunkill’s post is right in line with yours. What a shock…NOT!

“at least spell my name correctly.”

You had me rolling in the aisles with that remark. Hilarious!

Looks like Stunkill’s clone warriors are out in force tonight!

330. MJ - October 3, 2012

For what it is worth to you Einsteins out there, Red Dead Ryan lives in British Colombia, Canada, and I live in SoCal, USA.

331. Captain Ransom - October 3, 2012

@329. K-7

Listen “MORON” … it was probably either you or MJ that posted as me. I’m the one that called out whomever was posting as me. You guys are real a-holes. You come across as such holier than thou and like to bully people on here. Funny how when Anthony was here, he had you guys an a leash. Now than he is gone, you guys have become bigger a-holes than usual. You are probably compensating for something or other. Can’t be a big man in real life so you have to do it one here. You guys were probably picked on when you are younger and since this forum is anonymous, you feel comfort and safety in your anonymity and feel you can say anything. You guys are a real piece of work. Jerks.

332. DiscoSpock - October 3, 2012

Jonboc, you are not having fun with MJ, Ryan, et al by posing as Stunkill and Captain Ransom, are you? If so, then that is very amusing to me.

333. MJ - October 3, 2012

Captain, I think you gave it away here my friend by immediately “acting mad” that someone spelled your name incorrectly. You do realize how silly that sounds — you supposedly complaining that some misspelled your name, don’t you? :-))

334. Stunkill - October 3, 2012

Sorry Cap…twas me, again. Was also posing as K-7 above for tonight as well. It is just so fun to see you all blame each other. You are all so damn paranoid and serous in your petty disputes.

OK, no more from me for awhile.

335. Captain Ransom - October 3, 2012

MJ – I was calling them out for posting as me, Einstein. You guys have your own little gang going on. Anyone that has a differing opinion than yours, you immediately pounce on them and critisize them.

To make matters worse, you tend to take it outside of Trek too. You pick on people for spelling errors. K7 jumps on people when there is some sort of glitch and calls them morons. Then when someone calls him out on it – you and your cast of idiots make fun of him. You tell people to “lighten up” when someone else calls you out on it.

Why do you have a problem with me? Because I happened to voice that you guys were whining about no news and then bitching for what was being posted as articles. You don’t like that so you claim I am posting as someone else. You tell people to ignore me because I am a sock puppet. Brilliant.

I am all for healthy debate, but you don’t debate. Someone has an opinion different than yours, they are wrong and you are right. MJ always has to be right.

MJ, you really are a jerk.

336. Jack - October 3, 2012

I think an animated series would end up being for kids — hopefully it can be a smart, funny show for kids, but…

Some of the animated movies — some of the DC stuff — are pretty darned good and a bit more adult.

Good TV is possible — look at some of the great stuff on UK TV… look at shows like Fringe (which has been in danger of cancellation since it started).

In my opinion, a show based on one or two starships, with maybe some switching to characters on a Starbase or somewhere else to tell a larger Bourne-ish story, well, would be cool…

337. Jack - October 3, 2012

I think an animated series would end up being for kids — hopefully it can be a smart, funny show for kids, but…

Some of the animated movies — some of the DC stuff — are pretty darned good and a bit more adult.

Good TV is possible — look at some of the great stuff on UK TV… look at shows like Fringe (which has been in danger of cancellation since it started).

In my opinion, a show based on one or two starships, with maybe some switching to characters on a Starbase or somewhere else to tell a larger Bourne-ish story, well, would be cool…

338. MJ - October 3, 2012

@335. Dude, see Stunkill’s post above…he has apparently been screwing with us all tonight. I have had enough of his crap, and if I offended you in some way, I apologize.

I am taking a week off from this site. Maybe when I come back there will be a fracking article on the new movie — something worth spending time one. This is getting infantile.

339. Captain Ransom - October 3, 2012

stunkill – you are a freakin’ idiot. I hate when people post as others. Post as yourself and leave me out of your crap. You troll.

I apologize MJ. This stunkill guy is a freakin’ pain in the a**. Didn’t he do the same thing with you and someone else too? This guy is a nuisance.

340. MJ - October 3, 2012

No worries, Captain. Peace!

341. Pensive's Wetness - October 3, 2012

Animated please. Though some of you insta-think that animation is 2nd rated, you still need to consider how the 1990′s installment of Batman affected animation, in regards to story telling. If you have a good story to tell, then a lack luster animation studio can still shine…

342. Buzz Cagney - October 3, 2012

I would like to see a new crew on a new ship introduced in the 3rd movie. They will play an important and integral role in the movie alongside Kirk and crew and from there a spin-off TV show made.
It will give the new show a great head start. I can easily see it working- just think back to the interest we had in the Kelvin and its crew.

343. Buzz Cagney - October 3, 2012

#258 For what its worth I agree with you. When Trek is referenced anywhere its very, very rarely that TNG is mentioned before TOS. Its an undeniable truth.

344. K-7 - October 4, 2012

All,

Starting with post #250, none of the posts today from that point to this point here were mine. I just got back from work and have to see all this shit in my name.

It seems that Stunkill was posting as me, and using my name to try to start fights with Nano and others. I never “went off” on folks calling them morons, nor did I have a hissy fit with Mike Jones.

345. Jim Nightshade - October 4, 2012

Aw Cmon JJ and crew do a much better job making trek than some of you make out….its much more than STAR WARS STAR TREK….You keep forgetting that making Trek appeal to more people requires some modifications and updates and we could do a lot worse than JJ and Mr Orci and companys Wonderful looking wonderfully cast version of trek…

hmm I made a silly post somewhere in the 200s and while several people seem to have repeated posts over and over mine and fights are breaking out my post seems to be missing…..either by accident or erased on purpose oh well……sigh least I know I made a post but cant find it now…

346. P Technobabble - October 4, 2012

Maybe a Trek 1/2 hour sitcom would work.

347. chrisfawkes.com - October 4, 2012

A mini series each year that helps paint the Star Trek universe in a way that a two hour movie simply does not have the time to do.

A ten hour story purely based on Klingon history giving depth to their warrior culture. Or simply a story set within that existing culture.

A story set in the late 21t century that tells the rise and fall of a group of genetic supermen that rule the world.

The story of a civil war that leads to the creation of the Romulan and Vulcan people.

348. chrisfawkes.com - October 4, 2012

Abram’s Star trek was far more like the original Trek in spirit and tone than anything that came after the original series.

Wagon train to the stars.

349. Holger - October 4, 2012

Re 348: This shows that different people have widely different views about the spirit and tone of TOS.

350. Kev - October 4, 2012

With the poisonous atmosphere of political correctness, constant shows about BS gunfights that just couldnt possibily happen in real life because of how strict the gunlaws are when it comes to full autos, suppressors and shortbarreled shotguns, fighting, rape, murdering and pillaging and everything bad and utterly pointless under the sun that I really dont want to think about I dont think trek would stand a chance in this modern age

and they’d certainly never be able to get the Drumhead made in this day and age, one of my personal favorite episodes as if you question authority in any logical sense you MUST be a terrorist!

I mean these guys cant even film a 5 minute scene without any sort of nastyness or murder listed above or talk about said nastyness in unwanted detail, I mean really, time it sometime!

It wouldnt be possibile, atleast not on a major normal access network, cable or something like Fios maybe, MAYBE it could.

I mean what is up with todays tv culture? where did it die? how’d it get this way? I mean wheres the glorious era of Sci Fi I grew up with in the 1990′s like Red Dwarf, TNG, DS9, Babylon 5?

you’d need a miracle to even get anything decent on the screen that was anywhere near as good as TNG and DS9 in there prime.

351. Lostrod - October 4, 2012

I think if Anthony was still involved in this site a lot of folks would now be “perma banned” …

Regards

352. T'Cal - October 4, 2012

You say that like it’s a bad thing…

353. T'Cal - October 4, 2012

I’ve liked the recent idea put out there by Michael Dorn about a Trek series with Worf as a Captain of a Federation ship. But, I’ve always the idea of the Rikers on the Titan post NEM. I can imagine Worf as a more mature, seasoned leader who has learned from some of the greatest Starfleet commanders in recent history: Picard, Sisko, and Riker. He might incorporate a bit of each in his style of command while retaining his own foundation based on duty and honor. As for Will and Deanna Riker, I’ve always liked the characters as well as the actors who play them. Frakers and Sirtis always displayed a nice blend of humor, class, and reverence. I could see Frakes and LeVar Burton and executive producers of a TNG/DS9/VOY era series – animated or live action.

354. T'Cal - October 4, 2012

Correction: I could see Frakes and LeVar Burton as executive producers of a TNG/DS9/VOY era series – animated or live action.

355. Red Dead Ryan - October 4, 2012

I didn’t attack anyone on this thread, nor the last one, Ransom. Please leave me out of this.

356. pilotfred - October 4, 2012

if they set the background in jj trek then cartoon

if set in prime timeline then live action
this could be very good as if its set after the event that lend nero jj trek

357. Dan - October 4, 2012

Unfortunately, I think that in this day and age a Trek series could only be a sustained success on the small screen if it had a good gimmick and I believe that this would be if it were the first proper 3D tv programme.

358. Phil - October 4, 2012

Trek is just way to type cast these days, all the comments here just shore that up – between having another ship, on another long voyage, with another bridge crew trying to recapture TOS magic…and more then a few people clamoring for epic space battles in every episode. Ron Moores BSG worked because once he got past the ‘rag tag fleet’ setup, they really were free to explore, because the origonal BSG didn’t hang around long enough to create the backstory of the BSG universe. Trek has 45 years of canon to deal with, and a fan base that goes ape s**t if they thing someone is messing with it. The Federation universe isn’t that boring, but the fan base needs to be willing to embrace something different. If you can’t pitch the idea of another Enterprise, another bridge crew, and another long mission here without getting laughed off the thread, no one will embarrass themselves trying to do it in the boardroom at CBS.

359. bybyby - October 4, 2012

@228 “How in the hell do you explain the huge ratings success of Falling Skies then? Explain that one to me?”

Out of Prozac are we?

360. captain realistic - October 4, 2012

The only way to do this is to take what they did with Deep Space Nine and bring it to the next level. Interwoven story arcs, huge plot developments that take seasons to play out…..

Shows like TNG would not survive in this new world of television. If LOST, BREAKING BAD, GAME OF THRONES, all these types of shows that appeal and are marketed to the commited viewer tell us anything, it’s that one episode casual viewer episodes will not work anymore. I say yes to a real intense STAR TREK drama on tv.

361. ZeroBANG - October 4, 2012

i say HELL YES
there is so much BS on TV these days every bit of Star Trek helps to raise the bar again.

If it has to be an animated series, at least make it an honest parody, like Simpsons or Futurama.

I really don’t need another Clone Wars… and sure as hell not in the JJ-Verse.

Anyway, for a Serious Show i’d go for a 29th + century show, something that is so far in the future that any former series would work as it’s past, be it the JJ version or the Prime universe, both would only be ancient history.

Instead of Warp, lets explore Transwarp, lets move to the next Galaxy cluster beyond the known 4 Quadrants.

362. Harry Ballz - October 4, 2012

Star Trek on TV?

Sure, if it’s done right, namely four 90 minute TV movies every year, like Sherlock.

Imagine that, four classic Star Trek movies cranked out every year!

That way the quality should be there for writing, production values, special effects, etc.

Nah, on second thought, that makes way too much sense!

363. Vultan - October 4, 2012

If Trek were to be made in animated form [again], something done in this style might be interesting. Old school, sure, but a nice break from the current three-dimensional CG trends in animation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-tBM2ZfncoU

364. Great Scott! - October 4, 2012

They had better hurry. In “The Neutral Zone”, Data tells a man from our era who has recently been revived from stasis that television did not last much beyond 2040.

365. ironhyde - October 4, 2012

Not into the animated thing at all. If they make an animated show I’ll probably check out of Star Trek completely. I’m already barely hanging on by a thread here. But while it’s great we’re here talking a whole new show on tv I would really just settle for a few pictures of the Enterprise at this point !

366. jamesingeneva - October 4, 2012

the problem with tv movies is it takes away from blockbuster movies… i wonder though if you look at it as purely margins… how much do you net by running tv movies and the residuals vs. producting big blockbuster, which one comes out on top. I have no idea, but I bet tv margins may look nicer for long term.

367. Robman007 - October 4, 2012

This site is deeeeeaaad.

368. P Technobabble - October 4, 2012

363. Vultan

While I don’t mind the 3d stuff, I agree the kind of animation you’ve pointed out is excellent. I may have it wrong but this looks very Japanese-style(?).

369. LizardGirl - October 4, 2012

@363
Okay what you’re talking about is ANIME!!! I love it! I didn’t want to say that word because when many think of anime they think of Pokemon or something.

There are a lot more updated looking anime styles that could be an interesting animated look for Star Trek:

Summer Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsLwVoZqEjk

Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence (ignore the music)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Qdc_Cfi1-k

Fate Zero (ignore the music)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrMUzoBXF1M

370. Vultan - October 4, 2012

#368

No, I don’t mind 3D animation either, but it is nice to see some well-produced 2D once in awhile.

You’re right; it is the Japanese anime style. I don’t know whether the artist (a fan, of course) is Japanese or not, but he or she or the creative team behind it did an outstanding job in injecting some new life into “old school” Star Wars—not that it needed it though.

371. Vultan - October 4, 2012

The old school stuff is still exciting to watch, I mean.

372. Phil - October 4, 2012

Another space anniversary missed by TrekMovie….

http://news.yahoo.com/sputnik-changed-world-55-years-ago-today-182603077.html

373. Craiger - October 4, 2012

Another Trek news article missed by Trekmovie.

http://trekweb.com/articles/2012/10/04/First-Images-and-Details-from-the-Upcominh-Book-Federation-The-First-150-Years-.shtml

374. LizardGirl - October 4, 2012

@370
Yeah, they did a fantastic job with the effects! And it has a very crisp picture too. So maybe they redid it in HD or something? It reminded me of a manga by Hisao Tamaki called Star Wars: A New Hope. There’s another manga adaptation but Tamaki’s one is older. When I saw that clip it I thought of that manga.

I like watching older animes in the style of, say, Akira, Roujin Z, Dragon Ball Z, even Hayao Miyazaki’s Princess Mononoke. But I may be in the minority (but really, who dislikes Miyazaki anyways?).

Either way, there are some great ideas that could be used for a Star Trek animated series. Thanks for the clip!

375. Vultan - October 4, 2012

#374

I’m somewhat familiar with Miyazaki’s work. I can remember watching something of his a long time ago, and enjoying it. But Speed Racer was more my, uh, speed. ;-)

You’re welcome for the clip. That seems to be something recent, so maybe, hopefully we’ll be seeing more from the artist or artists behind it. (Lucasfilm, are you listening?)

376. Jack - October 4, 2012

362. Harry. Agreed!

377. Jack - October 4, 2012

362. Harry. Agreed!

378. Jack - October 4, 2012

362. Harry. Agreed!

379. Jack - October 4, 2012

362. Harry. Agreed!

380. DiscoSpock - October 4, 2012

Harry, Agreed!

381. Jack - October 4, 2012

I hit “say it” once… :)

But I really do agree.

382. chrisfawkes.com - October 4, 2012

I see three options to make the show an obvious ratings grabber.

1. Cast Charlie Sheen as captain of the enterprise for a new series.

2. Reboot next generation and cast Shia Labeouf as Wesley Crusher. Call it next generation the next generation.

3. Go completely soap opera, days of our lives in space. The Horton family running a starship. At some point do a cross over with a well known british time traveler for a double episode and call it Horton hears a Who.

383. Thor - October 4, 2012

http://trekweb.com/articles/2012/10/05/First-Footage-from-Star-Trek-Into-Darkness-Online-MINOR-SPOILERS.shtml

384. wtfiswrongwiththissite - October 5, 2012

WTF is wrong with this site. New footage has been released and no news!

385. ironhyde - October 5, 2012

OMG 383!!! I have never been so excited in all my life for 3 frames! I am SOOOO gonna watch and rewatch the bugger out of this! :) Not even kidding. OMG Spock goes into a volcano for reasons unrevealed?? OMG

There’s something very wrong when I’m this excited for this much… but wtf, I’m excited :) YAY!

386. ironhyde - October 5, 2012

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUMf6aEE2YI

387. chrisfawkes.com - October 5, 2012

I’m pretty sure that was Beelzebub in hell. He and Spock get mistaken all the time.

388. Richard - October 5, 2012

I was into it for the first 2 frames, but by the 3rd I’ve decided I’m not seeing this movie!

389. Glenn Saunders - October 5, 2012

The reason Trek has such difficulty is that it has reached a religious inflection point, something that was commented-on in that Futurama episode.

And like any religion, it splinters off into side-groups. The TNG fans, the TOS purists, the JJ apologists, etc…

What you see now with fan films are what happens when a handful of fans attempt to take matters into their own hands. They want Trek served their way, and so they make their own.

That’s what I think should be embraced.

I think that’s what interactive TV is, which is to take the fan-film concept and formalize it, through animation.

That is what I attempted to do with the Fem Trekz modpack for Xtranormal State. Unfortunately State was discontinued and XD won’t let you mod, so my stuff is rapidly fading into obscurity. Nonetheless, it is as viable an animation system for Trek as GoAnimate (which recently retired its Trek world). Animation tools keep getting easier to use and it’s harder and harder to use the “it’s too expensive” argument. Unless you demand Avatar-grade graphics, Trek is viable on a shoestring, period.

What should happen is something like this should be encouraged as a way to embed Trek into the web. You have your “official” animated Trek and then you have the fans who all strut their stuff. It is diametrically opposed to how Hollywood wants to work, as far as protecting intellectual property, and that’s why fan films have been, at best, enjoyed benign neglect.

http://www.youtube.com/user/femtrekz

390. Ziro - October 5, 2012

animated series tie-in with the new films, is the way to go right now. They are crazy not to do it.

Then a live action if it works out, when time is right.

And I still want my Doctor Who cross-over please, on screen

391. Jonboc - October 5, 2012

#360. ” If LOST, BREAKING BAD, GAME OF THRONES, all these types of shows that appeal and are marketed to the commited viewer tell us anything, it’s that one episode casual viewer episodes will not work anymore. I say yes to a real intense STAR TREK drama on tv.”

I’m sorry, but if it were done in the serial format of those examples, I’d have to say no. They give instant gratification week to week but when the ride is over, it’s over. I LOVED LOST…I tuned in religiously every week all the way to its conclusion. You know how many times I’ve rewatched a single episode? never. Do you know how many Seasons of it I own on DVD? None. I love Trek, and I like to revisit it often. I don’t want a serialized Trek where I have to see 5 years worth to get enjoyment of it. I like self contained, one hour episodes with a beginning, middle and end….no need to see the previous 3 seasons to know what’s going on. Of course, that’s just my personal preference, but I love to cherry pick episodes and rewatch them again and again…a serialized drama just doesn’t offer that option.

392. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 5, 2012

I agree that episodes should be self-contained. Occasionally, some episodes may be two-parters but they should be the exception, not the norm.

The series Fringe somehow manages to bridge that gap. Each episode can be watched and enjoyed on its own merits and yet still be part of a larger story/series. I like that.

My son (who is a big TNG fan) and I have managed to get the entire seven seasons of Star Trek TNG. While he watches, eg seasons 3 and 4, I can watch, eg seasons 2 and 5 20 kms away, and select any episode and enjoy it on its own merits, without necessarily needing to know anything that gone before. There are obviously aspects that got changed between season 2 and 5, but they are not significant enough to spoil my enjoyment of any episode. Once I see all seven seasons, then the gaps get filled in.

I am thoroughly enjoying Star Trek TNG, btw. Good, fun, thought provoking entertainment.

Now if only I could get my hands on Star Trek TOS – even though it only contains 79 episodes, the set is twice as expensive as TNG or the other spin-off series and, right now, is not available for purchase in NZ (as far as I can tell). I am hoping that once Star Trek Into Darkness starts being promoted late this year, early next year, that there might be a Star Trek TOS DVD set available retail, but Lord only knows how much it will cost!

393. K-7 - October 5, 2012

“#360. ” If LOST, BREAKING BAD, GAME OF THRONES, all these types of shows that appeal and are marketed to the commited viewer tell us anything, it’s that one episode casual viewer episodes will not work anymore. I say yes to a real intense STAR TREK drama on tv.”

I agree completely. Well said. This format is changing television, and given an epic movie quality to the TV medium, and also given the writers more time to craft larger and more complex stories.

I hope Trek goes this route. Bring on the HBO version of Star Trek in 2016. If Jonboc doesn’t want to play, he can buy the Voyager Blu-Rays and watch all those mediocre shows again in 2016.

394. gingerly - October 5, 2012

Repeat after me.

Animation is a medium, not a genre.

One can tell thought-provoking stories using it.

See: Ghost in the Shell, Waltz with Bashir, The Plague Dogs, et al…

I would love to see an animated show for one big reason. That is the freedom do things one couldn’t in a live-action show because of the lack of an unlimited budget.

I would love to see an animated primetime series featuring this or another crew….Hopefully with an alien captain, this time.

It’s the only thing that hasn’t been done.

395. chrisfawkes.com - October 5, 2012

What are you saying Glen, that outside of religion no one disagrees?

396. Chris M - October 6, 2012

Star Trek on TV is a tough one, it would be fnatastic to see a live action show back on TV but the reality is the best we could hope for at this point is an annimated show. If that is successful along with the expected sucess of Star Trek Into Darkness then the networks may take a chance on a live action Star Trak series. Just goes to show how lucky we were to have Star Trek on TV for 18 straight years from 1987-2005!

397. denny cranium - October 6, 2012

I’d love to see Star Trek on TV in any form, animated, live action, etc.
I’d want to see Kirk Spock and McCoy, though. Especially if its a live action show.

398. Marika - October 6, 2012

OF COURSE i would want a new ST show in the old timeline, and i have a lot of friends who thinks the same. Business talking: the thing that skips from everybody’s minds is: Why you have to ask sharing statistics only on US citizens and TV stations? Some of the shows get to Europe after they were already cancelled or almost ready to be so . World wide people doesn’t count at all?

399. Rufie - October 6, 2012

Whatever they do I would hope they stay with the original vision and show an optimistic future. Kids need that. Hell, I am 61 and I need that!!

400. MJ - October 6, 2012

@394 “Animation is a medium, not a genre.”

Call it a cat for all I care. I, and there are more than a few others like me, just am not a big animation fan, an never will be. Never could get past the suspension of disbelief deal with animation, and the perception of kiddie aspect.

I’m not hear to argue and try to convince others to feel the way I do, but I will tell you that there are a lot of people who would never take an animated show as serious as they would a live action show, right or wrong.

401. Simon Tarses - October 6, 2012

@David Moss: I’m sorry, but your love of Phase II is just quite naive and silly. Although those shows are good, they are not that good to be fully bankrolled into professional productions by CBS Studios that would appeal to a wider audience (Phase II is good only in the way that amateur theater is; it’s the best of the amateur productions, not the most professional show that would be good enough for a major network TV show.) Please stop being such a dreamer and deal with reality.

402. Simon Tarses - October 6, 2012

As for animation: I think that it could work, and I even have my own idea for a post-Nemesis Starfleet Academy show:

Star Trek: Starfleet Academy-TAS

An animated series based on Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry, written and directed by Bruce Timm & Paul Dini ( Batman: TAS, Superman: TAS, Batman Beyond, Static Shock, The Zeta
Project, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited,
) with some scripts by Manny Coto and Garfield and Judith Reeves-Stevens, plus others.

PLOT/CONCEPT: The famous training institution,and the young people who inhabit it. The show will center on a core of freshmen (about 6 youths) training to be future officers and crew members in Starfleet-their hopes, dreams, aspirations, successes, and failures.
The 6 youths, ranging in age from 18-20, are all from different parts of the Federation: three will be human, two will be alien, and the sixth will be from a race that one would not expect to see in Starfleet: Cardassian. As always, the human will be the leader of the group, and it
will be through their eyes that we experience what’s going on, and the story’s main focus.

The 6 are:
George Washington Carter: The self-appointed leader of the group, he is an Afro Canadian from Toronto, and the second generation of his family to be in Starfleet, on the command fast-track. A self-confident young man, his confidence is somewhat marred by feelings of self-doubt, because of the legacy he has to live up to: his mother, Madeline Carter, captain of
the Nebula-class starship U.S.S. Morningstar, whose accomplishments are just as impressive as Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Kirk, etc.

Samira Al-Sadr: The ‘second in command’ of the group, on the Life Sciences fast-track, of Arab origin from Palestine. She is conscious of her history, and that carries over into the way she handles medicine. Always striving to become perfect, she does not let that overcome her good-natured sense of humor and fun, or her sexuality (Religious extremists be warned; she won’t be wearing a burka or a chador, despite her ethnic origin.)

Masumi Ito: The ‘third’ of the triad, she was genetically engineered as a youth on a rediscovered lost colony similar to Moab IV (from the Next Generation episode The Masterpiece Society). However, that was not perfect, and although she is obviously smart, she is left with a craving for food that has given her unsightly weight gain-as well as a caustic
tongue when anybody tells her about it. She is studying to be an engineer.

Selan-A Vulcan cadet on the Security fast track, he is the jock of the group, and is the star of the track team, the new baseball team, and the Paressies Squares (sp) team! He is a somewhat laid-back (for a Vulcan), blonde-haired Vulcan of half-human parentage, who speaks in human slang (whatever slang teenagers of the 24th century speak) on occasion,
mixed in with his perfect English.

Thalla-An Andorian, she is on the Science fast-track, and is somewhat nerdy (for an alien.) To her, scientific discovery is everything, and making (or keeping) friends is low on the list of priorities. She has to be occasionally brought out of her shell by Samira and George.

Jandara-The Cardassian cadet mentioned earlier, she was found on a horrific abandoned Cardassian outpost world near the Cardassian Neutral Zone, a product of a secret Obsidian Order program to create a super-warrior similar to an Augment. As the embodiment of the
Cardassian enemy, she has to prove that she can coexist among humans and the other races at the Academy. Compared to that, the curriculum’s a breeze.

ANIMATION STYLE: Let’s face it, anime is the style that’s popular now, and in order to get viewers, a style similar to anime (think Teen Titans) would be the way to go. While the show will be that way, it won’t have all the trappings of anime; no large drop of water from the head or anything like that, more something along the lines of Cowboy Bebop.

TIME SETTING: as mentioned above, the 24th Century, sometime after the Dominion War and the events of Star Trek: Nemesis, possibly before or around the events of Star Trek: Titan.

If anybody’s got a idea that’s better than mine, or that’s just as good as mine, or wants to compliment my idea, respond.

403. DB - October 7, 2012

OK. I think we should have a new show that is set about a decade after Voyager comes home. I think the JJ Abrams “universe” should be a”parallel” universe sort of like the “evil” alternate universe portrayed in TOS and DS9. If that universe exists obviously there are others. The “temporal” police refereed to in past series could be used in the new series to explain these other universes. Perhaps a future faction creates an event that “fractures space time to a point that allows these other universes to be accessed. The new series could start by trying to fix this issue . Having this new series set in this “time” would allow cameos from many different cast members from all the old shows. Admiral Janeway, Admiral Pickard, Captain Riker, etc. This would cement past fans watching it while drag in new viewers. Imagine all the kids that get hooked when their fathers are watching the new show that has all their old favorite characters that show up from time to time. They could explore Data recovering in B4. All the while continuing the universe that has been built up to this point. By going backwards to “Enterprise” and then even farther with a reboot, I think the Star Trek universe has been done a great disservice. Yes some of the writing of Star Trek was poor in Voyager, DS9 etc, but It has always been that way all the way since the TOS. I loved TNG and all the series that came after. Even Enterprise as it filled in gaps. Roddenberry created a universe that has grown over the past 40 years. Going back and deleting it with Abrams reboot is nothing more than money grubbing greedy bastards trying to rehash a money-cow. If the reboot universe continues I guarantee Star Trek will not live another 40 years. A couple movies down the road and it will finally die.

404. Rose (as in Keachick) - October 7, 2012

Once again – all this idiotic talking about “deleting it with Abrams reboot” etc and these film makers being nothing more than “money grubbing greedy bastards”. Film making is an expensive business so therefore requires a lot of revenue in return. What’s more – NOTHING got deleted!

I like being able to meet a younger Captain Kirk, Spock, Dr McCoy et al of the Enterprise, albeit in a more or less parallel/alternate universe again. It was about time! No disservice to the Star Trek universe has been done by these new Trek movie iterations. Anything but…

405. DeShonn Steinblatt - October 7, 2012

402. / 403.

If doing more of the same somehow magically attracts new viewers, then Voyager and Enterprise would have been colossal hits.

Sorry, they won’t be doing more of the same.

406. Commander Tomalak - October 9, 2012

Of course in some form Star Trek wiill return in a proper series just like Doctor Who in the UK eventually did.

407. Bob Tompkins - October 9, 2012

I already stated Showtime is the spot for Star Trek on TV, it’d be a great boon to the number of subscribers.
Commercial TV is and always will be the Vast Wasteland.
TLC [The Learning Channel] was a joint venture between NASA and The Health Department in 1972 that ended up being privatized.
Now we get two headed girls and Honey Boo Boo, lowest common denominator ‘entertainment’.
Greatest advertisement ever against privatization— of anything.
Save PBS.

408. Bob Tompkins - October 9, 2012

Word is also out there that Star Trek: Enterprise will make the jump to Blu- Ray very soon based upon the sales success of TNG hi-def. Easily done since it was filmed in native 1080p. The FX were done in 720p, but the best course is to upconvert so that they maintain the same ‘match’ with the original live work. Rendering them in 1080p will very likely make the too sharp and look out of place.

409. Phil - October 10, 2012

@400. Okay, we get that it’s not something you would watch, let alone enjoy. Anime is big in some corners of the world, and adapting Trek would build audience for future live action features. It’s not the end of the world to adapt the product to make it more acceptable to a foreign audience.

410. Ranja Minor - October 11, 2012

@BobOrci

Where is Bob Orci in this speculative message block?

How does Bob realistically “see” a animated series coming to TV?

He has mentioned a animated series briefly in a few articles.

C’mon Bob, give us your realistic thoughts and ideas – if possible.

Thank You!

411. Charlie Snow - October 12, 2012

Most of you people are nuts, Paramount after JJ drops out of doing trek should make Star trek acdemy for tv and far as stories to tell, just copy every story from every series our there like cop shows and court shows and medical drama shows and put them in the trek universe and to make money to produce the show just tell the fan base to buy, buy, buy everything that shows up as a commercial dueing the episode and then get on the internet and tell these companies that you are buying there product just to keep the show alive ifthis does not work then cancel trek and done with it.

P.s. for crying out loud people use the internet for something other then facebook would you please, pressure, pressure, pressure and buy buy buy only products on the show. show coca cola on the enterprise i dont care if its going to pay for it. there…

412. Seleya - October 12, 2012

I’d like to see a one season anthology on TV where fine writers from around the world are each in turn given freedom to frame the Trek concept within their culture’s history and values for one story. See what new doors it opens.

413. Richard - October 12, 2012

Huge news, Enterprise is coming to blu ray next year:

https://twitter.com/Mike_Sussman/status/254345914280456192

So stoked!

414. Scott - October 13, 2012

Next Generation came out in the late 1980s there is a whole generation out there that has never seen Star Trek and with the lack on interest in science and particularly space perhaps a new show or several shows could be entertaining as well as inspiring

415. Phil Edgley - October 15, 2012

Folks, so long as Star Trek is making huge profits as a movie franchise Paramount isn’t going to spinoff a TV series that would only delute the audience for both the movies and television. Of course, anything can happen over the rest of this decade. Most likely Kirk and Spock along with the look and feel of the original series are going to stay on the big screen. But after four TV series and nearly a thousand episodes do we really want more of the same plots and characters every week? The producers are going to have to break some new ground in a new series like not setting the new show on another spaceship or space station. Why not just set the show in the Federation about a government bureaucrat like someone working in the Inspector General’s office who goes around to different planets or starships to investigate corruption or incompetency in Starfleet or other government agencies. In other words, Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek to be Dodge City in space.. Well it’s long past the time for Star Trek to get out of Dodge City and lets find out what it’s really like to live and work in the Federation. I’ll betcha it won’t be boring.

416. T'Cal - October 15, 2012

I’d love to see annual or semi-annual miniseries of 2 hours per night for 5 nights and then replayed several times at various hours on various days for about three months. Then, six months later, it would be released on disc and a new miniseries would be aired. As for the plot, I miss the 24th century but I wouldn’t make it only about TNG; I’d include characters and storylines from any of the three series. However, subsequent miniseries could take place in ENT, TOS, TOS-movie, or nuTOS eras.

417. LizardGirl - October 15, 2012

@415
You have a point. Different is hard to do. Even if the series took place way after Voyager/DS9 with a different crew, ship, timeline, etc., it would still need new plots and arcs. That could be very hard, live or animated.

418. charlie snow - October 15, 2012

I’ like the way Phil and T’cal think but decided to post something about the next movie, anybody can comment:

They go to the edge of the universe like in where no man has gone before (into darkness) and find khan and it is he who gets superhuman abilities.

419. Chris Roberts - October 16, 2012

413. Richard – “Huge news, Enterprise is coming to blu ray next year:

https://twitter.com/Mike_Sussman/status/254345914280456192

So stoked!”

A week or so on since I heard, but it’s awesome news.

I can’t wait to see the show in HD and any newly made extras CBS Digital come up with.

420. Randall Williams - October 16, 2012

My suggestion for what it is worth to Bad Robot and company is to finish the
and release the third film in the installment. Before that, however, sit down
and decide if the show will be animated or live action. Animated shows
would probably be scheduled on the kid-vid slot on Saturday mornings like
the old Animated Trek (it lasted two seasons before being cancelled). Can
it compete with “The Simpsons” popularity curve in a similar time slot?

Are you going to “rehash” TNG in alternate timeline or TOS in alternate
timeline? Or are you going to “bite the bullet” and come up with a new
ship, crew, and mission – new material in the JJ verse without relying on
past stories and episodes — which is badly needed anyway?

What to do wise sage?

421. Chain of Command - October 17, 2012

No.

422. charlie snow - October 18, 2012

@420
Mr JJ A needs to do what he doing in order to make Paramount what Paramount really wants and that is money. If trekkers don’t like it P does not care specially since they will go to see the movie anyway plus they are good from a certain point of view. A live show on tv on weekly basis will have the drama and sense of adventure that fans want but modern audiences require a whole lot of stuff that Gene R. did not care for, it won’t fly today so it will have sex and such you know not just a kiss from the captain. For movies in an alternate timeline as R. W suggest it will fly specially if it goes something like this: They go to the edge of the universe (Galaxy) like in where no man has gone before (into darkness) and find khan and it is he who gets superhuman (more) abilities, just an idea…now a rehash of TNG that won’t make it I’ would suggest to Mr JJ. I like the idea of new crew but not a new ship without Enterprise so have new ships but report back to the flag ship when she comes around, other crews better get there act together when she does so. Now to finish on tv and even the movies but specially tv movies not series bring back the space music and original sounds from TOS and the colors with no kirk and spock, just another vulkan just like spock no more no less and an american captain no french but make him be in a wheel chair and still be able to have a wife and children on the ship and make his wife and his older children both male and female kick ass during the series and I’ll tell a story as to what good science fiction is all about…

423. charlie snow - October 18, 2012

have his mind control the wheel chair and throw it at an en enemy and kill him with it, that would be a good sci f , never been done before. throwing things with your mind yes but not a wheel chair lol.

424. charlie snow - October 18, 2012

problem with too many fans is nobody can satisfy them (not all, but most) so they make the mistake of not watching the new non original kirk and spock show and not buying whats sold on the tv ad’s, so it gets cancelled DUH I did say most not all. We trekkers need to demand a live action show back on tv even a weekly movies would be best and we need to get busy letting the studio and advertisers know that we will only buy there products only if they help keep the show on for ever lol. (ever) well you all know what I’ mean. the movies only untill jj quits or mentors another director now I’am not saying is the best director but what I’am saying is he knows what sells on big screens we need that who ever takes over does understand that also.

425. charlie snow - October 18, 2012

Before somebody say that I should get a life, IL just say your a sad person, I may be talking to no one,

426. paul smith - October 21, 2012

ST the original gave us hope for the future…can we develpe a story line as to what got us there…the no longer need for money/pay…universal health…just go to sick bay….the growing pains not in Enterprise or the early Trek…tie to the social, ecological and economic growing pains we now struggle with

427. charlie snow - October 22, 2012

@426
I’ agree with you, but it will make for a big screen disaster.
However for TV with fans making sure to buy the products that are advertise during the two hour TV movie, eventually we will gain a reputation similar to the SuperBowl, they whoever they are will realize that advertising on ST TV movies pays for them and we will get a lot more trek in our collections.

It order to make it on the big screen it can be as you suggest plus with a really really bad aas as the antagonist and action, action, action like The First Enterprise kicking ass I mean the USS Enterprise on our oceans. that be something to see.

428. Lubitsch - October 22, 2012

I think we all agree that a certain creative fatigue set in with Voyager and Enterprise that transmitted to the audience. So if you want a new series, the question is indeed, why? Why should a new attempt work if the last two ones turned out to be rather disappointing? What can be done that hasn’t been done on Star Trek? It is most certainly not a long intricate story arc because the Star Trek universe itself already provides such a frame, pushing further in this direction leads to a big in-joke for fans.
Therefore I’d strongly support the anthology idea. On the one hand it can draw old fans with clever connections to the whole narrative universe, there’s in fact no need to restrict oneself to a certain era, stories could take place any time, anywhere with guest stars from the series. On the other hand one could tell all kind of daring stories that were never told on Star Trek because the series format never allowed it with all stories having to be somehow connected to the main cast and therefore be told in a certain way.
What about an episode first showing us some characters on the TNG Enterprise before it gets attacked by the Borg in Q Who and telling what happened to these people on the Borg cube. This would be pretty grim and I’m not suggesting to make it a kind of ultra-dark series, but it’s an example of a story that never could be told on the series since the main characters can’t be killed off. Or the contrary: what about an story about a member of the TOS cast, grappling with mortality, legacy and so on? A description of a quiet day in old age without any superficial dramatic development, but with some deeper insights into the characters.
An anthology series could be incredibly fresh and very familiar at the same time. If done well which means, get good authors, why not talented SF ones like TOS did in its first season.

429. charliesnow - October 22, 2012

We have at this time no real way of going to the planets of the universe, ST provides a way to do so. Do I need to say more?

TV has to entertain us and some of us could careless about reality TV, I’ don’t buy anything that is shown during reality shows as a form of protest.

No fast foods, nothing that is associated with reality shows, I want science fiction shows of any kind, some people like westerns or comedies that is good but some people want science fiction and I’m willing to buy for it.

Star Trek can come back to TV if they don’t put to much money into it, a million dollars per episode is to much, so new actors playing Bond (hope you all know what I’m saying) can be a way of keeping cost down.

I’ve been told that doing that will cuz the show to be canceled so fast it won’t be funny, well I don’t see ST on TV, so if doing bold stuff like providing acting opportunities for new actors gets the cost down, I’ think I can see new Kirks popping up every now and then and I’ll deal with it.
What is the alternative no Trek on TV, we the fans must put up with less in order to get more, less special effects is also the way to go…I’m not saying do crap just to have the show back on TV, what I’m saying is lest be creative with less money it can be done. Now another problem that fans have is that when we disagree, we get mean with each other.

430. MaddenKIDD49 - October 23, 2012

I missed Enterprise from never knowing when it was on but watching it over and over on Netflix I missed out. Season 3 was the best season of any of the Trek series. They were just getting going when they were cancelled. The Finale was awesome even though got bad reviews. Voyager was great. TNG is immortal and TOS is what started it all. They can and should do a new series if they do it intelligent, correctly and not try to force too many new things down our throat al at once.

431. MaddenKIDD49 - October 23, 2012

Why don’t they have a new movie that has Q unite all the Starship Captains for some challenge or whatever. That way they could bring Shatner, Bakula, Picard and young Kirk together. Maybe even Janeway with Data being the moderator. There is your story, I want royalties if they use it nyuk nyuk

432. pilotfred - October 25, 2012

if they are doing a cartoon then jj universe,i welcome a cartoon set in this time, it will open the background to this changed univeres, a bit like what the comics are doing

if live tv then prime, set after spock has left

433. Flake - October 27, 2012

I want a TV Series that explores what would happen if we discovered warp drive, anti-gravity and limitless energy tomorrow :)

Star Trek but in the present day! We could still find aliens etc out there but we could also have it much more accessible and believable for todays audience.

434. Flake - October 27, 2012

I want a TV Series that explores what would happen if we discovered warp drive, anti-gravity and limitless energy tomorrow :)

Star Trek but in the present day! We could still find aliens etc out there but we could also have it much more accessible and believable for todays audience.

435. Gmajick - October 30, 2012

If Star Trek was to get rebooted for TV, I think the best way direction to take it would be an animated series based off the end on STNG and the Titan Novel series.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.