Star Trek’s heart is in television, says Ron D. Moore | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Star Trek’s heart is in television, says Ron D. Moore February 5, 2014

by Matt Wright , Filed under: Trek Franchise,Trek on TV , trackback

The web site Digital Spy recently caught up with Ron D. Moore to interview him about his new SyFy Channel show Helix, they couldn’t help but talk a little Trek with him.

I think its home and its heart is really in television. That’s really what Star Trek is – the core concept is really a TV show.

I think the features are good and I really admire what JJ Abrams has done with the last two films – I think it’s great – but the heart and soul of that franchise demands a return to television.

The kinds of stories that you’ll tell in the features space are not the kinds of stories that made that show so popular. The features all have to be action-oriented.

The TV shows were morality plays, they were more thematic, they were examining society in different ways. Sometimes the stakes were just one crew member’s life, sometimes the stakes were just one alien world or the Enterprise.

On bringing Trek back to TV:

The TV show is really what Star Trek is to me. I think the features are great, but I think it has to return to TV if it’s going to remain an ongoing franchise.

On being the one to re-launch Trek on TV:

I’d love to do Star Trek again, in all honesty, but I also don’t have a great new Star Trek idea. I’m not saying I know exactly how to do a new [Star Trek] TV show – I don’t. Maybe I shouldn’t do it until I have that great epiphany!

–Source: Digital Spy

Comments

1. TerranGuy93 - February 5, 2014

I completely agree with him. I love some of the movies but they are more about spectacle over story. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

Even something as awesome and story based as say Wrath of Khan would probably be less action and more story if done on TV.

I, personally, did not like STID, but I loved Star Trek ’09. However, I do want a TV show back and one not set i the JJ Verse.

I’d really like to see something more like Renegades get picked up.

2. DLope - February 5, 2014

I agree with him. I wouldn’t mind RM taking over Trek for TV. Particularly in this golden age of Television when we’re capable of doing such great story arcs and drama.

I loved his take on BSG… though my one gripe with that series was that it was entirely humorless. Trek requires (and BSG should have too) that the characters can occasionally laugh at themselves and each other to lighten the crisis from time to time.

3. NuFan - February 5, 2014

He said at Comic-Con that Star Trek will not return to the old canon, but it might return to tv if the movies continue to do well.

4. Adam C - February 5, 2014

I too completely agree he said, star trek stories are meant for tv, but he cant think of a series he wants to tell, i too would kind of strugle for inspiration for star trek that hasnt been run into the ground.. something will happen though there is no chance cbs will sit on the franchise.

But I do think there are new directional, and productive ways to tell a story about star trek (or planet trek lol) it wont take allot to get the ball going, but it will take allot for it to remain faithful to gene’s vision.

5. MJ - February 5, 2014

I like Ron Moore, but the sad fact is that he last several sf shows have pretty much stunk. And this Helix show is un-watchable and a gross-out for my tastes.

BSG was his last and only real hit in shows that he led.

So great guy, but I think his opinion is a bit suspect given that he is kind of a one-hit wonder.

He needs to demonstrate to me that he can do more than one successful TV show, plus do a couple of movies, before I would consider him an expert on TV versus movies for Trek.

6. Yob Benami - February 5, 2014

@TerranGuy93 I couldn’t have said it better.

7. James McDonald - February 5, 2014

I agree. It is time for a new Star Trek tv series. The time frame between the original STAR TREK (196-69), Star Trek animated tv series (1973-74) and Star Trek; The Next Generation, I believe is available.

8. Martman - February 5, 2014

a Star Trek show of some type, needs to come back to TV,
and BSG needs a reboot for the big screen !!!

9. Corylea - February 5, 2014

I agree very strongly with Mr. Moore; I think Star Trek works much better as television. Big-budget movies are usually action pictures, but it was the CHARACTERS and the IDEAS that made Star Trek so beloved. Movies usually have a frenetic pace, but the characters work best when they have a chance to breathe.

I’d love to see the original series characters in a new TV show. (Not with the original actors, obviously — half of them are dead, and the rest are not up to the strain of a weekly series.) But you don’t have to blow up Vulcan or make Kirk a captain before he’s ready, the way Abrams did….

Get real science fiction authors to write stories for you. Everyone THINKS they can write, and most actors, directors, and producers are wrong about that. :-) Get Robert J. Sawyer, Lois McMaster Bujold, and similar folks to write the stories. Spend a lot of time focusing on exploration and a lot of time developing the characters. Show us some alien cultures, give us some interesting moral dilemmas, provide main characters we can care about, and Star Trek fans will reward you with legendary loyalty. ;-)

10. Craiger - February 5, 2014

I think they could do Romulan War and the founding of the Federation series even though they already have done Enterprise. Enterprise ended right before the RW and the Federation was going to start. That could have a lot of character driven stories and action. I think a lot of time has passed since DS9’s Dominion War that it wouldn’t be been their done that. Or would it?

11. Aaron (Naysayers are gonna nay) - February 5, 2014

I would be okay with Moore or even Jane Epstein being show runner. Moore at the very least seems to get the pulse of the Trek universe.

12. Aaron (Naysayers are gonna nay) - February 5, 2014

**** Jane Espenson sorry auto correct

13. Damian - February 5, 2014

I’ll give him credit for admitting he doesn’t have a great new idea for a Star Trek show, and that maybe he shouldn’t be involved until he had a great idea.

I liked his work on Deep Space Nine and The Next Generation. Deep Space Nine certainly pushed the envelope for Star Trek. I admit, I didn’t think it was going to fly when it started. A Star Trek show on a space station and no Enterprise. But it worked, and worked well. I think it also helped that they didn’t use a select few writers, but they had a ton of writers. That helped keep it fresh. Ira Steven Behr also had a big part of Deep Space Nine’s success, and of course Mike Piller and Rick Berman for pushing the idea forward in the first place.

I also agree with Moore on his opinion of Voyager, that it was missing something. I did end up liking Voyager in the end, but I can’t help thinking they missed some opportunities. I loved the fact that it was all new aliens and it was the ultimate exploration show. But Voyager should have faced more adversity. A bit more like what we saw on the Equinox, and less the Enterprise. Maybe not as severe as the Equinox, I mean, 3/4 of the crew would probably be dead. But more adversity, energy shortages, having to improvise more, those are things they could have explored a bit more.

14. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@5. MJ

“So great guy, but I think his opinion is a bit suspect given that he is kind of a one-hit wonder.
He needs to demonstrate to me that he can do more than one successful TV show, plus do a couple of movies, before I would consider him an expert on TV versus movies for Trek”

You sound so full of yourself here, MJ. Ron Moore doesn’t needs to demonstrate anything to you. He is one of the best TV writers in Hollywood & a better writer than your friend Bob.

Go back & watch BSG or any of Star Trek episodes that he wrote & then come back & give us a meaningful opinion about him.

And the article is about bringing Trek back to TV, not about Moore. But of course as a true nuTrek, you don’t want that. All you really want is your two hours of relentless dumb action movies that you like so much.

15. crazydaystrom - February 5, 2014

“I think (Star Trek’s) home and its heart is really in television.”

Hard to disagree with that. But everything he said poses the question – What will it take to bring Star Trek back to television, its voyage home if you will?

16. CmdrR - February 5, 2014

We’re barely a dozen posts in and already there are enough ideas in this thread to justify a production meeting.

YES, ST needs to return to TV where it thrives. Frankly, if all we’re ever going to get from a movie ticket is a nominally new villain doing a Khan impression and a lot of explosions, then the hell with it. Trek has IDEAS and characters and real conflict. I’d like to see the producers open the doors to sci-fi writers… even fans… for story ideas… and pass those to staff writers and the producers to polish.

I’d love to see a real Star Trek re-invigoration.

17. crazydaystrom - February 5, 2014

Wow Ahmed. 14 posts and phaser fire. Here we go…

And here I go. Bye-bye.

IDIC

18. T'cal - February 5, 2014

While I’ve always thought TNG was the best Trek, DS9 did have better writing that allowed for more character and relationship development, which I’ve always attributed to RDM’s influence. These attributes drew me to BSG as well, which was better than both of the aforementioned Trek shows. High praise, indeed. Give RDM a bit of time to develop a plan and then hand him the reigns to Trek TV.

19. T'cal - February 5, 2014

Oh, and hire Bear McCreary for the music. His work on BSG was nothing short of genius.

20. Calbie - February 5, 2014

I know how to write it back, been writing it for seven years. biggest part will be selling it to paramount but it will be amazing.

21. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@ 19. T’cal – February 5, 2014

“Oh, and hire Bear McCreary for the music. His work on BSG was nothing short of genius.”

I second that.

22. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@17. crazydaystrom

When someone suggest that Ron Moore “needs to demonstrate to me that he can do more than one successful TV show, plus do a couple of movies, before I would consider him an expert on TV versus movies for Trek.” while giving a free pass to the Transformers writers, then I do have an issue with that.

23. pilotfred - February 5, 2014

he is spot on,start trek is best on TV,yes its nice to have a movie every so often and if done right,sorry not a big fan of the jj films,they are fun take your brain and enjoy the ride,however once you start to think about the plot then it all fall apart,i am just glad they are not set in the prime timeline,honest the shat your better off not being in them

24. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

Moore: “The kinds of stories that you’ll tell in the features space are not the kinds of stories that made that show so popular. The features all have to be action-oriented. The TV shows were morality plays, they were more thematic, they were examining society in different ways. Sometimes the stakes were just one crew member’s life, sometimes the stakes were just one alien world or the Enterprise.”

Agreed with his assessment. There is no escaping the fact that the movies will be geared to appease to mainstream audience & the focus will be mostly on action & adventure, not philosophical or social issues.

Perhaps what Trek need is to return to TV but on cable rather than a network. Cable shows these days come with better writings & well developed characters, unlike the case with networks shows.

25. j4yn1ck5 - February 5, 2014

I can appreciate the intricate chess game plot style of both BSG and DS9. But, they were slow as all hell, too much boring development time. DS9 was too serial for Star Trek. I did like it, but I have to be honest. For that reason, I prefer VOY over DS9. It had the episodic rhythm that I love from Trek, and didn’t have repulsive Ferengi episodes like DS9.

26. crazydaystrom - February 5, 2014

crazydaystrom the grand return! lol!

22. Ahmed
@17. crazydaystrom

When someone suggest that Ron Moore “needs to demonstrate to me that he can do more than one successful TV show, plus do a couple of movies, before I would consider him an expert on TV versus movies for Trek.” while giving a free pass to the Transformers writers, then I do have an issue with that.

I hear ya

27. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@ 26. crazydaystrom – February 5, 2014

“crazydaystrom the grand return!”

LOL

28. Carl LaFong - February 5, 2014

I understand what Moore is getting at, and basically agree with his notion, but I disagree that the features can not match the depth of character or thematic morality plays.

They can, quite easily, but Paramount has deliberately chosen not to. Studio interference has always opted for an action-adventure, with only the fourth film eschewing a traditional protagonist/antagonist melodramatic structure. Several of the features are quite well executed, but on the balance, all are rather conventional in structure and content in an effort to reach a four-quadrant boxoffice audience.

Paramount will NEVER fork over $150 million dollars to produce a “City on the Edge of Forever”, “Chain of Command” or “In the Pale Moonlight” – each is too much of a downer, despite being exceptional works of drama.

What needs to be examined is WHY feature films can’t take the risks of television nowadays? Studio produced cinema is now the playground of remakes, re-treads, and re-boots; originality does not guaranteed profitability in the Hollywood mindset – which explains the continued employment of Orci & Kurtzman.

29. Platitude - February 5, 2014

Love to see Moore helm a new Trek series. They should also totally get him to write the next movie.

30. Blue Thunder - February 5, 2014

Frankly, I wouldn’t trust Ronald D. Moore with anything Star Trek related.

He was part of the franchise fatigue period that both Rick Berman and Brannon Braga caused during the mid-1990’s to the early 2000’s. And in all honesty, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise were not all that hot in the Star Trek realm.

After his desecration of the original Battlestar Galactica with that remake, I wouldn’t let him near anything science fiction related, period.

31. Damian - February 5, 2014

30–

Moore had nothing to do with Voyager (except for writing 2 episodes) or Enterprise.

He had some involvement with TNG and a lot of involvement with Deep Space Nine.

Also, I would argue the mid 90’s Star Trek was at the top of it’s game. Not only was there a blockbuster movie, First Contact, but Deep Space Nine had come into its own and was well regarded at the time. So I disagree with franchise fatigue at that time.

But he was long gone by the early 2000’s.

32. Damian - February 5, 2014

BTW, if you didn’t like DS9, that’s fine.

But I don’t think you can argue Star Trek was unpopular in the mid 90’s. Quite the opposite. That was a period of heightened interest in Star Trek, much like today with Star Trek (2009) and STID, and there happened to be a TV show at the time. DS9 was the top rated syndicated show after TNG went off the air.

33. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@30. Blue Thunder

“After his desecration of the original Battlestar Galactica with that remake, I wouldn’t let him near anything science fiction related, period.”

Are you kidding me ? The original BSG was just a show for kids that was made to cash in on the success of Star Wars. Ron Moore rebooted that old series & created one of the most sophisticated and original sci-fi shows ever.

34. Lurker - February 5, 2014

Saying nuBSG was a desecration of the original Battlestar is like saying Nolan’s Batman was a desecration of the 1966 Batman.

I sense a Dirk Benedict fan in the midst.

35. Phil - February 5, 2014

@14. Easy there – I agree that Ron Moore is a bit more then a one hit wonder, and he was responsible for a lot of great Trek. On the other hand, he was also responsible for that abomination known as Generations – the writing effort on that movie makes Bob’s efforts look downright Shakespearian. In so much that Mr. Moore admits his Trek well is dry, that may be a de-facto admission that any format beyond ‘captain and six side kicks’ is probably dead on arrival.

36. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@ 35. Phil – February 5, 2014

“In so much that Mr. Moore admits his Trek well is dry, that may be a de-facto admission that any format beyond ‘captain and six side kicks’ is probably dead on arrival.”

Well, at least he has the courage to admit that, unlike Bob & co who never even hinted that they made any mistake at all in the new movies.

Why the secrecy around Khan before the movie is out ? Blame it on Abrams or Urban. Why bring Khan back first place? It was Lindelof’s idea & so on

37. THX-1138 - February 5, 2014

Right on, CmdrR.

Right on.

38. Gary 8.5 - February 5, 2014

Bob Orci and Co. dont have to admit they made any mistakes as far as I am concerened .
I just want a good third movie .

39. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@ 38. Gary 8.5 – February 5, 2014

“Bob Orci and Co. dont have to admit they made any mistakes as far as I am concerened .
I just want a good third movie”

And how do you expect to get a good third movie if the writers don’t acknowledge that there were issues in the previous movie ?

If the writers believed that all was well & sound in the last one, then there is no reason for them to improve anything & you will end up getting a 3rd movie with same issues.

If on the other hand, you think that the last one was great & amazing, then have no worry, the writers share that opinion & you will get what you got last time.

40. Damian - February 5, 2014

35–Yet on the other hand again, he was one of the writers of First Contact, and most would agree that was a huge hit.

41. MJ - February 5, 2014

“Go back & watch BSG or any of Star Trek episodes that he wrote & then come back & give us a meaningful opinion about him.”

Star Trek wasn’t his franchise. And he’s had 3 flops since BSG. He’s a good writer, for sure, but not someone who I think would be credible in being Trek back to TV. Until he produces a 2nd great TV series, I will maintain that he is a one hit wonder.

And regarding movies, the one movie experience he had was on MI-2, which was a rather disappointing film.

But nevertheless, what he did on DS9 and BSG is timeless, and I love the guy for it. I just don’t want to “bet the Star Trek farm” that lightening is going to strike a 3rd time for him in his career given the stream of very disappointing attempts at scifi from him over the last five years.

Here’s what he should do — he should go back to being on the writing team of a sf tv show and write episodes. That is his first, best, destiny.

42. MJ - February 5, 2014

@35

“He was also responsible for that abomination known as Generations – the writing effort on that movie makes Bob’s efforts look downright Shakespearian.”

Yep!

43. MJ - February 5, 2014

Don’t let it get to you, crazydaystrom. We all over-react at times here, myself included.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

17. crazydaystrom – February 5, 2014
Wow Ahmed. 14 posts and phaser fire. Here we go…

And here I go. Bye-bye.

IDIC

44. MJ - February 5, 2014

“crazydaystrom the grand return! lol!”

LOL — cool !

45. Thorny - February 5, 2014

I know I’m in the minority, but I lost interest in BSG after the early part of the second season. The pilot and first season were great, but then it went off the rails.

I want Star Trek back on TV, but I want it set in the prime universe, 50-75 years after the TNG/DS9/VOY era. Leave the Vulcan-less and Romulus-less Abramsverse in the movie theaters, please.

46. Son of Captain Garth - February 5, 2014

At the risk of seeming masturbatory, I’ll quote myself here:

It would have to make some sort of economic sense to all parties involved in order to promote the idea of a new series. Problems:
1. It has to feel like Trek, because the die-hard fans would be the base audience, i.e. white men in their 40s and beyond. Maybe Geritol could get behind it as a special sponsor the way cigarette companies used to do back in the 50s.
2. It can’t feel too much like Trek if it wants to attract a broader audience. Therefore, you risk “raping the childhood” of the aforementioned Viagra crowd (oh, maybe they could sponsor it, too, with a “set it on STUN” campaign!).
3. It would have to NOT run on SyFy as one of those embarrassingly cheap shark/snake/mutant spider movies with the Commodore 64-level CGI effects.

So, the challenge is to make it familiar, but not stale, yet also pitch it to the 40-plus crowd with the most disposable income while making the mindless millennials happy at the same time. Yeah, I don’t think I’ll hold my breath for that.

Nor is anyone going to fulfill some fanboy’s pipe dream of having one of the fan films picked up for production by Paramount or CBS. Get your heads out of the clouds. Paramount will devote its Star Trek resources solely to the next movie; CBS is largely SOL. All they could conceivably do is another Classic Trek series which would be buoyed solely by the Grecian Formula crowd.

47. Hugh Hoyland - February 5, 2014

Would love to see a new Star Trek TV series!

But I’m afraid for those that want something like TRW or Captain Picards great, great grandson/daughter flying a quantum star ship in the year 8044 prime universe, I doubt that will happen.

I mean I might watch it and you might watch it. But for every group of us that would, there’d be about 5000+ other viewers that would skip it and tune in Game of Thrones or something.

I would guess the studio would go with whats hot, and thats something based on the new films. I for sure would gladly watch this new crew (even re-cast) each week! :] (And likely a lot of other viewers would as well).

48. Vultan - February 5, 2014

#45

Unfortunately, Romulus was destroyed in the Prime Universe. But it’s still got Vulcan!

I agree with you about BSG. I lost interest about halfway through its run. Got too depressing to watch. For me anyway.

49. Vultan - February 5, 2014

As much as I like Ron Moore (he did some great work on TNG and DS9), I think Trek needs new blood with, most importantly, new ideas. And if STID is any indication, that eliminates the most recent group of writers as well.

The two new guys—not a long resume for either, so who knows what they’ll bring to the next movie?

50. Marja - February 5, 2014

39 Ahmed, Frankly I don’t give a tinker’s fart if the writers ADMIT their mistakes before writing the next movie.

All I care about is that they write the next movie and DO A GOOD JOB — with a logical storyline that’s not truncated or buried due to too much zippyzip action.

That’d make up for the past boo-boos, more than any words spoken or written by way of apology for them.

51. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@50. Marja

“That’d make up for the past boo-boos, more than any words spoken or written by way of apology for them.”

I’m not interested in an apology or anything like that at all. What I’m saying that a writer who think that his previous movie was perfect & very successful, will not feel any need to improve his next one, after all, why improve on a “perfect” movie ?

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right ??

52. Ahmed - February 5, 2014

@ 49. Vultan – February 5, 2014

“The two new guys—not a long resume for either, so who knows what they’ll bring to the next movie?”

Not even a short resume, just one item on it so far, ST XIII!

53. Marja - February 5, 2014

Son of Garth,

They should put Trek on Netflix; limited run per season, say 10 eps, get the movie cast involved [even if they only make appearances where Enterprise is the “sister ship” of the TV one], they should continue the interest generated by the movies but engage in dramatic “moral question” and science fiction storylines that are not overrun with overly violent brutal and ultimately meaningless action [I understand that action sells blockbuster movies, but it is not a basis for a good television show].

I would like to see a five-year mission set in the AltVerse timeline established in the new movies. Re-use those expensive sets!

If there’s a limited run per year, the movie Trek actors will still be free to work on other projects during the year ….

THIS IS MY QUEST, TO FOLLOW THAT STAR, NO MATTER HOW HOPELESS …. ;-)

54. Marja - February 5, 2014

51 Ahmed, unfortunately, I worry that you are right and the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” idea will win out in the production of ST3.

STID did make phenomenal money at the box office; Paramount is ultimately interested only in the money and I’m sure they couldn’t give a ding-dong if we diehard fans are happy or not.

I just hope that Bob Orci, who comes here and reads comments, takes in some of our critiques and does better next time. I felt that elements of STID’s storyline were much better than the simple “Nero’s-revenge-and-let’s-get-the-crew-on-the-Enterprise” plot of 2009. Maybe there’ll be another step upward for Trek3.

So, yeah, like the guy said, “I just want a better movie next time” ;-)

55. Blue Thunder - February 6, 2014

@33 – Not really. The original battlestar was adult in nature and had a serious storyline. The only kids show I know of was that abomination known as Galactica 1980. Something that BG fans ignore completely.

56. Ann Hogg - February 6, 2014

Yes please, a new Tv series. We really need a Si-Fi series, bring back Star Trek, would the big stars be willing to play their parts though? It could be the ongoing 5 year mission with the new cast. Yes, yes, yes!!!

57. The Keeper - February 6, 2014

He’s just looking for a job.

58. Lee - February 6, 2014

What they should do for the next series is follow the format of American Horror Story or what Heroes was originally supposed to do (well, not reusing the same actors) – but have each season be a different storyline, a sort of 13-episode miniseries each season. It could be used to fill-in untold gaps and time periods of the Trek universe and without needing to get actors to take the roles on a permanent basis.

59. Mad Mann - February 6, 2014

Ron is a great guy. He hooked me up with his former agent.

Anyway, what about an animated series? I think it would be fun. Sure, it would be more action-adventure oriented, but it could still be just as thought-provoking as TOS. And, it would be similar in style/continuity as the Abrams movies, but it does not have to be exactly the same. I imagine it being similar to the comics in story-telling tone, but better.

I would rather it see it air on the Hub network, they treat their shows a lot better than Cartoon Network.

60. MCG - February 6, 2014

Hey, Ron! I have a great new idea that you’d be perfect for! Star Trek Beyond!

http://www.StarTrekBeyond.com

It modernizes Trek thematically, dramatically and technologically. The pilot episode, character backgrounds and series bible is written an on the site! The 50th anniversary is coming and Trek needs to come back to TV for it! Make it so, Ron!!! :)

61. Damian - February 6, 2014

41–In a way, it seems Ron Moore agrees with you. He admitted he doesn’t have any ideas about a new Star Trek show, and until he does, basically he’s not the one to do it. But I do agree, should there be a new show at some point, it might not be a bad idea to see if he could write some episodes.

I know he gets slammed for Generations (which I thought was an average Trek film, BTW, other than how they killed Kirk–I thought the Nexus was an interesting plot device).

But let’s not forget he also co-wrote First Contact (along with some great DS9 episodes)–and that more than made up for any failings in Generations.

62. Tim Smoke - February 6, 2014

I hope to return to new Star Trek TV show soon. I have been watch the Star Trek: TNG, DS9, Voyager also old and new Star Trek movie show. I love that. Better is Star Trek: DS9 and new Star Trek movie. I love to what design of new starships in 25th to 29th century. I don’t like kind of lot of time traveler story about.
I am real like Battlestar Galactica in 1970s to 1980. It okay to about new Battlestar Galactica story about.
I hope to get rip of Borg story about as really destroyed by ST: Voyager in last show.
Some of Vulcan, Romulus, Klingon and new alien life form as friendly. where is alien like cat persons? Some who are little bad person.
Something idea of new starship of Enterprise is as mixed of Enterprise E and ST: DS9 space station as large size as like a Enterprise J starship. Something like more than ten forward as more space like inside DS9 of mall. I love to seen mall.
I hope to change color code on new uniform as black with gold fine line is command, red is security, white is medicine, yellow or gold is an engineering / ops and blue is a science, green is marine corps, gray is an intelligence, and purple is for diplomat service and light brown is cargo service too.
I am real like that uniform in DS9 and Enterprise E.
I hope to use TV in both air and cable show.

63. Mikey1091 - February 6, 2014

If CBS and Paramount have anything to say about it, Star trek will never return to TV, and that’s very unfortunate.

64. Kevin J. - February 6, 2014

Blue Thunder, I mean Christopher, why are you such a negative person? Mommy issues…daddy issues?

65. Damian - February 6, 2014

61–I’m afraid you’re probably right. CBS appears to have no interest in any new Star Trek shows. They seem content to upgrade the existing shows to Blu-Ray. That’s a good thing, of course, but that seems to be it, other than the usual licensing for the novels, comic books, etc.

66. Commodore Adams - February 6, 2014

Would love Ron Moore, Bryan Singer, and Bryan Fuller to spearhead a new Trek show. But that is just wishful thinking.

67. Commodore Adams - February 6, 2014

It’s been said in many articles that CBS only has the right to release existing shows, Paramount still has the rights to produce a new show along with movies, and the executives at Paramount said they are interested in a TV show, eventually. To say that CBS and Paramount do not want a new tv show is nuts when Paramount has expressed interest. CBS has archival rights and that’s about it. Anything new be it tv or movie, it’s Paramount who decides.

68. Damian - February 6, 2014

67–CBS owns Star Trek now. Paramount only has the right to release the movies. But even in that case Paramount still doesn’t “own” Star Trek.

CBS owns the copyright now even to the Star Trek name.

Not sure where you got your info, but CBS is the final arbiter of all things Star Trek, including all the TV rights.

69. Damian - February 6, 2014

And Les Moonves, who runs CBS, is not the least bit interested in Star Trek. I’m actually surprised (pleasantly so) that CBS went ahead with upgrading TNG for Blu-Ray, knowing how dismissive he has been about Star Trek.

70. Danpaine - February 6, 2014

54. Marja – February 5, 2014
51 Ahmed, unfortunately, I worry that you are right and the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” idea will win out in the production of ST3.

Agreed, to the point where I’m not the least bit excited about the next film, which is sad after 40 years of being a fan.

71. kmart - February 6, 2014

Trek as a parable of OUR current times is doing Trek as end of 23rd century beginning of 24th, where our concept of technology is changing from Kirk’s to Picard’s (end of era like westerns THE WILD BUNCH, THE PROFESSIONALS and BITE THE BULLET give a good idea of conflict, as does BUNCH’s ad line about unchanging men in changing times)

I’ve thought that was the era Trek needed to explore ever since seeing GENERATIONS opening night, and I find it is more relevant than ever (though not as good potentially since you can’t have the actors from GEN playing that time period after 20 years have lapsed.)

This wouldn’t be a connect-the-dots exercise like ENT was in terms of being something between now and TOS, but instead a real expansion of the retro thinking and paranoia rampant in SFS and TUC, where we may not be attacking the right people and certainly not for the right reasons, and that ethical quandry coupled with a need to explore and root out truth could make for great storytelling (along with plenty of shoot-em-up possibilities.)

72. Phil - February 6, 2014

Paramount has gotten back into the TV production business – so, if Paramount wants to produce Trek for TV, and CBS licenses it, it’s a go. So, the framework is there, someone needs to make a legitimate pitch to get a pilot commissioned.

73. Ahmed - February 6, 2014

@ 57. The Keeper – February 6, 2014

“He’s just looking for a job.”

No, he is already working on two shows, Helix (SyFy ) & Outlander (Starz ).

Next time, try to do your homework before posting a comment like that!

74. Ahmed - February 6, 2014

@ 72. Phil – February 6, 2014

“Paramount has gotten back into the TV production business – so, if Paramount wants to produce Trek for TV, and CBS licenses it, it’s a go.”

That is good news, maybe we will hear something about a new series by 2016.

75. Damian - February 6, 2014

74–

I think that is even unlikely. CBS on the one hand under Moonves is not interested in doing any new Trek. But they’re also not going to want to license someone else to do it and take the chance of losing out.

Basically, they don’t want to put out the money to do it themselves, nor do they want to relinquish control to someone else.

As much as I’d love to see a new Star Trek tv show, I’m just not at all optimistic, at least until after the Abrams team is done doing what they are doing.

76. Damian - February 6, 2014

And that’s even assuming Paramount would want to do it. Star Trek costs a lot to produce. I think Paramount is perfectly happy to invest in the movies, which only come out every 3 to 4 years. They reap a quick profit and move on. A Star Trek show costs a lot of money week in and week out, and the returns, assuming the show is successful, take a long time to come in. I’m just not sure Paramount is interested in that kind of investment.

77. Stallion - February 6, 2014

I would still like to see Enterprise finish it’s story it set out to tell and see the formation of the Federation. You have to give Rick Berman and Brannon Braga credit for putting Manny Cotto in charge of Enterprise after his work on season 3. They were able to recognize that Enterprise needed a guy like Cotto pretty quickly and put him in charge.

You have to give Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci credit. They knew when they signed on to direct Trek movies that they would have to write a big action adventure story and still went ahead with it. They have a respectable track record when it comes to writing for television and movies.

78. Ahmed - February 6, 2014

@77. Stallion

“They have a respectable track record when it comes to writing for television and movies.”

By a respectable track, do you mean these classics:

The Island, The Legend of Zorro, Transformers, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Cowboys & Aliens. Or Hercules: The Legendary Journeys, Xena: Warrior Princess & Jack of All Trades ?

IMO, most of their work are not great or even good by any standard, only exception are Star Trek 09 & Mission: Impossible III (two good movies) , Alias, Fringe & Sleepy Hollow.

79. Ahmed - February 6, 2014

Say hello to Captain Jane Tiberia Kirk!

=========================
Star Trek sex change: comic flips entire crew’s genders

Parallel Lines, says writer, ‘is very Star Trek in the way it invites an examination of deeper themes’

“It’s life, Jane, but not as we know it … ” Walking in the footsteps of a thousand fan fictions, the latest Star Trek comic flips the genders of the Enterprise’s famous crew, which is now run by Captain Jane Kirk with the able assistance of a female Spock and Scotty.

The first issue in a two-parter storyline from IDW Publishing, Parallel Lives, is just out, and sees “Captain Jane Tiberia Kirk and her crew encounter a never-before-seen enemy in deep space”. “Wait… Jane Kirk? What’s going on?!” asks the comics blurb.

As well as Kirk’s switch, the parallel universe storyline sees Pavel Chekov become Pavlona, Hikaru Sulu become Hikari, Scotty turn into Marjorie Scott, and the ship’s female inhabitant, Nyota Uhura, become a man, Nnamdi Uhuro. Lt Commander Spock remains Lt Commander Spock, but a female version of the character, with a much sharper hairdo.

The storyline, writer Mike Johnson told Comics Alliance yesterday, is “attention-grabbing and slightly weird, in the tradition of the more daring original episodes”. “It is also very Star Trek in the way that it invites an examination of deeper themes in the story beyond just the unusual premise,” he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/feb/06/star-trek-sex-change-comic-flips-genders-parallel-lines

80. Terry Carch - February 6, 2014

I like RM`s idea of another Trek TV series;however,I think there is too much violence in action pack adventure tv series,need more thought proveking serbral intectual and timely topics that deal with the problems such as race, environment,the right for privacy,healthcare education and so onetc.There is just too much violence not just on tv but also in the movies as well. That is why I like Star Trek TNG so much. I like the way TNG calborates so well together and co-operates totether in a cooprerate spirit without the fueding and fighting between the characters as Gene Roddenbarry had invisioned. I think this is why TNG has stud up and held up so well for so long to this very day.I think brains over brawn is so very critical in order for people to think and not fight over such important issues that this planet needs to face,etc.

81. MJ - February 6, 2014

@46

Come on, do we really need to see your supposedly clever use of the words masturbation and rape in a post here.

Nice Job, Beevis…or is it Butthead?

:-(

82. Colin Restorick - February 6, 2014

Its funny that the concept of made-for-tv Star Trek movies rarely gets mentioned. To me, those would be a happy medium I think most people would enjoy.

Take Star Trek Insurrection for example. It was a good Trek story, but as a movie its not going to live up to the bill. It just can’t, especially in todays block buster or bust movie mentality. Make Insurrection into a TV movie, with the appropriate budget, and I think you have a winning formula. You’d get the viewership, plus the home video sales.

But what do I know, I don’t work in Hollywood!

Colin R

83. Kenji - February 6, 2014

Trek on TV?

Marja (@50) mentions the idea of a Netflix limited series, and that seems plausible. They are gonna air Marvel series, and Marvel is doing pretty much everything right these days.

Everyone is saying that the best writing is for TV, so attracting quality actors and techs should not be a problem.

I also agree with Ron Moore that the Star Trek format is was developed and may be best served by TV.

What I can’t see – and this is me, maybe – is that there are actually enough untold stories in the Trekverse that justifies a new series.

Trek was continuously aired from 1987 to 2005. That’s a ridiculously successful run commercially. Artistically, not so much. The concept was absolutely run into the ground:

– crew sees threat
– crew meets guest star
– crew either supports or opposes guest star
– the babblefrinkium machine reversed its polarity
– humourous remark; fade to black

To me, the feature format is arguably the way to go because it should force the producers to come up with new worlds to explore, as opposed to a light redress of Set 10 with new styrofoam rocks (aka “Class M planet”).

Imagine if Star Trek ever showed space – no gravity, new dimensions, truly alien races and environments, as opposed to Forehead of the Week. That’s feature money.

If Trek is back on the tube, I think it is just going to be more of the same. Incompetent admirals, stock transporter effects on new planet, cheap throne rooms, arrrrrrgh!!

Don’t get me wrong: I loved these stories the first time I saw them, the second time I was ok with it, the third through tenth times, not so much.

The one way to get around it is to fully break the mold of TV Trek and that’s by planning to make a show with a beginning and an end. I don’t mean that you write every show in advance of shooting frame 1 (probably not possible given production schedule), but definitely a unifiying sensibility and overarching concept that glues the viewer to share the journey.

This has been done recently: remember that show in which the whole hook was, what if the human race was nearly wiped out and a pitiful handful of survivors fled into space looking for a mythical 13th planet?

More recently: what if you took Mr. Chips and turned him into Scarface, so that by the end, an ineffectual but pleasant family man was a criminal monster who destroyed almost everything and everyone he once loved?

I think that kind of big, embracing vision is what you need to pull off a Trek that is worth watching. I think that is the idea that Ron D. Moore is saying that he would need to have in order to feel that TV Trek could be viable again.

Once you have a great concept (and I’m not saying I do), then the show could absolutely throw in cherished Easter Eggs to longtime fans, but you can’t have all that background texture be what comes first in the planning process. It’s not enough to have a ship and a crew and the background history of the Federation. We have had that. It was good (and then boring as hell).

Gotta have the new thing.

84. Phil - February 6, 2014

@81. Could not agree more – resurrecting Trek in another ‘captain and crew’ format is a recipe for mediocrity. The Federation encompasses a big chunk of galactic real estate, it’s hard to imagine that the only thing of any interest is the travels of one ship in one portion of Starfleet.

85. boborci - February 6, 2014

love Ron Moore.

86. Sarek66 - February 6, 2014

Star Trek: Anthology. An anthology series that explores the entire Star Trek universe. We can have Klingon episodes, Romulan episodes, Federation episodes, The Vulcans, etc. Do not focus on one crew. Each week we would see different aspects of the Star Trek universe. We could see what the Next Generation crew has been up to, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise etc. Even Kirk and Spock could make an appearance. That is what I would like to see in a new Star Trek series. Moore is correct in that the best of Star Trek can be seen on television.

87. Captain Smirk - February 6, 2014

Although Star Trek on TV has been known to threaten either the crew (often) or Earth (far less often), the movies vacillate between these two plot devices with annoying regularity.

The Star Trek Movies and Who/What They Primarily Threaten:

1 Earth
2 Crew (RIP Spock)
3 Crew (RIP Enterprise)
4 Earth
5 Crew
6 Crew (Enterprise decommissioned)
7 Crew (RIP Kirk, Enterprise-D)
8 Earth
9 Crew
10 Crew (RIP Data) – also added Earth as an afterthought
11 Earth (RIP Vulcan)
12 Crew

I prefer Star Trek on television because the focus is usually more on characterization, adventure and mind-blowing sci-fi concepts instead of, “Who are going to ALMOST blow up this time?” (though that happens too).

88. Hugh Hoyland - February 6, 2014

85. boborci

Hey welcome back bro! How goes the script?

89. Jack - February 6, 2014

Absolutely loved Caprica. Loved it! Haven’t seen Helix.

Everybody says Trek does better on television. But I still haven’t heard any great pitches.

Personally, I think keeping it simple is best — give us a crew on a five-year-mission with minimal backstory. Set it in the new universe so we’re not mired by all the canon. Let it evolve from there. And don’t assume that the thing’s going to last for multiple seasons.

That said, it’s tough telling crew-on-space-ship stories every week, 20 weeks a year, for multiple seasons. God, TNG stunk until it found its groove. Everybody on here who always talks about how Trek is about exploration must forget how bad some of those TNG “let’s visit a new planet!” stories were.

I prefer the way the Brits do things — with shorter relatively-self-contained series. And not, “you’ll be seeing us for 7 years.”

90. Ahmed - February 6, 2014

@89. Jack

“I prefer the way the Brits do things — with shorter relatively-self-contained series.”

I like that idea but not sure if that system will work in an American network like CBS.

91. Dom - February 6, 2014

Ron Moore doesn’t even need to come up with a different approach: he needs to get back to basics. All you need is an interesting bunch of archetypal characters in a starship travelling through space, searching for new life, new civilisations and, in the process, learning about themselves.

Screw Federatons, lumpyhead aliens of the week, Klingons, Romulans or whatever. I don’t need a weekly show ***about*** the Star Trek universe detailing the same races and their silly recurring characters: I just want a Star Trek show.

Seriously folks, look at what made the original series successful: it wasn’t returning villains or politics between established races. It was new stories and new characters each week and wondering where they’d end up next. Remember Errand of Mercy? The Klingons were new then. There were no rules surrounding them. They were fresh and interesting.

Look at each time previously-seen races cropped up in TOS: we never had the same Klingon or Romulan commander, not just because of actor availability, but also because it was an enormous universe and the chances of meeting the same person from the same race multiple times, if they weren’t a friend, was unlikely. It’s like me, sitting here in England, meeting the same random person from China multiple times in multiple places played out on an even bigger scale. It simply doesn’t happen very often.

An ideal Trek show would move to an era where the old Federation and other alliances are all gone and new friends and enemies exist. And if, metaphorically, the old alien races of Trek exist in a westerly direction, then it’s time for the new equivalent of the Enterprise, be she an HMS, SS, USS or IMS, to sail in an easterly direction to discover something new.

The universe is vast and infinite, so cut loose from everything that’s gone before and tell fresh stories from the new frontier.

Think about it: is Star Trek an adventure series exploring new places or is it the all the detritus the snowball’s already picked up rolling down the hill?

92. Kenji - February 6, 2014

Boborci! Did you miss being harangued?

Still much love for Trek here, right?

I’m glad you’re back, having a writer among the critics reminds me to write my own stuff too – someday I hope to be haranged by people who tell me I got it wrong!

93. dmduncan - February 6, 2014

I think Moore is right.

94. Son of Captain Garth - February 6, 2014

#81 MJ: “Come on, do we really need to see your supposedly clever use of the words masturbation and rape in a post here.

Nice Job, Beevis…or is it Butthead?”

I don’t know what the f**k you’re talking about. I had no “clever use” in mind when I chose those words. If they bring up some deep scars from your past, I’m sorry, but I have no way of knowing what’s going to set off your memories of getting paid to pickle kiss the milkman–and 12 of his friends. Keep that to yourself.

BTW, I’ll use whatever words I damn well please. Go play word cop with someone who gives a damn about your opinion.

95. Red Dead Ryan - February 6, 2014

Son of Captain Garth,

You did use explicit and highly offensive phrases in your post. Anyone with a half a brain could see that. Quite frankly, you seem very bitter and obnoxious.

People like you aren’t needed or wanted here.

Take a hike loser!

96. Plum - February 6, 2014

Ron Moore said; ‘the core concept is really a TV show.”

Truth.

Lots of great comments here and I just wanna add – anyone would be crazy to not see how many of the films, JJ Abram’s Star Trek included, weren’t terrific films. But. Star Trek was designed as a serial. It never had an over-all plot or reason for being. It went out and looked for stories, it wasn’t THE story. That’s also *cough* fundamentally the difference between Star Wars and Star Trek. Yea, you can turn Star Trek into a Star Wars, but it’s MUCH harder to go other way ’round. I think Ron is understanding this and I think JJ Abrams does too, he was right to bring a little Star Wars into Star Trek. Because that was a film, not a serial (tv show). Logic?

97. Jonboc - February 6, 2014

91, well said Dom. I agree 100%.

98. Son of Captain Garth - February 6, 2014

#95 Oh, great. Another forum cop. What’s the matter? Not feeling important enough in your career as assistant manager at the doughnut shop? Are you tired of people laughing at you in that paper hat?

Unless this website is your personal property, princess, STFU. I don’t care whether you think I belong here or not. I’ve tolerated your semi-literate blatherings for years and said nothing about you not belonging here.

If you need to feel powerful, take the magnifying glass that your wife uses in the bedroom and resume your hobby of zapping ants on the sidewalk. You can tell yourself, “they think I’m a god!”

99. Red Shirt Diaries - February 6, 2014

Son of Garth,

You are a pig, pure and simple.

100. ajdczar - February 6, 2014

Amen, Mr. Moore, Amen. The past two Star Wars movies were action adventures with no soul. (yes, I said Star Wars…sarcastically).

I can’t wait to see JJ do Star Wars as I appreciate his directing style. But please stop killing Star Trek. Into Darkness wasn’t even as good as the Star trek fan films I’ve seen….

Too bad Joss Whedon is so busy with Marvel. He would be the perfect writer/director for a new Trek show. Morality plays….Light Comedy….and Soul.

101. Son of Captain Garth - February 6, 2014

#99 Har, har. What, did I touch a nerve, Mr. forum cop? Jones-ing for some respect? Here’s a tip: you’ll never get any.

102. Garak's Pride - February 6, 2014

@101

I agree. You are a pig.

And “Jonesing”, really? really? Like who ever says that?

The New Oxford American Dictionary has “Origin 1960’s: said to come from Jones Alley, in Manhattan, associated with addicts.”Etymonline suggests that it rose from a use of Jones as slang for herroin: The slang sense “intense desire, addiction” probably arose from earlier use of Jones as a synonym for “herroin.”

So he have masturbazion, rappe and druug use now as common terms from the low-life clown, who also seems think its going to intimidate us all with his lame aggressive responses….lol…I think I more likely to call the kids parents and recommend and intervention, before things get out of control

Based on these inputs, I’ll take a guess at his occupation?

“Krack Hore?”

103. Garak's Pride - February 6, 2014

What’s up, Matt, my response to this pig of a man is getting censored???

104. K-7 - February 6, 2014

@102

Remember, it shitheads like him to always get protected by censors. One sidebar of our free society is having to listen to rude dumb-asses like him,

He’s nothing without his audience. And you can bet that he has a fake real world and that he is living in trailer park somewhere.

105. Son of Captain Garth - February 6, 2014

@102 Wow, three on one. You must like those odds. MJ attacks me for no reason, then RedShirt decides to dive in and now you, Garak? Feeling brave? Your “pig of a man” comment is thrown at someone who has never even directed a comment towards you. I bet you’re in your Mom’s basement right now, patting yourself on the back (if your arm can reach that far) for being such a hero. Of course, Garak was a little sneaky backstabber, too, so I guess that’s appropriate.

Oh, maybe you three will hook up later on line and digitally high-five each other and then use your digits to give yourself a very special treat, right?

106. Blue Thunder - February 6, 2014

@64 – Another clear sign of Mankind having a long way to go. With all of this infighting and disputes among Star Trek fans, it’s a wonder Star Trek fandom has lasted for this long.

All that aside, while First Contact was one of the better ST-TNG films, the remaining NG films – Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis were not all that hot. In fact Insurrection was a NG version of The Omega Glory, while Nemesis was a NG version of both The Wrath Of Khan and The Undiscovered Country.

Not a successful formula for writing a Star Trek film(i.e. recycle what had been done before).

The only good things about Generations were the following:

1. The entire Enterprise-B segment(actors, storyline, etc)
2. Malcolm McDowell
3. The deaths of Lursa and B’Tor.

The rest of the film, including Jim Kirk’s ‘less than graceful’ death just sucked, period.

All the more reason why Ron Moore should NOT be let near anything Star Trek related, period. Or any other science fiction production.

107. Son of Captain Garth - February 6, 2014

#104 Yeah, it always bothered me that Kirk’s death was staged so pedantically. A scaffolding breaks? What’s that supposed to be–a fat joke?

The plot holes were rather worrisome as well.

Oh, and I’m totally with you about the Enterprise-B segments being superior. The TOS guys were much more charismatic than the TNG people, even though, at least ostensibly, it was their film.

108. Jim Nightshade - February 7, 2014

Nice to see bob orci here again…we miss hearing from you sir…
i think most of us miss trek on tv…while i personally would love a trek anthology series with something new every week with plots n scripts by good scifi writers, because i love n know the trekverse well, i dont think casual scifi fans n regular tv watchers would be familiar enough to want to tune in every week….most viewers like returning characters they get to know better as time goes on…twilight zone had serling as the returning host which helped to make that anthology work…also used great scifi writers as well as serling himself….but if a weekly show like the other trek series would not work as a series then what would?
i also think part of the problem is the divisiveness within our own fan ranks…it never ceases to amaze me how much hatred there seems to be by supposed fans…some hate everything but tos, some hate the jj movied,some hated voyager,enterprise etc….i am a fan n enjoyed every incarnation of trek…i know none are perfect but each have something to enjoy and continue to carry on roddenberrys universe quite well…just stid for instance involved a helluva lot of work n thought with great actors, fantastic sets n ships, a storyline with more layers n some commentary on some of todays military/political agendas whether or not you agree with them, and an astounding amount of action pacing as well…kudos n thanks to bob orci, jj n crew…they even threw in some trek lore n easter eggs fir us fans…i know as should all of you that for a movie to be successful worldwide it needs faster pacing,action n fantastic efx to try to thrive…we should all be supporting trek today if we are fans instead of spouting hate n acting like foot stomping spoiled brats cuz the movie isnt what we wanted….i agree no movie or show is ever perfect n its ok to discuss n criticise i just wish some of us fans would do so more positively and less negatively, and especially less rude n crude…all that makes you seem like less of a fan and more of a jerk, filled with hatred n no respect ror anyone who disagrees with you…for those people IDIC doesnt seem to mean as much….corny as it is it does mean something to me…if we fight n bitch amongst ourselves then maybe we dont deserve to have more trek…we are not mature enough yet…imho

109. Jim Nightshade - February 7, 2014

RE. column cops…i can understand why some may object to particularly rude n crude comments…while believing in our freedoms to comment how we want….you might want to think a bit more about making your comments less offensive,as they would sound more intelligent…i know some of you like to use language n crude references to shock the rest of us but realize that doing that is not helping us to understand your points…quite the opposite in fact…think before you post especially the many personal put downs and name calling fights that keep happening…it only demeans us all, and makes us seem pretentious, and immature,self important and smug…rudeness n crudeness is never entertaining or clever…despite what some of you may think…

110. Damian - February 7, 2014

104–But again, Ron Moore wrote some great episodes of Deep Space Nine as well as being part of the writing team of First Contact. He did write a lot of Star Trek, more good than bad, IMHO. Everyone has a bad day.

And Moore had nothing to do with Insurrection or Nemesis.

Take how they killed Kirk in the final scene out (his “first” death scene actually was appropriate–he “died” alone saving the Enterprise), and I think Generations would have been an average Star Trek film. Not the best, but an original story, more or less, that also had the distinction of having nothing to do with Earth for a change. The Nexus was something completely new (I don’t recall ever seeing anything like it before in Star Trek). I’ve certainly seen worse movies.

111. MJ - February 7, 2014

@104

That is all you could come up with?

At least you seemed clever in your earlier posts?

112. Orion Slave Girl Party - February 7, 2014

107 Thanks for your input Jim.

The problem is that pathological juvenile person who for years here:

-masquerades as a hundred different people,
-has conversations with himself (intertwining his fake characters to suppport his own bs, and attack others),
-violates every sense of board etiquette (and should’ve been banned along time ago.),
…..has now a new name: mj-(legion of fools). His shameless hypocrisy is astounding.

To mj-(legion of fools): remove the gigantic plank from your eyes before you chastise anyone.

He should be the last one to censure anybody. Garth Jr just gave him a taste of his own medicine: well deserved karma. Son of Garth, I salute you sir.

113. K-7 - February 7, 2014

MJ,

Yea, with his initial post, one would have expected something more interesting in a reply from him, versus the standard “condescending prik” stuff that is so overused here by many. It was disappointing.

114. Riker's Mailbox - February 7, 2014

104 Blue Thunder is spot-on with Generations. The movie starts off humorous, up-beat, and sentimental with Kirk, Scotty, and Chekov sharing banter. Even without Spock or Bones, they still manage to pull off scenes with charisma and bravado. As soon as we fast forward to the TNG crew, the tone changes and the movie goes downhill from there.

I love Ron Moore, but I think there were 3 things that ruined the TNG movies he had a hand in writing:

1) Giving Data emotion
Data went from the most fascinating and fun character in TNG, striving to understand humanities quirks, to Jar-Jar Binks annoying once he installed the emotion chip. In one fell swoop, everything that data was, everything that he strived for, everything that made us root for him was gone. On top of all that, he was completely unlikeable.

2) Changing who the Borg were
Throughout the series, the Borg were a menacing decentralized entity that assimilated everything in their path. There were as Q put it “The ultimate user”, not interested in wealth or power. They were a faceless hive with no authoritarian structure who simply wanted to consume everything in their path and adapt cultures and technology to serve their own needs. It was simply chilling. Then with First Contact, a Borg Queen was added. She sought power and wealth and had a tizzy when Picard ‘rejected’ her. She had a convoluted idea of traveling back in time to prevent humanity’s first contact with Vulcans. The story was flat out stupid and uncharacteristic of who the Borg were and what their function was. I think too many people give that movie a pass without acknowledging that a much better movie could have been made had they kept the original Borg intact.

3) Changing Picard into a crazy action hero
The best way to sit through First Contact without doing a face palm is to pretend that Picard is a different person. He is not Picard from the show. Television Picard would never kill crewmates or insult Worf’s honor. He would never rage with a tommy gun in the holodeck. I hate watching him in that movie.

That being said, I think Ron Moore made some of the best TNG episodes of the series:

The Defector
Sins of the Father
Family
Redemption part I and II
Relics
Chain of Command part I and II
The Pegasus
All Good Things

I would be more than happy if he took on a new show. He’s not afraid to take things in bold directions. More power to him.

115. Jason - February 7, 2014

The problem with the movies is there’s only a new one every three or four years. The beauty of the TV format, and what made Star Trek so successful, is there can be a new story/ idea every week – not one every few years. That’s why the last film failed, imo. Star Trek is about ideas, timely ideas, but when they take a few years to write and make one film – those ideas could be old and dated. TV is where you can keep those ideas fresh and timely.

116. Damian - February 7, 2014

111–Re: First Contact

I too liked the Borg as portrayed in “Q, Who?” However, once they included the Borg as the villain in First Contact, they really needed to add another dimension to the Borg. They were in danger of becoming one dimensional. I was a bit put off at first myself with the idea of a Borg Queen, but then after thinking on it for a while it made perfect sense. The Borg were already depicted as having a hive culture. Having a Queen makes perfect sense.

The Borg in First Contact were certainly creepy enough. I just don’t think it would work without a Queen. TBOBW worked excellently because they were able to use Picard as their voice.

If First Contact had no Queen, there would be no voice. No one really to communicate with. They could have assimilated someone else, but then that would be basically copying TBOBW.

The Borg weren’t interested in wealth here either. They wanted to assimilate humanity. They found something in humanity they could use, that they could add to themselves. But the Federation had already proven an ability to hold off the Borg. So they went back to a time when humanity was vulnerable, which made sense if they wanted to achieve their goal.

I look at a movie overall as to whether it was entertaining. I was thrilled to see the Borg in a movie. Along with the Dominion (who should have been featured in Insurrection, IMO) they were one of the best villains ever created. I thought they were well done in First Contact. They were overused and the Queen became a bit annoying in Voyager, but she was sufficiently sinister and creepy in FC.

They did tone down the emotion chip thing in FC and Insurrection, and it apparently disappeared by Nemesis, which was a good thing. I agree it was a bit overdone in Generations (though I did laugh out loud when Data mentioned he “finally” got the joke from Farpoint 7 years prior).

I do agree with Picard-action hero being a bit out of character. I can buy it in FC because he was hurt by the Borg and still harbors a great deal of resentment, esp. since they hurt his ship and were trying to hurt his world. Makes sense he might have a chip on his shoulder. But it carried forward–apparently because Stewart wanted it that way.

117. Son of Captain Garth - February 7, 2014

The main problem for me in FC was the same thing with Generations–gaping holes in the logic of the plot. To wit: when the Borg went back in time to assimilate Earth, my big question would be: why? If they’re consumers of technology, what tech would 21st-century Earth have for them? I like Panera, too, but I don’t think it’s worth that kind of risk.

Further, we are made to understand that when Q introduced the Enterprise to the Borg, that it had been done prematurely and that in the normal course of events, they wouldn’t have met their Swedish nemeses until quite a bit later. Until that introduction, the Borg didn’t even know the Federation–let alone Earth–existed. So, doesn’t that cause a causality loop? If the Borg go back in time and assimilate Earth, Earth doesn’t meet the Borg when they’re supposed to, so they don’t go back and change time, which means that the Federation exists again, which . . . etc.. . .

As far as Nemesis, there are just too many problems to list, such as the transporter McGuffin, Picard taking on the whole Reman ship, Shinzon having only hours to live, yet engaging in time-wasting theatrics, the convenient “benign space phenomenon blocking communication with the nearby fleet” plot device, etc.

However, I will still watch any Trek movie (including 5) before I’ll watch any of the Star Wars prequels.

118. Damian - February 7, 2014

114–

All the Star Trek movies have plot holes. I loved STID but there were tons of plot holes there too.

In FC, it was more humanity and what made it unique that the Borg wanted, more so than the technology. Humanity managed to resist the Borg, and that’s what made them want humanity. They had already assimilated some Federation technology, so that probably became less important.

The novel “Engines of Destiny” by Gene DeWeese does an interesting job with it. In that case, Scotty goes back to save Kirk just before being killed on the Enterprise-B (but after succeeding in saving the ship). This resulted in him not being able to help Picard stop Soran, so Picard and his crew die on Veridian III, meaning he is not there to stop the Borg in FC. This results in the Borg succeeding and the Federation is never born. And they have to fix it.

Probably if the Borg succeeded, it would create an alternate timeline a la Star Trek (2009) or Yesterday’s Enterprise.

119. Blue Thunder - February 7, 2014

@109, 110 – Concerning Generations, what is there to say? The entire movie speaks for itself. It starts out well in TOS half and then goes completely downhill in the NG half.

A clear reflection of Rick Berman’s disrespect toward TOS. Something well known in Star Trek fandom.

That’s about as straightforward as the issue can get.

120. Son of Captain Garth - February 7, 2014

#115 “Engines of Destiny”? Sounds like a NASCAR documentary.

Honestly, I’ve read very few Trek novels (2 or 3 in the early 80s), so I’ll have to take your word on it. However, sounds like another problem. If they know what their actions are going to do, doesn’t that alter the outcome?

Anyway, thanks for the explanation.

121. Ahmed - February 7, 2014

@ 116. Blue Thunder – February 7, 2014

“The entire movie speaks for itself. It starts out well in TOS half and then goes completely downhill in the NG half.

A clear reflection of Rick Berman’s disrespect toward TOS”

If the TOS half was done very well as you are saying , then how that it was “A clear reflection of Rick Berman’s disrespect toward TOS” ?

122. Jeyl - February 7, 2014

At least if we get a television series we can have Star Trek stories that focus on one theme instead of a movie that tries to cram in every theme at once.

Also, I’m getting bored with the whole “Kirk and Spock are friends” storyline that these movies seem to think that’s all they need to be about. I miss the Star Trek stories where friendship wasn’t the central focus of the story and our heroes were able to work things out without everything causing a conflict to their relationship. Plus having a series would let other characters who are not the main heroes have stories of their own.

123. Blue Thunder - February 7, 2014

@121- Jim Kirk’s ‘less than graceful’ death near the end of the film.

124. Ahmed - February 7, 2014

@ 123. Blue Thunder – February 7, 2014

“@121- Jim Kirk’s ‘less than graceful’ death near the end of the film.”

Yeah, that was a big dumb mistake on their parts.

125. Blue Thunder - February 7, 2014

It’s a shame that Generations turned out the way it did.

Frankly, if Paramount had to do a seventh Star Trek film, they could have waited until 1996 and adapted Bill Shatner’s Star Trek novel ‘ The Ashes Of Eden’ into a film.

Granted I don’t think very highly of Shatner and his egotism, however, his book(ghost written by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens)would have been more preferable and watchable than what Ron Moore, Rick Berman, and Brannon Braga concocted.

126. Marja - February 7, 2014

122 Jeyl, agreed! I love the Kirk & Spock “brotherhood” but would love to see more contentious philosophical/moral discussions between Kirk, Spock, McCoy and Uhura or Scotty, as the case may be.

I miss those new, fresh days of TOS, but I still think there are adventures enough out there in space.

As Sarek66 suggested, perhaps there could be an “anthology” series, but my suggestion would be several regular casts in rotation in various sectors/sections of AltVerseStarfleet. A ship, a station, a rescue/interdiction group; whatever. I, for one, like a familiar ensemble to visit with every week, after a while they become “family.”

And this way we might be able to see the Nu Enterprise crew on TV/Netflix! I love that ship!

Just one thing: could we have episodes completely free of time travel/destiny paradoxes? PLEASE.

127. Marja - February 7, 2014

108 JimNightshade Dude, I hate that iPhone formatting of yours, but I love what you have to say; I too love Trek in all its incarnations [well, except much of Voyager, but I love Janeway and Tuvok].

I like that we have this forum for discussion and criticism, especially constructive criticism. The name-calling I think we could all do without. There’s enough hostility in the real world.

128. MJ - February 7, 2014

Son of Captain Garth or Orion Slave Girl Party

Just pick one identity and stick with it, Einstein. LOL

Like this is actually fooling anybody? ;-)

129. MJ - February 7, 2014

What we have here folks is this on individual, who periodically shows up with his foul mouth, his rude behavior, his historical axe to grind against me and others, and his legion of sock-puppets. And, here we go, RIGHT ON SCHEDULE…once I challenge him, and he perceives that I have hurt his pride, he ALWAYS come back at me with a lame “preemptive strike” that accuses me and others of being sock-puppets — so as to immediately draw attention away from him and made up little friends. When you are the king of clones as he is, the best defense is a good offense I guess.

He’s half sociopath and half class-clown. And his language is crude and unacceptably insulting towards women — that is how he rolls. I’m just glad he doesn’t live in my neighborhood in the real world.

I’ll continue to stand up against this bully, and I encourage everyone here to do the same. Keep in mind though that he’s going to claim your my sock-puppet though if you try to stand up to him — he can win an intellectual argument here with any of us, so to him its all about the facade of falsely accusing people of things to try to quench his ego and feel superior to the rest of us here. Don’t let him get that satisfaction.

130. MJ - February 7, 2014

correction: “…he can’t win an intellectual argument here with any of us…”

131. MJ - February 7, 2014

Some aspects of sociopathic behavior:

Glibness and Superficial Charm

Manipulative and Cunning

Grandiose Sense of Self

Pathological Lying

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt

Shallow Emotions

Need for Stimulation

Callousness/Lack of Empathy

Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature

Irresponsibility/Unreliability

Parasitic Lifestyle

132. DiscoSpock - February 7, 2014

MJ,

Well said. I am behind you 100%.

But then again, of course I am you — your sock-puppet — your complete fabrication!

LOL

Keep fighting the good fight!

133. Son of Captain Garth - February 7, 2014

Ah, the trenchant comments of pseudo-intellects can warm the soul on cold winter nights such as these. To respond to some of your rambling points:

1. I am here by myself; I do not want nor require to argue by proxy.

2. You, MJ, are the one who started it by nitpicking my choice of words in a post that had NOTHING to do with you. You are being callous by attacking me for NO REASON.

3. Then two of your henchman decide to pick up the fight about NOTHING against someone who did them no harm.

4. “Stand up to a bully”? You’re the coward picking fights and then hiding behind others. Oh, and before you pin yourself with the Norma Jean badge of courage, please remember you are waging a fight ONLINE with someone whom you have never met, regarding something that should not have begun the fight that you initiated.

5. Of course I’m going to stand up against someone who slanders me for no reason. It’s typical coward behavior like yours and your associates that demonstrates poor behavioral control by resorting to name-calling (i.e., Beavis or Butthead, pig, etc.). You dish it out, but then you cannot take it. As for the list of characteristics that you’ve carefully copied from Wikipedia (obviously, you’re not well-educated enough to pull these from the top of your head), you have no idea about me and you’ve never met me. You’re making assumptions based on my reaction to an unsolicited, undeserved attack on your part.

Therefore, if you don’t like being insulted, don’t do it first. Furthermore, you’re still not the word police for this forum or anywhere else.

134. Vultan - February 7, 2014

What an ugly board this has become.
Matt, where art thou?

135. MJ - February 7, 2014

I may not be the word police, but when I see comments that I find are crude and insulting towards women and all good people here, I am going to say something about it…whether you like it or not.

I will give you credit for finally explaining yourself here — thank you.

And you perceive that I treated you unfairly, then I apologize for perhaps the way in which I went about responding to your posts.

136. Mad Mann - February 7, 2014

@125 Blue Thunder:

Yeah. I always thought that TNG should have went two more years. I think that Paramount wanted to milk that cash cow quick, so they cancelled TNG to turn it into movies. That was a bad move. TNG could have went two more years easy. THEN release their first movie in 1996.

137. Ahmed - February 7, 2014

@Son of Captain Garth

Now that MJ apologized for his first response to you, perhaps you should do the same & then we all move on from these unnecessary personal attacks, what do you think ?

138. MJ - February 7, 2014

@136

They should have went 10 seasons, and then did no movies, and instead go right into the TOS reboot back in the early 2000’s. Voyager and Enterprise should never have been made, and DS9 should have been given the 10-season treatment as well.

139. Damian - February 7, 2014

120–

What was interesting about “Engines of Destiny” is the Enterprise-D is the ship that ends up having to help Scotty put things right.

The timeline of the story took place before Generations. So Picard and co. have no idea why Scotty saving Kirk on the Enterprise-B changed history. They still think Kirk died then. They also have no idea what happened that the Borg assimilated Earth. All they know is they have to put things right.

So you, the reader, know why things happened the way they did, but the crew of the Enterprise doesn’t know, nor do they find out obviously to maintain canon.

Once they do fix things, much like Yesterday’s Enterprise, everything returns to normal and no one remembers this alternate universe ever existed.

So that’s basically why when Generations and First Contact occur, they can’t prevent it.

140. Damian - February 7, 2014

138–Agree for the most part.

Voyager actually could have been better had they taken some of Moore’s ideas for the show (and the reason he didn’t get more involved when they didn’t follow his advice). He thought Voyager should have faced more adversity and so on.

Re: Enterprise, had they started with Season 4, that show probably would have fared much better. That was what Enterprise should have been from the get go.

The premises behind Voyager and Enterprise were actually pretty good. They just didn’t execute Voyager as well as they should have, and Enterprise found it’s legs too late to save it.

141. Dave H - February 7, 2014

Ahmed,

I commend you for trying with that Son of Captain Garth kid. He whined like a little baby about MJ picking on him, but in the end, when MJ offered an apology, and when you then tried to broker a truce, the guy just disappeared.

No class!

142. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

To MJ: Apology accepted. I also offer mine to you. I do wish to make clear that I had no intention of offending anyone with the original post. The whole “raping my childhood” has been an oft-repeated refrain from a number of people over the years–especially when details of the JJ-prise first came out. (Remember the April Fools joke when they showed the fake concept drawings for the new ship? Droves of middle-aged Trek fans voiced similar lamentations)

To Dave H: I took a nap, dude. Calm down.

143. Marja - February 8, 2014

Is it safe to come back now?

Glad you guys worked it out there. Some of that stuff was ugly.

144. Jim Nightshade - February 8, 2014

i also happened to like the borg queen played wonderfully by alice k though i understand why some think it kinda lessens the borg concept……iphone formatting?…i wish actually its nintendo 3ds formatting hahah what do you think makes it irritating to read? i could try to change it….also loved borg queen in voyagers series ending climax….and her portryal again in borg 4d at the star trek experience….shes the best female villain in anything since the ice queen in the narnia franchise…

also thanks for respecting my posts…i also think the petty fighting here which seemed to reach a climax with the bob o incidents does just make us all look like the worst trek fan nerdy stereotypes…theres no reason for anyone to be rude n crude n hateful lets all try to be better..i, like adm pike think we can and should be better….hah hah…im sure anthony p would not have put up with it this much….

145. Jim Nightshade - February 8, 2014

heres an easy way to check yerself….criticism is ok as long as its CONSTRUCTIVE, not destructive….
and to qrote the rabbit in bambi if you cant say something nice, dont say nothin at all….:)

146. Curious Cadet - February 8, 2014

@89. Jack,
“I prefer the way the Brits do things — with shorter relatively-self-contained series. And not, “you’ll be seeing us for 7 years.”

How do explain Doctor Who then?

147. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

#146 Maybe because they switch out the actors periodically, they consider each iteration a new series. Just a guess.

Frankly, I wish they’d be a little more American when it came to dishing out the goodies. Three episodes of Sherlock and then NOTHING for more than two years? Ugh, I got hooked with that first one on PBS a few years ago and I’ve been mainlining Elementary and Castle to keep my mystery Jones alive–but it’s not the same. Three frickin’ episodes.

I’d blame STID, but it was that way the first season before Cumberbatch got the roll of KHAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!

BTW, How It Should Have Ended and Honest Trailers on YouTube have great, humorous videos about both of the NuTrek movies.

148. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

A new Trek-like series is coming our way :)

====================================

FX turning ‘Star Trek’-inspired ‘Redshirts’ novel into limited series

A new “Star Trek” TV series might not be happening any time soon, but the next best thing is. FX has greenlit a limited series based on “Redshirts,” a satirical science fiction novel written by John Scalzi published in 2012.

Down to its name, Scalzi has some obvious “Trek” origins. It follows a group of recruits on the Starship Intrepid who realize that members of the ship’s crew are dying at a troublesome rate.

Eventually they discover that a 21st century sci-fi TV show somehow is influencing their reality by turning it into a narrative they can’t control. “Redshirts” won the Hugo Award in 2013.

Currently the only people attached to the project are film producer Jon Shestack and producer-director Ken Kwapis. Deadline reports Kwapis is slated to direct the pilot episode of the series, while the search is underway for writers for the show.

http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2014/02/fx-turning-star-trek-inspired-redshirts-novel-into-limited-series.html

149. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

*role, not “roll”

Geeze, I must be getting senile.

150. Marja - February 8, 2014

148 Ahmed, what great news! Having fun with the “time” trope and the Redshirt trope. I love it.

In fact there are probs a couple of comedy short series that could be made from Trek. Those Time Travel monitor guys, for one. How tired they must get of the time travel paradox …

I know I am. I love that they just made an Alternate Verse instead of some time travel bullshite.

151. Marja - February 8, 2014

144 JimNightshade, Try making paragraph returns about every 8 – 10 lines, and especially when you change subjects. Those paragraphs were pretty long.

Former admin assistant/secretary USCG Yeoman speaking here ;-)

And, nah, on the in-fighting nonsense, Anthony sometimes let it go on a bit too long. And he had this gig pretty much full-time, as opposed to our wonderful present guy, Matt Wright, who’s taken it upon himself to do this in his spare time from work. He and Kayla Iacovino have “done good” finding Trek news [sometimes there’s a little help in the posts from MJ and Ahmed], but both work in real life, so can’t monitor as closely as they’d like.

That infighting gets O L D. and it’s nasty to have to scroll thru, accusations, insults, bullying, demands for apologies, crikey. We’re not on a middle-school playground in here.

Well, maybe we are, sometimes. But some of us don’t like to play. We like to have fun discussions.

152. Marja - February 8, 2014

140 Damian, “Voyager” would have been a hella lot better if they had employed as little technobabble as possible. I got so sick of it I stopped watching, i think in Year 3.

Say what you like about “Enterprise,” at least they integrated the engineering probs and fixes into the flow of the stories well, without a lot of BS.

153. MJ - February 8, 2014

@142

Likewise, thanks for the apology, man.

Truce! :-)

154. MJ - February 8, 2014

@148

I hate to sound like a malcontent, but I think I would rather have no Star Trek series versus a “making fun of Star Trek series” on TV.

155. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@151. Marja

“That infighting gets O L D. and it’s nasty to have to scroll thru, accusations, insults, bullying, demands for apologies, crikey. We’re not on a middle-school playground in here.”

Come on, Marja, if Chris Christie himself is bringing up high school in the recent political scandal, then we sure can have that as well, right ? :)

But, I totally agree that it gets really old.

I’m really excited about “Redshirts”. It was one of the funniest sci-fi books that I read for a long time. The ending was a bit weak but overall I enjoyed reading it.

The good news that the show will be a limited series, so there will be no need for filler episodes as it is the case with longer series.

156. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@154. MJ

Read the book, it is only 300 pages :)

157. Marja - February 8, 2014

146 Garth My fave is Mr Plinkett reviews “Star Trek into Reference” – hilarious. Crude but hilarious.

Speaking of Capt Garth I wish he’d been STiD’s Dark Side guy.

158. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

#153 MJ, I’ll even pinkie shake to it. Thanks.

#157 Marja, yeah, I thought my “dad” would have been a great villain–especially with a ship like RoboCop had. It could have had the cat-and-mouse tension of TWOK with two brilliant commanders. Of course, JJ would have had to make Kirk more like Kirk and a little less bratty.

159. MJ - February 8, 2014

@156

Yea, good point. I actually have the book, but haven’t got around to reading it. I think I will read this now as my next book.

I hope FX does this justice. I’m not sure that FX would be my first stop as a novelist. They tend to sex things up and do “fast-food” tv series targeted at the lowest common denominator viewer (not always, but frequently). So I hope those of you who like this novel get what you are expecting from FX here, and not “Cops:Star Trek 911″.

160. Blue Thunder - February 8, 2014

MJ – They should have went 10 seasons, and then did no movies, and instead go right into the TOS reboot back in the early 2000′s. Voyager and Enterprise should never have been made, and DS9 should have been given the 10-season treatment as well.

On some levels, MJ does make some valid points about how the franchise should have evolved, since TNG . In all honesty, TNG movies were really not all that cinematic. First Contact came close, but with no cigar.

As far as DS9 is concerned, it really should not have been made. Regretfully, DS9’s conception can be based on some staff at Paramount ripping off J. Michael Stracynski’s Babylon 5(WB, 1994 – 1999). An error in judgement on Paramount’s part that would lead to some serious confrontations between Star Trek and B5 fans at various conventions.

From an artistic standpoint, the story of Star Trek had been told as far as the original series is concerned. As much as I respect TNG, there really was no need for it.

Also, from an artistic standpoint, the producers at Paramount should have taken the opportunity(open door)that Star Trek VI – The Undiscovered Country presented at the end of the film. A Star Trek series about Captain Hikaru Sulu and the crew of the U.S.S. Excelsior.

That would have been more entertaining and watchable than DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise.

Unfortunately, Paramount was motivated by greed and utter stupidity while milking the Star Trek franchise for its every worth. A useless experiment that led to the franchise fatigue period.

Talk about unethical business practices at their utmost worst.

161. Tough Little Ship - February 8, 2014

Nobody accepts that DS9 supposedly copied Babylon 5. The series was the brainchild of Michael Piller; read the book “The Making of Deep Space Nine” which has reproductions of Piller’s scripting notes.

162. MJ - February 8, 2014

@160

Where do you come up with this stuff. DS9 was the 2nd best Trek series, only a little bit behind TOS in my book. Now TNG, that show had a really bad start, but was “OK Star Trek” by late in Season 3.

Voyager and Enterprise were pretty bad.

But no, DS9 is one of my favorite series of all time. And if was partially inspired by B5, then that is fine with me. Filet Mignon may have copied NY Strip, and I love to eat both.

163. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@161. Tough Little Ship

“Nobody accepts that DS9 supposedly copied Babylon 5.”

JMS pitched the idea of Babylon 5 to Paramount in 1989. They didn’t take it & in 1991 WB greenlit the show. In the same year, Paramount asked Berman to develop a new Trek series that just happen to be on a space station !!

Here is what JMS said back then

““Were Pillar and Berman aware of B5 at any time? No. Of that I am also confident. The only question in my mind is to what degree did the development people steer them? One scenario is that they did not steer them at ALL…but knowing of B5, and knowing how swell it would be if they could co-opt B5, if Pillar and Berman came up with a space station on their own, they would likely say nothing, even though they might be viewed as being under a moral obligation to say something.

Another scenario is that they gave direction to the creative folks without telling them the origin of that direction. There are several ways of dealing with this. One is to launch a major suit with full powers of discovery. The result is that DS9 gets tied up for months, maybe even years in litigation, and maybe the show doesn’t go forward. It also means hundreds of thousands of dollars spent by Warners and me and others pursuing this…not to mention the sense of ill will that will fly back and forth.””

http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/02/is-this-the-smoking-gun-proving-deep-space-nine-ripped-off-babylon-5

At the end of the day, the two shows went in two different directions but it is clear that Paramount used JMS ideas in creating DS9

164. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

#160 “some serious confrontations between Star Trek and B5 fans at various conventions.” Really? Who pulled out their plastic pistol and fired first?

I’ll bet it was a veritable Battle of Lexington. Do we know which side fired the first shot? Maybe I could name my aluminum fishing boat after them.

165. Marja - February 8, 2014

158 Garth, It would have been “glorious” because Garth of Izar was one of Kirk’s great heroes in TOS. (Well, before all that bit in the barmy bin.)

But think of the scripting potential there, man, Garth, Kirk’s hero, working with Section 31, outsmarting Kirk and attacking Enterprise, showing “the kid” how an experienced captain, using excellent strategy and tactics, wins a battle. On an EQUAL ship, not a giant black-tiled monster. (You know the saying, “Old age and treachery beat youth and brilliance every time…”?

I was hoping, hoping when they announced the “villain” would be ‘someone from canon’ that they’d chosen Captain Garth, so ill-served in that awful TOS “Whom Gods Destroy” episode.

What a shame they used KHAAANNN.

166. Marja - February 8, 2014

155 Ahmed “Come on, Marja, if Chris Christie himself is bringing up high school l….”

CHRIS CHRISTIE ATE A HIGH SCHOOL? And later “brought it up”? Eeeeuuuwww :-P

167. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

#165 Yeah, you’re definitely on to something there. Of course, given JJ’s propensity for ripping off previous Treks in some “paint-by-numbers” fashion, I’m sure Quinto or someone still would have yelled something like “Gaaarrrthhh!”

They still would’ve probably used the Vengeance, given JJ’s love of “angry guy with bigger ship” plots–one ripped off from Nemesis, of all films. Man, how creatively bankrupt are you when you have to rip off the WORST of the films? Nemesis makes Star Trek V look like Citizen Kane.

168. MJ - February 8, 2014

“At the end of the day, the two shows went in two different directions but it is clear that Paramount used JMS ideas in creating DS9.”

Again, so what. Like I said earlier, ” Filet Mignon may have copied NY Strip, and I love to eat both.”

My favorite period of my life in watching sf on TV, was when B5 and DS9 were going strong every week in the mid-late 90’s. These shows are among the greatest TV shows in history, in my opinion.

169. MJ - February 8, 2014

LOL — you are I are in full agreement on this one, Garth. I “was there” as B5 and DS0 fan at conventions in the mid-90’s, and it was a fun debate — I don’t know what the heck Blue Thunder is talking about. Seriously, that guy needs to get back on his meds soon. ;-)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

164. Son of Captain Garth – February 8, 2014
#160 “some serious confrontations between Star Trek and B5 fans at various conventions.” Really? Who pulled out their plastic pistol and fired first?

I’ll bet it was a veritable Battle of Lexington. Do we know which side fired the first shot? Maybe I could name my aluminum fishing boat after them.

170. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@168. MJ

“My favorite period of my life in watching sf on TV, was when B5 and DS9 were going strong every week in the mid-late 90′s. These shows are among the greatest TV shows in history, in my opinion.”

Well said, MJ. I Totally agree with you there, the writing & characters on these two shows are the best in the history of science fiction & television in general.

171. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@169. MJ

” I don’t know what the heck Blue Thunder is talking about. Seriously, that guy needs to get back on his meds soon. ;-)”

Perhaps you should check the new Star Trek Continues article, there are more “interesting” stuff over there from BT :)

But seriously, the guy is obsessed with Vic Mignogna & don’t seem to be able to resist trashing him & the entire STC team !!

172. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@166. Marja

“CHRIS CHRISTIE ATE A HIGH SCHOOL? And later “brought it up”? Eeeeuuuwww :-P”

LOL

173. Red Dead Ryan - February 8, 2014

It’s pretty obvious that Paramount ripped off the B5 concept for DS9. I don’t think the writers knew of that though. It was most likely the head of the studio who thought he could get away with something. Remember too, that JMS also came up with the idea of a shape-shifting security officer.

Gene Roddenberry himself “stole” a lot of elements from “Forbidden Planet”.

In the end, Hollywood writers, producers, and studios all steal ideas from each other every now and then. Currently, based on the trailers, it appears that “Captain America 2: The Winter Soldier” took some plot elements right out of “Star Trek Into Darkness”.

174. Blue Thunder - February 8, 2014

@164 – I don’t think comically slandering that battle is constructive to this subject, but whatever makes you happy.

@169 – Here are the answers to your questions concerning the feud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon_5#Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine_controversy

http://blog.codezen.org/2012/10/19/on-the-ds9-babyKK

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Babylon_5

175. Blue Thunder - February 8, 2014

@171 – Concerning Vic and STC – There’s a couple of old saying that says ‘What goes around, comes around’ and ‘You danced. And now you have to fiddler”. AFter all the BS he has pulled, he deserves whatever form of karma that the universe throws at him, regardless of whatever form it is in.

Anyway…although Red Dead Ryan and I don’t see eye to eye on the STC issue, he does make a valid point in his statement regarding the DS9 controversy. Chalk that up to two other issues in the science fiction realm.

1. The 2001: A Space Odyssey and Space:1999 controversy of 1975.

2. The Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica dispute of 1978.

The latter being a rather hypocritical issue unnecessarily instigated by George Lucas, himself, when he ripped off numerous ideas just to create his own space opera.

Yes, Gene Roddenberry did steal a few ideas from the 1956 MGM classic. He even admitted it. He’s lucky that the production administration at MGM didn’t pursue him in the matter in the years ahead.

176. Blue Thunder - February 8, 2014

Correction – Pay The Fiddler. Please excuse the typo.

177. Marja - February 8, 2014

162 MJ, Interestingly, “The Bonding,” the script that helped begin TNG’s improvement in 3rd Season, was written by one Ron Moore.

We don’t agree on “Enterprise,” but I do agree with you that DS9 is terrific Trek, and for me ranks neck & neck with Post-Season-3 TNG, right after TOS.
—————————
Garth, Here’s hoping the Big Black Ship goes the way of the dodo for the next movie :-p
—————————-
Blue Thunder, When my eyes lit on the bottom of your #175 post, I thought FORBIDDEN PLANET. I was amazed, when I saw it for the first time, at how much Roddenberry had copped from it.

“What goes around comes around” — have another look at your posts about Mignogna, keeping this in mind. If he’s in store for some heavy Karma, it will take care of itself. How ’bout let’s drop it, okay?

Personally I much prefer that we all discuss other aspects of Trek. You have some interesting things to say.

Just sayin

178. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

#174 No matter how much you try to puff it up, it’s still just a bunch of paunchy, middle-aged people, likely dressed in costumes representing their favorite character, arguing over two syndicated television shows. Applying the term “battle” to it belittles those who have served in the military and have actually fought a life-or-death engagement, or those who have battled deadly diseases, etc.

All that happened at those conventions was that some geeks got in a shouting match.

179. Dave H - February 8, 2014

“To Dave H: I took a nap, dude. Calm down.”

Oh, OK. Was it a normal nap, or a “masturbatory nap” ? ;-)

180. Son of Captain Garth - February 8, 2014

#179 Can’t let it go, can you?

I’ve already made my peace with MJ, so I’m going to ignore this.

181. Jack - February 8, 2014

I still love seeing Trek in a theatre. Sometimes movies can do amazing thongs that TV doesn’t. Ex. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. vs The Avengers (which is a better Trek movie than Into Darkness, discuss — and it has some similar themes [how do we cope with threats while staying true to values — and a few scenes that get copied in STID). It’s on TV right now, and I’m just thinking how much more I enjoy watching it, than STID, which I’ve only been able to sit through, all at once, two or three times.

But then you have great TV Trek, like The Drumhead (which is playing out now, arguably, in the Woody Allen case). Could that eork in a movie, possibly.

182. MJ - February 8, 2014

@181

Wow, I gave up on Agents of Shield weeks ago. It was boring me to death.

183. Ahmed - February 8, 2014

@181. Jack

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is the most BORING series that I’ve ever watched for ages!

I had high hope for the series & every week I was trying really hard to watch it. After “The Magical Place”, I gave up on the show.

The stories are dumb, most of the characters & the actors who play them are bad, except for Coulson & Ming-Na Wen.

184. Red Dead Ryan - February 8, 2014

The problem with “Agents of SHIELD” is the fact that it involves tertiary Marvel characters no one cares about.

For most people, Marvel is Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, etc. The big names.

But they’re being used exclusively for movies, so you’re not going to be seeing them on the small screen which makes a Marvel series much less interesting and somewhat pointless.

DC is producing a new series, “Gotham” that revolves around a younger James Gordon, chronicling his rise to commisioner. But there is no plan for Bruce Wayne/Batman appearances in the show. It’s going to be mainly a crime procedural drama, involving lesser-known characters.

I mean, really, what’s the point of producing series based on the comics if you’re omitting the popular characters.

185. Red Dead Ryan - February 8, 2014

179. Dave H

“Oh, OK. Was it a normal nap, or a “masturbatory nap” ? ;-)”

I think this response might have rubbed him the wrong way! ;-)

186. I am to Smurfy - February 9, 2014

I always laugh when MJ tries to play Moderator.
Considering how many times Anthony came close to banning him over the years.

Thanks for the Laughs MJ lol
I need that tonight.

187. I am to Smurfy - February 9, 2014

182
Your loss MJ The Grand return (lol seriously Grand Return lol)
Cause the episodes since the return in January have been great, especially this past weeks episode.

anyone who has given up should give it another chance, youll be pleasantly surprised, and its great watching them set up the eventual big bad of the series.

188. I am to Smurfy - February 9, 2014

Red dead
you got your facts about Gotham wrong, Young Bruce Wayne is actually going to be featured in the series, according to the latest write ups on Variety and deadline.com

The series will run up till Bruce’s first time donning the cape and cowl as well.

189. Jim Nightshade - February 9, 2014

shield has gotten better in the last few episodes…i was afraid they were going to lapse into the find a superhero nobody knows or cares about every week, they should leave that to the x-men…

details on how they saved coulsons life and background on skyes past plus more serious battles n repercussions and conflicts are making the show more interesting…i think they should involve less well known heroes to help but you never know which characters wont get a movie….hawkeye…i always liked green arrow better, the android vision n scarlet witch maybe n quicksilver…

anyway despite joss whedons involvement so far the only thing i like about it is the created by lee n kirby credit every week….especially the kirby recognition what little he gets…

190. Andorian - February 9, 2014

Who is the hell is this “I am to Smurphy” clown? What a jack-ass name, and not even spelled right at that. I’ts “too” dufas, not “to.”

Not to mention that the Agents of Shield recent episodes have actually been getting worse, not better, as this clown seems to claim. And the kid Bruce Wayne thing makes that spin-off sound even more idiotic than before.

191. Dave H - February 9, 2014

@190

He’s someone’s sock-puppet here who always tries to bait MJ.

192. P Technobabble - February 9, 2014

Unless a new Trek series would guarantee millions of viewers per week, we probably won’t see something new. So, let’s see — how many people post here each week?

I don’t know how many viewers a show needs to pull in before the network yanks the plug but ENT was down to around 3 million viewers when it was cancelled. I’m guessing a Star Trek series would need to have between 8 – 10 million viewers to be considered a success and that’s presuming it could break into mainstream programming. TNG managed to become a mainstream hit but no other Trek show did. They were all more cultic. And while cultic shows can be critically acclaimed, if they don’t generate lots of $$$ they are going to be short-lived. When it comes to sci-fi on tv history repeats itself far too often.

193. roy - February 9, 2014

@16. Star Trek has’t thrived for years tv wise.

194. Damian - February 9, 2014

192–Deep Space Nine was an interesting show. There are those out there like me, that like all Star Trek in all its forms.

But DS9 was a bit more unique because there are legions of DS9 fans only out there. It also turned out to be a well done show. I know there are some fans out there who didn’t like the serial concept, that thought it wasn’t true Trek.

But to me, the thing I ended up liking about DS9 is that is pushed the envelope for Star Trek. You already had TNG continue much the same things as the original series, and it ended up doing a good job at it. But for it to continue on TV, it had to be different. I admit, I had my doubts when it first started. But I ended up liking DS9 a great deal, esp. once the Dominion was introduced.

With Voyager, it almost seemed like they tried to reset to what worked for TNG. Instead, with Voyager, they should have charted even more new ground. I thought the premise had a lot of promise. It certainly would allow for new exploration on a weekly basis. It did carry over some of the serial concept from DS9, but unfortunately the writers played it safe more often than not. I ended up liking Voyager, but not as much as I could have. They should have taken some elements written for the Equinox and applied them to Voyager. There should have been more stress between the Starfleet crew and the Maquis. I do think in the end, having them earn each others respect and admiration would have been a good thing, but it should have taken a few years. However, there was very little strife by the middle of season 1. That was one of the things Ron Moore had protested about Voyager. And there should have been more challenges in the sense with how far can they uphold Federation ideals so far from the Federation. Not saying they should have betrayed those ideals, but they should have been challenged.

And to Marja, toning down the technobabble would have helped. I got used to it, and even learned to understand much of it, but I can see how it would grate on people. I always liked that they tried to make Star Trek as realistic as possible. That’s one thing that separates Star Trek from Star Wars. Star Trek actually does try to explain why things are the way they are, whereas Star Wars seems to make things up on the fly. But, they didn’t need repeated explanations.

It did seem in Enterprise they heard some of the complaints, as I didn’t find the technobabble as distracting to the story.

195. MJ - February 9, 2014

@190 @191

Sorry that this guy is disrupting the boards. He shows up once in a awhile to personally insult me and try to make trouble for everyone here. I just ignore him, which unfortunately, usually just aggravates him further.

His comments give it away that he is a regular who has been here for yours, even though that “I am to Smurphy” name is less than a year old. A real man who had a grudge against me from past years here would simply come out and have his say here using his regular identity. But this dude is too much of a wuss to do that.

196. Ahmed - February 9, 2014

@195. MJ

It looks like trekmovie is getting more of that type nowadays, with Blue Thunder as the latest addition !!

197. Blue Thunder - February 9, 2014

@196 – I’ll ignore of what you said partially and just point out that this is what I said about the state of the boards earlier – the polarized factions, the infighting between fans over issues concerning J.J. Abrams and the prequel/reboots, the very ‘colorful’ and vicious difference of opinions over other topics –

Yeppers, life has certainly imitated art(i.e. Vulcan’s barbaric history, the infighting between the genetic supermen, Let That Be Your Last Battlefield and to some extent The Cloud Minders).

198. Ahmed - February 9, 2014

@197. Blue Thunder

“just point out that this is what I said about the state of the boards earlier – the polarized factions, the infighting between fans over issues concerning J.J. Abrams and the prequel/reboots, the very ‘colorful’ and vicious difference of opinions over other topics –”

The key word here is “issues”. At trekmovie, we tend to have long arguments over the new movies but we don’t focus on the personal life of the movie creators like you are doing with STC cast & crew.

199. MJ - February 9, 2014

“the infighting between fans”

YOU are complaining about this Blue Thunder? YOU, of all people?

Really, dude? Really?

200. I am to Smurfy - February 9, 2014

190 think what you want but I have to say its funny that someone who calls me out for how i chose to have my screen name spelled, turns around and missspells it himself.
SMURFY not Smurphy
lol

for the record I chose the name I am to smurfy, because I like the the song that right said fred did for smurfs 2
“I’m too Smurfy ”
Smurfs 2 of course has a trek connection with Anton Yelchin

201. I am to Smurfy - February 9, 2014

I just want to point out again I am not the one calling names or slinging insults its you and MJ are.

But the jokes on you i am not insulted by you calling me a clown.

202. MJ - February 9, 2014

Yawn!

203. The Batman - February 9, 2014

Let’s not criticize DS9 for being “slow” or “boring.” It suffered from the same problem that TNG (which was actually boring at times, especially the last two seasons) and VOY (which was frequently boring and generally unwatchable during its entire run), which was that each season had to be roughly twenty-six episodes in length.

That glut of content was designed to quickly bring a series up to the golden syndication number. There aren’t any shows, no matter how great the writing and acting, that can consistently be great with that many episodes.

We have only to look at Breaking Bad or The Walking Dead to see the face of modern TV: short seasons, broken up by a mid-season hiatus, allowing for quality over quantity.

Moore and Behr would create exciting, tightly-scripted and planned Trek with a thirteen to sixteen episode season requirement. There’s be no need for filler as we saw in the old days of Trek.

I want to see what these guys, who really love and understand Trek and who did some of the most critically acclaimed Trek work, would do in the new television frontier.

204. Curious Cadet - February 9, 2014

Just noticed that Jack Ryan Shadow Recruit is currently the highest grossing movie worldwide of 2014. Pretty impressive for a movie that had such a weak domestic opening. More impressive is that with a 61% foreign boost, the movie should easily close well over $120 million, which is double the $60 million budget. So no doubt Shadow Recruit made its money back, and will likely make a small profit, especially considering how little marketing and advertising went into it.

This may or may not be good news for Chris Pine. But if Paramount can turn a profit, even a small one, with Chris Pine at the helm, then perhaps this franchise isn’t dead yet, and Pine might even get a second chance with a better script. By comparison, Shadow Recruit could do as well as STID based on its return on investment — STID earned just under 2.5 times its budget at the Boxoffice; Shadow Recruit only needs to earn another $35 million to achieve the same ratio. Hardly a failure.

205. Red Shirt Diaries - February 9, 2014

“We have only to look at Breaking Bad or The Walking Dead to see the face of modern TV: short seasons, broken up by a mid-season hiatus, allowing for quality over quantity.”

What a crock, as this season of the Walking Dead is the boring dead.

And excuse me, but the last two seasons of DS9 were light’s out awesome.

206. Red Dead Ryan - February 9, 2014

#200.

“for the record I chose the name I am to smurfy, because I like the the song that right said fred did for smurfs 2
“I’m too Smurfy ” ”

Okkkkkaaaaaayyyyy…………………

#205.

“And excuse me, but the last two seasons of DS9 were light’s out awesome.”

Yes, I agree. The last two seasons featured some of the best writing of all the series.

207. Garak's Pride - February 9, 2014

#206

I find it kind of creepy actually that an adult would model him name off a show for preschoolers. Give’s me the willies…

208. Red Dead Ryan - February 9, 2014

#207.

Yeah, and not to mention Right Said Fred — the group behind the lame ass “Too Sexy” — was somehow the “best” the producers could find for the soundtrack.

And they’re making another “The Smurfs” movie right now. :-(

209. Jim Nightshade - February 10, 2014

i am to smurfy didnt mention that he thought the shield shows were getting better that was me…course you are entitled to your opinions i happen to like the series more lately to me they have more depth n seriousness …

210. Blue Thunder - February 10, 2014

@177 – Thanks, Marja. I’m glad you like the subjects that I have covered.

Another interesting Forbidden Planet(MGM, 1956)and Star Trek resemblance that I noticed involves the storylines between the former and a latter third season episode written by Jerome Bixby.

That episode being ‘Requiem For Methuselah’. Obviously Bixby was heavily influenced by both FB and the inspiration for FB, itself: Shakespeare’s ‘The Tempest’.

I don’t know if Gene Roddenberry had an uncredited hand in the development of that episode’s storyline, but it wouldn’t be surprising if he did. Both have a lot of similarities.

211. Cygnus-X1 - February 10, 2014

194. Damian – February 9, 2014

But to me, the thing I ended up liking about DS9 is that is pushed the envelope for Star Trek. You already had TNG continue much the same things as the original series, and it ended up doing a good job at it. But for it to continue on TV, it had to be different. I admit, I had my doubts when it first started. But I ended up liking DS9 a great deal, esp. once the Dominion was introduced.

You raise an interesting point. Being a serial was definitely unique to Trek, but there was something else about DS9—some other quality or element of its form—that made it less likeable to some fans of TNG and more likeable to other fans. I’m actually inspired to start re-watching the whole series now that I’m thinking about it and that X-factor is eluding me….

One of the differences between TNG and DS9 was that DS9 didn’t do mystery or mind-bender episodes, which TNG did so well. DS9 was more of a straight-ahead drama—a “space opera”—which goes hand-in-hand with it being a serial (like soap operas).

Another difference is that DS9 didn’t do allegories or theme-driven episodes nearly as much as TNG did. TNG was very much in the tradition of TOS in the way that it used a fantastical, futuristic setting to disguise morality plays that were relevant in the real world. DS9 seemed to be more about relationships between the characters as people and emotional growth within the characters. DS9 seemed to be more directly about people than about concepts. The pacing of DS9 was also very different from that of TNG. DS9 really took its time and took advantage of the serial form to slowly, gradually develop relationships between characters over the course of an entire season, two seasons or the entire series—Sisko and Dukat, O’Brien and Bashir, Kira and Odo, Garak, Quark, etc…

When it aired, I couldn’t stand DS9. As a huge fan of TNG, I was extremely disappointed with DS9 from the get-go. I just didn’t have the patience for it, as I was far more intellectually stimulated by the more conceptual approach of TNG than by the slowly developing, more character-driven approach of DS9. But, Netflix has really allowed me to appreciate DS9 for what it was. Knowing that I can watch as many episodes as I want in one sitting, I don’t get impatient now with each episode.

Even at its best, DS9 doesn’t compare with TNG, which had superior writing and acting. There’s something lacking in DS9. For a character-driven series, it doesn’t go for broke and cut loose emotionally nearly enough. There were a few very emotional moments in the series—like Dukat’s breakdown when his daughter, Ziyal, dies—but, too few such moments for a character-driven show. And there’s something else lacking in DS9 that still bugs me—like it lacks that extra 10% of intelligence/vision which would bump it up into the higher tier of quality with TNG. I suppose that falls under “writing.”

But, even so, there are some nice moments in DS9. One of my favorite episodes was “Duet,” in which a guilt-ridden Cardassian clerk pretends to be a jailer infamous for torturing Bajorans and tries to provoke Kira into executing him. Veteran character actor Harris Yulin does a superb job in the role, and his scenes with Kira come closest to the style of TNG’s theme-driven episodes like “The Survivors” and “Chain of Command.”

212. Cygnus-X1 - February 10, 2014

194. Damian – February 9, 2014

They should have taken some elements written for the Equinox and applied them to Voyager. There should have been more stress between the Starfleet crew and the Maquis. I do think in the end, having them earn each others respect and admiration would have been a good thing, but it should have taken a few years. However, there was very little strife by the middle of season 1. That was one of the things Ron Moore had protested about Voyager. And there should have been more challenges in the sense with how far can they uphold Federation ideals so far from the Federation. Not saying they should have betrayed those ideals, but they should have been challenged.

I wonder if Moore’s disappointment with the Voyager/Equinox dynamic influenced the way that he did Galactica/Pegasus, with Galactica being analogous to Voyager and Pegasus being the renegade ship with ethics gone astray. Also, I wonder if the Battlestar Pegasus in BSG was inspired by the “USS Pegasus” in TNG, which also had a renegade captain who bucks convention to be more aggressive against his society’s sworn enemy. It seems like more than just a coincidence. Though, the Battlestar Pegasus did first appear in the original Battlestar Galactica (1978), I can’t quite remember if it was portrayed as a renegade ship or not. If so, then perhaps TNG’s USS Pegasus was inspired by the Battlestar Pegasus.

That’s one thing that separates Star Trek from Star Wars. Star Trek actually does try to explain why things are the way they are, whereas Star Wars seems to make things up on the fly. But, they didn’t need repeated explanations.

Right, classic Trek cares about science, which means it cares about the “how” and “why” of natural phenomena and technology. Star Wars doesn’t care at all about how things work. With Star Wars, the world and the objects in it are all just a set for the mythological play being performed upon it. A hyperdrive is no more meaningful or significant than a V8 engine. This is why people were so disappointed when the concept of the Midi-chloreans was introduced in Ep.1—it violated the sort-of fourth wall of Star Wars by calling attention to the inner workings of a thing which had hitherto been regarded simply as part of the Star Wars world to be taken as given.

213. The Batman - February 10, 2014

Red Shirt Diaries: please take the time to actually read my posts before you misquote them: the only “last two seasons” I referred to were those of TNG, which frequently featured boring filler episodes.

214. MJ - February 10, 2014

@211

DS9 was vastly superior to TNG:

— Much, much better writing across the board — it’s not even close!

— None of this 2.5 seasons of waiting before it elevated past mediocre

— Better acting by far / better casting / didn’t take years to care about cardboard characters being played by average actors (yes, both Crushers, Frakes and Sirtis, I am talking about you)

— None of this condescending know-it-all Picard teaching the universe a lesson crap.

— Went back to TOS roots and showed that action is OK is Star Trek, not a vice

— Much better special effects — ships and structures looked more realistic, like you could actually live in them.

— Broad spectrum of politics across multiple races in region of space

— Long, meaningful and well-thought-out story arcs

— Most believable aliens in the history of Star Trek

215. MJ - February 10, 2014

plus….

— got back to the great wit and humor between characters not seen in Trek since TOS. No other Trek series achieved this at the level of TOS and DS9.

216. Son of Captain Garth - February 10, 2014

To MJ: Honestly I never really got into DS9, mainly because I was worn out by TNG. I’ve seen a few episodes, but when DS9 was on originally, I had begun grad school and had bigger fish to fry than to watch something that I had assumed was as tedious as TNG. TNG was always sterile to me; the friendships were “work friendships” by and large. And you’re right–I got sick of Picard throwing the rule book at people. What a preachy bastard. I also got sick of seeing the Enterprise bitch-slapped every week. I mean, I can understand not winning every engagement and/or the opponent putting up a good fight, but honestly, it was just an office in space and worse, they had kids aboard a ship that was engaged in dangerous, deep-space missions. How sadistic: Teacher: “Kids, ignore the rocking of the ship and the exploding noises–let’s get back to math class!” Really?

I’ve only seen a couple of DS9 episodes, like the one where Sisko is killed and Jake spends his life getting him back (the reviews were really good), the Trouble with Tribbles tribute and I may have seen the finale. I skipped Voyager altogether, catching just pieces of it, never any whole episodes. I did catch more Enterprise, which I thought was kinda meh. The last season was OK.

217. Disinvited - February 10, 2014

#207. Garak’s Pride – February 9, 2014

The Smurfs existed long before Hanna-Barbera got their mitts on them. As I recall being aware of them before HB animated them, I don’t think it would be either accurate or fair to categorize the intended target audience of their creator as the pre-school set.

218. Cygnus-X1 - February 10, 2014

216. Son of Captain Garth – February 10, 2014

DS9 did have regular characters (Jake, Nog) who weren’t co-workers, so they could naturally have less formal rapport. But were the Troi/Riker or Data/Geordi friendships any more “work friendships” than O’Brien/Bashir? They all worked together. DS9 was more of a character-driven show. TNG did interpersonal relationships, but not as much because it was a more concept-driven show. But, then, DS9 didn’t do mind-bending mysteries like TNG’s “Conundrum” and “Cause and Effect.”

219. Vultan - February 10, 2014

#218

No mind-bending mysteries in DS9?

Guess you never saw The Search, The Visitor, or Far Beyond the Stars then, to name a few.

220. The Keeper - February 10, 2014

Ron Moore looks tooo much like George Lucas, I wouldn’t trust him.

221. Cygnus-X1 - February 10, 2014

219. Vultan – February 10, 2014

I’ve seen them all, but I guess “mind-bending mystery” has different meanings for us. What I mean is that the premise of the episode is the characters trying to figure out a bizarre riddle that they’re all wrapped up in, and their lives depend upon them figuring it out.

222. Ahmed - February 10, 2014

======================
STAR WARS: EPISODE VII Will Shoot from Mid-May through September

HitFix has confirmed through multiple sources that director J.J. Abrams’ sequel will begin filming in mid-May and will shoot through September. Not a crazy short schedule, but not a particularly lengthy one either.

Wrapping principal photography on Star Wars: Episode VII in September, per HitFix’s confirmation, should give Abrams and his team ample time to complete post-production before the film’s release. It should be noted, though, that September may not mark the end of filming on Episode VII, as the pic will no doubt go back for additional shooting at one point or another—it’s now common for almost every movie to have some form of reshoots/additional filming after wrapping production.

http://collider.com/star-wars-episode-7-filming-dates/

223. Vultan - February 10, 2014

#221

Actually, yes, my mind is bent as easily as a gum wrapper. This conversation is mystifying as I type this. Hey, look, a pencil!

224. Vultan - February 10, 2014

mystifying ME

225. Son of Captain Garth - February 10, 2014

#220 Really? I thought he looked more like Kenny Loggins; maybe that means that hiring him to write Trek would be a trip to the Danger Zone!

Please, please . . . . hold back the applause.

226. Cygnus-X1 - February 10, 2014

223. Vultan – February 10, 2014

lol – fair enough.

I don’t remember those episodes by name, but I am making a note of them and will try to remember your advocacy for them as I get to them in the series, which I’ve just started re-watching.

227. Vultan - February 10, 2014

#226

I think those are among the best episodes overall actually. If memory serves, The Search is the only one of those three that really involve multiple character arcs. The other two are centered around Sisko.

Tor.com has its own weekly re-watch/review of each DS9 episode going on now. I think they’re in the fourth season now. Here’s a link if you’re interested.

http://www.tor.com/features/series/star-trek-deep-space-nine-rewatch

Cheers!

228. Cygnus-X1 - February 11, 2014

Cool, thanks for the link!

229. Chris Fawkes - February 11, 2014

Kirk, Spock and McCoy are still the iconic characters. If they wanted to guarantee success on the small screen then they would need to base it on the originals series characters.

Now there was a five year mission was there not after Kirk was demoted from Admiral to Captain after The Voyage Home.

If they took up a series there then they could cast actors older than in the current films.

230. Curious Cadet - February 11, 2014

@229. Chris Fawkes,
“If they took up a series there then they could cast actors older than in the current films.”

That would totally defeat the point of a TV reboot of TOS.

The trend in media is younger, not older. Nobody wants to see a crew of 50-something’s explore the Galaxy. A Bruce Greenwood Pike among the cast is one thing, a cast of Greenwood’s is quite another. BSG did it right. Enough older cast to give it credibility, a mostly young attractive cast to draw in the key demographic.

Abrams has set TOS Trek up perfectly to return to TV after the next film, with a rebooted cast. We’re all used to the idea of a new Kirk now, so switching to a new one should be no problem, especially for a young audience who hasn’t grown up with just one. And that doesn’t necessarily mean they have to stop making movies. Smallville was on the air during the first Superman reboot. Batman will continue on the big screen regardless of whether Gotham (AKA the adventures of young Batman) becomes a series. Why not Kirk? This way, the features can focus on revenge-based plot to destroy the Earth by a super-villain every four years, while satisfying the exploratory aspect of the concept weekly. Heck, on TV, I wouldn’t mind seeing Khan come back as Kirk’s recurring Lex Luthor to really explore that character as Kirk’s nemesis. Far better idea than perhaps the lamest character ever created — Q.

231. MJ - February 11, 2014

@230

Interesting, since the crew of Gravity – Bullock and Cloony – aversge around 50 years old, an that was a hugely profitable big sf space movie.

WHOOPS !

232. Marja - February 11, 2014

211 Cygnus, I beg to differ. There are plenty of great emotional moments. An episode featuring Tony Todd as honored writer Jake Sisko – trying to save his father in the past to get history aright … an episode where a tiny changeling is discovered and Odo and Dr. Mora, Odo’s nemesis from the past, try to bring it to maturity … Sisko’s dilemma when he suspects his lover of smuggling … and these are just in 5th season.

The ongoing relationships, flowing with time, and the solid father-son relationship between Sisko and his son, and great friendships betweenKira and Odo, Sisko and Dax, Worf and Dax, and others are realistically portrayed. In TNG there was one relationship of note that bore any resemblance and that was between LaForge and Data, and something of a father-son relationship between Picard and Data.

I urge you to watch DS9 again, from 4th season on, all eps are available for streaming on Netflix. I’ve been far more moved and brought near tears by DS9 than any other Trek series, with the possible exceptions of a few eps in Enterprise and several in TOS, in its time and place.

233. K-7 - February 11, 2014

DS9 has arguably the best, and most, seminal character moments of an Trek series, including TOS.

234. K-7 - February 11, 2014

Curious Cadet,

As MJ just said, the biggest space science fiction movie in years, which made the most money of any space sf movie i years, uneqiuvocably proves your point wrong given thr ages of Clooney/Bullock.

235. Ahmed - February 11, 2014

@ 233. K-7 – February 11, 2014

“DS9 has arguably the best, and most, seminal character moments of an Trek series, including TOS.”

Is a planetary alignment going on at the moment or something because I totally agree with you here :)

236. K-7 - February 11, 2014

Ahmed,

Could this perhaps be the dawning of The Age of Aquarius?

:-)

237. Brandon - February 11, 2014

Moore’s attitude is exactly what’s wrong with every Star Trek idea I’ve seen in the last decade. Star Trek doesn’t NEED a “great new Star Trek epiphany”. It doesn’t need a gimmick or a special conceit. It didn’t need any such thing for either of the two most popular series (the first two). Put it on the bridge of a new Enterprise in the 25th century, give it a new crew, and boldly go. That’s it. That’s all it needs. If you can’t write good characters or stories without the assistance of gimmicks or fancy premises, you shouldn’t be in the business anyway.

238. crazydaystrom - February 11, 2014

235. Ahmed –
@ 233. K-7 – February 11, 2014

“DS9 has arguably the best, and most, seminal character moments of an Trek series, including TOS.”

Is a planetary alignment going on at the moment or something because I totally agree with you here :)

236. K-7 –
Ahmed,

Could this perhaps be the dawning of The Age of Aquarius?

:-)

Maybe K-7, maybe, because I am, and have long been, in 100% agreement with that opinion of DS9 as well.

232. Marja –

Total agreement with you as well. The Visitor is my favorite DS9 ep. And in my top five of ALL Trek eps.

239. MJ - February 11, 2014

@237

Been there…done that…

Need new ideas, unless you are james and vic and want to live in the past forever.

240. Marja - February 11, 2014

239 MJ, It’s fun to live in the past sometimes, otherwise I’d never watch TOS.
————————————————————————————
I think an Alt/Nu/jJVerse Trek on TV could work, if they kept the seasons short with superb writing, like the critically acclaimed “Breaking Bad,” “Mad Men” and others. And personally I’d love to see the AU actors and that big beautiful Enterprise on TV too. [Just can the fins on the warp nacelles, guys, totally unnecessary]

I would NOT want to see them violate their in-show canon as has apparently been done on “Walking Dead” [a program I have never seen, I just don’t care about zombies and all the other supernatural things any more. X-Files was fine, I’m done thanks.] – a critic who was a big fan of the show lamented watching it devolve.

Vince Gilligan, Manny Coto, Ron Moore, I think these three could put their heads together with Bob Orci and come up with some DAMN GOOD TREK for TV. If science fiction writers are invited into the fold [as in TOS], so much the better.

241. Cygnus-X1 - February 11, 2014

All this talk of a Bad Robot Trek TV show is depressing me. The only flicker of hope that I have is that someone who is NOT Bad Robot will do a Trek series.

If Bad Robot takes over Trek on TV, I’m joining the protest at the next Con.

242. Jim Nightshade - February 12, 2014

i liked ds9 but didnt love it…it had its great moments and the cast all excellent…

kira n odo standouts, quark too..,the tribble episode wonderful funny homage to tos…they got away with being not quite trek…which was good n bad…from emissary on…bajors religion/prophecy played a too big role…imho…

i hated daxs death as much as i hated tasha yors death…ezra dax not even close to being as good tho i dont blame her…it was like the writers werent sure what to do with her…and also hated the series ending with sisko becoming a student of the gods…overall a lot to like in ds9…

243. Phil - February 12, 2014

@237. Well, you pretty much just described TNG, DS9, Voyager, *and* Enterprise. So, how many times do you thing we can keep doing this format over..and over..and over….and over..and over…and over…

Yeah, someone does need something different in the Trek universe.

244. Marja - February 12, 2014

241 Cygnus, They are, it’s called “Star Trek Continues” ;-)

[twitting you a bit there.]

245. Cygnus-X1 - February 12, 2014

244. Marja – February 12, 2014

And I’m quite enjoying it! ;-)

246. Kenji - February 12, 2014

@151

Thanks for that bit of behind the scenes info, have been wondering what happened to this site’s original maestro. Quite a fun read at times, at other times the infighting is head-scratching.

247. Kenji - February 12, 2014

@240

In principle, I would prefer seeing new Treks that way. Small budgets lead to the sort of talky drama (to save money) and wacky off concept experiments (to keep things fresh or because no one in the writing room had a better idea) that some of us like to think of as real or essential Trek

But that would kill the film series and it doesn’t feel timely.

It’s a given that STID is the Quantum of Solace of the series.

To avoid a repeat of the problems of STID – e.g. laborious fan service, Khan unresolved, villain not emotionally resonant, excessive familiarity – the team has to come up with yet another fresh take and invigoration.

Rather than simply go bigger, they should go more interesting/weirder, a more grown up sci fi.

Suggestion: Five Year Mission – uncharted space, the historic mission and showing the changes it wreaks on people during that time (while turning them into a fighting instrument that would be spoken of in awe for generations of future Starfleet cadets).

248. Marja - February 12, 2014

245 Cygnus, Me too!

247 Kenji, “Rather than simply go bigger, they should go more interesting/weirder, a more grown up sci fi.”

I cannot say enough how much I love this idea

249. Curious Cadet - February 13, 2014

@241. Cygnus-X1,
“If Bad Robot takes over Trek on TV, I’m joining the protest at the next Con.”

That’s a rather minuscule representation of the fan base, and certainly nothing to the Bad Robot Trek audience.

You’re entitled to your opinion, but I think this is a terrible way to view it. There’s a number of things I don’t like about Arams Trek, just as there was much I did not like about Enterprise. But I still watched it, and in some cases even really enjoyed it.

Bad Robot in of itself is not the problem with this reboot of Trek. Bad Robot has produced a lot of good TV — I would even argue more good TV than Berman produced good Trek. I would even argue that is where BR is at its best — TV. Maybe Abrams just isn’t a film guy. So far I’ve not been particularly impressed with his cinematic efforts. Either way, BR’s track record on TV, combined with the reality that TV budgets cannot support the kind of mindless non-stop action stories the last two Trek films presented all bode well for BR producing Trek for TV. And the writing would likely improve as well. Instead of overextended writer/producers trying to squeeze out a good story between projects, these guys would cherry pick the best ideas from a staff of writers whose jobs are to think Trek 24/7.

Now if you hate the reboot, then too bad for you. I like the reboot. Chances are Ron Moore would have done the exact same thing. I take exception with some of the character development I’ve seen over two films, but that’s only 4 hours of story. It took TNG over 48 hours of story to get their characters developed to a point where many cared. So I’m all for a well written rebooted series in the hands of BR.

But if the prospect of this upsets you, then by all means join the vocal minority, but for those of us in the majority this time, who weren’t interested in DS9, or Enterprise, but sat through them for the joy of Trek; please give us our day to enjoy a version of Trek we actually are interested in for a change. You had over two decades to have it your way. Time for something new.

250. Cygnus-X1 - February 13, 2014

249. Curious Cadet – February 13, 2014

We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

I would only disabuse you of the notion that the premise per se of rebooting Trek is the issue for the likes of me. It isn’t.

Also, a comparison of Ron Moore’s Battlestar Galactica reboot with BR’s Trek does not suggest that Moore’s Trek reboot would have been “the same thing” as BR’s, especially given Moore’s history of Trek work.

If you like Bad Robot’s TV shows, then these are happy days for you, and you’ve certainly had no shortage of days to celebrate BR’s Trek, especially at this site, which for years did little else for months on end.

I’ve expressed my opinions at length regarding why and BR’s Trek is fundamentally different from what came before, and it’s got nothing to do with being set in an alt universe. And I’m certainly not the only person—fan or professional—to express the opinion that BR’s “Trek” doesn’t feel like Trek. We can leave it at that.

251. Son of Captain Garth - February 13, 2014

Honestly, I still just can’t see how it can be done–putting Trek back on TV, that is.

There are the economic challenges. Trek that looks as good as the movies in terms of sets, props, CGI, etc. is expensive, and yet that is what the audience will expect.

The second problem also feeds into the economic challenges. The demo for Trek is old. If you don’t pitch to people like us–in our 40s and beyond for the most part–they risk losing the core audience. However, if you don’t use the non-stop action, Cuisinart editing style and intellectually unchallenging writing, you will not attract the Millennials whom the advertisers covet, despite the fact that they have less disposable income. However, they are the audience by whom the advertisers calculate their spending, which in turn has a direct impact upon the budget for the show. It’s a vicious cycle.

Then, of course, there is the contentious relationship between Paramount and CBS. Creating a product upon which these two entities could agree would be challenging.

252. Cygnus-X1 - February 13, 2014

251. Son of Captain Garth – February 13, 2014

Trek has had thoughtful writing and mature themes in the past. It can do so again.

Enterprise had a pretty good formula with a 40-something captain and younger crew. That formula could translate to a hit series. And I wouldn’t regard technology as a problem, either. Again, Enterprise had outstanding production values. No issues there whatsoever.

It’s all about having a visionary to run the show. Ron Moore has shown himself to be a visionary in his fantastic reboot of BSG. Though he doesn’t seem particularly interested in doing a Trek series, Moore is a good model of the kind of person that Trek needs to be leading the project. Trek needs a visionary at the helm—not a producer who’s good at executing on the vision—Trek needs that also, but that person should not be calling the shots creatively. The Bermans and Abrams of Hollywood need people with vision telling them what to do. And that’s where a Gene Roddenberry or Ron Moore comes in. Put a visionary in charge—not a bean-counter, not a craftsman—but someone who is primarily a writer, a “creative.”

253. Dave H - February 13, 2014

“Enterprise had a pretty good formula…”

Good God Man, are you really holding Enterprise up as the gold-star example of how to bring Trek back to TV?

Did you just really say that?

wtf?

254. K-7 - February 13, 2014

Dave,

Yea, I Cygnus really just said that. :-))

I am drinking a soda here, and nearly spit it up all over my computer as I laughed so hard when I read this. LOL

255. Disinvited - February 14, 2014

# 254. K-7 – February 13, 2014

” Dave,

Yea, I Cygnus really just said that. :-))

I am drinking a soda here, and nearly spit it up all over my computer as I laughed so hard when I read this. LOL” – K-7

I bet my “nearly” beat yours when I saw you had apparently revealed that you are Cygnus.

First, the planetary alignments, and now this! :-)

I hope you were just quoting a post of his that got swallowed by the system moderation-yeah, that’s the ticket!

256. Curious Cadet - February 14, 2014

@250. Cygnus-X1,
“Also, a comparison of Ron Moore’s Battlestar Galactica reboot with BR’s Trek does not suggest that Moore’s Trek reboot would have been “the same thing” as BR’s, especially given Moore’s history of Trek work.”

We’ll never know, but look at what Moore did with BSG. He took it to a dark place. The characters were twisted up with human frailties, and mixed up in a way that kept them living in fear and distrust. That was a very different thing than the valiant heros that populated the Galactica in the 70s. He took that series to a place nobody ever envisioned including the original fans, most of whom rejected it.

You say given Moore’s history with Trek … Moore slaved under the iron fist of Rick Berman. His views on that are fairly clear with things he’s said about Voyager — in fact his experience on Voyager is likely what inspired part of his dark vision of BSG. Moore’s on record that if he had his way, Voyager would have been as dark and twisted and realistic as BSG — something that I see direct parallels with in Bad Robot’s reboot.

So I’ll agree to disagree all you like, but I don’t think Moore would give us anything like what you seem to be interested in for Trek at all. In fact DS9 is exactly what I don’t want in my Trek, and based on my experience with it reflects numerous elements that I did not like about STID. I’ll bet you had Moore been in charge for the last 8 years, Chris Pine would get his wish to take Kirk to a dark place.

257. Marja - February 14, 2014

256, Curious,

I remember the fan reaction to Moore’s BSG, but I remember too the great critical reception it got.

I think I might’ve stayed with “Voyager” if there had been more conflict among the crew, keeping things interesting to me as a viewer. Think of all the scripting possibilities as Janeway has to walk the fine line every week of keeping the Maquis loyal to the mission of getting out of the Delta Quadrant, managing the interpersonal conflicts, the different sense of discipline the Maquis had regarding one another as opposed to Starfleet officers, with each party attracted to the opposite sides for their own reasons. The ‘fleet ensign who’s sick of command discipline and chain-of-command where she’s at the bottom might find herself more valued by the Maquis, for example.

DS9 doesn’t have crew at loggerheads with each other for year after year. Sure, Quark is equally objectionable to the Bajorans and the Starfleet folk, but he mixes a damn good drink and offers wonderfully fun holosuites – for a price. As for the crew, and Bajorans vs Starfleet, once they get to know each other, they become friendly. E.g., Kira and Sisko have their differences, and she’s in a position where her religion told her he is a great figure, the Emissary of the Prophets, yet his decisions as a Starfleet officer are sometimes ones she has to bite her tongue and go along with.

But over three or four seasons they become friendly. She has learned that this man has made difficult choices from a place of good ethics, and sometimes has to bite HIS tongue when he gets certain orders from Starfleet Command.

258. Cygnus-X1 - February 14, 2014

256. Curious Cadet – February 14, 2014

You say given Moore’s history with Trek … Moore slaved under the iron fist of Rick Berman. His views on that are fairly clear with things he’s said about Voyager — in fact his experience on Voyager is likely what inspired part of his dark vision of BSG. Moore’s on record that if he had his way, Voyager would have been as dark and twisted and realistic as BSG — something that I see direct parallels with in Bad Robot’s reboot.

We’re not in disagreement here. I’d LOVE to have seen Moore’s vision of Voyager. I’m a little surprised at the notion that fans of the original Battlestar Galactica—well, firstly, that there are fans of it to be spoken of—wouldn’t like Moore’s reboot. I mean, the reboot was sooo different in tone, look and ideas from the original, that I suppose it makes sense that it would appeal to different tastes than the original did. But Moore’s reboot was exponentially more sophisticated and thought out in every regard—there’s just no comparison.

However, I really don’t know what you mean when you draw parallels between Moore’s BSG and BR’s Trek. I see nothing similar about them. In fact, I see BR’s Trek as the antithesis of Moore’s BSG, in that Moore had a clear vision and direction for his project, whereas BR’s Trek doesn’t seem to have any particular artistic statement or ideas to convey—it’s basically just a commercial endeavor, using the names, likenesses and back-stories of a well established franchise and then modifying the form of the product so as to appeal to a different audience (Europeans wanting more action, etc…).

In fact DS9 is exactly what I don’t want in my Trek

I think you might have assumed that I’m some kind of a Berman-Trek loyalist. I’ll briefly summarize my tastes: TNG was the pinnacle. I’ve come to appreciate DS9, and to a lesser degree VOY, for what they were, but by no means do I hold DS9 up as an exemplar of what Trek should be. The entire string of Berman-era movies was a disappointment. FC was the best of those, and it suffered very badly from plot holes and bad writing generally. I really enjoy ENT Seasons 3 and 4 now, but the first two seasons were and remain disappointing, especially Season 2.

So, as you can see, I’m not necessarily advocating a return to the Berman-Trek style or formula. However, in comparison with BR Trek, I’d rather a return to Berman-Trek. BR Trek has caused me to appreciate Berman-Trek a lot more in retrospect…which is not to say that Generations and Nemesis weren’t abysmal; they were. And as annoyed as I get watching STID, at least it has some good scenes in it. However, I’d easily take the Berman TV over the BR movies. Not even a contest.

259. Basement Blogger - February 14, 2014

I agree with Ronald Moore. Star Trek does belong on TV. As Anthony Pascale puts it, TV is where more complex stories can be told. We all love “The City on the Edge of Forever.” Yet, that type of great storytelling is lacking from movies. You won’t see that type of story on the movie screen.

It’s important for cinematic Star Trek to be Star Trek. That is it should follow Gene Roddenberry’s vision for the franchise. That vision was to have a science fiction show with substance. Christopher Nolan has shown us that big action epics can be thought provoking. And I thought Star Trek Into Darkness was a move that Roddenberry would approve of. There were many themes in the film. So let’s hope for the fiftieth anniversary that the next film continue to ask us to think and thrill us at the same time.

260. Keachick - February 14, 2014

I have just come back to Trekmovie and have only read the first 100+ posts on this thread.

@ Bob Orci and Jim Nightshade #108 – Hi there.

Thank you, Jim, for a great post. I agree with you.

@ Bob Orci – The last time I commented to you, I think my post was confused and rude towards you. I apologize.

I like the way the personality of James Kirk is unfolding. Some complain about how immature this Kirk is. What does *mature* mean? Defining *maturity* is very often contextual and subjective. Besides, if I want to see an older, more mature James Kirk, I need only watch some TOS episodes.

261. T'Cal - February 14, 2014

I’ve heard and read people panning ST: Insurrection because it was too much like an episode. That’s exactly why I like it. It does deal with morality and, while it has quite a bit of action, it’s a ‘damned if you do/damned if you don’t’ situation that Trek does so well on TV. Bring on RDM! He can do this kind of television really well, and Trek would be in good hands under him.

262. DiscoSpock - February 14, 2014

@252 / CygnusX-1 @260 / T’Cal

I think I have heard it all here now. You both suggest that Enterprise and Insurrection are templates for great Star Trek. Huh???

It’s no wonder Star Trek fans are not taken seriously by anyone in the general public. We deserve to be ridiculed when some among us say just plain dumb-ass stuff like this.

263. Keachick - February 14, 2014

Insurrection is an enjoyable movie and frankly I do not really care if some people consider it to be episodic in nature.

No, if people generally do not take Star Trek fans seriously, it may be because the fans are too busy vigorously and repeatedly criticizing various aspects of the franchise and other fans. I think, for some, it is a real deal breaker.

If only there was some cheese to stem the spirit/bone crushing…

264. Cygnus-X1 - February 14, 2014

The episodic feel of Insurrection did not bother me.

265. MJ - February 14, 2014

Cygnus, Keachick,

Well the fact that it was the most boring Star Trek movie ever made did in fact bother me…episodic or not.

It’s not really a bad Trek movie…just mind-numbingly boring. Star Trek’s version of going to an inssurance seminar or reading the phone book.

266. K-7 - February 14, 2014

MJ,

I agree completely. Insurrection is so boring, that, by comparison, it makes TMP seem like Raiders of the Lost ark in terms of excitement and interest. ;-)

267. Keachick - February 14, 2014

I did not find it boring at all. Some aspects were quite lovely – “minute aka eternity” and other parts quirky and funny. I guess my sense of humour must be different to other people, because I loved Picard singing his version of a Very Modern Major General from Gilbert & Sullivan. I also had no problem with seeing characters experiencing their more youthful selves.

I also think that if I/you were actually there on such a planet, experiencing oneself becoming younger would be anything but boring – embarrassing perhaps, but not boring.

I just put myself in where the characters are when I watch a film and for that time, I am nowhere else and know little else. That is how I can (or not) understand, empathize, enjoy what I am seeing and hearing.

I have not seen the film in some time. This has reminded me to look out for and buy the DVD of ST: Insurrection.

268. Keachick - February 14, 2014

BTW – Chris Pine is in Christchurch, NZ and he is about to start to filming his part in the film Z for Zachariah. Apparently, his character is an added character, one which apparently does not appear in the book upon which this movie is based.

It seems that parts of Canterbury is a good place to film this movie. The director really likes the fact that NZ has different topography, often taking less than a day’s road travel to get from one place to another.

Chris Pine has not contacted me. I am mortified…oh well, it is likely he will leave our fair shores via Auckland, so he can contact me then…:)

269. T'Cal - February 15, 2014

The humor in INS was a bit much but it was light and not heavy handed. And there are several very good scenes in the film. When Picard and his away team go down to the planet to “rescue” the Starfleet Officers from the duckblind, his discussion ending with a sincere apology was pure Picard – diplomatic, classy, intelligent, etc. In the final ship battle in which Commander Riker tells his Chief Engineer LaForge to release the core, and Geordi says, “I just did!” I thought was a set up for the next film in which Riker gets his own command and Geordi becomes his XO. The dialog was excellent and the action was great.

My biggest complaint about TNG films is their forced use of humor. It rarely worked well and more often than not, made Worf and Data, two of Trek’s richest characters, look like fools.

270. Red Dead Ryan - February 15, 2014

“Insurrection” wasn’t a good movie. It did feature an interesting plot — but it was brought down by poor villains, an ugly love interest, lame jokes and dialogue, as well as cheap-ass visual effects.

Michael Piller wrote some good TNG episodes, but this was a poor effort on his part. Jonathan Frakes did the best he could with what he was handed. The cinematography and locations were stunning, however, and Patrick Stewart put in another good performance.

Unfortunately, “Insurrection” was a big disappointment following in the footsteps of the much better “First Contact”.

271. Phil - February 15, 2014

All Trek movies are enjoyable, some just more so then others.

I happen to do Inssurannce seminars for a living, MJ. It takes a lot of effort to not be boring…

272. P Technobabble - February 15, 2014

I think my initial point (about Trek on tv) went unnoticed — and I’m sure it’s a point others have stated at various times. I simply do not think a new Star Trek tv series is going to pull in the numbers of viewers week after week to justify the expense, effort, blood, sweat and tears required to do a weekly show. It might have great numbers initially but it is likely that those numbers will dwindle over time. There simply aren’t enough die-hard Trek fans and there aren’t, most likely, enough mainstream viewers to make Star Trek a hit.
I would love to be proven wrong, honestly. And I’m waiting for someone to present some hard evidence as to why I’m wrong. Unless someone can do Star Trek a la Big Bang Theory I don’t see a hit show.

273. Cygnus-X1 - February 15, 2014

272. P Technobabble – February 15, 2014

What’s fundamentally changed since the 90s, when there were two Trek series running at a time? Viewers who liked it then would like it again if it were done well. And if it’s done well, it will attract new viewers who simply appreciate good quality shows, plus, of course, new viewers who like sci-fi in general.

274. Marja - February 15, 2014

272 Techno, I certainly do hope you are proven wrong, with all due respect! If the series gets enough critical acclaim “mainstream” viewers may check it out. Trekkers and Trekkies of course will do so and recommend it to friends and relations. People who saw the movies and liked them may do so as well.

I think it’s been long enough since “Enterprise” for new people to get interested in TrekTV again.

I really, really hope they can get the movie cast to do short [“Mad Men”-length] series each year ….

o please o please o please! powers that be, make it so!

275. T'Cal - February 16, 2014

I see the crap that makes it on SyFy and I wonder why they can’t fund a good Star Trek TV movie. As much as I would love a high quality weekly series, I think there’s a case for an annual or semi-annual miniseries. Each one could stand alone and be from different eras. I liked how Torchwood was aired in that they showed episode 1 on Monday, episode 1 & 2 on Tuesday, episode 2 & 3 on Wednesday, etc. Each episode could be an hour or two long. Just sayin’…

276. Ahmed - February 16, 2014

Star Trek Into Darkness is streaming now on Netflix Canada !!!

277. P Technobabble - February 16, 2014

273., 274.
Hey guys.
Cygnus, I think the thing that has changed is that during the 90s Trek was on a high road. TVH had become the first really big film hit, mostly based on high critical praise and word of mouth. This was followed with an enthusiastic announcement of Trek returning to tv with TNG. That show was presented in first-run syndication which allowed it to be shown at times when an individual station could run it when they thought it would do best. It is plausible that if TNG were on a major network, shown every Thurs night at 10:00pm for example, it might not have done so well. Following the positive response of TUC and all the hype about it being the final original cast film and the TNG cast moving up to the big screen, DS9 was presented as a different kind of Trek so it attracted attention that way. VOY came about because… who knows, really? An attempt to satisfy the fans who wanted the starship-based scenario? It was also the flagship of the (ahem) great UPN network. DS9 had some really great episodes. VOY was very hit-and-miss. Meanwhile, after the last two TNG films took a downslide, ENT seemed an attempt to “get back” to what Star Trek started out as. But by the time it started to find its legs it was canned. I think that entire string of events is what was different about that time versus now. I could be wrong, of course, but it’s just how I see it.
And Marja, I truly wish the powers that be would make it so — almost in any format! I know some of the fan-made stuff leaves a lot of folks shaking their heads, but right now that’s the only new stuff we have (not counting the films, of course — which is another whole Pandora’s box). Non-network mini-series kinds of shows would seem the way to go. But ya gotta wonder: if CBS doesn’t give a rat’s ass about Star Trek, and yet they aren’t willing to give it up… what’s up with that??? Doesn’t make a lot of sense, right?
In any case, I think a new Trek show would have to be a remarkably good one to get the sort of “critical acclaim” we’re hoping for. I tend to feel that there’s an almost inherent negative attitude towards Star Trek, when it comes to “professional” critics. They did seem to like ST09 well enough, but there was a lot of mixed reaction to STID — which doesn’t help if you’re trying to build up a franchise.
Who knows what the future will bring? I’m sure every one of us here could offer some thoughts as to what Trek should be, or needs to be, in order to be successful. But, ultimately, who’s listening?
(Quoting Pink Floyd:) Is there anybody out there…?

278. Marja - February 17, 2014

277 Technobabble, “Non-network mini-series kinds of shows would seem the way to go. But ya gotta wonder: if CBS doesn’t give a rat’s ass about Star Trek, and yet they aren’t willing to give it up… what’s up with that??? Doesn’t make a lot of sense, right?”

It doesn’t make a damn bit of sense. Seems they could sell Star Trek, its “rights and assigns” and make a bundle of money. Maybe they’re being “leeches” and leach more TOS & other series profits from any future movie successes? Creatively it makes NO sense, but business-wise, it’s the usual.

Seems to me limited licenses for non-network miniseries would be the way to go for CBS. License it to Netflix for a period of X years, that kinda thing.

As to “critical acclaim,” I think ST:TVH was “warmly” regarded, but I wouldn’t say it got the “critical acclaim” that non-fans usually think of, like that accorded Woody Allen’s movies or the funnier Coen Brothers outings.

Rober Ebert, may he R.I.P, regarded the better Star Trek outings with some critical acclaim, and definitely warm regard. [I think he was a Trekker!]

279. Cygnus-X1 - February 17, 2014

277. P Technobabble

It’s a good question as to what CBS intends to do with its Star Trek property rights. I don’t see anything among what you listed that wold preclude another series or render it necessarily unprofitable. Good quality shows attract viewers, there would be no shortage of press and buzz about a new Trek series, and it would be starting with a built-in fan base composed of Trekkies, fans of any of the previous 5 Trek series, plus general sci-fi fans. I’d love to read an interview with someone at CBS asking them about their intentions for Trek.

280. Cygnus-X1 - February 17, 2014

278. Marja – February 17, 2014

Marja, I recently got nostalgic for Siskel & Ebert and revisted a lot of their old movie reviews, including STII, STIII, STIV, STV and the TNG movies. The only ones that didn’t get “thumbs up” from both critics were STV (which got two thumbs down) and Nemesis (which actually still got a thumbs up from Roeper, who’d taken over by that time for the late Gene Siskel).

The point being that critical opinion, at least that of the two most popular and influential critics in the US, was pretty much in line with Trekkie opinion and actually even more accepting, with regard to Trek movies.

281. Cygnus-X1 - February 17, 2014

P.S. Actually I didn’t see a review for Generations or for Insurrection.

FC got two thumbs up as did STVI.

282. MJ - February 17, 2014

Ah, that’s the same Roger Ebert who gave Die Hard, Unforgiven, The Elephant Man and Gladiator, only 2-star reviews.

283. Jack - February 17, 2014

I never understood the appeal of Gladiator, just bately sat through the Elephant Man or Unforgiven. Die Hard’s a ridiculously enjoyable
flick.

BTW, I’m now caught up on Helix. Hated the first episode, but am now pretty intrigued — even after Jeri Ryan showed up and started mawing on the scenery with her filed-down teeth.

Just tried watching STID on Netflix — Khan really looks a lot like Glee’s Chris Colfer that first scene, which makes the ridiculously over the top dramatic Khan theme especially goofy (I love MG, but didn’t like any of the new stuff he did for this movie, except the bit with Harewood’s daughter).

The Gatt cyborg guy’s cool, though.

284. Son of Captain Garth - February 17, 2014

#279 “Good quality shows attract viewers”? Not always. Sometimes they languish and sometimes they get the axe pretty quickly. For every Downton Abbey that does well, there’s a Two and a Half Men that inexplicably remains on the air and somewhat popular for more than a decade.

285. K-7 - February 18, 2014

“I never understood the appeal of Gladiator”

Let’s see,

Ancient World Recrreated – check
Gladiators – check
Roman battles – check
Joachim Phoeix, Richard Harris, Russel Crowe – check
Ridley Scott directed – check
John Logan screenplay – check

Yea, I just can’t see the appeal of a movie like that? Why would people be interested in this movie?

LOL

286. Red Dead Ryan - February 18, 2014

“Gladiator” and “Unforgiven” are utter classics.

The director’s cut of “Gladiator” is the version you want to watch. It’s a big improvement over the thatrical version.

#284.

Not to mention Hans Zimmer’s excellent score as well.

287. MJ - February 18, 2014

“I think the features are good and I really admire what JJ Abrams has done with the last two films – I think it’s great” — Ron Moore

Wow, no one seems to be noticing this part of the Ron Moore story. Here is this guy, who many of you are saying should be leading Star Trek back to TV, who flat out says that Star Trek 2009 and STIS were good, maybe even great, Star Trek flims. He likes them a lot, obviously, from his comments here.

288. Marja - February 18, 2014

285, K-7, It could be that overt violence in some movies does not appeal to some of us, any more than overt crude sexual humor does.

Some of us love “Downton Abbey” [engaging and dramatically well-written] vice “Two and a Half Men” [rude, crude scatology and overtly smirky sexual humor] or the Jeremy Brett “Sherlock Holmes” [engaging but old-fashioned, not hugely popular] vice “Law and Order: SVU” [hugely popular].

“House of Cards” and “West Wing” are both very well-written and well-acted, and both, strangely popular! There’s hope yet.

289. K-7 - February 18, 2014

@288. But I assume that you understand how movies about ancient Roman history, which do include some violence (though Scott handles it well without being over the top), appeal to many viewers, right?

Jack said that he couldn’t even understand how anyone could like that movie. Surely, you understand the appeal of a Roman history period piece by Ridley Scott, with supreme acting, and an incredibly good screenplay by Logan.

5 academy awards, including Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Visual effects, and 12 academy award nominations, yet someone here claims they don’t have the faintest clue what the appeal is of the movie?

Huh?

290. Marja - February 18, 2014

Yes, K-7, I can understand the appeal of such a film to many. While I did not attend [due to its violence against animals – probably CGI animals, but nevertheless], I know that [heh] legions did, and assured the movie a great place at the box office.

They didn’t need me to see it!

Jack “never understood the appeal” of it; it just means he doesn’t understand how or why that spectacle would appeal to people.

Kind of the way I feel about every Zombie program or movie ever produced. I’m guessing it’s some sort of socio-political dystopia.

291. Disinvited - February 20, 2014

Hmmm…if this is possible:

http://www.deadline.com/2014/02/j-michael-straczynski-options-harlan-ellisons-repent-harlequin-for-feature/

who knows what might be possible for a 50th anniversary script?

292. WillH85 - February 23, 2014

I think RDM is the only person that could bring Trek back to TV with good ratings and keep us Trekkies happy at the same time. Anyone else is either going to go just for a new crowd or try too hard to please the hard core fans and not get the ratings to stay on the air. Help us RDM, you’re our only hope.

293. Jack - March 1, 2014

Yep. That’s me. I know that it won a trillion awards and was very popular — I just couldn’t see why. You’re allowed to like it. I just thought it was overrated. I find that with a lot of Scott’s more recent stuff.

BTW, helix is now completely bonkers, which is fun.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.