PDA

View Full Version : The only good idea for a new Star Trek show



banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Jul-07, 03:44 PM
The only good idea for a new Star Trek show has already been used and made into a somewhat mediocre show called "Andromeda". A fall of the federation show could have been good. I just hope that Paramount doesn't come back in a few years and attempt to make such a show. Anybody agree?/disagree?

Glom
2005-Jul-07, 03:50 PM
Stuart came up with an idea about an attempt to overthrow the communist military regime with the help of aliens friends that aren't shallow one-dimensional cliches.

banquo's_bumble_puppy
2005-Jul-07, 03:53 PM
Glom...Star Trek...Glom...sigh

Archer17
2005-Jul-07, 04:20 PM
I think Star Trek ran it's course. I thought the idea behind Enterprise - the era before the TOS - had promise but it never took off. Shallow plots/acting didn't help, but I think the main problem was the simple fact that after TOS and TNG the Trek-cow was milked dry (so to speak). I never liked Andromeda so maybe I'm biased here, but I don't think a post-Federation angle would work any better than Enterprise, Voyager, or DS9 did.

hippietrekx
2005-Jul-07, 05:38 PM
VOY and DS9 actually worked pretty well. After VOY ended, that should have been the end of Star Trek for at least ten years. ENT as well as Nemesis were sort of beating the dead dog.

I don't know if Trek could rebound. At least, not in the military focus that it has been. I think that a civilian centered show would be good, but not for a few years. Trek is on it's death bed. Give it time to recover. Anyway, I'd like to see what the future would be like for an everyday person. Not just people in Star Fleet.

I think Trek needs a different angle. The fandom needs time to get the "only geeks watch Star Trek" stereotype out of the way. Who knows, maybe if Trek is put on a shelf for ten to twenty years, it will become a retro-hit and demand for the show will be there. Demand just wasn't there for Nemesis and ENT.

--hipster

Humphrey
2005-Jul-07, 05:40 PM
First of all they need to tie up B&B, throw them into a sack and hit them with large concrete blocks untill they promise never to step onto a studio, direct/produce, or even look at a scripts again. Without a doubt they are the #1 and #2 reasons for the failure of Star Trek. Want proof? Look at the episode they have produced/directed and written vs those by the other trek directors. Massive difference.

I like Trek alot and i hope they do make a new show. Just dont give it the 3rd rate crappy writers and producres that Enterprise had.

I had a few ideas (some influenced, helped out by, and discussed with Stuart :-))

-Entirely fan written show. That i know of this has never been done. So each season have fgans send in their best scripts, and choose the 24 best. They they get to go to Hollywood and work with a real scriptwriter to improve the weak points on the script. and make the show.

Of course this jhas to be a new show, new characters, etc. but the fans can work with that.

-A show based on a non federation group. The Maquis. Have the show portray them as the good guys and the federation as evil. It would be a fun turnaround thats very rarely done on tv. Might not work, but hell it could not hurt to even do a single episode on this. Look at how much fun the evil fewderation universe stories were in TOS, DS9, and Enterprise.

-A "3rd watch" type show where they follow seperate , but intercoonected groups of Federation p[eople. One on a federation spacestation (not DS9, but a starbase) and one on a ship.

hippietrekx
2005-Jul-07, 05:48 PM
Oh, Humphrey, I'd almost blocked out Bergman, and you had to bring him up again! #-o

Lord Bergman and his evil henchmen {yes, I'm being dramatic} helped to beat Trek into the nothingness it is now. Currently there are no production plans for Trek. I don't know if that's good or bad...

--htx

Moose
2005-Jul-07, 05:50 PM
First of all they need to tie up B&B, throw them into a sack and hit them with large concrete blocks untill they promise never to step onto a studio, direct/produce, or even look at a scripts again. Without a doubt they are the #1 and #2 reasons for the failure of Star Trek. Want proof? Look at the episode they have produced/directed and written vs those by the other trek directors. Massive difference.

Exactly. You can't have a solid seven years (three under ENT and what, four(?) under VOY) of Berman's obsession with bad writing, reset buttons, and time travel without thoroughly jading the fans. Even Star Trek fans.

Brannon Braga = Bad.
Rick Berman = Bad (and then some).
Manny Coto = Good.

hippietrekx
2005-Jul-07, 06:00 PM
First of all they need to tie up B&B, throw them into a sack and hit them with large concrete blocks untill they promise never to step onto a studio, direct/produce, or even look at a scripts again. Without a doubt they are the #1 and #2 reasons for the failure of Star Trek. Want proof? Look at the episode they have produced/directed and written vs those by the other trek directors. Massive difference.

Exactly. You can't have a solid seven years (three under ENT and what, four(?) under VOY) of Berman's obsession with bad writing, reset buttons, and time travel without thoroughly jading the fans. Even Star Trek fans.

Brannon Braga = Bad.
Rick Berman = Bad (and then some).
Manny Coto = Good.

I'm a major Star Trek fan. TNG is my favorite TV show (I praise the syndication gods). I liked time travel in Trek-verse when it was used with great caution and in drastic situations {and maybe once or twice in seven years}. Since Bergman became the un-official king of Trek time travel became standard. Something so fantastic gets boring after a while.

And I really didn't like ENT. The concept was good, the characaters were good, but the way they were used... were terrible. I think I've seen parts of every episode, but not one episode fully. The writing just didn't hold me to the show. I couldn't sit through an entire episode without changing the channel or picking up a book. It just seemed like Berman borrowed all of the ideas from the other trek series and haphazardly glues them together to make a show. ENT felt like a re-run. A bad re-run, because I like re-runs...

--htx

Humphrey
2005-Jul-07, 06:16 PM
The Enterprise Coto episodes were well done and really improved the show. i enjoyed those episodes. They were well directed, and well written.

But we are getting off topic, how to save the series?

Well first of all, no more movies. Never make another movie unless the next trek series does very, very well. Frankly the Movies just cannot do as well as a good two or three parter for the real show itself. ]

Second: Let your actors act. I do not care about graphicvs, cool ship visuals, or stupid technobable. I want to see the characters being the characters. I want to see Sisko being the leader of DS9, a father, and a authority figure. I do not only want them to be breasts with a trek communicator.

third: listen to the fans. You do not write all of the episodes for the entiure span od the show right away. So if the fans in tyhe first season do not like something, re-write the dman second season scripts. Hold off on the second season untill you got it right. the fans of the show will understand.

Fourth: Do not have the show stupidly compete with other shows that are giuaranteed to take away your viewing audience. like going against the amazing Sci-fi friday night lineup. Move it to a day that is lacking in Sci-fi shows, like Tuesdays, Thursdays, or Mondays.

Fifth: Keep the budget low. You will be amamzed at how good of a show you can make with a limited budget. Spend as little money on graphics as you can, use the rest to hire great writers.

Sixth: LISTEN TO THE FANS They watch your damn show. If you ignore and anoy them they stop watching.

publiusr
2005-Jul-07, 06:19 PM
I love ships if done right. A Dyson Sphere based series would be nice.

I loved Relics.

WaxRubiks
2005-Jul-07, 06:29 PM
Are they still going to bring back Blake's7(BBC) or has the new series they were planning been abandoned?

[edit to add image from blakes7.com]
http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/8885/blakes74ky.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Gullible Jones
2005-Jul-07, 06:34 PM
Trek needs to be completely redone if it's going to be any good. Needs:

- Good, non-campy plots
It would be a good idea for plots to place much less emphasis on special effects!

- Well thought out, non-humanoid aliens

- Better main characters

- Better thought out technology
For example, the Enterprise's central computer would just be a very fast (and rather specialized) one, with no artificial intelligence; phasers would be replaced with electrical and projectile weapons; and warp drive would only work at STL speeds (a different mode of FTL travel would be needed).

In other words, it would have to become Babylon 5 minus the supernatural stuff.

Rich
2005-Jul-07, 06:50 PM
My fandom seriously drifted off as DS9 came to an end. I kind of followed Voyager, but just found Enterprise silly. It's a bit tough to do a prequel series with obviously better tech than TOS. Then all the timeline re-writing... :roll: You'd think if sci-fi writers learned anything from B5 it's that the fans like continuity... heck we even prefer it!



As for what I'd like to see in a future Trek. I'd like to skip ahead about 500-1000 years to put the current generations even farther in the past than we are to TNG. Make the setting a galaxy spanning civilization struggling with creating unity and the forces trying to tear it apart. Make the "good guys" the folks trying to forge the fragile pan-galactic "federation" for peace and freedom and the bad-guys shadowy figures attempting to sow dissent and terror for personal gain. You could even introduce a nebulous dark force from another galaxy at some point. Nasty badguys like B5's Shadows intent on grabbing power through trading favors and supported seemingly minor roleplayers in exploiting each other.

Or... turn the whole idea on its head. The bad guys are the ones attempting to forge a pan-galactic hegemony. Maybe even using the ideals of the mythical federation as the basis for their crusade. The hegemonists are perfectly willing to subvert the freedoms and independence of entire civilizations (let alone individuals) to exact their highly conformist versions of stability and "peace". The good guys are the freedom fighters striking from settlements between the stars trying to preserve individual and species based self-determination. The irony is that the "good guys" look a bit like terrorists and are put in a position to seemingly be fighting against the ideals expressed in the older series. The nebulous extra-galactic others are a moderately helpful force trying to get the independents to use less destructful and more enlightened means to fight their battles against a massive and implacable enemy (a serious concern in an age where battles may obliterate entire star systems?). The outsiders will give advice but no active help; kind of like their own Prime Directive is in effect, seriously frustrating the heroes (be great to see that rule turned around I think wherein the protagonists are the ones not getting help). If you want you can still introduce extra-galactic badguys as well. Maybe a nasty civilization that has spent millions of years conquering the local group (of galaxies).

And if you really want to make it interesting: start with the first premise that the hegemonists/federalists are the good guys fighting these terrorists and extra-galactic forces, but slowly show us how they are kind of bad and the independents are the good guys trying to preserve some modicum of species and personal individuality. You could do this through the idealistic eyes of a new recruit who witnessed heavy handed federalist tactics and maybe eventually even some hints of deliberate genocide of non-cooperative civilizations. Such a person full of patriotic fervor might eventually come to see his side as wrong and seek out contacts among the rebels. Perhaps an extra-galactic infiltrator is the one slowly training his thought process and aiding his intellectual rebirth (which he and the viewers won't know for a while). What is his reaction the first time he sees or is asked to do something he finds questionabe? What happens the next time he is asked to do something he now believes to be wrong? Will any of his former friends feel as he does? Will his attempts to find rebel contacts tip his hand to his superiors, or will suspicious rebel contacts think him a spy or plant and kill him? What happens the first time information he gives to the rebels results in someone he knows being killed? Or when a number of federal citizens die as a result of his help to the rebellion? How does he deal with the conflicting loyalties and consequences? Is he a traitor or an idealist? Good question to explore if his/her/its story line persists.

Just a broad framework of the kind of story I might like to see.

John M. Dollan
2005-Jul-07, 07:20 PM
In many ways, I'm quite sad to see what is apparently, for a while anyway, the end of the Trek universe. I can still remember sitting in our basement when I was about 7 or 8, in the great big black arm chair of my great grandmother's, pretending it was my own captain's chair. The original series influenced me quite a bit in my likes and dislikes of science fiction.

With the newer series (I still consider TNG "new"), I still thoroughly enjoyed them. Voyager really started to wear on me, though, at least as far as the writers were concerned. With the blatant tossing out of continuity, I fell into the status of simply watching the show on an episode by episode basis, without really connecting them to the greater Trek universe at large.

Enterprise, I felt, had a lot of promise. But the writing was pretty sad. I don't really think the acting was bad; the actors were pretty much limited by what the writers presented, and from what I've read, little room for even minor improvisation. Unfortunately, the episodes were simply rehashed tales from the other series. There was nothing outstanding, nothing to mark this as its own series.

A lot of people had a major problem with the introduction of Enterprise. For myself, I liked it as a nice change. but really, if you judge the show on the basis of the intro, you'r essentially ignoring the entire meat of the series. Unfortunately, the meat of the series was somewhat tainted. After all, the biggest hurdle was to make the show appear pre-TOS. How can you do that and not look just plain silly when TOS was made in the 60's? Even dials and meters looked more advanced!

In the end, it was not until the fourth season that the show began to become what it should have been all along: an introduction to the Star Trek universe, and a set up for TOS. We saw the Andorians, the Tellerites, we saw a fairly good story line involving the Vulcans (though this was more to make up for thier shoddy treatment of that species in the earlier seasons than anything that *needed* explaining in the Trek Universe). Had the show not been cancelled, we would have been able to see the Romulan War, far more exciting in my view than some new, uber-enemy like the whole bloody temporal time war thing.

So what is to become of Trek now? I had thought that movies were the way to go, but I tend to agree more with Humphrey (was that who said it?). Movies would only be a waste of time. I like the movies, but they are still little more than extra long television episodes. In my view, I would like to see some well thought out, well done mini-series, set in various points along the Trek time line, dealin with key events. It's time not to let one ship hog all of the action for a given time frame.

At any rate, I'm out of time and I have to go back to work. I had more to say, but it has pretty much been said, and people tend to skip these long posts anyway!

...John...

Gillianren
2005-Jul-07, 07:58 PM
proof of the failings of Enterprise:

I'm a huge Scott Bakula fan. loved Quantum Leap--I have all the novels, the encyclopedia, and even the soundtrack. (it would be a much better soundtrack without the 11-minute interview on side 2, but I digress.) in my personal opinion, Scott Bakula is one of the most underrated actors around.

I gave up less than half-a-dozen episodes into Enterprise, because not even Scott Bakula could make me watch. I watched about as far as the first obligatory "weird alien sex" episode, and then, I was done.

how to improve it? I have to agree--let the franchise sit for a while. don't force it. after all, how many years went by between TOS and TNG? I didn't watch DS9; I didn't watch Voyager except to MSTie it with my friend Cara. if there is demand in ten, twenty, thirty years, bring it back then. otherwise, let it cool until a new generation demands it back. I, for one, don't yet.

Humphrey
2005-Jul-07, 08:03 PM
Yes i said to not do any more movies. Frankly becuase i have yet to see a trek movie that was better than any of the episodes of the show could do, or did. I just disagree with most movies made out of tv shows. It frankly just wont work. Make it into a miniseries like they did with farscape.

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2005-Jul-07, 09:13 PM
Rich ...

Sounds like Trek Wars ...

Hmmm, It's a Thought ...

At least they left Room in the Continuity, for More Episodes of Enterprise ...

Kristophe
2005-Jul-07, 09:23 PM
Voyager lost me when they introduced the time police dudes.
Enterprise lost me when they introduced the temporal cold war.
I spat on Enterprises undug grave when I flipped past it one day and saw Borg.

If there is another ST series, I'll not watch it unless such obviously overused crutches get burned. I'm tired of "Ratings are down. Let's bring out the Borg". Seriously.

Humphrey
2005-Jul-08, 02:00 AM
LEts be frank. Television, movies, books have been around for a very, very long time. It is becomeing near impossible to think of something that is not taking off of something earlier. Cliches are fine. But at least make them somewhat unique or innovative. At least try to make us surprised at the endsing of them, or throw in some unsuspecting twists. Hell give us the same old rtired cliche we know word for word, but give us good writing and acting!.

Having a cliche is not a bad thing. Having one, and using it instead of hireing a good writer, or actors is bad.

Daniel H.
2005-Jul-08, 03:07 AM
Another thing that any new Trek Series needs to avoid: Anomaly of the Week. Voyager would probably have doubled it's quality if it replaced every anomaly episode with something else.

And yeah, Enterprise was a good concept, but horribly botched by Berman and Braga. Their series ending felt like it was a slapt at all the good work done in season four. I did find amusing how before the series started the two of them were going on about this "cool idea" of the temporal cold war, but in the end, nothing particuarly interesting was done with it, and it was killed ASAP once the people that could actually write got in.

WaxRubiks
2005-Jul-08, 10:42 AM
I think that any new eppisodes of ST should at least contain some refference to lavatorial matters.

Surely there is a public loo on the enterprise and the other ships. What about those shuttles? Surely any designer would incorporate some sort of arrangement for these matters.

Well, I think that it's important. [-(

farmerjumperdon
2005-Jul-08, 01:44 PM
Rich, Sounds like life on Earth; what with smearing the distinctions between who might be the good guys and who might be the bad by flipping perspectives. Everyone is so certain, from their perspective, that they are the good guys, that such a distinction has pretty much lost any real meaning.

Staiduk
2005-Jul-08, 01:47 PM
Trek did pretty good for a moderately lousy little 3-year '70's show.
mediocre writing; mediocre acting, but it was the sense of exploration/adventure IMO that got people hooked - even if the things they were discovering looked like rejects from the Doctor Who workshops. :lol:

I personally loved TNG and DS9 - I think TNG went on one year too long myself; the last season was really stretching for plots IMO. And Avery Brooks is a superb actor when he's allowed to cut loose. The Gem Hadar (sp?) and the Founders were a brilliant 'bad guy'; I thought.

Unlike most I think, I liked Voyager. (I've got a thing for mature sexy redheads.) It had a good (to use J. Michael Straczinski's phrase) sense of wonder about it - at least in the early going. It started really going downhill when they brought in Seven - face it; she was eye candy and not much more. Certainly she wasn't hired for her formidable acting talents.
But like others have said it devolved into the 'anomaly of the week' show. They could have done so much with it - they didn't.

I watched the pilot of ENT; and that was it. You knew it wasn't going to make it on its merits right from the get-go. I mean; if they have to sink to using a nipple shot right in the bloody pilot; you know it's going to be pretty horrible from a writing persective. (Yes, Jolene Blalock's gorgeous. No; they didn't need to dress her in shrinkwrap - she's a Vulcan! And that strip-and-rub-down scene was IMO frankly gratuitous.)

IMO; Trek fans love continuity, good sensible writing, the sense of discovery and high adventure. (Which is why MY fave show was Babylon 5.)
If I was writing a new Trek series; I personally would love to turn it around and make Star Trek: Klingon. (Yes; I know that's the name of a game. :D) Trek fans love the Klingons - they're a fantastically-developed alien creation. I think turning the focus around and making them the good guys and the Federation the 'bad guys' would be a lot of fun and if properly managed a superb story arc.

Another storyline would be much similar to one already mentioned above. I forsee a far future where the Federation continued to expand, weakened, became corrupt and collapsed in a progression similar to the Roman Empire. Technology has regressed; much that was learned was lost. Many former Federation worlds have forgotten their ties or have been forgotten. The future Starfleet is little more than a deep-space police force; and a marginally corrupt one at that. The protagonist Captain throughout the course of the show learns - through meeting former colonies, finding old tech etc. about the once-noble goals of the ancient Starfleet.
Those are two ideas I've always entertained, myself. :)

ToSeek
2005-Jul-08, 02:12 PM
Trek did pretty good for a moderately lousy little 3-year '70's show.
mediocre writing; mediocre acting, but it was the sense of exploration/adventure IMO that got people hooked - even if the things they were discovering looked like rejects from the Doctor Who workshops. :lol:

Star Trek was a breakthrough series for its time (which was the 60's and not the 70's, btw). I think it's hard for someone not from that era to fully appreciate it, since so many shows since have followed the same path and gone much further than Trek ever did.

I would argue with the "mediocre writing" characterization, at least in some instances. Trek managed to get a host of science fiction writers to write for it, from Harlan Ellison to Robert Bloch to Theodore Sturgeon, and won two Hugos.


Unlike most I think, I liked Voyager. (I've got a thing for mature sexy redheads.) It had a good (to use J. Michael Straczinski's phrase) sense of wonder about it - at least in the early going. It started really going downhill when they brought in Seven - face it; she was eye candy and not much more. Certainly she wasn't hired for her formidable acting talents.
But like others have said it devolved into the 'anomaly of the week' show. They could have done so much with it - they didn't.

Voyager never lived up to its promise. From the initial billing, you would have thought that it have the Feds and the Maquis crew members at each others throats while the ship around them, far from any Federation starbase, is held together with baling wire and duct tape. But they were all happy families after about three episodes, and Voyager conveniently seemed to have an unlimited supply of shuttle pods and photon torpedoes.

WaxRubiks
2005-Jul-08, 02:17 PM
Voyager was my favorite, wasn't Deep Space Nine mainly about ears?

Staiduk
2005-Jul-08, 02:54 PM
Star Trek was a breakthrough series for its time (which was the 60's and not the 70's, btw). I think it's hard for someone not from that era to fully appreciate it, since so many shows since have followed the same path and gone much further than Trek ever did.
I would argue with the "mediocre writing" characterization, at least in some instances. Trek managed to get a host of science fiction writers to write for it, from Harlan Ellison to Robert Bloch to Theodore Sturgeon, and won two Hugos.

Very true - I was busy being born when ST came out; so I didn't actually see it until it had been gone for quite a while. No question the show was a breakthrough; and no question at all of Ellison and Sturgeon's work. However; I'd debate that their skill really showed through in the 'sense of wonder' that the show evoked;rather than in the nuts-and-bolts of writing. IOW; the strange new worlds, aliens, etc. Much of the actual dialogue (though not all, by a long shot) was pretty hokey, IMO. :)




Unlike most I think, I liked Voyager. (I've got a thing for mature sexy redheads.) It had a good (to use J. Michael Straczinski's phrase) sense of wonder about it - at least in the early going. It started really going downhill when they brought in Seven - face it; she was eye candy and not much more. Certainly she wasn't hired for her formidable acting talents.
But like others have said it devolved into the 'anomaly of the week' show. They could have done so much with it - they didn't.

Voyager never lived up to its promise. From the initial billing, you would have thought that it have the Feds and the Maquis crew members at each others throats while the ship around them, far from any Federation starbase, is held together with baling wire and duct tape. But they were all happy families after about three episodes, and Voyager conveniently seemed to have an unlimited supply of shuttle pods and photon torpedoes.
...and picked up the odd TNG character now and then to liven things up. GEEZ I hate when ST does that!
I personally would've loved to have seen the Voyager dealing with the 'year of hell' that didn't actually happen throughout the first couple of seasons. Badly damaged; many crew killed, desperately running, hiding, making deals and alliances along the way, etc. until they could pull all the pieces together. With the huge internal stress created by the Feds vs. Maquis. It'd have been great to see - and Chakotay could really have shone as the Maquis leader; following Janeway's orders because he has to; not because he wants to. And the sexual tension between himself and the Captain in the first season could really have been a great plotline as well. Too bad they had to trekkify it to death.
:)

Staiduk
2005-Jul-08, 03:03 PM
Voyager was my favorite, wasn't Deep Space Nine mainly about ears?

IMO DS9 was one of - if not the - best-written ST series. Definitely had its faults; but it dealt with some seriously powerful subjects and major plotlines. I think people were originally worried about DS9 because it could't go anywhere and shoot at things - that was IMO one of its strengths. Since it couldn't rely on yet another anomaly or enemy-that-drops-shields-to-60%-before-blowing-up; it had to rely on a more political approach. The Defiant was great; but I think it was a bit of a cheat.

It had an excellent range of characters as well. Garek, Dukhat and Quark were all brilliantly done; and kept a real undercurrent running on the show.

Personally I loved the Klingons going bad again; with Sisko trying to deal with them, the Cardassians and the Dominion.

Best line in all Star Trek: "Brag all that you want! But DON'T get between ME and the blood-wine!!" :D :D :D You know Brooks REALLY enjoyed shouting that. :D

ToSeek
2005-Jul-08, 05:49 PM
I think DS9 was the best Trek series after the original. It had some real drama and great ongoing storylines.

snowcelt
2005-Jul-08, 06:33 PM
I like the general idea Rich puts forth, a much later time when the Federation, or a successor Hegemony/Empire deals with the Galaxy. It could be much more edgy. Maybe what is needed is a series that aims at an older, more mature audience.

As others say however, wait a few years first. Maybe by then a general audience would be willing to watch Science Fiction that has not been grade one like. It would be nice if a Star Trek series was written so that it assumes that the audience is not completely scientifically brain dead. This way there would be more time spent on character development and a deeper story.

Just my 2 bits worth.

Superluminal
2005-Jul-09, 01:52 AM
The idea I had for a new Star Trek show was a follow up to TOS missions. Kirk's five year mission is over and a new crew goes out to see how things are going. Or to see how badly Kirk screwed up the galaxy. Probably wouldn't work as a full time series but a mini-series might work. I've always wondered what happened to the Gorn, the planet with the Nazis and Gangsters. What did they learn about the planet killer? What ever became of the time machine in "City on the Edge of Foreever"? And there's a few others.

gopher65
2005-Jul-09, 02:34 AM
I always thought the Romulan Empire would be a good place for a show.

Since the Romulan government fell in the last movie, there is a total power vaccum there. I would like to see something along the lines of the "Empire Trilogy" by Janny Wurts and Raymond E. Feist happen on Romulous. IE The solo surviving member of a once numberous and powerful noble house is being hunted down by her enemies. She turns the tide and eventually over the course of the series beats the crud out of them, restores order to the Empire, and yadayadayada. Maybe a bit over the top, but hey, this is Star Trek after all. Over the top is what it is all about.

I picture it as being much edgier than pervious ST series. I also like the idea of using Romulans because they hate humans, and it would be interesting to see the anti-human/Federation viewpoint LOL.

Makgraf
2005-Jul-10, 07:22 PM
I like the idea of a series of mini-series about concepts that would quickly wear thin if it had to happen for 7 seasons. Plus, because you're only with the characters for a couple of hours you can make the events that happen to them the most important of their lives.

Have one about a medical ship. Set one on a federation-made space station. Do a Section 31 one. Have one on post-war Cardassia where all the different races covertly struggle for influence (like early West Germany). Do one with the court system (maybe an ambitious prosecutor trying to bring down the New Sydney syndicates). Use the mini-series to flesh out and explore aspects of Federation life that haven't been seen before.

Or, more likely, have Rick Berman make his pet concept Star Trek: Intergalatic Pole Dancers XXX (http://www.somethingpositive.net/sp02032005.shtml).*

*Warning: Minor Foul Language

hewhocaves
2005-Jul-13, 04:33 AM
two words:

Ferengi Sitcom

gopher65
2005-Jul-13, 12:46 PM
I like the idea of a series of mini-series about concepts that would quickly wear thin if it had to happen for 7 seasons. Plus, because you're only with the characters for a couple of hours you can make the events that happen to them the most important of their lives.

Have one about a medical ship. Set one on a federation-made space station. Do a Section 31 one. Have one on post-war Cardassia where all the different races covertly struggle for influence (like early West Germany). Do one with the court system (maybe an ambitious prosecutor trying to bring down the New Sydney syndicates). Use the mini-series to flesh out and explore aspects of Federation life that haven't been seen before.

Or, more likely, have Rick Berman make his pet concept Star Trek: Intergalatic Pole Dancers XXX (http://www.somethingpositive.net/sp02032005.shtml).*

*Warning: Minor Foul Language

*nodds* I thought up something similar to that as well, and I think it would be a good idea.

Along the same lines, I thought that rather than doing a 4-10 season real series, it might be better to do a single season limited series (or would that be a mini-series?). For a single season you follow around a character or group of characters in their lives (maybe while a war is going on), and you watch what happens. Because it is only one season you could kill off pretty much anyone at any time.

Also, you could do more than one such limited-series. You do 1 season with some characters, then have a different limited-series the next year with different characters. I suppose if you wanted you could have a cameo appearence or two from characters from previous seasons, but it wouldn't be necessary.

Grizzly
2005-Jul-13, 03:24 PM
I liked DS9 except for the Ferengi. I thought that they took a race that had some serious potential and made them into a campy ridiculous farce and a running gag. Not good.

Obviously this race developed a culture and society substantially different from that of Earth, and yet they come across as bumbling idiots, and the rules of acquisitions? Give me a break.

And I got seriously sick of the "just add a funny nose or badly done ears and you have an alien" approach (Bajorans and Odo).

Other than that the story lines and arcs were quite enjoyable.

I think a series of mini-series about people and races might be extremely interesting.

You know, someone inspired to tell stories along the lines of Vance in the Star Trek universe. We could do a heck of a lot of exploring of new life and new civilizations. Vance did that with one character - in his case a ruler of a section of the galaxy - who kept turning up in unrelated stories as an anonymous observer and benefactor.

Rich
2005-Jul-13, 03:44 PM
Rich ...

Sounds like Trek Wars ...

Hmmm, It's a Thought ...

At least they left Room in the Continuity, for More Episodes of Enterprise ...

Well sort of. Some of the most interesting Trek episodes were the ones with a great deal of conflict and where the threat of violence between armed parties was present. Some folks want to see the Romulan War os something similar. And we've got the problem of not disturbing continuity.

So, put a new Trek in a period of serious conflict. Make it far enough into the future that continuity shouldn't be a problem. And spice it up by calling into question the very principles the original shows stood for. What if those principles were warped (no pun intended) into something that they originally were not? What if those principles were used for the empowerment of certain individuals or groups over others (which we know to be at odds with the original intent, but the contemporary characters may not be aware of the original intent of the Federations principles)? What if the guys we start off thinking are disruptive badguys are actually in the right? What if the people we first see as heroes/protagonists are actually bad?

I would only make it a galactic struggle because I don't see how you can get far enough into the future to make continuity not be a problem without having some serious advancement in travel technology. Surely, they will be progressing quickly enough to make a galaxy-wide civilization, or at the very least, interaction possible/probable.

NEOWatcher
2005-Jul-13, 04:23 PM
two words:

Ferengi Sitcom
=D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

gopher65
2005-Jul-13, 04:43 PM
What if the guys we start off thinking are disruptive badguys are actually in the right? What if the people we first see as heroes/protagonists are actually bad?

That's why I want a series based on the Romulans. They would view themselves as the good guys and the Federation as the bad guys. It would be great to see humans on ST as a bunch of arrogant [badwordpredeleted] instead of benevolant benifactors who are always noble and kind:P. Give me a break.

It would also be fun to see the anti-human propoganda:). ooooo in the 10th movie (ST:N) the entire Romulan central government is destroyed! So 'Romulas' could take place maybe 5 years after that, as a bunch of power hungry generals, politions, special interest groups, political parties, and maybe even religious figures attempt to reform the government to suit their purposes and goals :).

Rich
2005-Jul-13, 05:01 PM
What if the guys we start off thinking are disruptive badguys are actually in the right? What if the people we first see as heroes/protagonists are actually bad?

That's why I want a series based on the Romulans. They would view themselves as the good guys and the Federation as the bad guys. It would be great to see humans on ST as a bunch of arrogant [badwordpredeleted] instead of benevolant benifactors who are always noble and kind:P. Give me a break.

Agreed. That's why I sort of liked my future Trek scenario. Of course we are tempered to already see the humans and vulcans and their partners as the good guys. Wouldn't it be great to see a Federation beauracracy run-amok? Federalism turned into a pseudo-imperialism, with "peace" and "cooperation" enforced by the glowy end of quantum weaponry? And seemingly terrorist rebels striking back through futuristic guerilla warfare.


As a side note, maybe at this time in the future there is some sort of time-travel truce or anti-time travel convention. This might be the one thing all parties agree on, going so far as to install some kind of temporal depressors or dampeners throughout the galaxy. Devices which would prevent any kind of temporal travel into or out of any region of spacetime in which they exist. Stop those pesky time-travel episodes from cropping up, unless the characters could find a really, really compelling and interesting reason to destroy a temporal dampener and time travel (so the writers better have a darn good reason for it). Even then, they would be very limited in their options... as they couldn't travel to anytime/place in which the dampeners existed. These devices would have to be backed by laws strictly punishing any time travellers.

Now that might be interesting... seeing those attempting to influence the past or who arrive from the past/future visciously hunted by multiple parties trying to maintain "temporal integrity"... Jean Claude Van Damme could play one of the "Time Cops".... errrr..... oh..... wait..... #-o

hewhocaves
2005-Jul-13, 07:16 PM
second good idea:

Mirror Mirror Trek

A lot of my firends, after watching "In a mirror, darkly" said that THIS is what Enterprise should have been from the beginning.

Of course it would go straight to cable (HBO,maybe). Network TV would never play it (not even FOX).

The best thing about it is that, if you don't like a character, wait around a few episodes. He'll be dead soon.

As an aside, we tried to think of a sci-fi novel where the sadistic society flourishes as the prinicipal vehicle for the story. Not many out there.

John