The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
This is a thread to discuss what a lot of people are calling for - a break from Star Trek for a few years. Majel Barrett herself believes that while the franchise shoudl continue, a few years without Trek would help revive the waning fortunes of the whole enterprise (no pun intended).
The fact is, Trek and its current setting of the 2370s and the creative staff behind it have long since gotten stale. It no longer reflects the world it is made in. DS9 may have been a more realistic view of people's interactions but as gritty, hard-edged TV it falls far short of Homicide or even NYPD Blue. Voyager is a step backwards, hastily abandoning the element of conflict inherent in the mixed-crews scenario almost fromt he word go.
So, imagine the world in a few more years. B5 is a fading memory, the X-Files are a movie franchise along with maybe Xena/Hercules and Buffy. The rush to bring out any sort of SF show has faded. Then would be a good time to bring out a Star Trek not rooted in the 1980s. The present staff would help start it off, but as with Fontana, Justman et al they would soon fall by the wayside. Trek for a new Millenium.
Can anyone come up with rational arguments why this shouldn't be? And please spare us the "any Trek is good Trek" spiel - it's quite obvious from the continuous Voyager-bashing that no-one really believes this. And more than anything it's time to grow up - it is possible to live a life where you're not getting at least 26 episodes of new Star Trek every year. Far sooner to take a break now and return refreshed than see one more misguided, ill-bred Trek spinoff made by people whose ultimate interest lies in protecting their cosy jobs at Paramount-Viacom.
posted
I would like to see Voyager finish a seven year run. It would hopefully improve as it went, rather then drop back into the quentionable quality of the second and third seasons. I would kind of like to see one more TNG movie, but If it were going to be of the quality of the last two, then forget it. A five to ten year hiatus would be good for the franchise. I'm not fond of the word franchise in regards to trek, but that is what it has become, and the franchise needs a break, and so do we. If "Flight Academy" is more then just a rumor, well, I hope that don't happen.
Maybe JMS could talk someone into doing a cheap "Crusade" movie. Say ten or twenty million dollar budget.
------------------ WHO ARE YOU
[This message has been edited by Kosh (edited July 06, 1999).]
posted
Well I really don't like Trek any more, but a few years rest might be good for everyone involved.
Btw on a Crusade/B5 movie jms stated that it wouldn't happen for lest a couple of years, until the Star Wars stuff was over . Also He said it would likely cost around 35 million bucks (which is pretty cheap for a movie).
posted
Oh boy, a Crusade movie. Maybe they can show it as a double feature with the Forever Knight movie.
But in all seriousness, I can see what our First One is saying. From an objective point of view, I agree. While I think there is a lot of potential in both the current time period of Trek and in the current production staff, a rest would be still be helpful.
However, I've come to the realization this summer that Star Trek is basically the only thing left that holds my interest on television. Oh, there are plenty of other shows that I'll watch, I suppose, but none that I will set out purposefully to see. Maybe MST3K, but that won't be on next season. So for purely selfish reasons I'd like to see a new incarnation sooner rather than later. But those are hardly good enough reasons to actually do it.
The only "rational" argument I can think of is that just because TOS survived for decades doesn't mean our newer shows will. Not because of any difference in quality, but a difference in the fans. There's just so much else out there. People don't feel the need to become attached to a series. But that's a question for those research types to answer.
------------------ "And give me back my evil heart so I can see you as you are." -- John Linnell
posted
I do agree that some kind of break is needed, if better material can't be produced. I also see many possibilities that could happen if Trek has a break or not. If the rumors about "Flight Acadamy" are true, they should forget that idea and have a break, 3-5 years. If they are able to come up with something that will be more generally appealing than they should continue. The only problem is, the audience that watches Trek at this point may not wait a few years for them to take a break and put out a new series, they may move on to other stuff. My question is how many of you are going to keep an interest going for 3-5 years, while no new material is being produced or created? The complete absence of new material could hurt Star Trek more than help it.
------------------ "Chocolate is a serious thing!"-Counselor Troi
posted
I think Voyager should finish it's run, then they should make one more movie, involving characters from at least two of the three modern series, to would wrap up loose ends: Bajor joining the Federation; relations between the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, etc. Sort of like ST6. Give the main characters one last adventure together, maybe kill a few, let them change the galaxy one last time, then sign off. Take a break for four or five years, then give us a new series in a slightly different time. And find someone who shared Gene's view of the future. To bad Majel is so busy, but maybe she won't be in the not-so-distant future...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The next movie is scheduled for 2001. That's what I heard. Voyager also ends that year. They should end Voyager, have the movie (which can be the Next Generation's crew's final change of the galaxy) and have a resting period of a few years. Paramount could save up its money in the few years and bring back the Next Generation crew. It could seem like the movie was the end, bring them back with all the money Paramount has saved and the show might just get the ratings it did before The Next Generation ended. This does sort of seem unlikely, but you can hope.
Registered: Apr 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
DS9 was also quite literally the only thing i watched on tv habitually...and even that i had trouble making sure i caught it. *cries* i hope they play reruns on the stations i get at school. :P
------------------ "Fear attracts the fearful" ([[[[[[*]}�������������������������
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
Oh, I think the interest will remain. In 5 years' time the sheer excitement a Trek revival would cause would make it worthwhile.
And that's the problem. The interest is there now, and as long as they can exploit it they will. They'll run it into the ground, beyond any hope of recovery, but then that's preferable to them because in 5 years they'll all have moved on and a new Trek series won't benefit them personally - look at how all the old hands (Roddenberry, Justman, Fontana, the guy who did TOS and early TNG uniforms, even Harve Bennett) were out after doing all the work that led to the interest in new Trek series.
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
Exactly. It's the difference between:
1. An audience that can't imagine life without new Trek but suspects - in fact KNOWS - that whatever TPTB come up with will make Voyager look good. 2. An audience that has gotten sick of reruns, remembers those late-nineties shows with fondness, and would like to see some new Trek after a five year absence.
posted
I agree that a break is needed. This is what I would like to see, in order:
1. Voyager go on to finish its seventh season. 2. Star Trek leaves TV for a while. Meanwhile, a TNG movie, hopefully showing post-Dominion War events. 3. After a few years, Star Trek returns to TV, with the awful "Flight Academy" idea having been banished long ago.
------------------ Darlene: I read a lot of science fiction. Herbert: Bless you, my child. Kay: The world needs more people like you.
posted
Firstly, why should Voyager even get seven seasons when DS9 was only supposed to have six, and secondly, what's this "Flight Academy" that no-one seems to like?
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ "I could never sleep my way to the top, 'cause my alarm clock always wakes me right up." - TMBG
posted
I'd like to see Voyager go for seven years, with at least one full season in the Alpha Quadrant. There are many loose ends the Dominion War episodes didn't resolve, and I'd like to see Voyager return to a battered Federation, with Starfleet stretched to the limit. A Federation where the euphoria of winning the war has worn off, and now people are turning their thoughts to rebuilding.
After that, it's down to movies. It doesn't look like the crew of the Big-E is willing to do one beyond the next movie, so I guess that would be it. I however do not want to see some epic action packed movie, with the Enterprise, Voyager, and Defiant blasting their way from one side of the Federation to the next. I'd like to see a movie where the crew does something that they feel really good about (Saving some small race or something like that, you know, the usual) and the last line of the movie would be Picard saying "Engage." End on a positive note, and leave the fans thinking that the series may be over, but the characters are still out there, boldly going. A DS9 movie is probably not going to happen, and Voyager doesn't look to good either.
As for a new series, a break is definately needed. I remember back during the pre-DS9 days how everyone seemed to like the Next Generation. My grandfather liked it, my six year old cousin liked it. It appealed to everyone. DS9 didn't have that, Voyager certainly doesn't. We need a break, to allow the people to start wondering, and to start talking, and start imagining again. Do you all remember the barrage of toys that the Next Generation spawned, with commercials for them showing lots of fun scenes created with action figures and starship toys? I do! And I never saw one for DS9 or Voyager. And that's the key. The Next Generation had broad appeal, and if Trek is going to survive, the next series needs that, too.
Oh, and that Flight Acadamy idea? I hate it. I wouldn't watch it. It would be an action show, with all of that standard "Coming of Age" shit like dating and loosing virginity. It wouldn't be Trek. I'm afraid however that it may be true. Rick Berman, when asked about the next series, mentioned that he doubted we'd seen the last of all of the DS9 characters, right? Well...(Warning, DS9 spoiler appoaching...) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Perhaps he was refering to Professor O'Brien?
------------------ Josh: I think they're getting to know each other a bit too well, if you catch my drift. Me: Oh, I agree. I think they're spending too much time together, that is of course, if you catch my drift. Asher: I think he's *ucking her, and he's cheating on his wife, and he's risking his marriage, and if his wife finds out about it she'll leave him and take their son, and his life will be ruined. If you catch my drift...
posted
Frak: Berman is making some noises about doing a Pilot/series with a younger crew. Possible based at the academy. It was likened to Top Gun. I liked the movie, but it's not trek.
. Also He said it would likely cost around 35 million bucks (which is pretty cheap for a movie). 
Printer-friendly view of this topic
