Flare Sci-Fi Forums: StarTrekEnterprise.TV

This is topic StarTrekEnterprise.TV in forum General Trek at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/555.html

Posted by Michael Dracon (Member # 4) on :

From Trektoday.com:

quote:
In June 2000, it was discovered that Paramount Pictures had registered the domains StarTrekEnterprise.com, StarTrekEnterprise.net and StarTrekEnterprise.org, just one week after the first prequel rumours appeared on the internet. Apparently Paramount didn't consider this enough, as a few months later another 'Enteprise' domain name was registered.
We were made aware that on the 24th of October, 2000, the domain name StarTrekEnterprise.TV was registered under the name of Brannon Braga, for Paramount Pictures. Together with Rick Berman, Braga is of course one of the two co-creators of the next Star Trek series.

------------------
Terry: "Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, ...."
Max: "And?"
Terry: "I forgot."
Max: "Come on, Clinton was the fun one, then came the boring one."
Terry: "They're all boring."

- Batman Beyond (aka: Batman of the Future)

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :

A) I doubt they'd register it under their own names.
B) If they're trying to put out mis-information, what not spend a hundred bucks to register domains that you'll never use...

I just don't want to believe the prequel idea...

------------------
"The sons of the Prophet were valiant and bold,
And quite unacustomed to fear.
But, of all, the most reckless, or so I am told,
Was Abdul Abubul Amir."
Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com

Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :

Who says it has to be a prequel to be Star Trek: Enterprise?

------------------
"Omega is right."
-Jeff Karrde, March 18, 2001 08:47 PM

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :

I guess that's just what I heard... I don't like the title, though, either.

Posted by Michael Dracon (Member # 4) on :

Someone mentioned a 26th century series. This, combined with the fact that they are creating a new ship, could mean we'll see the Enterprise-F or maybe even the Enterprise-G.

------------------
Terry: "Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, ...."
Max: "And?"
Terry: "I forgot."
Max: "Come on, Clinton was the fun one, then came the boring one."
Terry: "They're all boring."

- Batman Beyond (aka: Batman of the Future)

Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :

If the series is set in the future, we will most assuredly see an Enterprise with a prefix far removed from the D & E. If it's the 26th Century, we'll probably see something much farther down in the alphabet ... maybe the J or the K... if it's set in the 25th Century, it'd be more likely to see the G or the H. I doubt we'll see something as close to TNG as the F -- unless:

It's established that the Enterprise-E stayed in service for close to sixty-some years ...

It's established that the Enterprise-F has been in service for many decades already.

And I tend to agree with Meggy-san in that just because it's named Star Trek: Enterprise doesn't mean it will neccessarily be set in the pre-TOS era. On the other hand, it also doesn't mean it won't be.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. ST:E needs something to keep it fresh. If it's a post-VOY Trek, it can't be like TNG all over-again, except with a 200-member world Federation and a 1500 crew. It's gotta have something new, something to "upset the odds" as it were. Something like Andromeda has, perhaps, with the Federation struggling to recover from a major diaster ... or something.

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted)
***
"Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!"
-Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001

[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited March 22, 2001).]

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :

I'd go for the Enterprise-G, myself. I believe it was gonna be the suffix for TNG before they brought it forward a bit.

------------------
"Kif, I have made it with a woman! Inform the crew!"

- Zapp Brannigan

Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :

Indeed it was. Of course, if they do do the G, and assuming the show takes place 100 years after TNG, that would tend to imply that either the E or the F was around for a good bit. Or, of course, that the G has been around the block a few times herself.

I'd bet on the H myself -- it's two removed from the E, just as the D is two removed from the A ...

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

And Scotty returns for a sequel to "Relics"...

"NCC 1-7-0-1... No bloody A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I, or J!"

------------------
The government that seems the most unwise, oft goodness to the people best supplies. That which is meddling, touching everything, will work but ill, and disappointment bring. - The Tao Te Ching

Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :

Augh! That would be an episode in itself, with him s-l-o-w-l-y going through the alphabet!

------------------
You know, you really should keep a personal log. Why bore others needlessly?
The Gigantic Collection of Star Trek Minutiae

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :

Now I do like the idea of a Federation that is in shambles and the few ships that are left are struggling to rebuild something. That could be good. It's still leave enough time for the Federation to be rebuilt by the time of "Relativity" and would even explain why there seems to have been such a lack in tech advancement over 500 years.

------------------
"The sons of the Prophet were valiant and bold,
And quite unacustomed to fear.
But, of all, the most reckless, or so I am told,
Was Abdulah Boul Boul Ameer."
Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com

Posted by Teelie (Member # 280) on :

Or, we could see the Enterprise-AAA set waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay into the future. The plot of this series would be them going around helping other ships brokedown and in need of repair.

*rimshot*

------------------
A day without sunshine is well, like night.