This is topic Are YOU looking forward to the new Trek? in forum General Trek at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/2050.html

Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
 
Everyone is talking about what the last episode of Voyager is, next series is, and next moive is but in reality are YOU looking forward to these?

I am personally looking forward to the last episode of Voyager and the next series, I'm not exactly looking forward to the next movies because its going to be a long time before we actually see any movie pics, trailers or even the movie itself so...

Also somewhere along the line this might turn into a Voyager bash thing so even though I support that Trek is goingdown hill (in my opinion) if you have a negative opinion about VOY please keep it to yourself for the sake of the topic and Voyager fans. Just post a new topic about it just not in this one.

------------------
Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!

-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11



 


Posted by Soontir_Fel on :
 
Yes and no. Yes for ST:X since I've always liked TNG. No for Series V because Star Trek has been overused the past few years. Let it take a rest for a decade or so.

------------------
"Asteroids do not concern me, Admrial. I want that ship, not excuses."

-Lord Darth Vader (Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back)



 


Posted by USS Vanguard (Member # 130) on :
 
no

------------------
Signatures are for losers


 


Posted by Teelie (Member # 280) on :
 
Last Voyager, yes, next Trek, probably not if it'll be pre-TOS and probably shit. Already with the rumours, they are taking anything from continuty and altering it to fit their needs instead if using it.

------------------

 


Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
 
I'm looking forward to X. I'm not so sure about the next series. The more I hear about it, the less I seem to like it.
The last episode of Voyager won't be around here in Germany for a long time to come. But I'm quite curious when it finally arrives.

------------------
Kryten: Pub? - Ah yes. A meeting place where people attempt to achieve
advanced states of mental incompetence by the repeated consumption of
fermented vegetable drinks. - Red Dwarf "Timeslides"


 


Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
 
Yes to Voyager
Yes to Star Trek X
No to Series V

------------------
"Species 5618, human. Warp-capable, origin grid 325, physiology inefficient, below average cranium capacity, minimum redundant systems, limited regenerative abilities."
Ex Astris Scientia

 


Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
 
I just read the recent issue of ST:M, and the writer of X (forgot name) who also wrote Gladiator said that 'the best villians are equals to the hero' This included General Chang, Kahn, and the Borg Queen. All of these movies were probably the best of all the nine, so X might be good if he can do this the way the other 3 movies were.

------------------
Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!

-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11



 


Posted by Zor Prime on :
 
They need to break out of the current Star Trek mold. Take a look at TOS, then look at TNG. It's like night and day. Anything after TNG is just so locked into a certain way of doing things. Is it me, or does everyone walk and talk too slowly in the shows lately?
I remember seeing Dr. Crusher walk wayyy to slow from a counter to a monitor and all the dialogue was very monotonous. All TNG era is like that now. Nothing is exciting. Nothing seems to mean anything.
They need to get new writers and directors to do any new Trek. I don't expect David Lynch, but something drastic has to change to make it exciting again.
For example, in Insurrection, it was supposed to be a big deal that Captain Piccy and his boys fought the Federation (!) - it was called "Insurrection" after all. But do they even fire on thei own people? Federation ships? No. It was kept nice and safe by making their opposition non-Federation.
First Contact is the closest to making Trek exciting. Original music, not the same old kind of thing that you barely notice on the tv shows. And things seemed to matter.
Oh well..

 
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
 
However todays Trek is trying to make it a sort of war-based show thinking it will capture more viewers. No, Trek isn't about war, unless a new by Trekkish concept is used in the next movie and series, I'm afraid that Star Trek could die within a few years. I am though aware of how much the last two movies made, but there has seen a decline in ratings since the last season of TNG.

------------------
Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!

-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11



 


Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
 
i'm looking forward to trek x
but not series V

series V better have a good story line or its gonna be nap time for everyone.

becuase we know how the federation is gonna turn out
new ships would be nothing but cylinders with nacelles
boring.....
and the aliens
sheesh
vulcans and more of their witty dialouqe.

 


Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
That sounds as though it were written by Eeyore. Only sorrow and sadness. Nothing ever good happens. Ho hum.

Who says it's just going to be cylinders and nacelles? I personally would be interested in how the Star Trek art department fills out pre-TOS tech. What the hell is the bridge going to look like? Or engineering? I can't wait to see how they link it up with the TOS warp engineering system and if they explain away any of the ambiguous relations with the TNG-Voy system.

Oh, ha. I forgot to reply to the point of the thread. I am looking forward to all three.

[This message has been edited by Daniel (edited May 06, 2001).]
 


Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
F0rce: Yeah, because, as we all know, the purpose of Trek is to titillate us w/ never-before-seen ship designs and technology every week.

C'm'on... TOS didn't have any of that, and it's what caused all the other series to exist. Who cares if none of the technology is new? If nothing else, maybe we'll finally be rid of the stories where the problem is solved by inventing some sort of magical new device. (Then again, they always forget those things in a week, anyway, so maybe we'll still have it...)

------------------
"Although, from what I understand, having travelled around the Mid-west quite a bit, apparently Jesus is coming, so I guess the choice now is we should decide whether we should spit or swallow."
-Maynard James Keenan
 


Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
 
I was lying awake last night, and trying to decide what it was about TOS that I liked so much - and what was lacking in every Trek since then:

Exploration first priority "Her 5 year mission,;To seek out..."

J.L. Picatd put it best:
"Can anyone remember when we were explorers?"

I really miss that approach. Gene had us (Okay, most of you weren't born yet) sitting on the edge of our seats, wondering what the crew would discover THIS week (and what social commentary would be buried within it).

Then after 3 years, the series ended. And Trek fandom took off. I sometimes wonder if the best thing that could happen is for the new series to bomb - and Paramount gives Trek a good hiatis (10-15 years). Look at what it did for fandom last time. And after a lousy first season, we got a GREAT show - TNG - which tried (and mostly succeeded) in following in the spirit of the original.

In other words: Note to Producers: "Back to Basics!"

------------------
Faster than light - no left or right.
 


Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
 
However the concept is over 30 years old to most people. I personally don't care if a concept it made for Trek, as long as it doens't get cheesy or just plain dumb.

The whole concept of TOS was made in the 1960's and is basically dead just like the westerns. What keeps SCi-Fi such a powerful franchise is that there is space battles and scary aliens now that make us sometimes piss our pants. When you watch Sc-Fi shows or movies we expect giant battles and aliens, no peaceful alien that wants to have peace with us, that's boring. That's why Trek is like that now.

Its almost common fact what made Star Wars Episode 1 a hit was not the plot, or actors, but the special effects. If the special effects sucked, then some of use wouldn't go and most definately wouldn't go a second or a third time like some of use have. SW E1, would have bombed without the effects. Star Trek except for a select few, (ST5, ST7) had good story plots and somewhat great special effects. Now if the story was writen where it gave what we want and what the general audience whats then this movie would be great however that's unlikely as there are hardcore Trek-haters who wouldn't watch Trek because they made assumptions thinking it sucks.

------------------
Signature for sale! For a mere price of $20 per letter you get this wonderful little space to say your own things. Get it now while there's still space!

-All you base belong to infinity. -infinity11



 


Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
Have you...can anyone...is that...

No. Nevermind. Whatever. Damn, that Bruckheimer knows how to make good movies, no?

------------------
OH NO< THE OLD MAN WALKS HIS GREEN DOG THAT SHOTS PINBALLS!~!!!
--
Jeff K
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet" and nothing at all will happen.


 


Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
 
Gotta love Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon, Top Gun ...

Can't wait to see Pearl Harbor.

------------------
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
***
Card-Carrying Member of the Flare APAO
***
"I think this reason why girls don't do well on multiple choice tests goes all the way back to the Bible, all the way back to Genesis, Adam and Eve. God said, 'All right, Eve, multiple choice or multiple orgasms, what's it going to be?' We all know what was chosen" - Rush Limbaugh, Feb. 23, 1994.



 


Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
SW1 would have bombed w/o special effects because the rest of the movie wasn't very good. That's the problem w/ sci-fi these days. It's almost all made by people who want to appeal to the masses that are easily distracted by shiny objects...

Just because that's they way most sci-fi is today, doesn't mean that's the way it should be. Today's popular music is mostly shite, but that doesn't mean we should all just say "Well, that's the way music is these days. May as well just listen to it."

------------------
Lister: "Cat, what are you doing?"
Cat: "I'm courting."
Lister: "Courting who?"
Cat: "Whoever shows up!"
-Red Dwarf, "Me�"
 


Posted by Xanthi on :
 
Has anyone wondered what it's going to be like having the movies set in the 24th century and the new series back in the past?

Personally I think Star trek is about the future and what humans will be able to achieve. I think going back into the past like this goes against everything that star trek is.

I think it will also be too hard to keep up with continuity. Too much about the past has already been said in the other four series'. There are bound to be errors. And if it's one thing I can't stand it's huge continuity errors!

I say we should be going boldly forward not backwards! Down with series V!
 


Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
 
TOS was a smash hit during the time when sci fi was still new----seeing cylinders with nacelles glued on just inflames one's imagination....but the point is, is that hurdle has been crossed already
we are done with the TOS and moved way past it...to jump back into it seems like a very risky idea.

only a small part of the trek audience will actualy care what a ship looked like before starfleet was even invented...i imagine they look like babylon 5 sets and tech...ships get hit and blows up-no shields..

though personaly i do want to see the Romulan Earth war but alot of trek people now don't even know about it nor do they care---i mean-romulans-ooooh---scary---wait till they see the borg!

my assumptions that Series V will bomb is based on the my expierence on how i got involved with trek.
------ ------- ---------- -------- --------
the first episold i ever saw was "Best of Both Worlds"
wow-that action and music

that episold hooked me onto trek-i remembered the channel and the time and ended up watching every TNG episold....then DS9 came out-got hooked on the borg's re-appearence...i watched the whole series and enjoyed it...then voyager came out--somewhat a dissapointment but stuck with it cause we see borg, and occasionaly some good story lines and get a glimps of what star fleet is like after the dominion war....

of all the series, i have not watched almost a single episold of what is rumored the best series---the TOS series.
why?
crappy tech...[ignoring the special effects at the time]just the tech.
then
can't get use to Jim's acting and some of the dated story lines--him fighting bare nuckles,geting his shirt torn and scoring with the babe every week...

the whole series just seemed like a less developed barbaric version of TNG but thats becuase i fell in love with TNG first.
there are people who fell in love with VOY and had no prior trek influence and won't look at an episold of TNG--so on that note series V might work if they bring in a whole new audience.

[This message has been edited by TheF0rce (edited May 08, 2001).]
 


Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
"Episold"... Perhaps an appropriate misspelling, given the fact that they're all about making money these days, anyway...

BTW, the new series isn't set in the past. It's in the mid-twenty-second century. This is the beginning of the twenty-first. They're still a century-and-a-half in the future.

------------------
Lister: "Cat, what are you doing?"
Cat: "I'm courting."
Lister: "Courting who?"
Cat: "Whoever shows up!"
-Red Dwarf, "Me�"
 


Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
 
And who said no shields? If they have warp, then they MUST have deflectors and shields.

------------------
"A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."

-Eleanor Arroway, "Contact" by Carl Sagan
 


Posted by TheF0rce (Member # 533) on :
 
-------------------------------------------------------
BTW, the new series isn't set in the past. It's in the mid-twenty-second century. This is the beginning of the twenty-first. They're still a century-and-a-half in the future.
-------------------------------------------------------

yes yes but theres no point in comparing it to our present time set in reality
the point is the time frame in trek have already been traveled past--it makes good movies but not an entire series--they may as well by that arguement go back and let us look at World Wars III on earth and call it star trek...its still in our future.


[This message has been edited by TheF0rce (edited May 08, 2001).]
 


Posted by Xanthi on :
 
By past I meant the shows past.

I just think we are too far beyond that (pre-tos) time now.
 


Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
Why? Everyone keeps saying "Oh, no, we can't go back to Trek's past! We have to keep going forward!" But why? The beginning of the Federation isn't something we've seen before. The nearest things we've seen are Cochrane's flight (a century before) and TOS (a century after). There's a lot of space in there that hasn't been filled in.

Besides, it's more original than the "Sulu on the Excelsior" idea people kept wanting. And that was in the "past", too!

------------------
Lister: "Cat, what are you doing?"
Cat: "I'm courting."
Lister: "Courting who?"
Cat: "Whoever shows up!"
-Red Dwarf, "Me�"
 


Posted by Xanthi on :
 
Personally I was hoping the new series would continue on in the present time frame.

If that wasn't possible then perhaps even going further into the future. If that was the case there would be endless possibilities for storylines. There could be new technologies, new aliens, new abilities. Maybe it could have even involved another galaxy to a certain extent. I just think there was no limit to what they could do with a series set in the [shows] future.

While you're right in saying we really haven't seen too much about pre TOS times, in my opinion there is a certain limit to what they can do with that time frame and if they push it too far we will be left with huge continuity errors which will just ruin everything.

Well that's only my opinion of course. I don't expect everyone out there to agree. Undoubtedly there are some people who are happy with the idea of going pre-TOS.
 


Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
 
I say make a show in the future and make a episode in that future go back in time to the past. That way it makes most people happy even though it would be a time travel episode. I think setting the future at 25th century is the best option. Unless they plan on throwing every episode out made before and destroy every single Trek fact to suit there needs then go ahead. I will still watch and I won't be surprised when the ratings go down. I won't be surprised if I'm the only person watching it. Its still Star Trek though if gets out of hand then I'll stop wtaching it.

------------------
The whole concept of Survivor is that nameless adults go at each other and try to outwit each other. In reality after the first episode of the show, each one will make a least over a thousand dollars for making appearences on some talk show. The first survivor, the Gay Guy now works at E.T. as a Survivor Consultent, where he gives advice to the new survivors. Not only did he win a million dollars that he now makes twice as much as what most of us make in 5 years.

I highly doubt that hes gay, made his own son run, and walk naked around the site. It was all tactics to get him win a million dollars. Right now I bet hes fucking some girl. Jerry from the second Survivro is something because everyone talks alot about her. The whole concept of Surivivor sucks, and it should end with the second one.



 


Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
 
quote:
If that wasn't possible then perhaps even going further into the future. If that was the case there would be endless possibilities for storylines. There could be new technologies, new aliens, new abilities. Maybe it could have even involved another galaxy to a certain extent. I just think there was no limit to what they could do with a series set in the [shows] future.

No disrespect, but that's, um, horseshit.

You can make the propulsion system transwarp, warp, slipstream, infinite-improbability drive, whatever, but at the end of every episode, the starship will fly away and arrive at a new planet. Sometimes they will outrun hostile ships, and sometimes they won't.

You can give the starship photon torpedoes, quantum torpedoes, triple-fusion-megatorpedo-blasters, explosive sheep, whatever, but whenever the ship meets a hostile ship, they'll fire and damage it to the extent the story requires, and the bag guys'll fire back and the ship will shake and consoles will explode to the extent the story requires.

If the starship needs to be in a faraway space, it can be there, and whether the writers refer to this area as "beyond sector 211" or "The Delta Quadrant" or "The Andromeda Galaxy" is irrelevant. If we need to see new aliens, we will.

Name one new technology that will actually benefit storytelling and not lead to more technobabble or, worse still, technobabble-induced plot conclusions. Just One.

Up until the TNG era, new technology may indeed have opened a few new storytelling possibilites over TOS. But don't let that convince anyone that the further along the timeline we go, the more possibilities we get. Moving further into the future will, IMHO, bring absolutely no new benefits, and indeed could set a new series at a disadvantage.

------------------
"And as it is, it is cheaper than drinking."
-DT on arguing with Omega, April 30

 


Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
 
I still keep hoping they'll wise up - and do a series based ACROSS the timelines. Ghu knows they have the wardrobe. There would be something for everybody.

------------------
Faster than light - no left or right.
 


Posted by Xanthi on :
 
Well thank you for your feedback.

While you made a lot of points against what I said I don't think once did you come up with a reason why a show set in the 22nd century would be a good idea.

I'm not going to go on again about my ideas for a 'future series' I think I already did that to a certain extent. Instead why don't you tell me some of your brilliant ideas?

Just like everybody I have a different idea on what the next series should be about. I don't think anyone is right or wrong but everyone has an opinion. Star Trek means different things to different people.You don't like my ideas and I don't agree with your point of view either.

But I'm not going to sit here and insult you.

But thats only my opinion.
 




© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3