Hey, look! He's got a five-year arc in mind. Anyone want to lay bets that it involves a bunch of folks doing one job for a year or two, then stumbling upon a much BIGGER problem from the past they have to take care of instead? You know, sorta like B5 / Crusade / LOTR / Jeremiah?
Mark <--- Likes B5. Seriously.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Fuuuuuuck that.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Hey everybody, I have the best idea in the world and it'll rock, rock, ROCK!!
Nevermind.
OK. Well... I'm all for an awesome Trek series. And it doesn't surprise me one bit that "political considerations" were involved. I've seen that before even in the tiny little places I've worked. "We know it's an awesome idea, but we can't disturb the delicate genius. We know we're wussies."
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It would almost be worth it just for the flamewars.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
I think I should be in charge of the next series Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Well, this would make the whole Battlestar Galactica original series vs. new series thing look like a fight between handicapped pigeons.
Sounds good.
I find it a bit odd though. I've always thought that the way Star Trek and Star Wars used to dominate mass science fiction was unhealthy and now that they've both essentially gone down, we have a lot more room for more interesting stuff like BSG, Firefly, SG1/SGA, and whatever comes up.
Now that its finally down, why try to prop up its corpse? Leave room for the newcomers I say.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Star Wars has not "gone down" yet.
They still have that upcoming TV series, after all. Then it'll go down.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
You seem to have escaped seeing the last two films.
Actually, snark and TV rumors aside, Star Wars really will be "down" in the sense that it will be done, at least as a visual phenomenon.
But I'm not so sure about this notion that hugely popular stories absorb attention space like this. It seems to me that one could make the claim that the opposite is true, that having a breakout hit allows smaller shows with similar themes to get their foot in the door, as it were.
How would we be able to judge which hypothesis is more accurate?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Well, look at the first Matrix movie: it paved the way for a score of abyssimally bad knock-offs. Visually, if not story-wise.
I thin there may be some fresh ideas to rise from SW/ST in that new film/TV writers will either attempt to capture what once made them fan-favorites or will do all they can to make their work not resemble SW/ST.
Who knows? Mabye we'll start to see faithful adaptations of sci-fi novels brought to the screen.
Probably not though: just look at I, Robot or the upcoming "re-imagineing" of War of The Worlds (which might be good, but definitely not Wells' book).
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
*shrug* There's probably some truth in both viewpoints. A mass market hit can spawn imitators while simultaneously supressing anything that is truly unique.
Thus are we reminded what an egotistical asshole JMS is.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
Adding the Harlan Ellison factor into this only highlights the irony further.
Ellison wrote TOS: "City on the Edge of Forever." Roddenberry made, in Ellison's opinion, signifigant changes to the script because Ellison had a drug dealer among the Enterprise crew and that went against Roddenberry's vision of the future.
Roddenberry may have wanted to explore "The Human Condition," but he didn't want to use humans in that metaphoric exploration. So much better to have the AOTW be the racist or dealer.
Roddenberry felt by the 23rd century humanity would have evolved beyond the base, animalistic nature they exhibit today.
Ellison was never too favorable toward Roddenberry or Star Trek after that.
Flash forward 30 years and Ellison is buddy-buddy with JMS because JMS IS willing to use humans to explore "The Human Condition." Ellison was a consultant on B--5 and even appeared on an episode.
Now JMS is saying that he's the man that can best pick up on Roddenberry's original vision?
That's rich.
Now, I'll admit that JMS would do a great job and I've said that Star Trek needs to follow his example in telling a good story.
Still, don't try to feed us a line. Tell us how it really is. Trek is a major franchise and JMS wants to try his and at that phenomenal franchise.
It's got nothing to do with being true to Roddenberry's vision.
Heck, even Ellison cashed in on Trek's success. He released his original TOS script for "City on the Edge of Forever" in a book that also detailed his dealings with Trek at that time. He had to have been counting on the number of Trek fans wanting to buy that book.
Guess everyone's a little ironic.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Thus are we reminded what an egotistical asshole JMS is.
I wouldn't go that far. He's certainly a pain in the arse, there's no two ways about that, but then I've heard that said of Roddenberry and Lucas too. If the man was a push-over would he have been able to maintain control over B5 for the full 5 years? The thing is that in my eyes, disqualifies him from being an egotist is that from what I've read/seen/heard in his own words leads me to think that he knows this about himself (who do you think he based Garibaldi on?) and seams to have a sense of humour about it. To my mind, while he's not always the most diplomatic of people, at least you know where you stand with him and he's never come off as being dishonest or phoney, which is a rare thing, especially in show business. As for his idea to reboot Trek, I'd be interested to see what he has in mind, it certainly can't be much worse than the majority of Voyager & Enterprise and (if I'm really cruel,) to a certain extent DS9 aswell. However from his last post it looks like trek is on a hiatus for at least two years anyway, it's all rather moot.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I've never got that argument. "Hey, I'm a bitch but at least I know it, which makes everything okay." Surely it makes him worse, since he acknowledges that he's a twat but doesn't try to change.
And as to him being like Garibalidi, I swear that if "addictive personality" was written any more times at The Lurker's Guide the universe would explode.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I suppose I have to be sympathetic, since I'm an unbairable git myself. Personality is something most people are stuck with and it's probably one of the hardest things about yourself to change.
As for Garibalidi, I never saw him as having an "addictive personality". To me he was always an insufferable, obsessive compulsive, pain in the arse. I live in squaddie central so I see that kind of person all the time. One of my old bosses was a WO2 and I swear he was so much like Garibalidi it was scary.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
So Jason would be the equivalent of Londo, right?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
As much as I am bitterly disappointed over Trek's untimely hibernation and long to see it sprout up again, I do not want to see a "reboot" of the franchise. I want something set in the same continuity with all the previous series that serves to further tie them together. The main attraction of Star Trek, to me, is the wonderfully detailed uiverse that is both diverse and remarkably consistent. There's so much ground to cover. Even based soley on references from previous series, there's a wealth of settings and story opportunities to explore. I couldn't abide seeing it all chucked away in favor of some "re-imagining."
-MMoM Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist II: So Jason would be the equivalent of Londo, right?
I'm closer to Lando than Londo. Plus, I have my cool, refreshing Colt 45 malt liquor.
MMoM, I agree completely: it's far better to move forward and keep all that's gone before than have some ass "re-imagine" anything.
I'd rather see some new talent brought into Trek than have them use "fan-favorite" writers that will just make Trek follow their own formula of repitition.
They should go to the sci-fi writing community for stories instead of relying on the relativly stale TV scripts they'll get from people already in the TV/sci-fi field.
Ask guys like Dan Simmons and Greg Bear (Hugo and Nebula award winners) for ideas and then let writers like S.D. Perry (who does a great job on the DS9 books) work with the ideas to keep them within Trek's universe and continuity.
They should avoid any writer/producer with a "vision" of how every bit of dialogue should go. That only leads to very stale dialogue and characters (as it becomes obvious that several characters are all really the same writer expressing himself over dozens of episiodes).
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
(Firefly)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
(Farcsape)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I don't even follow.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Its quite simple really. His original post said that Star Trek shouldn't be run by just one person with a vision. Having one person with vision like JMS would detract from Star Trek which is a clear example of a show that didn't have one creator with a vision. You countered with Firefly as an example of a show that is focused on one person with a vision (Whedon). He countered with a mispelling of Farscape which from context, I presume was run by committee and was pretty good.
Yep.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Basically, yes. (though really, Farscape was also not really run by comittee: it was not 100% dominated by one guy)
Even if you went with "one man's vision", it should be someone with more diversity than JMS (and frankly, a better track record).
A solid team of writers and cast that agree to stay with the show for a multi-season arc would be nice (so we're not left hanging when some writer or actor wants more money).
Posted by Doctor Jonas (Member # 481) on :
Ah, by the way, you've been talking for nothing. JMS took his proposal back, because he 'discovered' that Paramount doesn't want any Trek series until 2007 approx, and he'll be booked for another project then. Owww.
Space King Fu I, or Space King Fu II?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
You might be disappointed to learn that, while I know of Fark, my knowledge of its meme complex is limited.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
I should remind myself to avoid using sarcasm on Flare.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Zuh?
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Zuh?
Z'ha'dum
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
If you go there, you will die?
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
No, that's the Taco Bell.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Great. Now I get to spend the weekend pursued relentlessly by this image of Kosh saying "Yo Quiero Taco Bell!"
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
It's sacrilicious.
Posted by Krenim (Member # 22) on :
*Morden speak*
What do you want... on your burger?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
HOw would the stoned customers at the local 24hr Taco Bell react to a Shadow running the drive-through.
Hmm...they'd probably just pass it off as bad X.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
That idea is made even stranger by the fact that I've just watched Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
WAnt a baaaad X trip? Watch Super Milk Chan on cartoon Network.
Freaks me out without drugs.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Re: JMS (who do you think he based Garibaldi on?)
JMS is/was an alcoholic, who was kidnapped and turned in his friend and work colleague?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Sounds about right.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
And the award for two dimensional thinking goes to...*drum roll* AndrewR! You got one minute to thank your publicist and the nice lady that taught you not to wipe your arse sideways last week before the chorus line pushes you off stage.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Err, it was a joke - you too may have been joking - but I may have missed it - how American of me.
I'd like to thank the chair I was sitting in for being so stable and comfortable all night, I'd like to thank the stairs that lead up to the podium for being even and not too many. I'd like to thank this statuette for being such an odd shape. I'd also like to especially thank this microphone for being too low, so I can pretentiously lean down to talk into it. Lastly I'd like to thank the orchestra that is cutting me off for speaking for too long. Thankyou. Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Wait.
Austrailia has the internet now?
Posted by Curzon Dax (Member # 1481) on :
Hey if he wants to do a much gittier series I say more power to him. I agree that in some aspects Trek is too G rated. I think Trek has always needed the intrigue that Bab-5. Just as long as Wesley Crusher does not show up as a Sec31 operative. Yuk!
:{)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Yes, I bet JMS would create a Star Trek that was quite git-filled indeed.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Worf's already a bit of a git though. And, er, Damar.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)