posted
Actually I'd applaud The_Tom's sentiments. A show created by the common lowest denominator would pander to the common lowest denominator and that alone.
While Voyager isn't exactly a awe-inspiring show, I honestly believe if they did everything some "fans" want it would incredibly lame and menial.
To use Sidewinder's example, remember what happened when Homer designed a car on the Simpsons? Just a thought.
------------------ Stealing from one author is called plagarism. Stealing from many is called research.
posted
These ideas have merit. However, when I put the idea up, I wasn't really thinking of a show by show idea. Instead, I was thinking series. I mean, the fan doens't need to dictate the whole show, however some input could be good. Perhaps if the fans seem to enjoy a male commander versus a female commander... or perhaps they enjoy a series based on zooming around in a starship rather than a station. Just some thoughts...
And why is my signature being pointed at? I am not sure if I like that kind of pointing... I mean, it is like the best song ever (in my opinion)!
------------------ There's a lady who knows, all that glitters is gold...and she's buying a stairway to heaven. -Led Zeppelin, "Stairway to Heaven"
posted
I hope that the next Trek show will not be set on a Federation ship or station. I'm hoping (Even though it's a little bit far) that the next series will be set on a Klingon ship. The idea is that it's the life of soldiers on a Vor'Cha-Class warship. I would absolutly love that, as would many other people, I think. A title like Kligon Battle Fleet, perhaps?
------------------ Weyoun: First Omet'Iklan, can you vouch for the loyalty of your men? Omet'Iklan: We pledge our allegence to the Founders, from now until death. Weyoun: Then receive this gift from the Founders. May it keep you strong.
Remember: Obedience brings Victory, and Victory is Life!
Now, someone said that the reason DS9 was successful was continuity, and Voyager wasn't successful because it avoided continuity, right?
Now, do you honestly think that even half the people watching Trek can tell the difference between the Excelsior and the Enterprise-B? Or the Enterprise-D and D for that matter? You think they giv two hoots that Starfleet directive 4747 said something different 4 years ago?
DS9 was critically acclaimed (successful is a bit stron), because it was generally well written, had good stories,and took a few chances. Voyager tends to be slated because it has derivative storeis that have been done to death in Trek and other formats, a fair number of the characters are dull, and it rarely does something that makes you go "now THAT was a good story".
A fair number of the fans give the impression that a great episode would involve people standing around saying "It's Defiant class. It's 170m long. We did mean to foreshadow the Borg in "The Neutral Zone". Kirk did have a second five year mission after TMP. Chakotay does come from that planet seen in Wesley's final episode. Voyager cannot seperate. Blah blah blah".
What makes Star Trek good is continuity. And what makes Buffy watchable is that Sarah Michelle Gellar's attractive. Nothing else matters apart from that.
------------------ "I can't believe we're actually gonna meet Guru Lou. Everyone says he's the wisest man in the universe. He's sensitive, creative, has a great sense of humour, and he's a really smooth dancer. *giggles*" "You're confused Polly. We're not meeting Paul Newman." - Polly & Speedy; Samurai Pizza Cats
posted
Well if I had to venture a guess, and mind you, these are only guesses..
Star Trek meets Mission Impossible = Section 31 Trek Star Trek meets ER = Holo Doctor series Star Trek meets VR = Holo ship and crew Star Trek meets Dr. Who = Time Travel Trek
------------------ "We are the middle children of history man, no purpose or place. We have no great war, no great depression. Our great war is a spiritual one, our great depression is our lives."
"We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionairs, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won't, and we're slowly learning that fact, and we're very very pissed off."
"You are not your job, you're not how much money you have in the bank, you're not the car you drive, you're not the contents of your wallet, you're not your fucking khackis. You are the all singing, all dancing, crap of the world." -- Fight Club
1. A different universe such as the Mirrior Universe. However this will not work well if you want to grab more people in watching it. No will know the difference between the two because you're on the same DS9 and the same Defiant. Or even if it was different people it would take time for those who are new at watching it to het hooked.
2. The future. Star Trek series could go into the the nect century and have new ships, a new plot and perhaps a new enemy to deal with. This is what TNG made it popular besides from its great writing and such.
3. The past. Perhaps showing the formation of the Federation and the dealings with being a new fleet. This n my opinion would be neat for an episode or two but not a series.
4. 23rd cetury revisited. Perhaps going on another refit Constitution class to explore the galaxy. (To tell you the truth, I just want to see that ship in action once again)
5. Section 31 series. Hell no, Starfleet does not sneek around causing trouble like assassainations or coverups.
------------------ It is better to walk the path of the devil than to be in the path of the devil. Though it still might not be the right path.
Alpha Centauri
Usually seen somewhere in the Southern skies
Member # 338
posted
Just having a silly(?) idea for a series:
Some sort of documentary series. It will not take place on a specific starship of space station, but every episode takes place somewhere else. The series will span the entire history from 2063 to where we are now. This might be great for creating continuity, and filling in the gaps in Trek history (for example: pre- TOS era, the gap between ST6 and TNG). But I don't think that this concept will appeal to the great audience, however it might great for the die-hard Trekkers. Also, I think we've seen enough series playing on starships. Another starship-focused series might be boring.
------------------ Advertisement in the United Federation NewsPADD, SD 53675:
"Now for sale at your local dealer: Antares class vessels, as good as new! They can shapeshift! Everybody in the galaxy has one! Now for only $800!"
posted
I think Daryus has hit the nail on the head here. *pauses, and puts on a Franksbane necklace*
Although I'm certainly treading on dangerous ground here, I'd like to point out that while B5 had continuity coming out of its ass, it still, IMHO, had shallow writing and as a result didn't garner as wide an audience as DS9. At least, on this continent it didn't.
Now, back onto the topic of broad audiences.
I'll begin by reminding everyone that there is still a huge audience out there that watched and loved TNG. I can still fondly remember watching First Contact on video in my residence common room. It was at the part where the Borg were advancing through the decks of the Enterprise, pushing back the security teams, where one dude fires his phaser and the Borg adapts to it. Somebody asked what just happened, and a guy who I knew not to be a watcher of either of the newer series promptly explained at length about the Borg adapting to weapons frequencies and remodulation and all that stuff, recieving words of agreement of others in the room. TNG's huge fanbase was primarily intelligent, interested educated people who were looking for a dramatic series that was both imaginative and compelling. There's a certain snobbishness that can be found on the Internet (where one naturally finds the hardest of the hardcore fans) that TNG catered to a lower common denominator than, say, DS9 or B5, but I firmly stand by my opinion that Trek as a both a franchise and as a source of entertainment would be better off with these people watching the fifth series than just a few hardliners. I don't mean taking it to the Voyager level of populism, where kitschy action sequences and wrestling crossovers are stuck in to attract a broader audience, because both ratings and intuition tells us that these aren't bringing back the TNG legions. Voyager commonly dips out of the "smart television" bracket, and it is a myth that a television series cannot be both "smart" and popular. TNG was both, DS9 was just "smart" and Voyager was neither.
So where are the millions of fans who tuned in for All Good Things... and lined up for First Contact? Firslty, when TNG ended, this audience didn't all flock to other sci-fi shows. Like I said, these were intelligent, interested educated people who were looking for a dramatic series that was both imaginative and compelling, and sci-fi as a genre really wasn't providing this kind of a series without resorting to the continuity-steeped 'cultish' formula of, say, DS9. We can't blame DS9/Voyager's inability to garner ratings that equalled TNG on there being more scifi/fantasy series on TV because these people didn't all run and watch Xena and B5 (indeed, I imagine most of these series' viewers were being shared amongst the series, not stolen from one another.) So where did these viewers go after that fatefall spring of '93? What shows did they watch? Well, seaQuest DSV's first season had been a big hit, but the show was abandoned en masse when it became garbage in season two. Lois and Clark had a rather large audience for a while who enjoyed the smart writing and decent acting, until both of the aforementioned qualities evaporated. The X-Files, too, caught a lot of these people for a while. Today, at a guess, they're watching The Practice, The Sopranos, and even Ally McBeal (or at least were, until the latter's ratings turned to mush). And why aren't they watching Voyager? Because it, for the most part, is not imaginative nor compelling. You may ask "But Deep Space Nine was both of the above, was it not? Then why weren't they watching it?" Simply put, a show like DS9 that is so steeped in arcs and continuity is remarkably difficult to pull new viewers in. It may enthrall most of the audience that is already familiar with Jem'Hadar and Pah'Wraiths, but like it or not, an arc-show's ratings will almost certainly never rise over time, no matter how good the writing is.
At this point, I imagine many of you are screaming "Damn the ratings! If Series V is like DS9 then I'll rejoice, and not give a damn whether the general public pushes its ratings to any level." But like it or not, Trek cannot afford to field another show that will dawdle near the Nielsons cellar. Trek is already beginning to be seen as a dead horse by the TV stations that air it and by the advertisers that fund it. Not to sound paranoid or anything, but there is only so long that a franchise can go on for if it's fueled only by a cult following. (M*A*S*H, anyone?) If Series V cannot improve on or even match DS9s best ratings, after about two or three seasons it will either start disappearing from the slate of syndicated shows bought by individual television stations (assuming s5 is syndicated, right now seen as the most likely option), go down with the sinking ship called UPN once it becomes clear that it cannot save the network (if it airs on UPN), or, in perhaps the most insulting way, be cancelled by CBS (if it airs on that network).
The TNG fans aren't a bad bunch. Its time they came home, and to do that they'll need a good home to move back to. Series V, like Berman and Braga have said, has to be fresh and new but return to the same qualities that attracted the general populace, albeit the more intelligent and discrimination slice of it. Scream and whinge all you like, but another Voyager, or even another DS9, could seriously damage or destroy the cultural phenomenon we're so fond of.
------------------ "Truth about Santa Claus debunks Santa God. God evolves from Santa." -Gene Ray, http://www.timecube.com
[This message has been edited by The_Tom (edited July 23, 2000).]
posted
Tom, you left out an example that I think really illustrates what you're saying. Namely, that heavy continuity cannot be the basis for a show, and that it tends to hinder otherwise good shows when it is present. Murder One. JMS can talk about doing a five year novel, but he had nothing on this show, which took a single court case and stretched it out for an entire year. Critically praised, as I recall, but its ratings were generally poor and the case per season was dropped. The show was canceled shortly after.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
