If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Fifty-three reasons why we need a new Star Trek TV show. Make it so   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 142
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

5095 clicks; posted to Geek » on 18 Apr 2012 at 10:14 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



142 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-18 08:45:53 PM
No

Let it die already

I love Trek, but let it die on a high note instead of watering down good memories. Its like those bands who have reunions that suck the living life out of their old good shiat.
 
2012-04-18 08:54:19 PM

cman: I love Trek, but let it die on a high note instead of watering down good memories. Its like those bands who have reunions that suck the living life out of their old good shiat.


You think it finished on a high note?
 
2012-04-18 09:07:13 PM
I didn't bother reading any of that but yes, we need another Trek series. And yes, it should be a continuation of DS9. Flame on.
 
2012-04-18 09:12:00 PM
Piss off subby.


.

.


Sorry, that was a little harsh. *ahem* I find your opinion on this matter is totally without merit.
 
2012-04-18 09:12:38 PM
There is a serious lack of sci-fi on TV right now, it seems, especially space-related sci-fi.
 
2012-04-18 09:12:52 PM
The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.
 
2012-04-18 09:15:03 PM
Get creative and have the TV show set 500 years in the future or the past.

Fuh? Star Trek: Middle Ages?
 
2012-04-18 09:21:31 PM

Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.


There are some gritty periods in Star Trek, the Earth-Romulan war Enterprise should've been about comes to mind...but anything earlier in the timeline than Voyager has to deal with canon, which in Star Trek...well....sucks.

Of course if you decided to do another TNG, and go a hundred years later than anything we've seen the technology would make them damn near gods.
 
2012-04-18 09:21:43 PM

Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.


DS9 wasn't gritty enough?
 
2012-04-18 09:23:04 PM

Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.


I think you're confusing "the" problem with "your" problem.
 
2012-04-18 09:24:05 PM

Mugato: Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.

DS9 wasn't gritty enough?


DS9 was still extremely utopian about humanity. Most of its darkness came from clashes between humans and other species, not so much making humanity as a whole more evil.
 
2012-04-18 09:28:22 PM
54 reasons. There were two #8s

Thats how interesting the actual content was that was all I noticed
 
2012-04-18 09:42:24 PM

mojofinger: the Earth-Romulan war Enterprise should've been about comes to mind


I think that because everyone expected that just made the show suck even more in comparison.
 
2012-04-18 09:42:42 PM
Yeah, I got about halfway through that ... *sigh* ... "list" before I just gave up. This guy is a moron.

And for the record, I don't know what movie J.J. Abrams made, but that was NOT Star Trek!
 
2012-04-18 09:43:17 PM

DamnYankees: Mugato: Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.

DS9 wasn't gritty enough?

DS9 was still extremely utopian about humanity. Most of its darkness came from clashes between humans and other species, not so much making humanity as a whole more evil.


I dunno, DS9 had humans rebelling against the Federation, taking bribes and the main character doing some pretty shady shiat to get an opposing force to join a war against another opposing force. And I don't want to talk about what Chief O'Brien and Dr. Bashir were doing in that homosuite.
 
2012-04-18 09:45:09 PM

HawgWild: And for the record, I don't know what movie J.J. Abrams made, but that was NOT Star Trek!


You're so cool.

Mugato: I dunno, DS9 had humans rebelling against the Federation, taking bribes and the main character doing some pretty shady shiat to get an opposing force to join a war against another opposing force. And I don't want to talk about what Chief O'Brien and Dr. Bashir were doing in that homosuite.


Yeah, but the other shows had stuff like this as well. USS Pegasus, anyone?
 
2012-04-18 09:48:28 PM

DamnYankees: HawgWild: And for the record, I don't know what movie J.J. Abrams made, but that was NOT Star Trek!

You're so cool.


I'm sorry! That movie just sucked ...
 
2012-04-18 09:53:49 PM

HawgWild: DamnYankees: HawgWild: And for the record, I don't know what movie J.J. Abrams made, but that was NOT Star Trek!

You're so cool.

I'm sorry! That movie just sucked ...


Sure it did. Sure.
 
2012-04-18 09:58:46 PM

DamnYankees: HawgWild: DamnYankees: HawgWild: And for the record, I don't know what movie J.J. Abrams made, but that was NOT Star Trek!

You're so cool.

I'm sorry! That movie just sucked ...

Sure it did. Sure.


You're not gonna troll me, man.
 
2012-04-18 10:05:01 PM

itsdan: cman: I love Trek, but let it die on a high note instead of watering down good memories. Its like those bands who have reunions that suck the living life out of their old good shiat.

You think it finished on a high note?


Not at all. I just don't want to see it finish on a lower note
 
2012-04-18 10:20:01 PM

Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.


That's my main beef with Star Trek - completely unrealistic future. The real Enterprise would have a logo of Coca Cola on the side of it.
 
2012-04-18 10:20:42 PM
Voyager was the high note for Star Trek. DS9 was boring.
 
2012-04-18 10:25:40 PM
Eh, I'd rather have more stargate: voyager.
 
2012-04-18 10:26:00 PM
I laughed at #33: Snakes on the Starship!"

/but #25: Vulcan-on-Vulcan sex scene sounds interesting........
 
2012-04-18 10:27:28 PM

DamnYankees: Get creative and have the TV show set 500 years in the future or the past.

Fuh? Star Trek: Middle Ages?


You realise the original concept for Andromeda was Star Trek: Fall of the
Federation right? She's a Federation warship. If they'd of let him keep that in it would of been a much better show than it became.
 
2012-04-18 10:31:52 PM

Ambivalence: The problem with Star Trek is that it's too utopian. It needs to be grittier.


No it doesn't. It needs to be more realistic, with better Characterisation. This is not 'gritty' or 'dark'. The only thing that should be 'dark' and 'gritty' is the god damn Batman. And, I'm looking at you Stargate: Universe, the opening scene of an episode should not be a gratuitous sex scene simply because you want to be 'edgy'. If you're cast can't act the parts you've written during rehearsals then faking replace them.

DS9 made a good stab at this but Voyager shat all over it from geostationary orbit.
 
2012-04-18 10:32:50 PM

DamnYankees: DS9 was still extremely utopian about humanity. Most of its darkness came from clashes between humans and other species, not so much making humanity as a whole more evil.


What about section 31? They were commit genocide in the name of the federation and earth. That's not super happy fun times.
 
2012-04-18 10:35:02 PM

DamnYankees:
Yeah, but the other shows had stuff like this as well. USS Pegasus, anyone?


which, by rights, should of been High Octane Nightmare Fuel for the Federation but was neither it or the repocussions for wilfully violating the treaty were ever explored. Next week everything was A-OK.

I want to see what else the Eqinox got up to, Yarrr!
 
2012-04-18 10:36:24 PM
Star Trek has been on a downward trajectory since TNG, and it plummeted like a paralyzed falcon with Enterprise

/let it go
//I love it still, but you have to move on
 
2012-04-18 10:38:07 PM

Bootysama:

What about section 31? They were commit genocide in the name of the federation and earth. That's not super happy fun times.


A drop of HONF is still only a drop of HONF, they were never really fleshed out And used. We saw them being taken out for a test drive but nothing else.
 
2012-04-18 10:38:40 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Star Trek has been on a downward trajectory since TNG, and it plummeted like a paralyzed falcon with Enterprise

/let it go
//I love it still, but you have to move on


Enterprise was far better than Voyager, IMO.
 
2012-04-18 10:38:41 PM
Maybe not another Trek, but the writer does have a valid point about there being no TV shows set in space write now. That's a travesty.

Says a lot about the national psyche, I think. We've lost our vision of the future.
 
2012-04-18 10:38:42 PM
FTA: Get creative and have the TV show set 500 years in the future or the past.

I'm not sure "Star Trek: Horse and Buggies" would really work.
 
2012-04-18 10:40:11 PM

Bhruic: FTA: Get creative and have the TV show set 500 years in the future or the past.

I'm not sure "Star Trek: Horse and Buggies" would really work.


It'd be like that Oregon Trail video game ...
 
2012-04-18 10:41:42 PM

Mugato: I didn't bother reading any of that but yes, we need another Trek series. And yes, it should be a continuation of DS9. Flame on.


Agree. It should take place 5 or so years after the Dominion War ended. The Federation is rebuilding, the Cardassians are decimated, the Klingons are in very bad shape themselves, and the Romulans return to isolationism. All the old dogs are focused on their own problems and there is a void in the galaxy for new powers to rise. Starfleet has largely recovered from the war and they launch a new flagship to explore the areas that were formerly off limits because of the Romulans/Klingons, encountering new enemies and allies along the way.
 
2012-04-18 10:42:13 PM
Reason 54 (Or 55, since there are two 8's as previously pointed out.): Mackenzie Calhoun.
 
2012-04-18 10:44:29 PM

Bhruic: FTA: Get creative and have the TV show set 500 years in the future or the past.

I'm not sure "Star Trek: Horse and Buggies" would really work.


You take that back or I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you.
 
2012-04-18 10:44:40 PM
You know Star Trek doesn't have to be about Starfleet. Just saying.
 
2012-04-18 10:46:44 PM
I'd like a Star Trek MMO. Ok, let me rephrase that. I'd like a DECENT Star Trek MMO, voice acted, dynamic content, non-violent solutions possible, exploration mini-games where what you discover actually makes a difference.

Not some shiatfest grind, WoW clone that was pushed out the door half cooked with half it's insides hanging out... Or In other words, not a Cryptic made MMO.
 
2012-04-18 10:47:46 PM
53. More slutty cosplay outfits
 
2012-04-18 10:49:04 PM

Evil Kirk vs Bad Ash: You know Star Trek doesn't have to be about Starfleet. Just saying.


Doesn't have to be just about a single Ship either. Babylon 5 did quite well in being mobile and following other ships around for a bit, despite Babylon 5 itself being a rather static space station.
 
2012-04-18 10:53:33 PM
I've always liked the idea of a ST anthology show. It doesn't have to be about anything specific and it could jump around to different time periods. It could get away with exploring the histories of all the major political powers of the show.
 
2012-04-18 10:53:52 PM

Vaneshi: Doesn't have to be just about a single Ship either. Babylon 5 did quite well in being mobile and following other ships around for a bit, despite Babylon 5 itself being a rather static space station.


Neelix trek!
 
2012-04-18 11:01:12 PM
img848.imageshack.us

See that, Paramount? That's the REAL reason you're going to make a new Star Trek series. We all know it.
 
2012-04-18 11:02:43 PM

Shaggy_C: Vaneshi: Doesn't have to be just about a single Ship either. Babylon 5 did quite well in being mobile and following other ships around for a bit, despite Babylon 5 itself being a rather static space station.

Neelix trek!


Sounds good to me. Sole survivor of several rather nasty events, sneaky bugger and a dab hand with machines as he kept his battered freighter flying.
 
2012-04-18 11:05:39 PM
DS9 gave the writers a chance to take a stab at the politics in the galaxy--better than TNG ever really got to do. Plus, underboob.
Never underestimate the fan service with alien gals in costumes.

And then they wanted to Mix it up with Enterprise--which for all the critics pans, I liked a lot. Not just for Topol and Hisho in the decon chamber either, though again, blatant fan service can't be ignored.

For the folks who found DS9 boring, it was more than monster/alien horde/cosmic disaster of the week. Voyager got boring very fast, but that was less about the situations, than characters who bored me. Just hard to connect with any of them--well, that and the "Oh Noes we are stranded!" bit got old, fast. Same as Stargate: Universe.

An Academy show would have problems with any staying power. Only so many times you can justify cadets being involved in big events.

The franchise needs a boot. Not necessarily a reboot, but a new crew, a new mission, and new ground to cover. Federation intelligence maybe, playing spy games with the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians and more, and throw in some of the Time Cold War to boot.

A Trek related spy show Folks could have some fun with.
 
2012-04-18 11:05:54 PM
It doesn't have to be ST: anything. Just a good space based SF series would be great.

/firefly anyone?
 
2012-04-18 11:06:00 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Star Trek has been on a downward trajectory since TNG, and it plummeted like a paralyzed falcon with Enterprise

/let it go
//I love it still, but you have to move on


This so much this. TNG was the last Trek to really embody Roddenberry's vision of the Trek Universe. I liked Voyager simply because they were actually exploring a lot more rather than playing diplomat, but the end of the series was ... such a damn cop out. I was really pissed off after it...

DS9 and Enterprise were not good. I keep on hearing about how DS9 was gritty and somehow more intense but in reality it's one of the only ones that completely abandons the formula and not in a good way. Odo, Quark, and Bashir and every Benjamin episode was what killed that show for me.

I just don't know if it's possible to recapture the feel of the Original and TNG (which were the most popular for a reason), if it was really good casting and good writers...maybe, but best thing might be to just let it die, rather than risk a reboot! *Shudder*
 
2012-04-18 11:06:47 PM

Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: I've always liked the idea of a ST anthology show. It doesn't have to be about anything specific and it could jump around to different time periods. It could get away with exploring the histories of all the major political powers of the show.


Actually... Some sort of website you could go to with a timeline of events, scroll through and it shows you the details, bit of fluff overview stuff. Click a button and the relevant show (TOS, TNG, DS9, etc) starts streaming. More shows commissioned to add to the timeline and such, maybe even throw in the movies as well.
 
2012-04-18 11:13:44 PM
Eh, maybe if they had actual sci fi writers, and a scientist and maybe an engineer or two to run plot devices by.

They had a terrible concept of what evolution actually is, had a few basic physics fails (unknown how many not-so-basic physics fails) that I recall.
 
Displayed 50 of 142 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report