Star Trek: Discovery

[Sildani]

Didn't her colony actively turn away from the Federation long before?

[Dynaman]

Didn't her colony actively turn away from the Federation long before?

An ST dodge at best, bad places are outside the Federation - even though all the people there are humans from the looks of things. There are other examples, The loony bin in the original series, Harry Mudd (need I say more about there being no money?), the prison planet in the original series. Gene tried to come up with a society without money or crime or (internal) war and found out that it made for BOOOORING tv.

[SuperSenpai]

> Specifically, Star Trek envisions a future Earth where war, disease, famine, and poverty have been eradicated

Too bad the show went on to have ALL of those ills pop up. And don't get telling me the "Gold Pressed Latinum" people were gambling for like crazy with was not money...

Maybe not on Earth but on colonies, that one where Tasha Yar came from was a real prize winner for example. If these things have only been fixed on Earth that is the equivalent of saying that some city on Earth TODAY doesn't have those problems, it is either ALL of humanity or just buzz words.

Well yeah, but as I said, a compelling plot requires conflict. If Star Trek was restricted to the utopian world of Federation-era Earth, the show would get boring pretty quickly. I don't see anything dishonest or insincere about having the show use characters or civilizations that depart from Roddenberry's vision for the future as a vehicle to explore the consequences of those ideas. Many episodes of Star Trek have the Enterprise crew encounter an alien civilization that is grappling with some issue that is basically just an allegorical version of a real-world issue. For example, there was one episode of TNG where Riker falls in love with an alien who comes from a genderless culture. When the character decides that she is female, she suffers all kinds of persecution and even ends up being subjected to a kind of conversion therapy. In those instances, the Enterprise crew is usually characterized as holding to Roddenberry's humanistic worldview, and critiquing the alien culture (and really, our own culture) from that perspective.

I would argue it's not unlike when a character like Superman, who is usually portrayed as deeply principled and morally grounded, is placed in a dark or cynical context. In such situations, the story itself may have a lot of darkness to it, but that backdrop serves to highlight the inherent righteousness of the main character. There's a difference between a dark Superman story, and a story with a Superman who is dark.

Edited November 4, 2015 by SuperSenpai

[Mr March]

Yeah Roddenberry's intentions for Star Trek, despite not always being perfectly delivered to screen, was always clearly a post-modern utopian society (or at least, Roddenberry's idea of utopia). This very fact was brought up by the writers who had to work on Star Trek, especially Next Generation where Roddenberry had much greater creative control. In fact, it was something the writers complained about vehemently as many a writer felt such a lack of internal conflict robbed the writers of the ability to create tension and drama in Star Trek (at least, certain KINDS of drama). Both Robert Hewitt Wolfe and Ronald D. Moore have gone on record as talking about these writing problems in Trek multiple times, which (later as showrunners) they discuss and address through both of their own subsequent sci-fi TV series.

Having said all that, I don't really think Trek's ideology and utopian society is a problem for any potential new TV series. Next Generation was certainly compelling drama and science fiction to me for years, despite the eventual ideological objections I had with it..and particularly, it's religious fanaticist fan base. I just think Trek cannot maintain it's fictional construct in exactly the same way today because a significant portion of the universe they built in the Next Generation-era TV shows is either not relevant, no longer dramatically compelling or outright offensive. It will take a clever creative team to recognize those tenents of the old Star Trek shows that still endure today and marry these tenents to the type of television drama that is the most compelling and relevant to today.

That is no small task.

Edited November 4, 2015 by Mr March

[Guest davidwhangchoi]

does that mean "Q" is not relevant anymore? gasp!

[Mr March]

does that mean "Q" is not relevant anymore? gasp!

"No, you obtuse piece of flotsam!"

I'd certainly hope whoever makes the new Trek would recognize Q as one of the better elements of the show that he was

[Dynaman]

I'd certainly hope whoever makes the new Trek would recognize Q as one of the better elements of the show that he was

Well, he was for an episode or two - and then they totally hosed the character. That said he still has my favorite line of all time "Ah Worf, EAT any good books lately?"

[Guest davidwhangchoi]

"No, you obtuse piece of flotsam!"

I'd certainly hope whoever makes the new Trek would recognize Q as one of the better elements of the show that he was

Well, he was for an episode or two - and then they totally hosed the character. That said he still has my favorite line of all time "Ah Worf, EAT any good books lately?"

Q the liar. Q the misanthrope. Q the miserable. Q the desperate. What must I do to convince you people?

Edited November 4, 2015 by davidwhangchoi

[Sildani]

"Die."

One of the best burns ever.

[Guest davidwhangchoi]

"Die."

One of the best burns ever.

Worf was perfect

[SuperSenpai]

Yeah Roddenberry's intentions for Star Trek, despite not always being perfectly delivered to screen, was always clearly a post-modern utopian society (or at least, Roddenberry's idea of utopia). This very fact was brought up by the writers who had to work on Star Trek, especially Next Generation where Roddenberry had much greater creative control. In fact, it was something the writers complained about vehemently as many a writer felt such a lack of internal conflict robbed the writers of the ability to create tension and drama in Star Trek (at least, certain KINDS of drama). Both Robert Hewitt Wolfe and Ronald D. Moore have gone on record as talking about these writing problems in Trek multiple times, which (later as showrunners) they discuss and address through both of their own subsequent sci-fi TV series.

Having said all that, I don't really think Trek's ideology and utopian society is a problem for any potential new TV series. Next Generation was certainly compelling drama and science fiction to me for years, despite the eventual ideological objections I had with it..and particularly, it's religious fanaticist fan base. I just think Trek cannot maintain it's fictional construct in exactly the same way today because a significant portion of the universe they built in the Next Generation-era TV shows is either not relevant, no longer dramatically compelling or outright offensive. It will take a clever creative team to recognize those tenents of the old Star Trek shows that still endure today and marry these tenents to the type of television drama that is the most compelling and relevant to today.

That is no small task.

Good points all around. To be clear, I do not share Roddenberry's humanism, and if fact I have some pretty serious differences with it. But I do appreciate that his philosophical outlook resulted in a TV show that was issues-oriented, and used its sci-fi backdrop as window dressing to explore real-world ideas. Star Trek was thoughtful space opera, and I think that's partly why it wasn't well received when it first premiered on network TV. People wanted simple-minded, exciting action not heady morality plays. In fact, if Star Trek TOS had been more like the rebooted films, it would have probably had a much more successful TV run.

Like I said previously, I enjoyed the reboot films for what they were, but in my mind they are not truly Star Trek. But to be fair, that same accusation can be made for most of the Trek films, even the TOS and TNG casts. The TV shows were more cerebral, while the films were made to be popcorn flicks.

Edited November 5, 2015 by SuperSenpai

[Mr March]

I think that despite whatever reservations I have about Roddenberry's ideology (and the toxic fanbase at that time) I value Trek as a very creative and interesting construct for a sci-fi universe. I still like some aspects of it to this day. But I think the topical nature of the stories and the debates about morality, law and culture told via the individual episodes of shows like Star Trek The Next Generation are gripping narratives that can still work now. Plus, not EVERY episode of Next Generation was a heady intellectual exercise; some of the best episodes were also fun popcorn action every bit as much (or more so) than the TOS and TNG films.

I actually enjoyed Star Trek (2009) very much and am not one of those who dimisses it's value because of some loyalty to "what is Trek". No offense, but that sounds like the fan fanatacism of old to me, and I'm thankful that has long since vanished from the collective conversation of popular culture. IMO, that first new 2009 film is definitely one of the better Trek films. But for whatever it's worth, I understand it is more character story, humor and action than an exploration of the humanities, saying so without judgement of it's merit.

I truly believe a cerebral Trek series can absolutely work (for me) again, but not as a broadcast show. I'd love to see Trek let loose by a specialty cable company to try all those Next Generation scripts that were rejected by Paramount/CBS because they were too edgey, too controversial or too risque for the antiquated censorship of broadcast television 25 years ago. ALso, a Trek TV series done with modern special effects and modern budgets is VERY appealing

[SuperSenpai]

I actually enjoyed Star Trek (2009) very much and am not one of those who dimisses it's value because of some loyalty to "what is Trek". No offense, but that sounds like the fan fanatacism of old to me, and I'm thankful that has long since vanished from the collective conversation of popular culture. IMO, that first new 2009 film is definitely one of the better Trek films. But for whatever it's worth, I understand it is more character story, humor and action than an exploration of the humanities, saying so without judgement of it's merit.

I understand your distaste, and to be clear was not making that statement in a dogmatic sort of way, or as a judgment on its importance or place in the overall franchise (I don't take my entertainment that seriously). It's more of a shorthand way of expressing what I find to be one of the defining characteristic of Star Trek that makes it distinct from other sci-fi franchises, and that seems to be missing from the reboot films. Don't me wrong -- I enjoyed them quite a bit, thought they were a lot of fun, and look forward to more from this series. But to bring this back to the original topic for a bit, I also like the topical nature of classic Trek, and I hope that the new TV show returns to that type of format. That way you would have the best of both worlds (pun intended).

[UN Spacy]

HUGE NEWS!!!

http://trekmovie.com/2016/04/13/breaking-the-new-star-trek-tv-show-will-be-set-post-undiscovered-country-pre-tng/

Not Abrams Trek...seasonal anthologies.

[Mommar]

Well that's interesting news.

I wonder if we'll see a little bit of the Ent-C pop up in one of the anthologies.

[David Hingtgen]

I am 10x more interested now than I was.

[Kanedas Bike]

^Agreed, the premise of seasonal anthologies is way more interesting than just another series of the same cast/crew that could go 3-10 years.

-b.

[JB0]

Well that's interesting news.

I wonder if we'll see a little bit of the Ent-C pop up in one of the anthologies.

Or the Enterprise-B. I have a soft spot for the Excelsior design, and she deserves to be seen as more than just the ship that killed Kirk.

[Sildani]

Hey, I see it as the ship that had Cameron from Ferris Bueller as its captain!

[Sandman]

Wow this unexpected but great news. Unexpected that it takes place in the prime universe but also right after TUC - one of my favourite time periods. It'll be good to see that era starship designs again. Now it makes sence that they hired Nicholas Meyer. I'm especially happy with the premise which was an idea I thought would be good for a spin off back in Berman days. The format allows for endless possibilities. Have a season follow the crew of a Klingon ship. Show us other periods in time not shown on any series like pre-Kirk. Or even do one set in the time on the motion picture. In officially excited now. Let's hope CBS All Access doesn't kill it.

[sh9000]

I would love younger TNG character cameos.

[David Hingtgen]

Cue Tom Hardy as Picard.

[sh9000]

Tom Hiddleston as Data.

[Mog]

Cue Tom Hardy as Picard.

Considering how much Tom Hardy has bulked up over the years, I just can't picture him as a young Picard anymore.

How about James McAvoy instead?

It's too bad the series went off the air so long ago, but I wouldn't mind one of these anthology seasons being a follow-up to DS9.

A number of books came out that gave an interesting skeleton/treatment of a potential Season 8. Introduced some new characters, put some old ones in new roles, and had the Defiant exploring the Gamma Quadrant.

Could be a season's worth of story fodder there.

[David Hingtgen]

Let's see Riker and the Titan, if we can do post-TNG

[Sildani]

I'd love to see Riker & Co. Especially given the Titan's diverse non-humanoid crew, it'd be truly awesome.

[Sandman]

I'm sure Frakes is up for it. He always comes back when they ask him. Maybe they could throw a bone to Michael Dorn and do a season of the Capt Worf premise he's been pitching.

[Keith]

I'm not at all emthused by this premise. I'll stck with the new movies for now.

[Mommar]

Let's see Riker and the Titan, if we can do post-TNG

God yes!

Really, they could do a season of Sulu at the helm somewhere. They could go off in all sorts of fun directions that a full fledged show probably couldn't do bit an anthology show could get away with.

[thereal9thdoctor]

I am hesitantly interested. I do however wish that THIS was the show to premiere instead:(and this isn't JUST an excuse to post fanart I made for a fancomic I am working on)new condor saga posterFINAL.bmp

[lechuck]

Prime timeline sounds good, anthology I can live with.

Some interesting season long stories could be events leading up to the Narendra III attack with the Enterprise-C. Or maybe someone getting trapped in one of those vicious parallel universes (not JJ like) and he/her having to manoeuvre themselves without getting discovered, dealing with difficult choices going against their ethics and morale.

But Ultimately I do wish they advance the timeline after the events of Nemesis, maybe even another 100 year jump or something.

Do we know who is handling the designs, is Andrew Probert free? Please not the guy that is in charge for the JJ-Universe.

[Sandman]

They can do a show like tng's parallels except one o the alternate realities is the JJ verse. The characters can comment on how lens flarey the universe is.

[sh9000]

[Mommar]

That's already more internally consistent than both JJ movies...

[JB0]

Reactions as I made it through the trailer:

Narration starts: "Wait, seriously? All you had to do was say "Space, the final frontier", and everyone would be on board. "

"Wait, is that the original theme? I really hope that sticks for the entire show."

Long story short, I was worried they had no idea who they were selling to, but... they do. We'll put up with a lot, just let us believe greatness is possible.