Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Bryan Fuller Wants To Mount
A New STAR TREK TV Series!!

Star Trek=Superman Returns by darthpigman	Mar 21st, 2009 02:42:22 AM

YEEEEEAHHHHHHHH! by caruso_stalker217	Mar 21st, 2009 02:43:06 AM
Bring on Chewie!
NEWNESS! by Pogue__Mahone	Mar 21st, 2009 02:49:24 AM
A whole universe!!! While I love these characters - and I'm pretty stoked about the new film - we have a whole universe to play with now! New captains... ships... crews... species. We've created a rich and beautiful cosmos. Let's go play in it!!! If there are familiar elements and themes that make it Gene's Trek then GREAT! That's what he would have wanted! Be as brilliant and creative as he was and make something new. I'm pretty sure in Kirk's era the 'dead horse' was extinct so they had nothing to flog.
Star Trek. by Carl XVI Gustaf	Mar 21st, 2009 02:51:22 AM
Will it finally become interesting?
CAPTAIN MAL REYNOLDS.... by wackybantha	Mar 21st, 2009 02:56:17 AM
....of the USS SERENITY!!!!!!!!!
Wrong Idea!!! The New Star Trek Needs To Occur 100 Years... by Media Messiah	Mar 21st, 2009 03:00:57 AM
...after The Next Generation. Enough with prequels. It is time to expand and evolve the Star Trek universe with new ideas and planetary vistas, not down size it!!!
i was blown away by how serious and dramatic old Trek was by Groothewarrior	Mar 21st, 2009 03:03:01 AM
they had the camera scope on characters and what they did amd felt, not special effects, i mean sometimes the jist of the show was Bones vs Spock or Kirk vs Spock. they did more with shipmembers at odds ends on teeny budget!
As much as I'd like a new TV Trek by Chuck_Chuckwalla	Mar 21st, 2009 03:05:17 AM
I still have a bad taste in my mouth from some of those later Trek shows. Let's just wait and see how the movie does. And don't even bother posting a story about some writer's wet dream of creating a new show until there's something a bit more concrete worked out. Don't bother with some vague idea, give us an outline with specifics and production art and maybe you'll get a grassroots following that will help make it a reality. Anybody can come up with a Star Trek premise but we need something a bit more tangible to get behind it. Otherwise, you're just talking out your ass like Kevin Smith often does.
So is this a pipe-dream, or what? by Zardoz	Mar 21st, 2009 03:05:57 AM
I mean, I've got an idea for a new Star Trek show, too...
The news series lost the 60s fun because they weren't in the 60s by HellKing	Mar 21st, 2009 03:08:01 AM
Sounds like a bad idea. What was so fun about the 60s? Bring back the hippies and new age idiots.
Bryan Fuller Kicks Major Ass by IrwinMFletcher	Mar 21st, 2009 03:10:38 AM
Bryan Fuller is probably one of the most talented writers in hollywood now, all the daisies were amazingly written and the Heroes episodes he wrote were some of the best of the bunch. I'd be very interested to see his take as he is a creative mastermind.
THESE FUCKING ROLLOVER ADVERT BANNERS by Ray Gamma	Mar 21st, 2009 03:15:57 AM
THESE FUCKING ROLLOVER ADVERT BANNERS ARE RUINING THE SITE FOR ME!!!! FUCKING HELL!!! I CAN HARDLY MOVE MY CURSOR ACROSS THE SCREEN WITHOUT TRIGGERING THESE FUCKING POP-UP ADVERTISMENTS. IT'S LIKE TRYING TO READ A BOOK WHILE SOME CUNT IS WAVING MAGAZINES IN FRONT OF MY EYES. FUCK OFF.
the really clever thing to do by Ray Gamma	Mar 21st, 2009 03:24:51 AM
the really clever thing to do would be to use the name of one of the existing Federation ships that occasionally cropped up in backstories over the years. that way, when fans re-view the older series', they will seem to cross-reference with the new series in a prophetic way. Hell, you could even deliberately create episodes where, for example, the USS Reliant actually visits an event that is already known from one of the old series episodes, but now seen from the Reliant perspective.
Mirror Universe Khan... by Lord John Whorfin	Mar 21st, 2009 03:41:43 AM
ends up in the "normal" Trek universe, and is a good guy. There's your new series.
I'm sick of people knocking Voyager! by BiggusDickus	Mar 21st, 2009 03:47:06 AM
Janeaway was a great captain! Much better than that sanctimonious tit Picard. Ok, so some of the earlier stories were a bit iffy and the later series were dominated by that bird in the skintight jumpsuit, but when Voyager was firing on all cylinders, there was nothing in the Trek canon to touch it. Don't believe me? Check out 'Scorpion', 'Equinox', 'Blink Of An Eye', 'Living Witness', 'Future's End' and the sublime finale 'Endgame'. It's just a shame that Voyager came at a time when everyone was sick to death of Star Trek...
Ray Gamma by Toonol	Mar 21st, 2009 03:48:03 AM
Firefox + various add-in (adblock, flashblock) will greatly enhance your browsing.
I agree with the Messiah by medicinaluser	Mar 21st, 2009 03:48:21 AM
He batshit crazy but he makes sense when he suggests they need to go waay into the future of TNG's:Timeline, if this will have any chance of standing out. I always thought they should have done that with Voyager to begin with but maybe now IS the right time for it to happen.
That idiot lost me at "I love Voyager". by Motoko Kusanagi	Mar 21st, 2009 03:50:48 AM
That show was mediocre at best. TNG and DS9 still stand high above the rest. TOS and Enterprise are completely forgettable.
"Sublime finale?" Surely you're joking?!?! by moondoggy2u	Mar 21st, 2009 03:56:57 AM
If that's your cup of tea, BD, then more power to you. Me, I'll take TNG episodes like All Good Things..., Children of Darmok, Yesterday's Enterprise, Conundrum, Best of Both Worlds, ResQue, Brothers, and, of course, The Inner Light. And something tells me I won't be the only one...
If it weren't for TOS... by menstrual_blitz	Mar 21st, 2009 04:03:58 AM
you wouldn't have your damn DS9. Show some appreciation. TOS is also the best. Long live Kirk, Spock and McCoy.
In fact, by menstrual_blitz	Mar 21st, 2009 04:05:23 AM
I'm gonna go watch The Cloud Miners right now. See yea.
No!!! No more trek series! by Citizen Sane	Mar 21st, 2009 04:08:55 AM
All of these lame-ass hacks that received huge careers from the tired franchise (Fuller being among the few exceptions), need to BACK OFF! The fact that Abrams isn't a trekkie speaks volumes in regard to why it has the potential to be so good. Fuller is talented as hell, but keep the trekkies out of trek,
No No No No No No No No.... by Bones	Mar 21st, 2009 04:13:42 AM
Leave the new universe for JJ and his cronies. That way, they can do their bad trilogy and be done with it, independant of any future TV show. Do a show in the FUTURE of the Next Gen--the same 100 year jump that TNG did past TOS--and instead of making it a more beaurocratic, boring era, make it a turbulant, exciting time of high adventure instead. Throw in all the character architypes that you want, make it exciting--pushing out further--maybe the first trip to a new Galaxy... You might as well go back to the old universe, since any show on a different ship is in the exact same boat as a completely seperate show...
Media Messiah-- by Bones	Mar 21st, 2009 04:14:39 AM
Sorry. I see you have the same idea as well!
I was just watching the new Trek trailer, and came over here. by Lashlarue	Mar 21st, 2009 04:20:02 AM
It's a sign. God, although it hates being called that, wants a new Trek series.
Motoko Kusanagi by kwisatzhaderach	Mar 21st, 2009 04:28:29 AM
TOS was completely forgettable?
BONES by DrunkyMcLush	Mar 21st, 2009 04:28:56 AM
Unless we're talking about Uwe Boll, you can't really judge a movie before it's released. Remember that the original actors LOVED the script and a few (NOT including Shatner) tried very hard to get roles for them written into the movie. I understand that having a new take on an old, beloved show can be very suspect. New Hollywood is nothing like Old Hollywood and this new Trek definitely has Hollwywood Eye-Candy shots. I've read the synopsis and it really does sound like a true Trek movie that's loyal to the mythology. I'm not saying you have to like it --- it could be a really really bad movie for all we know. I'm just saying - you shouldn't write a movie off until you see it. Again, unless we're talking about Uwe Boll.
Bring back Firefly by criticalbliss	Mar 21st, 2009 04:43:08 AM
(and erase Serenity from the memory database). Great series (and I hate Buffy). We need good, but fun SF. I'd be up for a new Star Trek series, but I'd hope the whole New World Order utopian bullshit would be stoppered so we can actually have a bit of entertainment. The key is the character dynamic, which is why TOS was so great.
Oh for the love of... by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 04:46:07 AM
STOP IT ALREADY. I am so very, very tired of prosthetic forheads. Just let the series end. Audiences are too intelligent to believe in prosthetic forheads. Again, please, just let the stupid series be over and done with.
the Battlestar Galactica folks are looking for work. by Greenlee	Mar 21st, 2009 04:50:44 AM
hire them.
Why won't they just let it die??? by Muki	Mar 21st, 2009 04:51:12 AM
If they absolutely insist on flogging this dead horse one more time and create a new Star Trek TV series then it has to be created by one man and one man only - that man's name is Ronald D. Moore.
Also... by Muki	Mar 21st, 2009 04:52:37 AM
Star Trek = this year's Superman Returns
Greg Grunberg, really? by Greenlee	Mar 21st, 2009 04:55:11 AM
what is so great about that man that he is in almost every project of Team JJ Abrams & Friends? Grunberg posted on Twitter recently that he wants his fans to email & tweet the Jimmy Fallon folks to make him a guest on jimmys show. Famewhore.
Furthermore... by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 04:55:22 AM
Are you all too brainless to realize how unrealistic it is that whenever two or more ships meet out in space, all of them have the same up and down, even though there is no up or down in space? Why is the artificial gravity never EVER damaged when the ships are being torn to pieces? You know why, Einsteins? BECAUSE THAT WOULD COST MONEY TO PRODUCE. Why are all of the aliens' eyes the same distance apart? Why are all the aliens the same height? Why do they all have only two arms and two legs? Why do none of them have more or less than five digits? Star Trek has always been one of the most unrealistic sci-fi spectacles in visual media. It's embarrasing that there are still grown adults who swear by it.
Sounded good till 'Pushing Daisies!!! by DC Films	Mar 21st, 2009 04:57:41 AM

And even more... by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 04:58:58 AM
Why are there no aliens who are shaped like velociraptors? Why do none of them have tails? Why do they all wear clothes? Why is Earth the only planet populated by people who speak more than one language?
Slicing and dicing by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 05:01:44 AM
What happens to any blood spilt on a hollodeck? Does it vanish when the program ends, or does it just fall to the floor? Why is anybody bald in the 24th or whenever century? Why is the human lifespan not a thousand years by then?
Star Trek's soooooooooo stupid by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 05:03:35 AM
Why is Jeorgi blind two or three or four hundred years in the future when we can cure blindness in the 21st century?
I Would Really Trick-Out Star Trek by Media Messiah	Mar 21st, 2009 05:05:02 AM
Instead, these folks want to copy George Lucas, if he turns left... now, they turn left, and if he turns right, they turn right, ala the prequel madness, regardless if it works, or not??? The Star Wars prequels would be laughable if they weren't so embarrassingly poor in execution, as with every prequel I have seen. George Lucas has lessened the brand of Star Wars, damaging it, almost as effectively as Michael Jackson has damage his career, in terms of the tremendous loss of respect for something that was once great, and we thought that Star Trek was hit hard when Rick Berman and Brannon Braga were in charge?
And more! by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 05:06:44 AM
THERE ARE NO SOUNDS IN SPACE, KIDDOS. AND LASERS ARE INVISIBLE IN SPACE.
Star Trek: The (All) 3-D Series by Media Messiah	Mar 21st, 2009 05:09:26 AM
They'll steal this idea, and if not them, someone else, but how about an all 3-D series--the first ever? Now that would be an event, in terms of form, and would make it appointment television, each week! Give me a damn studio to run already!
Bottom line... by DC Films	Mar 21st, 2009 05:12:41 AM
Difference between old and new generations of trek is that they are completely different sub-genres of sci-fi... Old Trek was a thrilling action-adventure version of the Twilight Zone/Outer Limits -- All Next Generation era shows were soap-opera versions of Twilight/Limits. While Kirk/Spock/Bones had had a strong relationship, their internal conflict was never greater than the external conflict, whereas New Trek pitches interanl far above external in terms of screen-time and the story. in theory you'd think the latter was preferable, but in practice i think the original Trek had a pace and excitement all new Trek never really matched. Where Kirk led a band of interplanetary green berets and adventurers... Picard and his fellow new show leaders led the UN and some concerned weapons inspectors. I know which i'd rather watch... It looks to me that Abrams is going for the action adventure thrills of the original show -- thank Frack for that!
by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 05:23:31 AM
I mean, honestly, Futurama has a more realistic approach to its alien designs and the way its ships function in space. Oh, and just because I hope it stings, the green, human-eating news reporter alien on Futurama could "beat" a Klingong, any time, any day. Y'know why? Because Klingongs are just men in prosthetic forheads. "Look at me, I have a bad case of acne on my forhead, so FEAR ME!!!" Hey Klingongs, KISS wants their outfits back.
by revolution82jdl	Mar 21st, 2009 05:25:37 AM
And don't even get me started on whatever race Spock is supposed to be. So his people originated a bazillion light years from Earth, and the only way in which they differ from us is that they have pointy EARS and mandatory bowl hair cuts? Seriously?
revolution82jdl by Harold The Great	Mar 21st, 2009 05:39:03 AM
I'm no trekky, but compraring the production values of a live action series to a fucking cartoon is ridiculous. If there were a Trek cartoon, I'm sure they would have some great three legged, two headed, piton faced, milk skinned aliens. You're not smart to point it out.
Uhhhhh Harold by thelordofhell	Mar 21st, 2009 05:48:57 AM
They made a Star Trek cartoon and it had an insect guy in the Chekov chair.
Imagine a BSG quality Trel though by Uncle_Bryn	Mar 21st, 2009 06:07:48 AM
I reckon I've seen over 90% of all Trek eps and the middle of the road, mild entertainment nature is nice after a hard days work but I'd love to see a full on dramatic, well acted Trek, that ISN'T a prequel. Bring it on.
*Trek (maybe they should call it Trel to trick everyone....) by Uncle_Bryn	Mar 21st, 2009 06:08:20 AM

Del Spel Nel by DC Films	Mar 21st, 2009 06:15:33 AM
Alias Eastenders In Space
revolution82jdl by kwisatzhaderach	Mar 21st, 2009 06:20:14 AM
Star Trek is a fantasy, it's not supposed to be reality. Get a grip.
The 60's series isn't the origins to base anything on.. by CeejayNightwing	Mar 21st, 2009 06:25:11 AM
Roddenberry hated what he was forced to do with that series, he didn't want a fist fight with evil aliens every week. Star Trek TNG is the show he wanted and it's the only Trek Show that's realised the utopion ideals of Roddenberry's original Trek Concept. Everything else they made afterwards is just a space sho with a brand name on it finding new ways to make ships go toe to toe with each other! None of these shows have built on human development as well as well as technology. None of these shows have advanced the ideals of accomplishment through evolution. They've just become fanboy dream scenarios full of unavoidable wars and fist-fights! Fuller should make his own show and leave the Star Trek name alone. Same goes to JJ Abrams!
"Klingongs"? by CHRISTIAN_BALE_TRASHED_MY_LIGHTS	Mar 21st, 2009 06:26:36 AM
You look a little silly saying that. Stop looking silly. What would your mom say?
I want to mount that chick from "Weeds" by CHRISTIAN_BALE_TRASHED_MY_LIGHTS	Mar 21st, 2009 06:37:09 AM
We don't all get what we want, do we Bryan?
CeejayNightwing, Roddenberry Spoddenberry by DC Films	Mar 21st, 2009 06:40:19 AM
Whether the original show reflected his ideas is besides the point - perhaps if it did it wouldn't have been so successful. Point is what make good TV, or film and our fascination with the original series is proof that it wins in the 'what do we wanna see' stakes. It had plenty of science and philosophy, it just presented in an engaging 'cowboys&indians' format. TNG may seem to have been more worthy, but in fact i think it was over indulgent and often comparatively self-important. Film's are simpler than TV - one idea on a grand scale - and that's something TOS format has done far better than TNG because it's adventure format is better.
mount??? by FamousEccles	Mar 21st, 2009 06:58:00 AM

DC Films - you speak the truth brother by FamousEccles	Mar 21st, 2009 07:17:03 AM

With all the calls to have it 100 years post TNG by Miyamoto_Musashi	Mar 21st, 2009 07:20:48 AM
Also agree they need to make it a bit more gritty and less sterile, with flawed characters, yeah a mix of Star Trek and BSG.
Christian Bale like your thinking by Miyamoto_Musashi	Mar 21st, 2009 07:23:34 AM
I want to nail Sun (from Lost) while licking out Boomer (from BSG)
STAR TREK belongs on TV first and foremost by YackBacker	Mar 21st, 2009 07:59:54 AM
It's not a film series, it's always been an odd fit for the series, save for a couple of shining films. STAR TREK has been most successful as a series, and it needs to find a way back to that format if the franchise is ever to endure. Personally, I would like to see something beyond JJ's TREK version, but if Fuller is involved, I'm excited no matter the concept.
Let a "series" concept die- but more films by tuttle300	Mar 21st, 2009 08:09:11 AM
WEll, I think it would be nice if they could at least be allowed to milk two or three more films out the franchise and get us faithful fans (old and new alike) to the 50 year mark.....and then walk away from it.-------- I think the new film will easily break Trek 4's record (the one with the whales) of 110 some million dollars and make enough to warrent a another film or two.------------But to mount an all new TV show would cost at least 3 million a week. (This would include using Lucas' way of filming (mostly using CGI for planetary landscapes as well as all the ships/aliens etc..) This is a bad idea specifically because Lucas' life action Star Wars series is due to be on television in 2011 and it WILL be a hit series (look at the Clone wars now ($$$$$$) and all other sci-fi attempts at similar action series will be measured against it. Trek has always been a more laid back series, more cerebral. (Yes, they have done action but today's audience demands more) Trek has always had it's own style which has run it's course quite frankly.------------- Besides, you couldn't use the current film actors because they would demand too much cash (after all, they are movie stars now and not "just television people") so you'd have to (once again) get all NEW actors (which will be cheaper since you still have most of the weekly cost going into the computerised effects each week)---------------------And more importantly you'd have to come up with a concept never before tried as yet. Something we (as an audience) haven't yet seen (from the original series all the way to Battlestar Galactica) Tough to do. I think Deep Space Nine was the best concept of the franchise even though Next Generation (arguably) made the most intelligent use from Roddenberry's original concept. And of course, The original series, bless them one and all (from cast to crew) took the concept, in the face of bad ratings and a couple of pretty bad scripts, and in the shadow of Lost in Space and Time Tunnel (More accepted concepts in the "suits" eyes) went in there week after week after week after week for three years and were true to the characters and the concept. They had no idea what would happen after they shut off the lights in '69........................... .................It would be a tribute to THEM and no-one else if Paramount (who has really made billions and billions)would just do the right thing and get us all to 2016 (either following the traditional James Bond schedule and crank out a film every two years-- or do one every three years and give us a good trilogy) Get us to 2016-Then walk away- The fans have earned that much. But sadly...if there is even a dollar to be made somewhere, somehow, Hollywood will milk it. But just this one time in history. For the fans who've given you (Hollywood) so, so much ($$$) let it go............
Money is the bottom line by tuttle300	Mar 21st, 2009 08:23:10 AM
One more thing-- Even if they do manage to get a pilot and a thirteen episode approval-- the suits will pay attention to the ratings and not the history, and mostly because Paramount doesn't have the money to back up a five year "mission" commitment.(Let's look at "Enterprise" 4 years as an example. Lucas, quite frankly, does have the money and the time. He already has 25 scripts done and is casting. Paramount (for now) MAYBE has a cool idea their floating out there for fan reaction. Lucas will kick Trek's butt on the television screen. So again, I think it's best to commit 300 million to three films (over a 7 year period) and rake in nearly a billion in boxoffice, cable, DVD/blueray sales and call it a day.
revolution82jdl by BackwardGalaxy	Mar 21st, 2009 08:23:26 AM
Why are you retarded? Star Trek wasn't the one who raped your mom.
keep Trek OFF the tv for at least 5 years!! by mr sulu	Mar 21st, 2009 08:26:40 AM
let the movies get going and fly the trek flag for a while like what happened with Treks I-IV where each movie felt like a special event...a big movie that felt like a proper MOVIE which could compete with anything the likes of Speilberg or Lucas had out (hell Lucas even got them to change the Star Trek II 'Vengence' of Khan title as it was too similar to his 'Revenge' of the Jedi)...no lame spin off tv show milking the trek name and turning people off the movies for the next few years..p> i dont mind a new tv show eventually but like after the 3rd movie in 2015 - Bryan Fuller please go away (btw this guy worked on DS9 and VOYAGER? get him the fuck away from trek!!)..
Mr Sulu by richievanderlow	Mar 21st, 2009 09:15:10 AM
I agree... Trek needs to build back up after the last TV outings... one movie is not going to change the attituge of TV goers.
NO MORE FUCKING PREQUELS!!! by photoboy	Mar 21st, 2009 09:18:32 AM
Either set it during the TNG/DS9 era or jump several decades ahead and start afresh. Stop rutting around in the past of the show and do something new for fuck's sake. You can pick whatever tone you want for the show just stop messing around in the established past and give us something new.
Excelcior by Omar B	Mar 21st, 2009 09:20:33 AM
Is it time to finally see the "Excelsior" series that was rumored from back in the DS9 days? That would be awesome! Or they could take one of the original novel series and turn it into a show, like "New Frontier," or "Starfleet Corps of Engineers"
DS9 DID have the 60s show's spirit by Drath	Mar 21st, 2009 09:21:43 AM
Hello, Trials and Tribbilations! It was heavier than Voyager--but Voyager's execution wasn't as ambitious as its premise. It stood out to be like the original series, but was more of a watered down version of Next Gen, very safe and dull. Brian Fuller, I don't know, I'd love for him to create a show that actually survives more than two seasons.
Voyager? Really? by FrodoFraggins	Mar 21st, 2009 09:33:23 AM
That show is the epitome of Trek at it's worst. A whiny captain, a crew of rebels that become stellar federation crew members by the end of the first couple of episodes. A rehash of every trek episode that ever aired previously. This is the show that killed my interest in Trek on TV. Please leave trek off TV for at least 5 more years.
New premise... by Kid Z	Mar 21st, 2009 09:44:42 AM
...its some time in the future of the Trek universe after Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager. The Federation has become fat, bloated, inefficient. The citizens stupidly elect a mentally deficient, drug addicted moron as President for two terms (I imagine him being an interspecies crossbreed between a father and mother from the mentally-slow planet and drug-addict planet from TNG, respectively). Anyway, he gets the Federation into a seemingly unending war with a former ally/minor threat who proves to be more stubborn than originally thought (the Bajorans perhaps) and also bankrupts the galactic economy. The Dominion has reopened the Bajoran Wormhole and, with their are exerting a huge influence on Bajor and Federation space at large, this time as a trading empire. Already the Ferengi and the Breen have joined them as allies. and on the edges of the frontier, evidence points toward a renewed threat from the Borg. The Federation's on the verge of total collapse. The only thing that stands between the citizens of the Federation and total annihilation is the crew of the NCC-1701F or as it's crew jokingly refers to it, "Starship Fail", a 40-year old, broken-down, underfunded wreck of a ship in series need of a total overhaul or retirement to the scrapheap of space. Just getting from one solar system to another is a chore, and the declining Federation's many problems and numerous enemies are bearing down. How can the crew cope? Can they hold things together for just one more day? Boom. New series. Of course no chance they'd ever do anything like this.
Why always "No Trek for 5 years?" It's already been 4! by Drath	Mar 21st, 2009 09:59:12 AM
Come May anyway. And people said Trek should go away for five years THEN! Change the record, you fucking hater/bitchers! By the time Fuller gets something going it'd be 2011 or 2012 anyway, and the world is going to end in 2012, so we'll only get a handful of new episodes thanks to fuckwits like you and your bullshit timetables, so shut the fuck up!
50/50 by The McPoyle Clan	Mar 21st, 2009 10:00:43 AM
There have been worse ideas (and executions) from less-talented writers, so it might not be a total disaster. On the flip side, I'd hate to see Fuller waste his talent on another tired rehash of the Trek universe.
Does anybody want to hear what I'd like to mount? by digitalcos	Mar 21st, 2009 10:11:03 AM
No? Okay.
Drath - you fuckin' idiot!! by mr sulu	Mar 21st, 2009 10:11:14 AM
STFU
The McPoyle Clan by richievanderlow	Mar 21st, 2009 10:11:19 AM
Yeah, you're correct that it really needs something drastically different with a completely new team... but Berman & co. were too formulaic and I think its going to take a lot to get past the damage their oversaturation did to the Trek 'market'... The movie will help move past that I hope, but I'm not sure it will be enough to get the public interested.. especially if its not related to the Abrams Movie's time frame.
New Warp 11 album comes out in May! by warp11	Mar 21st, 2009 10:14:54 AM
The new album from the amazing Star Trek band Warp 11 comes out in May. It called Vulcans in Hell, and it rocks! The song Jerk my Kirk by Warp 11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =2o1Ca9luS9A
Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead by Jodet	Mar 21st, 2009 10:19:46 AM
Way to go AICN. Let's run an article about news that is what, four months old? The March 2nd article was a repeat of Fullers comments from months ago.
Drath - i apoligise by mr sulu	Mar 21st, 2009 10:31:22 AM
i didnt mean that... but u gotta realise just how some fans feel about trek going back to a coma inducing tv show(s)...when we are so close to recapturing the glory days of Wrath of Khan/Search for Spock/Voyage Home on the big screen with big budgets...with NO lame tv show ruining everything for the love of christ keep it off the tv for the next 5 years FROM THIS MOVIES RELEASE
DC Films - regarding Trek = Twilight Zone /Outer Limits by mr sulu	Mar 21st, 2009 10:48:32 AM
Wow great analogy - ive always thought that too…esp in regard to certain eps e.g. - Spectre of The Gun really felt like a 60s TZ/OL - the music, the sets, the feel eerie etc…City on The Edge of Forever is also one of those very eerie, strange, slightly scary trek episodes that could easily be a Twilight Zone or Outer Limits…i mean if you turn the colour off so its B&W and edited in a Rod Sterling intro and Twilight Zone opening and closing credits then it could easily pass for a TZ ep… they did that with Planet of the Apes - probably on utube somewhere…edited it down to a half hr, B&W and found a suitable sterling intro and did the credits etc and it worked real well (Rod Sterling wrote it anyway) a few other season 1 eps like Where No Man, Charlie X, Little Girls etc would also work as TZ/OL eps…but i think COTEOF would work maybe the best along with Spectre where as TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT were all like the crappy 80s/90s TZ/OL (well maybe TNG was pretty ok in parts as was ENT season 3/4 but the rest pah)
Don't let Fuller touch this. by mrfan	Mar 21st, 2009 11:04:08 AM
The movie is going to suck enough. No need to add to that.
An overarching storyline... by LandWaster	Mar 21st, 2009 11:09:01 AM
...is what a Trek series needs. Otherwise the episodes eventually start to rehash what's come before. What they need is consequence, consequences for the choices the captains make. There needs to be a plot driving the series forward so that it's not repetitive and bland. That's my main gripe with Trek, and why I prefer the films (Wrath of Khan is still the best).
Calm down Trekkies/Trekkers/BSG refugees by EverythingEverywhereStinks	Mar 21st, 2009 11:11:49 AM
Let's see how the reimagined and infinitely-cooler-than-anythin g-Roddenberry-or-anyone-else-h as-ever-done-before-with-Star Trek universe looks before we start talking about a new TV series. I mean, I know Bryan Fuller is a TV fanboy demigod, but is his divinity enough to trump JJ's? Which golden boy can reshape this old franchise into something tangibly 'cool?' Right now, it's JJ's turn so let him have a crack at it before we get yet a third muddied vision of what Gene Roddenberry apparently really wanted (but was too stupid and/or poor to actually do).
DC Films-then why don't you make want you want to see.. by CeejayNightwing	Mar 21st, 2009 11:13:07 AM
and NOT call it Star Trek? Why does everyone have to piggyback their vision onto someone elses? What Bryan Fuller wants to do is regress to a truly indulgent childhood fantasy. ST:TOS was successful because it the first concept of its kind for that time. ST:TNG was even more successful because it was the show GR wanted to make and it inspired a greater audience in its time as well as clueless spin-offs made by merchandise driven producers for simple to please fanboys! Star Trek isn't a film format ideal, it's about storys not features! Allthey do in the movies is create spectacle, they do not challenge the individual on any cerebral level. The TNG movies all failed becasue they tried to dumb down a show that challenged writers to produce intelligent TV, to a regressive base summer film spectacle with Picard and Data as action-heroes in the same way Lucas sold out all integrity that Yoda ever had! Sure JJ Abrams will make a spectacle with exploding ships and fist fights, then the sequel will have the same format and then the next one and before you know it if you've seen one formatted Trek flick then you've seen them all. They will abuse time travel to sort out every problem in the same way they wasted the ideal in the lazy years of writing TNG movies, DS9, Voyager and that insult that was Enterprise! At the end of TNG, Q had a message to them all and it escapes the likes of fanboys who just want to see one exploding ship after the next one! mapping the galaxy is not what it's all about, its about exploring your own potentials and evolution. That's what ST is supposed to be about, stories about how we manage to overcome our limits, solutions, evolution and exploration. Not about regressing the human being of the future to a 20th century cynic who just wants to have an adrenelin rush, get laid, drink and pat yourself on the back for winning a fight!
Any TREK other than JarJar's would have to be by kabong	Mar 21st, 2009 11:29:44 AM
an improvement.
TALES OF STARFLEET - Anthology!! by Odkin	Mar 21st, 2009 11:44:24 AM
Different ship every week - who lives, who dies? Some episodes TOS, some eps TNG. Think of the MAJOR guest Captains they could book. Who wouldn't want to play a Captain? The known races are pretty well established, as are ship designs, so makeups, CGI, even sets are infinitly reuseable - cheap and entertaining! Where they should spend BIG bucks is the writing - they need Serling/Roddenberry quality - they should go after BIG writers.
Make a war series already by yomomma	Mar 21st, 2009 11:47:32 AM
BSG is ending, it showed there is an appetite for military SciFi, the movie is very action packed - JUST MAKE A TREK WAR SERIES! No more namby-pamby explorations of feelings and getting locked in the holo deck while exploring deep space in a heavily armed cruiser. What a total waste of a great setting.I HATE THAT SHIT.
I feel so lucky by kwisatzhaderach	Mar 21st, 2009 11:55:08 AM
to have grown up during the late 70s/80s, when Spielberg and Lucas were at their peak, when James Cameron burst onto the scene, when cool genre directors like John Carpenter and Joe Dante were at work, people with vision. Who put the fanboys in charge? What vision do they have? I feel sorry for the kids growing up today, what great filmmakers have they got to follow? JJ Abrams? Michael Bay? Stephen Sommers? McG? Brett Ratner?
It's times like these that I thank God... by StarWarsRedux	Mar 21st, 2009 12:03:15 PM
...that I'm not a Trekkie.
critical bliss/firefly by 900LBGorilla	Mar 21st, 2009 12:19:59 PM
Bring back Firefly (and erase Serenity from the memory database). Great series (and I hate Buffy). We need good, but fun SF. I'd be up for a new Star Trek series, but I'd hope the whole New World Order utopian bullshit would be stoppered so we can actually have a bit of entertainment. The key is the character dynamic, which is why TOS was so great. Well said. I hared the space-cowboy concept of Firefly- until I saw it. That was hands down some of the best television ever….and enough if the moronic “Utopia Trek”. Where good intentions solve all problems and people are a cardboard replicas of each other with no conflict. How boring and unrealistic.
YES!!! With Olmos, Hogan, The Sack, ect by picardsucks	Mar 21st, 2009 12:28:34 PM
The original E has 12 sisterships (or did before a bunch of them got blown to bits by the E herself). How fucking cool would Olmos be as Commadore Bob Wesely of the Excalibur with Bamber as his young first officer, Michael Hogan as the Crusty Engineer, James Calius as the flakey but altrustic Dr., and the Sack as Chief of Security in those TOS thigh high stripper boots and miniscrt. This could work !!! The TOS universive is much more vast and spooky and edgy than all the Faggy Next Gen era crapass, Berkley hippee, pseudo-intellectual, banal, lameness. I WNAT OLMOS ORDERING A PHASE STRIKE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CeejayNightwing by 900LBGorilla	Mar 21st, 2009 12:34:23 PM
DC Comics is right. Star trek is not simply “Gene Roddenberrys vision” Star Trek is what is on screen -0 and the best of Star Trek was often stuff Roddenberry did not approve of. TOS being what it was created the Fan interest that is the only reason we even remember Gene’s name, and DS-9 beat the pants of the boring TNG because it dealt with real personality issues instead of being a fake chrome plated utopia that denies the basics of the human motivations and differences. As a case in point Gene also hated the idea of the hands down best Trek movie that spawned the a great core trilogy- Wrath of Khan. If ot were up to Gene, instead of Start Trek II, II, and IV- we would have had a movie about Kirk and Spock trying to go back in time and stop the Kennedy Assassination….(and *Surprise! Failing!). Yes the best of Trek was clearly when Roddenberry’s basic concepts were taken and he was forced to have them realized in a compromise with people who knew how to tell stories far better than he did….in fact the myth of how great was the “unfettered vision” of Roddebenberry reminds me of what we saw when another “god-like creator” no longer had to compromise…what was his name again? Oh Yeah George Lucas- that “unfettered vision” was preferable too – wasn’t it? (Rhetorical question Farley- it wasn’t). It is a rare talent that can both create a great universe and also know how to realize it with no fetters- and Neither Roddenberry nor Lucas had both these talents.
VERY old news by whitty	Mar 21st, 2009 12:54:19 PM
This was widely reported on the various Star Trek boards months ago. What the heck?
Or.....Instead of Fuller by The_Myhand	Mar 21st, 2009 12:58:19 PM
Bring Ron Moore back into the Trekverse? PLEASE!!!!!!! Forget Fuller and get Moore in on a new show
ATT: revolution82jdl by whitty	Mar 21st, 2009 12:59:23 PM
revolution82jdl wrote: "Why are there no aliens who are shaped like velociraptors? Why do none of them have tails? Why do they all wear clothes? Why is Earth the only planet populated by people who speak more than one language?" To answer your questions: There are. Some do. Some don't. It isn't. So you might want to actually WATCH Trek some time before trashing it, as all of your assumptions are incorrect.
ATT: Ceejay by whitty	Mar 21st, 2009 01:02:54 PM
Ceejay wrote: "ST:TOS was successful because it the first concept of its kind for that time." I'm a major Star Trek fan myself, but that statement is simply untrue. Star Trek is most definitely NOT the first sci-fi title to have a ship exploring space, or the first to have a multiracial crew, or the first to have a hero captain who always gets the girl, or the first to have an alien in the crew. In fact, it's basically the same as Forbidden Planet, right down to the Captain's Log. Star Trek was fantastic--but original? Not really.
Agreed with 'no more prequels' by supertoyslast	Mar 21st, 2009 01:06:15 PM
The next Trek needs to be set long enough after Nemesis that you won't keep getting characters from the other series turning up. It needs to build on what has gone before, but also refresh the franchise - a tricky thing to pull off. Personally, one aspect I would like to see being built upon is the status of holograms as explored in the last series of Voyager. I'd like to see holograms gain their independence but treated as second-class citizens by humans. How about a hologram who is the first Starfleet officer by right, rather than one who has just been programmed for the job?
Enterprise was awesome by punto	Mar 21st, 2009 01:16:48 PM
I'm sick of all these losers saying "oh, I have a great idea, let's go back to the 60's look and feel! it's a completely original idea I just came up with!". We get it, enterprise was a commercial failure, so the popular thing to say right now is that you want to go back to the original series (which was also a commercial failure btw). But enough already. Somebody with balls needs to take the franchise forward; this is going nowhere. Also, Archer owns all the other captain's asses.
Punto by MattmanReturns	Mar 21st, 2009 01:56:15 PM
Yeah I want a post Next Gen show... like 60 years after Next Gen. I am looking forward to Abram's movie though...
Dawson's Trek by Yamato	Mar 21st, 2009 01:56:19 PM
No interest in this Dawson's creek-esq Star Trek. Only one who is old enough to drink legally in the cast is Pegg. And I am sorry, but I just can't get past the whole "Enterprise constructed on the surface of the Earth bit". Just shows the writer really has no clue.
Yamato by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 21st, 2009 02:13:59 PM
So, because they build the Enterprise on the ground, you 'dis the whole movie? Goddamn, you are one sorry-ass stupid motherfucker. You're the pathetic kind of fanboy that gives Star Trek a bad name.
Yeah, Ccon, it ain't likely. by StarWarsRedux	Mar 21st, 2009 02:14:54 PM
Though I, for one, have continued to dig "Heroes". And frankly, "Company Man" is an overrated episode. Fun, sure, not nearly as good as Fuller-fans insist.
CCon99 by zacdilone	Mar 21st, 2009 02:15:42 PM
Herc said this episode was great, that's all he said. I love how Talkbackers respond with such sarcasm and virtriol to things that were never said. It's too bad you people learned to type before you learned to read.
Yamato by richievanderlow	Mar 21st, 2009 02:17:33 PM
Spare us the whole 'Enterprise was never built on Earth' crap. If that's what bothers you about the new movie, then you're an idiot. 1. I can't find anyone that can tell me where in Canon that has been established.. in any series or movie. The best I've ever gotten is its on some plaque on the Bridge that isn't even readable to the viewing audience. If that's the level of detail that must be adhered to for this movie to be taken seriously, then they should wipe out ever Star Trek episode from the first episode of TNG forward. Bermand and Co. raped canon repeatedly. 2. If that is what you deem important to the story then please go lock yourself in a room with TOS on DVD and watch only that and keep your narrow minded negativity away from what could be the best thing to happen to Trek since TOS. Quit living in the past.
And so it begins.... by scriptgirl_nipples	Mar 21st, 2009 02:26:26 PM
JJ Abrams massive inflated ego, totally fucks Star Trek up the ass.
Prequel should've been "Starfleet" by thevision	Mar 21st, 2009 02:35:01 PM
"Enterprise" was a wasted opportunity; the series should've taken place 50 or so years after first contact with the Vulcans and the main focus should've been the merger between the civilian United Earth Space Probe Agency and the Earth Defense Forces or whatever into the new entity called "Starfleet." It should've shown tension not only between the military and science wings of Starfleet but increased encounters with hostile aliens such as Orions- that would be the reason for the Earth government to force the merger because it felt UESPA didn't have the experience to handle hostile species and the military didn't have UESPA's resources- anything military has been looked at with hostility since the end of the third world war but has since gained influence because UESPA had been ineffective against the aliens. I would've liked to see prequel use nukes and primitive laser guns, real military sci-fi in Trek liks BSG- instead in "Enterprise" we got more time-travel, holo-decks and the ship taken over every episode. Only thing I liked about the show was Connor Trinneer and Jolene Blalock and season 4 showed promise, but too little, too late.
Quit living in the past? by mrfan	Mar 21st, 2009 02:38:49 PM
Then maybe you should tell Abrams to come up with an original concept to Star Trek instead of borrowing from elements from the past. Nothing original about this turd coming to the theatres.
Its always sunny in a Holodeck... by Doc_Hudson	Mar 21st, 2009 02:41:33 PM
You want it,admit it.
How about this? by Omar B	Mar 21st, 2009 03:54:34 PM
Have a small ship (kinda like Defiant) and a small unit of Federation troops akin to our Navy Seals. Every week they go in and handle sh*t the Federation can't with negotiations. Highly trained, highly bad-ass, heck, even throw in a klingon or two on the team. I'm thinking a cross between Clancy's Rainbow 6 and Don Pendlton's Phoenix Force.
The biggest things that went wrong with Star Trek.... by Ray Gamma	Mar 21st, 2009 04:01:35 PM
1. When the sense of danger & adventure on board a starship was replaced with cosy carpeted corridors & coffee-machine replicator lifestyles. 2. Endless encounters with stuffy alien diplomats with prosthetic foreheads. 3. Endless encounters with primitive cultures who dressed in scruffy Mediaeval costumes and inevitably said the execrable line "...We are but a simple people..." in inexplicable Californian accents.
Do it by lockesbrokenleg	Mar 21st, 2009 04:24:22 PM
We need another good sci fi show on TV since BSG is over.
Hahahahah The Next gen era is dead as a doornail by picardsucks	Mar 21st, 2009 04:26:47 PM
You guys got a nifty comic book out of it though. Fuck that fat android Data!!! Ha Ha in 40 years maybe you guys get a reboot. Hope it's DS9 that gets a reverential treatment though, Next Gen sucks. Any ship that looks like the inside of a Hilton Garden Inn sucks!!! Like I said earlier, Olmos, Hogan, The Sack, Bamber and Trish for the Big E sister ship Excalibur!!!!
Great post Ray Gamma by SantiagoAtez	Mar 21st, 2009 04:39:36 PM
had me laughing...all very true
Bjornegar by Dr.DirtyD	Mar 21st, 2009 04:41:27 PM
Warp 11 is a crappy star trek themed band from Sacramento. I know "crappy" is a little vague and subjective; I see and hear little originality or creativity...mostly just standard funk-rock and trekkie posturing. No Kill I is THE best star trek themed band...and Stovokor, the Klingon Metal band are impressive as well. You can hear both of them for free on Myspace.
NO TV SERIES. STICK TO MOVIES. by eXcommunicated	Mar 21st, 2009 04:43:57 PM
This new cast of JJ's needs to stick with movies. PERIOD. Have a good run of 3 or 4 movies, THEN a few years later go with a TV series. That puts the next TV series around 2020. PERFECT. Around that time, hopefully, we'll be back on the moon and planning our jump to Mars. Perfect time to start up a new series with a whole new cast and all new tech. Set it a generation after TNG/DS9/VOY. Paramount needs to do this shit right.
You want a new Trek series, Fuller? Make STAR TREK: NEW FRONTIE by SpyGuy	Mar 21st, 2009 05:06:02 PM
Peter David's STAR TREK: NEW FRONTIER is easily the best Trek since DEEP SPACE NINE ended. Make it happen, Bryan!
NO, NO, NO by NeoDevilbaneX	Mar 21st, 2009 05:06:55 PM
It's bad enough that the new film goes back to the well with Kirk'n Spock (after already doing a prequel in the Enterprise TV series), that an ensuing series AGAIN returns to the 23rd century... just... no. Fuck no. It doesn't need to be set in the 24th century, but maybe go even further. The 25th, 26th, maybe even the 29th when we saw Starfleet are time police as well. Something NEW. I have no interest in bolding going back to where we've already fucking been decades ago.
Don't quite get the love for DS9... by DoctorZoidberg	Mar 21st, 2009 05:06:55 PM
I mean Quark, Odo, the wrinkled nose butch chick, Cisco's annoying kid, the fact that they just sit out there by the wormhole. There were just too many annoying things about that show. Couldn't get into it, and I tried.
Don't do it. by jimmy_009	Mar 21st, 2009 05:08:55 PM
Please don't. Let Trek rest for a while until someone has something better than an idea "kicking around" to go back to the swingin' 60's.
Star Trek: Special Victims Unit by CrashPanda	Mar 21st, 2009 05:12:04 PM
you know it'll happen
CSI Starfleet with the EMH Program by lockesbrokenleg	Mar 21st, 2009 05:14:04 PM

NG was great, Voyager had its moments, and by DoctorZoidberg	Mar 21st, 2009 05:16:52 PM

My version of a new Star Trek series by ShadowVision	Mar 21st, 2009 05:17:00 PM
I always had this idea of a Star Trek series that takes place in the future called Star Trek Beyond. The captain of the ship could be genetically created and possess traits from the various captains from other series. His conflict could be whether or not he made decisions on his own or if they were based on his genetic coding. The series would be more darker and reflect a future of increased conflict. The ship could have a exploration/ cruise mode and a battle mode where it transforms into a fighter ship. For crew I would have a member of the Q who is under strict orders to observe but not interfere, a set of twins who communicate telepathically, etc.
and Enterprise wasn't all bad by DoctorZoidberg	Mar 21st, 2009 05:17:06 PM

and Enterprise wasn't all bad by DoctorZoidberg	Mar 21st, 2009 05:17:11 PM

I'd pass on that ShadowVision by DoctorZoidberg	Mar 21st, 2009 05:18:29 PM
Besides isn't all Trek taking place in the future?
eXcommunicated, you serious? by YackBacker	Mar 21st, 2009 05:45:45 PM
2020? When we "go back to the Moon"? Dude, we're not going back to the Moon for a really fucking long time as it looks right now. Besides, why would any of this matter? Or whether J.J. Abrams could successfully produce 3-4 films in front of another TV series taking place. STAR TREK is a TV show that just happened to be made into some films, not the other way around. Sure, crappy efforts like VOYAGER will fuck up the whole brand, but that would happen regardless of where you place it in sequence with the movies. If the show is good, it's worth it. Simple as that.
"they seem to have lost the ‘60s fun..." by Royston Lodge	Mar 21st, 2009 05:47:04 PM
Oh, please, spare us. Does he need to be reminded that the original series was ingloriously CANCELLED? Let's really think about this idea. Let's see, the new Battlestar Galactica has been hailed as as a triumph, and this guy thinks tv sci-fi needs to go back to the "FUN OF THE 60's"??!?!?!?!? No, no, no...
What is left to cover? by Charlie_Allnut	Mar 21st, 2009 05:50:24 PM
Honestly what can you do that hasn't already been done? They would really have to shake up the format to gain viewers beyond trekkies and 12 year olds. I'm sick of the format of: Hey there's a new planet/crisis, lets send the whole command cadre and no one else down to take care of it! Nevermind the other hundreds of people on the ship, the Commanding Officer is clearly the only interesting character onboard!
Enterprise.... by emeraldboy	Mar 21st, 2009 05:52:48 PM
There was a scene in Enterprise where two of the characters where in what appeared to be a Sauana Like room. Stripped down to there undies. That scene was pretty hot and the two characters were Tpau and The guy from the mid west who was Archers right hand man. It was bold and risky thing to do. and it never ever happened again. cast were told to keep there clothes on!
Photoboy hit it on the head by InfinityWave	Mar 21st, 2009 05:59:28 PM
The 'established past' is not fertile ground for a forward thinking sci-fi show like Trek. It was a noose around Enterprise's neck, and it would be the same for any other TOS era show. Move forward. Isn't that what sci-fi is all about? Can't people come up with a great new show premise that is set ahead of TNG, DS9, Voyager and that is accessible to new fans without contradicting or ignoring what the existing fans have paid for all these years? Someone will eventually. I hope the new movie will be amazing, but part of me thinks it'll delay any progress on the heart of Trek - a TV series - for years longer than it would have taken otherwise.
Why I loved DS9. by Royston Lodge	Mar 21st, 2009 06:02:22 PM
1) Politics. 2) Espionage. 3) War. 4) Jake was the Anti-Wesley. 5) Ferengi make great ongoing characters. 6) Commander Sisko was badass like Samuel L. Jackson. 7) It upped the alien quotient for a Trek show. It wasn't a "homo-sapiens only club". 8) It got us out from under Starfleet's bootheels and let the writers explore what live might be like for civilians living in the less seemly quarters of the Quadrant.
Little bit of a spoiler maybe but by Tommy999	Mar 21st, 2009 06:08:34 PM
It's my understanding that the timeline from the movie is an alternate version of the timeline caused by Nero going back in time and blowing up (I'm guessing Vulcan) going by the countdown comics but as Star Trek tends to go, the timelines usually end up being restored and everything goes back to peachy normal. So is Fuller wanting to do a TOS era series or are we going to have a no happily ever after ending to the movie which leaves the timeline as is thereby allowing Fuller to use all the flashy new sets and such from the movie
Ok, so you all hated Voyager but... by BiggusDickus	Mar 21st, 2009 06:30:01 PM
...how about a series based around the USS Relativity, the 29th century timeship from the Voyager episode 'Relativity'? That might work!
how about all you fuckin nerds grow a pair by Kenny_Fuckin_Powers	Mar 21st, 2009 06:43:55 PM
and try and lose your virginities. i mean shit, he wants to "mount" a new star trek show? besides, does anyone think they could even come close to what BSG did with a show on a ship for the past four years?
For the record by Ray Gamma	Mar 21st, 2009 07:16:01 PM
By its very nature, the premise of DS9 was STATIC, STATIC, STATIC. It was crap. They had a fucking tailor as one of the characters. He was only acceptable in hindsight because we were all too busy directing our hate at the clownish fat gimp Neelix from Voyager.
BSG's pedestal by InfinityWave	Mar 21st, 2009 07:22:06 PM
That show started out firing on all cylinders, and had two series of mystery, action, suspense, incredible character development - then pissed it all away in two final series of mopey, self-important, self-destructive, nonsense. I can't believe how radically it turned from completely compelling sci-fi to a bunch of dimly lit, bottle episodes with angry drunks mumbling at each other in undertones. BSG drank itself dead with its own Kool-Aid.
Fuller - Please do something else by _Maltheus_	Mar 21st, 2009 07:27:55 PM
I was a big trekkie, but the concept is done, as far as I'm concerned. I would have loved for him to be doing the Abrams movie, giving it that 60s look and feel, but I certainly do not want to see another prequel series. If he must do a series, set it at least 100 years after DS9. But Fuller has to come to terms with the fact that he's getting older, and like every talented person, the talent won't last. He needs to use this time to do another unique series that's capable of lasting. Star Trek just doesn't work in these times.
Of COURSE they can do 23rd century well. by 900LBGorilla	Mar 21st, 2009 07:59:18 PM
We have seen a very limited story of that century primarily from the perspective of a few people on one frigging ship. That era has MASSIVE potential for good stories. Saying their hands are too tied is like saying you cant write a good show about the 20th century….because of all the continuity problems (in fact the latter is far harder) – this theory keeps being reiterated here and is UTTER nonsense. Throwing away Roddenberry’s no-internal conflict utopian nonsense of the TNG era all by itself broadens the story possibilities immensely. All you need is someone with talent to do it
Odkin, that was the original premise for Voyager. by Rakafraker	Mar 21st, 2009 08:10:41 PM
And as much as some ppl hated the idea, it was supposed to be about Wesely Crusher after turning into a Traveller. It was supposed to be a different cast (almost) every week except for the Traveller, who was only supposed to observe, but not change anything. Except for the Crusher part, I thought it was an excellent idea for Star Trek, and it truly would have gone where no one has gone before, plus we could've seen all the cool stuff that we always wondered about, and it wouldn't have gotten stale very quickly, AND just imagine the cameo appearances (not to mention it truly could be like the Twilight Zone format!). sigh!
You Won't See a Trek series by SWEEP	Mar 21st, 2009 08:31:42 PM
for at least 6 more years, Paramount will make way more money from movies so they wont greenlight a series that they think may lessen interest in the movies. There gonna want to get 2 maybe 3 movies out of this cast, then you will see a tv show(maybe).
"Bryan Fuller Wants To 'Mount' Star Trek" by pokadoo	Mar 21st, 2009 08:38:55 PM
"I'd like to take Star Trek to a sleezy motel and do things you can only do in Bankok. You get my drift friend?"
Suggestion by Cobbio	Mar 21st, 2009 09:32:48 PM
I'm lukewarm on Trek in general, though certain aspects of it are mildly cool. Thankfully, I'm excited as hell for Abrams' kickass war drama Trek. In my opinion, it's about fucking time. Brannon and Braga are two of the cheesiest dipshits to ever think they know science fiction. "Voyager" and "Enterprise" were unwatchable piles of stinky shit. Janeway was the worst, most pathetic excuse for a "captain" I've ever seen. The Native American guy who played her second in command should've been in charge. But even then, I thought the show was cheese. "Battlestar Galactica" took science fiction seriously. Thank God for Ron Moore and his kickass, in-your-face take on the genre. Because cheesepuff science fiction is just that: cheese. Star Trek is cheese. Always has been. It's not thought-provoking, it's G-rated kiddie flavor of the week. There isn't even a larger story arc to follow. Well, except for "Deep Space 9". This is open to interpretation, of course, but I suggest to Bryan Fuller: don't do anything with Star Trek. Seriously, stay pretty fucking far away from it. If you want to make a science fiction show, I say "Hell yes!" But make it something non-Trek. You want to re-interpret Trek in the Abrams' action-packed mode, right? Give it more drama? More immediacy? more intensity? I absolutely support this instinct. I applaud you for it. But don't resort to freakin' hamfisted Trek to do it. Take another road: create a new property from the ground up. You'll be happier you did.
SWEEP, actually TV shows are more profitable than films by YackBacker	Mar 21st, 2009 09:41:36 PM
If they are successful. Less people go to movies nowadays. And a successful TV show rakes in revenue off of the inital order by a network, the DVD sales, etc. And with STAR TREK, it's all about the licensing anyway. Trust me, Paramount/CBS wants another series. There's much less risk involved than what comes with a $150 million movie.
Make a right-wing STAR TREK series... by BurnHollywood	Mar 21st, 2009 09:43:41 PM
Decades after NEMESIS, a massive war has concluded between the Federation and Klingons on one side and the Romulans and Cardassians on the other. Both sides took massive losses and entire worlds were destroyed, and on top of that, the Borg (as usual) are waiting to make their move on all. This series would be about the remorseless captain and crew of the Enterprise-G, veterans of some of the worst fighting, whose primary goal is reestablishing Federation control over as many of the destroyed worlds as possible, and secondarily, to convert as many Romulan and Cardassian worlds to their side. Naturally, there will be an underling (doctor or Federation emissary) who doesn't share his reactionary methodology, and that's where all the dramatic tension flows from. Pacing and tone will be similar to BSG, hugely dissimilar to past TREK series.
YackBacker by SWEEP	Mar 21st, 2009 10:02:11 PM
Not in this case. I think this movie is going to make 300 million domestically another 200 international. people who dont even like star trek are excited by the trailers. A tv show of star trek is actually the greater risk.(2-3 mil cost per episode/22 eps in season and if it doesnt succeed?)I dont think they want anything that would distract from these movies and this cast. Case in point I bet that Sex and the City movie made shitload more money than the series did dvd's and all. That being said I'd still love a new series. Live Long and Prosper.
Federation needs a revolution. by kabong	Mar 21st, 2009 10:03:29 PM
Rebels slaughter Starfleet Fascist Command to liberate the galaxy. Eat phaser, ya Fed fuckas'!
kabong by BurnHollywood	Mar 21st, 2009 10:18:46 PM
I'll let ya do an entire season's worth of stories on that once Paramount calls me back... Yeah, right...get ready for more of the fucking same.
So much dumb-fuckery here by ByTor	Mar 21st, 2009 10:19:51 PM
OK. Look. The problem with (insert-name-of-your-least-fav orite-Trek-series-here) was not the premise, and it was not the time it was set in. If you think Enterprise would've gone from suck to perfect by moving it ahead 250 years, then you're a moron. And the thing that made TOS work so well was not "60's sense of fun," so Fuller is clearly an idiot, too. TOS was simply more character-driven and aimed at an older audience. I liked TNG for what it was, but it was very much plot-driven and not character-driven, and seemed to be aimed more at fourteen-year-olds. When it hit its highs, it was very entertaining, but often it was crippled by the lack of internal conflict and reliance on technobabble resolutions (a natural result of plot-driven stories). And shut the fuck up about what Roddenberry intended. Roddenberry had a nice idea, but history clearly shows that he didn't know fuck-all about making quality entertainment. Roddenberry's idea of a great Trek movie was TMP. The real brains behind what TOS ultimately became was Gene Coon, and as soon as he left, the episode quality dropped significantly. The reason BSG is hailed -- often by people who don't generally like SF -- is because it's completely, utterly character-driven, and it doesn't treat the audience like children or idiots. THAT'S the gold standard. So, you wanna make a new Trek series? I'm fine with that. And I don't give a flying fuck whether it's a prequel or a sequel or a parallel universe or whatever. And for the most part I don't care about the premise (as long as it's not moronic). Just get quality writers, and focus on the characters first. That will rock.
Enterprise... by automaticbutt	Mar 21st, 2009 10:30:22 PM
was just starting to get interesting when they canned it. Getting back to future directions, I foresee a show that will be Trek in name only. Gone will be the nerd appeal that made the show unique(boring forehead aliens, neat and spotless starships with wall-to-wall carpeting, passionate finger waggling speeches about living one's life nobly, etc.), to be replaced with angsty young cadets, glimpses of flesh, cursing, handheld shots and fast cuts, in other words, just what JJ is going to give us. Probably a good thing, provided they have decent writers on board. It's a whole new generation of youngsters out there, and the Trek of old, as fondly as we continue to look back upon it, just wouldn't wash.
Oh, yeah...the captain of the Enterprise-G is Ro Laren by BurnHollywood	Mar 21st, 2009 10:33:26 PM
After the Maquis were liquidated on DS9, she was captured by the Cardassians, and in an experimental procedure conducted by a sadistic researcher (Gul Madred), kept in stasis to be routinely thawed out and tortured for information. Eventually she was forgotten, but a power outage by a Federation attack freed her in the 25th century (still in her forties), whereupon she wiped out the Cardassian base and commandeered a ride home. Admiral Chakotay was instrumental in having her installed as the Enterprise's captain, admiring the zest she applied to hunting Cardassians as an advisor during the war. Hell, yes, I'm trying to shoehorn Michelle Forbes/Cain into STAR TREK...she and the Pegasus were the best thing about BSG...
As if I needed another reason to give up on television... by tangcameo	Mar 21st, 2009 10:34:28 PM
...you present me with one anyway.
Make it a Blakes 7 ripoff and I MIGHT watch it... by tangcameo	Mar 21st, 2009 10:36:36 PM
Make the Federation evil, like in the Brit show, and make the crew a bunch of excons (some wrongly accused and some not) and MAYBE I will watch.
Still have no interest in the movie... by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 10:48:20 PM
...but have quite a bit in a new TV series by THIS PERSON! Not some company schmuck who has no concept of Trek history.
Jaka: you FAIL by ByTor	Mar 21st, 2009 10:55:04 PM
The only people who give a flying fuck about Trek history are Trek nerds, and there aren't enough Trek nerds to make anything succeed. The ONLY way Trek succeeds -- as a movie, as a TV show, whatever -- is if it can reach out and grab non-Trek-nerds. Those people don't want to hear about continuity and don't give a fuck whether the Enterprise is built on the ground or in space. Make a series by the fans, for the fans, and you will get convoluted shit that crawls up its own asshole with references and continuity.
New title sequence... by BurnHollywood	Mar 21st, 2009 10:55:07 PM
"Space... the Final Frontier. These are the campaigns of the warship Enterprise. "Its five-year mission: to reclaim lost ground, to rise to the challenge of rival civilizations, to bravely advance where no man has dared before!" Cue an EMPIRE STRIKES BACK style military march...
The REAL Trek universe is having it's revolution... by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 10:55:42 PM
...right now as all the major book lines (TNG, DS9, Voyager, Titan (Riker's ship) - as well as other story elements like Ezri Dax's command of the Aventine) have been moving towards one story/timeline for the last year or so. Now, they're there and it's the stories are kicking much ass. Worf is Picard's first office. He and Beverly are married and expecting. As mentioned, Riker has his own ship and Trio is there with him. Also, the Borg have changed, "Resistance is futile. You will be anihilated." And it's my understanding that following the books I'm reading (Destiny - a none show specific trilogy) the Borg will no longer be the Federations biggest threat (after they destroy large portions of the Federation and kill 30 billion beings). Enterprise was a pile a cha-ching enduced bullshit and I find the casting on the new "movie" to be laughable. Read books.
ByTor by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 11:00:04 PM
Seriously, preach at somebody who cares. A'ight? I didn't request your pass/fail on my post - I was just expressing my opinion because people who actually matter read these talkbacks (ya know!?). Also, I'm a Trek geek and proud of it - yo' mamma is a nerd. Last, since clearly you know everything about Hollywood and have all the money in the world, would you please get on with making this movie already?
Awesome. by LeviDTinker	Mar 21st, 2009 11:08:44 PM
This would be awesome its time for a new trek series, definately been to long. I like the idea of it takeing place in classic trek era but on another ship. And fuller would be the perfect person to helm a new trek series.
New Frontier would make a GREAT Trek Series by crankyoldguy	Mar 21st, 2009 11:09:18 PM
Peter David's New Frontier would/would've made a MUCH better Trek series than Enterprise (or a lot of Voyager). The stories run from intense drama to humor-filled WTF? In other words, a lot like TOS (and DS9, too, which far surpassed TNG by its third/fourth season on to the end, really). And I'm with you on the recent books Jaka. I like the Titan series and the crossover 'Destiny' books, though the Klingon-specific ones don't work for me as well. What do you think of the New Frontier tales? Calhoun is definitely the most Kirk-like of TNG/DS9/Voyager-era Trek.
BSG was too often.... by crankyoldguy	Mar 21st, 2009 11:17:12 PM
a military drama with some Science Fiction (and religo-bullshit) trappings. Character-driven, yes? Interesting (at times, not always, sorry), yes. Ponderous at times? Sorry, yes. Fun, though? Never. Meanwhile... I was at a 'Monsters Vs. Aliens' screening today and some "writers" in front of us complained about all the kids at the screening. Pompous jJackasses. They also bitched about having to move down a row to help close up seat gaps, whining they were 'press' (We were ALL media you arrested-development doprs, the rest of us just had kids w/ us you assholes). I considered slappin' them upside the head, but had my boy and one of his friends w/ me and of course, had to set a more restrained example. Did wonder if any of those clowns write here on AICN? Probably some other sites like Crud....uh...Chud.
You want a decent Trek? by Literarywanderer	Mar 21st, 2009 11:18:33 PM
Then get decent writers. It isn't that hard. This dream that mankind will become infallible is a dream. Roddenberry was a dreamer, but if mankind could create the bomb before solving their problems then that is a sign we aren't going to ever be perfect. Make a Trek with imperfect characters, have the courage to create characters who fail, and make a vast universe of possibilities and then you'll have a successful Trek. I'm so tired of this liberal bullshit that has tainted the original Trek. The universe should be the world writ large. Have problems, have humnanity trying to find their place in it and then you'll find s story the world is interested in.
and Bytor by crankyoldguy	Mar 21st, 2009 11:18:45 PM
clearly, you're a wussy.
Sorry... by Literarywanderer	Mar 21st, 2009 11:20:07 PM
So drunk I am making mistakes. But you get my drift...
good point Lit, look at some of the best TOS scripts by crankyoldguy	Mar 21st, 2009 11:27:10 PM
Richard Matheson, Jerome Bixby, and yes, Ellison, even if re-written. But the orig. Trek had plenty of 'liberal' ideas, don't be delusional about that. But '60s liberalism, wasn't the liberalism of the '80s or '90s.
crankyoldguy by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 11:27:30 PM
Not to take away from whomever may or may not be creating and/or writing the next ST TV series (as there will be one eventually), but I would love to see Peter David involved in any way. I wish he'd be allowed, asked or interested (don't know if any of that ever took place) in the past as his ST "voice" is by far the most pure and clear when working with any character in this universe. His books consistenly make me feel as if I'm watching, not reading. And his dialogue is just outstanding. So yeah, that would definitely be a good thing. Next Frontier, though - I don't know. I have to be honest, I didn't keep up with them. They gave him complete freedom to create (so you would THINK I'd have followed along) and as I already read all Trek books (other than Enterprise), other books, comic books, surf the net, watch tv and occasionally sleep (I work when I'm not unemployed - lol), I just found it too much to keep up, so I stopped. I believe I actually have a couple on the shelf I need to read, too. But still, Peter is the man and I would definitely be interested. I'm pretty sure the resemblance to Kirk (in attitude and action) is not accidental, though. And ya know... Vanguard is in TOS timeline, and DS9 (which I agree has the best seasons (the latter) BY FAR of any series - but TNG might have some of the best single/double eps, and TOS will always be the respeceted original classic) was a great idea that needed some room to grow (like the Defiant and war). If they do a series in that era I hope somebody puts two and two together and has the ship stop by Vanguard (Starbase 47)from time to time.
TOS pushed liberalism.... by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 11:33:06 PM
...on television in ways it hadn't been done before because it was "science fiction". Using that as a starting point has allowed Trek to cover every hot topic of the day while each show was in production. Roddenberry's idyllic vision of the not too distant future was liberal in and of itself at that time. He just happened to write the lead of the series as a "man of action" (there were plenty of thinkers around) and the Shat took the ball and ran.
TOS pushed liberalism.... by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 11:33:12 PM
...on television in ways it hadn't been done before because it was "science fiction". Using that as a starting point has allowed Trek to cover every hot topic of the day while each show was in production. Roddenberry's idyllic vision of the not too distant future was liberal in and of itself at that time. He just happened to write the lead of the series as a "man of action" (there were plenty of thinkers around) and the Shat took the ball and ran.
BrowncoatJedi by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 11:40:58 PM
lol - Clearly you've read all 400 of them on my wall. Again, lol. What is wrong with people tonight? Jumpin' up in this talkback spoutin' nonsense out they necks. SOME of the Trek books are absolutely hackery. But most of them are from waaaay far back. And even then to lump them all into that catergory is just silly. These days (and for the last 10-15 years or so) Trek books kick much ass. I have a library of books and would put at least 10 Trek books in my list of all-time greats. I've read Trek MANY Trek books that shit all over the last two movies, all of Enterprise and large portions of Voyager. Also, what is this "licensed" thing you speak of. I only read cannon; and you can clearly tell if you follow the books which are, and which aren't. I read the books that fill in the gaps and are FINALLY progressing the stoy of the Trek universe forward. Y'all can keep going back to eat leftovers 'til the cows come home. I'm lookin' for something I've never tasted before.
Eh... by Jaka	Mar 21st, 2009 11:44:28 PM
...didn't finish that thought properly. Trek books aren't licensed - they're released as official Trek by Simon Schuster/Paramount/CBS Televison. After that they're either cannon, or not. But to think that somebody is licensing out Trek to writers is just all kinds of backwards. The people who own the Trek properties are paying working writers (some of them QUITE good) to create these stories.
Prime Directive, Best Destiny, Federation... by crankyoldguy	Mar 21st, 2009 11:54:08 PM
All better than most Trek films. Yes, apples/oranges and books can do things films can't and visa-versa. Interesting that Best Destiny is part of what's driven the upcoming Trek new-launch movie. But Browncoast, there are plenty of great/good/fun-read Trek novels. The original Imzadi (not so much the sequel), the New Frontier Books, and others besides the ones I named in subject heading.
I could name a bunch of 'em... by Jaka	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:00:00 AM
...but I'll spare the poor, angry haters this evening. Best Destiny and Federation (if you mean "Articles of...") would be in my list of "best ever" FOR SURE! President Baco is one of my all time favorite non-Starship characters (love her assistant, too- can't remember her name... Piniero?).
Klingons.... by Jaka	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:05:54 AM
...will be a problem if they do a new series in TO timeline (but I guess, technically, they've already sorted that out and most people would probably not notice - seeing as how they aren't GEEKS, lol). Regarding the Klingon books; I read DeCandido's "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" and I actually REALLY enjoyed it due to the familiarity of the characters. I then ordered all three of his IKS Gorkon books, but only book one and three made it to the bookstore. I've still not found book two - so I'm waiting. But genreally I find that writers need to be careful with Klingons as they're easy to use as a crutch. Also, it's just so hard to write antything better than what happened to Worf over his run on the series. As DS9 is my favorite series, I really hope they do more of the "Lost Era" Terok Nor books (it's not looking very likely right now).
I wonder how many.... by Jaka	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:11:42 AM
pennies I put in Herc's pocket with this diarrhea of the mind? lol
Sonavabitch, Jaka... by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:16:05 AM
Thanks for mentioning "her"...Dax can be Enterprise-G's "better half", endlessly bickering with Ro about her methods. Sorry, I'm having fun with my idea...carry on.
lol @ "her" by Jaka	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:18:43 AM
I guess I should have specified that it's Ezri, also. Not Jadzia. Please, continue with the ideas. They're often so much more interesting than opinions. :)
trek died with roddenberry by Happy Boy	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:15:38 AM
DS9 wasn't Trek it was Babylon 5. Voyager was crap. Enterprise was irrelevant... Let Trek just die, do something else vultures
HAPPY BOY by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:24:09 AM
How fucking stupid are you? DS9 came before B5. And it sure as fuck was Star Trek. At times, some of the better Trek. So stop telling the rest of us what Trek is, you goddamn stupid motherfucking baby-raping idiot. Your ignorance must be legend wherever you come from.
Happy Boy by MattmanReturns	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:08:47 AM
Babylon 5 was shit. DS9 was quality television, well written, good production values, and thought provoking. You don't know wtf you're talking about.
We'll see... by Boborci	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:11:57 AM

MattmanReturns by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:27:36 AM
Actually, Babylon Seasons 2-4 were some of the best scifi television that's ever been made. I'm afraid you are nearly as pathetic as Happy Boy. I bet you guys could have some great butt sex together.
@Jaka by Dingbatty	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:30:11 AM
Book 2: http://tinyurl.com/dzcoq9
Thanks, Jaka by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:57:14 AM
Point is, if you can't do something interesting, new and daring within existing continuity, you aren't doing your job as a writer. I'm really not digging the new TREK movie. By the time Kirk became the Enterprise's captain (Starfleet's youngest), he'd survived a genocide, been relentlessly hazed in Starfleet Academy, and had a distinguished run as a lieutenant on the Farragut. This well-established backstory is evidently being trashed in the name of some overrated young director's "vision" of Kirk as some young rebel... I say, color within the lines or create your own bloody universe to "reboot".
BurnHollywood, You're an Idiot by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:08:24 AM
Your point is total bullshit. Why is a good writer required to work within existing continuity? Your stupid fucking statement has no logic. It was the writers job of the new Trek film to specifically work OUTSIDE of Trek continuity. This does not mean the writers are not doing their job. What a fucking stupid asshole you must be. You're merely stating your limited and ignorant preference. "You aren't doing your job as a writer" my ass. Goddamn, what a pathetic fucking fanboy you must be. Please, kill yourself.
The last event in the ST Universe was what? by ides	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:13:04 AM
Nemesis? The end of Voyager? I'm talking about normal chronology, not one of the episodes where someone from the future comes back in time. Wherever it ended, it needs something better.
BurnHollywood... by BiggusDickus	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:16:40 AM
Chap, If I had any money, I'd pay you to go make that! Top idea! Go to the head of the class!
ByTor by BiggusDickus	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:18:37 AM
...without the nerd factor, you're going to end up with another 'Alien Nation' and no-one will watch it.
Bryan Fuller is so over Heroes by zooch	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:50:53 AM
and so am I
Akira Cowabunga by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:56:42 AM
Are you planning to spit or swallow when JJ lets go in your mouth? The entire series is in the process of being retconned because that douche has no imagination, and you're telling the rest of us to line up and enjoy the flavor of no-talent jism.
BurnHollywood, You're Still an Idiot by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:03:54 AM
The only thing I'm telling you to do is to not pass judgment until you've seen the fucking film you stupid fucking idiot. Any fool who is condemning the film based on a few clips and some plot details is nothing more than a sad fucking fanboy stuck in the past. Things chance, cumwad. I'm looking forward to the film, and I grew up with TOS. I may or may not like the movie, but I'm giving it a chance. I'm going to see it first before I say whether it's good or bad. There's no way in the world you can tell that right now. Thus, you're a dumbfuck fanboy who probably dresses like a Klingon so you can get a hard on. Then you probably stick it in your mother or your sister. Goddamn fucking imbecile.
Sticking within continuity... by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:04:03 AM
...The story practically writes itself: Why is Kirk Starfleet's youngest Captain? Because he's an overachiever possessed by survivor's guilt, who was relentlessly victimized by classmate Finnegan and his pals, but only pushed himself harder, even when he was assigned to the Farragut. By the time he gets to the Enterprise, he's decorated and respected, but a closet emotional basket case. On top of that, his second in command, Spock, is having "illogical" issues of his own, feeling slighted by Starfleet when Pike left command. STAR TREK should be about how these two resolved their differences, conquered their demons and built a lifelong friendship. Instead, we're getting a STAR WARS: A NEW HOPE rehash. For Christ's sake...Nero is even driving around his own Death Star ("machine of war" the book synopsis calls it) around!
"NERDS!!!" by shellfishh	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:36:50 AM
So says Ogre. So say we all.
No more origins series!!!!! There is no mystery.. by Damien Chowder	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:47:00 AM
Origins should only be peppered into a season of something. Not a whole series.
CeejayNightwing by DC Films	Mar 22nd, 2009 06:45:05 AM
Trust me, i don't wanna see Trek portray the future as a series of fist-fights either. But i think you're over-simplifying things - it's not a question of TOS = fistfights / TNG = interlectual heaven. TOS tackled many of the issues TNG did, just in a more entertaining way. That's not to say TNG was never entertaining, but, due no doubt to the 80s/90/s era it was far to politically correct to challenge the viewer. TNG's strength was Stewart and Spinner acting chops and this is where it succeeded; the great ideas aren't so great when the acting chops aren't centre stage (Best TNG was Times Arrow, which centered on Stewart). But often the shakespearean monologues detracted form the concept - the show got too issues based. ST TOS/movies was simple: Plot (high concept idea) & Confict (how this effect the core relationship between Kirk, Spock and Bones). Biggest difference between the two shows is TOS kept this core relationship as the focus, whereas TNG tried to be broader by giving equal focus to the peripheral relationships. Noble effort, but in practice it simply watered it down. Be honest, you'd watch a new TNG and when you realized this episode wasn't really about Picard & Data you were a sad, but watched it anyway, hoping next weeks ep would make up for it. From the Kirk/Spock centric trailer it seems Abrams is on to this - i hope.
Akira Cowabunga by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 08:37:24 AM
Sorry...almost forgot: fuck you and the big Hentai she-male cock you rode in on. You're an illiterate twat who tries to cover up his banal idealism with lots of potty language. I'd say "grow up", but you probably are, complete with all the silly fucking face piercings and dorky flame tattoos to prove it...you probably jizzed in your pants when you saw Nero. Tool.
BiggusDickus by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 08:39:08 AM
Thanks, bro.
Fuller's ST ideaa... by MCVamp	Mar 22nd, 2009 09:56:27 AM
Star Trek--Magic Hour. After a quirky but cute and young female Starfleet captain on a five-year mission loses her first officer, the ghost of Sulu begins aiding her through a talking pie.
JarJar could have broke new space with revisioning by kabong	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:17:25 AM
but without trashing the continuity and canon established in TOS. But indications are that JarJar's Trek version is a deliberate attempt to cancel the canon/continuity. I'm in favor of some re-imagining for Trek because all the previous movies have been boring. But show some imagination in the re-imagination, not just put a bowl-cut Jake Lloyd pod-racer scene, a saloon scene . . .
Doc Cottle: Federation Doctor by Alientoast	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:37:51 AM
They need to give that actor the same role in a new Trek. "Doctor, your smoking of cancer causing cigarettes, especially in front of sick patients, is most disturbing" "So is your sense of hair style, you damned Vulcan. Now get the hell out of my sickbay, I have work to do!"
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! by jonsnow	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:39:34 PM
You might as well hire One of the judges of Dances with the Stars. You need some serious talent to resurect Trek. Pushing Daisies was his latest idea, are you serious? What a boring show. Let the bloody show die until someone like J.J. Abrams can put together a great cast and script writers(J.M.S. perhaps) like in his shows Alias and Lost and create a serious well though out story arc like Battlestar or B5.
BiggusDickus by ByTor	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:45:45 PM
The hard-core nerd factor is irrelevant, and it's about time Trek nerds learned this. Let's say the Trek novels sell about 500,000 copies. (I doubt most sell anywhere near that, but let's play it safe.) Now I'd guess that the majority of hardcore Trek nerds buy the books, but let's say only one quarter do. So that's 2,000,000 people. Make a TV show for 2,000,000 people? Doomed to failure. Christ, Everybody Hates Chris outdraws that. Make a movie for 2,000,000 people? That's, what, $20m at the box office? Flopsy-flopsy. Can't argue with numbers. You can double my figures if you want, but it still doesn't change anything.
Just gimme a series based on Wesley Crusher! by DoctorZoidberg	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:49:36 PM
He is the next step in human evolution! All hail Wes!
Star Trek belongs on TV by greenstyle92	Mar 22nd, 2009 12:58:35 PM
It's the franchise's first, best destiny. So this would be cool.
how about reboot TNG? by greenstyle92	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:00:54 PM
If Abrams is doing rebooted classic in the movies, The new show should be TNG rebooted with the changes from the new movie in effect. And Patrick Stewart could be in the pilot as "old Picard" giving advice to his young self!
TOS era, different ship by br1947	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:02:04 PM
I could see that working, have faith in Fuller. I really don't want a reboot though, just make a new ship in the same era, side step continuity. Make a long running joke with the captain & XO reading reports of what Kirk 'just did' and wondering how he gets away with it all. Maybe some sort of arc that results in the new ship making some noble sacrifice that results in them being forgotten in history. Something like the Enterprise-C in TNG.
cool idea greenstyle92 by br1947	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:04:02 PM
but damn would it be confusing! lol
Entire Galactica cast as the crew by picardsucks	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:40:26 PM
Sister ship of the E, the Excalibur, Commodore Bob(Olmos) Wesley, Science officer Masata (Callius), first officer Apollo, Doc Cottle, Chief Engineer Tigh, Security Chief Starbuck, Communications officer Helo, Helmsman Boomer, Yeoman Helfer, guest apperance by Fleet Admiral Komak (SHATNER!!) Perfect cast let's go with it!!!!!!!!!!
Cheers... by DC Films	Mar 22nd, 2009 01:57:18 PM
FamousEccles, mr sulu & 900LBGorilla
Fuller can do whatever he wants by Lovecraftfan	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:18:32 PM
Its Bryan fuller
Akira by MattmanReturns	Mar 22nd, 2009 02:21:27 PM
Babylon 5 greatest sci-fi? I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. That's like saying "Legend of the Seeker" is the greatest fantasy ever. Jesus. I gotta go brush my teeth.
JJ Abrams FUCKING Star Trek up the ass. by scriptgirl_nipples	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:01:34 PM
He's got a lot to answer for....
Trek was already fucked up the ass by MattmanReturns	Mar 22nd, 2009 03:51:06 PM
You saw Insurrection and Nemesis right?
Thoughts on trek by haywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:06:18 PM
I will be giving the new film the chance it deserves, and I will hold off saying if I like it or not until I walk out that theater, that said. I really like Kirk's original history as it presented itself in the original shows, here and there we would get pieces of information that built up in the viewer's mind what that character had to do to achieve that high rank at that early age. There is something to be said about the fellow that studies hard, works harder, tries his best and gets to were he wants to be. I am not crazy about this "rebel bad boy" who finds his inner genius at command so easy. Have to wait and see. One looks at the Mercury astronauts and you see the rebels, but those fellows worked their asses off every day studying manuals, procedures, picking up flight time. They made it look easy but in reality it took a toll on their own lives. It would be fun to see Kirk as the uptight one and Spock a bit of a madman as he still has no control over his human half. Lets wait and see.
KAHNNNNNNNN!!!!!! by alice 13	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:11:32 PM
is an angel.
Fuck Ron Moore by criticalbliss	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:12:50 PM
Don't let him anywhere CLOSE to Star Trek. He already fucked up BSG, making a great concept somehow misanthropic, misandrist, boring and miserable to stomach. And don't let him near Buck Rogers either. Let him write Oz or something where the characters all DESERVE to die in squalor and misery. Ron Moore is ass.
Bryan Fuller, if you're really a Trek geek... by MasterShake	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:42:39 PM
Set the new series in the time between "Enterprise" and TOS, during the full-on war with the Romulans. And the main thing is...STICK TO CANON! Set it aboard a Daedalus class starship. Starfleet still has LASERS, not PHASERS. Transporter technology is still iffy and consumes horrible amounts of power. Shield technology is fairly new too. No Photon torpedoes, but fusion missles. Hand Lasers look like the ones from the TOS pilot "The Cage". Get the stuff right that "Enterprise" didn't. You've got to her the engines strain when warping. The lights dim from the power it takes to fire weapons and use the transporter. And one person just doesn't poke a few buttons and beam someone, it takes two people and a LOT of setup! If you get these basics right and add great characters and plots, people will come back to Star Trek.
LET TREK DIE. by mode_7	Mar 22nd, 2009 04:58:15 PM
Let the fucker die. Fuck putting a new spin on an old formula. Fuck finding new and creative ways to stretch the canon into something you can work with. Fuck Reboots. GIVE US SOMETHING NEW YOU CREATIVELY BANKRUPT MOTHERFUCKERS.
Don't let Trek die by BlueHawaiiSurfer	Mar 22nd, 2009 05:09:00 PM
I agree with MasterShake. There are a TON of good stories still left in this franchise and a thousand good writers who can tell them. Just do it correctly.
post-TNG ship named USS Enterprise or don't bother by Anakin Whoopass	Mar 22nd, 2009 05:25:01 PM
No more prequel series, no more other ships. Do what Roddenberry did when it was time to make TNG and move the original premise forward past what people expect.
A war series, founding of the federation and no timetravel by Norm	Mar 22nd, 2009 06:07:03 PM
Time travel is shit writing. There's no drama because there's always a reset button within easy reach, and it's just boring. I'm sick of timetravel sci-fi. Actually, the only good time-travel writing I've seen is Lost, and that's because they don't control it. The other problem with setting it post-TNG is that they let the technology become magical. If you can do anything at the push of a button, there are no stories to tell, it's all too easy. I agree with everything MasterShake said. I want to see the birth of the federation, the wars with the Romulans and Klingons, the battles and standoffs that created the neutral zone. Technology that isn't godlike and stil leaves room for some drama. The Enterprise series did everything wrong, but I think there are a ton of good stories to be told in there. It should be tense, like BSG. A hard war, massive losses on both sides, an arms race, battles where it's known ships aren't comming back. A storyline worthy of the founding of an interstellar empire.
HERC! No Big Love finale talkback? by Fico	Mar 22nd, 2009 06:53:45 PM
I used to be bored with the show, but this season has been amazing. Can't believe you're not down with the Principle.
Andromeda should have been a Trek series... by MisterE	Mar 22nd, 2009 07:16:55 PM
"Andromeda" should have been a Star Trek series. It could have been set at the end of the Federation, and would have been the capstone on Roddenberry's Trek legacy. Heck, most of the races on the show were analogues to Trek species, and it was probably a reworked Star Trek concept anyways.
Fuller > Abrams by Geekgasm	Mar 22nd, 2009 07:34:59 PM
Because (a) he's seen Star Trek (b) he likes Star Trek as opposed to constantly telling everybody how much he likes Star Wars better than Star Trek and how much Star Trek would be better if it were like Star Wars and (c) he's a fag, which I'll admit is just a personal preference.
Bjornegar, No Kill I v. Warp 11 by warp11	Mar 22nd, 2009 08:03:13 PM
No Kill I, can you even call what they play music? Warp 11 = innovative.
To those of you wanting a gritty trek war series by greenstyle92	Mar 22nd, 2009 08:52:03 PM
Please be aware that it already exists: DS9 perfectly captured the arc of finding new territory, meeting it's local inhabitants, meeting their Government,(the dominion,) pissing them off, having a slow tense build to war, having war erupt, having that war be bloody and exhausting to both sides, showing the emotional and moral compromises that come with war, and finally showing it end. And while the "good guys" (federation) won, it was everyone who celebrated. DS9 already did it, perfectly.
Why pay a whore for sex when I can get it for free? by Leafar the Lost	Mar 22nd, 2009 09:03:56 PM
In other words, why should I pay $10.00 for a movie ticket to see Star Trek when I can see it for free on TV? I am paying for satelite every month, but you get my point. Most of you get the point. Anyway, I am sure that this Fuller guy is probably looking for a "Smallville" type show. I thought I just had is maybe the show will feature a young Captain Pike? Or, maybe we will finally a Starfleet Academy show? They could do it cheap, not too many special effects, not too many sets since it all takes place on Earth? I am not a producer, so I do not know what the fuck I am doing, but I do know I will be buying a movie ticket to see Kirk and Spock for the next 10 years...
Cheers DC Films by 900LBGorilla	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:35:05 PM
Good stuff
greenstyle92 by BurnHollywood	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:39:08 PM
I absolutely loved DS9...it's the best SF series ever, IMHO (B5 and BSG run a close second). It fully brought the "real world" into TREK. Any successor series should build on its foundation, especially the troubling aspect it introduced with "Section 31". The concept I was playing with in my posts above would be about a Section 31-dominated Federation, and how it finds its way back to a more familiar, TNG mode of life. Just a thought.
Poor Little BurnHollywood by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:42:30 PM
I think I must have hurt your little girl feelings. I'm so so sorry to have exposed you as the immature tard you really are. Perhaps you would like to crawl back into your mother and hide from the big scary world, the horrible horrible world that would mess with Star Trek! Oooh, what a terrible thing. Boo fucking hoo hoo hoo.
Although I DID love DS9 too. by Akira Cowabunga	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:44:07 PM
I'll agree with you there. And B5. So maybe you're OK enough.
Dominion War by MasterShake	Mar 22nd, 2009 10:58:32 PM
I agree with you greenstyle92, in that the Dominion war was the high point of DS9, and was done pretty well. But you also have to admit, it was too much "ships blow up good" without the human pathos behind all those cool phaser blasts and photon torpedoes flying around. The Defiant did get the crap pounded out of her a few times, but it was always pretty pat that it would make it. I want to see more of the human struggle of a crew trying to save a battle-damaged ship, bring it back into battle or just try to get home alive. It doesn't all have to be war and battles either. There should be political manuevering between factions inside and outside the federation. Crews sent on special missions. New species sought as allies, not just "Hi, nice to meet you, let's go over this Federation First Contact checklist." Setting a new series beyond Next Generation just isn't appealing to me either. We don't need more superscience that needs technobabble explanations every episode. Talkbacker Norm said it best that the NextGen tech was getting too magical and god-like. Time travel at will. Perfect matter replication. Force-fields out the wazzoo. Holo decks. GODDAMN HOLODECKS. If I never see another holodeck malfunction episode before I die, it will be too soon.
Warp 11 is pure crap by Shakeshift	Mar 22nd, 2009 11:58:33 PM
Not funny, not musical, not even on-key if you listen close enough. Why are these guys making CD's again?
Peace, Akira... by BurnHollywood	Mar 23rd, 2009 12:04:32 AM
We had fun, didn't we? ;-D And yes, I see your point...why judge the STAR TREK book by its cover at this point? But that's why I'm airing my concerns here, and not on a TREK movie TB (where I'd be legitimately labeled a "hater")...the changed continuity in the movie may work for IT, but the "powers-that-be" may decide that revising the TREK universe in a new TV show might also be a good idea. This would likely throw established elements of the best in the series (especially DS9) out the window. A reboot is in order, but I think DOCTOR WHO offers a much better example: the continuity remains intact, but a major event (a time war that wiped out the Time Lords) has occurred that has fundamentally changed the underlying premise.
26 by DarthFloyd	Mar 23rd, 2009 12:11:21 AM
A new series that takes place in "Real Time" around the planet Bajor. The hero, Dr. Julian Bashir - former agent of secion 31 and Chief Medical Officer of DS9. Dr. Bashir stops threats to the Federation and Bajor while breaking the rules, going rouge, finding moles (and Cardassian Voles) and travelling back and forth from the station to Bajor in a runabout (taking three hours each way). "My name is Julian Bashir, and today is the longest day of my life." The clock is ticking...
MisterE, Andromeda WAS Trek... sort of by br1947	Mar 23rd, 2009 12:23:21 AM
It was based on Gene Roddenberry's notes after his death. At least that's what they said...
STAR TREK is going to be the biggest... by 420 Boylston St	Mar 23rd, 2009 01:02:30 AM
movie of summer? This is Star Trek Herc's talking about here? Goddamn it keep dreaming! I can't believe Star Trek will be as big as Transformers... another Paramount film released this summer. As for Bryan Fuller's idea of a tv series, I don't have much hope for his series since his Voyager sucked ass and taint. Stay with making a Pushing Daisies movie or Wonderfalls or whatever is imaginative for him.
"TOS [is] completely forgettable"?!?!? WTF?!?! by Bob Loblaw Law Blog	Mar 23rd, 2009 03:54:04 AM
Did I really just read that? No disrespect, Motoko Kusanagi, but you're a complete idiot if you really think TOS is forgettable.
Warp Hard: The Captain Cox Story by Stunt Vocalist 709	Mar 23rd, 2009 06:00:49 AM
It's about the good warp and the hard warp and the green girls you made cry it's about shoot a little phaser every day 'til you die. It's a beautiful ride...
I'm up for another series... by GaiustheBrave	Mar 23rd, 2009 07:26:22 AM
got nothin' better to do. And, after the shit fest that the new Trek looks like it'll be (see how I'm reserving judgement) this would be a good antidote. Sure the movie looks action-packed and blah blah blah, but Trek has never been about action, imho.
Section 31 by Harold The Great	Mar 23rd, 2009 07:30:54 AM
was actually pretty cool, hinting that the Federation with it's storybook idealism and values like a shiny apple is rotting from the inside (explaining why it prospers without any sacrifices, when there are other more capable and aggressive forces outside.) They should explore that in a new Trek series. Something's wrong with the federation.
Even the shittiest Trek episode was a THOUSAND times.... by Motoko Kusanagi	Mar 23rd, 2009 08:03:00 AM
...better than everything Farscape ever achieved.
Remember, Rick Berman destroyed the Star Trek... by Leafar the Lost	Mar 23rd, 2009 08:27:06 AM
...Universe by being an incompetent shithead. The new Star Trek movie wipes out all of the "canon" that Trekkies have devoted their lives to. The past 30 years never happened, Trekkies. Its gone! All of that memorized triva is just taking up space in your brain cells. I would tell you to move out of your mom's basement and get a real life, but at this point it would be useless. You might as well accept the fact that you have wasted the last 30 years of your life, and maybe you can reach a sort of "Happy Place" in your mind.
The new Trek Movie... by Furzee	Mar 23rd, 2009 08:28:21 AM
I think we have all psyched ourselves out that we know the whole story for the new Trek Movie. However, I think it would be a great twist (and genius marketing on the part of Abrahms and great acting on the part of Shatner considering his response to the movie thus far) if the slight tinkering with the timeline not only let them reboot the franchise but also allows them to reintroduce a now living older Kirk (in the same time as old Spock /24th century?/ ). It would be a great reveal to create buzz for the movie to those Shat fans that had written it off and also pay homage to the old series. Plus it's a great twist no one at this point is expecting. Anyone else agree??
fuller by ZO	Mar 23rd, 2009 08:47:19 AM
is living off one decent ep of heroes like 3 yrs ago
Zo... by Furzee	Mar 23rd, 2009 09:30:49 AM
Fuller has shown he has a good flair for a story (ex Pushing Daisies). Even if these stories aren't your cup of tea he's still got a good voice for storytelling. But in terms of a Trek franchise, I tend to agree with you. I would prefer a different writer too.
I Just Want Aliens That Look like Aliens! by Ines5	Mar 23rd, 2009 09:48:29 AM
What ever The Next Version of Star Trek is? Please I Beg You Please! Make The ALIENS Look like Actual EXTRATERRESTRIALS From Another Planet or A Different Universe. Like Say For Example Babylon 5 or Farscape or Doctor Who or All 6 Star Wars Films!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I Just Want Aliens That Look like Aliens! by Ines5	Mar 23rd, 2009 09:48:34 AM
What ever The Next Version of Star Trek is? Please I Beg You Please! Make The ALIENS Look like Actual EXTRATERRESTRIALS From Another Planet or A Different Universe. Like Say For Example Babylon 5 or Farscape or Doctor Who or All 6 Star Wars Films!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
revolution82jdl by DoctorWho?	Mar 23rd, 2009 10:06:27 AM
Shut the fuck up... This is science FANTASY. Stick to Arthur C. Clarke for the real shit if you need to but don't tune in to Trek damn full well knowing what it ain't.
JMS tried doing this not too long ago. by AgentArchangel	Mar 23rd, 2009 01:17:22 PM
His original pitch is floating around out there in PDF format. It sounded pretty good. I don't know if Fuller can do it though, we don't need a Captain Kirk who could revive Spock from death, only for them not to be able to "hug it out" lest Spock should drop dead once more.
revolution82jdl by thedoctor28	Mar 23rd, 2009 03:15:56 PM
IS A FUKIN IDIOT, LOL.....
Ray FGamma by thedoctor28	Mar 23rd, 2009 03:21:55 PM
YOU ARE A GENIUS...LOL
BWAH-HAHAHAH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! by TedKordLives	Mar 23rd, 2009 05:22:09 PM
TOS Rules. New Movie will be soulless and brainless. But I will go see it anyway, like (almost) all of you. I say almost due to the TF2 TB's where people make the claim I just made. But I didn't see TF1 in the theater. And I won't see TF2 in the theater. You are all awesome. God I love AICN.
Ok, my two cents.... by seniorspeilbergio	Mar 23rd, 2009 05:26:59 PM
Talkbackers are usually whinny, impossible to please, miserable little pseudo-intellectual virgins which is why theses star trek threads always suprise me with there coherence and wealth of interesting ideas that are thrown out as analternative to whatever new concept the studio is playing with. A lot of interesting "counter ideas" here and some pretty damn spot on analysis as to what went wrong with Trek and what went right. So here's my idea: we take everyones' "suggestions" for a new show and combine them all to create a NEW SHOW that's not called STAR TREK. You know, A BRAND NEW CONCEPT NOT BEHOLDEN TO A UNIVERSE WITH NO TIES TO THE PAST OR A DEMOGRAPHICS CHART! They used to do this. Please see the 70's and 80's.
Screaming Kirk figure Toys R Us exclusive! by DickBallsworth	Mar 23rd, 2009 06:21:22 PM
This is all kinds of fucking awesome. Want! http: // images.powerreviews.com/images _customers/01/41/6310728_55874 _raw.jpg
Stop. Now. by ChicagoGangster	Mar 23rd, 2009 07:46:57 PM
Look, we all know that without Star Wars, Trek would be a failed TV show. That's all. It was only dusted off because Paramount wanted to copy the success of 20th Century Fox. Trek gives geeks a bad name. OK, I'll grant you that Shatner is fucking awesome. That's it. Data is the worst character in sci-fi history. It's like a low rent C-3PO with cheapo gold paint(!) on his face instead of a suit. "Ohhhhh...does he have emotions?" WHO CARES? I'd rather watch Jar Jar Binks, for Christ's sake. But at least we got to see him die. That was fun.
ChicagoGangster.... by seniorspeilbergio	Mar 23rd, 2009 07:58:54 PM
Wrong. Way before Lucas sat down to write his first outline, a grassroots Trek fanbase had already popped all over the world. The first convention was held years before '77. Also The Motion Picture was going to be the new Phase 2 tv show and was CHANGED to a movie because of the success of Star Wars. It was already on it's way back with new stories way before Lucas rolled out his blockbuster. And just for the record, I'd take Star Wars over Star Trek any day of the week but I still love Roddenberry's sandbox. And as for your chief complaint about Data, well that's known as character developement; which you want since this guy will be showing up 25 times a year for an hour. You can argue about production design all you want but the main difference between Data and C-3P0's characters would be an arc.
Head now to Eden... Yey, brother. by bswise	Mar 23rd, 2009 08:14:09 PM
If you want to get back to the fun of the 60's, what could be more chock full o' chuckles then a spin-off show based on the adventures of those whacked-out space hippies in TOS' "Head Now To Eden?" You could show them as fugitives running from the federation "pigs" as they travel across space trying to "find the galaxy," go to white/black protests on the black/white planet, have orgies on the green chick planet, cultivate weird flowers and freak out on the burning grass.
A MUST see- The Very best of Voyager by 900LBGorilla	Mar 23rd, 2009 10:11:30 PM
1 minute long...check it. http://tinyurl.com/cgovzy
Trekkies calm down! by jarjarmessiah	Mar 24th, 2009 09:00:52 AM
Why can't there be two Trek Universes? (universi?) Like Marvel did. TOS,TNG,DS9, etc= Universe 616 New Movie= Ultimates
Fuck Battlestar Galactica by joshuavance1701	Mar 24th, 2009 09:42:30 AM
With it's dour, oppressive, bleak, entirely modernistic cynical sensibility. Fuck that stale tripe shit, and fuck those of you who praise it as the second coming. The whole POINT and purpose of Star Trek was to demonstrate a future you could feel good about fuckwads, not a reminder you could get by turning on daily news. Haent we had enough post apocalyptic centered sci-fi fuck fests? Evidently some fucks haven't been paying attention. It's Star Trek's inherent OPTIMISM ass fucks that distinguish it from the majority of other science fiction tripe. That's the spirit LONG forgotten with your God damn DS9 and Voyager, only 20- something Generation SUXXORS would relate to an infinitely pessimistic piece of tripe shit like modern Battlestar Galactica, that COMPLETELY forgot to be FUN along the way. Shit, give me the pomp and pageantry of old school Galactica and Trek ANY day over this monochromatic shit passing itself as entertainment today. Didn't you fuckers learn anything from the BOMB that was Watchmen?? No one gives a shit about a two hour reminder of life. Escapist fantasy with something to look forward to is the only true entertainment. Why the fuck do you people think Star Wars is the entertainment juggernaut that it is? Fuck the writing, and acting. It's FUN. That's the whole point and purpose of entertainment. Now, when Avatar falls on it's fat bloated post apocalyptic ass, and Star Trek ends up being THE entertainment hit of summer '09, I don't want to hear a GOD DAMn thing about how cool dark dank shit like Battlestar galactica is.
JOSHUAVANCE1701... by seniorspeilbergio	Mar 24th, 2009 01:43:51 PM
You speak the truth, for sure. That's exactly why, after watching the first season of BSG; I got bored with it. Nihilistic, gritty, social commentary with a blatant allegory for thr war on terrorism is soooo fucking tired. Does every damn sci-fi show now have to be a metephor for Iraq and Terrorism? Jesus, give it a rest already. And the whole "dark, gritty future" is so fucking nineties. Might as well have the main theme written by Trent Reznor. That 90's cynisism had it's place back in the day but the world has changed and that nihilism shit just seems out of date and pretentious, although I have to disagree about DS9. It was a little darker than the other shows but it still had a lot of light hearted moments and I like the idea of some serious conflict testing the strength of Roddenberry's utopian vision. And the final statement of that show seemed to be that that optimistic future held up against an alien invasion and internal conflict. In DS9, i like that they had so much to fight for. It's a future where they've eliminated disease, hunger and poverty. Who wouldn't want to fight to keep that utopian future? That show worked for me because of how much was at stake. Personally, i like both the dark futures and the optomistic ones. The way i see it, if you're traveling the universe, sometimes you'll have an E.T. situation and other times you get the Alien scenario. But too much of one isn't good. Right now, i want to see more optomistic Sci-fi like Trek or 2001, not just to balance out the genre but also because that type of Sci-fi seems to be more intellectual and thought provoking. This pessimistic shit always feels like an excuse to degenerate into endless space battles and outer space cowboy shit. Enough already. Sci-fi cn be so much more than a tired action genre.
Bryan Fuller rocks by 2bitkubrick	Mar 25th, 2009 12:32:03 PM
I'm becoming very impressed with this man. And after watching "cold snap" last night, which was a fantastic episode, I really really hope he gets to write and executive produce a trek series. I think it would kick ass. Also, I think we know where all Hiro and Ando's trek references in season 1 are coming from, as they haven't done that in a while and now with fuller back they drop two in this episode (transporter accident and baby genesis device, in case you missed 'em). Oh, and all you people hating on BSG can frak off (i say politely).
Get over it! by cosmicshape	May 29th, 2009 03:36:42 AM
I'm very surprised to see that 90% of people on this board hate the idea of JJ Abrams doing this movie due to continuity errors (that are worked out completely). This franchise was pronounced DEAD by Paramount 4 years ago. You guys should be down on your knees sucking JJ Abrams dick for bringing this show back to life or even having anything to do with it at all! I'm a fan, since I was 4 years old I have been a fan. Star Trek in name is box office POISON! Who the fuck do you think wants to walk into a situation like that? JJ Abrams had the balls to take it and breath new life into it and all you fuckers can do is sit around and bash him. I think that you guys should stop and realize the potential of having a new universe to work with, for instance, what will happen if the Enterprise runs into the Botany Bay again? How will a new Kirk (that has a slightly different personality than the original due to not having a father)deal with Kahn? The fact is that the original series isn't going anywhere, it's always going to be there for you. Let Abrams have his fun and lets see where it takes the franchise, it's better than letting it die(which it did).
Also! by cosmicshape	May 29th, 2009 04:01:29 AM
I thought this was a joke til I saw this forum....everyone should watch this!... http://www.hulu.com/watch/7149 5/onion-news-network-trekkies- bash-new-star-trek-film-as-fun -watchable#s-p1-st-i0
That was actually funny by Orcus	Jun 1st, 2009 11:10:10 AM

Captain Matt Decker by cosmicshape	Jun 1st, 2009 03:39:26 PM
From The Doomsday Machine. I think the ship was the Constellation if I remember correctly. That would make a good crossover, keeping us in familiar territory with the ship and characters. They could easily include the constellation in a battle scene or two in one of the upcoming movies to spark interest and get us somewhat familiar with the crew.

Talkbacks

Bryan Fuller Wants To Mount
A New STAR TREK TV Series!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks

Talkbacks

Bryan Fuller Wants To Mount A New STAR TREK TV Series!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks

Bryan Fuller Wants To Mount
A New STAR TREK TV Series!!