General Star Trek thread

TheValeyard

http://www.inverse.com/entertainment/star-trek-strange-new-worlds-leak-archer-scott-bakula/



Rumour has it Captain Archer is making a return to TV

ilovesmybrick

TheValeyard wrote: »

http://www.inverse.com/entertainment/star-trek-strange-new-worlds-leak-archer-scott-bakula/



Rumour has it Captain Archer is making a return to TV

Wouldn't be opposed to that, Enterprise wasn't in my top tier of series but in fairness the first four of most of the 90's era were dodgey. And Bakula was decent in the roll. I think if they'd made season 5 it would probably have been great, and I really would have loved to see the refit of the NX-01, it's one of my favourites designs!

pixelburp

What's the timeline for this to work? Wouldn't (presumably admiral?) Archer be fairly old by the time of Pike's tenure? It'd be a nice nod to the ugly stepchild of the franchise, if it were to be true

ilovesmybrick

pixelburp wrote: »

What's the timeline for this to work? Wouldn't (presumably admiral?) Archer be fairly old by the time of Pike's tenure? It'd be a nice nod to the ugly stepchild of the franchise, if it were to be true

I'd guess a McCoy at Farpoint job!

Rawr

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

I'd guess a McCoy at Farpoint job!

I often wondered about McCoy at Farpoint. Upon arriving on the Refit 1701, he complained that the medical facilities were more like a computer lab than a sickbay.

Surely his review of the 1701-D sickbay would be been a more extreme complaint of the same? :P

ilovesmybrick

Rawr wrote: »

I often wondered about McCoy at Farpoint. Upon arriving on the Refit 1701, he complained that the medical facilities were more like a computer lab than a sickbay.

Surely his review of the 1701-D sickbay would be been a more extreme complaint of the same? :P

Good thing he never met the EMH!

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

What's the timeline for this to work? Wouldn't (presumably admiral?) Archer be fairly old by the time of Pike's tenure? It'd be a nice nod to the ugly stepchild of the franchise, if it were to be true

They already had Scotty meeting him in Kelvin timeline

breezy1985

pixelburp wrote: »

What's the timeline for this to work? Wouldn't (presumably admiral?) Archer be fairly old by the time of Pike's tenure? It'd be a nice nod to the ugly stepchild of the franchise, if it were to be true

According to the ships log on the Defiant Archer died of old age the day after 1701 Enterprise was launched.

But this is Discovery so no need for things like that to get in the way

Spear

Prodigy looks very generic, and not very Trek. I suspect this can be written off already.

Source:

https://intl.startrek.com/news/breaking-star-trek-prodigy-first-look

~Rebel~

Spear wrote: »

Prodigy looks very generic, and not very Trek. I suspect this can be written off already.

Source:

https://intl.startrek.com/news/breaking-star-trek-prodigy-first-look

Indeed... looks very Final Space-y.

The robot basically looks like Kvn with legs.. and the globule/seal thing has a bit of 'Moonpie' to it.

Even the colours (purple!) and design of the backdrop look like a bit of a lift..

TheValeyard

It's aimed at kids. Could be great for them. We will have to wait and see.

breezy1985

Spear wrote: »

Prodigy looks very generic, and not very Trek. I suspect this can be written off already.

Source:

https://intl.startrek.com/news/breaking-star-trek-prodigy-first-look

What age are you cause this is a show for kids so unless you are 12 or something it doesn't really matter whether you think it "can be written off already" or not

Spear

breezy1985 wrote: »

What age are you cause this is a show for kids so unless you are 12 or something it doesn't really matter whether you think it "can be written off already" or not

I get that it's for kids, but I had hoped it would still keep some level of Trek to it. But what's there appears the same as any Disney or other generic movie.

Goodshape

Hey, firstly - I can appreciate a well made "for kids" TV show.

Secondly, I was about 10 to 12 when I first discovered and fell in love with Star Trek, and TNG and TOS seemed perfectly good enough for kids then. I'm entitled to be a little disappointed that Trek4Kidz might now be reduced to silly zany wacky antics with 6 of the most obvious looking personality-tropes-as-character-design characters you're ever likely to see.


And also... this looks 0% Star Trek so far. I can write it off on that account if not the others.


(would be nice if I'm wrong though! ...still hope.)

breezy1985

The characters do look like maybe they were made for another show originally but it's sad to see a show made for Nikelodeon which isn't even out yet and is for kids is getting the #notrealtrek bashing from the fanboys already.

I loved Star Wars but thought the Clone Wars and all that was crap so I just didn't watch em and moved on. Will probably do the same with this

JayRoc

I think some concern is understandable tbh. Every time something comes out under the Star Trek banner that is sub-par generic action/sci-fi it is obviously going to "dilute" the brand.

If that went on for long, it would mean there was more bad Star Trek out there than good...and who wants that fate for a franchise they love?

Markitron

It is perfectly possible to make a sci-fi/fantasy show that appeals to kids and adults equally.

Clone Wars is a great example. This seems to be going the other way.

pixelburp

breezy1985 wrote: »

The characters do look like maybe they were made for another show originally but it's sad to see a show made for Nikelodeon which isn't even out yet and is for kids is getting the #notrealtrek bashing from the fanboys already.

I loved Star Wars but thought the Clone Wars and all that was crap so I just didn't watch em and moved on. Will probably do the same with this

Takes some surfeit of possessiveness, and an utter absence of self-awareness to rail against a kid's cartoon FFS. To be fair, this is a poison among a lot of fanboys of pop culture these days and not exclusive the Trek: wherein they can't seem to process the idea that not everything is going to explicitly speak to them. Be it the overall age-group, sexuality of main characters or whatever. It's pathetic.

As to the designs? Yeah they're not especially "Trek" in appearance, but I just don't have any interest in kids cartoons in general anyway. I know Clone Wars and the like try to angle the material at all ages, but it just comes down to personal taste. That and I just hatttttte TV CGI cartoons; the animation is always so rubbery and blergh. Again, personal taste, more power to people who enjoy Clone Wars et al.

Honestly, I think in principal it's amazing that Trek will expand into kids cartoons: it's literally going to prepare the ground for ... wait for it ... The Next Generation of Trek fans Not that the angry internet neckbeards will appreciate that - and I'm sure there are already 100s of YouTube videos of idiots like that ranting into their webcam.

breezy1985

JayRoc wrote: »

I think some concern is understandable tbh. Every time something comes out under the Star Trek banner that is sub-par generic action/sci-fi it is obviously going to "dilute" the brand.

If that went on for long, it would mean there was more bad Star Trek out there than good...and who wants that fate for a franchise they love?

Ya but people don't even know it's bad yet.
It might be great for kids or it might be the next Ewoks: Caravan of Love but we don't know yet but the clowns who should be way too old to care about a Nikelodeon cartoon are already queuing up to feel outraged

Evade

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect something with Star Trek slapped on the side of it to at least be recognisable as Star Trek. A Star Trek kids cartoon is nothing new, that's what TAS was, and it was mostly bad. Kids deserve good TV too.


They wouldn't even have to make something just for kids if they didn't make STD and Picard "adult" in the most juvenile ways. Kids used to watch Star Trek, I've been watching it as since I was about four.

Rawr

Poster doesn't give away too much. Kind of surprised that they didn't go for any of the more recognizable alpha quadrant races, but that in itself might be a positive since they'll avoid messing too much with established cannon there.

One thing I am pleased about is the general lack of humans. Trek has been very human-centric over the years despite the wide range of aliens in the Trek Universe. I get that budget limitations made it that they couldn't do exotic aliens all of the time, and that most aliens were just humans with a dab of makeup.

Lower Decks brought in a more alien Starfleet, which I kind of liked. So, this very non-human group of kids might be a good sign. If Kurtzman stayed away from this one too, maybe it will be good?

pixelburp

Ah lads, we're not going to enter the whole "I've been watching Trek since I was a zygote, and I TURNED OUT FINE" argument? Nickelodeon aims for a wide range of ages, so looking at the designs, I'd speculate they're angling for something suitable for the younger scale of things. Kids like cartoons, and if this acts as a gateway drug to the overall universe, isn't that a Good Thing in the end?

If I see a thread appear on this forum, dedicated to this series and it turns into a deep-dive on the .. I dunno, nacelles of the ships, I may just unsub from the forum altogether

AMKC

Honestly that poster looks like it would be more suited to a fantastic Fours cartoon or even Star Wars certainly not Star Trek. But as long as its respectful to Star Trek and if it gets more kids into it then great.
I am glad that my first show do was TNG and not that.

Evade

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah lads, we're not going to enter the whole "I've been watching Trek since I was a zygote, and I TURNED OUT FINE" argument?

No it's a "Star Trek used to be suitable for all ages" argument. There were elements that were scary for young kids, watching Where Silence Has Lease at seven years old in a dark room at night comes to mind, but it was still fine.

pixelburp

Evade wrote: »

No it's a "Star Trek used to be suitable for all ages" argument. There were elements that were scary for young kids, watching Where Silence Has Lease at seven years old in a dark room at night comes to mind, but it was still fine.

'tis a half-joke Evade I just think it's quite clear from the aesthetics that Prodigy is leaning towards the younger scale of the market and most kids aren't raised on ostensibly "adult" TV. That it's OK if this show doesn't stick rigidly to some expectation of what Trek is or isn't in this case. It can be over there, doing it's thing, entertaining kids as a gateway drug.

Markitron

Evade wrote: »

No it's a "Star Trek used to be suitable for all ages" argument. There were elements that were scary for young kids, watching Where Silence Has Lease at seven years old in a dark room at night comes to mind, but it was still fine.

The episode where Barclay turned into a spider ****ed me up for life.

breezy1985

pixelburp wrote: »

Ah lads, we're not going to enter the whole "I've been watching Trek since I was a zygote, and I TURNED OUT FINE" argument? Nickelodeon aims for a wide range of ages, so looking at the designs, I'd speculate they're angling for something suitable for the younger scale of things. Kids like cartoons, and if this acts as a gateway drug to the overall universe, isn't that a Good Thing in the end?

If I see a thread appear on this forum, dedicated to this series and it turns into a deep-dive on the .. I dunno, nacelles of the ships, I may just unsub from the forum altogether

I bet most people who enjoy James Bond are blissfully unaware of James Bond Jr. and it hasn't "diluted" the movies. Same goes for Indiana Jones, Star Gate and Highlander.

And ya if people start crying that X is not canon or ruins the timeline about a kids show it will be that that might ruin Trek for me not the quality of a kids show

Goodshape

pixelburp wrote: »

Takes some surfeit of possessiveness, and an utter absence of self-awareness to rail against a kid's cartoon FFS.

[...]

but I just don't have any interest in kids cartoons in general anyway

It's all well and good not caring about something you've already decided to entirely dismiss out of hand

Not that I think I'm "railing against" anything, but I do have an interest in kids watching Star Trek. I think the "sheer ****ing hubris" of treating Trek like some edgy adults-only affair is as misguided as anything else in modern Trek.

pixelburp

Goodshape wrote: »

It's all well and good not caring about something you've already decided to entirely dismiss out of hand

Not that I think I'm "railing against" anything, but I do have an interest in kids watching Star Trek. I think the "sheer ****ing hubris" of treating Trek like some edgy adults-only affair is as misguided as anything else in modern Trek.

I only dismiss it because, based purely on one poster's aesthetic leanings and intimations elsewhere, I know younger-skewed kids cartoons aren't my thing. I just don't presume to judge or dictate to anyone who does enjoy them, or those that make the cartoon More Trek, ultimately, is great!

Honestly, TV cartoons have just slipped my interest in general as a genre: Lower Decks (for the Trek), Disenchantment (for Matt Groening & Futurama alumni) & Bob's Burgers (because Louise is fantastic) are about the only cartoons I've watched in the last year or so and I couldn't give you a deep or meaningful reason why I stay away from them overall. It's like Musicals: I get they're popular, and beloved, but just not for me. And hey, that's OK; I ain't going to rant on YouTube about them either

Stark

breezy1985 wrote: »

I bet most people who enjoy James Bond are blissfully unaware of James Bond Jr. and it hasn't "diluted" the movies. Same goes for Indiana Jones, Star Gate and Highlander.

And ya if people start crying that X is not canon or ruins the timeline about a kids show it will be that that might ruin Trek for me not the quality of a kids show

Young Indiana Jones was pretty great if I remember correctly.