General Star Trek thread

JayRoc

AMKC wrote: »

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.

I honestly don't get why the producers of a new kids show would want the Star Trek name attached to it, really, or what difference it would make.


What small children would base their choices on the "Star Trek" brand being on something?

Maybe more likely for a parent familar with the franchise to let their kid watch it?

breezy1985

JayRoc wrote: »

I honestly don't get why the producers of a new kids show would want the Star Trek name attached to it, really, or what difference it would make.


What small children would base their choices on the "Star Trek" brand being on something?

Maybe more likely for a parent familar with the franchise to let their kid watch it?

Probably an easier sell with network execs or something

Goodshape

Goodshape wrote: »

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.)

I was 6 or 7 when Sky started showing TOS in the run up to TNG.
Had MASK, Transformers, Thundercats, etc


Most of today's animation is lazy and generic but I'll hold off until my kids give me a review

breezy1985

Stark wrote: »

Young Indiana Jones was pretty great if I remember correctly.

If I remember correctly you are not remembering correctly

pixelburp

breezy1985 wrote: »

If I remember correctly you are not remembering correctly

Young Indiana Jones, IIRC, was a weird one in that it tried to be one of those "Educational" shows where Indy kept bumping into Important Events / People all the time, getting in the way of an actual plot or storyline. I wanna say it got better when the older Indy came along and joined the Belgian forces during WW1? Wasn't there an extended period of the show set in the trenches?

odyssey06

pixelburp wrote: »

Young Indiana Jones, IIRC, was a weird one in that it tried to be one of those "Educational" shows where Indy kept bumping into Important Events / People all the time, getting in the way of an actual plot or storyline. I wanna say it got better when the older Indy came along and joined the Belgian forces during WW1? Wasn't there an extended period of the show set in the trenches?

The plots with the child age young Indi were very 'educational' as you note.
I think it picked up once Sean Patrick Flannery came on board as young Indy.
Yes he made it to the trenches in Belgium and fought in East Africa also. They would be the strongest episodes in the series.

Came via Dublin (caught up in Easter Rising) and London (caught up with Elizabeth Hurley).
Then post WW1 it got a bit random and weird... Jazz episodes? Maybe one in Transylvania.

Stark

I started watching it with Sean Patrick Flannery

pixelburp

odyssey06 wrote: »

The plots with the child age young Indi were very 'educational' as you note.
I think it picked up once Sean Patrick Flannery came on board as young Indy.
Yes he made it to the trenches in Belgium and fought in East Africa also. They would be the strongest episodes in the series.

Came via Dublin (caught up in Easter Rising) and London (caught up with Elizabeth Hurley).
Then post WW1 it got a bit random and weird... Jazz episodes? Maybe one in Transylvania.

YouTube'ed a couple of moment and even by today's standards, those were pretty high production values for a TV show. I'd say only something like Game Of Thrones would have that many locations, costumes, and props. A reboot of the idea wouldn't be the worst recycling of a LucasArts property right now; even if the idea is possibly a bit played out (given Indy figured in nearly every major historical event of the 20th century lol)

Goodshape

odyssey06 wrote: »

Came via Dublin (caught up in Easter Rising)

oh, wow! Didn't know that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkajKDx4RB4

Only half-watched that clip so far but looks like they did an alright job of it tbh! Better than Captain Planet's Norn Iron adventures anyway

pixelburp

Deleted User wrote: »

I was 6 or 7 when Sky started showing TOS in the run up to TNG.
Had MASK, Transformers, Thundercats, etc


Most of today's animation is lazy and generic but I'll hold off until my kids give me a review

Oh I dunno, lazy compared with what though? Hanna Barbara where all their characters had neckties because it was easier to animate by swapping head positions (instead of drawing the neck moving around)? Or where intros would run for minutes on end to save on actual story time? I loved Dogtanian but never realised how lonnnnng that intro went on for.

Whilst I hate TV CGI, I gotta say that TV animation is in much better shape than it used to be; I'm not mad on the aesthetics of Lower Decks, but the range, detail and complexity of the animation was frequently impressive. I don't think I ever spotted a reused prop, animation or whatnot ala those old HB cartoons.

pixelburp

BTW, something that's a bit lost among the chatter about Star Trek: Prodigy, is that as I suspected, the Section 31 show is floating around in purgatory.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/star-trek-universe-paramount-plus-prodigy-1234914526/

Specifically, the below aside is the good/bad news, depending on your thoughts on the show. "Conversations" feels like heavy code for "Not remotely near greenlit". Me? I'm delighted to hear this because of all the problems with nu-Trek, it doesn't need more Space Hitler muddying up the universe's image.

Kurtzman and McNamara say there are still “conversations” about a new “Star Trek” series around Michelle Yeoh’s Philippa Georgiou and the mysterious Section 31, and there are other “Trek” shows in development that haven’t been previously announced. But they emphasized that the current five-series slate will likely not expand further until at least one of the shows runs its course.

breezy1985

pixelburp wrote: »

BTW, something that's a bit lost among the chatter about Star Trek: Prodigy, is that as I suspected, the Section 31 show is floating around in purgatory.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/star-trek-universe-paramount-plus-prodigy-1234914526/

Specifically, the below aside is the good/bad news, depending on your thoughts on the show. "Conversations" feels like heavy code for "Not remotely near greenlit". Me? I'm delighted to hear this because of all the problems with nu-Trek, it doesn't need more Space Hitler muddying up the universe's image.

Ide love if it never happened. I hate her character, the MU and any non DS9 S31. The idea of constantly dragging up this secret organisation will make them not so secret and ruin the concept like Voyager did with the Borg

ilovesmybrick

breezy1985 wrote: »

Ide love if it never happened. I hate her character, the MU and any non DS9 S31. The idea of constantly dragging up this secret organisation will make them not so secret and ruin the concept like Voyager did with the Borg

What makes that news quite irritating is the two episodes they wasted in Discovery season 3 to set up this series. I don't think an extra two episodes would have helped with the many, many issues I had with season 3, but they could have used them to further develop the plot/characters/ships etc.

odyssey06

Seen on Twitter... Was Cheers a Holodeck program?
https://twitter.com/CalebHowe/status/1252032537125322753/photo/1

pixelburp

breezy1985 wrote: »

Ide love if it never happened. I hate her character, the MU and any non DS9 S31. The idea of constantly dragging up this secret organisation will make them not so secret and ruin the concept like Voyager did with the Borg

At this stage, it seems clear enough it won't; Kurtzmann speaking in euphemisms that amount to "yeah, it's cancelled". As ilovesmybrick notes, it's a pity we wasted 2 episodes of Discovery to Backdoor Pilot a show that'll never happen, but at least now she's gone, and Section 31 ain't returning either. Well, baring a return in Discovery S4 in a future form.

breezy1985

pixelburp wrote: »

At this stage, it seems clear enough it won't; Kurtzmann speaking in euphemisms that amount to "yeah, it's cancelled". As ilovesmybrick notes, it's a pity we wasted 2 episodes of Discovery to Backdoor Pilot a show that'll never happen, but at least now she's gone, and Section 31 ain't returning either. Well, baring a return in Discovery S4 in a future form.

I wont get my hopes up just yet. People who dont like Discovery are constantly making up stories about its cancellation but Kurtzmanns comments are a good sign

Rawr

odyssey06 wrote: »

Seen on Twitter... Was Cheers a Holodeck program?
https://twitter.com/CalebHowe/status/1252032537125322753/photo/1

I think Paramount Television was also involved with Cheers, which might also explain why there's a lot of shared cast. Feels like they missed a trick with silly Irish villages on Voyager's holodeck, when they could have gone to a bar where everyone knows your name....because it's tied into the crew manifest

Well...we did get Morn, who was essentially Norm.

Goodshape

Started a Voyager re-watch, from season 4 (or the season 3 final anyway). About half way through the season now.

Really enjoying it

Truth be told there's a lot (maybe most) of this which I've never really seen since it was first on air, and back then I wasn't much of a fan at all. But it's good stuff. I never really appreciated before just how comparatively small Voyager is, compared to Ent-D or even lot of other ships of the era. It used to annoy me that they wouldn't take things as seriously as they did on the big -D in TNG, or on DS9 --- but of course not. They're a tiny little close-nit group in comparison to those cities in space.

The crew -- and the ship itself -- feels much more personal and I'm enjoying that. Almost a lower-decks quality to the whole setup.

Also, Janeway is terrific.

Also I think with the hindsight of what Star Trek has done since, I'm pretty much over "what they did to the Borg " and Seven is a great character, boob-suit not withstanding.

And Harry Kim -- LOL. Everything about that guy is useless. The character, the acting, the dialogue. It's amusing. There was a small scene in Scorpion (S04E01) where Chakotay and Janeway were discussing something on the bridge, in-frame and in-focus. Suddenly some voice chimes in with a different opinion. It's Harry Kim, in the background, totally out of focus while he says his lines for a couple seconds. Camera doesn't even bother to focus on him. Janeway and Chakotay don't look at him. Janeway just says "nah" and that's it. Poor Harry

There's still an awkward 1990's Melrose Place / 90210 clean-sheen to the look and feel of the show, and the acting and sets are just cheap at times, but it's good binge-streaming TV. Nice to be finally giving myself some time to enjoy it.

Stark

Goodshape wrote:

and the acting and sets are just cheap at times

Are you talking the sets used for Voyager itself or the per-episode sets? I really liked the Voyager sets, especially the bridge and Captain's ready room.

Goodshape

Stark wrote: »

Are you talking the sets used for Voyager itself or the per-episode sets? I really liked the Voyager sets, especially the bridge and Captain's ready room.

All of it to be honest. I mean the main sets aren't too bad but for some reason it all looks a good deal cheaper than it did 10 years before on TNG.

But that might be a sum of the pieces thing. The lighting is bad, and the actors are obviously a lot less invested in it than they were in TNG or DS9. Picking up props and tapping on consoles without any thought to supposed weight or function of the obviously plastic device.

It's not a problem though. Tbh on this watch through I'm finding it more amusing than anything else.

Rawr

Goodshape wrote: »

All of it to be honest. I mean the main sets aren't too bad but for some reason it all looks a good deal cheaper than it did 10 years before on TNG.

But that might be a sum of the pieces thing. The lighting is bad, and the actors are obviously a lot less invested in it than they were in TNG or DS9. Picking up props and tapping on consoles without any thought to supposed weight or function of the obviously plastic device.

It's not a problem though. Tbh on this watch through I'm finding it more amusing than anything else.

I do wonder if the Voyager sets were generally designed to be a bit more cost effective. The flat corridor walls must have made it easier for them to re-dress the Voyager corridors to appear as other ships or alien buildings. The Enterprise D or DS9 sets would not have been as easy to convert for non-ship scenes.

The believe the Voyager bridge was however was a lot more ambitious, and was the largest Bridge-set they had built up until that point.

Evade

Rawr wrote: »

I do wonder if the Voyager sets were generally designed to be a bit more cost effective.

The TNG sets were arguably the most cost effective since a lot of them were free as far as TNG's construction budget was concerned.

AMKC

Evade wrote: »

The TNG sets were arguably the most cost effective since a lot of them were free as far as TNG's construction budget was concerned.

The Battle bridge was built already for the Enterprise-A and the movies. What else was free?

pah

Big birthday for me today. My sister just dropped this over.

Evade

AMKC wrote: »

The Battle bridge was built already for the Enterprise-A and the movies. What else was free?

The corridors and the transporter room.

EDIT: The engineering set was reused too.

TheValeyard

AMKC wrote: »

The Battle bridge was built already for the Enterprise-A and the movies. What else was free?

Didnt they use most of the TNG sets for various scenes in Star Trek VI,

Sure even ten forward was the Presidents office.

Stark

pah wrote: »

Big birthday for me today. My sister just dropped this over.

Best sister ever!

TheValeyard

pah wrote: »

Big birthday for me today. My sister just dropped this over.

I think we can safely say no cake remains now

Inviere

TheValeyard wrote: »

I think we can safely say no cake remains now

Was it a cellular peptide cake?

Evade

While I was reading a bit more about the sets I found out the Voyager corridors are the TMP/TNG corridors. They really got their money's worth out of that set. If you look closely at the bottom of the walls of the Voyager corridor you can see the light panels are leaning back like the ones in the TMP/TNG corridors.