New Star Trek TV show - Star Trek Discovery

ziedth

I will definitely be less excited if it more from the Abrahams time. Post Voyager/DS9 I'll be climbing the walls but I'd even settle for something a bit different something like a section 31 story would be deadly.

pixelburp

Thargor wrote: »

This is something 99% of the Star Trek fanbase dont want to see, Gene Roddenberrys vision being torn up and shat all over for the sake of a generic action movie/tv show that contributes absolutely nothing to anything. The way they portrayed the female characters in both films tells you everything you need to know about the people makingthese films. If you dont think people are going to complain about that with something like Star Trek you're deluded. I heard Star Wars fans weren't too happy about the Phantom Menace either, might want to watch out for some moaning there aswell.

Thing is, that's the films you're talking about; TV is quite simply a whole different narrative ball game & I don't think it's wise to assume all the strokes made in the cinema will find their way to the TV screens. There simply isn't the budget or limited running-time to mirror the kind of set-pieces and broad narrative strokes the films did.

TV dramas need stronger characters and respective story arcs to thread a series together into a coherent whole. And no matter what money gets ploughed into this, it won't be enough to have the same spectacle of the cinematic siblings. There's still a chance that ultimately the characters will be rotten anyway (network TV likes its tropes and hackneyed characters), but the nature of the beast means a TV show has to slow itself down, play the long game, and let its characters breath.

If anything, a TV show in the Abrams universe could well be the kind of character-focused, utopia-set vision of the new Star Trek universe fans would have craved. In that sense, there's more reason to be positive than negative & assume it's going to be 20-odd episodes of Carol Marcus in her underwear.

briany

I thought Voyager was a fantastic series. It opened up a lot of possibilities that the other series couldn't explore as much, given that the ship was travelling through unknown territory. In many ways it was monster-of-the-week television at times, but it remained fresh and interesting because of that.

The original series was probably fantastic upon first viewing back in the 60s, but much like many series from that time it now looks horribly campy and dates in many places.

Blazer

Technocentral wrote: »

I'd say the TV ranking is:

1. TOS (by a long shot). 9/10
2.TNG (brilliant overall apart from awful bloody characters like Q and Troi.) 7.5/10
3. Voyager, some fantastic episodes, great captain and secondary characters like Harry, Tuvok and Seven of Nine. 6.5/10
4. Deep Space Nine, (pretty good, 5/10).

Enterprise, awful generic sci fi. (2/10). Hope new one is a smart reboot like Battlestar, if so it could be great. But ifs just a bunch of pretty boys and girls taking part in frenetic action scenes aimed at the masses it will be a waste of time.

Ever since DS9 I was hoping they'd make one just after the creation of the Federation and cover the Federation-Klingon war. I suppose it would have been expensive with the CGI effects etc.
I really thought Voyager was awful, couldn't stand Janeway and for me the only standout one was the Doctor.
DS9 on the other hand had Garak, Quark,Bashir, Worf, Dukat to name but a few.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

Blazer wrote: »

Ever since DS9 I was hoping they'd make one just after the creation of the Federation and cover the Federation-Klingon war. I suppose it would have been expensive with the CGI effects etc.
I really thought Voyager was awful, couldn't stand Janeway and for me the only standout one was the Doctor.
DS9 on the other hand had Garak, Quark,Bashir, Worf, Dukat to name but a few.

Personally, I think Voyager improved greatly in season 4 when Seven of Nine was introduced. Herself and the Doctor were at least interesting characters - the rest of the Voyager crew were a little bit one dimensional unfortunately, which really held the show back.

Although it's hard to admit anything other than TOS or TNG is my favourite series (especially given my username - although it was a close toss up between Also Starring LeVar Burton and Who Mourns For Morn?), DS9 is actually my favourite of all of them, and it comes down to the sheer amount of well rounded main characters & supporting characters (Garak, Dukat, Rom, Nog, Morn, Martok etc) and actually having good overall story-arcs with the war against the Dominion-Cardassian alliance for example. Granted the earlier seasons were a bit hit and miss (you could argue the same for TNG though), but like a fine wine it improved with age.

Never understood the great hatred people seem to have for DS9 - is it because it's set mainly on a Space Station rather than travelling on a ship like the other shows?

Blazer

I hated it too at the start for that exact reason..but then it really hit its stride..
I must definitely sit down to watch it back to back.

Preset No.3

I think the biggest thing will be how it stacks up against other CBS shows and other shows in its timeslot. Ratings is king and if it doesnt pull in the numbers with non trek fans then it is doomed.

syklops

Also Starring LeVar Burton wrote: »

Never understood the great hatred people seem to have for DS9 - is it because it's set mainly on a Space Station rather than travelling on a ship like the other shows?

No, I could be wrong but DS9 had at times a little too much religion/spirituality in it, particularly from the Bajorans but other species as well. For every fabulous episode of DS9 and there were many, the title would appear and you go "Oh no, this sounds religion-y", or the intro starts with a Bajoran priestess doing something, and you consider skipping to the next one.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

syklops wrote: »

No, I could be wrong but DS9 had at times a little too much religion/spirituality in it, particularly from the Bajorans but other species as well. For every fabulous episode of DS9 and there were many, the title would appear and you go "Oh no, this sounds religion-y", or the intro starts with a Bajoran priestess doing something, and you consider skipping to the next one.

I can agree with that point. The Bajoran's really bugged me too - it took me a couple of seasons to warm to Kira even, but at the same time because religions plays such a huge part in our world, I can appreciate them having a highly religious/spiritual race of people as major players in the series - and to be fair there's only a handful of those episodes over the course of the 7 seasons. Sure I'd roll my eyes at a couple of episodes, but there were episodes of every Star Trek series that had episodes where it would begin and within 5 minutes you'd think (oh, it's one of those episodes, sigh!). Even with those low points though, DS9 had so much to offer as a series, that it is odd that so many people can't stand it. Fair enough, I understand the hardcore "TOS/TNG until we die" type trekkies who despise anything other than those two series, but there's so many people who seem to rate Voyager over DS9 and it just makes me wonder have those people really watched both shows properly...

For me, it's this way -

1) DS9
2) TNG
3) Voyager
4) Enterprise
5) TOS

What I loved about DS9 is that it had among the best cast of characters. And it was completely different - all the other series were about exploration, but that was about political intrigue. Gul Dukat is one of the best antagonists ST has ever seen, up there along Khan, in my opinion. And the Dominion war was just superb.

Voyager gets a lot of flack, but it had some of the best episodes that ST ever had. Year of Hell is, of course, among the top. Plus TNG had its own missteps.. remember they met the equivalent of intergalactic Travellers.

Blazer

True voyager had a couple of good episodes...but DS9 had far more..
I loved TNG but I rate DS9 above it for the above reasons.

ScumLord

I don't know about this, I grew up on TNG and the original to a lesser extent. If it's a reboot I won't be interested at all.

The problem is we have some of the technology in star trek now, if they just do what they did in the older series it's going to look dated. The new films could sort of get away with a lack of technology with all it's blinding light effects covering up all the holes, but that would get old very quickly in a TV series.

The human race is set to go through some significant technological changes over the next half century, I hope they put some thought into what our society would be like because of that technological change, but I kind of doubt they will. Which will make the series look to familiar or even out of date by our own standards.

I miss good sci-fi though. I never watched stargate when it came out and just went through the series this year. It was more of a classic sci-fi in that it was almost a thought experiment, it tried out weird and new things. Eventually it went off the deep end with Tilk turning into a Rambo parody and their science mumbo jumbo descending into fairy tail bollox. But sci-fi these days is just some fancy techno effects plonked on top of a dawson's creek like teen drama, so I'd really like to see something make an effort.

syklops

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't know about this, I grew up on TNG and the original to a lesser extent. If it's a reboot I won't be interested at all.

The problem is we have some of the technology in star trek now, if they just do what they did in the older series it's going to look dated. The new films could sort of get away with a lack of technology with all it's blinding light effects covering up all the holes, but that would get old very quickly in a TV series.

The human race is set to go through some significant technological changes over the next half century, I hope they put some thought into what our society would be like because of that technological change, but I kind of doubt they will. Which will make the series look to familiar or even out of date by our own standards.

I miss good sci-fi though. I never watched stargate when it came out and just went through the series this year. It was more of a classic sci-fi in that it was almost a thought experiment, it tried out weird and new things. Eventually it went off the deep end with Tilk turning into a Rambo parody and their science mumbo jumbo descending into fairy tail bollox. But sci-fi these days is just some fancy techno effects plonked on top of a dawson's creek like teen drama, so I'd really like to see something make an effort.

Yeah the technology bothers me too. Abrahms ST movies have already introduced trans-warp beaming. Something I liked about ENT was them distrusting beaming altogether resulting in them docking with ships more which added some tense moments.

I worry how they are going to reboot the series, keep it fresh without relying on new tehnology, and without re-covering old plots. I was quite concerned relationships with the Klingons would become tiresome in Ent, but they handled it well I thought.

Technocentral

ScumLord wrote:

I miss good sci-fi though. I never watched stargate when it came out and just went through the series this year. It was more of a classic sci-fi in that it was almost a thought experiment, it tried out weird and new things. Eventually it went off the deep end with Tilk turning into a Rambo parody and their science mumbo jumbo descending into fairy tail bollox. But sci-fi these days is just some fancy techno effects plonked on top of a dawson's creek like teen drama, so I'd really like to see something make an effort.

Will the last BSG ever be topped? I'd say no, smart, provocative sci-fi like that is probably a thing of the past.

Is this a reboot or an entirely new crew? You know would be really interesting, is if they went in an entirely different direction and didn't follow the Starfleet.

syklops

Deleted User wrote: »

Is this a reboot or an entirely new crew? You know would be really interesting, is if they went in an entirely different direction and didn't follow the Starfleet.

We don't know yet but it had the starfleet emblem on the picture I saw so Im pretty sure it will be starfleet based. I'll be really annoyed if its just a reboot of the original crew. As I said before, that will get tiresome fast.

Blazer

Technocentral wrote: »

Will the last BSG ever be topped? I'd say no, smart, provocative sci-fi like that is probably a thing of the past.

I highly doubt it..unless they hired the same writers and team...could be awesome then but even then I doubt it would surpass BSG..that's how to do a remake.

Myrddin

I'd say 100% it'll be the new JJ-universe. However, they might set this new show in the TNG-era of that universe, which has the potential to make it at least semi-interesting (kinda like another clean slate).

ixoy

Technocentral wrote: »

Will the last BSG ever be topped? I'd say no, smart, provocative sci-fi like that is probably a thing of the past.

Could well be. The first 2.5 seasons were excellent but then it started to get a bit wonky. It became clear that there was no actual plan which took away from it so it was not perfect.
There's definitely been smart sci-fi since then, but not really ones which took on the big themes that it did.

pixelburp

ixoy wrote: »

Could well be. The first 2.5 seasons were excellent but then it started to get a bit wonky. It became clear that there was no actual plan which took away from it so it was not perfect.
There's definitely been smart sci-fi since then, but not really ones which took on the big themes that it did.

Plan or no plan, BSG wouldn't have been a patch on what it was without its bedrock of strong, compelling characters; sure the overarching plot turned out to be a bit wonky, but the people within the maelstrom are what (imo) made the show memorable. It boasted a cast of complicated, layered characters, often with disastrous flaws that ensured the drama always stayed human, no matter how spiritual, conceptual or alien things got.

Sure, the show was 'smart' and dealt with some timeless human concepts about religion & all that, but often where Sci-Fi can shoot itself in the foot is when the Concept leads the Humanity in the story, when to me it should always try to be the other way around - which BSG did well.

syklops

Myrddin wrote: »

I'd say 100% it'll be the new JJ-universe. However, they might set this new show in the TNG-era of that universe, which has the potential to make it at least semi-interesting (kinda like another clean slate).

I dont think they would give away nearly 100 years of the new timeline so easily(if they are in any way smart). Speaking of being smart, why didnt the temporal alliance crowd not clean up the changes to the timeline of Star Trek 2009? Oh I know why, coz of these things: $$$

JakeArmitage

I'd love a 25th century Enterprise crew set 100 years after the next generation in berman's universe. They could call it Star Trek: A new generation

Myrddin

syklops wrote: »

I dont think they would give away nearly 100 years of the new timeline so easily(if they are in any way smart).

I dunno, never underestimate the incessant need to base Star Trek on a ship called the Enterprise. Unless the cast of the movies sign on to do a series (which won't happen), they'll need a new crew...meaning it won't be another new Kirk & co, so they'll need a new ship...enter the TNG-era.

Speaking of being smart, why didn't the temporal alliance crowd not clean up the changes to the timeline of Star Trek 2009? Oh I know why, coz of these things: $$$

Ha, best not even go there. Depending on its needs Trek handles time travel in two different ways:

1) Interfering in the past changes the future (First Contact)
2) Interfering in the past doesn't change the future, but creates a new alternate timeline (Star Trek 2009)

ScumLord

ixoy wrote: »

Could well be. The first 2.5 seasons were excellent but then it started to get a bit wonky. It became clear that there was no actual plan which took away from it so it was not perfect.
There's definitely been smart sci-fi since then, but not really ones which took on the big themes that it did.

The problem with a lot of sci-fi these days, IMO, is it goes too far into fantasy/magic. There seems to be this idea that humans are evolving into smarter, wiser beings that will somehow be able to do magic because they "evolved".

When star trek came across something powerful and unknown, they might accept that it is beyond their understanding, but they made the effort to understand it. Current sci-fi gives us characters that make no attempt to understand anything, they just believe in themselves and then something magic happens and everybody lives happily ever after.

ziedth

Wouldn't we all be gutted if they just picked up renegades........ decent idea for a show that but it's fairly poor all the same

geecee

My ideal show stars Avery Brooks as disgraced ex-starfleet captain Ben Sisko... thrown out of the fleet on some trumped up charges

He is flying his junk space ship along with wife Kasidy yates and a visiting friend (Garak) when they intercept a distress call from a starfleet vessel that has been attacked

On arrival learns that starfleet and the federation have been decimated in a surprise attack by some alien race (or could be existing races after forming a new alliance) Chief engineer Nog persuades his inexperienced (cowardly) Starfleet captain to cede command to Sisko and his hard ass crew.

Sisko must then lead his rag tag fleet BSG style in a fight against this new race and drive them out of federation space.

Oh and the doc from voyager needs to be involved too!

Also Starring LeVar Burton

geecee wrote: »

My ideal show stars Avery Brooks as disgraced ex-starfleet captain Ben Sisko... thrown out of the fleet on some trumped up charges

He is flying his junk space ship along with wife Kasidy yates and a visiting friend (Garak) when they intercept a distress call from a starfleet vessel that has been attacked

On arrival learns that starfleet and the federation have been decimated in a surprise attack by some alien race (or could be existing races after forming a new alliance) Chief engineer Nog persuades his inexperienced (cowardly) Starfleet captain to cede command to Sisko and his hard ass crew.

Sisko must then lead his rag tag fleet BSG style in a fight against this new race and drive them out of federation space.

Oh and the doc from voyager needs to be involved too!

Technocentral

geecee wrote: »

My ideal show stars Avery Brooks as disgraced ex-starfleet captain Ben Sisko... thrown out of the fleet on some trumped up charges

He is flying his junk space ship along with wife Kasidy yates and a visiting friend (Garak) when they intercept a distress call from a starfleet vessel that has been attacked

On arrival learns that starfleet and the federation have been decimated in a surprise attack by some alien race (or could be existing races after forming a new alliance) Chief engineer Nog persuades his inexperienced (cowardly) Starfleet captain to cede command to Sisko and his hard ass crew.

Sisko must then lead his rag tag fleet BSG style in a fight against this new race and drive them out of federation space.

Oh and the doc from voyager needs to be involved too!

Good grief no! He can't act for toffee, toffee I tells ya!!

ixoy

ScumLord wrote: »

The problem with a lot of sci-fi these days, IMO, is it goes too far into fantasy/magic. There seems to be this idea that humans are evolving into smarter, wiser beings that will somehow be able to do magic because they "evolved".

When star trek came across something powerful and unknown, they might accept that it is beyond their understanding, but they made the effort to understand it.

I'd agree with this and TNG was the best in this regard. Since then even shows like BSG have stooped to mysticism - in fact by the end BSG had very heavy elements of it.
The earth-bound sci-fi doesn't go this direction but space bound adventures are not trying as hard to tackle big concepts. Of course there's a complete lack of them anyway and what there is, is generally hindered by budgets.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

Technocentral wrote: »

Good grief no! He can't act for toffee, toffee I tells ya!!

Don't think that's a fair statement. He plays the straight-man as Sisko, so his character is supposed to be quite wooden, since he's surrounded by so many colourful characters. Was just re-watching the season 6 episode "Far Beyond The Stars" this afternoon, not only one of my favourite DS9 episodes, but one of my overall favourite Trek episodes, and Avery Brooks is fantastic in it.

Frank O. Pinion

Oh yeah, Avery Brooks is a great actor, just look at his wonderful resume...

Thargor

He's critically acclaimed on Broadway and other theater roles, he's definitely a good actor, maybe should have hired better agents or something.

charlietheminxx

Isn't Avery Brooks notoriously difficult to work with? He's a bit eccentric to have around it seems.

Technocentral

For any ST:TNG fans there is a new documentary on UK Netflix about the apparant huge problems on the first two seasons of the show. Directed by Bill Shatner, Its called "Chaos On The Bridge", I had a quick look, decent enough looking, will watch whole thing later.

degrassinoel

charlietheminxx wrote: »

Isn't Avery Brooks notoriously difficult to work with? He's a bit eccentric to have around it seems.

He's a bit eccentric in any of interview i've seen him in, but apparently him and Cirroc Lofton (Jake from DS9) are still very close friends

syklops

Also Starring LeVar Burton wrote: »

Don't think that's a fair statement. He plays the straight-man as Sisko, so his character is supposed to be quite wooden, since he's surrounded by so many colourful characters. Was just re-watching the season 6 episode "Far Beyond The Stars" this afternoon, not only one of my favourite DS9 episodes, but one of my overall favourite Trek episodes, and Avery Brooks is fantastic in it.

And he was fantastic in American History X.

Antar Bolaeisk

syklops wrote: »

I dont think they would give away nearly 100 years of the new timeline so easily(if they are in any way smart). Speaking of being smart, why didnt the temporal alliance crowd not clean up the changes to the timeline of Star Trek 2009? Oh I know why, coz of these things: $$$

I doubt there's much chance of it being in the original timeline, but being in the new timeline isn't a bad thing so long as they can make a decent show.

Technocentral

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

I doubt there's much chance of it being in the original timeline, but being in the new timeline isn't a bad thing so long as they can make a decent show.

There ail never be another Spock as good as Leonard Nimoy.

When you look at his IMDB, you realize that Avery Brooks really hasn't done much since the late 90s.

SimonTemplar

It probably won't happen, but I'd love a proper goodbye for Picard. Such a fantastic iconic character, Nemesis didn't give him the ending he deserved.

I haven't read any of the novels though.

ScumLord

SimonTemplar wrote: »

It probably won't happen, but I'd love a proper goodbye for Picard. Such a fantastic iconic character, Nemesis didn't give him the ending he deserved.

Picard Could be good for the odd cameo as top brass in star fleet. He'd be good at a commander general or whatever they're called in star trek.

Depending on what they're planning they might be able to entice him back. TV seems to be the place to be and I'm sure he could work a favorable deal for himself.

AMKC

ScumLord wrote: »

Picard Could be good for the odd cameo as top brass in star fleet. He'd be good at a commander general or whatever they're called in star trek.

Depending on what they're planning they might be able to entice him back. TV seems to be the place to be and I'm sure he could work a favorable deal for himself.

Admiral you mean thats the next level up after being a Captain. After that I think its just retirement. Would be great if he got a few cameo,s in the new series all right as an Admiral.

_Tombstone_

A bit of picard while we wait..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOnfE7z7-u8

pixelburp

Latest reports are that Nicholas Meyer, the director & writer of Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country (he also wrote The Voyage Home), has joined the writing staff for the new show. That's very interesting news, and suggests an intention to at least surround the production with people who understood the more successful, old-school Trek.

AMKC

http://redshirtsalwaysdie.com/2016/04/25/new-star-trek-series-start-filming-september/

Lets hope this is true and there will be a few episodes or even more ready to go when it launches in January.

ScumLord

I'm going back watching all the star trek series in chronological order. I've done enterprise and I'm on the 3rd season of original star trek. One thing I've noticed is how horribly they've aged. A lot of the "science" in the original series has been proven bunkum by now like telepathy. They have good techno jargon though.

It will be interesting to see how they go with the series. The current films wouldn't make a good series, they make decent enough action films but there isn't enough depth there for a series. I think if they made a revamped original series I wouldn't be too interested. I want to see some good sci-fi, I want to see what the future might actually be like rather than a series set in the 1960s interpretation of the future we're already in.

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson

Star Trek 2017 TV show will be 13 episodes and starts shooting in September

The first season of next year's Star Trek series will be 13 episodes long.

Co-creator and showrunner Bryan Fuller confirmed that the episodes will tell one story, and that shooting begins in September.

"We've got the arc of the first season entirely written, or arced out, and we've got the first six episodes entirely broken," he told Collider.

Fuller added that because the series will be on streaming service CBS All Access, the writers will have more flexibility.

"Because we're CBS All Access, we're not subject to network broadcast standards and practices," he said. "It will likely affect us more in terms of what we can do graphically, but Star Trek's not necessarily a universe where I want to hear a lot of profanity, either.

"I've met with a few actors, and it's an interesting process.

"There's a few people that we like and we want to carry on what Star Trek does best, which is being progressive. So it's fascinating to look at all of these roles through a colourblind prism and a gender-blind prism, so that's exciting."

Early reports have hinted that the new Star Trek will be set on a ship other than the Enterprise - and will maintain continuity with the '60s series but not JJ Abrams's movie universe

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/star-trek/news/a798992/star-trek-2017-tv-show-will-be-13-episodes-and-starts-shooting-in-september/

pixelburp

TV certainly is a 13-episode world these days. I like it, there's no question it helps the pacing and story when the writers aren't forced into writing half a seasons worth of filler.

DubTony

"Because we're CBS All Access, we're not subject to network broadcast standards and practices," he said. "It will likely affect us more in terms of what we can do graphically, but Star Trek's not necessarily a universe where I want to hear a lot of profanity, either.

Yep. Despite being no prude, I always felt that Meaney's one instance of "Bollocks" was definitely enough in hundreds of Star Trek episodes.