DS9 Movie...

[NIUPonyBoy]

The new-trek crap has doomed any prime trek from ever re-appearing on the big screen or even the small for that matter. And that sucks.

 

[DevilEyes]

The new-trek crap has doomed any prime trek from ever re-appearing on the big screen or even the small for that matter. And that sucks.

The only way this statement could make sense is if by "new trek crap" you are referring to Insurrection and Nemesis.

But since you seem to be referring to ST09, which is BTW not crap, you seem to be in some denial, if you don't realize that:
1) the Star Trek franchise was dead as a dodo after Nemesis.
2) ST09 managed to revive it, which is a small miracle.
3) Even if the Star Trek franchise hadn't been dead as a dodo, a DS9 feature film was one of the least likely things to happen.
4) The success of ST09 means that there is a lot more chance for any kind of new Trek to be produced, thanks to the renewed interest in Trek in general.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

Anything new in Trek will be in the JJverse, not anything I am really excited to see. The ST09 was a good flick, better than the last TNG ones, but I am not excited to see the new 'verse crap instead of the traditional trek.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Any new film would have to be set at least 10 years after the end of the DS9 series. So much can happen in 10 years what makes people think the same crew will be on DS9.

Well...there's always Capt. Ezri Dax of the Aventine....

 

[Plain Simple]

Anything new in Trek will be in the JJverse, not anything I am really excited to see. The ST09 was a good flick, better than the last TNG ones, but I am not excited to see the new 'verse crap instead of the traditional trek.

So it was a good flick and crap at the same time? How does that work?

 

[apenpaap]

^Just like the way VOY is both a good and a bad show: it's got many awesome stuff, and many crappy stuff.

 

[Plain Simple]

^Just like the way VOY is both a good and a bad show: it's got many awesome stuff, and many crappy stuff.

It's something else to say that a series had good and bad episodes or that a film is at the same time good and crap.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

^Just like the way VOY is both a good and a bad show: it's got many awesome stuff, and many crappy stuff.

It's something else to say that a series had good and bad episodes or that a film is at the same time good and crap.

It's good that it has breathed new life into Trek and the movie itself was very good and I enjoyed it a lot. It's crap as it has doomed the 'old' Trek and killed that from continuing. As the 'old' Trek is the one I want to see furthered, not the JJverse.

 

[DevilEyes]

^Just like the way VOY is both a good and a bad show: it's got many awesome stuff, and many crappy stuff.

It's something else to say that a series had good and bad episodes or that a film is at the same time good and crap.

It's good that it has breathed new life into Trek and the movie itself was very good and I enjoyed it a lot. It's crap as it has doomed the 'old' Trek and killed that from continuing. As the 'old' Trek is the one I want to see furthered, not the JJverse.

And how was 'the old Trek' going to continue, exactly? By having 80-year old actors reprise their roles and have CGI Bones and Scotty? Recasting the roles and putting the AU spin on it is the closest you can get to 'old Trek'.

Since that's probably not what you had in mind, I have to ask, what is 'old Trek', exactly?

TNG (The Next Generation = old Trek - that's an oxymoron in itself, but nevermind...)? Those movies ran themselves into the ground, the actors are also getting too old, and/or too disinterested to get involved (Brent Spiner wanted his character killed so he wouldn't have to do any more Trek movies), and after the failure of "Insurrection" and "Nemesis", the studios were never going to finance another TNG movie.

DS9? Much as I love the series, it finished 10 years ago, and there has never been any realistic chance of getting a DS9 movie, instead we kept getting worse and worse TNG movies, because TNG was the show with higher ratings.

VOY and ENT? Please don't tell me you are referring to them as "old Trek"?

And since the cancellation of ENT, the chances of getting a new Trek TV show were about as high as getting a new TNG movie or a DS9 movie. Something like 0.000001%.

So what exactly did ST09 "kill" or "doom"? It only could have - and has - revived the entire Trek franchise, gotten loads of new fans interested in Trek in general, and as a result, helped every other Star Trek project.

 

[Too Much Fun]

I hate what the writers did with Sisko at the end of "What You Leave Behind". I thought it was so stupid and such a cop-out. He's no longer alive, but he's not exactly dead either. Apparently he comes back and lives with Kasidy, Jake, and his new child on Bajor in a novel, but that's not good enough for me.

I would have liked to see a DS9 movie (even if it was just direct-to-DVD) if for nothing else than just to see that play out in live action. It should have happened in the series finale, though, rendering such a movie unnecessary. What happened to him instead in the finale was crap (speaking of crap).

 

[DevilEyes]

I hate what the writers did with Sisko at the end of "What You Leave Behind". I thought it was so stupid and such a cop-out. He's no longer alive, but he's not exactly dead either. Apparently he comes back and lives with Kasidy, Jake, and his new child on Bajor in a novel, but that's not good enough for me.

I would have liked to see a DS9 movie (even if it was just direct-to-DVD) if for nothing else than just to see that play out in live action. It should have happened in the series finale, though, rendering such a movie unnecessary. What happened to him instead in the finale was crap (speaking of crap).

Well the whole Pah-wraiths thing was ridiculous and a bunch of utter crap. I agree with you on that. I praise the show for dealing with politics and religion in an intelligent way, for complexity and moral ambiguity, and then, after 6 and a half seasons, they flush it all down the toilet in order to hit us over the head with a black and white resolution with good and evil spirits, magic, Jesus figures and possessed red-eyed villains?

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

It's something else to say that a series had good and bad episodes or that a film is at the same time good and crap.

It's good that it has breathed new life into Trek and the movie itself was very good and I enjoyed it a lot. It's crap as it has doomed the 'old' Trek and killed that from continuing. As the 'old' Trek is the one I want to see furthered, not the JJverse.

And how was 'the old Trek' going to continue, exactly? By having 80-year old actors reprise their roles and have CGI Bones and Scotty? Recasting the roles and putting the AU spin on it is the closest you can get to 'old Trek'.

Since that's probably not what you had in mind, I have to ask, what is 'old Trek', exactly?

TNG (The Next Generation = old Trek - that's an oxymoron in itself, but nevermind...)? Those movies ran themselves into the ground, the actors are also getting too old, and/or too disinterested to get involved (Brent Spiner wanted his character killed so he wouldn't have to do any more Trek movies), and after the failure of "Insurrection" and "Nemesis", the studios were never going to finance another TNG movie.

DS9? Much as I love the series, it finished 10 years ago, and there has never been any realistic chance of getting a DS9 movie, instead we kept getting worse and worse TNG movies, because TNG was the show with higher ratings.

VOY and ENT? Please don't tell me you are referring to them as "old Trek"?

And since the cancellation of ENT, the chances of getting a new Trek TV show were about as high as getting a new TNG movie or a DS9 movie. Something like 0.000001%.

So what exactly did ST09 "kill" or "doom"? It only could have - and has - revived the entire Trek franchise, gotten loads of new fans interested in Trek in general, and as a result, helped every other Star Trek project.

"Old" Trek is the traditional timeline. It's really not hard to follow.

So yes TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT is "old" Trek as it is the "old" traditional timeline.

STXI is "new" Trek as it is the non-transnational alternate timelime.

 

[Plain Simple]

^Just like the way VOY is both a good and a bad show: it's got many awesome stuff, and many crappy stuff.

It's something else to say that a series had good and bad episodes or that a film is at the same time good and crap.

It's good that it has breathed new life into Trek and the movie itself was very good and I enjoyed it a lot. It's crap as it has doomed the 'old' Trek and killed that from continuing. As the 'old' Trek is the one I want to see furthered, not the JJverse.

Okay, that makes sense. Well, we can debate another ten years whether or not the reboot (basically) was necessary or if an `old Trek' movie could have been as successful, and probably we all will. But even though you might have preferred new `old Trek', if you liked the new `new Trek', why not look forward to a new installment of that?

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

It's something else to say that a series had good and bad episodes or that a film is at the same time good and crap.

It's good that it has breathed new life into Trek and the movie itself was very good and I enjoyed it a lot. It's crap as it has doomed the 'old' Trek and killed that from continuing. As the 'old' Trek is the one I want to see furthered, not the JJverse.

Okay, that makes sense. Well, we can debate another ten years whether or not the reboot (basically) was necessary or if an `old Trek' movie could have been as successful, and probably we all will. But even though you might have preferred new `old Trek', if you liked the new `new Trek', why not look forward to a new installment of that?

I gotcha. And I agree.

I don't like change damn it! lol

I guess the "old" traditional Trek has a soft spot in my heart and I really enjoyed it. I hate to give up that "history."

 

[DevilEyes]

"Old" Trek is the traditional timeline. It's really not hard to follow.

So yes TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT is "old" Trek as it is the "old" traditional timeline.

STXI is "new" Trek as it is the non-transnational alternate timelime.

So, what are the Mirror Universe episodes of TOS, DS9 and ENT? How about the TNG episode "Parallels"?

Non-canon novels that take place in all sorts of alternate universes, are they 'old Trek', 'new Trek', or something in between?

For that matter, is the entire TNG after "Yesterday's Enterprise" 'traditional timeline' or should we regard it as something else?

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

"Old" Trek is the traditional timeline. It's really not hard to follow.

So yes TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT is "old" Trek as it is the "old" traditional timeline.

STXI is "new" Trek as it is the non-transnational alternate timelime.

So, what are the Mirror Universe episodes of TOS, DS9 and ENT? How about the TNG episode "Parallels"?

Non-canon novels that take place in all sorts of alternate universes, are they 'old Trek', 'new Trek', or something in between?

For that matter, is the entire TNG after "Yesterday's Enterprise" 'traditional timeline' or should we regard it as something else?

Your argument is silly.

I am fairly certain that an episode taking place inside the confines of the previous parameters... IS part of that grouping.

 

[DevilEyes]

"Old" Trek is the traditional timeline. It's really not hard to follow.

So yes TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT is "old" Trek as it is the "old" traditional timeline.

STXI is "new" Trek as it is the non-transnational alternate timelime.

So, what are the Mirror Universe episodes of TOS, DS9 and ENT? How about the TNG episode "Parallels"?

Non-canon novels that take place in all sorts of alternate universes, are they 'old Trek', 'new Trek', or something in between?

For that matter, is the entire TNG after "Yesterday's Enterprise" 'traditional timeline' or should we regard it as something else?

Your argument is silly.

I am fairly certain that an episode taking place inside the confines of the previous parameters... IS part of that grouping.

I think that your argument is silly.

You would classify every Star Trek show, movie, novel, comic, that takes place in the Prime Universe as "old Trek" and the new movie and anything that takes place in the Alternate Universe created by Nero's incursion as "new Trek"?! C'mon!

For starters, alternate universes are nothing new in the Star Trek franchise. And by your logic, is the Countdown comic "old Trek" even though it's a tie-in to the movie? How about the new Star Trek novels that are about to be released? Some of them take place in the Prime Universe, others take place in the AU. So now we should classify some of them as "old Trek" and the others as "new Trek"?!

Speaking of which, the fact that they are about to released doesn't support your assumption that the existence of the fiction set in the fictional AU universe will somehow make it impossible for some other fiction to be set in the PU, does it? I find the assumption quite silly in itself. As someone on the TrekLit forum said, it's not like the readers will say:

Oooh, so these totally unreal stories are now less real than these other totally unreal stories? Aaaah, burn them, burn them! Come on. All that matters to most people is that the stories are enjoyable. It doesn't matter whether they think of them as a viable alternate history or simply an alternative way of imagining a made-up bunch of characters.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

So, what are the Mirror Universe episodes of TOS, DS9 and ENT? How about the TNG episode "Parallels"?

Non-canon novels that take place in all sorts of alternate universes, are they 'old Trek', 'new Trek', or something in between?

For that matter, is the entire TNG after "Yesterday's Enterprise" 'traditional timeline' or should we regard it as something else?

Your argument is silly.

I am fairly certain that an episode taking place inside the confines of the previous parameters... IS part of that grouping.

I think that your argument is silly.

You would classify every Star Trek show, movie, novel, comic, that takes place in the Prime Universe as "old Trek" and the new movie and anything that takes place in the Alternate Universe created by Nero's incursion as "new Trek"?! C'mon!

For starters, alternate universes are nothing new in the Star Trek franchise. And by your logic, is the Countdown comic "old Trek" even though it's a tie-in to the movie? How about the new Star Trek novels that are about to be released? Some of them take place in the Prime Universe, others take place in the AU. So now we should classify some of them as "old Trek" and the others as "new Trek"?!

Speaking of which, the fact that they are about to released doesn't support your assumption that the existence of the fiction set in the fictional AU universe will somehow make it impossible for some other fiction to be set in the PU, does it? I find the assumption quite silly in itself. As someone on the TrekLit forum said, it's not like the readers will say:

Oooh, so these totally unreal stories are now less real than these other totally unreal stories? Aaaah, burn them, burn them! Come on. All that matters to most people is that the stories are enjoyable. It doesn't matter whether they think of them as a viable alternate history or simply an alternative way of imagining a made-up bunch of characters.

Yes that is exactly what I am saying. And makes sense. The "old" Trek is Gene Roddenberry's timeline, complete with diversions into mirror 'verses and the like, BUT it follows thru on his creation.

The "new" Trek is the JJ stuff. NOT following Gene's story.

I like both stories thus far, but I prefer the "old" stuff.

And I do firmly believe that with the JJ "new" Trek the "old" Trek is all but dead, at least in terms of movies and more than likely TV as well. Just judging by how the American public always goes for the new flashy stuff.

 

[Cyke101]

It's good that it has breathed new life into Trek and the movie itself was very good and I enjoyed it a lot. It's crap as it has doomed the 'old' Trek and killed that from continuing. As the 'old' Trek is the one I want to see furthered, not the JJverse.

And how was 'the old Trek' going to continue, exactly? By having 80-year old actors reprise their roles and have CGI Bones and Scotty? Recasting the roles and putting the AU spin on it is the closest you can get to 'old Trek'.

Since that's probably not what you had in mind, I have to ask, what is 'old Trek', exactly?

TNG (The Next Generation = old Trek - that's an oxymoron in itself, but nevermind...)? Those movies ran themselves into the ground, the actors are also getting too old, and/or too disinterested to get involved (Brent Spiner wanted his character killed so he wouldn't have to do any more Trek movies), and after the failure of "Insurrection" and "Nemesis", the studios were never going to finance another TNG movie.

DS9? Much as I love the series, it finished 10 years ago, and there has never been any realistic chance of getting a DS9 movie, instead we kept getting worse and worse TNG movies, because TNG was the show with higher ratings.

VOY and ENT? Please don't tell me you are referring to them as "old Trek"?

And since the cancellation of ENT, the chances of getting a new Trek TV show were about as high as getting a new TNG movie or a DS9 movie. Something like 0.000001%.

So what exactly did ST09 "kill" or "doom"? It only could have - and has - revived the entire Trek franchise, gotten loads of new fans interested in Trek in general, and as a result, helped every other Star Trek project.

"Old" Trek is the traditional timeline. It's really not hard to follow.

So yes TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT is "old" Trek as it is the "old" traditional timeline.

STXI is "new" Trek as it is the non-transnational alternate timelime.

To be fair, the writers' intent is that ENT is a part of nuTrek's history.

By extension (and admittedly it's one hell of an extension), since ENT counts in nuTrek's history, and ENT has connections to all the series preceding it, they sort of count in an expanded way. Even DS9 has a few shout outs in ENT.

 

[DevilEyes]

Your argument is silly.

I am fairly certain that an episode taking place inside the confines of the previous parameters... IS part of that grouping.

I think that your argument is silly.

You would classify every Star Trek show, movie, novel, comic, that takes place in the Prime Universe as "old Trek" and the new movie and anything that takes place in the Alternate Universe created by Nero's incursion as "new Trek"?! C'mon!

For starters, alternate universes are nothing new in the Star Trek franchise. And by your logic, is the Countdown comic "old Trek" even though it's a tie-in to the movie? How about the new Star Trek novels that are about to be released? Some of them take place in the Prime Universe, others take place in the AU. So now we should classify some of them as "old Trek" and the others as "new Trek"?!

Speaking of which, the fact that they are about to released doesn't support your assumption that the existence of the fiction set in the fictional AU universe will somehow make it impossible for some other fiction to be set in the PU, does it? I find the assumption quite silly in itself. As someone on the TrekLit forum said, it's not like the readers will say:

Oooh, so these totally unreal stories are now less real than these other totally unreal stories? Aaaah, burn them, burn them! Come on. All that matters to most people is that the stories are enjoyable. It doesn't matter whether they think of them as a viable alternate history or simply an alternative way of imagining a made-up bunch of characters.

Yes that is exactly what I am saying. And makes sense. The "old" Trek is Gene Roddenberry's timeline, complete with diversions into mirror 'verses and the like, BUT it follows thru on his creation.

The "new" Trek is the JJ stuff. NOT following Gene's story.

I like both stories thus far, but I prefer the "old" stuff.

And I do firmly believe that with the JJ "new" Trek the "old" Trek is all but dead, at least in terms of movies and more than likely TV as well. Just judging by how the American public always goes for the new flashy stuff.

Gene Roddenberry had nothing to do with DS9 (and probably fortunately so, for DS9), VOY or ENT.

And since he is not actually God (whatever some people might think ), he did not "create" an actual universe that exists in itself and can be called "his universe". He merely created a popular franchise. Since any universes that "exist" in it are fictional, this entire discussion is absurd.