New Series

[Cary L. Brown]

jonnyskywatcher said:I would prefer a complete re-imagining like Battlestar Galactica, but it doesn't look like they're going that direction with the movie. So, maybe if the movie doesn't do as well as they had hoped, they could do a re-imagined series in a few years.

The term "reimagine" basically means "make a new show but cheat by pretending that it's an old show."

I'm 100% behind having a new show... many new shows... but if the ship isn't the same, the characters, aren't the same, the setting isn't the same... all of those things should simply be called something else. You can do ANYTHING you'd do in a "reimagining" without needing to prey on the gullibility of people who'll assume they're seeing one thing when they go in. "Reimagining," to me, means "bait and switch"... nothing more.

I love having new stuff. I love having new characters. Sure, create a new hotshot pilot character named Kara Thrace... it's completely pointless to "borrow" the name Starbuck.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Jack Bauer said:
USS Excellent is beging to be made!

Ah, THOSE were the days...

The term "reimagine" basically means "make a new show but cheat by pretending that it's an old show."

I think the cheating happens for the sake of the bean counters, at least in the case of BSG. Ron Moore wanted to make a show that was "VOY done right" and glommed the BSG name in order to convince people to give him money because BSG was a known quantity and the bean counters love that. Nobody was going to be doing anything else with the BSG name, so no harm done, really. I know some BSG loyalists have convinced themselves otherwise, but let's be real here. Kara Thrace is a great character regardless of whether her call sign is Starbuck, so the names of things isn't really a big issue for me.

But the same situation does not apply to Star Trek. There is an essence behind the Star Trek name that is well worth resurrecting, and Abrams would be a fool to ignore that.

 

[Michael_Kroh]

I would serialize the Lost Era of Earth's post-atomic Recovery, set about 70 years before the events of Enterprise.

FIRST CONTACT: The Iron Horse

 

[Sulu_Love_child]

I'd like to see a series that continues the "5 year mission".
Complete with TOS uniforms etc...
I'd like to see more of the arms/space race between the Romulans,Klingons and UFP. I'd like a new series to explore in detail the politics and background of the TOS universe that was often left vague. Star Trek New Voyages is comparable to what I invision but with better actors, effects and stories...

 

[jonnyskywatcher]

Cary L. Brown said:

jonnyskywatcher said:I would prefer a complete re-imagining like Battlestar Galactica, but it doesn't look like they're going that direction with the movie. So, maybe if the movie doesn't do as well as they had hoped, they could do a re-imagined series in a few years.

The term "reimagine" basically means "make a new show but cheat by pretending that it's an old show."

I'm 100% behind having a new show... many new shows... but if the ship isn't the same, the characters, aren't the same, the setting isn't the same... all of those things should simply be called something else. You can do ANYTHING you'd do in a "reimagining" without needing to prey on the gullibility of people who'll assume they're seeing one thing when they go in. "Reimagining," to me, means "bait and switch"... nothing more.

But I wasn't talking about changing everything, and I don't agree that a reimagining can change everything. You would have to change way too many things in nuBSG to make it not Battlestar Galactica (Cylons, Adama, Battlestar Galactica, Twelve Colonies, searching for Earth, vipers.) My main idea would be to keep what I like and throw out the rest.

I like Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. The other characters don't have enough depth that you couldn't change minor details or just replace them with a different character. The Enterprise stays. I'd get rid of the alien of the week, and keep the alien species to a minimum. I'd limit or just get rid of time travel. I'd keep most of the technology e.g. transporter, phasers, warp drive.

It's different enough to be a re-imagining, but too similar to Star Trek to be called something else.

 

[Kegek]

I like Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. The other characters don't have enough depth that you couldn't change minor details or just replace them with a different character. The Enterprise stays. I'd get rid of the alien of the week, and keep the alien species to a minimum. I'd limit or just get rid of time travel. I'd keep most of the technology e.g. transporter, phasers, warp drive.

I've no real concerns with the supporting cast should a straight remake is made - dramatically, Kirk, Spock and McCoy is all that counts - but I don't think they should eliminate aliens of the week and time travel. Not use either as a crutch, sure, and definately not overuse as some of the later shows did. But I think a lot of cliched and bad episodes about both obscured the fact those kind of stories can be told well, and in a really interesting manner. I'd love to see a Star Trek episode, for example, which dealt a bit more about the morality of time travel: What if you could create a better past - get rid of the Holocaust, World War II, disease, famine, plague - should you?

It can also be an avenue for mind-bending weirdness, which is always a good thing... and aliens of the week can be used to all kinds of fun ends. From the computer wars of 'A Taste of Armageddon' to the mealy-mouthed gangsters of 'A Piece of the Action.'

The real issue here isn't what kind of stories a new Trek series would tell - drama, soft sci-fi, hard sci-fi, general weirdness, soap, mystery - just that they have a wide palette and they tell those stories well.

And just about this remake/re-imagining stuff... I remember back in 2003 Moore was adamant he wasn't making a re-imagining, he was making a remake, and said he didn't like the term. Has he changed his tune?