Star trek re-imagined.

[TerraNovan]

Its great irony that so many plots have characters going across a galaxy, to find a race of pale skinned hominids, who have such diverse views that they practice slavery.

Which shows you're missing the point. It's the fact that we can go across the galaxy. That we choose to go across the galaxy. That there is nothing beyond our grasp.

Say what you want, but that represents a powerful hook for a story.

Of course it is a powerful hook. And I don't deny its one of the many many parts of star trek as a whole.


But I think that hook has overloaded all logic and reason for many people involved in star trek.

Its intensely under utilized and for much of star trek is something writers continually invent ideas to get around.

If I thought trek could still be trek on a galactic scale Id be all for it.

If you had trillions upon trillions of intelligent lifeforms, (not humanoids) floating around, with millions of years of history between them, with humans travelling great distances etc.

Id be all for galactic trek,

But for most part, trek audience wants humanoid species, numbering in the thousands(not trillions), experiencing life through the similar lense that we all know as adult life.

Obviously there is a mix, but the galactic scale I think creates an inconsistency that detracts from the meaningful story.

 

[BillJ]

But for most part, trek audience wants humanoid species, numbering in the thousands(not trillions), experiencing life through the similar lense that we all know as adult life.

Obviously there is a mix, but the galactic scale I think creates an inconsistency that detracts from the meaningful story.

People want to be entertained. People want to have fun. It is that simple. It doesn't matter whether the number of species mesh with the show being on a galactic scale. Most of the audience doesn't put that much thought into it.

They do know it's cool seeing starships hop all over the galaxy.

 

[Tim Walker]

I recall a novel in which interstellar distances were daunting, but there were brown dwarves that were within reach.

 

[urbandefault]

I recall a novel in which interstellar distances were daunting, but there were brown dwarves that were within reach.

I thought we were supposed to call them "little people" now.

 

[TerraNovan]

People want to be entertained. People want to have fun. It is that simple. It doesn't matter whether the number of species mesh with the show being on a galactic scale. Most of the audience doesn't put that much thought into it.

They do know it's cool seeing starships hop all over the galaxy.

Of course people want to be entertained, saying that doesn't really mean anything.

The quality of that entertainment is where staying power comes in.

TOS reruns with its horrid production wouldn't still be on the air, if it weren't for the characterizations, the details, the lore, all those little addons that people seem to suggest are inconsequential.

Deviating from the attention to detail is exactly what killed the series.

 

[Tarek71]

Going to the stars was an important part of Star Trek. A Trek across the stars was embodied in the name of the show. But what really is at the core of it, is a hopeful vision of the future. One produced in the Cold War that said we are not going to be exterminated. On the contrary, there will be a united earth with one united species that goes to the stars together. There is no dystopian nightmare society, no post apocalyptic wasteland and the evil robots don't take over.

We can argue about whether TNG and Berman Trek took the "Paradise Earth" idea a little too far. Everyone can have a laugh at "evolved sensibilities" and wonder whether it hurts dramatic tension to have too little conflict among humans. But if nothing else, it's the sort of future Star Trek embodies. There is no shortage of dystopias in science fiction. I think it's ok if at least some versions of the future are not so bleak.

Taken together with the idea of boldly going where no one has gone before on a trek across the stars, we have Star Trek. Does this reimagined Trek capture that? Not really. In addition to no trek across the stars, this is not that hopeful a vision of the human future. Deep divisions exist between human factions, and some of these live under militaristic dictatorships.

They are supposedly apart for centuries, but they should never have been out of radio contact. And unless the space program was on hold for 200 years, contact should have been continuous throughout. As I said, it's not my baby, and not my decision, but for me, this is better left out of the ST universe.

 

[TerraNovan]

G
We can argue about whether TNG and Berman Trek took the "Paradise Earth" idea a little too far. Everyone can have a laugh at "evolved sensibilities" and wonder whether it hurts dramatic tension to have too little conflict among humans. But if nothing else, it's the sort of future Star Trek embodies. There is no shortage of dystopias in science fiction. I think it's ok if at least some versions of the future are not so bleak.

Taken together with the idea of boldly going where no one has gone before on a trek across the stars, we have Star Trek. Does this reimagined Trek capture that? Not really. In addition to no trek across the stars, this is not that hopeful a vision of the human future. Deep divisions exist between human factions, and some of these live under militaristic dictatorships.

They are supposedly apart for centuries, but they should never have been out of radio contact. And unless the space program was on hold for 200 years, contact should have been continuous throughout. As I said, it's not my baby, and not my decision, but for me, this is better left out of the ST universe.

Who said it wasn't utopian.

To call augments human factions I think is missing the point.

They actively decided to relinquish their human status.

The lack of contact is no different than the prime different.

Albeit slightly different motivations, but I think it maintains that ideal.

 

[Squiggy]

A 5 year mission to seek out new life and civilizations....

Can't do that unless you're going faster than the speed of light.

 

[Tim Walker]

One has to ask, what makes Trek...Trek?

Can a spin off series really be Star Trek? Consider these ideas:

1. Do something like Lost in Space, but with a Star Fleet vessel.

2, We will make a space station, not a star ship, the main setting. Whats more, we will park it next to a wormhole.

Can one do a series that adds something to the Star Trek universe, without creating a completely distinct franchise?

 

[BillJ]

1. Do something like Lost in Space, but with a Star Fleet vessel.

But it really wasn't lost as they knew exactly where they were going and started working in Alpha Quadrant species the fourth or fifth episode in. See: "Eye of the Needle"

2, We will make a space station, not a star ship, the main setting. Whats more, we will park it next to a wormhole.

People quit watching in droves and forced them to reconsider having a starship.

Can one do a series that adds something to the Star Trek universe, without creating a completely distinct franchise?

Absolutely. But when one abandons the "Star Trek" part of Star Trek, I don't think the show qualifies as Star Trek anymore.

 

[Tim Walker]

Like TOS, TNG and ENT featured ships/crews that would "boldly go"..... This basic premise is adaptable/open ended, and can lead to a variety of adventures. Stories can range from action-adventure to drama.

I think between DS9 and B5, the space station setting is exhausted.

A base on a planet was done by Stargate Atlantis. No particular advantage to this, story wise, and this has now been done.

Space station and planetary setting are inherently limited, as they are stuck in the same place. (Earth works well for other genres, but thats a different topic). For a space opera, you end up concocting some means of commuting away, such as a small ship. In which case, why not use a large ship as the main setting?

So for a new Trek series, you really ought to have a ship that "boldly goes".....

 

[TerraNovan]

People quit watching in droves and forced them to reconsider having a starship.

Absolutely. But when one abandons the "Star Trek" part of Star Trek, I don't think the show qualifies as Star Trek anymore.

This is nonsense, Early episodes of DS9 were simply garbage, has nothing to do with the ship not being present.

Even when the show got better, the defiant, was rarely an integral part of the better episodes.

DS9 wasnt popular because it was too trek for many casual fans to get into it.

Which contradicts the nonsensical notion that it wasnt trek.

DS9 wasnt perfect but its biggest flaw was rehashing TNG plots.

 

[Tim Walker]

Actually, BillJ was the one you seem to be quoting, not me.

 

[Tim Walker]

I apologize because I don't recall the title-in one novel an Earth like planet is ravaged by the Borg, turned into a waste land. The survivors turn towards another planet, long known, that is marginal for human habitation.

(Occasionally such appear in science fiction, such as Dune and Star Wars).

An implication is that prime real estate is located on a small number of planets, the ones most Earth like. Given a choice, that is where colonists would go. So presumably there were marginal planets that were bypassed.

But what if much of the (once) prime real estate is rendered desolate? Where would refugees go?

 

[Melakon]

The transporter is a concept almost unique to Star Trek in terms of visual science fiction, and is perhaps more identified with it by the general public than warp drive. Removing it makes Trek feel like any other show.

I have a fictional sci-fi universe I've been developing over 15 years that I play in. One of the first things I did to distance it from Trek was to decide no one has teleportation technology at all. I'm working in a universe much smaller, with only 3 or 4 major races including humans, and a few minimally developed minor races, with most of the action taking place near one solar system currently. My military dudes that resemble Starfleet are mostly expendable background characters so that I can kill people off when they're not important to the story. The main characters are primarily civilians in a war zone.

 

[Tim Walker]

Various teleportation devices occasionally appear in science fiction novels, but yes, Star Trek seems the only series where such appeared on screen. Even ENT had it.

The stargate in Stargate Universe is more of a magic doorway, akin to the Iconians'.

 

[Melakon]

Even Duck Dodgers in the 24th 1/2 Century uses a teleporter before Star Trek. But Trek popularized it with the "Beam me up" phrase before any later popular sci-fi came along. They don't have a patent on it of course, but other shows seem to avoid copying the method.

 

[TerraNovan]

The transporter is a concept almost unique to Star Trek in terms of visual science fiction, and is perhaps more identified with it by the general public than warp drive. Removing it makes Trek feel like any other show.

There are about 40 different things primarily connected to star trek.
Claiming the removal of some these elements will make it unrecognizable to star trek is being far too attached to the pass.

If you think a new star trek is gonna have every element people like, your not gonna see a new star trek show come about.

If star trek comes back it will have to reinvent itself to remain current. Just as TNG did.

Lack of creative ideas is what took the show off the air in the first place.


Granted I think this is the desire of many here but whatever.

if i were to make a show not based on star trek Id remove more than a few details.

It would be based on capitalism, there would be no space navies but people working under contract.

Theere would be no exploration.

I could go on and on.

 

[Tim Walker]

The Star Trek canon is huge by now, with a vast number of details. Almost like real history.

 

[BillJ]

If star trek comes back it will have to reinvent itself to remain current. Just as TNG did.

TNG reinvented nothing. Check out Star Trek: Phase II, a series that was created by Roddenberry in the late-70's that never made it to air and was the basis for Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

There would be no exploration.

Just wow. Who hurt you as a child?

The Star Trek canon is huge by now, with a vast number of details. Almost like real history.

Which works against it for all but the most hardcore of fans.