Jump to content


Photo

"New ‘Star Trek’ Series Coming to CBS in 2017"

star trek cbs 2017 series

  • Please log in to reply
1901 replies to this topic

#1401 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:33 AM

Fans didn't want TNG, and wanted more Kirk and Spock, but it turned into a lot of people's favorite series. 


For many, TNG is a better version of Star Trek.

This time though, it's different. People don't want more Kirk or Spock, people don't want Picard and Data... people just want good Star Trek and the question is; will Discovery deliver that?

It's hard to say but there isn't anything that I've seen or heard that fills me with the confidence that this will deliver solid STAR TREK storytelling. If anything I'm seeing a lot of influence from Game of Thrones.

the undeniable fact here though is Roddenberry's Star Trek died with him so how do you do Star Trek without him? You absolutely have to listen to the fans.

#1402 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 20 August 2017 - 09:56 AM

Fans didn't want TNG, and wanted more Kirk and Spock, but it turned into a lot of people's favorite series. 

That's not a very good comparison at all. TNG was a different kind of Trek, and yes some fans didn't want to move away from the characters they had grown to love. The difference here is Discovery is shaping up to be something fundamentally different from all incarnations of Trek. TNG brought in new fans and old alike. The new fans then discovered TOS and grew to love it as well. I would imagine that new fans of Trek through Discovery will check out TOS, TNG and others and quickly realize they aren't the same thing and not develop any interest. One big difference is these serialized show are really great but they are essentially throw away series'. They hook people in and develop a huge following. It's a great form of storytelling but it's really a one time thing. How many Lost fans do you see nowadays? within one to two years of Discovery's end it will be gone and forgotten, with its fan base having moved on to whatever new series comes later on Netflix, HBO or whatever.



#1403 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:20 AM

They managed to make Star Trek just fine for quite a while after 1991, or was everything after his death not proper made Star Trek? 

 

Roddenberry practically killed TNG, and removing his control over the series resulted in huge improvements. 

 

Star Trek needed fresh blood then, and it needs it now. 

 

We don't need TNG 4.0, we need something new. 

 

I really don't understand why people are still saying Discovery won't be proper Star Trek, when everything everyone working on the show has implied it will be. Nothing I've seen has contradicted that.  

 

But of course they're all lying. Clearly rumors and speculation from fans is far more accurate for a show none of us have seen, and still know little to nothing about. 



#1404 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:23 AM

That's not a very good comparison at all. TNG was a different kind of Trek, The difference here is Discovery is shaping up to be something fundamentally different from all incarnations of Trek. 

So, TNG was a different kind of Trek to everything that had come before. 

 

And Discovery is a different kind of Trek from everything that came before. 

 

And it isn't a good comparison because...?

 

The rest of your comment is speculation based on nothing. 

 

If anything, it'd be the opposite. 

 

The Abrams movies brought in new fans that watched older Trek and loved it too. I don't know why there is any doubt that Discovery will do the same. 



#1405 JMW326

JMW326

    If I don't have it, they never made one.

  • Members
  • 4,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charlotte, NC

Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:34 AM

So, TNG was a different kind of Trek to everything that had come before. 
 
And Discovery is a different kind of Trek from everything that came before. 
 
And it isn't a good comparison because...?
 
The rest of your comment is speculation based on nothing. 
 
If anything, it'd be the opposite. 
 
The Abrams movies brought in new fans that watched older Trek and loved it too. I don't know why there is any doubt that Discovery will do the same.


Exactly!

#1406 robster

robster

    Will work for toys.

  • Members
  • 1,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crapland....some call it Norway.

Posted 20 August 2017 - 10:36 AM

I do count the last three movies,since they are real Trek as well. So 2005 to 2009 isn't that much of a gap. But maybe what Trek needs,and I'm hoping STD will be,are good stories and something new. Let it evolve and catch our interest again. I agree that dooming a show to hell before anyone has actually seen it is kinda backwards. I'm still looking forward to actually seeing it. If it fails,then take a break,lol!

#1407 VulcanFanatic

VulcanFanatic

    Leonard Nimoy fan

  • Members
  • 3,165 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southeastern North Carolina

Posted 20 August 2017 - 11:24 AM

Fans didn't want TNG, and wanted more Kirk and Spock, but it turned into a lot of people's favorite series. 

I was a Star Trek fan long before TNG came out and I don't remember the negativity then about TNG coming out that there is for Discovery. I was there watching the first episode of TNG the day it premiered and I always saw it as a continuation of Star Trek,not a reboot, a reimagining or a trashing of what came before. They never disrespected or blew off canon.

#1408 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 20 August 2017 - 11:43 AM

So, TNG was a different kind of Trek to everything that had come before. 

 

And Discovery is a different kind of Trek from everything that came before. 

 

And it isn't a good comparison because...?

 

The rest of your comment is speculation based on nothing. 

 

If anything, it'd be the opposite. 

 

The Abrams movies brought in new fans that watched older Trek and loved it too. I don't know why there is any doubt that Discovery will do the same. 

TOS and TNG are essentially identical. The only real difference in the series is the time period and characters. The format of the show is exactly the same, the message is exactly the same and it being a vehicle for good sci-fi storytelling is exactly the same. They even adapted a few unused TOS scripts for TNG.

 

Yes my issues with the current series are of course speculation since it obviously hasn't aired yet. My speculation is based off trailers and comments made from those involved with the production and those who have inside knowledge of the production. If somehow Discovery has managed to pull off a trailer that has nothing to do with the series and what everyone is talking about is false then I will be very happy, but lets be realistic. We all know a little bit about what's coming, it's going to be a heavy serialized drama. That just doesn't lend itself to the good optimistic sci-fi storytelling that is the most fundamental part of what Star Trek is.

 

I do count the last three movies,since they are real Trek as well. So 2005 to 2009 isn't that much of a gap. But maybe what Trek needs,and I'm hoping STD will be,are good stories and something new. Let it evolve and catch our interest again. I agree that dooming a show to hell before anyone has actually seen it is kinda backwards. I'm still looking forward to actually seeing it. If it fails,then take a break,lol!

 

If you're going to count that then in comparison I think you have to count the mid 90's Doctor Who. Yeah it's still a slightly bigger gap but not by that much. 

 

I agree in giving the show a fair chance, and I plan to do that. At the same time I'm not going to play dumb and pretend I can't see what's coming. I'm hoping for the best but as you say if it doesn't work out maybe a break is in order. Who knows maybe 5 years from now this crazy reboot everything phase that Hollywood seems to be going through will have played it's course.



#1409 robster

robster

    Will work for toys.

  • Members
  • 1,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crapland....some call it Norway.

Posted 20 August 2017 - 11:58 AM

I do actually count the Who tv movie from 96 as Who,McGann IS the eighth Doctor,lol! But one tv movie isn't exactly much,at least we've had three Trek movies since 05.

I too hope that all this reboot thing will soon be over and we'll get back to new and exciting stuff soon. Trek doesn't need any more reboots and such,just a continuation.

#1410 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,461 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 20 August 2017 - 12:10 PM

That's not a very good comparison at all. TNG was a different kind of Trek

 

TOS and TNG are essentially identical. 

 

You say one thing, and when I point out Discovery doing something similar, suddenly you're saying the opposite?

 

What a waste of time this is. I really don't know why I even bother. 

 

I'm done. 



#1411 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 20 August 2017 - 12:25 PM

 

 

You say one thing, and when I point out Discovery doing something similar, suddenly you're saying the opposite?

 

What a waste of time this is. I really don't know why I even bother. 

 

I'm done. 

I'm sorry you're confused I'll try to make it simple. TOS and TNG are different variations of Star Trek. They are set in time periods a hundred years apart. The format of the show is almost identical while continuing the canon into the future and introducing new characters. Discovery appears as though it's going to mostly abandon the canon and more significantly shift to a completely different format and tone of storytelling.

 

The way I see it TOS is vanilla ice cream and TNG is chocolate ice cream, they're both different flavors but in the end they're both ice cream. Discovery is a chocolate candy bar, its something completely different with a little of the same flavor.



#1412 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 20 August 2017 - 02:27 PM

Alteran, I get your frustration and I respect your view. I can see where you're coming from.

From where I sit, I see a badly damaged franchise that hasn't recovered from Enterprise. I see two studios with varying ideas on how Star Trek should be handled and neither one of them with the right ideas on how to move it forward.

The rumours surrounding discovery may or may not turn out to be true but more often than not, whilst rumours aren't always 100% accurate, there is usually some truth to them.

I guess we will find out in due course as to the fate of Discovery. All I can say is how I feel about Star Trek right now and I have to say that I feel frustrated by it.

I'm frustrated that the studios can't work together, I'm angry that they've decided to reimagine/reinvent Star Trek when there was nothing wrong with Star Trek's look before Abrams took over. Yes new writers needed to be brought in to freshen the storytelling up but at least everything looked like it was mean to be in the Star Trek universe, I'm annoyed that this is a series set a mere 10 years before Kirk and Spock and nothing looks like it's from that era except the phasers.

I'm dubious that so much of what I've seen looks too generic sci fi and not unique to Star Trek. I'm worried that this version of Star Trek will have lost the optimism and the hope that made Star Trek a household name. I'm disappointed that both Paramount and CBS have copied other franchises to make Star Trek more accessible, instead of being truthful and respectful of Star Trek's past.

Most of all though I'm ashamed of both Paramount and CBS for not having any confidence in Star Trek and have instead tried to reshape it into something it isn't - a Star Wars knock off on the big screen and a game of thrones in space serial on the small screen.

They've failed to understand Star Trek and that is so disappointing. In 12 years, all Star Trek has had to show for it is 3 movies, each more mediocre than the last. Discovery should of been an easy and triumphant return. Instead it's another desperate reimagining of something ALREADY POPULAR.

In my opinion, being a prequel to TOS, Star Trek: Discovery should of looked as though it was a collection of lost episodes of TOS. Uniforms, props, aliens, sets, ships... each costume, prosthetic, ship meticulously recreated for this triumphant return of Star Trek, new characters, new stories, episodic television at its absolute finest, as if an historian from the 25th century was looking through old tapes of a period in the Prime Timeline - not a confusing mesh of different designs, something reimagined to look like everything we expect sci fi to look like these days - that's not Star Trek.

Star Trek leads the way for others to be inspired by it.

With all the talk over Star Trek: Discovery and over the right and wrong way to produce a Star Trek production, how would you do it?

In my opinion Star Trek is an episodic adventure that may incorporate the odd two part story or arc that runs in the background throughout an entire season.

First and foremost though Star Trek is about one crew, one ship on a pioneering exploratory adventure through the vastness of space, boldly going where these heroes come into contact with contemporary issues that in some way shape or form reflect our own world through the eyes of the fictional Star Trek universe. Whist stories can be as complex as any writer wishes to make them; the premise to Star Trek is clearly quite a simple one.

My idea if I were CBS would be to employ the talents of those who have worked on Star Trek over the 50 years and a fan base who have shown their credentials already through Star Trek: Continues and New Voyages to guide this series but to also reach out to Netflix to ensure that production values were high. No more All Access but a dedication to Star Trek that CBS won't use it to launch their fledgling streaming service but to ensure that Star Trek was given the best.

My idea for a series would be to go back to what everyone loves Star Trek for: bright, enjoyable, whimsical, intelligent and cerebral storytelling. A new generation will be inspired as we return to a legendary universe of characters and aliens as well as introducing new worlds, new species, new characters to an ever expanding universe of stories.

Set onboard a new starship Enterprise packed with new technologies for a new generation to be inspired by. A series set in the early 25th Century, a new crew takes command and is thrust into a pioneering adventure to seek out new worlds, new life and new civilisations, to boldly go where no one has been before...

Simple.

#1413 MisterPL

MisterPL

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 943 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 August 2017 - 09:41 AM

I'm so glad none of the naysayers here are doctors. They wouldn't even fully examine the patient to pronounce him dead.  :lol:

 

Seriously, Trekkies have no idea what they want. The fandom is a far cry from a hive mind, that's for sure. Some of you even contradict yourselves. I don't envy the powers that be.



#1414 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 21 August 2017 - 10:53 AM

I'm so glad none of the naysayers here are doctors. They wouldn't even fully examine the patient to pronounce him dead.  :lol:

 

Seriously, Trekkies have no idea what they want. The fandom is a far cry from a hive mind, that's for sure. Some of you even contradict yourselves. I don't envy the powers that be.

And then there are some who don't even think for themselves and just accept anything with the name Star Trek slapped on it. I do agree we all need to give it a fair chance. It's like the old saying though "where there's smoke there's fire" and there sure is a lot of smoke surrounding this new show.



#1415 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 21 August 2017 - 12:50 PM

I'm so glad none of the naysayers here are doctors. They wouldn't even fully examine the patient to pronounce him dead.  :lol:
 
Seriously, Trekkies have no idea what they want. The fandom is a far cry from a hive mind, that's for sure. Some of you even contradict yourselves. I don't envy the powers that be.


Haha. True.

There is though only so far you can tip the scales, reinvent the wheel before it isn't a wheel anymore. I think the fans are pissed off at that notion that CBS/Paramount are going out of their way to redefine and reimagine what Star Trek is - there are set parameters to Star Trek that allow for a lot of creative freedom but there are certainly some things you just don't do - JJ Abrams made fun and enjoyable Star Trek movies but they stepped beyond the established parameters of what you do and don't do with Star Trek - will Discovery do the same? All indicators point to yes but let's hope they don't go to extremes in trying to do something that is Star Trek but in name only - do we know the answer? We all think we do but the truth is we all have a different idea on what Star Trek is but I think we can all agree on general guidelines Star Trek productions must adhere to.

#1416 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 21 August 2017 - 04:24 PM

One of the things I always found so enjoyable about Star Trek... and I think this is true of just about all incarnations of the TV shows and most of the movies... is they were always a crew... through good and bad times... and they made me want to be a member of that crew.

 

I lost that with STID... and even though Beyond tried to come back... the opening sequence made is seem like such a drag to be "stuck" on that start ship... I didn't want to be a part of those adventures.

 

If Discovery can make me want to embark on that journey... it will have accomplished something very trek like to me!



#1417 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 21 August 2017 - 11:33 PM

I'm so glad none of the naysayers here are doctors. They wouldn't even fully examine the patient to pronounce him dead.  :lol:

 

Seriously, Trekkies have no idea what they want. The fandom is a far cry from a hive mind, that's for sure. Some of you even contradict yourselves. I don't envy the powers that be.

 

As opposed to people like you perhaps, who would be satisfied with being told a patient is in good health - regardless of their moans of agony/pain, because a colleague told you so? :lol: His leg's on backwards and he has nine thumbs now, but the senior nurse said he's completely fine!! :D

 

Trekkies are unique in that we're not all 'one', sad as that is. We all like different aspects of the franchise, that appeal to us in different ways. For me, Star Trek was at its best between the start of the 80's, and the end of the 90's. This is mainly because each iteration built upon the last whilst respecting what came before; all the while looking ahead. Going forward is better than going backwards, primarily because you can affect change and implement new ideas. Ret-conning what came before (regardless of its place in continuity) is never a good idea.



#1418 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 22 August 2017 - 07:10 AM

Trekkies are unique in that we're not all 'one', sad as that is. We all like different aspects of the franchise, that appeal to us in different ways. For me, Star Trek was at its best between the start of the 80's, and the end of the 90's. This is mainly because each iteration built upon the last whilst respecting what came before; all the while looking ahead. Going forward is better than going backwards, primarily because you can affect change and implement new ideas. Ret-conning what came before (regardless of its place in continuity) is never a good idea.

Star Trek fans are no different from any other fan base though. We are a product of the franchise we love. In 50 years who can really define what series or movie IS everything every Star Trek fan ever wanted.

a lot of people would point to the original as proper Star Trek and that everything that came after it has been a slowly diluted version of the classic.

I'd disagree with that because I think TNG is the most Star Trekky of all of the shows. Others may say no, DS9 is or Voyager or even JJ Abrams Star Trek IS perfect Star Trek.

It's hard to define Star Trek when Star Trek has been so many different things, to so many different people, and has come in so many different forms.

I think there are though certain things a Star Trek production has to adhere to and I think a lot of the vitriol against Discovery and the Kelvin films is simply the same anger Enterprise faced;

In whatever shape or form it takes, Star Trek is about moving forward. It's not a prequel series or about cashing in on the Kirk and Spock characters. It's about going... boldly into the future. Our future as much as Star Trek's in-universe future. I think many fans really want to see a great, well told series that moves the timeline beyond Voyager and Nemesis.

#1419 s8film40

s8film40

    New Forceaholic

  • Members
  • 862 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Celebration, FL

Posted 22 August 2017 - 09:32 AM

It's funny I personally rank Enterprise above DS9 and Voyager. I felt even being a prequel it went back to the roots of what makes Star Trek great, exploration. DS9 and Voyager had great episodes but the overall story lacked just a bit of that "seek out new life and civilizations" aspect. The exception to this for me is the whole Xindi thing, it's Star Trek not Star WARS. That's probably also one of the big issues I have with Discovery. It apparently is all based around this war and like the Xindi storyline is going to likely be another heavily serialized war story, more Star Wars in other words.

#1420 MisterPL

MisterPL

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 943 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 August 2017 - 09:43 AM

 It's like the old saying though "where there's smoke there's fire" and there sure is a lot of smoke surrounding this new show.

 

 

I'm not seeing smoke from the show nearly as much as I'm seeing an unprecedented amount of hot air coming from fans. Maybe I'm just being optimistic.

 

 

... there are set parameters to Star Trek that allow for a lot of creative freedom but there are certainly some things you just don't do...

 

 

For example? And who set these parameters?

 

 

 

As opposed to people like you perhaps, who would be satisfied with being told a patient is in good health - regardless of their moans of agony/pain, because a colleague told you so? :lol: His leg's on backwards and he has nine thumbs now, but the senior nurse said he's completely fine!! :D

 

Trekkies are unique in that we're not all 'one', sad as that is. We all like different aspects of the franchise, that appeal to us in different ways. For me, Star Trek was at its best between the start of the 80's, and the end of the 90's. This is mainly because each iteration built upon the last whilst respecting what came before; all the while looking ahead. Going forward is better than going backwards, primarily because you can affect change and implement new ideas. Ret-conning what came before (regardless of its place in continuity) is never a good idea.

 

 

Actually I'd insist on examining the patient BEFORE making a diagnosis.  ;)

 

I don't want or expect all fans to be the same except when it comes to embracing the optimism of the franchise. Trek was always very forward-thinking. Maybe more fans are relating to the cynicism of Dr. McCoy these days but I always preferred to look ahead with hope rather than dread.

 

And Trek's been ret-conning itself since the first season when they recycled "The Cage" and changed Kirk's middle initial from R to T later in the series. It wasn't sacred then either. We got over it.

 

Are you not looking forward to the rumored Khan series from Nick Meyer?

 

 

In whatever shape or form it takes, Star Trek is about moving forward. It's not a prequel series or about cashing in on the Kirk and Spock characters.

 

 

Unless it's about time travel, in which case you get fan favorite episodes like "City on the Edge of Forever" or "Trials and Tribble-ations" or popular movies like The Voyage Home and First ContactB)







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: star, trek, cbs, 2017, series

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users