With the exception of TOS, all of the Star Trek series took the first three seasons to sort themselves out and become interesting. That was one thing that really bothered me about Enterprise. They arrived at season 4, and gave the keys to the series over to Manny Coto, who took a couple of episodes to kill the stupid time travel plot, and then the series took off. And then it was cancelled. It was as if no one in charge had ever seen seasons 4 through 7 of every other Star Trek series.
A couple of things that I would like to see.
1) Ignore the abomination that was Voyager.
2) Less involvement from Brannon and Braga.
3) The Universe is a big place. Let's go in another direction than left (Klingons), right (Romulans), or ahead (Cardassians). Let's try back, up or down.
4) Cumulative effect of actions.
5) Take on uncomfortable social issues. A Star Trek version of the Middle East would be crazy, and relevant. How about starting the series with a migrant crisis from a previously ignored or unknown sector?
__________________
"We don't even know who our best player is yet. It could be any one of us at this point." - Peter LaFleur, player/coach, Average Joe's Gymnasium
With the exception of TOS, all of the Star Trek series took the first three seasons to sort themselves out and become interesting. That was one thing that really bothered me about Enterprise. They arrived at season 4, and gave the keys to the series over to Manny Coto, who took a couple of episodes to kill the stupid time travel plot, and then the series took off. And then it was cancelled. It was as if no one in charge had ever seen seasons 4 through 7 of every other Star Trek series.
A couple of things that I would like to see.
1) Ignore the abomination that was Voyager.
2) Less involvement from Brannon and Braga.
3) The Universe is a big place. Let's go in another direction than left (Klingons), right (Romulans), or ahead (Cardassians). Let's try back, up or down.
4) Cumulative effect of actions. 5) Take on uncomfortable social issues. A Star Trek version of the Middle East would be crazy, and relevant. How about starting the series with a migrant crisis from a previously ignored or unknown sector?
BSG meets Star Trek. Not to many migrants left though...
They should definitely explore other races though. Maybe some new tech that creates a stable wormhole to a distant galaxy that the Federation thought was mostly empty but full of resources.
I really like the idea of continuing the timeline from point where Nero travelled back and created the alternate timeline that is shown in the movies. We could still get a few TNG, DS9, Voyager, etc cameos but give show us what would happen if things kept going.
From an entertainment standpoint, the last two movies were great. From a writing and logical sense standpoint they were pretty atrocious. I wouldn't be surprised if they separate the movies as an alternate timeline.
__________________
"We don't even know who our best player is yet. It could be any one of us at this point." - Peter LaFleur, player/coach, Average Joe's Gymnasium
Ya, they should have Q show up, do a little flash through the previous movies, shake his head and say "WTF was that?" snap his fingers and banish it from the timeline. Then we can start somewhere, ahem, logical.
With the exception of TOS, all of the Star Trek series took the first three seasons to sort themselves out and become interesting. That was one thing that really bothered me about Enterprise. They arrived at season 4, and gave the keys to the series over to Manny Coto, who took a couple of episodes to kill the stupid time travel plot, and then the series took off. And then it was cancelled. It was as if no one in charge had ever seen seasons 4 through 7 of every other Star Trek series.
A couple of things that I would like to see.
1) Ignore the abomination that was Voyager.
2) Less involvement from Brannon and Braga.
3) The Universe is a big place. Let's go in another direction than left (Klingons), right (Romulans), or ahead (Cardassians). Let's try back, up or down.
4) Cumulative effect of actions. 5) Take on uncomfortable social issues. A Star Trek version of the Middle East would be crazy, and relevant. How about starting the series with a migrant crisis from a previously ignored or unknown sector?
That was done in Star Trek 6 the Undiscovered country
Including the debate at Federation Command when they talked about a Klingon refugee crisis where they would flood the federation and inhabit the lower rungs of society and become the trash of federation society.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Back in the mid to late 90s, when the Internet was smaller and people discussed the shows on Usenet, I recall people squawking about the multi-episode story-arc format DS9 had adopted. But I loved it: I think it was the first show I watched that told stories in this way, and now it's common place.
5) Take on uncomfortable social issues. A Star Trek version of the Middle East would be crazy, and relevant. How about starting the series with a migrant crisis from a previously ignored or unknown sector?
So lets do Bajor again?
__________________
THANK MR DEMKO
CPHL Ottawa Vancouver
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Blaster86 For This Useful Post:
I watched a few of those Shatner made Star Trek Documentaries where he interviews old cast members and it is unreal the universal disrespect for Michael Dorn.
Either the cast of all Star Treks are a collective group of Interstellar racists or Dorn is just an insufferable Jerk.
I'll give Dorn credit though, he's gotten a lot of mileage out of, if I'm honest, a pretty crap character.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
I actually though that DS9 was an alagory for Isreal, as many of you do as well. Considering the time in which it was made, I thought that the migration issues coming into the States from Mexico was the buried storyline from Undiscovered Country.
It is probably better saved for a discussion in a political thread, but I think that the long term impact of the Syrian migrant crisis is being viewed through rose colored glasses.
There is a problem in countries such as France (for example) with immigration causing the formation of insulated communities, that have difficulty integrating into the existing fabric of their adopted nation. Few nations have bothered to develop a solution to this problem, for fear of being labeled politically racist. In this way, although multiculturalism has been a great success in the past, America's melting pot may be an even greater success in the future. this is a very simple argument to a complicated situation, that I won't discuss here. i would say that the Federation is a culticultural society and not a melting pot.
From a Star Trek perspective, of taking a serious situation and putting it in a fictional world to examine all sides the the issue, I don't think taking insulated pockets of contrary values, inside of the Federation, has really been done. Usually the Federation is considered an ideal, and dissention fairly minor. What happens when there is a growing call for theocracy inside of an advanced civilzation?
A ship leaves to discover the cause of the migration of billions of people, only a season later to come back and discover the Federation in turmoil, as a strong opposition to the norm has taken hold and an idealogical war could change the Federation forever.
The theological problems in DS9 were such that in the end, the Federation could really care less. The migration issues in Undiscovered Country were such that it was one culture integrating into another that held many of the same general values.
Things are going to get crazy in Europe, and the Middle East would be a nutty place to fly a Starship. Would thais be enough of an interesting backdrop to a seven season run of Star Trek?
Free form rambling thought over.
__________________
"We don't even know who our best player is yet. It could be any one of us at this point." - Peter LaFleur, player/coach, Average Joe's Gymnasium
Last edited by Harry Lime; 11-06-2015 at 12:05 PM.
Reason: Browser posted by itself
I actually though that DS9 was an alagory for Isreal, as many of you do as well. Considering the time in which it was made, I thought that the migration issues coming into the States from Mexico was the buried storyline from Undiscovered Country.
I'm not sure about this buried Mexican migrants story but the actual allegory in the Undiscovered Country is Chernobyl/Glastnost.
I'm not sure about this buried Mexican migrants story but the actual allegory in the Undiscovered Country is Chernobyl/Glastnost.
Undiscovered Country tracked a lot of issues. Chernobyl was just a catalyst for them. In this case Glastnost, the removal of the Berlin Wall, the power of the military industrial complex, and a refugee crisis scenario.
Oh and prison reform.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Undiscovered Country tracked a lot of issues. Chernobyl was just a catalyst for them. In this case Glastnost, the removal of the Berlin Wall, the power of the military industrial complex, and a refugee crisis scenario.
Oh and prison reform.
And as my Trekkie high-school English teacher would point out, full of Shakespeare.
And as my Trekkie high-school English teacher would point out, full of Shakespeare.
Christopher Plummer was a great choice for a Shakespeare quoting villain.
The best line in that whole movie was during the final battle when Plumber was quoting Shakespeare and Bones muttered "I'd give real money if he would shutup"
When I look back at those movies, the casting was incredibly good. In terms of my list of top Star Trek outsiders
1) Kahn (ST 2) - Ricardo Montalban. We first saw him as Kahn in Space Seed. He established a strong and somewhat sympathetic villain who thought that his actions were justified "The world needed order". when we see him years later, he's become obsessed with vengence when Captain Kirks actions lead to the death of his wife. He did an incredible job of being Ahab to Kirk's white whale, and in the end you could almost feel sorry for him, as he was a man who lost everything in his thrirst for vengence
2) Kruge (ST 3) - Christopher Lloyd was a relative unknown at the time, best known for playing the Reverend Jim on Taxi. He really invented the modern day Klingon. He chewed the scenary fiercely and threw himself into being a ruthless ambitious Klingon Captain. He had some great lines
"Sir they outnumber us 10 to 1"
"We are Klingons"
3) Christopher Plummer (ST 6) - another actor who embraced being Klingon, he was almost the Klingon version of Kirk, but with an obsession with Shakespeare. When he was hunting Kirk and you heard the chilling
"I can see you Kirk, can you see me" You knew it was on.
4) Kim Catrtell (ST 6) - Valeris, Originally the traitor was going to be Savik, but Kim Cattrell bought a whole new dimension to a player that until she was revealed you would have a hard time seeing as a cold hearted villain.
5) Kirstie Allen - (St 2) - did an amazing job as Savak. She was very much a flaw Vulcan and if you were any kind of Star Trek fan its hard to watch her reaction to Spocks death and not curse those damn onions.
HM
Mark Lenard, Kurkwood Smith (as Federation President he should have ordered someone to put a boot up the Klingon Empires a$$), Alice Kreig (ST First Contact), Malcolm Macdowell (First contact)
Worst non main casting decisions
Tom Hardy (ST Nemisis) - This whole movie was such a mess, and the script writing and dialogue for this character killed Tom Hardy's ability as an actor. When he asked Troi if he could touch her hair, I almost threw a shoe. He just couldn't create a believable villain.
Laurence Luckinbill (ST 5) - Maybe I had trouble with an emotional Vulcan, but he was so flat in this movie and never made for a great Villain or even anti-hero.
F Murray Abraham (St Insurrection) - Besides the fact that this movie was shockingly surpassed by Nemisis as the worst trek movie is surprising because this movie is so terrible. Abraham who is normally a strong character actor created a carboard villain who was missing a twirly mustache.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Mark Lenard, Kurkwood Smith (as Federation President he should have ordered someone to put a boot up the Klingon Empires a$$), Alice Kreig (ST First Contact), Malcolm Macdowell (First contact)
McDowell was in Generations, and I felt he was a pretty one dimensional villain. Was I supposed to sympathize with him, was I supposed to see him as anything but a villain? If so, that failed for me, among other major issues with that movie.
(That being said, watching the Enterprise crash sequence will never get old for me.)