Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Star Trek
Byrne Robotics > Star Trek << Prev Page of 2
Topic: Where do we go from here ? Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Marten van Wier
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 August 2015
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 360
Posted: 02 May 2017 at 11:54pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

 Eventually, everything will end up being owned by Disney anyway...

**

Heh, I can't help now but imagine Spock with a pair of Mickey Mouse ears next to his regular Vulcan ears.

"Live long and profit"

But serious, I honestly thought about such a scenario and it made me shudder, Disney owning all the major IPs people have loved for so many decades.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Andrew Saxon
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 June 2016
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 121
Posted: 03 May 2017 at 12:14am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

"The creators of Doctor Who Confidential making-of documentaries would get a heart attack if they read this :) They take great pride in frequently emphasizing that the 2005 version of Doctor Who is a direct plot continuation of the original series (1963-1989) and the 1996 telefilm."

I don't care if they do get a heart attack over this, but for some of us fans of the 'classic'* series of Doctor Who, 21st century Who is every bit as bogus as the Kelvin timeline Star Treks movies.

*Sadly, Whovians too have to put up with calling adding the word 'classic' to the real deal.
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3954
Posted: 04 May 2017 at 6:22am | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Doctor Who benefited from nearly 15 years of other-media gestation
------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------
Hmm, You may have a point there. Star Wars also had a long period of time where there was no product available. Then there were just books, then comics, then the toys. Then the video re-releases. And then the cinema re-releases.

Between ROTJ and the re-release there was a period of 14 years, and Joe Public had indeed thought there would be no new Star Wars (I remember having a conversation in 1995 where I bet someone (not a real bet), that in 1997, everyone would be going nuts for the films again.

Maybe Star Trek could benefit from such a break
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 107290
Posted: 04 May 2017 at 6:38am | IP Logged | 4 post reply

…for some of us fans of the 'classic'* series of Doctor Who, 21st century Who is every bit as bogus as the Kelvin timeline Star Treks movies.

••

I would not go that far, but I definitely feel it's a bit silly to declare DOCTOR WHO to have a single, unbroken continuity. Even in context, since the Doctor is a time traveler, the different incarnations of himself are having their adventures all over the galaxy "at the same time." So this superhero Doctor who has evolved since the return (the idea that on some worlds the word "Doctor" has come to mean "warrior," for instance) is operating "side-by-side" with the Hartnell Doctor, the Pertwee Doctor, etc. And, of course, not in chronological order! (Someone could meet the Smith Doctor, and later the Troughton Doctor.)

In this respect, DOCTOR WHO fans are a lot like some Marvel fans, who scoffed t DC for "needing" the likes of CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS while Marvel continuity was "perfect."

Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 6851
Posted: 04 May 2017 at 10:24am | IP Logged | 5 post reply

A Matt Smith episode established that adventures had by David Tennant no longer happened for the general populace, since the public still didn't quite believe there were aliens despite a full-scale invasion by the Sycorax in recent times and a giant Cyberman stomping all over Victorian era London. The idea was that moving back and forth along the timeline constantly rewrites what takes place and makes crossovers between different eras of the Doctor more unlikely since they are moving through different versions of events back and forth throughout time. 

It's not a timeline, after all. It's a big ball of wibbly-wobbley, timey-wimey stuff.

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Warren Scott
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 July 2016
Posts: 86
Posted: 04 May 2017 at 6:54pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

I think I'm getting a headache.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 6851
Posted: 04 May 2017 at 8:22pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

Star Trek had a period of enforced inactivity in between the cancellation of the series and the debut of the motion picture, with only the animated series in there as any sort of "official" product. It was during this time that it became so widely discussed, conventions began to occur, and fanzines cropped up, filled with material from eager viewers who wanted very much to contribute to this powerfully imaginative and inspirational concept.

Since then, Trek has experienced tiny "mini-droughts," such as the short period in between the cancellation of Enterprise and the start of the Bad Robot films. There was a funny moment between Shatner and Nimoy while they were doing promotion for the Bad Robot film when a fan brought up the suggestion that Trek take a ten-year break from the public view. Laughing, both said that yes, they could easily see the owners and corporations deciding NOT to make money from the property for the next ten years...

Allowing the fields to lie fallow has its appeal, but in Trek's case, it's unnecessary. There has already been a long period of time with any Next Generation product out there. The same is true of DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise. All of the various iterations of Trek have had their fans, and those fans, in their own way, are eager again for a Trek that somehow speaks to them. 

The Bad Robot series was supposed to be a sop to fans of the Original Series, giving us back a Kirk, Spock, and McCoy we could love going forward. It didn't quite hit that mark, but in the process, created a ton of fans of that particular approach, all of whom want at least one more movie so McCoy can be given more to do. If there aren't any more Bad Robot films, those fans too will be among those waiting for something to come along to tickle their fancy the way those films did.

I have no idea to whom Discovery is supposed to appeal, except perhaps to fans of the franchise in general and the public; The latter is always a tough sell since the Trek name carries a "dork" taint that somehow Star Wars never did. It's perfectly acceptable to cheer on Rey and Finn and go buy a little BB-88 you can drive around with an iPhone app, but to admit that you like Star Trek...? Like ST:TNG before it, the producers are actually building a brand new ghetto to house Discovery... Hopefully enough immigrants from the various series move in to make a going concern of it, but CBS will be looking to gentrify the place as quickly as they can.

If Discovery goes down in flames as it certainly looks as if it must at this point (Is anyone with advance knowledge of the project actually high on it? Or are all the reports tentative at best? The premise is shaky; The ship is a non-starter, etc., etc.) we may get our much-wished-for drought. But in time, we may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting...

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2612
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 10:10am | IP Logged | 8 post reply

I think Trek has long been considered more cerebral. And to some extent, there's truth to that.

Lots of the characters in Trek are smart. Book smart. I mean, most went to and graduated from an Academy. But even more on top of that...

Spock and Data, one with a computer-like brain...one with an actual computer brain. Picard is clearly well-read. And, yes, the OS Kirk. A "stack of books with legs" as a cadet...who reprogrammed the Kobayahsi Maru simulation (NuKirk made it thru the Academy in three years...but had to con someone else into reprogramming the simulation). We got beat over the head with how much of a genius Wesley Crusher is. His mom's a doctor. McCoy, too. Scotty and Geordi, of course, have an abundance of technical knowledge.

With Star Wars...well...Anakin is good at "fixing" things. Otherwise, you have cunning characters like Han Solo, not necessarily book smart. He does seem to have some technical expertise, but he didn't even really know what a parsec is. And I suspect Chewie may have been the real brains of that outfit.

Of course, C-3P0 and R2-D2 have computer smarts. But don't seem to be on the same level as Data...or even Spock.

Otherwise, you have a bunch of people who are skilled, but not necessarily all that impressively intelligent. Stealing the plans to the Death Star was ostensibly the Rebellion's only avenue to combat it (and with ROGUE ONE...they know that there was an existing weakness, not even discovering it for themselves).

And the Empire is no better. At what point will they give up on the Death Star or very-much-like-Death Star ideas?


So, perhaps it's more "cool" to wear Star Wars stuff because they're not all super-smart. They just go in, guns a-blazin', Pew Pew Pew! And the robots are cute. Yoda, too.




Edited by Brian Rhodes on 05 May 2017 at 11:02am
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Brian O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 November 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 1339
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 11:47am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

BTW, can 'Pew Pew Pew' please die in a fire?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2612
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 12:48pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Sorry. I guess it's only slightly more tired than "die in a fire"...


Edited by Brian Rhodes on 05 May 2017 at 12:48pm
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Anthony J Lombardi
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9276
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 12:57pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

"Some people just want to watch the world burn."...
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Hunt
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5176
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 1:45pm | IP Logged | 12 post reply

I have always wished for a Trek Series that explored
other military aspects of the Federation. Kind of like a
JAG/NCIS type show. Or even one focusing on a Federation
Special Ops team. Explore the moral delimas while
investigating Federation officers' violations of the
prime directive and stuff. We've seen enough of the
exploratory voyage angle.
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 6851
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 1:54pm | IP Logged | 13 post reply

Brian Rhodes, I like that analysis. I remember someone once making a similar comparison between the two, the main difference being that the characters in Star Trek had jobs. Joining the Rebellion isn't exactly the same thing as joining the Army since you can apparently leave any time you feel like it. The people in Starfleet however don't all have personal spaceships in which they can come and go as they please. They also do boring stuff, like star-mapping in between confrontations with extra-powerful beings and murderous reptiles. The only time anyone in Star Wars is bored is when they're stuck at home before they're actually in the fight. Once there, there's never a dull moment. 

The characters in Star Trek are also, for the most part, humans who are just a couple hundred years ahead of us. Everyone in Star Wars on the other hand is a space alien living in a distant, fabled past entirely removed from Earth or the human condition. It's very much make-believe as opposed to Star Trek, which could be seen as having a sit-down office job in space. Star Wars is more kids stuff, with big scary bad guys and laser gun fights whereas Star Trek is primarily about grown-ups dealing with grown-up questions and omnipowerful beings who think we could still be even a little bit more grown-up... 

On the whole, Star Trek's basic premise expects a little bit more from its audience. Star Wars just lays it all out for you, throws noble knights errant, space princesses, dark overlords, and star pirates at you in rapid-fire fashion, pew pew pew! (Sorry, Brian O'Neill, couldn't resist...) and then gives those who stick around abominable snowmonsters, giant walking robots, and as a bonus, rewards you at the end with adorable space teddy bears for your time spent on the midway. 

I like them both, with the edge being given to Star Trek by a considerable margin for the amount of fun and imaginative storytelling its given me over the years. Star Wars is more popcorn-like in its appeal. Fun and appealing, but also a lot of puffed air in there as well. 

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 6851
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 1:56pm | IP Logged | 14 post reply

Brian Hunt, your idea sounds in many ways like the antithesis of Star Trek.

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Anthony J Lombardi
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9276
Posted: 05 May 2017 at 6:14pm | IP Logged | 15 post reply

I would be interested in seeing a series about the USS Relativity.

For those not familiar with it. The Relativity is from the Voyager episode Relativity. The ship is equipped with sensors powerful enough to scan thru out spacetime. It's temporal transporter can beam someone pretty much anywhere in time. I thought the episode was a good basis to build a series around.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 605
Posted: 06 May 2017 at 5:43am | IP Logged | 16 post reply

So, LEGENDS OF STAR TREK TOMORROW?

Bleh.

The last thing Star Trek needs is any more timey-wimey or alternate universes/realities (parallel, perpendicular or otherwise).

TOS used these things sparingly, like a fine spice.
Every other Star Trek show has loaded up on them like salt in a Big Mac.


Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 6851
Posted: 06 May 2017 at 12:00pm | IP Logged | 17 post reply

I remember being initially intrigued when a spin-off was suggested starring Dulmer and Lucsly or the department they worked for back in the days of DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations." Since then, we've had so much time-travel, it's difficult to figure out what could be special about another such series. 

While Star Trek comfortably employs time travel as a storytelling element (another point of difference between it and Star Wars), too much of anything, even time travel, is not necessarily a good thing, especially since you would likely have to imperil the status quo week after week. The whole Enterprise/Kelvin nonsense has already made Trek's prehistory far too fragile, and Discovery looks to be piling on to poor effect. Who even knows what the status quo is supposed to be anymore? Mike, Denise, you can put down your hands. Yes, we all know you'd love to just make up an answer for the class. Can we hear from someone else for a change...?

On the other hand, I do love time travel... "This week on a very special episode of Relativity, Chris Pine guest-stars as Kirk as we go back to a City... Adrift on the outskirts... of Forever... Featuring Kristen Stewart as Edith Keeler and Bruno Ganz as Adolf Hitler..."

Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Marten van Wier
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 August 2015
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 360
Posted: 07 May 2017 at 6:35am | IP Logged | 18 post reply

My thoughts on Time Travel in Star Trek are really mixed.
Some episodes and movies pull it off well but in general time travel stories tend to be a miss because the writers tend to fail at maintaining logic in it and because time travel stories tend to end with a reset to the status at the start at the story it is often just used by the writers to do all kinds of outrageous stuff such as killing main characters, blowing up a lot of things and so on.
Voyager for example did that a lot.

What I liked in "The City on the Edge of Forever" was that it was a character growth story next to a time travel story.
Yes, everything was restored to what history was before but it had a profound impact on the characters and they weren't the same as they were before.

But I don't see a Star Trek time travel series pull that one off. It will more likely be Voyager and Enterprise like time travel antics with of course plots like "What if the Nazis won WW2, again", "What of Earth and her allies were defeated by the Romulans.", "What if the Borg were successful during BOBW", etc
So it would not just be time travel but also parallel universe travel.

In this case I think it is better to get back to the source without some ridiculous complex storyline tacked onto it.

Probably a dumb suggestion but I came up with it yesterday.
I always liked the "What if's..." regarding Pike and his crew on the Enterprise as shown in various comics and books. Especially Early Voyages which IMO is one of the better Star Trek comic series.

If I remember correctly Pike had two tours on the Enterprise.
Would people like a... well I guess a sort of re imagined version of Pike and his crew's journeys? (re imagined as in having new actors pick up the roles of the actors of the pilot episode, but for the rest do stories you would expect during such a run)

I think that would be more interesting than Discovery.
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 107290
Posted: 07 May 2017 at 7:32am | IP Logged | 19 post reply

STAR TREK fell into a common trap in time travel stories, the idea that the time travelers somehow "wrote over" their own history.

TOMORROW IS YESTERDAY is a typical example. The Enterprise doubles back on itself, so it is able to return Captain Christopher and the AF Sergeant to the moments from which they were taken, and from there, events proceed on an altered timeline. There is no "UFO" for Christopher to photograph, Kirk and Sulu are not in the office when the sergeant enters.

But that's not how it would work, is it? The established timeline would still be unfolding as before. Nothing Kirk and company did would "erase" what they had done before. In fact, there would be a danger of creating a temporal loop, with the same set of events repeating in an infinite cycle.

Mind you, it took me about ten years to notice this! But it's still something time travel stories tend to do a lot!

Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Hicks
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1286
Posted: 07 May 2017 at 11:43am | IP Logged | 20 post reply

The "logic" in the resolution of Tomorrow is Yesterday never worked for me.  The pilot and guard they beamed back should have full knowledge of what happened to them.  But they would be stuck in a situation where they could prove none of it since the events did not happen in the new timeline.
Back to Top profile | search
 

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login
If you are not already registered you must first register

<< Prev Page of 2
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login