• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

I have a great idea for getting the new CW attention.... Why not Trek?

G

Garrett

The Next Star Trek series!

Ok, before you start beating up on me, consider this:
Both UPN and Fox had bench mark shows that got them attention. Fox had Joan Rivers, and Gary Shandling. UPN had Star Trek Voyager. Who did WB have?
Also, consider that UPN did not have 100% affiliate coverage when Enterprise was on.

Alright, I know it's a long shot, and who wants to associate a new network with a failed show? But think about it, it has name recognitiion. Yeah, it could work!

Just MHO...
 
> The Next Star Trek series!
>
> Ok, before you start beating up on me, consider this:
> Both UPN and Fox had bench mark shows that got them
> attention. Fox had Joan Rivers, and Gary Shandling. UPN had
> Star Trek Voyager. Who did WB have?
> Also, consider that UPN did not have 100% affiliate coverage
> when Enterprise was on.
>
> Alright, I know it's a long shot, and who wants to associate
> a new network with a failed show? But think about it, it has
> name recognitiion. Yeah, it could work!
>
> Just MHO...
>
Eh? You actually watched Voyager and Enterprise, right? Unless Gene Roddenberry is somehow raised from the grave, there should NEVER be another Trek series period. If Aquaman is still a go, that might be their big launch series. The idea intrigues me and I'm not particularly a comics fan.

WB's lineup before Buffy, Charmed, Dawson's Creek, etc. began was profoundly weak. I think their best-known launch show was the blatant Married: With Children ripoff Unhappily Ever After.
 
> Eh? You actually watched Voyager and Enterprise, right?
> Unless Gene Roddenberry is somehow raised from the grave,
> there should NEVER be another Trek series period.


You're opinion (which you are welcomed to) is not shared by many Trek fans...
You sir, I definately not a die-hard Trekker.
 
Garrett...you're wrong, and here's why

> You're opinion (which you are welcomed to) is not shared by
> many Trek fans...
> You sir, I definately not a die-hard Trekker.


No, his opinion is shared by many Trek fans. Which is why ENT isn't on the air (psst...it was cancelled). This could have been the fact that it was on UPN, whereas TNG and DS9 were syndicated. Ratings for VOY stank, and ENT stank worse.

Reasons why VOY was weak:
* UPN wanted an action show, not sci-fi.
* Rick Berman
* When 7 came onto the scene, she was pretty much in every scene (which is why they built astrometrics for her, to give a reason for needing her). Nice to look at, but it got repetitive. It was like "Hey, we can't think of anything trekkie to come up with again this week...check out the (BLEEP) on this hot Borg."
* Rick Berman
* One of the strengths of the world of Trek is the Federation. The fact that Voyager was in the Delta quadrant negated this very strength. So, with the help of CGI and UPN's control...they blew lots of stuff up.

Don't get me wrong...I loved the graphics. But Trek isn't about shiny graphics.

Now on to Enterprise:
* It was horribly out of place on UPN
* UPN didn't promote it
* Rick Berman
* Continuity errors ran rampant...because of...
* Rick Berman
* They didn't even want to mention is was a Trek franchise for the first 2 seasons
* The Enterprise was a knock off of the Akira class
* The entire 3rd season was one long boring plot
* Rick Berman..who didn't notice
* In the CGIfied Ent-D in the final episode, the saucer's impulse engines were red. They weren't red in TNG, only GEN

In fact, trek fans loved this show so much, its the only Trek to be cancelled.

I still feel syndication was the biggest strength of TNG and DS9. This allowed Paramount to give the shows to somewhat establish affiliates of Fox or whoever who mostly ran the shows on weekends, which wasn't a conflict since us geeks weren’t going out on Saturday nights anyway.

CW won't be putting on a Trek. The powers that be have said numerous times that the franchise will be resting for a while, being on non-stop for 18 seasons will beat any idea, no matter how good, to D-E-A-T-H.

Also, there's no way in hell they could slap together a series in less than 8 months. And if they could, would you really want to watch it?
 
Re: Garrett...you're wrong, and here's why

> Also, there's no way in hell they could slap together a
> series in less than 8 months. And if they could, would you
> really want to watch it?
>
That sums it up right there! Not enough time to produce something GOOD!
UNLESS there's a lost episode to fine tune...even then...that's just one episode...good for movie filler, if lucky...<P ID="signature">______________
"If you never say NO, How much is your YES worth?"
</P>
 
The Tribble With Trekkies

Interesting posting, FM, and mostly valid I'm sure.

I'm not enough of a trekkie to know who Rick Berman is, however.
(I never watched DS9 or VOY, and never watched a lot of TNG.)

And, you forget, the 5-year mission of TOS was cancelled after 3 years.

I hated the theme music of ENT. Sounds more like pop than sci-fi.

But I did enjoy ENT. And also was a Quantum Leap fan.

"Live long and prosper ... May the Schwartz be with you."

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
Prairie Home Companion Coming To Miami in Feb! South Florida Radio Pages (since 1995)</P>
 
> > Eh? You actually watched Voyager and Enterprise, right?
> > Unless Gene Roddenberry is somehow raised from the grave,
> > there should NEVER be another Trek series period.
>
>
> You're opinion (which you are welcomed to) is not shared by
> many Trek fans...
> You sir, I definately not a die-hard Trekker.
>

No, I'm not really, although I was definitely into the first 3 series. Most of the hardcores I know couldn't stand the last few seasons of Voyager and were iffy on Enterprise, and these are people who own uniforms and have actually learned Klingon.

I actually had a slightly higher of Enterprise than they did, but I still don't think it was as good as the original or DS9 and definitely nowhere near TNG.
 
YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING...

> > Also, there's no way in hell they could slap together a
> > series in less than 8 months. And if they could, would
> you
> > really want to watch it?
> >
> That sums it up right there! Not enough time to produce
> something GOOD!
> UNLESS there's a lost episode to fine tune...even
> then...that's just one episode...good for movie filler, if
> lucky...
>

So let me clear it up.
All of those things stated about the problem with Voyager and Enterprise, completely agree with. My gripe was Clichemoth's statement that the should not be any more Star Trek TV shows since Roddenberry is dead. THAT'S WHERE I DISAGREE!

As for slapping a show together in 8 months? I don't think that's true, that would only be if the show was going to debut in the Fall. But didn't that TNG debut in January? That's about 12 months (if you count the month we are in).

For those who don't know:
Gene Roddenberry was the original producer
He was succeeded by Michael Piller (now, also deceased), Rick Berman and Brannon Braga. Brannon Braga has been the Executive Producer most recently criticized for his management of Star Trek Enterprise, but I don't agree that this is fair. A TV show is a team effort. Casting did not do a good job, the actors didn't care about thier roles, and UPN did not properly position the show.
 
Re: YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING...

> As for slapping a show together in 8 months? I don't think
> that's true, that would only be if the show was going to
> debut in the Fall. But didn't that TNG debut in January?
> That's about 12 months (if you count the month we are in).

Star Trek The Next Generation debuted on September 28, 1987.

Having an anchor of a network not air until mid-season is sorta pointless. All the wind will be out of the sails of the sign-on by then.
 
> The Next Star Trek series!
-----------
Not interested. I'd much rather see CW run some classic programs in their schedule, including the original Star Trek, and TNG.<P ID="signature">______________
From WNBC-TV New York this is Liiiiive at Fiiiiive!</P>
 
Re: YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING...

As a HUGE trek geek myself, I did not like VOY and ENT. I was a huge fan of TOS, TNG, and DS9.

Voyager lost me just because it didn't continue with the big buildup of backstory and "mythology" that was built with the first three series. The Delta Quadrant was a big bore, and the ship was a huge divergent from traditional Trek starships. Movable nacelles? A shield-shaped hull instead of a saucer? The makeup on the half-Klingon, half-human was lame. The introduction of the Borg could have been potentially interesting, but you knew that they wouldn't have the firepower and protection of Starfleet or the Klingon Birds-Of-Prey. Sucks.

Enterprise lost me because of the stupid battles with quite literally giant insectpeople, fishpeople, and lizardpeople. Dumb, dumb, dumb. And the fact that they tried to stay away from the Star Trek name in the first two years plus that cheesy power wuss-rock theme song just didn't give it any credibility with me. And the addition of a sexed-up Vulcan? Ridiculous.

Syndication gave the producers more free reign and creative control. Network executives killed Trek. And yes, I do agree to a certain degree that Rick Berman has steered Trek in the wrong direction.

Should there be another Trek? YES. Without network executives, without Rick Berman, and going to adventures relating to the same time period as the USS Enterprise-E in the 25th century. Maybe with the USS Titan or some other ship. Bring back the Klingons and Romulans! With CGI advances, Trek could be even better than before as long as there are good writers and producers to take it in the right direction. Make it so.

Live long and prosper.

radioinfosignature.gif
 
Re: YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING...

Jammin'...you have a new best friend in me.

I agree...100%. I think the Titan concept would be a wonderful idea. It'll take the popularity and the familiarity of TNG and bridge the gap into 21st cent Trek. I think that was another downfall of ENT. It was so different. Trek has always about forward momentum...looking to the future...and then ENT slammed the breaks on that ideal.

Have Riker on the Titan, rest the Enterprise name. Have Riker be an explorer (like TOS and TNG) and still have him blow the bejesus out of people that get in his way (like the kick ass CGI in later DS9.

In fact, I was talking with a co-worker with mine about the CGI. Wasn't just awe inspiring to see the battle scenes during the Dominion wars? Dozens of Galaxies! Dozens of Mirandas! Even the Akira is a nice addition to the fleet. Growing up on TNG (honestly, my favorite show ever), I was used to seeing just the Ent-D with maybe an Excelsior or a once a season.

HOW CAN YOU NOT LIKE THIS!
<IMG SRC=http://memory-alpha.org/en/images/e/e3/Battle_of_Cardassia_1.jpg>
Its like Bush is the Federation President!
 
no, no, no, no, NO!!!!

Yea, the original Star Trek was different (even though it really was a Western in disguise).
Yea, it was cheesey and over-the-top sometimes, but had its moments of brilliance. The subsequent revivals of the franchise were all, for my money, quite lame - especially Deep Space 9 - the worst of the lot. I WANTED the revivals to be good - they just never were. They recycled so much of the original show with only superficial changes. The original show WAS Gene Roddenberry - just like the Twilight Zone WAS Rod Serling. Both shows should have died along with their creators.

Stick a fork in it -- it's done...
 
Re: Trek

THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! Awesome pic of Klingon Birds-of-Prey and Battle Cruisers and Romulan Warbirds fighting alongside Federation starships!

Alright, those who are not into Trek can skip the rest of this-- as it will get even more geekier. LOL

There still is a huge range of stories that can still be continued or expounded upon. Captain Sisko returns to DS9 after an amazing struggle in the novels. There are books establishing the crew and USS Titan. Picard is dealing with a new command crew on the Enterprise-E. There is the very fragile state of the Romulan Empire after NEMESIS. Spock was supposed to be still working with trying to bring about Romulan unity. The Cardassians have been embarrassed, upon realizing their mistakes of the Dominion War. Even the Founders don't know what to do with themselves. What about the Tholians, who were barely discussed in DS9? Bring back Q, and maybe talk about his relationship to Trelane (from the original series). Scotty is still wandering about in his shuttle. There are tons of stories about the Klingon Empire, how the capital city was bombed and destroyed and how Kahless saved the Klingons from another civil war. Worf is now an ambassador. Heck, you could humor Shatner and run an episode based on his novel where Spock has died.

Of course, I'm just looking for something to revive my excitement for all things Trek. Voyager and Enterprise just didn't do it for me, and I consider myself a MAJOR Trek nerd.

And now I leave you with a silly video of Captain Picard that I had up on my MySpace page for quite a while:
http://ebaumsworld.com/2005/12/piccardtechno.html

I should start up Trek-Info.com. Yeah. LOL

radioinfosignature.gif
 
Now you're getting it!

> As a HUGE trek geek myself, I did not like VOY and ENT. I
> was a huge fan of TOS, TNG, and DS9.
>
> Voyager lost me just because it didn't continue with the big
> buildup of backstory and "mythology" that was built with the
> first three series. The Delta Quadrant was a big bore, and
> the ship was a huge divergent from traditional Trek
> starships.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All those stories went nowhere. In the end, their getting home had nothing to do with any of it. And, why did the whole series have to based around one theme and one theme only? It was like they took Gilligan's Island, and threw in a space ship.

Movable nacelles? A shield-shaped hull instead of
> a saucer? The makeup on the half-Klingon, half-human was
> lame. The introduction of the Borg could have been
> potentially interesting, but you knew that they wouldn't
> have the firepower and protection of Starfleet or the
> Klingon Birds-Of-Prey. Sucks.
YUP!

>
> Enterprise lost me because of the stupid battles with quite
> literally giant insectpeople, fishpeople, and lizardpeople.
> Dumb, dumb, dumb. And the fact that they tried to stay away
> from the Star Trek name in the first two years plus that
> cheesy power wuss-rock theme song just didn't give it any
> credibility with me. And the addition of a sexed-up Vulcan?
> Ridiculous.
Poor writting from an inept production crew that didn't understand that if you're going to go back in time, you need to tie it all together. Instead, they wasted an entire season on stuff that had NOTHING TO DO WITH KIRK AND SPOCK, and then had to play catch up during Season 4, when it was already too late.

>
> Syndication gave the producers more free reign and creative
> control. Network executives killed Trek. And yes, I do agree
> to a certain degree that Rick Berman has steered Trek in the
> wrong direction.
Yes and no.
Berman and Braga get the ultimate blame, kinda, but not all their fault. Being on a network allowed them access to markets. But after that, I agree, syndication was a mistake. First, it had to be on at the same time in every market, instead of local station making it's own determination. Second, network execs who didn't know crap about Trek sticking their fingers in and messing the whole thing up, just so they could sure up their own network lineup.

> Should there be another Trek? YES. Without network
> executives, without Rick Berman, and going to adventures
> relating to the same time period as the USS Enterprise-E in
> the 25th century. Maybe with the USS Titan or some other
> ship. Bring back the Klingons and Romulans! With CGI
> advances, Trek could be even better than before as long as
> there are good writers and producers to take it in the right
> direction. Make it so.
>
I hate to say it, but you are right!

> Live long and prosper.
Amen.

>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Garrett on 01/30/06 12:09 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: Trek

> THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! Awesome pic of Klingon
> Birds-of-Prey and Battle Cruisers and Romulan Warbirds
> fighting alongside Federation starships!
>
> Alright, those who are not into Trek can skip the rest of
> this-- as it will get even more geekier. LOL
>
> There still is a huge range of stories that can still be
> continued or expounded upon. Captain Sisko returns to DS9
> after an amazing struggle in the novels. There are books
> establishing the crew and USS Titan. Picard is dealing with
> a new command crew on the Enterprise-E. There is the very
> fragile state of the Romulan Empire after NEMESIS. Spock was
> supposed to be still working with trying to bring about
> Romulan unity. The Cardassians have been embarrassed, upon
> realizing their mistakes of the Dominion War. Even the
> Founders don't know what to do with themselves. What about
> the Tholians, who were barely discussed in DS9? Bring back
> Q, and maybe talk about his relationship to Trelane (from
> the original series). Scotty is still wandering about in his
> shuttle. There are tons of stories about the Klingon Empire,
> how the capital city was bombed and destroyed and how
> Kahless saved the Klingons from another civil war. Worf is
> now an ambassador. Heck, you could humor Shatner and run an
> episode based on his novel where Spock has died.
>
> Of course, I'm just looking for something to revive my
> excitement for all things Trek. Voyager and Enterprise just
> didn't do it for me, and I consider myself a MAJOR Trek
> nerd.
>
> And now I leave you with a silly video of Captain Picard
> that I had up on my MySpace page for quite a while:
> http://ebaumsworld.com/2005/12/piccardtechno.html
>
> I should start up Trek-Info.com. Yeah. LOL
>

Go for it!
I'll be one of your first to sign up!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom