Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Forbes: How to Reboot Star Trek for Modern [network] TV

Star Trek

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#21 Cybersnark

Cybersnark

    NERV wants YOU!

  • Islander
  • 2,570 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 12:40 PM

View PostChristopher, on 05 January 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

The issue with Cybersnark's idea of unifying all the different platforms into one shared continuity is that it would mean abandoning one or all of the existing tie-in continuities.
Not necessarily; Star Trek has alternate universes built into its concept more than anything else short of Transformers and Gundam (who used alt-universes to justify reboots long before anyone ever heard of J.J. Abrams).

Hell, it could be a selling point; imagine when the inevitable alt-universe episode comes up, instead of characters ending up in "random alt-verse #438," we-the-viewers actually recognize the alternate universe, which is as real and coherent as "our" universe (similar to what Fringe managed to accomplish).

Edited by Cybersnark, 07 January 2013 - 12:41 PM.

"Hilarity ensues." --Seamus Harper

#22 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 32,875 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 01:08 PM

View PostSparkyCola, on 07 January 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

^ On  the one hand there is nostalgia - but on the other, sometimes we can look back and think of things as dated (take Andromeda for instance) - but if you re-watch it, you realise why you liked it in the first place and remember that actually it genuinely IS a quality show. I've done that a few times - seen something I had written off with embarrassment as 'Oh yeah that heh well it was the 80s/ 90s....' and then gone back and realise no, it actually was a great show and still holds up.

That happens sometimes, sure. But sometimes you revisit something you remember liking a lot and find it doesn't hold up as well as you thought. I've had that experience a few times, including just last night. I discovered that Netflix was streaming MacGyver, and I decided to watch what I remembered as one of my favorite episodes, the 5th-season 2-part premiere "Legend of the Holy Rose." I remembered Dennis McCarthy's music accompanying the cliffhanger sequence as being particularly impressive. But when rewatching it, I realized after it was over that I'd hardly noticed the music. I went back and replayed the sequence, and didn't find the music very impressive at all. (I guess that after so many years of listening to McCarthy's Trek work, I've sort of gotten used to all his stuff and it fades into the background more for me than it did back then.)

So there is no universal trend toward better or worse. Some things are better, some things are worse, some things are the same.


Quote

As for are things better or worse... To be honest, I think that drama today is about level with drama in the past - the quality of the content has been consistent. Some of today's shows truly have some superb writing. No question. But I don't see more experimentation or originality per se. Monty Python, The Twilight Zone, The Prisoner, Red Dwarf, all highly original and unique. And while experimentation is nice, it's not necessarily better. Peep Show is more experimental than the IT Crowd - but I like the IT Crowd more, despite its relative unoriginality. I think the level of experimentation is the same as it ever was - which is good, it's at the right level I think.

I was responding to the specific complaint someone made that shows today were less creative. Hence I pointed out that there's still a lot of experimentation and diversity.


Quote

But that's drama. This is definitely not the golden age for comedy. Or perhaps it's more accurate to say that the type of prevalent comedy has shifted, and not in my favour.

Too many people treat those as the same thing, confusing their personal tastes with objective standards of quality. I'm not a fan of modern sitcoms either, but I don't claim that's anything more than my personal taste. Maybe comedy is more of a culture- or era-specific thing than drama, and what's funny for one generation may not be for another.
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Facebook Author Page

#23 DWF

DWF

    Dr. Who 1963-89, 1996, 2005-

  • Islander
  • 48,287 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 05:30 PM

I'd hardly call this a golden age of television, most of the trailblazing IMO was in the '50s and '60s even the famous seven words you can't say on television is passe nowadays.
The longest-running science fiction series: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans... Cybermen! They're still in the nursery compared to us. Fifty years of absolute fandom. That's what it takes to be really critical.

"Don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido

#24 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 06:35 PM

It's not the golden age of genre television but if you look more broadly at TV drama over the last dozen years or so, there is a ton of great work - arguably an unprecedented amount - that more fully realizes the potential of the form than we'd seen before.  Novels for television became popular, and they got better, presenting smarter, more challenging - and ultimately more impactful - narratives.  The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, West Wing, Gilmore Girls, Lost, Buffy, Mad Men, The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Shield - all got long runs during the period and got to wrap up on their own terms.  Even Battlestar got four seasons and Deadwood got three.  Those are just off the top of my head, and I'm leaving out long-running shows I think of as just good rather than great (Angel, Game of Thrones, True Blood, Walking Dead, The Good Wife, Justified, Sons of Anarchy, Supernatural, et al).  

What were the great dramas of the 80s, by comparison?  Hill Street, LA Law, thirtysomething.  Not to knock those shows.  I love them.  But all in all, it seems like a pretty great time to be a fan of hourlong TV dramas.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#25 Josh

Josh

    He stares...

  • Islander
  • 13,774 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 06:41 PM

Quote

But that's drama. This is definitely not the golden age for comedy. Or perhaps it's more accurate to say that the type of prevalent comedy has shifted, and not in my favour. The golden era of comedy happened with Blackadder, Father Ted, Allo Allo, Porridge, The Good Life, Yes Minister, Red Dwarf and A Bit of Fry and Laurie. And Monty Python. There were duffers back then, of course, and there are some notable exceptions today. But on the whole I think that was the golden age for comedy. A lot of today's comedies proclaimed as hilarious, award-winning shows just leave me completely cold. They are samey, predictable and self-aware. They rely more on sarcasm than on the dry humour I prefer. Same quantity, but lower quality. (Ok comedy is a personal thing - but so is drama after all)

Yeah,  Cynical and snarky is definitely "in" right now and you see it in virtually every genre. It can get tiring, although there's a few great sitcoms (like Parks and Recreation) that find the right balance.
"THE UNICORNS ARE NOT TO BE TRIFLED WITH!" - John Burke.

#26 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 06:56 PM

View PostSparkyCola, on 07 January 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

Film-wise it's similar: Airplane, The Naked Gun, the Python films, Ghostbusters, Blazing Saddles, The Blues Brothers - high quality. I don't recall a film in the last ten years on the same level.

Sparky

I kind of think of The Avengers as The Ghostbusters of our time, but I agree with you about feature comedy.  It's a vast wasteland of stoner/douchebag hijinks out there.  A great comedy in this day and age is almost as rare as a great horror movie.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#27 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 32,875 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 07:04 PM

^I tend to agree, but the thing to remember is that it doesn't mean there's some progressive worsening over time; rather, these things are cyclical, and even if a certain genre or category of entertainment is languishing or stagnant, eventually the dissatisfaction with it will drive a subsequent generation of creators to revitalize and reinvent it, and it will become fresh and exciting again.

It occurred to me today to wonder why I don't fall prey to the nostalgia illusion, the belief that the past was some golden age and things have been getting worse ever since. I think it's because I had a really rotten childhood. My past was awful, and I'm much better off today. Heck, part of the reason I fell in love with Star Trek as a child was because of its optimism about the future -- I needed to believe the future could get better in order to cope with how things were in the present.
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Facebook Author Page

#28 DWF

DWF

    Dr. Who 1963-89, 1996, 2005-

  • Islander
  • 48,287 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 09:32 PM

View PostBklnScott, on 07 January 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

It's not the golden age of genre television but if you look more broadly at TV drama over the last dozen years or so, there is a ton of great work - arguably an unprecedented amount - that more fully realizes the potential of the form than we'd seen before.  Novels for television became popular, and they got better, presenting smarter, more challenging - and ultimately more impactful - narratives.  The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, West Wing, Gilmore Girls, Lost, Buffy, Mad Men, The Wire, Breaking Bad, The Shield - all got long runs during the period and got to wrap up on their own terms.  Even Battlestar got four seasons and Deadwood got three.  Those are just off the top of my head, and I'm leaving out long-running shows I think of as just good rather than great (Angel, Game of Thrones, True Blood, Walking Dead, The Good Wife, Justified, Sons of Anarchy, Supernatural, et al).  

What were the great dramas of the 80s, by comparison?  Hill Street, LA Law, thirtysomething.  Not to knock those shows.  I love them.  But all in all, it seems like a pretty great time to be a fan of hourlong TV dramas.

All of the shows you mention were built on what came before them, if anything those shows and their success is owned to what came before them.
The longest-running science fiction series: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans... Cybermen! They're still in the nursery compared to us. Fifty years of absolute fandom. That's what it takes to be really critical.

"Don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido

#29 DWF

DWF

    Dr. Who 1963-89, 1996, 2005-

  • Islander
  • 48,287 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 10:17 PM

Robert Orci is still talking about a new Star Trek series but as long as Les Moonves is at CBS I an't see it happening.
The longest-running science fiction series: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans... Cybermen! They're still in the nursery compared to us. Fifty years of absolute fandom. That's what it takes to be really critical.

"Don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido

#30 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,072 posts

Posted 07 January 2013 - 11:48 PM

Wow- a veritable gaggle of good points being made- which prompts a segue for another thread:

Exisle needs to modern-eyes. It needs a like/dislike function.

I bring this matter up because I was fishing around a number of times, as I read various posts, for the non-existent thumbs to click on. Surely I'm not the only one this happens to?

("Don't call me Shirley!")

"Like" if you agree :)
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#31 Cardie

Cardie

    I'm a very *good* tailor

  • Administrator
  • 22,632 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:06 AM

Although we don't have a "dislike" button, if you like a post, click on the green arrow in its bottom right corner. That gives the post (and the poster) a "karma" point. I'll click on the one in your post to illustrate.
Nothing succeeds like excess.

#32 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,072 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:47 AM

Oh-h-h-h-h . . . I did not know that!

Can you maybe turn the arrow into a big fat thumb in order to make it more obvious? :)
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#33 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,300 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 06:19 AM

View PostChristopher, on 05 January 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

The versions of the Trek universe in Pocket's novels, IDW's comics, and the Star Trek Online game are all mutually incompatible continuities (insofar as IDW has any continuity at all -- other than the Abramsverse ongoing title and the interconnected John Byrne titles, all of IDW's Trek miniseries are self-contained and sometimes inconsistent with one another). I'm not sure I'd like to see the current continuities be ditched in favor of a single umbrella one.

I am not clear that that would be necessary . As mentioned, Abrams-verse is self-consistent, buut it is also recognizably Abrams-verse, not touching other continuities at all.

Quote

As for the anthology idea, what I miss are the days of TV movies. Back in the '80s and '90s, when we still had TV movie series like the revived Perry Mason and Columbo, I often thought it would be great if Paramount did 4-6 Trek-universe movies per year, maybe blending some ongoing series with one-shots exploring various aspects of Trek history or side stories -- maybe a movie from the Klingon perspective, or one about the Earth-Romulan War, or one set in the Mirror Universe -- basically the same sort of things that Pocket's novels have been doing for the past dozen years. I thought that TV movies would be a good middle ground between a weekly series, which came out regularly but had limited money to spend, and feature films, which had much bigger budgets but came out too infrequently. Unfortunately, TV movies seem to be a lost art in the US.

Children's television still does it (Kim Possible, Phineus & Ferb, Wizards of Waverly Place all had movies, sometimes more than one, during the regular season run.)

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#34 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 08 January 2013 - 04:17 PM

View PostQueenTiye, on 08 January 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

View PostChristopher, on 05 January 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

The versions of the Trek universe in Pocket's novels, IDW's comics, and the Star Trek Online game are all mutually incompatible continuities (insofar as IDW has any continuity at all -- other than the Abramsverse ongoing title and the interconnected John Byrne titles, all of IDW's Trek miniseries are self-contained and sometimes inconsistent with one another). I'm not sure I'd like to see the current continuities be ditched in favor of a single umbrella one.

I am not clear that that would be necessary . As mentioned, Abrams-verse is self-consistent, buut it is also recognizably Abrams-verse, not touching other continuities at all.

Nor am I, but I do think bringing Trek back to TV would have to go hand-in-hand with creating a new layer of ancillaries with more of a top-down, guided fan experience overseen directly by Bad Robot.  I assume most of the content would be video, though.  The sort of thing people could go to Amazon and click for $1.99 after each episode...  with longer-length specials over hiatuses...  I don't think that would have to affect licenses for things like books.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#35 G-man

G-man

    Is there a problem?

  • Moderator
  • 8,585 posts

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:39 AM

Hmmm ...

If the rebooted TV Star Trek is a ship-based series, I think serializing it (at least over the course of the series) would be a bad mistake.

Why?

Well, serialized TV would fall victim to the vagaries of TPTB.  e.g.  Oh, we have a hit, let's extend the series; Oh, it isn't performing as well as we thought it would, let's cut/cancel the series.  This happened with B5; this happend with Surface.  A serialized story needs to have a definite length to it, if only for pacing purposes if nothing else.

Then, in reading accounts of ships, or the officers serving on them, their experiennces are often more episodic in nature.  After all, they're noting in what they tell the public the highlights of their adventures.  And generally, any follow-up is more a checking up to make sure the situation remained settled than an attempt to once again charge into the breach.

In fact, the only place one would see any continuous development/progression would be in the relationships formed on the ship, and the person becoming better acquainted with their duties and working towards their promotion/qualifications.

Now, as for what I would do differently:

Well, I'd have the focus characters be the junior officers, NCO's and enlisted personnel; as these would be the types to serve for years on a vessel; and also are more likely to be the ones sent out on dangerous missions, and mingle with the hoi polloi and the demi-monde of various worlds while their betters generally deal with the high ups.  Probably have the main character be the new guy on board, so that he (or she) would be learning about the vessel and its crew, as well as their duties, responsibilities, etc. allowing the audience to become familiar with how the ship operates.  These people are not paragons of virtue, but rather the types that one would find below decks on a ship.  They'd argue, bicker and tease each other, some might even hold grudges against others, but when the chips are down they are all of the same crew and will stick up for each other.

For a continuing series long arc, this character would, by the end of the series, have worked himself (or herself) up to being a Department Head on the vessel -- before being transferred off ship -- as helped by those encountered along the way.  I'd also have the Captain and XO replaced once or twice during the series (depending on the series length) as those individuals advance along their career paths.

Also, I'd make the series primarily episodic, with an evolving situation occuring in the background that would have to be resolved by season's end (say 13 episodes).  This would help appeal to those seeking a through story, while at the same time allowing the series to remain accessible to late comers.

Finally, I'd have the seasons be nominally independent of each other.  Each season starts fresh, with most of the cast returning, but the overarcing problem is simply different from the previous seasons as opposed to being larger (and more important) in scope.  And the focus would be more on a local level (that world for an episode, or that sector for the season), and less of  galactic import.

I think this would allow for a more in-depth exploration of the universe and the ship, than the model of the command staff who do everything while everyone else is simply cannon fodder.

Oh, and I'd insist on minimizing the techno-babble as much as possible, and eliminate the special - single engagement only - gadget solution that saves them from the crisis du jour.

/s/

Gloriosus
the G-man Himself

Edited by G-man, 09 January 2013 - 12:49 PM.

Let me strive every moment of my life to make myself better and better, to the best of my ability, so that all may profit by it.
Let me think of the right and lend my assistance to all who may need it, with no regard for anything but justice.
Let me take what comes with a smile, without loss of courage.
Let me be considerate of my country, of my fellow citizens, and my associates in everything I say and do.
Let me do right to all, and wrong no man.
-- Doc Savage

Few people want to be moderated, most people see the need for everyone else to be moderated. -- Orpheus

#36 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,300 posts

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:01 PM

I like the idea of Star Trek: Junior Grade.. ;) But I think that concept lends MORE to serialized tv, not less.

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#37 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 32,875 posts

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:15 PM

View PostG-man, on 09 January 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

If the rebooted TV Star Trek is a ship-based series, I think serializing it (at least over the course of the series) would be a bad mistake.

Why?

Well, serialized TV would fall victim to the vagaries of TPTB.  e.g.  Oh, we have a hit, let's extend the series; Oh, it isn't performing as well as we thought it would, let's cut/cancel the series.  This happened with B5; this happend with Surface.  A serialized story needs to have a definite length to it, if only for pacing purposes if nothing else.

Then, in reading accounts of ships, or the officers serving on them, their experiennces are often more episodic in nature.  After all, they're noting in what they tell the public the highlights of their adventures.  And generally, any follow-up is more a checking up to make sure the situation remained settled than an attempt to once again charge into the breach.

In fact, the only place one would see any continuous development/progression would be in the relationships formed on the ship, and the person becoming better acquainted with their duties and working towards their promotion/qualifications.

As I've been saying for many, many years, it's a mistake to think of episodic and serial formats as mutually exclusive. Many shows are a mix of just the kind you suggest -- episodic in plot, with each installment focusing on a case/adventure of the week, but serialized in characterization, with the cast members' personal arcs and relationships evolving, the events of the various episodes having lasting impacts on their attitudes or behavior. This is not some hypothetical proposition; it's how a large number of TV, comics, and prose series have actually been done for decades. It's how DS9 was mostly done -- and TNG to a lesser extent, since there were character and plot arcs made up of various isolated episodes scattered through the series.

In fact, it's pretty much how Babylon 5 was done. People think of B5 as serialized, but in fact it wasn't, not in the way something like Lost was. For the most part, each episode (or 2-parter) told a complete story from beginning to end. What was notable about it was how much the episodes interconnected, the way they were pieces of a larger whole. Events in one episode would have consequences, but not necessarily in the very next episode -- sometimes not for months.

Quite a few TV shows today combine episodic plots with serial character arcs. That's how most modern procedurals work, such as the CSI franchise. Most shows on Syfy or USA have case-of-the-week plotting with a larger seasonal or half-seasonal story arc woven through the weekly adventures and coming to a head in the season or midseason finale. Fringe has a case-of-the-week format, although increasingly the cases have been facets of the evolving serial story arc. And Fringe is one of many shows where the weekly cases conveniently happen to relate to whatever personal issues the protagonists are dealing with as their serial arcs evolve.

So what you're proposing for a ship-based Trek show is not only possible, but likely to happen by default. A different planet or a different crisis every week, but paralleling or illuminating the ongoing shipboard character and relationship arcs or whatever overarching astropolitical plotline is unfolding over the season, much as DS9 did things, is the likely format for such a show because it's the standard format for most episodic TV today.

Edited by Christopher, 09 January 2013 - 12:16 PM.

"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Facebook Author Page



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Star Trek

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users