The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > General Star Trek Discussions > The End of Trek
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-23-2012, 12:15 PM
LCARS 24's Avatar
LCARS 24 LCARS 24 is offline
Lieutenant Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 593
Default

This thread just gave me an idea that doesn’t neatly fit Trek canon exactly, where Starfleet is human-centric as before but the advanced humans are descendants of survivors of a disaster or war that knocked Earth’s civilization back to the Stone Age millennia ago with the exception of those in space at the time, most of whom, aside from a few researchers here and there, were involved in the asteroid-mining industry or space tourism. They were greatly saddened by the situation on Earth but couldn’t really help much and decided not to openly interact.

They survived in space and in remote areas of the Earth, and their population and infrastructure grew. Contact with the Vulcans resulted in friendly relations and technological assistance, and they made protecting Earth their primary mission while letting its society naturally progress, learning its lessons the hard way, thinking that someday the new society would be ready for contact. The Vulcans deemed that a logical approach and offered their assistance.

All members of that space-based human society are members of Starfleet, and they do spend time on 21st-century Earth but strictly obey the Prime Directive, which in this scenario treats Earth’s population as a prewarp culture. Earth, as a special case, is officially a Federation World, a founding member, even though the Federation only deals with Starfleet, while the planet remains off-limits to off-worlders.

So the idea is that this could lead to a different kind of Trek series, where Starfleet looks pretty much like 24th-century Trek of TNG, DS9, and VOY, but it’s our 21st-century with some stories based on happenings in space but much of it involving close plain-clothes observation by Starfleet personnel of events on Earth, which would presumably be less expensive to produce for weekly episodic TV than previous Trek series.

Maybe it’s not a good idea, just something worked out so far only in the course of typing these few paragraphs. Maybe someone has suggested something like it before (maybe numerous times). I wouldn’t know. I guess it would be classified as a reboot but one in which the look and feel of Trek wouldn’t have to change much, although canon would be pretty much a blank slate, allowing the writers to reinstate some previous canon at their discretion while building new canon (with the planet Vulcan still long thriving and prosperous, not destroyed by Tabasco Sauce).
__________________
Star Trek Journal
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-24-2012, 11:07 AM
Quark's Avatar
Quark Quark is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Santa Monica, California
Posts: 2,622
Default

I have no doubt that Star Trek is not in any danger. I mean, look...people had to wait nearly 20 years before Star Wars reappeared on the big screen. During that long period, Star Wars was very much alive in terms of watching the movies and showing them to the younger generation of fans and with the toy lines; books; comics and video games. We only had to wait four years before a new production of Star Trek came about. Wither we liked the reboot or not, it is still Star Trek nonetheless.
__________________
*The word "dabo" means "I will give" in Latin, and "Gold" in Aramaic.

J.J. "Binks" Abrams is taking over sci-fi!
Fans Expendable
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-24-2012, 12:59 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

Every notable administration/regime/whatever has tried to move in a direction counter to the one prior. I'm convinced that's just nature. It's no different with ST, and I believe it's a healthy thing. And every fresh incarnation of ST has claimed to be in some way 'truer' to the original than the one just prior. The TV series was too sexist, and had too much technicolor. No, the movie was too monochrome and lacking in character. No, the subsequent movies were too militaristic and not sci-fi enough. No, the TV reboot was too PC and not enough rock-and-roll. See, by you bald is sexy. And so on.

It will happen. If the current version doesn't agree with some people, there will eventually be another (most likely theatrical, since I believe ST is pretty much over for TV). Someone else will inherit the franchise, and they will want their own fingerprints smudged across it. They'll say "the Abrams films were good, but they weren't sci-fi/nautical/retro/whatever enough. We're going to remind you what ST 'really' is." And fans will be skeptical once again, until most of them see it. And some even after. Life goes on.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-25-2012, 09:57 AM
Quark's Avatar
Quark Quark is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Santa Monica, California
Posts: 2,622
Default

I can't wait to see the first R rated Star Trek film. Star Trek vs. Aliens haha! :P
__________________
*The word "dabo" means "I will give" in Latin, and "Gold" in Aramaic.

J.J. "Binks" Abrams is taking over sci-fi!
Fans Expendable
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-25-2012, 09:59 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

I think the day that any ST film gets an R rating will be when it has officially lost touch with its roots.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-25-2012, 10:00 AM
Quark's Avatar
Quark Quark is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Santa Monica, California
Posts: 2,622
Default

Of course! No doubt. But then again, people do think that II is the best of the series and it certainly is the darkest of the series. I mean, that in addition to First Contact.
__________________
*The word "dabo" means "I will give" in Latin, and "Gold" in Aramaic.

J.J. "Binks" Abrams is taking over sci-fi!
Fans Expendable
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-25-2012, 10:13 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

Well on the other hand Nemesis is dark, and most of us don't like that one. While First Contact I personally find 'somewhat' overrated (I would rank it upper-middle, next to The Undiscovered Country).
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-25-2012, 12:16 PM
Captain Tom Coughlin's Avatar
Captain Tom Coughlin Captain Tom Coughlin is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USS Meadowlands
Posts: 10,985
Default

I think I like The Undiscovered Country more than most. The only part I don't like is when Kirk is fighting a shapeshifting Kirk. That scene does not work for me at all, but other than that I like it a lot.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-25-2012, 01:20 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Nemesis has a 'dark' visual aesthetic to it that I think gives it that darker feel but I dunno if I would really call it a dark film as such.

I'm happy enough with PG-13 for Trek in film but I do feel that most of the audience is sufficient for that rating to be pushed to it's boundaries from time to time.

The Undiscovered Country I liked more when I was younger. It's OK, but it's in the middle of the pack for me and has been for a while.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-26-2012, 01:29 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Nemesis has a 'dark' visual aesthetic to it that I think gives it that darker feel but I dunno if I would really call it a dark film as such.

I'm happy enough with PG-13 for Trek in film but I do feel that most of the audience is sufficient for that rating to be pushed to it's boundaries from time to time.
I'm sort of at a loss as to what on the ST front would constitute dark if Nemesis doesn't. I would think not Wrath of Khan, because Nemesis already mirrors that one too closely.

The Undiscovered Country is moody, but not dark. And its darkness is undermined by a lot of classic TOS-style campy humor (assuming the camp was even intentional; after 20 years I still can't tell). First Contact likewise has too many humorous turns in its subplots to really be considered dark. Ditto ST09.

DS9, I think one would have to go through in much greater depth to evaluate whether it's dark or not. On the average, I would say probably not very.

The Search for Spock maybe? I mean what else is left...

There was a time when PG-13 for Star Trek was perceived as the new exception rather than the rule. While I would agree most of the target audience could handle a 'strong' PG-13 that was borderline R, ST just doesn't seem to me the type of franchise that would. Compared to Nolan's Batman, or a lot of the 'psychological thriller' horror flicks that are PG-13.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:08 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.