Star Trek to Return to TV??
- Thread starter Chuckanut
- Start date
He'll have some work to do to be better than Gene Roddenberry. Good luck to him though.
Car-Guy
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Not sure that's possible.+1
Even more work to find a bigger ham actor than William Shatner.
Don't dis the "Shat" -not good karma+1
Even more work to find a bigger ham actor than William Shatner.
There have been some indie episodes.
Some not so bad, some kinda good.
Make of them what you will
http://www.startrekcontinues.com/episodes.html
Last edited:
There was a movie that came out a few decades ago where William Shatner plays himself as "Bill". He was a HOOT. This was right before he started doing the Priceline commercials - and I'm convinced it was the inspiration for that ad campaign.+1
Even more work to find a bigger ham actor than William Shatner.
The movie is called "Free Enterprise" and is worth watching - especially if you have some nerd in you, or know people similar to the characters on Big Bang Theory.
Shatner is a pivotal role - but not a main character - Eric McCormick plays the lead (Will and Grace, Perception.)
robnplunder
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
I don't know about this. Star Trek TV series has been losing fans. The last one didn't do so well. What can they do for an encore? All the story lines have been hashed, and rehashed. Good luck to CBS, and to the fans. I am sure to give it a chance.
Well, how many 'reboots' have we seen of franchise movies? The trickle down now goes to TV series - there is some blood yet in them rocks.
OP
OP
Chuckanut
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Don't dis the "Shat" -not good karma
There have been some indie episodes.
Some not so bad, some kinda good.
Make of them what you will
Star Trek Continues: Episodes
+1
They are amazingly good considering the amount of money they had to produce them. Production values seem to match the original ST series.
OP
OP
Chuckanut
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
They have an entire Galaxy to use as story material. It's the imagination and creativity of the writers that is needed. FWIW, the two recent movies show a serious lack of both imagination and creativity IMHO. Unless one considers lots of blasting, blowing-up and generally unbelievable mayhem to be creative.
harley
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
It's not going to be a TV show, as such. It's going to be on a On Demand and streaming system, CBS All Access. So not available without extra payments. I'll wait for the free repeats.
And that's a deal-breaker for me. Linear cable television is the most efficient means of distributing video entertainment. The ascendancy of streaming-only programming does nothing other than provide the foundation to increase the overall cost to consumers. It is probably inevitable, but as long as there is enough decent programming to watch on cable, and as long as the ISP surcharges for excessive use of Internet bandwidth, I'm not going to give streaming-only options a look.
W2R
Moderator Emeritus
I don't pay for TV shows, so I'll never see it either unless it's free later on.
It was on the air the first time from 1966-1969, and we put a man on the moon in 1969. People had great hopes and expectations for space exploration at that time, and naturally there was a lot of interest in space travel (at least among those I knew at the time).
Times have changed, though, and it will be interesting to see if the show arouses much interest from younger people.
OP
OP
Chuckanut
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
I may end up waiting to get ST 2017. Perhaps when the disks can be borrowed for free from the public library.
easysurfer
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 13,151
Make it So.
Redbugdave
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Are there no more original movies or shows being made anymore? All these Star Treks, Supermans, Batmans, Rockys, Medical and Police shoot em ups. They are all without new material and originality. I doubt I will be impressed with another Star Trek. They are pumping a dry well as far as I am concerned.
I would rather watch reruns of the original shows/movies. I miss Seinfield.
I would rather watch reruns of the original shows/movies. I miss Seinfield.
REWahoo
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give
How about The Martian, Bridge of Spies, Steve Jobs, Everest, and Black Mass?
So I suppose you figured that Mozart's "Twelve Variations on Vous dirai-je, Maman" was a big let down after bar 24. (It's a masterwork of theme and variation, the theme being the tune of old French folk song, which you'd now recognize as "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star".) And I suppose there is no point in ever going to Morimoto's for sushi. After all, I'm sure that it's no different from the sushi available at the supermarket. And it was pretty pointless to make The Wizard of Oz in 1939, given that it had just been made in 1925.
I'm being facetious, of course. My point is that some of the very best things I've enjoyed were cases where someone added their own originality and creative vision to something preexisting. The usage of a preexisting universe - especially with regard to fantasy, science fiction, and related genres - allows the creator to focus on building up above the surface level, instead of having to waste so much of the readers' (viewers') time building the ground level itself.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Chuckanut
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
I'm still waiting for the modern equal of Rocky and Bullwinkle.
I can relate...but...when watching "Into Darkness" and it turned out to be a Khan rehash it was an eye rolling headshaking really this again moment.
Sure, use the established 'infrastructure', make some tweaks, but take us where no one has gone before!
OP
OP
Chuckanut
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
I can relate...but...when watching "Into Darkness" and it turned out to be a Khan rehash it was an eye rolling headshaking really this again moment.
Sure, use the established 'infrastructure', make some tweaks, but take us where no one has gone before!
IMHO, Abrams does not understand what Star Trek is about. He appears to have a good understanding of what blowing things up is about.
I do understand the reset of the initial series however. Making new movies with Kirk and Spock would have been difficult if they had to be completely coordinated with all the ST stories of the past 50 years. So, that was a tough but probably necessary decision. But, blowing up Vulcan?!??!? They could have done it much more subtly, for example, by simply delaying the Human-Vulcan alliance a few years. Or messing a bit with the timing of the Federation. Blowing up planets is for adolescent kids and Star Wars fanatics.
An example of an non-creative rehash is not proof that all variations on a theme must be offensively derivative.
robnplunder
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Come to think of it, none of the ST movies had the imagination and creativity. All the movies were some variation of past episodes, or prequel/sequel to one.
Badger
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2008
- Messages
- 3,410
I can wait for it to come out on Netflix. I still have enough old TV series that interest me that I haven't seen yet.
Cheers!
Cheers!
