The only way ‘Star Trek’ keeps coming back is the same way a meal of mouldy potatoes, rancid cheese and lard washed down with bottles of poorly-made moonshine does.

In its day ‘Trek’ was a ground-breaking provocative, intelligent series. In its day. That day has gone. When TOS (the Original Series) came out in the 1960’s it was revolutionary and worthwhile, fresh and creative. In the 1990’s TNG (The Next Generation) revitalised and gave new life, new worlds and ideas a good airing. Then DS9 stayed boldly put and it along with Voyager had their moments - but less of them & it was already clear the time was neigh. Finally, we got the contradictions and flatness of ‘Enterprise’ confirming a once good franchise was stale, played out and done to death.

We’ve also had the many movies, at first a few quite good ones, lately some that, well left a bit to be desired and again confirmed the well was running dry. So now please, I think its time. Overdue in fact.

Call it enough and let ‘Trek’ rest with dignity and retain some unblemished nostalgia value rather than grind away the bones of the dead horse its become. Please NOT yet more of a stale, played out franchise, turned flat, saccharine, self-contradictory and long mined out; foisted on the public in the knowledge that die-hard trekkies will see and pay for anything Trek connected however bad.

Moreover, if we really, really, really _*must*_ have yet another ‘Trek’ movie (& we don’t) then for pity’ss sake, lets avoid the prequel trap! Instead, I’d rather see one of the series that hasn’t had a turn yet get its chance. (As long as its NOT ‘Enterprise” I’d rather anything but have that rubbish further blacken the once bright true ‘Trek’ franchise!)

Better though, if we’re going to resurrect any old series please lets revive ‘Babylon-5′ or ‘Firefly’ or best of all come up with something new. Something ground-breaking, provocative and fresh.

All strictly my humble subjective personal opinion - but, come on people, surely I’m not the only erstwhile ‘Trek’ viewer to feel enough was enough already some time ago.

No, I can’t. I will admit to not being a bit Holmes fan. I’ve read some of the stories and seen most of the classic movies. I was basing that comment on the portrayals by Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. My impression watching those films was that Holmes was in his mid-30s and Watson was in his 50s.

Imagine my shock when I looked them up on the IMDB and discovered that Rathbone was actually three years older!

- Jack

Babylon 5
Stargate SG-1
Andromeda
Farscape
Firefly

New franchises, new characters, each with its own unique universe and charm. (These are ones that I, pesonally, watched some or all of. YMMV.)

Gary Mcleod said:
> I’ll go and see the next Trek, as I’ve seen all the others, but I’m soooo frustrated that movie makers now just recycle material that has already proved successful. There are so many brilliant sci-fi novels that would make extraordinary movies that are being ignored.

In one respect, more interesting SF is being made for mainstream. Witness stuff like Premonition, which has some sort of time travel aspect to it, or Deja Vu, or even The Butterfly Effect. What is important is that the SF element is critical to the story, not just background. Though some might argue they are less Sci Fi because there’s no science (at least in Butterfly and perhaps Premonition).

Alternately, I worry about SF getting made now because Hollywood has preconceptions about what SF is and what it is for, and in turn how to make it. They focus on the wrong elements - they see SF as “Action Adventure/Special FX”, so they focus on big space exposions and robots and CGI and anything that is “fun”, rather than the thinking elements that are the heart of true SF - the heart that drives many of the fans to find it interesting in the first place. If you have some good, interesting and thought provoking SF novel/story you really like, flinch if you hear it is getting made into a movie. The Lord of the Rings conversions are rare. Usually you get Dungeons and Dragons. (I know, they’re fantasy, not “SF” - same difference. Witness I, Robot that reverses the whole intent of Asimov, or any Heinlein butchery such as Starship Troopers. I used the two I did because they are spectacular examples of the extremes of how similar content was handled.)