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.)

Generations was 7. First Contact was 8. Insurrection was 9. Nemesis was 10. Yep, 11. I know, 8 – 10 blend together into one blah.

http://my.voyager.net/~mikegr/kirk/

The shorter answer is that the Star Trek writers don’t claim that their pseudoscience is true. Scientists tend only get annoyed when sloppy writing unnecessarily gets the facts wrong, or overlooks an obvious science-based plot device in favour of some psuedoscientific gobbledygook.

We are(mostly) rational materialists and SciFi is all about the rational response to a dramatic change in our environment, such as “what if we could go FTL?”
or “what if we could breed humans with extreme life spans?” or,,,well, you get the idea.

I am tolerant of strange ideas in SciFi, so long as there is a connection with reality and the possibility of a rational response to that idea. Good SciFi is not pseudo scientific. It’s about human response to a credible change in the environment. Star Trek was the first TV show to propose that humans were capable of a rational response to such, rather than a magical one.

To be a skeptic means to question. SciFi is very subversive in that regard.
It’s all about questioning underlying assumptions and the accepted view of things, as mandated by Authority.

Star Trek was not about “bad science”. It was about questioning the status quo.
Arguing acceptance of any idea based upon the dicta of some overpowering Authority is what I find unacceptable.

GAry 7

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QI0_i7OASdc

I’ll likely pay money to see the new movie.

I agree that Enterprise made a major comeback, but in my opinion it was season three with the whole xindi arc and stopping the Repitilians/Sphere builders blowing up Earth.

Season 4 IMHO fell a bit flat but had a few nice miniarcs.

Ahem, no I’m not a trek nerd. Really. =)

Take Brian Aldiss’ ‘Hothouse’, set in 4 billion years time, the sun is becoming a red giant and human civilisation has been reduced to a few small humans with rudimentary weapons battling carnivorous vegetation. It would be a unique visual treat, utterly unlike any sci-fi before it. Sci-fi is supposed to be about new visions, imaginative possibilities, but movie makers just want to play it safe and keep giving us the same old familiar stuff.

In any case, I doubt the Damon/Brody/Sinise rumour is anything more than just a rumour. The same source also said James McAvoy was being cast as Scotty and Daniel Dae Kim as Sulu (James McAvoy is way too young and has since said it’s a lie, and Daniel Dae Kim is way too old for Sulu at that point in time).

I’d like to see Zachary Quinto as Spock, he is phenomenal (no other word for it) as Sylar in “Heroes” and looks right too.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9186670810343559618

Besides all three are much to old to play these parts. they’d probably be better off casting relatively new unknown actors. Younger actors might attract a new generation of Trekkie.*

* And yet the danger is that the new movie become “Star Trek Babies” or “Laguna Beach: the Neutral Zone”.

I’m quoting most of Kevin’s post because it was so far back, but he absolutely nailed it.

“I’m not opposed to the idea – I just think that it’s too
soon, especially after the mockery of Trek that
Berman & Braga made of it.”

Amen, ah say AMEN, brother!

“Plus, to anyone who’s a real Trek geek, they know
that Kirk and Spock didn’t meet in the Academy,
but when Kirk took command of the Enterprise.”

Didn’t any of these producers ever watch “The Menagerie?” This whole thing reminds me of “Young Sherlock Holmes” where Holmes and Watson are supposedly classmates in prep school. In the books and movies, Watson is nearly twice Holmes age. And Gary Sinise as McCoy? This is supposed to be the Academy? He’s already over 60. When the series started, McCoy wasn’t that much older than Kirk (early 40′s maybe).

As Scotty said in “Beauty Survives”, “It jus’ feels wrong Mr. Spock.”

- Jack

You mean like the last ten years?