New series?

[Tyler]

posted on August 14th, 2009, 4:30 pm

Last edited by Tyler on August 14th, 2009, 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think that's the danger when making a show with "the enemies of the federation", too. It mustn't become a Star Wars series, I'd hate that, it'd kill Star Trek. On the other hand it is possible to bring up totally different issues in those shows. Honor is something quite unimportant in Western society, however, in other parts of the world it may decide about life and death. A problem that could mentioned in a Klingon series.

Since the Klingons aren't the Federation's enemies, a show about them could include their attempts to deal with the alliance and adjusting to the peace.

roddens TOS series was a lot different than TNG which i thought was way too nice and optimistic.   the problem that roddenberry had is that he lived in a dream world which is completely different from how humans work.   humans can be compassionate, rational, selfess and clean but they can also just as easily be violent, uncaring, selfish and messy as well.   

i get the impression that roddenberry wanted to sweep the latter half under the rug and just pretend it wasnt there.   one of the reasons i liked DS9 waaay better than TNG was because they tried to flesh out the not so nice characteristics of humans as well.   alot of people assume that most star trek fans are all about the preachy messages and political correctness.  most of the trekkers i know liked the show because of the settings and technology and characters.   as for not relating to klingons or romulans, i only attended one sci fi festival (which bill shatner made an improptu visit too.  )  but i noticed alot more people dressed up as klingons than starfleet personal.

TNG isn't that bad, it may have focused on the good things but the bad wasn't hidden (completely).

Well if a new series were to be made, the creators would really want to be careful to make something that's going to be a hit and get ratings (not wanting to go the way of Enterprise), and that would probably mean doing something fairly familiar (i.e. Federation).

I would be opposed to a show about a show centered around another race, because that would be very anti-Star Trek. A large part of Roddenberry's ST is humanity...humans as the special race with a careful balance between all the extremes, with unlimited potential. People can't relate to Klingons or Romulans.

I don't know about you, but I don't really feel like watching a 'Human supremacist' series...which is what you seem to be mistaking Star Trek for.

posted on August 14th, 2009, 5:58 pm

I think you miss my (and Roddenbury's) point. Star Trek came about in an age when people were constantly ambushed with fears and propaganda about the Reds...and it was common to see nuclear war as inevitability. This is a very pessimistic view that I think is almost worse these days; Star Trek was meant to show us that however dark and troubled mankind is, we all have the potential to overcome and unite, to create an enlightened and egalitarian society. But of course that doesn't mean humans are all supreme and infallible (that should be rather obvious); even in an "advanced" civilization you can't just sit around (i.e. nothing is perfect).

posted on August 14th, 2009, 6:07 pm

I know, but the way you put it sounded excessivly pro-Human.

posted on August 16th, 2009, 1:05 pm

Since the Klingons aren't the Federation's enemies, a show about them could include their attempts to deal with the alliance and adjusting to the peace.

That is of course an interesting thought. It is quite ironic, that the warmongers and the peacemakers of Star Trek are best friends  . Yes, perhaps they may show a change of the Klingons, like with the Ferengi in DS9. Of course, nobody wants real peaceful Klingons, but perhaps they could be a bit enlightened to make less war.

posted on August 16th, 2009, 1:10 pm

I can't help but wonder; What would Kahless think about the alliance?

posted on August 16th, 2009, 3:04 pm

if they make the klingons more "enlightened" i will puke.  there is already to much politically correct crap for the human species, do they really have to screw over another species as well.  why couldnt they just have an honest show about a warrior culture that relishes combat and competition and just leave it at that without having some director impose his views on it.

people love this stuff why do you think shows like sopranos were so popular.  as i mentioned before i went to a sci fi festival and there were way more klingons there than federation people.  its stuff they would never do themselves but they like to see it play out in someone elses life.  i might not blow up some newly encountered species cause they made me spill my gahk,  but i would love to see a klingon do it.   

i dont know how many episodes of star trek could the "situation" have been solved if they had simply used a more klingon approach in the first ten minutes, instead of dicking around.

posted on August 16th, 2009, 3:23 pm

I feel Leave the Klingons Alone!!!          John Stuart Mill, an English economist and philosopher, explained it best in 1862:

“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse.”

posted on August 17th, 2009, 8:00 am

if they make the klingons more "enlightened" i will puke.  there is already to much politically correct crap for the human species, do they really have to screw over another species as well.  why couldnt they just have an honest show about a warrior culture that relishes combat and competition and just leave it at that without having some director impose his views on it.

people love this stuff why do you think shows like sopranos were so popular.  as i mentioned before i went to a sci fi festival and there were way more klingons there than federation people.  its stuff they would never do themselves but they like to see it play out in someone elses life.  i might not blow up some newly encountered species cause they made me spill my gahk,  but i would love to see a klingon do it.   

i dont know how many episodes of star trek could the "situation" have been solved if they had simply used a more klingon approach in the first ten minutes, instead of dicking around.

I'm in a Star Trek LARP fan club since 8years and we also have had many klingons all the time. Okay, by the time there were more Vulcans, but we may leave them aside now . However, those klingon fans love the klingon culture, and the honor thing, the weapons, the layout, however, they wouldn't like a Star Trek series without the essence of Star Trek. If you want to see a series about war with no sense and fighting all the time go watch Star Wars . I'd really hate a Star Trek "war" series, Enterprise was sometimes close to it and you know what happened .
And in todays times I don't think it is politically correct to show peaceful cultures. Our western society is constantly at war and the media likes to spread propaganda so that we might support that.

The more I think about it, I support the idea of a series with changing cultures, I don't think that 7 seasons of klingons can convey a proper quality.

posted on August 17th, 2009, 10:01 am

I think it is an overall problem for all fictional stories that the terrestrians are always outlines as the good ones who have the most proper morale, in especial a peaceful one, which isnt the case when we look at the history of mankind.  I wished there were some more divergence in the feds themselves.

posted on August 17th, 2009, 11:49 am

I think it is an overall problem for all fictional stories that the terrestrians are always outlines as the good ones who have the most proper morale, in especial a peaceful one, which isnt the case when we look at the history of mankind.  I wished there were some more divergence in the feds themselves.

You need to watch more Sci-fi, Humans are often the bastards...

posted on August 17th, 2009, 11:58 am

Not often enough IMO.

Nevertheless you are right, but I have no idea whom to steal the hours from 

posted on August 17th, 2009, 2:06 pm

But I think the whole point of star trek is that humanity has evolved beyond that.

"We've grown out of our infancy."

"Povery, disease, war, they'll all be gone [by the early 22nd century]"

posted on August 17th, 2009, 2:14 pm

Yes, Q also had problems to show the "barbaric nature" of the humans in the 24th century. Today he wouldn't have difficulties, though  .
I fully agree, that this is what Star Trek is about. Roddenberry wanted to show, that humans are able to change. in his idea there were no mistakes in the federation at all. Berman changed that point, which I thnik was a good thing. Insurrection is my favourite movie and it shows that there are still some problems left, even after 200years federation.
A new Star Trek show should still convey this ideal. Starfleet is not like as SG1, going armed to the teeth on every planet, killing every Goa'uld hiding in the bushes.

posted on August 17th, 2009, 2:19 pm

You have a slightly provocating opinion on both, starwars and stargate. Be careful not to come across people who think too different, when spitting that generalizing words. 

posted on August 17th, 2009, 2:25 pm

But I think the whole point of star trek is that humanity has evolved beyond that.

"We've grown out of our infancy."

"Povery, disease, war, they'll all be gone [by the early 22nd century]"

Yeah, but most Trekkies think it's about a perfect universe rather than perfect Humans. One person even commented on a DWar music video about it is supposed to be about a perfect technological future...probably the sort of person who would prefer the Federation cowar under a table when the Dominion came.