Thanks for the fish, Rick Berman

Lincoln Russell 11 Mar, 2009 at 2:18pm ET Article published in Tech

Comments

1. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 2:28pm Thrax Dear J.J. Abrams and Bryan Fuller,
   
   I have read that you are both pushing for a revival of the Star Trek TV franchise on the heels of Abrams' Star Trek film. You plan to revive the "'60s fun."
   
   I cannot impress upon you how ****ing absurd this concept is. It is a small miracle that you find the mental faculty to develop a story, given that you cannot conceive how tired, nonsequitur and boring prequel content is.
   
   I have a better idea: The year is 2388, and the USS Voyager has been home for 10 years. The Borg Warp Conduits were collapsed with Voyager's arrival, but the Borg have spent the last decade rocketing from the Delta Quadrant to lay the beat down on Sector 001 for wrecking their shit. Earth and the Federation is at war.
   
   Wolf 359 got nothin' on this.
   
   The series will herald a new interest in the Federation warships, political intrigue, grittiness, and darkness the series so desperately needs. The episodes portraying the height of the Dominion War and Romulan espionage were amongst the most compelling ever developed. We will extend this, and take Star Trek in new and amazing directions.
   
   I await your phone call.
   
   Love,
   Robert
2. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 4:21pm foolkiller Dear Paramount,
   
   Please do not make any more Star Trek until Berman and Braga are both dead and gone. This way, we can have someone with decent writing skills working on the franchise again. Even better, fire them now and hire Okuda to fix all the damage they've done. At least he can write a story (See "In a Mirror Darkly, Part I and II")
   
   Also, fire all the other ****ing directors and writers that decide to continue a storyline, but admit to not ever having watched the other series/movies. In fact, just shoot them, so they can't be hired somewher else.
3. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 4:23pm foolkiller Oh oh, I almost forgot. Paramount, this is not Doctor Who. Quit using time for all your plot devices!
4. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 4:37pm RADA I wholeheartedly agree..
   
   But the present day Hollywood seems to be as stuck in retro as Detroit is with car design... You'd think with the total failure of the Enterprise series would have yelled a BIG "HELLO!! McFly!!!!" to nix these 60s era redos.
   
   ...they don't seem to be able to come up with an original idea very often either...
   
   
   
   
   

   Thrax wrote:

   Dear J.J. Abrams and Bryan Fuller,
   
   I have read that you are both pushing for a revival of the Star Trek TV franchise on the heels of Abrams' Star Trek film. You plan to revive the "'60s fun."
   
   I cannot impress upon you how ****ing retarded this concept is. It is a small miracle that you find the mental faculty to breathe, given that you cannot conceive how tired, nonsequitur and boring prequel content is.
   
   I have a better idea: The year is 2388, and the USS Voyager has been home for 10 years. The Borg Warp Conduits were collapsed with Voyager's arrival, but the Borg have spent the last decade rocketing from the Delta Quadrant to lay the beat down on Sector 001 for wrecking their shit. Earth and the Federation is at war.
   
   Wolf 359 got nothin' on this.
   
   The series will herald a new interest in the Federation warships, political intrigue, grittiness, and darkness the series so desperately needs. The episodes portraying the height of the Dominion War and Romulan espionage were amongst the most compelling ever developed. We will extend this, and take Star Trek in new and amazing directions.
   
   I await your phone call.
   
   Love,
   Robert
5. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 6:09pm Leonardo

   You plan to revive the "'60s fun."

   Exactly, that's what needs to happen. I agree with those of you above who don't want a Star Trek that precedes another fictional Star Trek era. But the rough and tumble adventure of The Original Series needs to return. Next Generation was good, but each episode being a moral lesson for us primitive 20th Century humans wore on me a bit. Deep SH!T Nine was an unneeded galactic soap opera, the action comprising only chit chat around tables and elevators. Give me a break! That's no adventure at all. Voyager had it's moments, but it took two years of ho-hum to get there. Enterprise had such promise. Enterprise could very easily have been Star Trek with real fun and adventure brought back, but the chemistry just wasn't there until too late.
6. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 6:48pm RADA

   Thrax wrote:

   You plan to revive the "'60s fun."

   
   Maybe if the continue on this course they can change the catch phrase to:
   
   To boldly go where EVERYONE has gone before....
   
   :Pwned:
7. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 6:50pm Thrax I appreciate your comments, Leo, but if you think it was all about elevators, well, I don't think you gave more than 30% of the series ago. That stopped in the third season... Of seven. DS9 is almost universally respected as the apex of Trek series, as is was the first to introduce story arcs, and the first to dedicate them to species other than humans
8. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 7:02pm Linc Original did have good adventures, and TNG felt like it "grew up" in later seasons and through some of the movies. DS9 was my favorite, and the only one I went out of my way to watch (as in, watching entire seasons on DVD and doing my best to follow it during the original run). Voyager (the little I saw of it) always struck me as dull, and Enterprise (from what I hear) as woefully unfulfilled potential.
   
   I approach any reinvention with cautious optimism, though I do agree I'd like to see more story development than plot resets.
9. 
   11 Mar 2009 ~ 7:52pm Leonardo

   I don't think you gave more than 30% of the series ago

   Wrong. Still though, DS9 did not have the level of action that Star Trek needs. Intense plots, rich with emotional interplay, inter-species interaction, and galactic geo-politics is simply Masterpiece Theatre set in the future, not science fiction cinema, in my opinion. I want more action. If not, why bother with TV or a movie? A book would be better.