Has i go through this thread, I find myself on the opposite side of many of you. I prefer the serialized story telling, it allows the show to build, giving you a little piece of the big picture each week.
What irritated me was in DS9, you have the whole Dominion war/changelings plot going on, Sisko and Jake go off and play baseball ARRGGGGHHH
In Enterprise, there was the Cowboys and Indians episode (amongst others) that were standalone.
Standalone episodes are great from a syndication perspective, since you can play any episode any time, but for me it does nothing from a character development perspective. They are always the same.
Look at what happened to Picard after he was rescued from the Borg, from being Locutus of Borg, it made him "different" , it haunted him if you will.
Do these serialized shows fail because of? Are people mere simpletons (no offense to those here that prefer the non serialized shows)that have such short attention spans,that they have to be spoon fed every episode?
My hard drive is chock full of shows I'm following, some serialized (which I wait till they are done to watch or come to a natural break) others I watch week to week (Arrow... even though it's technically serialized it's 22/3 episodes too much to watch in a row).
I've argued over and over that if the conventional networks could compete against their own cable networks , if they just dropped the old 22-3+ episode seasons and gave us tight 8-13 seasons. You'd get more variety,and there would be less of a chance a show would be cancelled before the first season is done.
The brits are fantastic for this giving you a tight story line in 6-8 episodes.
I've read a lot of different things. That it is Kahn, that it isn't Kahn. It's hard to tell which is true or not.
I would love a Star Trek mini series, where they visit things that were mentioned in the full series, and added more depth to them. Like the Eugenics war. I think that would be interesting to see the full story behind that.
actually, i was surprised during the scot bakula "enterprise" series we didn't see more remnants of that star trek universe history. keep in mind these new movies are running through an alternate timeline, so a lot may occur inconsistent with past trekkie certainty.
actually, i was surprised during the scot bakula "enterprise" series we didn't see more remnants of that star trek universe history.
And that is why the show failed to catch on. They instantly went for time incursions and when ratings dropped, the Borg. By the time they started focusing on the pre-Kirk era history in season four, the damage had already been done.
This trailer certainly gives us more idea of a plot line. I think I saw robocop in there, too!
best trailer thus far since it displays the plotline;
After the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction.
As much as I enjoyed the Star Trek 'reboot', and as curious as I am about the new movie... I'm actually more excited about the movie finally coming out so they'd already release the damn Ender's Game trailer. :\
I couldn't stand Enterprise when it was on and stopped watching it. However, being able to watch all 4 seasons back to back recently I really enjoyed it.
Of course I'll watch this and love it but what I really have a hard time with is the complete lack of originality in Hollywood where they just keep picking the bones of what has come before.
Random Idea: A movie series based on the pre-appocolypse era of Andromeda.
Not sure if anyone remembers Don Williams (who actually just came out of hiding on his ranch to release a new record I think), but way back in 1980 he had that line in the Roger Cool "I Believe In You" song "I don't believe ... ... that Superman and Robinhood are still alive in Hollywood". It's just funny that Hollywood regurgitation was so noticeable even 33 years ago.
remember the reboot is a new timeline. do you recall in the early star trek movies when some oversized version of the enterprise was in dry dock and could barely break orbit? my guess is this is a militarized version (more guns less science) of that ship.
I think you are talking about the Excelsior when Scotty mucked with the warped drive so they couldn't be followed after taking the Enterprise-A in The Search for Spock.
If you don't want to read spoilers, stop reading the review sites now. Apparently there has been an in depth critic released about the movie, which contains plot line summaries and loads of spoilers. Of which some of it may be quoted by other review/critic sites.
I just hope no one posts any such spoilers here, even though we all seem to have an idea what is going on.
I really wish they'd stop over promoting the movie, it's like they expect it to fail.
I watched the low res version of this movie online. the story was sadly unoriginal, but fun to watch it's definitely worth paying to see on a big screen, with lots of high speed epically scaled action, and each classic cast member gets some iconic roll play.
actually, i was surprised during the scot bakula "enterprise" series we didn't see more remnants of that star trek universe history. keep in mind these new movies are running through an alternate timeline, so a lot may occur inconsistent with past trekkie certainty.
it depends on the point of divergence, in this case it was kirk's father dying, so in essence everything before should be more or less the same.