dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
16
share rss forum feed


Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
reply to footballdude

Re: Star Trek: 5/17/2013 Into Darkness

I agree with what ekster said. They jumped the shark in the new Star Trek by placing it in an alternate time line. So while they have to respect the canon laid out by the Star Trek "gods", they can play it a lot freer as well. They have more wiggle room.
I also wanted to see the eugenics war, where people like Khan were created. I thought seeing some of the "backstory" brought to life would be interesting, and a change of pace.

--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?.


footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
said by Snakeoil:

I agree with what ekster said. They jumped the shark in the new Star Trek by placing it in an alternate time line. So while they have to respect the canon laid out by the Star Trek "gods", they can play it a lot freer as well. They have more wiggle room.
I also wanted to see the eugenics war, where people like Khan were created. I thought seeing some of the "backstory" brought to life would be interesting, and a change of pace.

I know, it gives them free reign to blow up canon and do whatever they want. But if they didn't want to stick to canon, why not just create new characters a couple of hundred years in the future? Why rehash old characters and not rehash their iconic stories? This is why the series 'Enterprise' failed so badly. They went back to the foundation of the Federation, then used time travel as an excuse to completely blow canon out of the water. If you don't want to stick to Star Trek canon, why make a Star Trek movie at all?
--
Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty - Ronald Reagan


ekster
Hi there
Premium
join:2010-07-16
Lachine, QC
kudos:3

1 recommendation

Publicity.

Hollywood likes to play it safe, and there's nothing safer than a Kirk and Spock.


Snakeoil
Ignore Button. The coward's feature.
Premium
join:2000-08-05
Mentor, OH
kudos:1
reply to footballdude
I thought the last season, and part of the season before that, were the best of Enterprise [the TV series].

I hated the fact the had time jumping in it, I felt that would have been better handled by Janeway and her Voyager crew or Janeway as a member of section 31 [interesting book series that spanned the entire Star Trek series].
But having time travel that early, I dunno. The even in the STOS, they had time travel in the series. Granted that travel didn't impact our time line at all.

It's about the money, and it's about rebooting and making it fresh and new.
Look at how successful Bond and Dr Who have been over the last 50 years. Then title character's face is always changing, as does his mannerisms. But people ae willing to accept it, at least with Bond. Dr Who has a neat trick to explain the changes, with Bond you just take it par for the course.

One of the Problems with Star Trek, is that reality has caught up to it. Cell phones, tablets, touch screens, blue tooth. So that stuff just lacks the interest that it used to have.

They could try one shots. Take a couple of fan favorite books and turn them into a movie. Maybe even a web movie to keep costs down. Avoid using the canon characters. There are plenty of Star trek books without them.
--
Is a person a failure for doing nothing? Or is he a failure for trying, and not succeeding at what he is attempting to do? What did you fail at today?.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
I think Enterprise tried to much to be an ongoing drama rather than one shot episdes like the series before it.

Even though DS9 had an ongoing story or plot, One could sit down and watch an episode and still enjoy it. but for two or three seasons of Enterprise if you missed a few you where lost.

the "Temporal Cold War" imo ruined the series. While it had some cool moments it also took away from the initial idea of a show revolving around the first true deep space exploration ship of Starfleet.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:4

1 recommendation

I know I'm in the minority, at least around here, but I enjoyed the Temporal Cold War bit.
--
♬ Music is life ♬

IanR

join:2001-03-22
Fort Mill, SC
reply to Kearnstd
I've noticed with many series the underlying theme is overplayed by the producers/writers. While the fans mainly like to sit down and enjoy each episode, as a separate piece of entertainment, the writers/producers often become obsessed with the theme they are weaving. They then keep returning to the theme, for far to many episodes, making the series become very predicatble and slow moving.
In a good scifi series one gets steady and developing characters, but their "adventures" should be as diverse as possible. So each week one tunes in for the unexpected scenarios. Enterprise could easily have run for more years, IMHO, if the producers had just "wised up" and removed their overplayed and stale theme.

Shows such as Babylon 5, Andromeda and SG1 managed this so much better. Again IMHO.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

1 recommendation

It is easier to gain viewers too when a show can be watched at any point.

for example I never got into lost so never watched it from the start. one night when channel surfing I put it on and had no idea WTF was happening. Yet with Star Trek TNG I could watch any point in all 7 season and get a full enjoyable and understandable TV episode of good scifi.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


Rook008
Miles To Go
Premium
join:2002-02-05
Far Rockaway, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by Kearnstd:

It is easier to gain viewers too when a show can be watched at any point.
...

I agree with it being easier, but I've also found that a series that doesn't have some overall "big picture" story arc doesn't hold my attention for more than a few episodes.
If every episode of a series is a stand-alone story, with no connection to the rest of the season, I don't feel the need to keep watching unless the writing makes each episode very entertaining. Not many shows have that.
I pretty much need a continuing storyline.
--
"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats." - H. L. Mencken


darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Frontier FiOS
said by Rook008:

I've also found that a series that doesn't have some overall "big picture" story arc doesn't hold my attention for more than a few episodes.

I totally agree with this. That's why shows like Haven and Grimm were hard for me to get through the first half season or so -- they were too much "weirdness of the week" and "monster of the week" at the beginning. As the overall story arc developed, they got MUCH more interesting to me.

BSG was probably one of the the best SciFi shows on TV and I doubt very much you could just drop in on a random episode and truly appreciate how good it was or even enjoy it.
--
♬ Music is life ♬


Voxxjin
Made of Hamburger
Premium
join:2010-01-13
Dupont, WA
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
reply to Kearnstd
said by Kearnstd:

It is easier to gain viewers too when a show can be watched at any point.

for example I never got into lost so never watched it from the start. one night when channel surfing I put it on and had no idea WTF was happening. Yet with Star Trek TNG I could watch any point in all 7 season and get a full enjoyable and understandable TV episode of good scifi.

It goes both ways. Yes it is easier to start watching a show if each episode is 'stand alone' but having a story arc or shows that build upon each other allows people to see the development and tune in to see what happens next.

That is why I loved B5. Even though it had a story arc, there were many episodes (esp S1 and S2) that were essentially stand alone but might contain a small glimpse of the main story---tantilizing clues to the future. The stories built on each other. Made me want to make sure I watched it the following week. ST:TNG didn't compel me to watch every week. (I would still watch but if I missed one then no big deal).
--
Cry "Havoc!" and let slip the dogs of war

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
well today I think its easier to do arcing stories due to VOD and DVRs. TNG was made in an era where the only way to keep up was setting your VCR and remembering to do so.

Now its just tell your cable box to record all new episodes.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


seaquake
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-23
Millersville, MD
reply to Kearnstd
The Temporal Cold war indeed ruined Enterprise. And since that's how they started the series, it had one foot in the grave on day 1. Had Enterprise had stories similar to those in the 4th season I believe it would have had a much better following and may have survived longer than it's 3.8 seasons.

Back on topic, I'm interested to see if this movie can build on the success of the previous one.