Jendresen: Star Trek Needs Epic Adventure
http://www.syfyportal.com/article.php?id=1764
Printable View
Jendresen: Star Trek Needs Epic Adventure
http://www.syfyportal.com/article.php?id=1764
I'm sceptical, but it could be good. Inreaguing!
We'll see. I'm open to almost anything.
Hmph. I'm skeptical, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobian
Facinating indeed. He wrote band of brothers. it could be good.
It looks like with Jolene Blalock calling the finale "appalling" it's quite possible they went with enterprise being a total holodeck adventure. I have no problems with the way this movie is shaping up.
That's what we all say about Gladiator scribe John Logan, when he was initially brought onboard for NEMESIS.Quote:
Originally Posted by BouncyCaitian
I still long for Nicholas Meyer.
The more I think about it, the more I think Meyer really screwed the pooch, especially with The Undiscovered Country. I can't put my finger on a single reason why (at the moment, anyway, though perhaps later), but the more I think about it, the less I like what he did.Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
Just so you know, Nicholas Meyer collaborated with Leonard Nimoy on the sixth film.
I'd be curious as to why you don't like it.
We think a lot alike, REG. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
It's a pretty basic premise, but my opinion (and that's all it is), is that Trek needs to continue moving forward and growing, not revisiting its fictional past. Somewhere between ENT and TOS? I just can't get moved by this.
That's what was so good about TNG and DS9...they grew the franchise into its "logcial" future. (TNG moreso than DS9. VOY had a slew of problems but its premise was strong.)
What's with the fascination of looking to Trek's past to propel the franchise forward?
Well....if We continue in the logical extrapolation of DS9
"The long night has come. The United Federation Of Planets, the greatest civilization the galaxy has even known has fallen."
:D
To borrow a line from a band I much admire - and I've used it here before, under similar circumstances - "You glorify your past when your future dries up."Quote:
Originally posted by Don Mappin
What's with the fascination of looking to Trek's past to propel the franchise forward?
If Ron Moore is to be believed, Rick Berman and Branon Bragga are - in terms of storytelling values, at the very least - moral cowards. The situation in the "regular" Trek universe has become normalized and there're no more threats to face? Well, okay...faced with the choice of inventing new sources of conflict that follow along with the format already developed, or delving back into a past that's already been written - and where we know how it's going to turn out, pretty much - it looks like we're going to choose the latter. It's easier, safer, and it doesn't present us with the terrifying prospect of setting our boots out on to a path that hasn't been walked before.
I've written it a million times before, but to drag out the dead horse again, ENT's premise was about as close to an utterly unworkable storytelling situation as I can imagine. You have two choices when writing from a format where the past has already been established: stick with the established history, in which case you're telling stories where people already know how it's going to turn out, and they're going to get bored watching these little automatons go through the numbers. It's going to piss people off. The other choice is the one B & B took; ignore the established history, make stuff up as the situation warrants, and to hell with the consequences. The result is that this take on things pisses people off. No matter what, you're going to end up pissing people off.
The route that B & B took might have been understandable, if not condonable, if they had developed and vetted stories that had actually been worth a tinker's cuss in a high wind. For the most part - at least as I understand it - they were not. Thus, they failed on two fronts: cowering away from taking the risky high road with regard to stimulating new ideas, and then not even bothering to do their best when taking the safe route. At the end of the day, and with the litany of lacklustre reviews the first three seasons recieved (or two, if you're a fan of the 90 degree turn that was taken in third year), I'm frankly amazed the thing lasted as long as it did.
If it does turn out to be the Holodeck-fantasy bit, or a dream that Will Riker had after a bad turn with Betazed five-alarm chili, I have to say I'm actually going to breathe a sigh of relief. To offer another quote, from a man (of sorts) who ruled the Known Universe for thirty-five hundred years - and should know, don't you think? - "Only fools prefer the past!"
Considering the ramshackle condition of the galaxy post DS9, the frontier has opened up again. actual stories are possible again.
ROTFLMAO!! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by D.S.McBride
Good stuff and convincingly argued, sir.
I so much agree. However I think Jendresen's philosphy is interesting, but I'd really like a series set again one century after VOY's end, like they did between TOS and TNG. Let us discover how things evolved at DS9's end. Let us see the Federation try to unite the galaxy with the slipstream drive. Have the Borg vanquished sometime in the past. Bring on the real sci-fi...
A-ha! Here we differ a bit! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Don Mappin
I don't mind looking at Trek's past, so long it is based on a significant historical event. The fourth season of Enterprise should have been main premise of the entire series run from the beginning, leading toward the Earth-Romulan War and the formation of the Federation. But what do we get from the beginning? The "Temporal Cold War" arc.
What... The... F!!!!!!!!!!
Of the first three seasons of Enterprise, I can only count a handful of good (though some not so great) episode, and all of them involve pre-Federation Andorians.
Sighs. Maybe I'm too set in my ways. It is much harder to impress me with good Trek stories, although Manny Coto have been keeping me entertain in this -- alas -- last season.
Oh, and I have no kind word for B&B.
* raises hand *Quote:
Originally Posted by D.S.McBride
I believe Ron D. Moore, 110%. :cool:
To use a phrase I haven't dusted off for a while, "Get out of my head!"Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
Word for word what my first thought was...
Thank you for the kind words. For what it's worth, the subject is something I've spent more than a few minutes thinking about - I wanted to know exactly why ENT's format and premise had caused such an instinctual - and overwhelmingly - negative reaction with me. The result, I think, has strengthened my own storytellling skills, and has steered me away from some easy-to-implement fixes for story roadblocks.Quote:
Originally posted by Don Mappin
Good stuff and convincingly argued, sir.
As a final note, I draw a very strong line of distinction between a format like ENT's, which is essentially a retelling of historical settings and events where the cast may as well be proxys, and a story like Greg Maguire's Wicked (and if you haven't read it, get that sucker just as fast as you can and dig in), where the core of the story is the building of a character. The former is a mechanical exercise, especially in episodic drama, because the very nature of the form forbids major character arcs and definitive endings. The latter, even if we know how it turns out, can be endlessly rivetting, because we're meeting a person and watching them grow - and that, endings notwithstanding, can be just about the most fascinating (and entertaining) thing in the world.
I think the key phrase here was :My first thought was: the guy's telling us "we'll give you something that *you* want and it'll be the Romulan War". Could that be it ?Quote:
Everybody just needs to just take a Romulan chill pill and have some faith
I agree with most of what DS McBride said (and that's not because he's Canadian!) but I'll play devil's advocate here on two points: 1- I'm not so sure another series set in the TNG era would have been a good idea. Berman said that he was sick of that time period. I can understand where he comes from. I mean we've had 7 years each of TNG, DS9 and VOY. 2- By going in the past, yes we do know what the future looks like and so that reduces the dramatic tension BUT going back at the roots of the mythology (IF well done, as it was in ENT's 4th season) can be interesting. But more importantly, if you can do it in a way to highlight the contrast between that time period and the cushy, all-powerful Federation of the TNG-era, then it can be good. I think in that category ENT has been hit-or-miss. They should have also focused on all the sacrifices that had to be made so that Kirk and co could have a Federation.
That being said, overall if it wouldn't have been for going back in the past with ENT they should have maybe done something that was 50-100 years past the TNG era.
If my vague hypothesis about a Romulan War movie is correct, that could be cool but I REALLY question the wisdom of going back in time again, especially since ST movies have to be geared towards a larger non ST-fan audience.