the new Star Trek Series, a Prequel!

[Cochrane]

What do y'all think are the chances that they'll keep going and do a sixth? Do y'all think it would begin before Enterprise ends?

[Cochrane]

think we'll ever get sick of Trek, or do you think in the 29th century Roddenberry Mythology will be right beside Greek and Roman?

[qerlin]

It's got it's place in fiction history. Don't think it has quite the staying power of Greek myth, but you never know.

But yeah...I think people are going to get tired of it, if they keep putting out crap like the last series.

[KlingonZ]

I think Trek will be around as long as they put out quality stuff. If series V is not good and the next movie is crap I think they will give it a rest for a few years. They thought of putting of series V for a year just for that reason, people were getting tired of it. What would you guys rather see based on the rumors? Series V, 150 years in the past or 150 years in the future. My vote is the future. That is if they won't do a Section 31 or a Klingon series.

[Makklor]

KlingonZ Johnson is right!

Sorry, watched Blazing Saddles last night.


I agree with the future as the best idea. Though, a Section 31 series would be different.

[This message has been edited by Makklor (edited 04-16-2001).]

[Captain Preas]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by KlingonZ:
I would like to see series V based on Section 31, with a futuristic James Bond flavor, something new and different, with the Klingon Empire ruled by Chancelor Martok sprinkled in.</font>

And that way, we can get Michael Dorn into it!

I can just see him, a few years from now at a convention. "Paramount owns my soul now...we had the ridges surgicly implanted to save time in the makeup chair every morning."

[Torpor]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Makklor:
As of a prequel, all I foresee are problems; we all know how the writers love to put new races, tech, and other unknowns into the series. The problem lies in that even with the longest deep space missions, of that time, the show will still happen in the area of federation space that we all know so well. Can we really rely on the writers to keep most of the unknowns to people, places, and things that we have already seen in the other series? Yes, first contacts are fun, but after how many times, does it get redundant. If we do see any new races, how are they going to explain their disappearance in TNG? They all died off.</font>

I don't think you would run into too many problems there, although from a fan's standpoint there probably would be a lot of "hey what happened to so-and-so?"-s but how many races or subplots that started in TOS never got finished in TNG? A few of the race/events survived but many of them have only been linked to future events through novels (e.g. the Doomsday Device portrayed as a device to fight the Borg, etc.).
I'm not disputing the point entirely, though. I know that Star Trek history had to be slightly rewritten for First Contact - although the pieces more or less fit together with the Canon history, you still asked questions like - "Wasn't Zefram from Alpha Centuri?" (Trek answer: He must have moved there later in life...)
As long as they don't throw any of the SW:E1 history rewrites in (I thought Yoda trained ObiWan...) I would be interested.
Assuming, of course, any of this survives beyond rumor.

------------------
Lt. Frank Torpor
U.S.S. James T. Kirk

[odoital]

Philosophically, I don't really like the idea of going backward for a whole series... Then again, Voyager abused the whole time travel idea without being a time travel series.

Aside from the fear of not following the established chronology or established facts is going in the opposite direction. Following it too closely. One of the things I do fear is the potential "coincidental" nature of a prequel series. Oh we know that T'Pau is around during this time, let's throw her in. Oh we know that this ship was involved in this incident let's show that. It could be cool, but it could also seem too contrived. If it follows naturally from the plot, characters or premise of the show it is okay. If it is just to make the new crew look good, blah!

[Cochrane]

Think this one will be another seven year voyage? Shouldn't it be a five year one?

[KlingonZ]

I think Paramount has a seven season thing with Star Trek. I think it began as a Rodenberry idea. If the show is popular enough to be renewed each year they only continue it for seven seasons to prevent it from becoming old or the same rehashed ideas in episodes or prevent it from being canceled.

[REG]

I believe that before the show is shot, the cast signed a five-year contract, and if the show managed to stay on for five years, they renew their contract every year thereafter (provided the show is still on the air).

I don't know if it is Roddenberry's idea. After all, during the mid-series run of TNG he was replaced by Berman, who ultimately succeeded Roddenberry as the head of the franchise. But it was TNG that began the tradition of running no more than seven seasons (while you're at the top of the game).

------------------
Anyhoo, just some random thoughts...

[Captain Blake]

I've always heard that 7 seasons was the optimum length of a show for syndication purposes. Enough episodes to sell (the stations buying can recoup their money since they're not showing the same things over and over again), but not so many that the series is overwhelming (which would make it cost too much for stations to buy).

Of cource, I could be wrong.

[DaveTalley]

Dammit Makklor
damn near sprayedDr Pepper accross the screen
Dave

>KlingonZ Johnson is right!
>Sorry, watched Blazing Saddles last night.
[This message has been edited by Makklor (edited 04-16-2001).]

[Doug Burke]

Actually, Reg, I remember reading somehwere that it was a Paramount thing. And the contract was for 6 years. That's why Terry Farrell bowed out when she did. She knew that the series only had one more season left and figured she should not renew her contract...

I may be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that's how it worked at least in her case...

------------------
Doug Burke



McCoy: "You're taking me to the promised land?"
Kirk: "That's what you get for missing staff meetings, Doctor."

[H. Tarlana]

I'm looking at the new "Trek" the same way I looked at Voyager 7 years ago. I will wait and see. Rumors, no matter how juicy, are no guarantee of a good show.
I figure I'll give it a few episodes, like I did with TNG(which I hated at first, by the way) and see what happens.

------------------
Keep your mouth shut and nothing wierd will happen