TFMF Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 I concor. Star Trek needs to be put to bed for at least a decade before they try again Hmmm....well i can't really say i agree. A decade? That just seems so long. A few years perhaps, but certainly not a decade. I mean if you think about it, it's only been 2 years since Ent ended. I need more Trek! And so do lots of other people. Perhaps if the show is planned is might turn out to be as awesome as Heroes. Nothing beats Heroes! :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted April 30, 2007 Share Posted April 30, 2007 Star Trek just isn't comparable to Heroes... in terms of quality or setting... Only two years since Enterprise finished? Wow, you're right. Almost EXACTLY 2 years... Finished May 13 2005. Well, we'll have the new film - for better or for worse - in 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steveo Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 I don't know how many times I have to say it before you realise it's true. The 'need' people feel for Trek is the leading cause of it's downfall. It's what allowed Enterprise and Voyager to happen, because there was a guarenteed audience of people to lap it up, regardless of quality. Trek needs a long, long absence, like between TOS and TNG, so we can all forget the tragedy and horror that was put onto TV towards the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 The 'need' people feel for Trek is the leading cause of it's downfall. It's what allowed Enterprise and Voyager to happen I liked Enterprise and Voyager. There are many people who consider it their favourite SciFi shows. You can't say Voyager and Enterprise was the downfall of Star Trek just because some people prefered TNG or DS9. Trek needs a long' date=' long absence, like between TOS and TNG, so we can all forget the tragedy and horror that was put onto TV towards the end.[/quote'] While we're at it, we can cancel Heroes right now. I think a nice long break between season 1 and 2 would do the show good. How does a century sound? That way, in 2108 when everyone can fly, read minds and teleport, the Heroes writers can write about normal people with ordinary lives who are being hunted down for their inferiority. Seriously though, by the time people think we'll be ready for new Trek - we'll be making first contact with the vulcans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 Well, I didn't like a lot of things about Voyager (probably because it was the show I watched most critically looking for blunders, that tends to happen with me when I've seen a show allmost 3 times), but after an initial period to get used to the new 'feeling', I really loved Enterprise, the only season of Enterprise that imo was not good (or at least the worst of the lot) was the 3rd season. In general Enterprise was pretty good especially the 4th season after the first few episodes I think, I'm allready beginning to forget, only seen the show once (except for the 1st season which I've seen twice). :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted May 15, 2007 Share Posted May 15, 2007 ..the only season of Enterprise that imo was not good (or at least the worst of the lot) was the 3rd season... That's a real shame, man. I LOVED Enterprise S3. I'm currently in my second time watching it through. different strokes for different folks i guess. As far as this thread goes, I like the idea. I just don't know if a 7-season commitment is really a good idea right now. Not in the current climate of television or the current state of Trek, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 that entire season of fighting a species given future information was well done in special effects but made me angry that they screwed with the Trek universe in such a big way with Roddenberry dead. Essentially they let every Trek show that came later chronologically be in an alternate universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Essentially they let every Trek show that came later chronologically be in an alternate universe. How so? I thought season 3 was great! And i didn't really see how it affected the overall timeline of Star Trek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjnave Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 I figure by the 50th year anniversary of Trek we will have a new series. And im sorry for all the ENT fans (this isnt a slam), but I've really tried to get into the show .. i mean, i WANT to like all things Trek (heck, I even read the books).. but no matter how hard i try i cant get over its mediocrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Essentially they let every Trek show that came later chronologically be in an alternate universe. How so? I thought season 3 was great! And i didn't really see how it affected the overall timeline of Star Trek. millions of extra lives, both on Earth and elsewhere were destroyed. it had to change the timeline in ways we didn't get to see later. is why I said essentially, we didn't see it but it had to have happened. so, either we saw shows that were in Enterprise's future or in a similar future with less deaths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 I still think its would be a disaster bring it back now...I remember when I was 18 years old in basic training when TNG came on TV..since then we have had 7 seasons of TNG, 7 seasons of DS9, 7 seasons of Voyager and 2/3 seasons of Enterprise....thats a total of 22/23 seasons.....which is roughly 550+ episodes...it was bound to happen that the general viewers would get bored of it. For trek to work it would have to appeal to trekkies and non-trekkies and the nature of sci-fi has moved on..trek needs a break...just like dr who did and BSG...now they have come back and there now fantasitic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vystral Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 I still think its would be a disaster bring it back now...I remember when I was 18 years old in basic training when TNG came on TV..since then we have had 7 seasons of TNG, 7 seasons of DS9, 7 seasons of Voyager and 2/3 seasons of Enterprise....thats a total of 22/23 seasons.....which is roughly 550+ episodes...it was bound to happen that the general viewers would get bored of it. For trek to work it would have to appeal to trekkies and non-trekkies and the nature of sci-fi has moved on..trek needs a break...just like dr who did and BSG...now they have come back and there now fantasitic i totally agree. trek does indeed need a break. not to split hairs, but ENT had 4 seasons :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 Well i'm young and impatiant and i want more trek now! I'll settle for season 2 of Heroes though... ::) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megalith Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 have to add ST did have a break of many years between tos and tng. Heroes is way way better than st ever was imo and for st to compete it will need to completely change. Can't see the modern world going for a program that seems to be about travelling about on a spaceship fixing things. 'she canny take no more captain, she's breakin up' lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amnot Borg Posted May 16, 2007 Share Posted May 16, 2007 the modern world isn't so tired of traveling and exploring. it just seems to enjoy exploring what is all around us already just as much as what is out there in space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megalith Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 maybe but if trek was to come back it would have to compete against new BSG and Heroes both of which are set in a nastier place than the 'tree hugging universe' that ST exists in bar a handful of episodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDE Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 I didn't like enterprise. I thought that it was boring. I like voyager right up till the end. The last episode was terrible. DS9 also had a terrible ending. I felt that the only series with a good ending was TNG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjnave Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 I like voyager right up till the end. The last episode was terrible. DS9 also had a terrible ending. I felt that the only series with a good ending was TNG. It sounds like you have a problem finishing ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDE Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 I like voyager right up till the end. The last episode was terrible. DS9 also had a terrible ending. I felt that the only series with a good ending was TNG. It sounds like you have a problem finishing ;) I think a tv show should have a good ending. It leaves you empty. Like with halo 2 it was a terrible ending and it made you want more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebrae Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 Voyager was never good - the end was what it had to be... an unsatisfactory ending to screw over the fans... a lot like Enterprise! The final frak you from Berman to his hateful "fans". Things should end well... Halo 2 was like The Empire Strikes Back - couldn't be more than just a "to be continued!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now