Personally I love B5 and ST and new BSG and many other SF shows (while still recognising their faults).

You know the current popular trend in TV-land? Where every new show seems to have a long term story arc? B5 was one of the earliest shows to go down that route. and its arc was planned right from the beginning unlike some arc shows which make-it-up-as-they-go-along (e.g. BSG). If you like story arcs, as opposed to pure standalone individual eps (as was the norm in TV up to the 1990s) perhaps you should give B5 another look. B5 is good for the mystery and reveals during the first view and then beautiful on subsequent re-watch when you can really see the subtle foreshadowing and hints of what's to come. Binge-watching also makes the arc much clearer. I love the care and attention to detail of B5. It's a show that rewards paying close attention while you watch.

i'm gonna hit up a few speculative blurbs. imagine it in a star wars style writtennarrative rolling up the screen.
heres my first:

------------------------------------------------------------
SCRIPT 1:

Star date: ????.????? (2430)

In the past 50 years much has changed in the Galaxy....
Whilst consolidating its position the Federation has for the first time in its history begun recruitment of a handful of Romulan officers into starfleet. This is helped by the recently signed alliance between Romulus and Vulcan.
However the U.F.P has lost a dozen or so members without any replenishment and with Cardassia is still in the throes of recovery The Breen have emerged as a superpower in the alpha quadrant during the early 25th century.

Rumours persist that the Breens rapid rise to prominence is being aided by a mysterious force, possibly from outside of the Galaxy. An impromptu 'cold war' has existed between the Federation and the Breen for 2 decades now without any severe military engagements.

one night in 2430 the U.S.S Titan is on a deep space mission just outside of federation space when.............??????????

Not keen on time ship, either. Trans-universal ship? Travelling to parallel universes?

I always wanted an anthology series. 2-3 episode stories, each set with different characters/places/times, for a full series.

Or you could go AHS with it, and have a whole season explore a different time/place/characters than the previous season.

^One story set on Earth/Starfleet Academy following a group of cadets fighting a conspiracy, one set in ancient Kronos about Kahless and his adventures/war (a real Klingon epic), a mirror universe escapade, or a million other things (even follow-ups to stories from any episode of any Trek series that had potential!)

Or COUGH, dare I suggest...multiple Enterprize mini movies/series leading up to the birth of the Federation, since they screwed us out of seasons 5, 6 and 7?

An idea about a fusion of invesigation/crime drama plus Star Trek, with a ship investigating weird crap going on could easily work, and to be honest, I see a network going YES straight away. Which begs the question; are THEY really going to let a series happen? I think it's just PR pacifying BS for fans, to be honest.

Well, I looked at the JMS link. To be honest, I didn't read it all as it got boring and they weren't really explaining much. Reminded me of those video ads that are just hyping their product, endlessly explaining BUT saying nothing, that you sit watching for ten minutes before price plugging you...

He seems to think THIS is what fans want? He really doesn't know fans, does he? Most fans I know want a CONTINUATION of the universe that they love not a sodding bloody reboot. The grand ideas about modernisation and threat, and geting talking about episodes and stuff etc. can be applied to a new series CONTINUATION, after all...a reboot, does anyone "really" think the main cast of Kirk/Spock/Mccoy etc. would ever really be in any real danger? They go on about plot repeats but then suggest a reboot to refresh Trek, which would essentially just paint old stories in an new light...? LOL

They have been talking about a new Star Trek TV series for a couple of years now.
It seems to be just that, all talk and no money.

No genuine sci-fi genre series has been on TV since 2009 (SG Atlantis) the whole Marvel heroes, Twilight vampires nonsense has taken over and killed sci-fi.

And even if they do commission a new Star Trek series (on CBS or CW), it will end up being very under funded like Enterprise was, with loads of episodes taking place on three stage sets, more like a play than a sci-fi epic.

They haver made it clear that any new TV series won't happen until after after the current film series has run its course, and that a new TV series will take place in that universe. Not necessarily set on the Enterprise, probably another ship, but in that universe.

That doesnt necessarily exclude potential interaction with the Prime timeline. Even something like, say, primeline Starfllet somehow learns old Spock is alive in the new timeline and send a ship to rescuse him. The ship becomes stranded in the new timeline, and take it from there. For obvious reasons they're never going to find him. The ship itself could be made up of a mixture of primeline characters and new characters from the new timeline, either set on the "futuristic" primeline ship or on a ship of the time. Thay may want to remain dark for fear of contaminating the timeline with knowledge of future tech, or may get involved, there are a number of possibilities they could go with.

A sort of Star Trek: Sliders?

Not for a full series, sorry, but would be good as a mini-arc over 2-3 episodes.


Now that idea I like. Better do it quick though, before the original Enterprise cast really do grow old.

They can't because the film rights and the tv rights reside with different companies. The trouble with Star Trek TV series is that you with the exception of DS9 it really is a star ship and planet of the week stories - it can get a bit samey after a while. They need to do something different. So what happened after Cochrane's first flight - how did the world go from the post apocalyptic world then to the more wealthy world that Archer lived. What about setting up the first colonies off world. For that matter how about a police procedural set up among early space colonies. A Star Trek series can be set in the same universe without going to the same well of a star ship travelling between the stars.

Sure, but I'm not talking about how things stand now, but rather once the current movie series has ended and the dust settles. Even now, Paramount, Bad Robot and CBS are collaborating to produce prequel comic books, movie tie-in video games, toys and novelizations. If the relationship continues to be productive there is every chance a business case will be made to expand the collaboration to a future TV series. As long as they all get their piece of the pie.

enterprise was under-funded? well that explains a lot (albeit I didn't think it was as bad as most people made out).

why on earth was it under-funded? circa 2001: considering the popular DS9 & VOY had only just ended and they were still making TNG movies (Nemesis) I would have thought ST was at the height of popularity. I'm surprised they lacked funds?

I don't recall the makers (principally Berman and Braga, then later Coto) complaining too much about under-funding. Compared to prime network shows, maybe, but it was still an expensive show. They got around a lot of cost concerns by having multi-part stories so the costs of set construction were born by 3 eps rather than 1. Most TV shows have pretty tightly controlled funding. There's always "more we could have done if we had more money".

There's a lot of great background stuff in the extras on the Enterprise DVDs/Blu Rays.

I recently re-watched all 4 seasons and liked them a lot more than the first time around (except for the Xindi, who still take first prize as the most stupid Star Trek villains ever. ).

out of interest which show had the highest budget. wouldn't surprise me if it was TNG.

I know the original series had a shocking budget apparently- even by 1960s standards.


disagree there- I liked the xindi personally. well I loved the aquatics particularly. I liked the idea of a race which was marine-like. I liked the insectoids as well. thought that was really cool. I like it when they push the boat out imaginatively with crazy looking species- rather than the standard ridges on forehead cop-out.

i'd say the ferengi were (before quark made them funny in DS9). no surprise TNG ditched them so early on.

TNG's per episode budget was $1m from the 1st through to the 7th season, something which Rick Berman is on record as saying he was happy with.

I don't know what the budgets were on the other shows. I suspect DS9 would've been far more expensive due to the station sets which all had to be built from new as the first season crossed with TNG's final season so its sets couldn't initially be reused.

If the following is to be believed then it may be good news for not just Star Wars fans but also for Star Trek and space sci-fi in general. Hollywood loves to jump on bandwagons, if a show of a particular genre does well, it increases the likelihood of studios taking chances with other shows of that genre.

Yeah, quite right there. Though to be fair, no-one back then had any idea of SFX costs in a space going TV show because it had never been done before. Roddenberry designed the show with ideas of how to keep those costs down e.g. The ships itself never lands and the idea of the transporter.

I've no objection to the look of the various Xindi species. They were actually very good and a break away from the standard "bumps on the faces" alien look.

I know the writers did it for the obvious parallels with 9/11 (maybe not consciously) and to create dramatic impetus for the show but, to have a major new threat species test the prototype of a deadly, planet destroying weapon on your enemy's home world, so revealing the existence of the weapon and themselves, is beyond stupid. If you think about for a moment you realise that all the Xindi had to do was to test the prototype on some distant world, well away from Earth, take a bit longer to perfect the full weapon and then deploy it to destroy Earth.

The writers needed to find a more convincing way of introducing the threat which would drive the whole of series 3 and develop Archer's character.

TNG didn't ditch the Ferengi, by the way, but they did not become the major new threat species that was originally intended, And they removed the strange, monkey-like body language after their first appearance. They continued to appear and became truly comic in DS9.

I am watching Enterprise on Pick TV now, and it still looks good ten years on.
The reason I suspect that it was underfunded is that several of the episodes I have watched recently were basically all set on the ship, making it seem more like a stage play than a sci-fi epic. UPN was the cable channel that made it and did not have much cash to spend on the series.

If they do ever greenlight a new series, a continuation of Enterprise storyline would not be a bad idea, with more funding form a big network like CBS in conjunction with Paramount Pictures.

@ GDK>> I know they didn't totally ditch them but they drastically limited them. that's what I meant to say really.



@whoatemedinner >> that begs the question why didn't CBS or the usual big networks pick up Enterprise?? would have been nice to have seen what ENT could have achieved with more funding and a little more patience. there reason why I say more patience is because it was cancelled when it was really hotting up. thought season 4 of ENT was very good personally.

Paramount was using Enterprise as the basis for UPN to be the so-called "fourth network", after ABC, CBS and NBC.

I think most fans would say season 4 was the best. It certainly started to deliver the kind of stories that the fans wanted. That was when Manny Coto took over from Rick Berman and Brannon Braga.

I agree with that, however I would also say the earlier seasons are far better than most fans remember or give credit for.

I used to blame Braga for the perceived faults in Enterprise, but, having re-watched it recently, and seen the candid interviews with him and others in the extras on the discs, I have a new respect for what he and Berman were trying to achieve, and, mostly, succeeding. Certain things, such as the future "war" were imposed by the studios.

In fact, I now think the worst "sin" they committed was choosing that god-awful theme song. (It's not that it's an awful song, it's perfectly decent in its own way, but it's completely wrong for a Star Trek show).

I was OK with it for the title sequence but my favourite hatred is the immediate drum-bash (whatever it's called but I know it's not "roll") right at the start of the closing credits which half the time was entirely inappropriate for the way the episode just ended. Either have a choice of 'sombre' or 'triumphant' (and then pick the right one) or have something that doesn't kill the mood! It's almost as bad as having those competitions wedged in there...

THAT WAS TERRIBLE. I think the show got off to a downer just with that intro song.

its just the opposite of what a star trek or generic sci-fi show should have as music. so out of place.

"Triumphant"
if I am interpreting what u mean by that phrase correctly that's one thing I always loved with TNG. it was riddled with upbeat scores. usually to start and finish episodes. often you'd hear picard say engage right on queue as well.
rob jones produced the best for me and then they stupidly ditched him. Dennis McCarthy had some good ones too. but it certainly had its share of sombre tones when the mood dictated as such.

I think you meant Ron Jones. There's a very good collection of his TNG music available on a multi-CD set: "The Ron Jones Project".

Generally speaking all the TNG composers weren't allowed to be too expressive or emotional. IIRC Ron Jones eventually moved on because Berman kept wanting him to dial back the emotional content. I think TNG music suffered because the composers were limited in what they were allowed to create.

Perhaps it's just nostalgia but the TV Star Trek music I love most is from the original series. Bombastic at times, emotional? Certainly! And often uplifting and upbeat.

And for the movies - it's got to be Jerry Goldsmith - especially the Motion Picture. It's a pity that the poorer ST movies usually had his music. The music is great though!

LOL- rob jones used to be a footballer. yeah I meant ron jones.

yeah I like a lot of incidental music from the original series.

I love the motion pictures score- which basically became TNGs intro theme. I loved the wrath of khans theme tune as well.

If they do make another Trek series it's bound to be in the style of Abrams rather than Roddenberry. Lots of good looking people, action, explosions, sex, token references to trek past. I'm already mentally preparing for that so I can just sigh rather than descend into nerd-rage.

Personally though I think that the tv climate is now perfect for another DS9 style show. Lots of slow story telling with well developed characters. The industry cares far less about about having 'stand alone' episodes or syndication than it did 20 years ago; everything now is about prestige (awards) and being able to sell to foreign markets. You would think that a well written trek series would be gold to them.

The movies are generally heavier on action and explosions etc than their TV shows, principlay to satisfy the medium. It wouldn't be financially sustainable for a series to maintain those levels of costs. Any future series would probably see a balance between action and character based drama. Anyway, it's not like the Original Series didn't have its share of good looking people, sex and action


Well DS9 had its share of good looking people and, alongside the storytelling and well developed characters, was the most action packed, explosive, and FX heavy of the lot of them (even more than some of the movies). There's no reason why a new series could also have both aspects, just like DS9 did.