• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • TV Shows: Cult, Sci-Fi & Fantasy
New Star Trek Series Coming in January 2017
<<
<
40 of 46
>>
>
blueisthecolour
08-11-2016
Originally Posted by GDK:
“Enterprise is underrated. Yes, even those first two seasons. The third was OK for character development (if not the pantomime main antagonists). The fourth season was great fan service and a taste of greatness that could have been, apart from that execrable final episode.”

Have to disagree with you on Enterprise. I tried to do a 'rewatch' (well, i never actually saw all of the episodes in order the first time through) of the series a few years ago. I really struggled through the first season, to the extent that I could only do one episode a day. Then it got worse with the second season - I gave up a few episodes in and skipped straight to the season three.

Season three is very watchable but it's based on an action based arc which tears up Trek continuity and gets mixed up in a lot of time travel nonsense.

Season four is genuinely decent but (in my opinion) the characters are already past redemption. Archer is the least charismatic captain since Harry Kim was given his pity command.
LuvJamTarts
08-11-2016
Originally Posted by blueisthecolour:
“
Season four is genuinely decent but (in my opinion) the characters are already past redemption. Archer is the least charismatic captain since Harry Kim was given his pity command.”

Would disagree, I thought Season 4 was fairly average and i hated the 3 episode arcs running through a lot of it. I really enjoyed the first 3 seasons of Enterprise.
RebelScum
08-11-2016
Originally Posted by blueisthecolour:
“Season three is very watchable but it's based on an action based arc which tears up Trek continuity and gets mixed up in a lot of time travel nonsense.”

That's just not true at all. It didn't mess with continuity and there's was nothing complex about the time travel in the season. If you want to point the finger at tearing up continuity then Voyager's Dark Frontier is one of the worst offenders.
GDK
09-11-2016
Originally Posted by blueisthecolour:
“Have to disagree with you on Enterprise. I tried to do a 'rewatch' (well, i never actually saw all of the episodes in order the first time through) of the series a few years ago. I really struggled through the first season, to the extent that I could only do one episode a day. Then it got worse with the second season - I gave up a few episodes in and skipped straight to the season three.

Season three is very watchable but it's based on an action based arc which tears up Trek continuity and gets mixed up in a lot of time travel nonsense.

Season four is genuinely decent but (in my opinion) the characters are already past redemption. Archer is the least charismatic captain since Harry Kim was given his pity command.”

The first two seasons lack direction - there's no mission, no purpose, except for the NX01 to wander aimlessly about getting into trouble. Archer himself comes over as "all American bland". Many stories feel like a throwback to the original series, without the originality, vitality and warmth of those characters. Mostly, I didn't like what they'd done to the Vulcans - made them fairly unfriendly towards humans. And the "temporal cold war" was just a cool sounding phrase that didn't really make any sense.

Oh, and I hated that song as the theme music. Still do.

I had a change of heart about Enterprise when I re-watched it last year.

In the first two seasons, despite the problems, there are some very good individual stories there and the characters develop over time (with the exception of Mayweather, who was criminally under-used). They managed to use the Borg and the Romulans without completely wrecking continuity (just). The overtly hostile Vulcans developed and I realised making them unfriendly at the start was a great way to bring in some conflict and explain T'Pau and something of how we got from first contact to the Federation of Kirk's time. The Andorians were introduced - and they weren't just second rate bad guys.

Season three, despite having the stupid Xindi show their hand by beginning with a test of their secret super weapon on Earth at the beginning did serve to give Enterprise purpose and injected some steel and grit into Archer. Some great storylines involving the Andorians and Shran.

Season four had some great stories that served fans and continuity well. It set off in the direction of showing us how the Federation came to be. Explained the two types of Klingon. Showed us the Mirror universe. And another alternative future. It developed the Vulcan story even further towards what we knew from the original series.

Season five... would have been great.
WhoAteMeDinner
09-11-2016
There was a season five.
GDK
09-11-2016
Originally Posted by WhoAteMeDinner:
“There was a season five.”

Well, there wasn't. Maybe you meant these proposed but undeveloped story ideas?
Baz_James
09-11-2016
Originally Posted by WhoAteMeDinner:
“There was a season five.”

Nope. There were episodes broadcast in 5 different years but just the four series.
little-monster
23-11-2016
Michelle Yeoh has been confirmed as the first cast member. No word on who she is playing.
Corwin
23-11-2016
Originally Posted by little-monster:
“Michelle Yeoh has been confirmed as the first cast member. No word on who she is playing.”

No role confirmed but all the articles I just looked at suggest/hope it's the lead role of the Lt Commander.


Then again she could be the Captain, it would be a new dynamic to have a female Captain and a female First Officer.
Baz_James
23-11-2016
Originally Posted by little-monster:
“Michelle Yeoh has been confirmed as the first cast member. No word on who she is playing.”

Then we'd have to differ on the meaning of the word confirmed. It's barely a rumour. It would be turfed out of court as hearsay. It's now six months to supposed air date and not a single cast member has actually been confirmed and not a single shot taken. It's rapidly becoming a laughing stock. No wonder Rodenberry was shot into space. He'd be spinning in his grave otherwise!
Tassium
24-11-2016
It's all very strange.

I imagine that CBS executives when faced with the reality of the concept are getting nervous.
GDK
24-11-2016
It's all "source say", meaning it's not confirmed.

Also "cast as a recurring character", and "a Captain".

So if true at all, she won't be the lead.

A good choice, I think.
CD93
24-11-2016
The source was Nicholas Meyer.
little-monster
24-11-2016
I like Michelle Yeoh. Great actress. She's one of those actresses who doesn't just attach herself to any project. She's decisive in what roles she takes on. This has sparked some interest for me personally that i had previously lost before.
GDK
24-11-2016
Originally Posted by CD93:
“The source was Nicholas Meyer.”

Well, he should know!

But who said it was him?
Ulsterguy
24-11-2016
Originally Posted by Baz_James:
“Then we'd have to differ on the meaning of the word confirmed. It's barely a rumour. It would be turfed out of court as hearsay. It's now six months to supposed air date and not a single cast member has actually been confirmed and not a single shot taken. It's rapidly becoming a laughing stock. No wonder Rodenberry was shot into space. He'd be spinning in his grave otherwise!”

I'll be surprised if ever gets made!
Flash525
24-11-2016
At this point, they'd be better off just releasing a statement saying the show is on hold. There's no way they're going to get it out for their desired date, and quite frankly, it seems a royal mess. The guy who pitched the plot has since stepped down, so anyone who steps up will either have to jump in with an already established plot (which they may not like), or pitch a new one that gets he approval of Paramount/CBS.

They should just take the next five years to establish a new timeline (yes, another reboot), get everything in motion, cast the right people in the right roles, establish what they want to do with a show, and where they want it to go, and then get the project rolling.
RebelScum
24-11-2016
Lol, same old moaners, same old moans. It's like Cause & Effect.
Fizzbin
24-11-2016
Originally Posted by RebelScum:
“Lol, same old moaners, same old moans. It's like Cause & Effect.”

P.... Something starting with P.
Flash525
24-11-2016
Originally Posted by RebelScum:
“Lol, same old moaners, same old moans. It's like Cause & Effect.”

It's an observation, not a moan. Everything we've heard as of late shouts fail, or at least heavily implies that this show is going to fall flat before it gets started.

I have/had no problem with the initial show setting; the only thing I despised was the ship design.
catsitter
24-11-2016
According to Wikipedia, "In 2016 [Michelle] Yeoh was cast as Federation Captain Han Bo of the Shenzhou in the series Star Trek Discovery." So not even on the main ship.
GDK
24-11-2016
Originally Posted by Flash525:
“At this point, they'd be better off just releasing a statement saying the show is on hold. There's no way they're going to get it out for their desired date, and quite frankly, it seems a royal mess. The guy who pitched the plot has since stepped down, so anyone who steps up will either have to jump in with an already established plot (which they may not like), or pitch a new one that gets he approval of Paramount/CBS.

They should just take the next five years to establish a new timeline (yes, another reboot), get everything in motion, cast the right people in the right roles, establish what they want to do with a show, and where they want it to go, and then get the project rolling.”

I think another rebooted timeline would be a disaster and pointless, as it would undermine the continuity and the sense of "future history" aspect of the show that most fans value. It would be wrong to downplay the chances of success for the current intended show just because it isn't taking the direction you happen to favour.

Better off hoping that what they finally produce turns out to be good. I still have high hopes and I'm disappointed by the negativity of some around here.
Baz_James
25-11-2016
Originally Posted by GDK:
“Better off hoping that what they finally produce turns out to be good. I still have high hopes and I'm disappointed by the negativity of some around here.”

I can't help feeling that being disappointed in the negative sum of action by the producers would be more ... er ... productive than worrying about us. We'll be fine. If, as we suspect, it all goes to hell in a handbasket we simply shrug our shoulders, utter a few told-you-sos and move on. We neither need nor want your disapproval or pity. And we certainly won't be better off hoping for something that is effectively unachievable only to be kicked in the teeth at a later date.
GDK
25-11-2016
Originally Posted by Baz_James:
“I can't help feeling that being disappointed in the negative sum of action by the producers would be more ... er ... productive than worrying about us. We'll be fine. If, as we suspect, it all goes to hell in a handbasket we simply shrug our shoulders, utter a few told-you-sos and move on. We neither need nor want your disapproval or pity. And we certainly won't be better off hoping for something that is effectively unachievable only to be kicked in the teeth at a later date.”

That's fine. I don't worry about you. If it makes you feel good to think you'll be saying "I told you so" in a few months time then who am I to rain on your parade? You may even be right. The point is nobody knows for certain right now.

It's not as if you or I can do anything to affect the outcome anyway. I will form my opinion when I've seen it, all else is pointless speculation right now.
Flash525
26-11-2016
Originally Posted by GDK:
“I think another rebooted timeline would be a disaster and pointless, as it would undermine the continuity and the sense of "future history" aspect of the show that most fans value. It would be wrong to downplay the chances of success for the current intended show just because it isn't taking the direction you happen to favour.”

Reboots happen all the time; sometimes for the better, sometimes not so much. I didn't mind the JJ reboots of Trek, nor did I mind the BSG reboot, and I am still holding out hope for a Stargate reboot at some point.

I think Trek, purely for tv purposes would greatly benefit from one. Special effects aren't going to get much better than they are at the moment, and if the powers that be got themselves organised and thought more about pleasing the fans and continuity, than profit, I truly think they could do something wonderful where Trek is concerned.

Trek needs to move with the times if it's to be successful, and having the old lore tied in to any project that's going forward, I feel, holds any new show back; they're somewhat confined with what they can do, certain events must happen, certain aliens need to look a certain way, and certain characters have to end up doing certain things.

With a reboot, they can alter ship designs, alter alien species (like the Klingons in JJ's Trek), alter the history of some or all known characters (if they even care to reference them at all); we can have completely new enemies, or a new story of old enemies. There's so much more then can do if they've got a fresh, clean slate to work from.
<<
<
40 of 46
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map