test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Brent Spiner: You'll likely see a rebooted Star Trek: TNG someday

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited April 2012 in Ten Forward
Well........................I guess so, but my next question is simple. If they do a reboot of TNG, then what universe would it be set in? The Prime or JJ's

http://trekmovie.com/2012/03/23/exclusive-brent-spiner-interviewpart-2-talks-bad-tng-episodes-why-nemesis-bombed-jj-trek-franchise-future/

I still want a new show based in the Prime universe, but if they do a reboot of TNG maybe it would be best in the movies new timeline.

What do you guys think?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    The JJ movie universe sucks. All the changes were far fetched and ridiculous.

    And, in addition, when making a show it's better to have more lore behind it. The movie universe basically has nothing, whereas the prime universe has hundreds of episodes, as well as 10 movies to draw on.

    They'd be making a big mistake if they didn't place the show in the prime universe. I would like to see a rebooted TNG, but I hope it's not a straight rip off. Give us Riker as Captain or something. Let's see how things have changed a couple of decades down the road.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Sir-Cedric wrote: »
    Well........................I guess so, but my next question is simple. If they do a reboot of TNG, then what universe would it be set in? The Prime or JJ's

    http://trekmovie.com/2012/03/23/exclusive-brent-spiner-interviewpart-2-talks-bad-tng-episodes-why-nemesis-bombed-jj-trek-franchise-future/

    I still want a new show based in the Prime universe, but if they do a reboot of TNG maybe it would be best in the movies new timeline.

    What do you guys think?

    only thing about JJ movie that is canno is romulus being bown up other then that every thing after is not canno that is why he even got to make that movie

    and if they base in in JJ movie i will not watch it
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    IMO before any reboot happens, then need to make a new show set in the prime verse, and set it right after VOY. That way we can have a few Cameos from the other older shows, and maybe a few of them will stick around to be regulars. But the new show MUST return to exploring and seeking out new life type missions. The other things will come as we go along for the ride, just don't make it heavy on the fighting is all.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Interesting...one and all.

    I suppose they could merge the timelines and say Data never dies.....Or Q could save the Romulus...

    I voyager they sure played with timelines alot........The theater set no matter what, I cant think of any trekkie that wouldnt like to see Picard again, maybe trying to save spock, return the timeline...?

    Fun thought food:cool:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Well any reboot wouldn't use the same actors, but you would get the same characters if that makes since. You would get a recasting of each major role in a new TNG, but with I am sure a new type of look.

    1. Different designed Galaxy Enterprise
    2. New actors in the beloved roles of the crew, (Mind up season one had far more people, before it was scaled back a bit.)
    3. New story;ines - (This is why I figured it would take place in the new timeline vs the old one. This in turn chould open the door to the Prime Universe, as people from it could be moved from it. Events after the Romulan event, could have old cast people being moved into the new timeline, just depends on the storyline being used. )
    4. A revisit of all the Factions within the TNG timeline, now that we have a better idea who they are, maybe better stories can be told with them. (Remember it took time to flesh out the Ferengi to what they are now, can you picture a reboot with them as a main player?)
    5. Maybe they would lose the Q angle as it is now, or maybe not but the Q would get a reworking in any reboot.
    6. Then you have the BORG, what would they look like with any reboot?

    I am not against any reboot as long as it's done right.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    If its a REBOOT it couldnt be set in the "prime verse", thats prety much the nature of a reboot.

    And a reboot couldnt be set in the JJ verse, wich, I agree, sucks, either, since that JJ movie wasnt a reboot since its directly conectet to the "prime verse".... you could even say erased the prime verse.

    I actually dont see a point in a TNG reboot to be honest. They either have to copy the orgininals, wich limits the way the storys and characters can go, or do it the BSG-way and... prety much do nothing but using die original names.... and there they simply could make a new series with entirely new chatacers in the first place.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    DC has 52 Universes. So you know, it's no big deal.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    A TNG set in JJ-verse could still draw from everything pre-JJ-Trek. It still is the same universe, with the change of Nero showing up, Kirk growing up without a father and the Ent-Nil being a Hotrodeprise. But as far as we know there still are Ferengi, there still is a Bajor and Prophets in the wormhole, there still are the Borg. You could just go ahead and explore it all from a fresh new perspective. Maybe JJ-verse-Picard is an even bigger hothead than Kirk instead of the anti-Kirk original-TNG-Picard was. And so on. Maybe Wesley is even a Sparks McGhee!

    Anyways, ST could need a fresh new start on the TV screen. Enterprise (the series) wasn't cancelled for no reason. Season 4 showed some promise, but only to ST nerds, and a hit series has to appeal to a broader audience than that, that's just reality. Get rid of all the preachyness, show badass starships doing badass things and still make it very Star Trek by giving the setting a positive vibe instead of BSG-style (or DS9-style) grimdark.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Did anyone of you ever asked yourself ... what was going on "west" of the Federation?
    We always fly around in the "east - east-north" on the borders of the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians etc. - but noone ever visited the other side of the galaxy.
    Thats what a new show could do. Take the established timeline, refer to events on the other side of the galaxys arm, but stay there and explore the other side of the galaxy.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    keep jjverse for the movies and have a new tv series set right after voyager/nemesis in the primeverse.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    First off TNG is a pure Star Trek Experience it had everything under the sun, the ship is kick ***, the Captain is fearless and not a womanizer most of his career unlike his predecessor. The First Officer has spunk and personality. Data is boss, period. A lot of fans and characters as stated are a lot to live up to. The Next Generation legacy is bigger than the TOS. It spawned my second favorite Star Trek series DS9 and my all time favorite ST of all time Voyager. All under the ST universe time and tech. Plus more than half the villians in the game and lore are ST TNG without this show have the game is gone,

    If they were going to do a redux they are gonna have to bring the old crew back like Rick Berman, Braga, Jeri Taylor and all the other artists and stuff for a redux because they had the TNG mindset and know what the new generation of ST fans like me expect and not a miss mash of garbage JJ did for our parents Trek.

    If you look on TV now you would see only one Star Trek series playing and thats TNG all the other Trek series has gone away on the vine like DS9, TOS, VOY and ENT. TNG is still playing on mulitple networks like BBC and Sy-Fi. What does that tell everyone? by the way fellow STO fans this series has been nominated more than once for Emmys for special effects among other things. The others have not.

    My thoughts to the remaker if there is one,

    Do the original down to earth version of Star Trek TNG and not a remake of the movies, although cool they do not scream the authentic TNG expierence.

    DO NOT Mess with the Ship or the character roles. Like in JJ's production. The Enterprise (TOS-9) looked pitiful and the love story of Spock and Uhura, honestly who thought of that TRIBBLE.

    The director needs to have an eye in the ST game or has actually lived in it. I would sugest either Levar Burton or Roxanne Dawson. Both have directed multiple episodes in Voyager and the Enterprise (NX-O1) series.

    Make the mood slightly darker than the first season and the first couple of episodes. One of the pitfalls of the series early on is the fact its too chipper compared to the inter-fighting and gun slinging predacessor.

    NO NEW bad guys either or other story arcs. Whatever enemy you put as the baddy don't make them some time traveling nut case that exist in a far fetched alternate universe and make sure hes beatable (NO Q) or how they all met, we all know that from "Encounter at Farpoint" If you must include Tasha do it but i strongly disagree if you do. The greatest parts of the series and fans remembers the TNG without her.

    NO ROMULANS. That has been beaten to death many times. May i sugest an updated Borg in 2012 with our special effects tech and 3d it would be kicks ***, then you would have to put in on the IMAX screen.

    All and all stay true to TNG, and not mix it with other series and keep the feel the same. TNG has a certain fell to it thats unique compared to other Sci Fi shows and even other spin offs of the Trek Empire.

    So fans they messed up on the first one lets not have a repeat shall we?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    If they do decide to make a new st tng series or st series set right after voyager/nemesis I think they should do it on the E with the whole cast there but show that they are retiring or moving on to new asssignment etc and have a new cast take over tht alomost looks and acts like the old crew in a way while bring something new that way it will keep the old fans like myself interested while bring in new auidences. And that way the old cast can make speical guest apperances.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    RAJ_2011 wrote:
    keep jjverse for the movies and have a new tv series set right after voyager/nemesis in the primeverse.

    That would defeat the purpose of a TNG "reboot"
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Jake477 wrote:
    TNG is still playing on mulitple networks like BBC and Sy-Fi. What does that tell everyone?

    Not much since network TV is a stodgy medium on the decline. Each series is now available on Netflix Instant, along with TOS and TOS The Animated Series. You can watch any and all Trek you want whenever you want on a variety of different devices with just a couple of clicks.

    I no longer have to care that the BBC keeps airing a rerun of the same episode I've seen 312 times, and can just skip to one I've only seen 20 or so times because they never got rerun as often. The control alone is superior to network TV.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    superchum wrote: »
    That would defeat the purpose of a TNG "reboot"
    Exactly. Also, it was Berman & Co who rode ST into the ground in the first place. Nemesis was awful and is easily the worst of the already weak TNG movies.

    Yes, TNG was boss, but we already have TNG. It is my favourite series and it is 100x better than DS9 and especially the dreck that Voyager was. Voyager had an insanely incompetent Captain and turned the Borg, a formerly unique and really cool villain, into the lame space vampires we have now. But I disgress: TNG was and still is great, but it wouldn't be a reboot if a new TNG would just do it all over again exactly as it was before.

    What makes Trek isn't the Technobabble solution of the week. The essence of Trek is that the future will be awesome. Earth will become a better place through technology and education. Humanity will be truly enlightened and shed off childish religion and other dogmas. That's what a new series has to show to be true to Star Trek in my opinion.

    A fresh new start should go on exploring this setting without falling back to the same old plot devices that never really changed much through TNG and VOY. We don't need more of that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    superchum wrote: »
    That would defeat the purpose of a TNG "reboot"

    Obviously. :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Maruko wrote:
    Did anyone of you ever asked yourself ... what was going on "west" of the Federation?
    We always fly around in the "east - east-north" on the borders of the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians etc. - but noone ever visited the other side of the galaxy.
    Thats what a new show could do. Take the established timeline, refer to events on the other side of the galaxys arm, but stay there and explore the other side of the galaxy.

    Actually Cardassian is in "the west" if you wanna call it that way. The STO star map IS taken from that published star chart wich isnt canon by itsself but based on canon star chars seen on lcars displays ect.

    Jake477 wrote:
    First off TNG is a pure Star Trek Experience it had everything under the sun, the ship is kick ***, the Captain is fearless and not a womanizer most of his career unlike his predecessor. The First Officer has spunk and personality. Data is boss, period. A lot of fans and characters as stated are a lot to live up to. The Next Generation legacy is bigger than the TOS. It spawned my second favorite Star Trek series DS9 and my all time favorite ST of all time Voyager. All under the ST universe time and tech. Plus more than half the villians in the game and lore are ST TNG without this show have the game is gone,

    I know I'm nitpicky here but: the next generation IS the TOS Legacy.
    I cant see them disconectet....

    Although of course TNG is of major importance, and more important then its follow ups (no matter if someone likes those more or not).
    And if you ask the "random person"; most ppl will know Picard and Data as much as Scotty Kirk and Spock, today may be even more people, but I doubt many people know who Archer, Sisko or Odo were...
    Jake477 wrote:
    DO NOT Mess with the Ship or the character roles. Like in JJ's production. The Enterprise (TOS-9) looked pitiful and the love story of Spock and Uhura, honestly who thought of that TRIBBLE.

    The whole movie was TRIBBLE, beside Urbans performance and the Soundtrack there is nothing good I could mention about it...
    The director needs to have an eye in the ST game or has actually lived in it. I would sugest either Levar Burton or Roxanne Dawson. Both have directed multiple episodes in Voyager and the Enterprise (NX-O1) series.

    And here is the problem. You mention LeVar Burton. Do you remember what he said?
    "Let Star Trek die!"

    Back when he said this Fans were prety angry about that. They believed he was just jelous because Star Trek continued without him. I shared that opinion, but now, 1 Abrahams movie later I know EXACTLY what Burton meant:
    Whats coming now is not Star Trek.
    Abrahams movie isnt Star Trek. This game here isnt Star Trek.
    Nothing of that is even close to what Star Trek was about. And I'm not talking about the shiny improoved mankind stuff, although thats part of it too.
    It was the "intelligent" story telling, Star Trek was something for people who like to use their brain (unlike, for example, the Stargate-series, wich I enjoyed for what it was: Brainless fun).
    And the current tendency.... well the Abrahams movie, as an example, was the EXACT OPPOSITE.
    Using the brain while watching that flick just causes serious pain. And thats the way it would go on.

    Marian Sirtis (the actress of Deanna Troy) mentioned something prety similar (although that is connectet to a prety funny story; the wrote that in some fan chat and was wondered that wasnt kept private later...)

    So my personal opinion; right now we do not need any more Star Trek.
    Look at Enterprise; that series didnt fail because of the "bad writing" people like to interpretate into it (imo it was MUCH MUCH better written then Voyager, and Voyager didnt fail because of it)

    Currently people do not watch Sci Fi generally that much any more. That hype is over.
    Star Trek was supposed to show a better future, socially and technologicly.

    Socialy?
    Star trek showed a black woman on the Bridge, it did show the first black series-captain, the first woman commanding a ship ect.
    Today the USA has a black President, and here in germany, slthough you might not recognize at once what that Chancelor is... it actually is a woman.
    Point is: All those tollerance-messages Star Trek had kind of have arrived on those who are willing to listen, the other wont listen anyway.

    Technologicly?
    How do ypou show awsome looking "Future" tech.
    Garantet, we do not have Spaceships and cant beam yet.

    But I was prety impressed when Picard spoke with that little Laptop on his table, seeing the Admrial or whoever and having a conversation, that was Sci fi.... Thats what Skype, Facetime and even Facebook does today.
    Ever earlier, when Kirk had a little device and could speak with his ship that is in orbit or his teammates that was sci fi. Today we call that Mobile Phone.
    Or that awsome bridge with als that LCARS... wow... the monitor and input device as one thing... as screen to touch...
    .... today every second person has an IPhone, IPad ect.

    Its kind of hard to even visually create a "futursitic looking enviroment" today.
    All that I can see to do that is... well... holographic displays ect... wich are not only looking silly but are also, I believe, prety unconfortable to use.
    Bottom line: I dont see what should be there to show that hasnt already been shown.

    Also: One of the great things about Star Trek WAS taking place in the same universe. It WAS awsome to know that Picard is flying arround there and wondering what the Enterprise does during the dominion war; just using the reset-button erases that.

    So, we do not need something with "STar Trek" tagged on it just to have something named "Star Trek".

    If they have a Story to tell, characters to show; ANYTHING of intrest to share, yes they should make a new series.
    But if, and thats the case, not... then they shouldnt throw out TRIBBLE just for the opportunity to name something Star Trek.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Actually Cardassian is in "the west" if you wanna call it that way. The STO star map IS taken from that published star chart wich isnt canon by itsself but based on canon star chars seen on lcars displays ect.

    Seems youre right ... there are different maps around, maybe I remembered anotherone.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Galactic_Quadrant_Star_Trek.png

    Although Qonos seems a bit far away for ENT Enterprise to reach it while taking forever to fly around the rest of the series? (They did go to Qonos in the first episode, or did they...?)

    Hm, so north-west then. ;)

    Abrahams movie isnt Star Trek. This game here isnt Star Trek.

    I sadly have to concur - although I enjoy both regardless.

    If they have a Story to tell, characters to show; ANYTHING of intrest to share, yes they should make a new series.
    But if, and thats the case, not... then they shouldnt throw out TRIBBLE just for the opportunity to name something Star Trek.

    Correct.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Nagorak wrote: »
    The JJ movie universe sucks. All the changes were far fetched and ridiculous.

    And, in addition, when making a show it's better to have more lore behind it. The movie universe basically has nothing, whereas the prime universe has hundreds of episodes, as well as 10 movies to draw on.

    They'd be making a big mistake if they didn't place the show in the prime universe. I would like to see a rebooted TNG, but I hope it's not a straight rip off. Give us Riker as Captain or something. Let's see how things have changed a couple of decades down the road.


    and despite all of this due to the "shiny iTrek" look of the new franchise you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be a reboot and it WILL be set in the JJ universe. :mad:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    pls no reboot!

    give us a new series..
    and romulans, and PLS - NO WESLEY CRUSHER!!!! :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    I say leave it as is. Some things shouldn;t be messed with. We must all learn from recent mistakes *cough* JJ *cough*

    but seriously, there is no need for remakes...how about something NEW. Hell, I could dig a new crew, and a new ship that happens to be during X era, but no need to remake things.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    I say leave it as is. Some things shouldn;t be messed with. We must all learn from recent mistakes *cough* JJ *cough*

    I wish my mistakes could gross almost $400 million worldwide.
    but seriously, there is no need for remakes...how about something NEW. Hell, I could dig a new crew, and a new ship that happens to be during X era, but no need to remake things.

    Remakes are much easier to make and sell in Hollywood. See 21 Jump Street and The Three Stooges for reference.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    A whole galaxy of possibilities and all they can do is re-hash the same stuff. Sigh.

    How about a series about a Klingon warship?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    I am also in the camp of wanting a new Trek series that's not a retread of something they did before. Something Post-TNG and Post-Voyager, preferably comfortably occupying and involving the pre-STO timeline.

    Bridging the gap in a sense.

    It could also be culturally relevant, exploring issues related to terrorism, social upheavals, military conflict that falls short of a sanctioned war, etc. Even the pitfalls of technological advancement.

    It could show that the 'utopian' Federation has been broken by "human" failure, but that the ideals and morality that shaped it aren't completely dead.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Superchum I don't know about the new Stooge movie. I am a BIG 3 Stooges fan, and it just doesn't seen right to me. lol

    See what I mean here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42TtQ6EseVg
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Yeah, it feels off. Then again, the Jump Street movie felt off too. A lot of the remakes go through this Hollywood "translation" that just seems to leave them not living up to what the fans liked about the original stuff (which is the audience draw that helped get the project made in the first place) and still not live up to what the new viewers like.

    It used to happen in every single super hero film, where Hollywood just had to have its touch on the super hero genre. So you get nipples on the bat suit or leather jackets as costumes for the X-Men.

    Then a few movies got made that played it straight from the source and suddenly super hero flicks opened up a bit. (Well not including Michael Bay's Non-Teenage, Alient Not Mutant, Ninja Turtles who may not be ninja nor turtle by the time he does a new interview).

    Be nice to see them take that same slant with remakes and play them closer to the source. But I doubt it.

    The Stooges movie scares me.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    I agree to Spiner. Next Star Trek should be in the future, after Voyager. And hopefully prime timeline.
    bluegeek wrote: »
    I am also in the camp of wanting a new Trek series that's not a retread of something they did before. Something Post-TNG and Post-Voyager, preferably comfortably occupying and involving the pre-STO timeline.

    Bridging the gap in a sense.

    It could also be culturally relevant, exploring issues related to terrorism, social upheavals, military conflict that falls short of a sanctioned war, etc. Even the pitfalls of technological advancement.

    It could show that the 'utopian' Federation has been broken by "human" failure, but that the ideals and morality that shaped it aren't completely dead.

    Hmmyeaaanoo. Touching touchy topics and showing them as the no-nonsense that they are is something Star Trek should stay true too. Like the often mentioned TOS Uhura. At that time - Unthinkable. Female, black, high ranking Officer. But in the show it was a totally normal situation. Nothing to make some wuzz about (excluding one or two episodes like the one with space lincoln, but even there it was just a few seconds).

    Going all out dark and gritty would end in Battlestar Trek. No, do not like the Idea at all. I do like BSG, I watched every episode 2-3 times and have the big collectors box with all seasons and stuff BUT I totally dislike the SciFi has to be dark, gritty drama mentality it spawnd.

    I really hope that a new ST show stays away from that. Maybe some darkness sometimes to spice stuff up, but it should always be an exception.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    Nagorak wrote: »
    The JJ movie universe sucks. All the changes were far fetched and ridiculous.

    And, in addition, when making a show it's better to have more lore behind it. The movie universe basically has nothing, whereas the prime universe has hundreds of episodes, as well as 10 movies to draw on.

    They'd be making a big mistake if they didn't place the show in the prime universe. I would like to see a rebooted TNG, but I hope it's not a straight rip off. Give us Riker as Captain or something. Let's see how things have changed a couple of decades down the road.

    its far more likely that since the 1 dimensional nero incident, the loss of vulcan and a man displaced from his own universe, it seems to me that if TNG got a reboot it would probably be something far more militant that then exploration. like peacekeeping the borders rather then exploring, it may very well end up going the direction of ENT S3 just to chase down a threat to the federation. the prime universe trek was based on respect and it's ideals, the alternate was based on conflict with no real interaction between the crew and all of them are cadets. its entirely likely that the TNG crew would be a younger version as well.

    This i so strongly disagree with that i will do anything to ignore it. but if there is another trek show i would rather it be based of a few years after the ENT-E reman incident as the bassen rift, that way it can completely debunk STO :D.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012

    I say a reboot is sketchy at best (however BSG did an amazing job, they went from campy to dark, stargate tried to do it with SGU but that wasnt as succesful).

    To me Star Trek at its core is about moving forward, socially, technologically, etc-ly. Granted some episode stories have been done to death... how often has the holodeck malfunctioned? Why do a reboot when it'll accomplish little and will always be up for comparison to the original? Push forward, expand your horizons.

    How has star trek progressed socially as both a cultural reflection and a counter-culture?

    The original pilot with Captain Christopher Pike was apparently way ahead of its time (a female 1st officer named Number 1?). Too bold they said, let's change that. Star Trek does hit its bumps behind the scenes, but even if it doesnt grow in leaps and bounds, it still grows. (I will say if you haven't seen Pike fight hand to hand, he blows Kirk's style out of the water)

    TOS: Uhurah (the kiss), Chekov, Sulu, you name em, that was one interracial international bridge.
    TNG: Tasha Yar, a strong female in an important and perhaps aggressive role. I will say that TNG was a bit more hesitant when it came to 'boldy going where no one has gone before'
    DS9: Benjamin Sisko, a man of color in the lead. Dax's past lovers.
    VGR: Janeway, a female in the lead. Sure they tossed in 7o9 for some eye-candy ratings, but hey we're all hew-mun!

    What's next on 'the agenda'? Ask yourself, how comfortable or interested would you be with an asian in the lead? Or maybe someone that isn't heterosexual, a homosexual on the bridge? Hesitant, unsure? Maybe, I'm sure a lot of people felt the same back in the day with Star Trek's other first bigs.

    For myself, I can gladly say I am interested in the challenge and seeing how well or how poorly the mainstream star trek universe will fare with it. If it comes to technology, I'm not quite sure what's next, we got cell phones, we have rail guns, lasers, I find human ability to create the literal out of the fictional to be spectacular.

    As they say in the army, "All the way." Give me something new, expand the universe, boldly go where no one has gone before. Do it without overdoing it, what made star trek's first bigs succesful was that they made sure that the characters in the end, despite their differences or uniqueness, were just people trying to get by... and when you look at another person, its the fact that they're a person too that matters.

    Because if a picture/tv company chose to just rehash, reboot, and play it safe, we'll just end up with TRIBBLE like Enterprise.
    ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2012
    After Linsanity swept the sportsworld, I think an Asian lead wouldn't be super duper shocking to our pop culture. A homosexual captain would be. Then again, with the way the 2012 political sphere is going, I think a woman captain would shock some more today than it did in the late 90s.
Sign In or Register to comment.