I honestly would rather see Annaxar become a full on series. Because there was a way between the Federation and the Klingon empire before TOS, be nice to actually see it first hand.
Renegades, could be interesting. Hell could be the Airwolf Verson of Star Trek. Could be the best of both worlds.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
It is a low badget production show from the "of gods and men" "producers". So, no, its not a tv show for the big screen. And i read the plot, and honestly it seems really crappy and pff for me.
Damn, when i saw the post i imagined something else.. lol.
I honestly would rather see Annaxar become a full on series. Because there was a way between the Federation and the Klingon empire before TOS, be nice to actually see it first hand.
FWIW, the idea of a pre-TOS Fed/Klingon war is actually from the old FASA RPG. AFAIK, there's no reference to it in any TV series - the Battle of Axanar is mentioned, but it's never stated how big the battle was, who Starfleet were fighting, or whether it was part of a larger war. As cool as Axanar looks, I can't help but wonder that it's inconsistent with TOS for Starfleet to have fought a protracted, destructive war so recently and then never mention it.
On one hand, you have the people who don't understand the idea behind ST, and want to go more SW on it, with more pew pew pew and less thinking.
On the other hand, theres the people who have been digging into books, that often tend to ignore continuity even more than the series themselves who want that to translate into the series.
And then the of cause there are the super-hard core ST fans, who are unable to see that for an IP to survive, it needs to adapt and grow and not just be the same old romance.
I personally feel this is the biggest obstacle to any long-time IP.
I've thought a lot about the previous Star Trek series, and I'm curious about their take on it. TOS and TNG were nice utopian visions, but let's be honest, it's incredibly easy to say that torture is wrong and barbaric if every time you need information from an enemy to save the day you have a telepathic alien around. DS9 had a few more tough choices, but I'm not really happy with the answers it provided (there is a reason the devs seem to be Section 31 fanboys), Voyager was extremely inconsistent so I can't say anything about that and Enterprise was a mess.
A true Section 31 series could be amazing. But all the trekkies who view the Trek future as an extreme Libertopia would stroke out and Gene would be spinning in his grave like a high speed turbine.
Nope, the worst people to put in charge of Star Trek are Star Wars fans. Just look at Jar-Jar Abrams.
You mean the man who breathed life into a dying franchise? He did quite well, thanks. And box office proceeds show that...no matter how angry some people sitting in a room with their lifesize Shat and Nimoy cutouts get.
A true Section 31 series could be amazing. But all the trekkies who view the Trek future as an extreme Libertopia would stroke out and Gene would be spinning in his grave like a high speed turbine.
while it would be interesting however it would be too much like a few other series out there, one i can only think of is person of interest, all that crazy hush hush tinfoil nut job storyline the average person doesnt know of.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
while it would be interesting however it would be too much like a few other series out there, one i can only think of is person of interest, all that crazy hush hush tinfoil nut job storyline the average person doesnt know of.
1) That's kinda like saying Star Wars has space ships so we don't need any more space ship shows.
2) Also, not everything involving clandestine intelligence agencies is "tinfoil nutjob". To think it is is naive.
3) I can't even figure out how you turned it into a Person of Interest comparison.
Aesthetically it looks like Abrams Trek.... Edit, okay that's a bit unfair. But it suffers from one of the same problems as Enterprise. It's not a believable prequel.
Just reapeat to yourself what Gene Roddenberry said about the Klingons in TMP* and apply it to the the rest of Star Trek and you'll be fine.
*Which was basically "they always looked like that."
I mean seriously if overhauling the look of the trek universe was good enough for the guys who created it who am I to complain.
We, the team who brought you Star Trek: Of Gods and Men, are proud to announce Star Trek: Renegades, a professionally produced television pilot to be presented for a possible online series
RIF it's a possible ONLINE show, and I saw OGAM, and it's pretty bad even with Tim Russ, ect.
I've thought a lot about the previous Star Trek series, and I'm curious about their take on it. TOS and TNG were nice utopian visions, but let's be honest, it's incredibly easy to say that torture is wrong and barbaric if every time you need information from an enemy to save the day you have a telepathic alien around. DS9 had a few more tough choices, but I'm not really happy with the answers it provided (there is a reason the devs seem to be Section 31 fanboys), Voyager was extremely inconsistent so I can't say anything about that and Enterprise was a mess.
the one redeeming thing about enterprise was Archer coming to terms with creating the standards that would become Starfleet policies
Aesthetically it looks like Abrams Trek.... Edit, okay that's a bit unfair. But it suffers from one of the same problems as Enterprise. It's not a believable prequel.
based on? there is very little in Canon as to what happened pre-kirk. even throwing in enterprise (Axanar is between Archer and Kirk)
FWIW, the idea of a pre-TOS Fed/Klingon war is actually from the old FASA RPG. AFAIK, there's no reference to it in any TV series - the Battle of Axanar is mentioned, but it's never stated how big the battle was, who Starfleet were fighting, or whether it was part of a larger war. As cool as Axanar looks, I can't help but wonder that it's inconsistent with TOS for Starfleet to have fought a protracted, destructive war so recently and then never mention it.
it's clear from the beginning of TOS that there is an uneasy truce between the Klingon Empire and the Federation. the only thing that doesn't make sense about axanar is the statement that Starfleet had no combat experience, when clearly they would have following the Romulan war.
It also make sense the Klingons would attack the Federation after that war, attacking when the federation is weakest
Does not really interest me to be honest, and even if it did make it, Trek fans would most likely reject it like they did Enterprise.
Star Trek needs to stay off the air another 10 years or so before coming back, and then it needs to be a Next Generation type of show with exploring, new civilizations, the odd skirmish... no season long wars, just a feature length 2 part episode now and then or some mini story arcs to spread over 3 or 4 episodes......
1) That's kinda like saying Star Wars has space ships so we don't need any more space ship shows.
2) Also, not everything involving clandestine intelligence agencies is "tinfoil nutjob". To think it is is naive.
3) I can't even figure out how you turned it into a Person of Interest comparison.
1. star wars can have their space ships, but section 31 doesnt HAVE to revolve around a ship or space station.
2. it would have to for a storyline point of view. what really made the difference during ww2 was propaganda and heroic recruitment pitches for the forces and it worked really well. s31 is about secrets and conspiracies as well as making some up themselves for a purpose yet to be revealed, if it isnt about this then why call it section 31?
3. because its the same as section 31, secret groups are fighting each other or controlling the lives of everyone and everyone else doesnt realize it. is your brain in gear today?
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
So I think the best approach for NETWORK TV would be to learn what you can from Gattica and Fringe, hire up a few people from Burn Notice and White Collar, and do a Gary Seven series. Modern day. With Trek aliens in the mix but played as a fairly straight spy show with the occasional big makeup and SFX.
If we're talking cable/Netflix, you might be able to do a more traditional Trek show but I think there you'd be looking more at the kind of 12-14 episode seasons you'd see with HBO/AMC, etc. You might get a season out once every 9 months instead of once a year. And if you're doing this, you'll probably need a few deals with the devil and strange alliances. Like have the Axanar/Free Enterprise guy coproducing with Seth McFarlane or something. I can go either way on Seth as a performer/comedian but he has the ability to make projects happen and I could see him in a behind the camera role. Not even writing or as showrunner but with some script supervision and business input. And from there, I think you'd be looking at trying to get strong writing voices involved.
Like, say, Warren Ellis, Grant Morrison, and Neil Gaiman from comics. I think given the direction of entertainment, you'd want some strong comedy writers because I think modern Trek needs modern comedy both to survive and attract strong actors. You want some folks who do a mix like, say, Tim Minear, Jane Espenson, and some of the Joss Whedon alumni.
I think you'd also be looking at star power. There's a class of actors that did Trek. Acting styles have changed somewhat and this informed things like how the new Doctor Who was structured. I think you probably want a mix of fairly strong, fairly recognizable but not always headlining supporting actors like John Slattery, Gillian Jacobs, Gabrielle Anwar, Enver Gjokaj, Dule Hill... It's a bit hard to quantify it exactly but Trek has tended to attract people who are vets, troopers, people who can act in front of a green screen, do period, do genre, handle odd dialogue, and who have charm but can avoid dominating the ensemble. GOOD actors but they don't all have to be GREAT actors in the "dial it up to 11" intensity sense.
There's a good 20-30 years worth of actors like this who could be tapped. In part because old Trek fell very much into its own pool of performers. In general, I think it's always ideal to these things to get people who have experience with the skillset but maybe not so experienced with space sci-fi so they can bring fresh eyes to the script.
been fallowing both for a while now.. im all excited for renegades.. looks like good stuff, high production value, and great acting. not to mention, it will most likely at the very least become a web series, considering some of the interviews ive heard from tim russes convention panels..
very very excited. more so about renegades than anything sto driven lol...
You mean the man who breathed life into a dying franchise? He did quite well, thanks. And box office proceeds show that...no matter how angry some people sitting in a room with their lifesize Shat and Nimoy cutouts get.
Now now J.J. shouldn't you be getting back to work on filming starwars.
Oh while you're at it, try and make sure you don't let Harrison Ford get injured anymore. :P
(On a side note i'll hold off on judgement and give renegades a fair shot, though i'm not getting my hopes up)
Now now J.J. shouldn't you be getting back to work on filming starwars.
Oh while you're at it, try and make sure you don't let Harrison Ford get injured anymore. :P
(On a side note i'll hold off on judgement and give renegades a fair shot, though i'm not getting my hopes up)
I just get sick of whiny old trekkies crying about JJ-Trek. It was good, it was popular and it was least as "real" as Roddenbury Trek.
I think it's funny when people nitpick nu-Trek...then get all enraged when you do the same to old Trek...trust me, it falls apart just as fast or even faster when put under a microscope.
I've thought a lot about the previous Star Trek series, and I'm curious about their take on it. TOS and TNG were nice utopian visions, but let's be honest, it's incredibly easy to say that torture is wrong and barbaric if every time you need information from an enemy to save the day you have a telepathic alien around.
If I'm understanding your statement correctly, I'm not sure I agree with it. The Undiscovered Country demonstrated that getting information by forced telepathic connection essentially amounts to "mind ****", and it was clear on the characters' faces they understood the horror of what Spock had to do to save the galaxy.
I think it's funny when people nitpick nu-Trek...then get all enraged when you do the same to old Trek...trust me, it falls apart just as fast or even faster when put under a microscope.
Oh, much, much faster. After all, the original Trek was written so that it could be aired in any order at all - continuity wasn't even a thing yet, back in the halcyon days of the late '60s. If you want to look for continuity errors and failures to follow up on technological implications, they're just all over the place.
(For instance, in "By Any Other Name", the Kelvans modified the Enterprise's warp drive so they could travel back to the Andromeda galaxy. When the sensors' capacity was exceeded, the last known velocity was Warp 14. Why didn't Scotty analyze what they'd done and reverse-engineer the technology, thus giving Starfleet an enormous advantage in their ongoing conflicts with the Klingon and Romulan empires? At least STID answered the question: Scotty's transwarp beaming technology was sequestered by Section 31, the only device capable of doing it was destroyed, and the notes were presumably lost when Admiral Marcus was brought down.)
Microscopes are best not applied to Star Trek in any of its forms; the flaws suddenly go from ignorable to glaring.
Comments
Renegades, could be interesting. Hell could be the Airwolf Verson of Star Trek. Could be the best of both worlds.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
Damn, when i saw the post i imagined something else.. lol.
FWIW, the idea of a pre-TOS Fed/Klingon war is actually from the old FASA RPG. AFAIK, there's no reference to it in any TV series - the Battle of Axanar is mentioned, but it's never stated how big the battle was, who Starfleet were fighting, or whether it was part of a larger war. As cool as Axanar looks, I can't help but wonder that it's inconsistent with TOS for Starfleet to have fought a protracted, destructive war so recently and then never mention it.
I personally feel this is the biggest obstacle to any long-time IP.
LOL...so true.
I tried watching one of these fan things once...ONCE.
It was supposedly one of the great ones...so thought I would give it a chance...I made it about 5 minutes in.
I disagree... I still think that it's all 3 groups.
A true Section 31 series could be amazing. But all the trekkies who view the Trek future as an extreme Libertopia would stroke out and Gene would be spinning in his grave like a high speed turbine.
You mean the man who breathed life into a dying franchise? He did quite well, thanks. And box office proceeds show that...no matter how angry some people sitting in a room with their lifesize Shat and Nimoy cutouts get.
Me too. Axanar looks 100x better.
while it would be interesting however it would be too much like a few other series out there, one i can only think of is person of interest, all that crazy hush hush tinfoil nut job storyline the average person doesnt know of.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
1) That's kinda like saying Star Wars has space ships so we don't need any more space ship shows.
2) Also, not everything involving clandestine intelligence agencies is "tinfoil nutjob". To think it is is naive.
3) I can't even figure out how you turned it into a Person of Interest comparison.
Just reapeat to yourself what Gene Roddenberry said about the Klingons in TMP* and apply it to the the rest of Star Trek and you'll be fine.
*Which was basically "they always looked like that."
I mean seriously if overhauling the look of the trek universe was good enough for the guys who created it who am I to complain.
RIF it's a possible ONLINE show, and I saw OGAM, and it's pretty bad even with Tim Russ, ect.
oh, H3LL YES!
the one redeeming thing about enterprise was Archer coming to terms with creating the standards that would become Starfleet policies
based on? there is very little in Canon as to what happened pre-kirk. even throwing in enterprise (Axanar is between Archer and Kirk)
it's clear from the beginning of TOS that there is an uneasy truce between the Klingon Empire and the Federation. the only thing that doesn't make sense about axanar is the statement that Starfleet had no combat experience, when clearly they would have following the Romulan war.
It also make sense the Klingons would attack the Federation after that war, attacking when the federation is weakest
Star Trek needs to stay off the air another 10 years or so before coming back, and then it needs to be a Next Generation type of show with exploring, new civilizations, the odd skirmish... no season long wars, just a feature length 2 part episode now and then or some mini story arcs to spread over 3 or 4 episodes......
For about 200 years later though.
1. star wars can have their space ships, but section 31 doesnt HAVE to revolve around a ship or space station.
2. it would have to for a storyline point of view. what really made the difference during ww2 was propaganda and heroic recruitment pitches for the forces and it worked really well. s31 is about secrets and conspiracies as well as making some up themselves for a purpose yet to be revealed, if it isnt about this then why call it section 31?
3. because its the same as section 31, secret groups are fighting each other or controlling the lives of everyone and everyone else doesnt realize it. is your brain in gear today?
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I don't see that happening.
So I think the best approach for NETWORK TV would be to learn what you can from Gattica and Fringe, hire up a few people from Burn Notice and White Collar, and do a Gary Seven series. Modern day. With Trek aliens in the mix but played as a fairly straight spy show with the occasional big makeup and SFX.
If we're talking cable/Netflix, you might be able to do a more traditional Trek show but I think there you'd be looking more at the kind of 12-14 episode seasons you'd see with HBO/AMC, etc. You might get a season out once every 9 months instead of once a year. And if you're doing this, you'll probably need a few deals with the devil and strange alliances. Like have the Axanar/Free Enterprise guy coproducing with Seth McFarlane or something. I can go either way on Seth as a performer/comedian but he has the ability to make projects happen and I could see him in a behind the camera role. Not even writing or as showrunner but with some script supervision and business input. And from there, I think you'd be looking at trying to get strong writing voices involved.
Like, say, Warren Ellis, Grant Morrison, and Neil Gaiman from comics. I think given the direction of entertainment, you'd want some strong comedy writers because I think modern Trek needs modern comedy both to survive and attract strong actors. You want some folks who do a mix like, say, Tim Minear, Jane Espenson, and some of the Joss Whedon alumni.
I think you'd also be looking at star power. There's a class of actors that did Trek. Acting styles have changed somewhat and this informed things like how the new Doctor Who was structured. I think you probably want a mix of fairly strong, fairly recognizable but not always headlining supporting actors like John Slattery, Gillian Jacobs, Gabrielle Anwar, Enver Gjokaj, Dule Hill... It's a bit hard to quantify it exactly but Trek has tended to attract people who are vets, troopers, people who can act in front of a green screen, do period, do genre, handle odd dialogue, and who have charm but can avoid dominating the ensemble. GOOD actors but they don't all have to be GREAT actors in the "dial it up to 11" intensity sense.
There's a good 20-30 years worth of actors like this who could be tapped. In part because old Trek fell very much into its own pool of performers. In general, I think it's always ideal to these things to get people who have experience with the skillset but maybe not so experienced with space sci-fi so they can bring fresh eyes to the script.
They'd better have enough flight hours or I'm not getting onboard.
yeah im not, renegades over axanar any day..
been fallowing both for a while now.. im all excited for renegades.. looks like good stuff, high production value, and great acting. not to mention, it will most likely at the very least become a web series, considering some of the interviews ive heard from tim russes convention panels..
very very excited. more so about renegades than anything sto driven lol...
system Lord Baal is dead
Now now J.J. shouldn't you be getting back to work on filming starwars.
Oh while you're at it, try and make sure you don't let Harrison Ford get injured anymore. :P
(On a side note i'll hold off on judgement and give renegades a fair shot, though i'm not getting my hopes up)
[/SIGPIC]
I just get sick of whiny old trekkies crying about JJ-Trek. It was good, it was popular and it was least as "real" as Roddenbury Trek.
I think it's funny when people nitpick nu-Trek...then get all enraged when you do the same to old Trek...trust me, it falls apart just as fast or even faster when put under a microscope.
P.S. I wish I was JJ, or at least had his money.
If I'm understanding your statement correctly, I'm not sure I agree with it. The Undiscovered Country demonstrated that getting information by forced telepathic connection essentially amounts to "mind ****", and it was clear on the characters' faces they understood the horror of what Spock had to do to save the galaxy.
(For instance, in "By Any Other Name", the Kelvans modified the Enterprise's warp drive so they could travel back to the Andromeda galaxy. When the sensors' capacity was exceeded, the last known velocity was Warp 14. Why didn't Scotty analyze what they'd done and reverse-engineer the technology, thus giving Starfleet an enormous advantage in their ongoing conflicts with the Klingon and Romulan empires? At least STID answered the question: Scotty's transwarp beaming technology was sequestered by Section 31, the only device capable of doing it was destroyed, and the notes were presumably lost when Admiral Marcus was brought down.)
Microscopes are best not applied to Star Trek in any of its forms; the flaws suddenly go from ignorable to glaring.