FFS, Phil - this is Star Trek for the small screen. For nerds. That can cope with a cerebral episode every now and then!
Your Star does not Trek here.
Yeah but my search copy & paste skills on my fone are as good as my bill paying abilities
Show titles & details announced tomorrow as Beyond opens in most the planet.
4 mates now seen Beyond (special release since they filmed here) all posted same reaction on FB.
1 mates wife who hates Trek burst into tears at the âphotoâ moment.
Downvoted for mentioning Beyond again on my Pure Trek thread.
This is for the highly exciting, world changing, actual Star Trek that is going to be on television, or at least on Netflix.
I am narked that they are making a fourth film, as that will delay the TV series in whatever year they decide to shit it out.
I am also convinced that itâll never work as well as the originals, and never can. The reason those old TOS movies are so fantastic is because even in the absolute fucking worst of them, Star Trek V, we are still having fun with characters weâve already spent years with and the actors just knew their gigs. It is a pleasure to watch them.
I was sick and tired of the fuckers in the last film by time theyâd shat on the Klingons and almost ruined Wrath of Khan.
This thread is for the real deal. Proper brainy Trek where you spend enough time with the characters to get more than catchphrase lip service, long term plans can be hatched and you STILL get to see stuff being blown up.
- Star Trek actually returns.
Geek rant over 
Voted you down Pap. You say a thread for TV series & mention the first run of Movies
BTW follow Trek Core & you would know the new series IS independent in all aspects & ST4 is an irrelevance.
The show is a key commercial element to drive audiences to Net TV and away from cable. The studios are investing huge money. The new series is as important in that regard as are the likes of Jezza & Co or Lucifer to Amazon in UK.
It is a battle for the future worthy of any ST Movie. Which is ironic in many ways.
The Trek Core crew are doing a great Independent PR job
1 Like
Seems like the new show is taking no chances getting this vessel out of Starbase. Theyâre enlisting David Semel, a guy you may not have heard of, but has gotten three consecutive shows into series.
Details here:-
Just as long as they have spock and kirkâŚThe kirk one is classic
5 Likes
Like all great artists, Shatner lost his edge over time. His later stuff is almost listenable.
Star Trek Discovery.
Jan 2017
NC-1301
Prime Time line. No hints at the period. Series will be like a novel not episodic, telling a story in chapters.
Teaser trailer on the Trek Core Web site.
So rest easy ST4 is NOT delaying it!
For non trekkers Prime means the original timeliness not the rebooted Kelvin movie timeline
And here she is. Some rather triangular stylings on that ship. Sheâs a beaut though.
That mock up of Discovery was completed in 3 weeks from scratch, so it will get tidied up when they put more time into it
Meanwhile a snippet from Bryan Fuller perhaps we get to see an exploration series for a change?
Discovery is so intrinsic as a concept to the philosophy of âStar Trek,â and I felt like it was a beautiful way to acknowledge that spirit â and also, what âStar Trekâ has provided for me is an inspiration on where weâre going as a species and a planet.
[âStar Trekâ] has given so much hope for a better world because we need it in the world that weâre living today. We need curiosity and we need exploration and we need to find better versions of ourselves, and we need to discover better versions of ourselves.
This is interesting. It has been long rumoured that the new series will be set between Undiscovered Country and Next Gen. This has been denied by the showrunner Bryan Fuller, although no specific other time period was offered up by way of replacement.
This link contains not only the denial, but also a wee bit of speculation that this could be set in the TOS time, or just before, which Iâm sure would make Phil do a bit of wee.
Major details land.
The new Star Trek TV series is to centre on a female character, the showâs executive producer has revealed.
Bryan Fuller said Star Trek Discovery will feature about seven lead roles, but will focus on a female lieutenant commander instead of the captain.
The show will be set 10 years before the original series featuring Captain Kirk and will bridge the gap between 2005 series Enterprise and the Kirk years.
There will be more aliens than you would usually expect on the crew - it will not be âone person with a bumpy headâ. And there will be robots.
There may be the possibility of seeing younger versions of the characters seen in Kirkâs crew, but not until the second season. There is also the chance to see the character of Spockâs mother, Amanda Grayson, played by Winona Ryder in JJ Abramsâs 2009 big screen adaptation.
The first season will consist of 13 episodes rather than the traditional 20-24 episodes to keep storytelling tight.
Because the programme will be shown on CBSâs on demand platform, it will not be âsubject to broadcast standards and practicesâ usually seen on network TV. Fuller said it would allow a âbroader spectrumâ of content including âslightly more graphic contentâ and profanity.
Some more stuff dropped on Star Trek Discovery.
Love this bit, possibly one of the reasons why Enterprise failed :-
8. Fans should âlower their expectationsâ
Meyer: If you carry on [with such high expectations] not only is there an inordinate pressure on those doing it, but youâre also putting pressure on yourselves that will almost inevitably lead to some disappointment. You canât please everybody and you canât please everybody all of the time. Art is not done by committee. With all due respect, fans do not know what is best for them. People told me I couldnât kill Spock and I said, âItâs not a question of if you kill him, itâs if you kill him well.â If itâs perceived that itâs a clause to work out something in Leonard Nimoyâs contract, people are going to throw things at the screen and theyâll be right to throw them. On the other hand, if it proceeds organically from what is going on in the rest of the story, and it belongs, then people donât question it. But itâs not a democracy. You have the right not to watch. You have the right to turn it off. But it is a symbiotic relationship and all Iâm suggesting is that if you go with open minds and open hearts, you may be rewarded. Whereas if you go with a set of impossible-to-realize expectations, which even you cannot specifically define, then weâre bound to fail.
I think the real reason Trek puttered to an end was because they were too in love with the business model theyâd grown used to. Other TV was moving on.
Beyond the initial airing of a series, networks make most of their money from syndication, selling the show as a whole to networks that can use it to fill months or years of programming. Thatâs why so many US shows do the 22-24 episode per season format.
Star Trek was wedded to that, and while it didnât matter that much in the earlier shows, by the time Enterprise came around the âtoys back in the boxâ at the end of an episode had been done to death. People were already feasting on arcs.
1 Like
Iâve been hyping the new series to Juvenile Unit #2, the one that is named after a Star Trek character. The next generation deserves its own Trek, after all.
She asks me when itâs set, and I happen to know that itâs set ten years before the original series.
So I Google the following:-
âWhat year is TOS setâ.
Before I complete my query, Google is helpfully providing predicted answers.
At the âWhat year isâ point, the top predicted answer, the one that most people end up choosing, is âWhat year is it?â.
What the actual fuck. Who is entering this search term? People emerging from long term comas? Time travellers? Terminators?!!!
So now youâre twisting the Trek thread to talk about Terminators?
Next youâll be harking back to Genesis & why it was the best movieâŚ
Said it before and Iâll say it again.
Star Trek II-IV is the great undiscovered sci-fi trilogy.
EDIT:
Genesys was utter tripe.