Looks like a quality project. Two things I have noticed about other fan done movies that I will challenge you on. 1) Good acting. Some of the things I have seen have been a little sad in this area. 2) Sound. When you watch any of the series, they have obviously managed to get rid of that open room echo. I am not sure how it is done, it seems like it might be a voice-over in a sound-deadened room or something.
Looks like a quality project. Two things I have noticed about other fan done movies that I will challenge you on. 1) Good acting. Some of the things I have seen have been a little sad in this area. 2) Sound. When you watch any of the series, they have obviously managed to get rid of that open room echo. I am not sure how it is done, it seems like it might be a voice-over in a sound-deadened room or something.
I think it's due to the directionality/range of the boom mic. I think a lot of fan productions just use the mic on the camera, or something else more omni-directional.
Agreed on both points though. Two of the bigger bothers of smaller projects like this, although everything's shaping up great for this project so far.
Sound is what often kills fan productions for me, that and poor acting, but even productions which have decent acting and poor sound I have a problem enjoying.
Your digital sets are spot on, so I have no doubts the interiors and compositing will be good enough to dispel any fears relating to visual quality
Looks like a quality project. Two things I have noticed about other fan done movies that I will challenge you on. 1) Good acting. Some of the things I have seen have been a little sad in this area. 2) Sound. When you watch any of the series, they have obviously managed to get rid of that open room echo. I am not sure how it is done, it seems like it might be a voice-over in a sound-deadened room or something.
Amazing work so far.
Thanks! I accept that challenge gladly! With the hundreds and hundreds (literally) of hours I've put into this so far, I'm definitely not going to skimp on acting and sound. I spent a lot of time looking for people that I thought would be right for the roles and I feel very strongly that they'll do a great job. First and foremost, I'm a writer/director, and this is my film. It's not just a fun fan project (though it is that too!).
In regards to sound, I'm not entirely sure what you mean. There was some echo in this one, but that's because I didn't have anyone around that day to help me with sound, so I had to place the shotgun mic a set distance away from me and leave it there. No worries, though. When we actually shoot I will definitely have good boom operators
Sound is what often kills fan productions for me, that and poor acting, but even productions which have decent acting and poor sound I have a problem enjoying.
Your digital sets are spot on, so I have no doubts the interiors and compositing will be good enough to dispel any fears relating to visual quality
I think a lot of the problem is that many fan productions often get one or a few parts just right, but don't get them all right. That's what I'm hoping to achieve. I've seen a lot of fan films and I definitely know what you all are talking about and am definitely going to do my best to avoid those issues
Personally, I love fan productions. Groups of fans who are passionate about the source material coming together to make films. What could be better? They're better than the huge budget, huge effects and lackluster stories/scripts that you get a lot of the time from Hollywood these days, in my opinion. My biggest problem with episodic fan films is the amount of time it takes to get the next episode out. But, that's what you get when your cast and crew consists of all unpaid volunteers and you have to find money and time to do everything. One thing I like about the feature length movie approach is that we don't have to worry about waiting for the next episode.
Audio, acting and scenic lighting&camerawork of the green screen footage (e.g., forgetting to add green markers so you can move the camera and match the virtual content later on while having the virtual and real content lit in a similar way).
Three traditional tripping hazards for fan productions.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but respect and admiration for fan productions, but I find it often hard to enjoy them because of the problems discussed.
Personally, I love fan productions. Groups of fans who are passionate about the source material coming together to make films. What could be better? They're better than the huge budget, huge effects and lackluster stories/scripts that you get a lot of the time from Hollywood these days, in my opinion. My biggest problem with episodic fan films is the amount of time it takes to get the next episode out. But, that's what you get when your cast and crew consists of all unpaid volunteers and you have to find money and time to do everything. One thing I like about the feature length movie approach is that we don't have to worry about waiting for the next episode.
Budget (not even Big Budget) Studio work often puts out much better acting and script writing than Fan Films and Series.
Even Ranking Enterprise's acting as the lowest, it's still far more natural than every Fan Film and Series out for Trek. The biggest problem in this area is chemistry between actors and actors with genuine skill and talent. Unfortunately many of these fan productions either employ Friends Fans or who ever they can get.
Star Trek: Phoenix was perhaps the BEST fan film ever to go out. Sure, the short Captain wasn't done well in cinematography and the story pacing needed some work but it had all the things you were talking about. Creativity in the story and a unique take on the universe. Still the bit off more than they could chew and haven't put out another episode in a couple of years.
Frankly as a professional Producer, I hate Rick Berman.
But he was a professional. He had an eye for acting skill even though everything he did completely lacked in originality but the job he did with Trek was professional, the total vision of the product, acting, videography,story telling and set work are elements that keep us in the story.
We have the technology to do bigger and better in the Free Lance as 1966 Trek.
But we still don't have Good Free Lance Producers yet.
Apparently that takes a lot of experience.
Budget (not even Big Budget) Studio work often puts out much better acting and script writing than Fan Films and Series.
Even Ranking Enterprise's acting as the lowest, it's still far more natural than every Fan Film and Series out for Trek. The biggest problem in this area is chemistry between actors and actors with genuine skill and talent. Unfortunately many of these fan productions either employ Friends Fans or who ever they can get.
Star Trek: Phoenix was perhaps the BEST fan film ever to go out. Sure, the short Captain wasn't done well in cinematography and the story pacing needed some work but it had all the things you were talking about. Creativity in the story and a unique take on the universe. Still the bit off more than they could chew and haven't put out another episode in a couple of years.
Frankly as a professional Producer, I hate Rick Berman.
But he was a professional. He had an eye for acting skill even though everything he did completely lacked in originality but the job he did with Trek was professional, the total vision of the product, acting, videography,story telling and set work are elements that keep us in the story.
We have the technology to do bigger and better in the Free Lance as 1966 Trek.
But we still don't have Good Free Lance Producers yet.
Apparently that takes a lot of experience.
I never said the acting was that great in fan films, I just said I like them. In fact, sometimes the bad acting makes them all that much more enjoyable to me. I watch them and think, "that could be me." I figure they're people having fun and making something that they love, which makes it fun for me. But, I'm also one of those people that doesn't judge video games by their graphics, so maybe my eye for what is "enjoyable" is a little suspect.
I never really had a problem with Rick Berman, though I did think season 3 of Enterprise was their weakest season (though, it does have some gems) and I was glad when Manny Coto took over and took the series back to the episodic format that I feel Star Trek TV shows should always stick to. (Gene Roddenberry cautioned Berman against continuing stories) Plus, I absolutely loathe the series finale, which he helped write.
Rick was no visionary...He kept Trek afloat.
Both he and the fan films haven't been able to see past the original format.
-Starship
-Star: Captain
-Crew of 7 (featuring diversity)
-Mission: Encounter the unknown
We've had 47 years of the same formula and new movies just rehashed the good ole' days.
in 2000 Rick failed to see TV was changing. Neilson ratings weren't telling the whole story. Shows that endured were dropping episodic formulas. 24, Alias, West Wing, ER, CSI since 2000, Law& Order since 1999. Rick saw this and bogged down Enterprise with a story no one cared about that couldn't possibly draw in new viewers. He wanted bland and cheesy background music and when his fan base began to turn away he snubs them.
It's a new world.
It's You Tube, Netflix, and instant feedback.
I see fan films take very similar direction.
It's amazing Phase two has lasted this long but it was a concerted effort.
This is all Rick and the Typical fan sees too.
Trek is more than this. Star Trek IS X-men, Star Trek IS, Doctor Who, Stargate, Heroes, 24, Agents of Shield.
The point is Trek can do anything. Yet we keep coming back to ships with push button lights, foreheads of the week and alien illusions that look like a farms in Missouri.
-I would completely Reboot Star Trek. Shove canon out the door. It's been wrecked beyond recognition.
-Focus on 2 or 3 people (preferably male and female)
-Use Drama, Survival and personal impact on those characters more often. (something you can't do in Star Fleet) Therefore more suspense.
-Employ more Grand Environments
-Step back from the human centric people and places all the time
Think, Mass Effect, Alias, 24 and X-Men in the Trek World.
It seems like taking away what Trek fans love but Trek fans don't realize people in general don't get off on space, technobable and foreheads. There has to be something more personal and impacting.
I CHALLENGE fanfilm makers to do this and I assure you, you will attract Fan, Studio and Public awareness.
You got to shake it up.
This is all Rick and the Typical fan sees too.
Trek is more than this. Star Trek IS X-men, Star Trek IS, Doctor Who, Stargate, Heroes, 24, Agents of Shield.
The point is Trek can do anything. Yet we keep coming back to ships with push button lights, foreheads of the week and alien illusions that look like a farms in Missouri.
-I would completely Reboot Star Trek. Shove canon out the door. It's been wrecked beyond recognition.
-Focus on 2 or 3 people (preferably male and female)
-Use Drama, Survival and personal impact on those characters more often. (something you can't do in Star Fleet) Therefore more suspense.
-Employ more Grand Environments
-Step back from the human centric people and places all the time
Think, Mass Effect, Alias, 24 and X-Men in the Trek World.
It seems like taking away what Trek fans love but Trek fans don't realize people in general don't get off on space, technobable and foreheads. There has to be something more personal and impacting.
I CHALLENGE fanfilm makers to do this and I assure you, you will attract Fan, Studio and Public awareness.
You got to shake it up.
What you've described isn't Star Trek. What's the point? Just make a new show and call it something else. There's nothing stopping you, especially since you seem to have so many ideas. Write a script and sell it to a studio. In the meantime, if ya really hate Trek so much, you don't have to watch it.
Literally, "trek" is an intransitive verb that means: to go on a long and often difficult journey. (at least, that's the definition that was used when they created the show) So, the name "Star Trek" literally means "Star Journey."
However, in a broader sense, Star Trek is 47 years of history. It's a phenomenon that grabbed parts of the world and has thrilled them by providing stories in a certain format. However, it's not just shows and movies. It's books, comics, games, merchandise, fandom, conventions. (the list goes on) The reason people stick to the original format of Star Trek is because that's what Star Trek is. It's a group of men and women going forth in starships on a journey through the stars. (except DS9, which kind of broke the tradition) They face trials and tribulations.
Like Tommy said, what you suggest isn't Star Trek in the sense of what Star Trek has been for 47 years. You can do a show like that, but don't expect people to enjoy it if you put "Star Trek" in the title because it's not Star Trek. I'd watch it, but it wouldn't be Star Trek. It would be like doing Star Wars and saying, "Well, we're not going to have Jedi and Sith." You could call it Star Wars, but it wouldn't be Star Wars and people wouldn't accept it.
Literally, "trek" is an intransitive verb that means: to go on a long and often difficult journey. (at least, that's the definition that was used when they created the show) So, the name "Star Trek" literally means "Star Journey."
However, in a broader sense, Star Trek is 47 years of history. It's a phenomenon that grabbed parts of the world and has thrilled them by providing stories in a certain format. However, it's not just shows and movies. It's books, comics, games, merchandise, fandom, conventions. (the list goes on) The reason people stick to the original format of Star Trek is because that's what Star Trek is. It's a group of men and women going forth in starships on a journey through the stars. (except DS9, which kind of broke the tradition) They face trials and tribulations.
Like Tommy said, what you suggest isn't Star Trek in the sense of what Star Trek has been for 47 years. You can do a show like that, but don't expect people to enjoy it if you put "Star Trek" in the title because it's not Star Trek. I'd watch it, but it wouldn't be Star Trek. It would be like doing Star Wars and saying, "Well, we're not going to have Jedi and Sith." You could call it Star Wars, but it wouldn't be Star Wars and people wouldn't accept it.
That's exactly it. What Saquist described put me in mind of Battlestar Galactica in some ways, which is probably farther from Star Trek than Star Wars is. You can reboot things and start anew - personally I'd love to reboot TMNT, I have so many ideas how to do that - but none of them involve changing it to the point where the only thing it has in common with the former TMNT is four mutant turtles and a name.
Literally, "trek" is an intransitive verb that means: to go on a long and often difficult journey. (at least, that's the definition that was used when they created the show) So, the name "Star Trek" literally means "Star Journey."
However, in a broader sense, Star Trek is 47 years of history. It's a phenomenon that grabbed parts of the world and has thrilled them by providing stories in a certain format. However, it's not just shows and movies. It's books, comics, games, merchandise, fandom, conventions. (the list goes on) The reason people stick to the original format of Star Trek is because that's what Star Trek is. It's a group of men and women going forth in starships on a journey through the stars. (except DS9, which kind of broke the tradition) They face trials and tribulations.
Like Tommy said, what you suggest isn't Star Trek in the sense of what Star Trek has been for 47 years. You can do a show like that, but don't expect people to enjoy it if you put "Star Trek" in the title because it's not Star Trek. I'd watch it, but it wouldn't be Star Trek. It would be like doing Star Wars and saying, "Well, we're not going to have Jedi and Sith." You could call it Star Wars, but it wouldn't be Star Wars and people wouldn't accept it.
"Find Success in a Stagnant Industry"~ Elon Musk of Space X & Pay Pal
-47 Years of Star Trek has failed in the rehash cycle.
DS9 broke your rules of "Trek". In art: Rules are made to be broken.
That's where we think differently
To me Star Wars & Star Trek are universes not a formula.
I know I'm in Star Wars because there is the FORCE. No other universe has it. It's a fantasy.
Star Trek IS our world. In that Universe we can go anywhere and do anything. There is unlimited potential.
Um, you are aware that there's TWO reboots of TMNT going on right now, right? The very enjoyable Nick show and the upcoming live action movie.
Oh yeah. I was simply saying that if it were up to me to reboot TMNT, I have some ideas that I find interesting on how to do it that would change it a lot, but it would still very much be classic, wonderful TMNT. I just get tired of this idea that in order to update or reboot something, you have to throw out all of the old.
"Find Success in a Stagnant Industry"~ Elon Musk of Space X & Pay Pal
-47 Years of Star Trek has failed in the rehash cycle.
DS9 broke your rules of "Trek". In art: Rules are made to be broken.
That's where we think differently
To me Star Wars & Star Trek are universes not a formula.
I know I'm in Star Wars because there is the FORCE. No other universe has it. It's a fantasy.
Star Trek IS our world. In that Universe we can go anywhere and do anything. There is unlimited potential.
DS9 broke the rules but it was still very definitely Star Trek. It had the ensemble cast with the main star being the captain, really the only rule that it broke was that it was on a space station instead of a ship. My issue with what you said was that it seems like you literally want to reset everything on Star Trek, keeping only the names. That just seems pointless to me, because at that point it's not Star Trek anymore.
Oh yeah. I was simply saying that if it were up to me to reboot TMNT, I have some ideas that I find interesting on how to do it that would change it a lot, but it would still very much be classic, wonderful TMNT. I just get tired of this idea that in order to update or reboot something, you have to throw out all of the old.
DS9 broke the rules but it was still very definitely Star Trek. It had the ensemble cast with the main star being the captain, really the only rule that it broke was that it was on a space station instead of a ship. My issue with what you said was that it seems like you literally want to reset everything on Star Trek, keeping only the names. That just seems pointless to me, because at that point it's not Star Trek anymore.
I'm not quite understanding.
Is it the naval ranking system that makes it Star Trek?
Are we idolizing the position of Captain?
Deep Space 9 certainly wasn't Trek-ing or exploring.
Everyone likes an ensemble but why is that ONLY Trek? NCIS, ER, Grey's Anatomy and Alias had that.
Why do you accept DS9 as "Trek"?
But exploring other parts of the same universe is not Trek?
DS9 threw out the starship aspect (for a while), but it kept the western tropes, instead of a wagon train to the stars it was the western town, you had the saloon, the sheriff, the school marm, the "big city" doctor, etc... and some of the classic Trek trope parts (the science officer, the captain, the chief engineer). If you look at the original Star Trek it feels very frontier-y and western, and DS9 follows in that mold enough that it could break traditions if it wanted to.
The kicker for this isn't just knowing what the rules are, but why they're there and the result they give-- you decide which results are what you want from a new Trek, you can figure out what rules to change. Specifics aren't important (and that's where Trek fell into trouble, it all became carbon copies of itself). Look at Legend of Korra, everything on that show is almost the opposite of The Last Airbender but it still feels "right" because they knew what the end result they wanted, they knew it wasn't XYZ that made it work, it's what XYZ produced.
A big part of Star Trek is that frontier, being at the edge of our knowledge and looking out into the frontier. Trek should make you feel good about people and what they can do and inspire you to help others and be a force for positive change in the world. And remember that the new principle for humanity in Trek "how can I help?" Once they realized what they could do together with the tools they had, they wiped out war and hunger in 50 years, they looked for solutions that could fix problems for the most people, the way to get food into people's mouths, to warm people when they're cold, to treat them when they're sick, and that created a ripple effect in their culture... by the time of TOS, there probably isn't a single person on the Enterprise whose family wasn't helped out in some way by a total stranger, and they carry that forward in order to help the next person, knowing that if they ever need it, someone else will get their back. And they go into the universe with that mentality. And Starfleet, well, they have the best resources to do that.
The main thing that DS9 definitely got right was to make the universe a lot bigger than a regular episodic show could.
Several layers of events with short, medium and long duration, not all of which were related to the show's story but some of which simply enriched the universe around it (e.g., the progress reports on how the war was progressing, with things like the fall of Betazed thrown in to tie it and the other shows together).
Different set-ups have different benefits. If you keep moving, the locations will determine your story (we're at a planet where X is happening), if you're in one place, the characters can motivate storylines. It's the difference between "a hero's journey" and "a stranger comes to town." You still have to do them WELL, though.
DS9 threw out the starship aspect (for a while), but it kept the western tropes, instead of a wagon train to the stars it was the western town, you had the saloon, the sheriff, the school marm, the "big city" doctor, etc... and some of the classic Trek trope parts (the science officer, the captain, the chief engineer). If you look at the original Star Trek it feels very frontier-y and western, and DS9 follows in that mold enough that it could break traditions if it wanted to.
The kicker for this isn't just knowing what the rules are, but why they're there and the result they give-- you decide which results are what you want from a new Trek, you can figure out what rules to change. Specifics aren't important (and that's where Trek fell into trouble, it all became carbon copies of itself). Look at Legend of Korra, everything on that show is almost the opposite of The Last Airbender but it still feels "right" because they knew what the end result they wanted, they knew it wasn't XYZ that made it work, it's what XYZ produced.
A big part of Star Trek is that frontier, being at the edge of our knowledge and looking out into the frontier. Trek should make you feel good about people and what they can do and inspire you to help others and be a force for positive change in the world. And remember that the new principle for humanity in Trek "how can I help?" Once they realized what they could do together with the tools they had, they wiped out war and hunger in 50 years, they looked for solutions that could fix problems for the most people, the way to get food into people's mouths, to warm people when they're cold, to treat them when they're sick, and that created a ripple effect in their culture... by the time of TOS, there probably isn't a single person on the Enterprise whose family wasn't helped out in some way by a total stranger, and they carry that forward in order to help the next person, knowing that if they ever need it, someone else will get their back. And they go into the universe with that mentality. And Starfleet, well, they have the best resources to do that.
That's interesting because the "Wagon Train to the Stars" bit was actually a complete lie just to pitch his idea past the moguls. Roddenberry's idea of Utopia actually had nothing to do with the Western theme. It was often NBC who wanted to push those settings. To this Effect Gene Made sure in ST:TMP and TNG that Trek got away from props that looked like guns and he seemed to hate uniforms and preferred unitards and jumpsuits. What about a Captain's couch instead of Chair?
That Frontier is there in every situation.
DS9 could easily fit the form of political show. Emissaries Founders, Vedeks, Ambassadors, Chancellors and Kai's fighting over a precious resource called a worm hole. Sure I see the Western aspect but TNG was far from a Western and so was Voyager. ENT seemed more like a fish out of water story. So many big boys on the block than equal footing for a shoot out at noon.
(Personally I find The Legend of Korra to be a shadow of The Last Air Bender. It's turning into the "Love Triangle" But yes I see this point well. Different but the same universe. That is what I agree with. There are other interesting things aside from the Avatar, the spirits and what of the stories of those that had equally interesting lives and greatness but had nothing to do with the Avatar.
That's the never ending story every literary creation can evolve into.
-Doctor Who and Torchwood
-TNG and DS9
-Tiny Toons Adventures and Pinky and the Brain
-All in the Family and the Jefferson's
-Buffy and Angel
Cheers and Fraiser
I hope fans can eventually see this potential and accept it.
Maybe not today but one day.
That's exactly it. What Saquist described put me in mind of Battlestar Galactica in some ways, which is probably farther from Star Trek than Star Wars is. You can reboot things and start anew - personally I'd love to reboot TMNT, I have so many ideas how to do that - but none of them involve changing it to the point where the only thing it has in common with the former TMNT is four mutant turtles and a name.
Dude, now you've got me in a TMNT mood. I've been a Turtles fan since the original cartoon debuted in the '80s.
I remember reading the original comic books (where they were cursing and killing) when I was WAY too young for it. Between that, the cartoon and the movies, there's NEVER been a "real" Ninja Turtles to me, just interesting reflections.
There was an INSANE miniseries where the Turtles were, like, big dumb monsters, only abel to hiss out half-sentences and Splinter was into the dark arts and weird stuff like that.
I've always felt that we should keep the established cannon - minus JJA - and do another show set either during the time of DS9 or after Voyagers return, but have it not be about a starship going into the unexplored. I'm not a fan of cop shows, but I'll use them as an example. Why not have a cop show, or a detective show, set in the star trek universe, making use of all the established alien races and places? As humanity has reached this state of enlightenment, it could be about the murder of the week committed by an alien. While that's not a serious proposal on my part, I think it illustrates how another show could be expanded beyond the formulamatic captain/first officer/etc. What about a detective show? Dare I say a sitcom? With a universe the size of Trek, it seems the perfect time to expand into other genres. Past crew of TNG/DS9/VOY could even guest-star in episodes. As exploration of the unknown wouldn't be the main theme, you could drop Star Trek from the title, but it would help flush out the cultures of the hundreds of alien races already explored, and I don't mean just the Klingon/Romulan fallbacks.
There was a funny audiobook/tape thing released in the 90s read by the great Gary Owens (TV announcer, Space Ghost, etc) called 'Star Wreck, The Final Degeneration" and the whole thing was crazy pitches for ideas for shows, theme parks, the whole nine yards. It was delightfully absurd.
Posts
Amazing work so far.
I think it's due to the directionality/range of the boom mic. I think a lot of fan productions just use the mic on the camera, or something else more omni-directional.
Agreed on both points though. Two of the bigger bothers of smaller projects like this, although everything's shaping up great for this project so far.
Your digital sets are spot on, so I have no doubts the interiors and compositing will be good enough to dispel any fears relating to visual quality
Thanks! I accept that challenge gladly! With the hundreds and hundreds (literally) of hours I've put into this so far, I'm definitely not going to skimp on acting and sound. I spent a lot of time looking for people that I thought would be right for the roles and I feel very strongly that they'll do a great job. First and foremost, I'm a writer/director, and this is my film. It's not just a fun fan project (though it is that too!).
In regards to sound, I'm not entirely sure what you mean. There was some echo in this one, but that's because I didn't have anyone around that day to help me with sound, so I had to place the shotgun mic a set distance away from me and leave it there. No worries, though. When we actually shoot I will definitely have good boom operators
Yeah, they are a bit strong, still working out the JJ Abrams technique
I think a lot of the problem is that many fan productions often get one or a few parts just right, but don't get them all right. That's what I'm hoping to achieve. I've seen a lot of fan films and I definitely know what you all are talking about and am definitely going to do my best to avoid those issues
Three traditional tripping hazards for fan productions.
Budget (not even Big Budget) Studio work often puts out much better acting and script writing than Fan Films and Series.
Even Ranking Enterprise's acting as the lowest, it's still far more natural than every Fan Film and Series out for Trek. The biggest problem in this area is chemistry between actors and actors with genuine skill and talent. Unfortunately many of these fan productions either employ Friends Fans or who ever they can get.
Star Trek: Phoenix was perhaps the BEST fan film ever to go out. Sure, the short Captain wasn't done well in cinematography and the story pacing needed some work but it had all the things you were talking about. Creativity in the story and a unique take on the universe. Still the bit off more than they could chew and haven't put out another episode in a couple of years.
Frankly as a professional Producer, I hate Rick Berman.
But he was a professional. He had an eye for acting skill even though everything he did completely lacked in originality but the job he did with Trek was professional, the total vision of the product, acting, videography,story telling and set work are elements that keep us in the story.
We have the technology to do bigger and better in the Free Lance as 1966 Trek.
But we still don't have Good Free Lance Producers yet.
Apparently that takes a lot of experience.
I never said the acting was that great in fan films, I just said I like them.
I never really had a problem with Rick Berman, though I did think season 3 of Enterprise was their weakest season (though, it does have some gems) and I was glad when Manny Coto took over and took the series back to the episodic format that I feel Star Trek TV shows should always stick to. (Gene Roddenberry cautioned Berman against continuing stories) Plus, I absolutely loathe the series finale, which he helped write.
Both he and the fan films haven't been able to see past the original format.
-Starship
-Star: Captain
-Crew of 7 (featuring diversity)
-Mission: Encounter the unknown
We've had 47 years of the same formula and new movies just rehashed the good ole' days.
in 2000 Rick failed to see TV was changing. Neilson ratings weren't telling the whole story. Shows that endured were dropping episodic formulas. 24, Alias, West Wing, ER, CSI since 2000, Law& Order since 1999. Rick saw this and bogged down Enterprise with a story no one cared about that couldn't possibly draw in new viewers. He wanted bland and cheesy background music and when his fan base began to turn away he snubs them.
It's a new world.
It's You Tube, Netflix, and instant feedback.
I see fan films take very similar direction.
It's amazing Phase two has lasted this long but it was a concerted effort.
-Space
-Advanced Technology
-Aliens
This is all Rick and the Typical fan sees too.
Trek is more than this. Star Trek IS X-men, Star Trek IS, Doctor Who, Stargate, Heroes, 24, Agents of Shield.
The point is Trek can do anything. Yet we keep coming back to ships with push button lights, foreheads of the week and alien illusions that look like a farms in Missouri.
-I would completely Reboot Star Trek. Shove canon out the door. It's been wrecked beyond recognition.
-Focus on 2 or 3 people (preferably male and female)
-Use Drama, Survival and personal impact on those characters more often. (something you can't do in Star Fleet) Therefore more suspense.
-Employ more Grand Environments
-Step back from the human centric people and places all the time
Think, Mass Effect, Alias, 24 and X-Men in the Trek World.
It seems like taking away what Trek fans love but Trek fans don't realize people in general don't get off on space, technobable and foreheads. There has to be something more personal and impacting.
I CHALLENGE fanfilm makers to do this and I assure you, you will attract Fan, Studio and Public awareness.
You got to shake it up.
What you've described isn't Star Trek. What's the point? Just make a new show and call it something else. There's nothing stopping you, especially since you seem to have so many ideas. Write a script and sell it to a studio. In the meantime, if ya really hate Trek so much, you don't have to watch it.
However, in a broader sense, Star Trek is 47 years of history. It's a phenomenon that grabbed parts of the world and has thrilled them by providing stories in a certain format. However, it's not just shows and movies. It's books, comics, games, merchandise, fandom, conventions. (the list goes on) The reason people stick to the original format of Star Trek is because that's what Star Trek is. It's a group of men and women going forth in starships on a journey through the stars. (except DS9, which kind of broke the tradition) They face trials and tribulations.
Like Tommy said, what you suggest isn't Star Trek in the sense of what Star Trek has been for 47 years. You can do a show like that, but don't expect people to enjoy it if you put "Star Trek" in the title because it's not Star Trek. I'd watch it, but it wouldn't be Star Trek. It would be like doing Star Wars and saying, "Well, we're not going to have Jedi and Sith." You could call it Star Wars, but it wouldn't be Star Wars and people wouldn't accept it.
That's exactly it. What Saquist described put me in mind of Battlestar Galactica in some ways, which is probably farther from Star Trek than Star Wars is. You can reboot things and start anew - personally I'd love to reboot TMNT, I have so many ideas how to do that - but none of them involve changing it to the point where the only thing it has in common with the former TMNT is four mutant turtles and a name.
"Find Success in a Stagnant Industry"~ Elon Musk of Space X & Pay Pal
-47 Years of Star Trek has failed in the rehash cycle.
DS9 broke your rules of "Trek". In art: Rules are made to be broken.
That's where we think differently
To me Star Wars & Star Trek are universes not a formula.
I know I'm in Star Wars because there is the FORCE. No other universe has it. It's a fantasy.
Star Trek IS our world. In that Universe we can go anywhere and do anything. There is unlimited potential.
Oh yeah. I was simply saying that if it were up to me to reboot TMNT, I have some ideas that I find interesting on how to do it that would change it a lot, but it would still very much be classic, wonderful TMNT. I just get tired of this idea that in order to update or reboot something, you have to throw out all of the old.
DS9 broke the rules but it was still very definitely Star Trek. It had the ensemble cast with the main star being the captain, really the only rule that it broke was that it was on a space station instead of a ship. My issue with what you said was that it seems like you literally want to reset everything on Star Trek, keeping only the names. That just seems pointless to me, because at that point it's not Star Trek anymore.
I'm not quite understanding.
Is it the naval ranking system that makes it Star Trek?
Are we idolizing the position of Captain?
Deep Space 9 certainly wasn't Trek-ing or exploring.
Everyone likes an ensemble but why is that ONLY Trek? NCIS, ER, Grey's Anatomy and Alias had that.
Why do you accept DS9 as "Trek"?
But exploring other parts of the same universe is not Trek?
The kicker for this isn't just knowing what the rules are, but why they're there and the result they give-- you decide which results are what you want from a new Trek, you can figure out what rules to change. Specifics aren't important (and that's where Trek fell into trouble, it all became carbon copies of itself). Look at Legend of Korra, everything on that show is almost the opposite of The Last Airbender but it still feels "right" because they knew what the end result they wanted, they knew it wasn't XYZ that made it work, it's what XYZ produced.
A big part of Star Trek is that frontier, being at the edge of our knowledge and looking out into the frontier. Trek should make you feel good about people and what they can do and inspire you to help others and be a force for positive change in the world. And remember that the new principle for humanity in Trek "how can I help?" Once they realized what they could do together with the tools they had, they wiped out war and hunger in 50 years, they looked for solutions that could fix problems for the most people, the way to get food into people's mouths, to warm people when they're cold, to treat them when they're sick, and that created a ripple effect in their culture... by the time of TOS, there probably isn't a single person on the Enterprise whose family wasn't helped out in some way by a total stranger, and they carry that forward in order to help the next person, knowing that if they ever need it, someone else will get their back. And they go into the universe with that mentality. And Starfleet, well, they have the best resources to do that.
Several layers of events with short, medium and long duration, not all of which were related to the show's story but some of which simply enriched the universe around it (e.g., the progress reports on how the war was progressing, with things like the fall of Betazed thrown in to tie it and the other shows together).
That's interesting because the "Wagon Train to the Stars" bit was actually a complete lie just to pitch his idea past the moguls. Roddenberry's idea of Utopia actually had nothing to do with the Western theme. It was often NBC who wanted to push those settings. To this Effect Gene Made sure in ST:TMP and TNG that Trek got away from props that looked like guns and he seemed to hate uniforms and preferred unitards and jumpsuits. What about a Captain's couch instead of Chair?
That Frontier is there in every situation.
DS9 could easily fit the form of political show. Emissaries Founders, Vedeks, Ambassadors, Chancellors and Kai's fighting over a precious resource called a worm hole. Sure I see the Western aspect but TNG was far from a Western and so was Voyager. ENT seemed more like a fish out of water story. So many big boys on the block than equal footing for a shoot out at noon.
(Personally I find The Legend of Korra to be a shadow of The Last Air Bender. It's turning into the "Love Triangle" But yes I see this point well. Different but the same universe. That is what I agree with. There are other interesting things aside from the Avatar, the spirits and what of the stories of those that had equally interesting lives and greatness but had nothing to do with the Avatar.
That's the never ending story every literary creation can evolve into.
-Doctor Who and Torchwood
-TNG and DS9
-Tiny Toons Adventures and Pinky and the Brain
-All in the Family and the Jefferson's
-Buffy and Angel
Cheers and Fraiser
I hope fans can eventually see this potential and accept it.
Maybe not today but one day.
Dude, now you've got me in a TMNT mood. I've been a Turtles fan since the original cartoon debuted in the '80s.
There was an INSANE miniseries where the Turtles were, like, big dumb monsters, only abel to hiss out half-sentences and Splinter was into the dark arts and weird stuff like that.