No member of the general public, which is to say, the audience that any big-ticket movie needs to bring in, is walking around right now going "man I want some star trek with time travel and totally obscure continuity porn."
Time travel? I'm with you on that one. Nobody actually likes Star Trek time travel stories.
But you're telling me nobody wants continuity? Tell that to all the Heroes/Lost/24/BSG fans. And, yes, I know we're talking about movies and not TV shows. But guess what? Movie ticket sales are declining while TV viewership is going up, largely driven by shows with continuity and complicated storylines. So why is Viacom sinking dollars into a movie instead of riding the Tivo wave while its still hot? (Rhetorical question, I know the actual reason why, and it's stupid.)
There were a few good ones, like Trials and Tribble-ations. Oh and The City on the Edge of Forever, the original time travel episode.
I was watching Battlestar with my dad last night, an older episode from season 2. Roslin is still dying of cancer, and she jokes that she wants a new body, one of those Cylon ones. We had a good laugh when dad commented that if this were Star Trek, they'd do just that. All they need to do is remodulate the polarity of the main deflector, increase the plasma throughput and and invert the wavelength of the Heisenberg compensators to generate a wave of subspace flux particles, effectively beaming Roslin's soul into the new body.
The continuity is pretty much what killed Trek - the self-imposed imperative to return to familiar scenarios, storylines, settings, etc
You know that these are almost exactly polar opposite concepts, right?
Maybe I'm not being clear - the ever-expanding Trek mythos, while cool, is not what the wider world is interested in, and it hems writers in by chaining them into fleshing out ideas rather than coming up with new ones. The franchise, IMO, suffered under the weight of too many self-imposed constraints towards the end. TOS writers were freer to make up any old shit they wanted for the sake of a good story.
The continuity is pretty much what killed Trek - the self-imposed imperative to return to familiar scenarios, storylines, settings, etc
You know that these are almost exactly polar opposite concepts, right?
Maybe I'm not being clear - the ever-expanding Trek mythos, while cool, is not what the wider world is interested in, and it hems writers in by chaining them into fleshing out ideas rather than coming up with new ones. The franchise, IMO, suffered under the weight of too many self-imposed constraints towards the end. TOS writers were freer to make up any old shit they wanted for the sake of a good story.
Okay, I get what you're saying now.
It's just that continuity implies continuous change. Shows that lack continuity generally reset to a base state at the end of every episode. That way all the same characters, the same sets, the same basic situations are reused at the beginning of the next episode.
Lack of continuity is what causes a return to familiar scenarios, storylines, settings, etc. Every TOS episode began and ended with Kirk and Spock on the bridge. Nobody ever died, they never lost their ship, every episode followed pretty much the same structure.
Frankly, I don't agree that's what people want. As I mentioned, epic shows with long story arcs and continuity are getting more popular.
I guess I don't have a whole lot of confidence in reboots and even less in movies made from old TV shows. For some reason, I keep getting images of Lost in Space dancing in my head. I guess my problem is that I just can't imagine how a Star Trek movie using young Kirk, Spock, etc. - characters which, frankly, are relics from the 1960s - could possibly be good. The only thing that made the Star Trek movies from the 1980s any good is that the characters finally grew up - Wrath of Khan is about aging as much as it is about revenge. Even then, most of them sucked.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
There were a few good ones, like Trials and Tribble-ations. Oh and The City on the Edge of Forever, the original time travel episode.
I was watching Battlestar with my dad last night, an older episode from season 2. Roslin is still dying of cancer, and she jokes that she wants a new body, one of those Cylon ones. We had a good laugh when dad commented that if this were Star Trek, they'd do just that. All they need to do is remodulate the polarity of the main deflector, increase the plasma throughput and and invert the wavelength of the Heisenberg compensators to generate a wave of subspace flux particles, effectively beaming Roslin's soul into the new body.
You know what I will buy if it is offered? A cell phone that is like the TOS communicator, and makes the noise whenever it opens and closes. I would buy that SO HARD. Even if it was an iPhone.
Trek tech is the best tech, though it should be said that Doctor Who was the one who reversed polarity and TNG stole that.
Trek needs another 100 year jump story, like the gap between TOS and TNG. The TNG era (that is, TNG and DS9) is funderfulmazing, but it's time to do something new.
You know what I will buy if it is offered? A cell phone that is like the TOS communicator, and makes the noise whenever it opens and closes. I would buy that SO HARD. Even if it was an iPhone.
Trek tech is the best tech, though it should be said that Doctor Who was the one who reversed polarity and TNG stole that.
Trek needs another 100 year jump story, like the gap between TOS and TNG. The TNG era (that is, TNG and DS9) is funderfulmazing, but it's time to do something new.
You know what I will buy if it is offered? A cell phone that is like the TOS communicator, and makes the noise whenever it opens and closes. I would buy that SO HARD. Even if it was an iPhone.
Trek tech is the best tech, though it should be said that Doctor Who was the one who reversed polarity and TNG stole that.
Trek needs another 100 year jump story, like the gap between TOS and TNG. The TNG era (that is, TNG and DS9) is funderfulmazing, but it's time to do something new.
You know what I will buy if it is offered? A cell phone that is like the TOS communicator, and makes the noise whenever it opens and closes. I would buy that SO HARD. Even if it was an iPhone.
Trek tech is the best tech, though it should be said that Doctor Who was the one who reversed polarity and TNG stole that.
Trek needs another 100 year jump story, like the gap between TOS and TNG. The TNG era (that is, TNG and DS9) is funderfulmazing, but it's time to do something new.
Posts
The continuity is pretty much what killed Trek - the self-imposed imperative to return to familiar scenarios, storylines, settings, etc - so I can sympathise with the decision to return to the most risqué, adventurous and dangerous Trek.
I was watching Battlestar with my dad last night, an older episode from season 2. Roslin is still dying of cancer, and she jokes that she wants a new body, one of those Cylon ones. We had a good laugh when dad commented that if this were Star Trek, they'd do just that. All they need to do is remodulate the polarity of the main deflector, increase the plasma throughput and and invert the wavelength of the Heisenberg compensators to generate a wave of subspace flux particles, effectively beaming Roslin's soul into the new body.
You know that these are almost exactly polar opposite concepts, right?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Maybe I'm not being clear - the ever-expanding Trek mythos, while cool, is not what the wider world is interested in, and it hems writers in by chaining them into fleshing out ideas rather than coming up with new ones. The franchise, IMO, suffered under the weight of too many self-imposed constraints towards the end. TOS writers were freer to make up any old shit they wanted for the sake of a good story.
"TEMPORAL ANOMALY. TEMPORAL PRIME DIRECTIVE. TEMPORAL COLD WAR."
"No," whispers Berman. "That's not nearly enough."
I take it Garak has never watched Law & Order?
Okay, I get what you're saying now.
It's just that continuity implies continuous change. Shows that lack continuity generally reset to a base state at the end of every episode. That way all the same characters, the same sets, the same basic situations are reused at the beginning of the next episode.
Lack of continuity is what causes a return to familiar scenarios, storylines, settings, etc. Every TOS episode began and ended with Kirk and Spock on the bridge. Nobody ever died, they never lost their ship, every episode followed pretty much the same structure.
Frankly, I don't agree that's what people want. As I mentioned, epic shows with long story arcs and continuity are getting more popular.
I guess I don't have a whole lot of confidence in reboots and even less in movies made from old TV shows. For some reason, I keep getting images of Lost in Space dancing in my head. I guess my problem is that I just can't imagine how a Star Trek movie using young Kirk, Spock, etc. - characters which, frankly, are relics from the 1960s - could possibly be good. The only thing that made the Star Trek movies from the 1980s any good is that the characters finally grew up - Wrath of Khan is about aging as much as it is about revenge. Even then, most of them sucked.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Inverse tacheyon pulse... works every time!
Yes.. that is the solution to everything.
Array. It's the all-powerful Deflector Array.
They are the most important of things. Without them, reality would come crumbling down.
Trek tech is the best tech, though it should be said that Doctor Who was the one who reversed polarity and TNG stole that.
Trek needs another 100 year jump story, like the gap between TOS and TNG. The TNG era (that is, TNG and DS9) is funderfulmazing, but it's time to do something new.
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/bluetooth-star-trek-communicator-025437.php
I hate you so much right now. Goddamn.
According to the dude that commented on it, it's easy to make. Go take a stab at it. :P
EPS Conduit
Memory Alpha- your source for information on Galactic technology.