I’m a Trekker. Have been since the latter half of the 1960s. TOS was a wonderful show, full of things both stupid and fabulous. The 1970s had all of us salivating for a new show. We didn’t know if we wanted an all new series, or a continuation of TOS (which we didn’t call TOS back then, btw, it was simply Star Trek). We got a couple of movies out if and then, all of a sudden :dubious: , we get The Next Generation. An all new series to satiate our Trek monkeys.
But, That first season kind of sucked. Hell, we didn’t really get a consistantly good weekly series till sometime around the third season. And then came DS9, which started of so well, then fell in boringnessativity. A few good eps every now and again, but way too much soap opera crap. Voyager tried to kill all things Trek, and Enterprise actually succeeded.
Battlestar Galactica also comes to mind. Some prefer the MTV edits and gutsy feel of the new version, while others still prefer the campy fun of the original.
Doctor Who gets mentioned here as well.
Should new series keep on being made? Why or why not? Any thoughts, suggestions, complaints, etc…?
On the one hand, sure, new versions should continue to be made. It’ll always be a crapshoot whether the result is any good or not. I guess Trek’s bad luck has been BSG’s and Who’s good luck.
On the other hand, I really really really don’t want to see a new Trek series any time soon. Bergman has left such an incredibly bad taste in my mouth that my knee-jerk reaction to any new series is going to be to avoid it at all costs, even if the buzz is good.
I think I understand your question: Not remakes, right, but a new take or a spin-off or some type of “continuation of the old theme, but with new characters, timelines, and plots,” right?
Or something like that. Like the example of Star Trek you gave; TNG, DS9, etc.
In that case, I say yes, they should. We have gotten some pretty good shows from this. Yes, some real glurge, too.
It is incredibly risky. Between The Suits and just crummy writing, it is hard to achieve success. But as long as I ain’t paying for it, I would like them to keep trying just for the few gems that occasionally pop up.
Sorry for the semi-hijack, but this is a good example of something that could have been really great. The potential was amazing, they had a kick-butt theme song, and it could have been fascinating. There were occasional flashes of what a brilliant series it could have been. Alas, they dropped the ball.
I’d watch Firefly if it got revived. Also, I’d watch Gunn if Whedon started a spin-off of Angel (assuming he survived that final fight, you know…). I think there’d be a few people willing to watch that.
I am really not looking forward to the next Star Trek movie. Star Fleet: 90210 just doesn’t appeal to me.
Yeah, we are not going to get a good, new Trek, possibly no Trek at all, until The Bergama and Les are totally out of the picture. Even if we did get something new in the near future, it probably be as bad or worse that ENT’s season two (which prompted the birth of my own spin off board that I pulled a Bergama of my own on).
But, I was looking at more than just spin offs. Look at the Doctor Who rebirth. Now, the concept for this show really allows for a rebirth of the series, since we expect to see new and sometimes radically different Doctors anyways. But Battlestar? Why? Why not just come up with a new idea that borrows from some old TV series instead of reimagining a series that has already come and gone? Are we going to see a new Space, 1999? Or a new Prisoner?
Actually, a modern reworking of the Prisoner, in the same mind set of the rebirth of the Doctors, might be pretty cool, now that I think about it.
But, does anybody want to see a new series like the hybrid Planet of the Apes Sat aft kid’s show that we once had? I don’t. Would a new version of To the Manor Born work? I doubt it. And as hot as Jessica Simpson is in short cut off jeans, I never want to see another Dukes. Or Starsky and Hutch. Gag, those things were bad.
It didn’t start as a series, but sometime in the next few years there’s going to be a live-action series based on the Star Wars universe. It is to take place without any of the well-known characters introduced in the movies, and in the time period between “Revenge of the Sith” (Episode III) and the first “Star Wars” (Episode IV).
I’m intrigued - it could hardly be worse than the prequels (knock knock!), and the “Clone Wars” cartoon series was better than anything George Lucas has put out in the past decade.
Not at all, I ate that up. But it did not meet the requirements of a new, hoped for series. It was considered mostly kid stuff, a prejudice against Saturday animation at the time, sure, but it wasn’t the new series we were looking for. There weren’t a lot of eps, the eps were 1/2 hr only, most of the stories were silly (with some exceptions), Doohan and Fontana made up most of the team. Even at this late date, they are not considered canon (but for part of one ep).
FYI, ftr, TAA stands for The Animated Adventures. An alternate abbreviation for TAS, The Animated Series. Some Trekkers use TAA, as does Trek.com. It avoids confusion with TOS. Others stick to TAS. On these boards, I often use TAA/TAS. Just thought I would clarify before anyone asks.
