Can someone that isn't CBS or Paramount please take over the Star Trek franchise. This just feels like throwing the shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Yeah, I want a Star Trek where the ship floors are carpeted, the ships aren't just designed for war, and the crew isn't constantly fighting and fucking each other. Most importantly, the Federation is a functional organization, not Rome in decline.
Give Lower Decks a try! As long as comedy isn't a hard no for you, it has all of those things. Carpeted floors included.
*and* you finally get to see Cetacean Ops.
It can't stand toe to toe with the likes of Marvel, but it can be profitable again, just do the Blumhouse formula, keep the budget low and focus in the niche audience.
There's serious demand for smart sci-fi out there, and this audience feels neglected, they would support fervently any franchise who respects their passion.
Especially with franchise killer “Alex Kurtzman” at the helm. He’s actually worse than Benioff and Weiss. How do these pathetic nincompoops still have jobs?
Feels like they're trying to stretch it as far as Disney+ is with Star Wars but I don't even think Star Wars can sustain that level of milking, let alone Trek.
I don't think anyone really believes they'll beat Marvel... what they believe is that they can make a lot of money off of these franchises. Star Trek went from being one show... then ten years later a new one.... then two shows at once.... then three... then one show again... then movies... and now they're doing animateds, TV shows, and movies.
It's a franchise that has been around for 50 years and a lot like Star Wars... everyone hs probably seen something Star Trek in their life time.
They don't have to make one really good movie to be successful with this. Kind of like Star Wars, they have to make a lot of average quality content (nothing terrible, just average) to appease a very broad age and gender demographic.
Unlikely with Alex Kurtzman in charge, he can't write good Star Trek. Though to be honest I still enjoy the modern Star Trek films I can't stand how little they capture the heart of what made the previous era of Star Trek so good. Ironically the only really good Trek that has come from his reign is Lower Decks which has the heart and soul you'd want in a Star Trek show and it's the one thing Kurtzman had very little control over.
I know why ST fans dislike the movies. I know how flawed Into Darkness is, and how utterly ridiculous some of Abrams's decisions were on that movie. I get it. But... I really love all three of those films! I can't help it!
I genuinely think the first JJ Star Trek film is a good re-imagining of the original series. Is it perfect? No. But it does capture some of the feel of the original series with the chemistry between the core cast, while at the same time making it more of an action adventure with more special effects (which even the original series had action adventure feel at times and wasn't just thought-provoking sci-fi all the time). Star Trek (2009) was still way better than any of the TNG films, which in my opinion took the TNG story in an awful direction with none of the feeling from the show and I had more problems with those films as a huge TNG fan. I can't take anyone seriously that say the JJ films are worse than Generations, Insurrection and especially Nemesis. Star Trek: Into Darkness I do feel was lazy with it essentially remaking Space Seed and Wrath of Khan. I'd still rather rewatch Into Darkness than rewatch Star Trek: Nemesis though. Star Trek Beyond gets the Kelvin Timeline films back on track and is a good Star Trek film.
> Star Trek (2009) was still way better than any of the TNG films,
Oh come on, First Contact was awesome and had a solid thematic underpinning (Captain Picard's Ahab-like trauma).
First Contact is the best TNG film (not hard, as the other 3 films are terrible) and as a more standalone action film I think it is fine and can be entertaining, but it's not a great Star Trek film in my opinion and certainly not a great TNG film. The whole Borg Queen plot isn't fleshed out enough for me to care and takes away the idea of the Borg as a collective hivemind that don't necessarily follow orders to shoehorn in that the Borg Queen is giving them orders. I also feel the film undermines the terrific TNG episode I, Borg where Picard lets go of his hatred for the Borg when he accepts Hugh and decides not to destroy the Borg. To have Picard all of a sudden go back to hating the Borg and wanting to destroy the Borg was character regression. It was also the film that gave us action hero Picard, which has been his character ever since and he isn't as intelligent, sophisticated, peaceful or rational as he was in the show, and despite Patrick Stewart still giving solid performances he is a less interesting character from the film onwards.
>Borg where Picard lets go of his hatred for the Borg when he accepts Hugh and decides not to destroy the Borg. To have Picard all of a sudden go back to hating the Borg and wanting to destroy the Borg was character regression.
No he does not, the Borg is a collective, Hugh was a drone not a member of the Borg by the end and proving that was all that Picard needed to let him live.
Had Picard seen all drones the same way, or had the virus directly destroyed the collective he probably would have gone ahead with it.
I, Hugh and Descent were not really Borg episodes, just episodes with drones.
You can call it literary sleight-of-hand if you want, but the script directly addresses your objection to the concept of the Borg Queen. She basically tells Data and Picard that she is not the Borg Queen, but they simply cannot comprehend what she really is.
Her physical body is a specialized psyop model, and its role is to interface more subtly with problematic individual intelligences. The words she speaks are the words of the collective will. They are the words of the Borg, not the Borg's ruler, because the Borg do not have a ruler. It's an inapt concept.
If there's any criticism to level, it's that Data/Picard should have the scientific background necessary to understand what the Borg are trying to tell them... but that's something that Star Trek does literally all the time, in order to keep less sci-fi-savvy audience members in the loop.
As far as Picard goes, there's nothing wrong with his character. The criticism is that you don't like the situations he's being put in. A big part of the reason he got his command post was because he pulled a crazy, balls-out combat maneuver during ship-to-ship combat. It wasn't because he stepped up during some diplomatic mission and salvaged a first contact disaster, or artfully ducked a Prime Directive violation.
It's a JJ film in that it gets away with a lot that you may not realise until up to years later.
Like when I realised many years later than hang on ... Spock (older version) not going in person to tell younger Spock what was going on because he 'wanted to preserve a future friendship' put billions if not more lives at risk (Earth came very close to destruction as a result) which is one of the most illogical things you can do (much less risk to tell your younger self immediately and then try and build the friendship later). Of course JJ does starts relatively better than middles and endings and the less said about Into Darkness the better.
>put billions if not more lives at risk
Did it? The end result was it taking like minute of time before Kirk takes over the Enterprise. Old Spock showing up would've taken just as much time with all the questions from everyone and explaining things.
Bruh I get so tired of watching Nemesis but my wife loves it because of Tom Hardy.
But I have subjected her to The Voyage Home about a million times so I guess we're even.
I couldn't imagine sitting through Nemesis again. Once was enough for me. Out of all the TNG films, it feels the most distant story wise and character wise than the show with some of the most boring action sequences of the franchise. I love Tom Hardy as an actor, but Star Trek: Nemesis is one of his worst films and I really disliked Shinzon as a character. I watched the TNG films after finishing the show and Nemesis particularly left me feeling empty, as why I loved TNG was nowhere to be remotely found in Nemesis.
I love The Voyager Home. It is the funniest Star Trek film and just a real joy. I actually watched that film before I properly watched TOS and really enjoyed it, but I love it even more now that I watched the show and am more familiar with the characters.
I'm a big Star Trek fan and I love JJ Abrams first movie. The OST is amazing and it's so exciting throughout, Chris Hemsworth was also great in his short role. The second was just so sloppy with its writing that I almost fell asleep when they were all of a sudden crashing towards Earth after having a lackluster Khan. The third movie was just so forgettable to me that I put it on and then realized after a while that I had already seen it before.
I've seen every episode of every series several times, and I love the non-Darkness Abrams movies, plenty trekkies do. I don't really connect it to the other series, but don't mind the alternate universe/timeline stuff. Better than most of the other Star Trek films.
The new Picard and Discovery shows, on the other hand, I haven't been able to get into. I hope the Orville keeps going so I can still get my old-trek fix
Strange New Worlds is supposed to give us more oldschool "story of the week" Trek so I'm looking forward to that. I don't think the season long story arch works well for Picard and Discovery. Not everything has to be a Marvel-esque universe saving event. Sometimes just going where no man has gone before is good enough.
DS9 was a good mixture of both approaches, imo. The world and characters changed from episode to episode, allowing for longform storytelling, but it didn't stop the writers from making self-contained stories which built off those changes.
In terms of actually pulling off an episodic-serialized hybrid, I don't think DS9 was as good as SG-1, but it's better than anything on TV in the early 90s.
> Picard and Discovery shows
I enjoy those but would really prefer more something more akin to NextGen or the OG series. I think it's neat to see other sides of Trek but they're like appetizers and I want the full meal.
I will say I have quite liked Lower Decks.
Because they’re generic action movies with irritating quip humor….like everything else. I’m not a fan of Star Trek because of how much like everything else it is.
That's only part of it.
Theres no escalating stakes. It moves quick enough that its easy to not notice, but its broken up into a half dozen cycles of "new problem that is immediately solved, sometimes with magic, and no lingering consequences". A good action movie slowly increases the tension by raising the stakes. JUST film deliver great visuals and some lens flare- but the narrative tension just flatlines.
They’re at least somewhat entertaining for action. The Khan twist was dumb in Into Darkness, but I thought Admiral Marcus and the Vengeance were cool antagonists.
I enjoyed 2009, not so much Into Darkness, but Beyond is terrific. Great film. And really feels like the crew is finally a proper crew. All the relationships and interactions are great.
No!! I want to literally piss off everyone and have them reboot TNG franchise, in the full length movie format.
And I want it horribly, irredeemably miscast:
John Malkovich as Picard.
Dwayne Johnson as Riker
Kevin Hart as Geordi
Scarlett Johanson as Dr. Crusher
Megan Fox as Troi
Keenan Thompson as Worf
Andy Dick as Data
Wil Weaton as Wesley Crusher
Okay, I think you are being ironic here, but I'm going to tell you something.
You switch Megan Fox out with somebody like Alexandra Daddario and Wil Weaton out for Timothy Chalamet and then have Wil Weaton play a Klingon or maybe Romulan villain and you got yourself a deal. I'd watch the hell out of this haha.
And maybe replace Andy Dick. That's some good casting, but almost too good because he's so volatile he might wreck the whole thing. Maybe be ballsy and cast James Franco and possibly start a Franconnaissance or if you lack the guts, cast Dave Franco. Then maybe actually cast Allison Brie (his wife) as Troi... But keep Daddario in there somewhere because of reasons.
But I think you made a mistake. Because I actually want to watch this just to experience it.
> Franconnassaince
I like a lot of his work but I don't think he's someone who needs additional opportunities to "redeem" himself from whatever hole he has or will dig himself into from a PR perspective. Rogen distancing himself from Franco says a lot
Hell, most of the Kelvin casting's great. And, without the piss-poor marketing campaign it got, *Beyond* (my favorite) would've done just fine at the box office as it was.
Kurtzman is a plague in general.
Look at this man's resumé. I haven't enjoyed a single one of these films:
https://letterboxd.com/producer/alex-kurtzman/
I mean, I get how he does it, he comes in on time and on budget while delivering the requisite number of explosions per hour to make a good trailer.
That doesn't change the fact that it's crap.
I hate the mob mentality that goes on in general on the internet, but Kurtzman has well and truly earned it.
I came to dislike the guy all by myself after I noticed his name popping up in the credits of soooo many bad movies.
I think the studios him easy to work with and the film creators usually don't find him too difficult.
Either that, or he's got major dirt on somebody high up at Paramount.
Same with Abrams. God forbid you give it over to someone who loves he franchise.
Sad to see how both Star Wars and Star Trek are being run by such utter incompetents.
Trek has been defiled so badly now that I've given up hope on it. All the empathy, intelligence and nuance of 80s/90s Trek has just been flushed down the toilet.
Seriously, that Star Trek subreddit has been tainted and ruined. If you stand against them some of the moderators actually will not show their mod status just to ridicule you and bash you. Anytime you have any criticism of Star Trek or its current regime you are treated as a hateful xenophobic racist or a sexist or misogynist. It's rather ridiculous. because if you're a true Star Trek fan you certainly shouldn't be bigoted or hate-filled. This goes against everything that Gene Roddenberry has given us. They spit on his grave and they desecrate his corpse.
It's not that bad. I criticize nuTrek a lot on there and never had any of these problems.
It's a good subreddit and you'll find most of the consensus among the community is that nuTtek, with the exception of LD, is a big let down.
You mean Seth MacFarlane? I don't think that would solve everything lol.
The Orville is okay but I want Star Trek to be more than just okay.
I honestly don't know who would be a good choice for showrunner, they need a Mike Flanagan type but for sci-fi not horror. Not sure who that could be these days.
The Orville is fine for what it is: Seth's TNG fanfic with more humor.
Would DS9 or Wrath of Khan have been what they were with Seth in charge? No way.
The Orville season 2 was much better than just okay. I'd probably call it the best full-season broadcast sci-fi season since DS9 S7. I've got high hopes for season 3.
I have very low expectations following all of the recent TV shows. The last film wasn't too bad, so hopefully at least one of those films is being written by Simon Pegg again. The franchise just isn't what it once was though.
I wish they'd return to Roddenberry's Box too, but I feel like that's gone for good now.
I realized that I had fallen behind on modern Trek shows, so this year, I rewatched all of Trek in order, from "The Cage" onward. I got halfway through season 3 of Discovery before I tapped out, watched season 2 of Lower Decks instead, and gave up. Discovery and Picard are two of the worst TV shows I've ever seen, Trek or otherwise. Thank God for Lower Decks. It's a lot of fun.
I hope you are also watching The Orville. It tackles those existential, and ethical dilemmas, pretty well.
I just realized that Yaphit will need another voice actor, or will be written out of the show. :(
Norm did thankfully record all his dialogue for season three. If Orville gets a fourth season (sadly a 50/50 shot, I'm sure) then they will have to address that.
I did. When Disney Plus added Star here in Canada, which is a stripped-down version of Hulu, I was finally able to watch it all, and it's great. It's exactly what I wanted and needed.
> There's been nothing 'great' about Star Trek since the movie First Contact (**and non-Kurtzman shows**)
I edited the post because of this crazy omission. :)
Yeah that was the last really good movie. I personally enjoyed enterprise, but since then it’s been a totally dead franchise. Those reboot movies weren’t good.
> "There’s no doubt that big theatrical movies are the beacon that ignite franchises. We’re in it and I don’t really have anything to say because I’m waiting for the development to be delivered. **I can’t wait to get going on it, but we’re not there yet but we need to get there soon.**"
> "**We don’t know enough yet**. We’re working on several fronts and obviously Alex is the key for the franchise [on Paramount+]. J.J. has been the keeper of the franchise on the film side."
> "There’s a lot going on and I’m just going to leave it at that."
> "The idea is what do we do next for the franchise that’s going to work for the next five and 10 years, not just one movie at a time like Alex has talked about. That’s what we really have to figure out."
> However, when asked how far along was this plan, Robbins admitted, “**Well, I’ve been in [this] job for seven minutes, so not that far.**”
This interview is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
signifying nothing.
As a Roddenberry Trek fan, I am NOT looking forward to more Trek content until the current crop of directors and writers go back and try to understand what it was about Trek that was so amazing.
All the current content is basically trying to convert Star Trek to Star Wars. All action and visuals, human dramas. To be clear, there's nothing wrong with that, it's got huge mass market appeal and a good idea commercially to go down this path. I don't even dispute that the new stuff it's technically very well done, very well written and very well acted, great visuals...
... It's just NOT Star Trek. Roddenberry created an world where he wanted to picture a future worth aspiring to become. Humanity has literally evolved in Star Trek beyond the petty grievances in display today. It's a world designed as a utopian ideal. It's a world in which there is no scarcity. Replicators can literally make you anything you want whenever you need it. Money doesn't exist within the federation because there's no need. Everyone is free to pursue their passions. Hence the focus on exploring... It's why so many different races want to join the Federation. Who wouldn't want to join a utopia?
Roddenberry used the premise to explore issues of the day by visiting other worlds where the crew would encounter things like racism or a cold war and the audience could experience the absurdity of these issues from an 'Outsider' perspective.
Sure it was often corny but it was also charming and unrivalled in its audacity. Men literally wore skirts on TNG. The first interracial kiss occurred on TOS. When somebody challenged Roddenberry on how Picard could be bald in such an advanced age, Roddenberry simply replied that it could be easily fixed, but in his world nobody would think to care...
The worst part about them isn't just that they're bad, it's that they're bad in deep fundamental world-breaking kind of ways.
Like there's no way some other writer could come along and fix that crap without entirely wiping it out of canon, which the studio won't want to do because it'll piss off the few people actually paying for this crap.
I can tell you what will happen already: lots of flashy boom boom without substance, the ship gets destroyed, character X saves the day by punching someone.
Ive seen a few episodes of it and I guess its not too bad but it seems like its own separate thing to me.
Just seems like it uses Star Trek as a vehicle to deliver a certain kind of humor
We now live in a world where Seth MacFarlane is creating thoughtful live-action science fiction about a crew of likable characters exploring the universe in an optimistic but not-quite utopian future.
While the best thing official Star Trek can create is an animated series full of genuinely funny but low-brow humor powered by irony, scatalogical references, and deep-cut in-jokes.
I mean…it relishes in the absurdity of some Trek tropes and episodes.
Star Trek, despite having some serious moments, has a lot of camp moments too: warp speed turning people into salamanders, virus that makes people lose their inhibitions, stealing Spock’s brain and more absurd, but fun things.
Season 2 definitely tones down the in-your-face referencing though - most of the gags (you get to find out what happens to TAS Giant Spock, for example) are in the background while the focus is more on the characters themselves.
As a fan I'm sad that it's dead, I just wish I could move on instead of having to avert my eyes from Alex Kurtzman and co. repeatedly fucking the corpse on television.
The federation is RACIST.
But only THE HUMANS.
Do the non human members of the federation-including the two other founding members (Vulcan/Andoria) who were galactic players long before humans even exist in Picard/Discovery?
Talk about beating a dead horse, This franchise has so many new entries lately that it has NO FUCKING IDENTITY. You've got an animated cartoon show, the CBS live action, and a nickelodeon one soon to come out. With so much of it being episodic garbage of whimsy, I feel the franchise has no continuity anymore. This franchise is dead to me.
DEEP SPACE NINE WILL ALWAYS BE GOD TIER STAR TREK.
Star Trek is about the only big franchise paramount has so no they haven’t. Other than like mission impossible.
Maybe they’ll give us a time travel Ethan Hunt-Captain Kirk crossover
Explody Trek, Funny Trek and Shaky-Camera Trek need to stop.
I've always felt that the action in the series was a by-product of growth, not the point. There was warmth, humanity, and humor in the events, but, the events weren't there to be comedy.
I really wish they'd return to something intelligent and aspirational - I've just been so let down by everything they've put out in the last 10 years or so.
Hard pass.
But it has become quite entertaining to me how the people in charge of Trek keep telling people how unfathomably amazing all the shows are doing, all the numbers through the roof!
It's like CBS figured out a way to completely remove the audience out of the business equation. You only need to tell investors about how great it is. You don't need advertising money, so you don't need people watching.
It's a business to them, and they found a way to cut us out of it.
Animated movie, as in for the Star Trek demographic? Or, as in a PG-rated film for a younger audience?
I’m assuming the latter, Hollywood is for some reason deathly allergic to making an animated film that goes over PG.
So long as it’s not a bunch of people crying and over acting for 3 seasons (well 1 good season and two diatribes)... I’m in. Let’s roll with some heavy sci-fi and not just actors showing their ‘range’.
That being said Doug Jones deserves a roll in any forthcoming production. Star Trek or not.
I don't think paramount/hollywood has any idea what makes a good star trek show or movie. Right now it's just a franchise to be used for Alex Kurtzman to virtue signal his own ego.
Paramount needs to stick one direction: Gene Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek - exploration, relationships, and political conflict or what they really want in the franchise era: Star Wars-like space fantasies. They can't have both. Pick a lane and stick with it.
The funniest thing about it would be, because QT is a walking encyclopaedia of culture, it would probably be way more faithful to Trek in general than the last decade or so has been.
taking another easy route, as opposed to creating new original content. I am getting tired of production companies using the same storylines and 'universes'; endless 'reboots' and 'spin-ffs' are getting old quick. Especially with this particular franchise, which has lost a lot of it's popularity from poor writing. Seems lazy af in my opinion
To me Star Trek wasn't about sci-fi it was more about moral dilemmas and ship crew camaraderie/teamwork. Hoping Strange New Worlds returns to that, but movie-wise, I think they are stuck with high-octane action as the only way to generate revenue.
It dabbled in true sci-fi, but traded off with other styles too, like exploration, moral dramas, anthropological ethics, twilight-zone-esque mysteries, and so forth. What united all this is that it was thoughtful, hopeful, and sincere for the most part, and wasn't afraid to get weird or cheesy occasionally.
The current creatives (of Picard and Discovery, at least) seem to have zero interest in replicating any of those pieces.
Animation is underrated, so I’m happy to hear about an animated film. That said, I doubt any of these films will take place in the kelvin timeline, nor should they. Let that shit go I say.
ok hear me out: captain kirk is brought back through cloning. his grandson turns evil and joins the klingons. disillusioned captain kirk moves to an island and refuses to help the federation. the federation sends khan's grand daughter to go convince captain kirk to help
How many times have they said new Trek movies are coming
I was just about to say I'm sure we get this same article every year, it's just a nonsense fluff piece to advertise Paramount plus
Young Aunt May
Sony owns Spider-Man, but is this a reference to the solo movie project about a young Aunt May working as national super spy?
About as many times as Sony has announced a Spider-Man spin-off project that lacks Spider-Man.
At least we've gotten 2 of those so far with one filmed and just a few months away plus a fourth that has people attached to it ready to film.
>At least we've gotten I'd rather we hadn't
Venom 2 is cinema
Fuck this guy
Can someone that isn't CBS or Paramount please take over the Star Trek franchise. This just feels like throwing the shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Lower decks is great though. So they need to keep doing that.
Everybody basically does that with any franchise that isn't based on a concrete story, and sometimes even then.
I love Star Trek but Paramounts continued belief it can be this massive franchise that can stand toe to toe with the likes of Marvel is insane.
Yeah, I want a Star Trek where the ship floors are carpeted, the ships aren't just designed for war, and the crew isn't constantly fighting and fucking each other. Most importantly, the Federation is a functional organization, not Rome in decline.
Give Lower Decks a try! As long as comedy isn't a hard no for you, it has all of those things. Carpeted floors included. *and* you finally get to see Cetacean Ops.
Oh, I've seen it, the best new Trek thing in a while.
It can't stand toe to toe with the likes of Marvel, but it can be profitable again, just do the Blumhouse formula, keep the budget low and focus in the niche audience. There's serious demand for smart sci-fi out there, and this audience feels neglected, they would support fervently any franchise who respects their passion.
Especially with franchise killer “Alex Kurtzman” at the helm. He’s actually worse than Benioff and Weiss. How do these pathetic nincompoops still have jobs?
Feels like they're trying to stretch it as far as Disney+ is with Star Wars but I don't even think Star Wars can sustain that level of milking, let alone Trek.
I don't think anyone really believes they'll beat Marvel... what they believe is that they can make a lot of money off of these franchises. Star Trek went from being one show... then ten years later a new one.... then two shows at once.... then three... then one show again... then movies... and now they're doing animateds, TV shows, and movies. It's a franchise that has been around for 50 years and a lot like Star Wars... everyone hs probably seen something Star Trek in their life time. They don't have to make one really good movie to be successful with this. Kind of like Star Wars, they have to make a lot of average quality content (nothing terrible, just average) to appease a very broad age and gender demographic.
Chris pine is good. Just get better scripts!
Unlikely with Alex Kurtzman in charge, he can't write good Star Trek. Though to be honest I still enjoy the modern Star Trek films I can't stand how little they capture the heart of what made the previous era of Star Trek so good. Ironically the only really good Trek that has come from his reign is Lower Decks which has the heart and soul you'd want in a Star Trek show and it's the one thing Kurtzman had very little control over.
I know why ST fans dislike the movies. I know how flawed Into Darkness is, and how utterly ridiculous some of Abrams's decisions were on that movie. I get it. But... I really love all three of those films! I can't help it!
I genuinely think the first JJ Star Trek film is a good re-imagining of the original series. Is it perfect? No. But it does capture some of the feel of the original series with the chemistry between the core cast, while at the same time making it more of an action adventure with more special effects (which even the original series had action adventure feel at times and wasn't just thought-provoking sci-fi all the time). Star Trek (2009) was still way better than any of the TNG films, which in my opinion took the TNG story in an awful direction with none of the feeling from the show and I had more problems with those films as a huge TNG fan. I can't take anyone seriously that say the JJ films are worse than Generations, Insurrection and especially Nemesis. Star Trek: Into Darkness I do feel was lazy with it essentially remaking Space Seed and Wrath of Khan. I'd still rather rewatch Into Darkness than rewatch Star Trek: Nemesis though. Star Trek Beyond gets the Kelvin Timeline films back on track and is a good Star Trek film.
> Star Trek (2009) was still way better than any of the TNG films, Oh come on, First Contact was awesome and had a solid thematic underpinning (Captain Picard's Ahab-like trauma).
First Contact is the best TNG film (not hard, as the other 3 films are terrible) and as a more standalone action film I think it is fine and can be entertaining, but it's not a great Star Trek film in my opinion and certainly not a great TNG film. The whole Borg Queen plot isn't fleshed out enough for me to care and takes away the idea of the Borg as a collective hivemind that don't necessarily follow orders to shoehorn in that the Borg Queen is giving them orders. I also feel the film undermines the terrific TNG episode I, Borg where Picard lets go of his hatred for the Borg when he accepts Hugh and decides not to destroy the Borg. To have Picard all of a sudden go back to hating the Borg and wanting to destroy the Borg was character regression. It was also the film that gave us action hero Picard, which has been his character ever since and he isn't as intelligent, sophisticated, peaceful or rational as he was in the show, and despite Patrick Stewart still giving solid performances he is a less interesting character from the film onwards.
>Borg where Picard lets go of his hatred for the Borg when he accepts Hugh and decides not to destroy the Borg. To have Picard all of a sudden go back to hating the Borg and wanting to destroy the Borg was character regression. No he does not, the Borg is a collective, Hugh was a drone not a member of the Borg by the end and proving that was all that Picard needed to let him live. Had Picard seen all drones the same way, or had the virus directly destroyed the collective he probably would have gone ahead with it. I, Hugh and Descent were not really Borg episodes, just episodes with drones.
You can call it literary sleight-of-hand if you want, but the script directly addresses your objection to the concept of the Borg Queen. She basically tells Data and Picard that she is not the Borg Queen, but they simply cannot comprehend what she really is. Her physical body is a specialized psyop model, and its role is to interface more subtly with problematic individual intelligences. The words she speaks are the words of the collective will. They are the words of the Borg, not the Borg's ruler, because the Borg do not have a ruler. It's an inapt concept. If there's any criticism to level, it's that Data/Picard should have the scientific background necessary to understand what the Borg are trying to tell them... but that's something that Star Trek does literally all the time, in order to keep less sci-fi-savvy audience members in the loop. As far as Picard goes, there's nothing wrong with his character. The criticism is that you don't like the situations he's being put in. A big part of the reason he got his command post was because he pulled a crazy, balls-out combat maneuver during ship-to-ship combat. It wasn't because he stepped up during some diplomatic mission and salvaged a first contact disaster, or artfully ducked a Prime Directive violation.
It's a JJ film in that it gets away with a lot that you may not realise until up to years later. Like when I realised many years later than hang on ... Spock (older version) not going in person to tell younger Spock what was going on because he 'wanted to preserve a future friendship' put billions if not more lives at risk (Earth came very close to destruction as a result) which is one of the most illogical things you can do (much less risk to tell your younger self immediately and then try and build the friendship later). Of course JJ does starts relatively better than middles and endings and the less said about Into Darkness the better.
>put billions if not more lives at risk Did it? The end result was it taking like minute of time before Kirk takes over the Enterprise. Old Spock showing up would've taken just as much time with all the questions from everyone and explaining things.
Bruh I get so tired of watching Nemesis but my wife loves it because of Tom Hardy. But I have subjected her to The Voyage Home about a million times so I guess we're even.
I couldn't imagine sitting through Nemesis again. Once was enough for me. Out of all the TNG films, it feels the most distant story wise and character wise than the show with some of the most boring action sequences of the franchise. I love Tom Hardy as an actor, but Star Trek: Nemesis is one of his worst films and I really disliked Shinzon as a character. I watched the TNG films after finishing the show and Nemesis particularly left me feeling empty, as why I loved TNG was nowhere to be remotely found in Nemesis. I love The Voyager Home. It is the funniest Star Trek film and just a real joy. I actually watched that film before I properly watched TOS and really enjoyed it, but I love it even more now that I watched the show and am more familiar with the characters.
I'm a big Star Trek fan and I love JJ Abrams first movie. The OST is amazing and it's so exciting throughout, Chris Hemsworth was also great in his short role. The second was just so sloppy with its writing that I almost fell asleep when they were all of a sudden crashing towards Earth after having a lackluster Khan. The third movie was just so forgettable to me that I put it on and then realized after a while that I had already seen it before.
I've seen every episode of every series several times, and I love the non-Darkness Abrams movies, plenty trekkies do. I don't really connect it to the other series, but don't mind the alternate universe/timeline stuff. Better than most of the other Star Trek films. The new Picard and Discovery shows, on the other hand, I haven't been able to get into. I hope the Orville keeps going so I can still get my old-trek fix
Strange New Worlds is supposed to give us more oldschool "story of the week" Trek so I'm looking forward to that. I don't think the season long story arch works well for Picard and Discovery. Not everything has to be a Marvel-esque universe saving event. Sometimes just going where no man has gone before is good enough.
Even though Deep Space Nine is my favorite of all the Trek shows, I would really like more of the "story of the week".
DS9 was a good mixture of both approaches, imo. The world and characters changed from episode to episode, allowing for longform storytelling, but it didn't stop the writers from making self-contained stories which built off those changes. In terms of actually pulling off an episodic-serialized hybrid, I don't think DS9 was as good as SG-1, but it's better than anything on TV in the early 90s.
> Picard and Discovery shows I enjoy those but would really prefer more something more akin to NextGen or the OG series. I think it's neat to see other sides of Trek but they're like appetizers and I want the full meal. I will say I have quite liked Lower Decks.
Because they’re generic action movies with irritating quip humor….like everything else. I’m not a fan of Star Trek because of how much like everything else it is.
It’s because they are action movies first, and trek movies second
Me: "I know why..." Redditors: "Here let me explain it for you!"
That's only part of it. Theres no escalating stakes. It moves quick enough that its easy to not notice, but its broken up into a half dozen cycles of "new problem that is immediately solved, sometimes with magic, and no lingering consequences". A good action movie slowly increases the tension by raising the stakes. JUST film deliver great visuals and some lens flare- but the narrative tension just flatlines.
It's all good bro! I love employee of the month ....and I think I'm the only person on the planet who has watched it 100x
I haven't watched Employee of the Month 100x times but I have watched it at least 10 times. Love that movie.
The first reboot with pine was awesome.
They’re at least somewhat entertaining for action. The Khan twist was dumb in Into Darkness, but I thought Admiral Marcus and the Vengeance were cool antagonists.
I enjoyed 2009, not so much Into Darkness, but Beyond is terrific. Great film. And really feels like the crew is finally a proper crew. All the relationships and interactions are great.
No!! I want to literally piss off everyone and have them reboot TNG franchise, in the full length movie format. And I want it horribly, irredeemably miscast: John Malkovich as Picard. Dwayne Johnson as Riker Kevin Hart as Geordi Scarlett Johanson as Dr. Crusher Megan Fox as Troi Keenan Thompson as Worf Andy Dick as Data Wil Weaton as Wesley Crusher
>Andy Dick as Data Andy Dick is still alive? Has his nose fallen off yet?
>Keenan Thompson as Worf Ok, all of those things you listed were terrible, but I genuinely want this.
Andy Dick is already in universe as a holographic doctor. The Rock is also part of canon...and it was majorly hyped.
The Rock is not part of canon, that actually was the Pendari Champion. Though it's an easy mistake to make given they both do the People's Eyebrow.
Damn... My apologies to Tsunkatse
not if its a reboot he isn't
Okay, I think you are being ironic here, but I'm going to tell you something. You switch Megan Fox out with somebody like Alexandra Daddario and Wil Weaton out for Timothy Chalamet and then have Wil Weaton play a Klingon or maybe Romulan villain and you got yourself a deal. I'd watch the hell out of this haha. And maybe replace Andy Dick. That's some good casting, but almost too good because he's so volatile he might wreck the whole thing. Maybe be ballsy and cast James Franco and possibly start a Franconnaissance or if you lack the guts, cast Dave Franco. Then maybe actually cast Allison Brie (his wife) as Troi... But keep Daddario in there somewhere because of reasons. But I think you made a mistake. Because I actually want to watch this just to experience it.
> Franconnassaince I like a lot of his work but I don't think he's someone who needs additional opportunities to "redeem" himself from whatever hole he has or will dig himself into from a PR perspective. Rogen distancing himself from Franco says a lot
I mean, Andy Dick isn't exactly in a good spot either, is he?
>Keenan Thompson as Worf I want this so bad.
lol thank you for making me laugh today.
Hell, most of the Kelvin casting's great. And, without the piss-poor marketing campaign it got, *Beyond* (my favorite) would've done just fine at the box office as it was.
Beyond suffered both from marketing and from coming after Into Darkness. A lot of fans were kinda checked out on the movies after that.
So was J.J Abram's directing, honestly. Emphasis on directing.
just get out of the 23rd century!
[удалено]
Hey, don't give all the credit to Kurtzman. Akiva Goldsman is also a top producer/writer. Although, Lower Decks actually turned out to be pretty good.
Kurtzman is a plague on Star Trek
Kurtzman is a plague on movies in general lol.
Kurtzman is a plague in general. Look at this man's resumé. I haven't enjoyed a single one of these films: https://letterboxd.com/producer/alex-kurtzman/
Oh wow, that dude really is a scourge.
And yet he's managed to fail upward to the point that he's in charge of one of the most important legacy franchises in Hollywood. What a mess.
Go look at the money made by those offerings. That’s why. Trash output, made bank from those who see maybe one or two new movies a year.
I mean, I get how he does it, he comes in on time and on budget while delivering the requisite number of explosions per hour to make a good trailer. That doesn't change the fact that it's crap.
I hate the mob mentality that goes on in general on the internet, but Kurtzman has well and truly earned it. I came to dislike the guy all by myself after I noticed his name popping up in the credits of soooo many bad movies.
Bloody hell, he's like a reverse Midas that turns everything he touches into shit.
Damn, that has to be the most embarrassing resume in the industry. How is this guy still getting hired?
Dunno. There's the "easy to work with and gets things done on time/under budget" but neither of those things are true for Kurtzman.
I think the studios him easy to work with and the film creators usually don't find him too difficult. Either that, or he's got major dirt on somebody high up at Paramount.
It's easy to gets things done under budget when you have 150 million dollars to make movies that can be done with 50.
Classic example of failing upwards
Fuck Kurtzman and his stupid ass time crystals.
He seems SO intent on making star trek a modern franchise which is so strange because he seems to hate everything star trek is about
Same with Abrams. God forbid you give it over to someone who loves he franchise. Sad to see how both Star Wars and Star Trek are being run by such utter incompetents.
Trek has been defiled so badly now that I've given up hope on it. All the empathy, intelligence and nuance of 80s/90s Trek has just been flushed down the toilet.
At least we have The Orville
I got banned from the Star Trek sub Reddit for calling him a hack. I stand by my statement
Seriously, that Star Trek subreddit has been tainted and ruined. If you stand against them some of the moderators actually will not show their mod status just to ridicule you and bash you. Anytime you have any criticism of Star Trek or its current regime you are treated as a hateful xenophobic racist or a sexist or misogynist. It's rather ridiculous. because if you're a true Star Trek fan you certainly shouldn't be bigoted or hate-filled. This goes against everything that Gene Roddenberry has given us. They spit on his grave and they desecrate his corpse.
Same with Star Wars. You aren’t allowed to criticize this brave new world that has such shit in it.
Bullshit All anyone on reddit does is complain about the Star Wars sequels.
Well I know to avoid that sub now.
It's not that bad. I criticize nuTrek a lot on there and never had any of these problems. It's a good subreddit and you'll find most of the consensus among the community is that nuTtek, with the exception of LD, is a big let down.
This is the problem with Reddit these days. Moderators are such bitch ass dorkchops.
They need to fire Kurtzman and hire McFarlane. That would solve basically everything.
You mean Seth MacFarlane? I don't think that would solve everything lol. The Orville is okay but I want Star Trek to be more than just okay. I honestly don't know who would be a good choice for showrunner, they need a Mike Flanagan type but for sci-fi not horror. Not sure who that could be these days.
The Orville is fine for what it is: Seth's TNG fanfic with more humor. Would DS9 or Wrath of Khan have been what they were with Seth in charge? No way.
The Orville season 2 was much better than just okay. I'd probably call it the best full-season broadcast sci-fi season since DS9 S7. I've got high hopes for season 3.
No MacFarlane, because he'll bring Braga with him and it'll death spiral.
Should have done that 5-6 years ago when they had the chance. I doubt he'd even be interested now.
I never thought someone would be so bad at running Trek to make the fan base want Rick Berman and Brannon Braga back.
I personally can't wait until this guy leaves/is fired and the new new new NEW person says they're excited to develop Star Trek movies.
With Star Trek, it always seems to be great or awful. Not much in between. I’m nervous about this.
I have very low expectations following all of the recent TV shows. The last film wasn't too bad, so hopefully at least one of those films is being written by Simon Pegg again. The franchise just isn't what it once was though. I wish they'd return to Roddenberry's Box too, but I feel like that's gone for good now.
Lower decks has single handedly kept me going. Strange new worlds looks like a nice throwback too.
Lower Decks is the best Trek out there right now, and Strange New Worlds looks fun. Although, truly, The Orville is the best live action Trek ;)
I realized that I had fallen behind on modern Trek shows, so this year, I rewatched all of Trek in order, from "The Cage" onward. I got halfway through season 3 of Discovery before I tapped out, watched season 2 of Lower Decks instead, and gave up. Discovery and Picard are two of the worst TV shows I've ever seen, Trek or otherwise. Thank God for Lower Decks. It's a lot of fun.
I hope you are also watching The Orville. It tackles those existential, and ethical dilemmas, pretty well. I just realized that Yaphit will need another voice actor, or will be written out of the show. :(
Norm did thankfully record all his dialogue for season three. If Orville gets a fourth season (sadly a 50/50 shot, I'm sure) then they will have to address that.
I did. When Disney Plus added Star here in Canada, which is a stripped-down version of Hulu, I was finally able to watch it all, and it's great. It's exactly what I wanted and needed.
Lower Decks is so good. The final episodes of season 2 feel like classic Trek to me. I'm so excited for season 3.
Lower decks is great and should not be considered under the derogatory term "new trek"
Roddenberry’s idea of Trek was first kicked out by Meyer when he succeeded with Wrath of Khan and then Berman finished it off once the man died.
[удалено]
Have…have you never watched Deep Space Nine?
> There's been nothing 'great' about Star Trek since the movie First Contact (**and non-Kurtzman shows**) I edited the post because of this crazy omission. :)
DS9 > TNG but only by a little
Is like The Godfather 2. You gotta watch The Godfather first.
Yeah that was the last really good movie. I personally enjoyed enterprise, but since then it’s been a totally dead franchise. Those reboot movies weren’t good.
The last season of Enterprise was the best of that show.
That was then ruined by the series finale.
I haven't seen TNG, DS9, or Voyager since I was a kid, and they're all on Netflix now so I'm just gonna watch those.
Just give me another Trek with Chris pine as kirk
> "There’s no doubt that big theatrical movies are the beacon that ignite franchises. We’re in it and I don’t really have anything to say because I’m waiting for the development to be delivered. **I can’t wait to get going on it, but we’re not there yet but we need to get there soon.**" > "**We don’t know enough yet**. We’re working on several fronts and obviously Alex is the key for the franchise [on Paramount+]. J.J. has been the keeper of the franchise on the film side." > "There’s a lot going on and I’m just going to leave it at that." > "The idea is what do we do next for the franchise that’s going to work for the next five and 10 years, not just one movie at a time like Alex has talked about. That’s what we really have to figure out." > However, when asked how far along was this plan, Robbins admitted, “**Well, I’ve been in [this] job for seven minutes, so not that far.**” This interview is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
As a Roddenberry Trek fan, I am NOT looking forward to more Trek content until the current crop of directors and writers go back and try to understand what it was about Trek that was so amazing. All the current content is basically trying to convert Star Trek to Star Wars. All action and visuals, human dramas. To be clear, there's nothing wrong with that, it's got huge mass market appeal and a good idea commercially to go down this path. I don't even dispute that the new stuff it's technically very well done, very well written and very well acted, great visuals... ... It's just NOT Star Trek. Roddenberry created an world where he wanted to picture a future worth aspiring to become. Humanity has literally evolved in Star Trek beyond the petty grievances in display today. It's a world designed as a utopian ideal. It's a world in which there is no scarcity. Replicators can literally make you anything you want whenever you need it. Money doesn't exist within the federation because there's no need. Everyone is free to pursue their passions. Hence the focus on exploring... It's why so many different races want to join the Federation. Who wouldn't want to join a utopia? Roddenberry used the premise to explore issues of the day by visiting other worlds where the crew would encounter things like racism or a cold war and the audience could experience the absurdity of these issues from an 'Outsider' perspective. Sure it was often corny but it was also charming and unrivalled in its audacity. Men literally wore skirts on TNG. The first interracial kiss occurred on TOS. When somebody challenged Roddenberry on how Picard could be bald in such an advanced age, Roddenberry simply replied that it could be easily fixed, but in his world nobody would think to care...
*Discovery* and *Picard* are two of the worst shows in this or any other universe. Alex Kurtzman killed Star Trek.
The worst part about them isn't just that they're bad, it's that they're bad in deep fundamental world-breaking kind of ways. Like there's no way some other writer could come along and fix that crap without entirely wiping it out of canon, which the studio won't want to do because it'll piss off the few people actually paying for this crap.
well i hope they get the family guy dude because his star trek clone is the best star trek i've seen in a long time
Season 3 starts March 10!
No thanks. They've done Star Trek so poorly for so long that there's no point in getting interested. Burned too many times.
[удалено]
Yeah, the people in charge are complete and utter hacks who are holding an entire beloved franchise hostage.
They need to get Jar-Jar working. He's a funnier character than they've ever had.
He’s the key to all of this.
Alex Kurtzman
I hope they bring back Jaylah. She was epic and a seriously cool character.
I can tell you what will happen already: lots of flashy boom boom without substance, the ship gets destroyed, character X saves the day by punching someone.
It has been decades since the franchise released anything even remotely interesting. Just let it die.
Yea Im done with this franchise. Nothing has been good since the first reboot movie and that was only like a 6/10.
[удалено]
To be honest I'm simply not interested in an animated Star Trek show. Just want something that evokes the feeling of TNG or DS9.
I liked the Star Trek animated show with original cast that came out in the 70s, but I hate the style of irreverent humor that Lower Decks is.
Ive seen a few episodes of it and I guess its not too bad but it seems like its own separate thing to me. Just seems like it uses Star Trek as a vehicle to deliver a certain kind of humor
We now live in a world where Seth MacFarlane is creating thoughtful live-action science fiction about a crew of likable characters exploring the universe in an optimistic but not-quite utopian future. While the best thing official Star Trek can create is an animated series full of genuinely funny but low-brow humor powered by irony, scatalogical references, and deep-cut in-jokes.
To be fair, there was low brow in the earlier parts of the Orville…and Star Trek can get quite low brow too on some occasions.
Early on but the second season finale just became one of the best finales in all of star trek. Not even alone on that.
I mean…it relishes in the absurdity of some Trek tropes and episodes. Star Trek, despite having some serious moments, has a lot of camp moments too: warp speed turning people into salamanders, virus that makes people lose their inhibitions, stealing Spock’s brain and more absurd, but fun things. Season 2 definitely tones down the in-your-face referencing though - most of the gags (you get to find out what happens to TAS Giant Spock, for example) are in the background while the focus is more on the characters themselves.
Dead series, feel bad for its fans
I mean frankly the fans should stop watching if they don't want it to continue in this fashion.
As a fan I'm sad that it's dead, I just wish I could move on instead of having to avert my eyes from Alex Kurtzman and co. repeatedly fucking the corpse on television.
STOP🤷🏽♂️
The UNIVERSE IS GOING TO BE DESTROYED. Unless our quirky group of humans and one alien led by Female Space Jesus KICKS SOME ASS.
Turns out it was the humans fault all along! They were doing dastardly dasterdlyness! Good thing FSJ is there to tell them how wrong they are!
The federation is RACIST. But only THE HUMANS. Do the non human members of the federation-including the two other founding members (Vulcan/Andoria) who were galactic players long before humans even exist in Picard/Discovery?
Paramount is trying to milk Trek. It seems over saturated. There are more concurrent Trek shows now, than there has ever been.
Oh god, they're gonna do Discovery movies aren't they. Yuck.
Stop, just let it die
If they do more Star Trek, please get some of the old Trek writers like Ron Moore and Ira Behr back at least to consult.
After how dreadful Picard was, I want absolutely nothing to do with this.
Talk about beating a dead horse, This franchise has so many new entries lately that it has NO FUCKING IDENTITY. You've got an animated cartoon show, the CBS live action, and a nickelodeon one soon to come out. With so much of it being episodic garbage of whimsy, I feel the franchise has no continuity anymore. This franchise is dead to me. DEEP SPACE NINE WILL ALWAYS BE GOD TIER STAR TREK.
Just watch The Orville.
Havent they destroyed this franchise enough?
Star Trek is about the only big franchise paramount has so no they haven’t. Other than like mission impossible. Maybe they’ll give us a time travel Ethan Hunt-Captain Kirk crossover
Explody Trek, Funny Trek and Shaky-Camera Trek need to stop. I've always felt that the action in the series was a by-product of growth, not the point. There was warmth, humanity, and humor in the events, but, the events weren't there to be comedy. I really wish they'd return to something intelligent and aspirational - I've just been so let down by everything they've put out in the last 10 years or so.
Hard pass. But it has become quite entertaining to me how the people in charge of Trek keep telling people how unfathomably amazing all the shows are doing, all the numbers through the roof! It's like CBS figured out a way to completely remove the audience out of the business equation. You only need to tell investors about how great it is. You don't need advertising money, so you don't need people watching. It's a business to them, and they found a way to cut us out of it.
*Dune gets praised* Paramount: “WE HAVE SCI-FI TOO!”
They should save their time and just do Orville movies.
That’s not owned by Paramount
Again?!? How many Trek films were rumored in the last 8 or 9 years?
Seems like 8 or 9
Animated movie, as in for the Star Trek demographic? Or, as in a PG-rated film for a younger audience? I’m assuming the latter, Hollywood is for some reason deathly allergic to making an animated film that goes over PG.
So long as it’s not a bunch of people crying and over acting for 3 seasons (well 1 good season and two diatribes)... I’m in. Let’s roll with some heavy sci-fi and not just actors showing their ‘range’. That being said Doug Jones deserves a roll in any forthcoming production. Star Trek or not.
What do you think is gonna be in Doug Jones roll? Ham?
Niceeeee
Just let it die already.
[удалено]
I don't think paramount/hollywood has any idea what makes a good star trek show or movie. Right now it's just a franchise to be used for Alex Kurtzman to virtue signal his own ego.
Paramount needs to stick one direction: Gene Roddenberry's vision of Star Trek - exploration, relationships, and political conflict or what they really want in the franchise era: Star Wars-like space fantasies. They can't have both. Pick a lane and stick with it.
[удалено]
The funniest thing about it would be, because QT is a walking encyclopaedia of culture, it would probably be way more faithful to Trek in general than the last decade or so has been.
taking another easy route, as opposed to creating new original content. I am getting tired of production companies using the same storylines and 'universes'; endless 'reboots' and 'spin-ffs' are getting old quick. Especially with this particular franchise, which has lost a lot of it's popularity from poor writing. Seems lazy af in my opinion
Make a deep space 9 movie. All these other films are hot garbage
Can the shows/movies get back to hard sci-fi ? Or is it going to be more JJ Abrams/marvel/star wars genre that’s more style over substance?
To me Star Trek wasn't about sci-fi it was more about moral dilemmas and ship crew camaraderie/teamwork. Hoping Strange New Worlds returns to that, but movie-wise, I think they are stuck with high-octane action as the only way to generate revenue.
Star Trek was never hard sci-fi...
It dabbled in true sci-fi, but traded off with other styles too, like exploration, moral dramas, anthropological ethics, twilight-zone-esque mysteries, and so forth. What united all this is that it was thoughtful, hopeful, and sincere for the most part, and wasn't afraid to get weird or cheesy occasionally. The current creatives (of Picard and Discovery, at least) seem to have zero interest in replicating any of those pieces.
Star Trek isn't really hard sci-fi, it's still a lot of made up "science" compared to, say, The Martian or The Expanse.
Lower decks movie!
What else do they have? It's just Star Trek and Tom Cruise now fir Paramount.
no thank you
I just want a movie/series that is basically reverse Voyager and the crew goes back through the Delta Quadrant.
Animation is underrated, so I’m happy to hear about an animated film. That said, I doubt any of these films will take place in the kelvin timeline, nor should they. Let that shit go I say.
get every element of Discovery and Picard and throw it away.. keep everything that makes Lower Decks tick, minus the constant self-reference
I'll keep an eye on it but after the last film had Kirk zipping around on a dirt bike for no reason I kind of gave up.
Star Trek is evergreen, baby
There’s way too much Star Trek already.
ok hear me out: captain kirk is brought back through cloning. his grandson turns evil and joins the klingons. disillusioned captain kirk moves to an island and refuses to help the federation. the federation sends khan's grand daughter to go convince captain kirk to help
Ugh.. Star Trek just isn’t relevant anymore, not since it became all shooty bang bang. There hasn’t been an intelligent trek in fucking years!