
One thing that still causes me considerable pain is that prior to JJ Abrams‘ reboot, Star Trek had become a joke, and anyone who dared proclaim their admiration of the show was treated like a pariah and forced to sit miserably at home in their mock uniform-PJ’s boldly going nowhere in particular, horribly alone. Oh, it’s cool now, because the new movie was so bad-ass, and Abrams’ name above the door made the grand old franchise accessible to a much larger general audience, at the same time as almost wiping out everything that came before it in the franchise by establishing a new history, but not so long ago it was all very different.
What has compelled me to write this article is the firm belief that there is still the potential for a Star Wars Trek TV show to work, and heal the considerable damage done by Enterprise and its notorious and idiotic finale. It’s not just that I really want it (though I do), it’s a simple logical assumption. Look at the success of the newish V, the sparkling Stargate: Universe and highly-anticipated upcomers like Falling Skies: sci-fi is where it is at right now, and Paramount or CBS would be fools to not add a fifth spin-off to the franchise, taking some lessons from the past, and the current crop of successful shows.
There is a certain section of people who will tell you that every film journalist/critic is no more than a failed actor/writer/film-maker, which is why we are always so invested in our own beliefs as to how a film should be made (which is the invisible bench-mark we then compare the actual film against). To be honest, that’s probably exactly how I would describe how I evaluate films, and so to stay true to form rather than try and go out and get my ideas turned into actual movies or shows I’m now going to offer exactly how a Star Trek TV show could succeed in the current TV environment.
1. Don’t make it a reboot

I’m sick to death of the solution to all problems with a franchise being proclaimed as a whole new beginning. Even the most successful of franchises or phases of franchises (I’m talking Nolan’s Batman here obviously) suffer that rather ignominious fate – and don’t doubt that it is a shameful fate, no matter how many people suggest that a reboot is often chosen in order to not infringe on the legacy of former great films. Because at the end of the day to reboot is to replace, and that inevitably damages the preceding films, or in this case TV shows.
So, make it original, but don’t abandon the legacy of former Star Trek series. That way you aren’t faced with the proposition of a show that can’t feature compelling villains like The Borg or technological advances that appeared in the later series. After all, part of the joy of sci-fi is catching a glimpse of what the future might look like- consider this: one of the enduring questions that remains attached to the Back to the Future series is why we aren’t all now scooting about on hover boards. To me, that says something strong about the relationship between sci-fi technological fantasies and our engagement with the genre as a mode of future-gazing.
2. Stop with the “humanity is invincible” philosophy

It’s a well known fact that nobody dies in the Star Trek TV shows. No-one of real note anyway: which of course bred the running joke of the Red Shirts. And this is despite the fact that across five different series we have met countless “main” characters. If you compare that mortality record with other sci-fi or even just general ensemble shows from the past few years the difference is telling. Take Lost for instance, a show in which no character was indispensable, no matter what the star billing, and which crucially valued the impact that death can have as a narrative device.
Star Trek rarely followed such a trend – in some ways the shows always viewed death the same way that prime time soap operas did (i.e. as a way to write characters out when necessary). And when the various casts did feel the Grim Reaper’s icy touch those instances were few and far between. I can count on one hand the character who have died in the TV shows: Tasha Yar in TNG, Jadzia Dax in DSN, Trip in Enterprise – none of them really felt fitting or appropriate.
The way ahead must be to accept the Lost pattern, make every character dispensable and write compelling story arcs that include major deaths. Those moments are what gripping TV shows are made of.
3. Bring back Q

Few characters from the Star Trek universe can claim quite the enduring level of popularity among fans that Q did. Perhaps it was the performance by John de Lancie, a snooty mix of charisma and bile, or the fact that the character is just plain exceptional on paper- but either way episodes involving the sardonic immortal tend to feature heavily in my all-time favourite. He’s also the easiest character to write into any future Star Trek series, given his diety-like-ness, and though Picard was definitely his greatest adversary, there is unbelievable scope (and I’d hope a fair amount of shared clamour) to get Q back on-screen opposite a new captain, given his cruel and somewhat baffling exclusion from the TNG big-screen outings. I mean come on – if Insurrection was somehow deemed a good idea, how the hell did a movie featuring a wrath-wrought and murderous Q not make it to the table?
4. Humanoid is not the only option

Although there was something wonderfully camp and cheerful about the way the original Star Trek simply painted sexy ladies with (hopefully water-based) poster paint and passed them off as alien life-forms, a lot of time has passed since then and sci-fi innovations have dispensed with the need to be so “creative”. So why are 95% of aliens glimpsed in the Star Trek universe bi-ped humanoids (albeit with various colourful “adjustments”)? Surely, human imagination is occasionally able to transcend the limitations imposed upon it by human arrogance? I want bio-tech crawlers; vicious, genuinely threatening beasts, not always fully sentient but still utterly threatening, and I think modern sci-fi audiences are ready for a little proper horror in their Star Trek.
5. Ignore Abrams’ versions

While JJ Abram’s new Star Trek universe has its place and indeed its merits, the idea that it has started an entirely different time-line is not exactly the most beneficial development for a new TV series. Star Trek properties need to accept and pay homage (in some way) to their lineage (which is precisely why Enterprise didn’t work), as I said above at number one.
6. Choose an authentic, appropriate theme song

The very worst thing about Enterprise, and the initial thing that made me lose interest in it was the horrendous theme tune, which was a million miles away from every Star Trek theme that had preceded it- sounding more like a particularly cheesy Christian rock song than something announcing a sci-fi show. I loved how Deep Space Nine and Voyager sounded very in-keeping with the Original Series and particularly Next Generation, even for original compositions: their similarities and the fact that I find it nigh-on impossible to hum all three later themes back-to-back without confusing sequences and creating my own Star Trek Mega-Mix are indicative of their appropriate nature. So, this time around (assuming my advice will be taken on-board – and why wouldn’t it be?!) stick with a similar theme- orchestral and for God’s sake no lyrics. Unless it’s William Shatner’s version of “Rocket Man” of course.
7. Cast clever (and not from another sci-fi)

Chiefly by choosing an actor for the new captain with a certain regal poise: after all, it worked incredibly well with Patrick Stewart. Another of the problems with Enterprise was the casting of Scott Bakula as the captain who had so infamously been the lead in Quantum Leap, which just plain threw my attention. If I had to make a fantasy pick for my new captain I would love to see Terry Quinn pull on a scarlet tunic and kick some alien tail – but then that sort of goes against the not casting from another sci-fi rule. But I did say fantasy…
8. Realise that ‘Gritty’ and ‘Dark’ don’t necessarily mean ‘Good’

Following the good initial reception of Stargate: Universe, V and BSG, it would be easy to assume that the model for modern sci-fi success would be to inject a liberal dose of darkness and grit, and even I am suggesting that a new show would require some blood-thirst above. I’m all for impactful uses of darker sub-plots, but obligatory darkness is not the way to go in all cases. We have to remember that Star Trek is set in a futuristic advanced society in which grimness isn’t really all that fitting – and to take that approach entirely would necessarily also require a Voyager-esque narrative conceit removing the crew and ship away from established society. And I wouldn’t be exactly thrilled about that…
9. Don’t Make It a Tale of Isolation

While I loved Voyager, and admired the bravery of the concept at the time, Stargate: Universe has made such a storyline redundant (since it would be now dismissed as a copy-cat), and Star Trek has already gone that route. And to be honest, at a few points throughout the series, I felt that the marooning of the USS Voyager would have worked better as an extended story-line – a season long at most. If I’m going to get a new Star Trek I want it to be a grand ensemble work, incorporating not just a main cast but a wider one too, including familiar aliens (foes and friends) as well as some new breeds.
10. Stick with the USS Enterprise

When I was a teenager, I had a very dirty habit. I used to lock myself away in my room for hours on end, and get my starship on. More specifically, I used to design variant Enterprises from a time period way beyond the Voyager time-line, incorporating technological advances seen in Voyager and also some presumptive developments of my own imagining. While that is a little disturbing to admit, the crucial fact is that I went back to the Enterprise as the base for my designs, despite the fact that DSN and Voyager had long-since replaced the iconic flag-ship as the shows’ main points of focus. And that’s because the Enterprise is Star Trek – hence the decision (albeit slightly misguided as it was in execution) to commission Enterprise – and what better place to focus the thrust of the narrative than on the fleet’s flag-ship? Flag-ship means best captain, and best crew. Simple as that.
The Enterprise should not be the only ship involved though- Deep Space Nine showed the value of that approach by including my favourite ship of all time, The Defiant (the reason: Worf commanding it in First Contact – “ramming speed”- and the inclusion of a cloaking device). Part of the joy of Star Trek comes in marvelling at the designs of ships and space-stations, and a broader cast of ships allows for even more marvelling, so it’s a winner all round.
Bonus Suggestion: Add Tribbles. Lots of Tribbles.

Does this really need an explanation? No, of course it doesn’t.
And if all else fails, just revert to Singer’s exceptional TV pitch!
Want to write about the stuff you're passionate about and have your work read by an audience of over 10 million a month? Click here to become a contributor.








30 Comments
Great ideas. We need another Star Trek.
I agree with *most* of your suggestions. However…
I think that a new Trek series *badly* needs a shot of darkness/grimness/etc. Admittedly, I’m a huge fan of SGU, (but not BSG, oddly) so my views may be biased. I just feel that TV has come along way since the TNG/Voyager/Enterprise style of “big friendly family”-type crew, squeaky-clean, ever altruistic Federation types, and the like.
I’d just appreciate SGU-esque realism, production value and character-driven story arcs. Like DS9, but even more realistic. When I watch *any* version of Trek, I feel like I’m watching a show… when I watch SGU, I feel like I’m *on* Destiny, experiencing the joys and struggles of the crew *with* them. I appreciate that level of realism.
Give me Star Trek Universe, and I’m SET.
“potential for a Star Wars TV show to work”
I am sure that you ment Star Trek there :) Anyway good article. i am however a bit more on a twist for the franchise. Looking back at all the Star Trek (all the shows), the ones at the top are more dark themed. i would love to see a Ronald D Moore (hence new BSG) hit on a new Star Trek series and exploring some really dark themes and making the overall feel more real.
Many people will hate me for saying that, but look at the epsisodes that RDM was behind in next gen and DS9, they were great.
A Star Trek series could very easily pick up where the MMO Star Trek Online is going. Taking place some decades after the destruction of the Romulan homeworld, it shows a massive fraying of alliances and outright hostility as different power try to fill the vacuum left by the decline of the Romulans (although they are still there). I think it would make a nice background and still leave room for the theme of exploration.
One of the things that disappointed me about Voyager (the main thing) was that the producers had a chance to do something really brave with that series and instead fell back on the planet-of-the-week type of episodes tacked onto the we-have-to-get-home theme. If I had been in charge, I would have done the we-have-to-get-home theme the first season but building towards a shift at the end of Season One where the crew decides that getting home is near impossible barring some technological innovation and instead they choose to remain and jump into the fray of an interstellar conflict where they are — perhaps the Kazon could have been used a little better in this way. Basically, the series would have been about how the crew of the Voyager helps create a sort of “Federation II” in the Delta Quadrant with the idea that they will either figure out how to get home or that when the actual Federation reaches them one day, they will find an offshoot of themselves ready to greet them.
Second paragraph you said Star Wars TV Show instead of Star Trek and as far as the sparkling Stargate Universe goes, you do mean the show that got cancelled after a season and a half for extremely poor ratings.
Actually, I think a whole series centering on Q might be very very interesting with a lot of imaginative possibilities. Regarding a new Star Trek TV series, first and foremost they need writers who really understand science fiction and don’t get trapped in technobabble mumbo jumbo, as well as storytelling basics.
I don’t think I will ever understand the Internet’s need to comment when a writer makes a written mistake, no matter how tiny or inconsequential the mistake is to the piece itself.
My bad! Star Wars on the brain.
And I meant “sparkling” because I enjoyed it personally.
While I totally disagree with your take on the reboot (it was awful, blasphemous and badly written to boot) I do agree entirely with the concept that if you are going to create a do-over, it needs be a bit different than what we’ve seen.
Ironically, I believe that the “different time line” angle is the answer, and can be derived directly from a Star Trek, the Original Series episode.
All one need to is substitute the history we know for the one briefly encountered in Mirror, Mirror.
Everything we’re looking for in an SF TV series can be found there; it would feature the Enterprise, offer dark and gritty (great costumes too), no problems with a non-interference policy, oodles of political intrigue, space-piratey iconography – and who couldn’t come up with a great theme song to go along with the empire’s logo – an Earth with a dagger through it!
A new Star Trek series is not an idea I’d previously considered but you make a very compelling argument! I think I was swayed by point 4 particularly. ‘Q, Q, what will you do, will you be terribly bad?’
And tribbles, a room full of tribbles and Spock. I’ll do the screenplay on that episode!!!
SGU has been cancelled & with it the Stargate franchise. V may not be renewed. The 1st ep of Fallen Skies hasn’t even aired yet. Strange choices for evidence that “sci-fi is where it is at right now”.
SG states what he would want to see in a new Trek series as if it would be enough to please the fans of original Trek, Next Gen & DS9 for a new series to be successful. On the 1 hand I doubt if the best creative talent will want to be involved with a remake, on the other I doubt a network exec will want to go where others have gone before & failed to attract an audience.
The heart of Trek wasn’t the characters, the villains or a ship named Enterprise. It was optimism about the future. All else is secondary & a reboot or, better yet, a new series altogether that is not committed to repeating the mistakes of the past is the better way to go, both creatively & commercially.
I agree Will. The article makes a lot of claims that are, frankly, woeful. I didn’t get SGU at all. Why be at others throats billions of light years away from Earth? What was it with Rush? Why did it take nearly 2 seasons to find the bridge, unlock the ancient’s code? Why no humour? The webepisodes were better than the TV episodes! Why try to duplicate BSG? There is no rag-tag fleet here! Heck they’ve got no air, water, food, way of getting back or toilets on Destiny! What’s the scarcity this week? Who’d want such a run down shi*t-hole of a ship anyway. What secrets still exist? We’ll never know and frankly few of us care.
Tribbles, Q, the Enterprise, killing off characters regularly and theme songs do not make Trek. You cannot build a series around just these items. The so-called ‘forehead aliens’ only started after Roddenberry departed and only because they are cheap. Trek will not come back to TV in the short term as its era has passed. Roddenberry was correct for his time – the network demanded it. Enterprise was hopeless, DS-9 dealt with war (something Roddenberry would not do as the Federation charter collapses) but was still a great show. Voyage hit the reset button every week but was again a great show – mainly. the movies went off the rails (just what was Generations doing??? See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h06WKYFYdlo (viewer discretion advised)).
JJ and Co did the only thing they could – reboot using the same characters and alter the time line. All continuity issues avoided – a fresh approach to the material applied – clever.
If Trek is to come back to TV it has to be clever, have optimism about the future, a great cast, stick to Roddenberry’s principles and have a ship called Enterprise ;)
So, because one out of the three I chose as an indication of the current state of play was cancelled my opinion is redundant?
And Marcus, kindly point out my “woeful claims”? You then attacked my supposed claim that a new Star Trek should ape BSG, which clearly I NEVER SAID AT ALL! You’re trying to start an argument in an empty room.
I love how people completely miss the point of the article, which was supposed to be a bit of fun…
Most of the suggestions are really good. But I think, it would be illogical to have a new series that is fully bright, after all the threats for the Federation DS9 and VOY showed. I think, the core meaning of this suggestion is: bring a renewed version of the Federation’s ideals of exploring and helping where they can.
Aside from that, I thought in the past of a new series featuring a ship under the command of Section 31 with ablative armor, that I’d find awesome. :D
I’m not sure why anyone would think the original post is redundant. Have there been other pieces about a Trek revival?
I don’t see science fiction as having a particularly strong presence on TV right now. SyFy has largely abandoned it for other programming. V, Fringe & the Event are doing OK, at best, in the ratings. Nothing like the success that Lost (which I don’t count as SF)had. And there’s no shows like Galactica that critics appreciate.
The bigger picture is that most people, including me, are tired of the lack of creativity on TV as well as the movies. Give me something new, not a retread. Especially a retread where there’s flaws that can’t be fixed & they’ve pretty much done as much as they can do with the premise over umpteen seasons.
I have been a Trekker since the very first episode and would love to see another series that had all the best characteristics of TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise (yes, Enterprise had SOME good stuff).
But sadly, I think the time has passed for that. Today’s audience (assuming they choose the 20 and under group as their demographic target) appears to want everything “dark and edgy” with fast cut video-game action; only young, beautiful people; conflict and war; graphic sex and violence; macho attitudes (even for the females); and tormented souls as ‘heroes’.
I didn’t bother going to see the latest film — I could tell from the trailer it wasn’t my taste. I have a feeling any new series would simply impose that style on a new storyline and wouldn’t appeal to me.
Frankly, I don’t see why a new SciFi series would have to try to ride the Star Trek coat tails — why not come up with an original idea. Oh, that’s right, we’re talking about television here. What was I thinking?????
I may be in the minority here, but what has always attracted me to movies or a TV series is not the special effects. I got past the WOW factor of special effects with the “jump to light speed” in Star Wars. What I like is the character study of the people involved. As Spielberg says it, “putting ordinary people in extrordinary situations”. For instance, what I’ve always wanted to see more of in a James Bond film is who this guy really is, how he really lives. What does he do with his life when not running an op for M? We’ve already seen enough of the 5 star hotels he stays at before dressing in his tux and going down to the casino. Followed by the super human (special effects) exploits to save the world. I want to see where and how he really lives. What furniture 007 would choose. What art. What watch would he choose to wear if not required to put on his MI6 issued Omega. Not to get too far off track, what I’m referring to is things like the rediculous cabins that have been shown in Star Trek tv and movies that have sparce decorations and a plastic bunk like bed with no blanket. Is that how a person on a star ship would really live? It doesn’t seem human to me. Maybe Vulcan, but not human. The long term interest in a series is being involved with the people, and that is NOT achieved with special effects. A Star Trek series that even has a lot of story taking place at Star Fleet headquarters in San Francisco, or up in orbit above Earth at the main Star Base, could be compelling if the characters were deep and well written and not just “Red Shirts” or Zefram Cochrane crazies. Plus the effects department could really do some interesting work recreating what Earth in 2265 might look like and not just what a starship interior is like. A successful TV series has to get the audience to wonder what is going to happen next week and that is done through the people and the story. Also aliens that are just humans in makeup don’t really work for me. Worf spoke better English than I do. Better to concentrate on the human aspect of Star Trek and not populate the bridge with too many aliens that act human. I did find the Data character interesting though……
A new Star Trek series would be nice. However, there are still Starship Exeter, Star Trek: Phase II (FKA Star Trek: New Voyages), and Starship Farragut. These are excellent series, and well done.
V_ sucked…… Stargate…… Nothing is like star trekTNG DS9 voyager it wasn’t about the ships or the cast it was about the history of trek…turn the page…ENterprise ..sucked and was a mistake I never heard of nx class and the only good thing was the klingons foreheads explained the rest sucked please continue the history thanks
I also would love to see a new star trek series… and heres some more advice on creating it. FORGET JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING SAID ABOVE! Enterprise was great and while I do agree to keep star trek focused on the enterprise it should not be a requirement. And please shoot tribbles on site!
Yeeaayyy!! Yes, it’s time again for a Star Trek series on tv. With a few exceptions(the destruction of the planet Vulcan, & WHY was the Enterprise built on Earth, AND in the middle of Iowa?!), I did enjoy “Star Trek”, the movie. But I’m still partial to Gene Roddenberry-based Star Trek. My pick for a new captain would be one who is a non-white female. Hey, Capt. Janeway doesen’t have to be the only female CO of a ST franchise. My other choice would be for the 1st alien captain;& for that role, I envision the talented Peter Dinklage(hope I spelled his name right.), currently starring in “Game of Thrones”. Having him as the lead will turn Trekdom on it’s ear, which is on thing that the Star Trek franchise is famous for doing, concerning popular perceptions of established themes in its universe, & science fiction in general. My 2 cents: My favorite of all the Treks is DS9. I thought that the grittier theme worked well, giving the sries a realistic feel. You can have a positive vision of the future, & still have conflict. The 2 are not mutually exclusive. Also, I thought Star Trek:Enterprise was great, and was finally finding its own voice when it was prematurely cancelled.
I think after some time away from TV a New Star Trek Series would be great if they don’t just worry about the Special Effects but a great cast and villian. The Stories and the chemistry with the cast would be very important if it would work. They should pick a solid actor or two to make it work, Ryan Reynolds as the Captain for example. They should have a vulcan too.
You want to know how I know you’re gay? You want Ryan Reynolds to be the captain of the next Star Trek TV show. Just kidding ;)
But honestly at this point in time, Star Trek just needs better writing; not to say that the past writing was bad but, its out dated and been following an out dated formula for quite sometime now. In fact up until JJ Abrams movie.
Take shows like “Heroes” – It started off great and kept everyone hooked. “Lost” was like that too. But the point is… make the show EPIC. Space travel is epic. And a show depicted about how it might be 300+ years should be even more epic. Star Trek can get away with having a 15 person “main” cast. Why does it have to be about one captain. Why not have like 6 Captains and constantly follow the intricacies of their travels and the political ramifications of their big chair decisions. Why not keep the BIG picture in mind. Picard, Riker, Janeway and Sisko are now admirals and appear as cameos now and again. Romulan border disputes are hot… The Klingon empire has finally fallen into civil war and Alexander is one of 3 aspiring hopes for the empire. The Pa’Wraiths have revived Gul Dukat and are troubling the now great and mighty Bajor. There’s more than enough room in one TV show for big concepts like that. Who care about the single-serving episodes where the captain goes back in time and changes history just slightly enough to leave it out of his report and smile about it?
Lame… And that’s why up until recently Star Trek’s audience has been declining…
Remember the movie “Crash?” Crazy awesome movie because it showed how all these events affected everything / everyone else. Star Trek can easily be the next best thing and wearing the PJs will come back in style.
But it needs to be expanded in every direction; like other modern shows have done. The universe is a big place. Maybe its time for an equally big TV show that has gone where no other TV show has gone before.
Great points. I would want some grittiness & dark stuff but the overall theme of optimism should be there. And some humour. Star Trek had lots of humourous elements in that they did not take themselves very seriously.
I would say try to get a movie star who is willing to put aside his major motion picture aspirations for a few years and surround him with some tv regulars. Big names will surely get a solid audience. Or here’s a thought even though he has acted in Stargate Universe – why not Louis Ferreira as the captain? He would be perfect!
Well i disagree with 7 & 10, 7 because how do you think the poor actor/actress will feel knowing that he/she can’t ever join a star trek show because of this kind of thing. And 10 because star trek can’t just be about the same ship, it would get boring. 5 is a bit annoying because you will just confuse people by having two different realities without restoring one or anything, and of course, tribbles are acceptable. Anyhow I think it was a good idea and a good article.
Another example of #8: the DS9 treatment of the Mirror Universe. The TOS episode, the TNG novel ‘Mirror, Mirror’ and so help me, Shatner’s novels about the Mirror Universe all dealt with it better. I haven’t seen the STE episodes, so I can’t speak for them. I wonder if David Foster’s new series involves the MU any: “If evil wore the face of a hero, would you recognize it? If freedom came in the likeness of your oppressors, would you accept it? If you were your own enemy, who would be victorious?”
And Terry Quinn already has Star Trek form of course as he played admiral Eric Pressman in the TNG episode “the Pegasus”
I’m digitizing all my episodes recorded on VHS tapes in the 90′s and 2000′s. And I am thinking a lot about a new series.
Science Fiction is not only about futurology exercises, it’s also about discussing the present with a new vision. That’s why I think a new series in the 2010′s should focus on uncertainties, on crisis and wars inside the Federation. Enough on this bright and clean vision of the future. Let’s put some darkness here: civil wars, terrorism, religion, fundamentalism… Why not the decline and the end of the Federation in the 25th century? Rise and threat from new powers? A return to some values of a distant, pre-technological past?
Sorry, but we don’t need another series that shows this human-centered, autocratic, naïve vision of the future, again and again. It worked in a brilliant way with STNG, DS9, and more or less with Voyager. It will not work again.
Yes, I am really missing a good scifi on TV these days. I think an interesting offshoot might be to move it off the spaceships (Enterprise etc) altogether and have an Earth based show – using the Federation as a political backdrop, with cops, crooks, politics and the odd travellinbg between planets/sectors – maybe put some characters on a ship far away so that interaction can be shown from the Earth based side – both polital/militarily/command/etc and personal with husbands/wives at home. DS9 was a poor-man’s Babylon 5 IMO (OK in parts and to watch, but missing on the complexities and struggle of inter-species/racial politics). I like Voyager, but it did go on too long and with some really absurd story lines that broke the wider universe story (STNG etc) – such as exceeding warp 10 and regressing into lizards (wtf?) – it was also a bit too much day-time-TV-ish. Enterprise was just naf: Only two things I liked about it where T’pol :D and the theme song (sorry Op).
As to SGU, I was really p!ssed that they cancelled it – it had bad ratings because they kept playing with the times and putting gaps mid-season and because the press killed it (i.e. lack of promotion) – the same thing can be said for Galactica (another killed off with stupid – multi-month gaps between episodes – and putting several on in one day – wtf?) – it wasn’t meant to be BSG or B&S, it had a whole other premise and audience – again badly promoted and aired erratically by the mnorons at syfy (sure everyone’s much happier with the cooking shows now!)
I hate SyFy, they buy up good looking shows, badly present and promote them, then can them as soon as the figures drop – no investment, they should not have bought SciFi channel, they should have left it alone and bought the Cooking Channel instead! Rant over!
I full heatedly agree. As an ongoing trek fan since I was six, I have seen all to well the evolution and sometimes de-evolution of the franchise. Gene Roddenberry was incredibly wize when holding the reigns of the origional series and tng. The two shows held similar aspects and historical points but were two very different shows that gripped different audiences. The problem began when ds9 came about. oh, I loved the show and the shows after, but since ds9 there hasn’t been any braving of a new frontier until JJ Abrams trek. If the writers would just take a look at what grips young audiences today they could come up with a very compelling show. It is possible that some old school Trekkies might not like a new direction but some of the origional series fans weren’t happy with tng. So I say he’ll yeah to a completely different type of trek show, one for today’s audience. The origional series fans had to let a new generation take over and now it’s time for those of us who started with tng to do the same. Live long and prosper, and thank you Gene for giving us a world that will never die in our hearts.