Slashdot Mirror


Could Fuller Take Trek Back To TV?

bowman9991 writes "Bryan Fuller, creator of the TV show Pushing Daisies and a former Star Trek writer and producer, is geared up to make it happen. The new Star Trek TV show would be based on "old style" Star Trek, rather than the more recent incarnations and variations: Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise and Star Trek: The Next Generation. There hasn't been a Star Trek TV series since Enterprise was canceled after four seasons in 2005. Fuller wrote twenty one Star Trek episodes over four years, two in Deep Space Nine's final season, and the rest for Voyager. He also produced Voyager's last season. If J.J. Abrams' reboot is successful (and the latest trailer suggests it will be!) perhaps we'll see him involved with a new Star Trek TV show with the style and impact of Fringe or Lost. The new Star Trek movie featuring a young Kirk and Spock is in cinemas May 2009." Besides his work on many episodes of Trek, Fuller's work includes Dead Like Me and some of the best of Heroes. (He's one of the names I actively seek in the writing slot.) Between him and JJ Abrams, the era of Rick Berman looks to finally be at an end. Cross your fingers.

37 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm... by Kokuyo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Rather than another series that will result in overpriced DVDs, I'd have loved to get a DS9 or Voyager Movie or two...

    1. Re:Hmmm... by FredFredrickson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm sure I'm not the only one who's hoping for a Patrick Stewart casting. DS9 or Voyager Movies? Eck. A new TV Series with Picard.. and Data!? Amazing!

      Two things:
      1. Brent Spiner would have to lose some weight
      2. They've got to get rid of Data's emotion chip. That's when Data lost his charm, I feel.

      Otherwise, bring it on.

      --
      Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
    2. Re:Hmmm... by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Two things:
      1. Brent Spiner would have to lose some weight
      2. They've got to get rid of Data's emotion chip. That's when Data lost his charm, I feel.
      3. They've got to rip off the Spock story from "Search for Spock" to bring him back to life.

      Fixed that for you ;) Alternatively they could pretend that "All Good Things..." was the last real TNG story and all of the crappy movies never existed. I'd be just fine with that.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    3. Re:Hmmm... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Funny

      I agree, Patric Stewart would make an EXCELLENT Klingon or other bad guy for the series.

      I would rather see Star trek redone with starfleet being the weak guy and getting our asses handed back regularly. Combat with the klingons needs to be "OH CRAP! RUN!" instead of this "I am here to reason with you, can we sit down for tea and crumpets?"

      They started the right track with enterprise, but it needs to be far more gritty. More death, A sea of red-shirts flowing out the ship and popping like popcorn whenever a hull breach happens. Kirk getting pissed and launching all 8 photo torpedoes at the single ship and then vowing to exterminate that species for killing ensign Davis. he can even rip his shirt and hyperventilate when he does it... That would be very much like the first season.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:Hmmm... by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Were all of them crap?

      Yes. Generations utterly ruined Data's character for the sake of an "Oh.... shit!" joke, destroyed the Enterprise-D for the sake of an action scene and killed off Picard's family for the sake of a cheap shock and never bothered to explore the ramifications of this.

      First Contact was an enjoyable standalone film but utterly destroyed whatever continuity we had from TNG for the sake of creating a single villain for the audience to focus on. It also didn't really do justice to Troi or Crusher. Actually come to think of it, none of the movies did them justice.

      and Insurrection was pure Trek, albeit perhaps a bit too cheesy.

      Perhaps? It was incredibly cheesy. And don't even get me started on Nemesis. This guy summarizes Nemesis way better than I could ever hope to.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:Hmmm... by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Funny

      "They've got to get rid of Data's emotion chip. That's when Data lost his charm, I feel."

      Without his emotion chip he would fail to grasp the full irony of your statement.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    6. Re:Hmmm... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Deep Suck 9 was just that...

      Oh please. DS9 was decent-to-poor in the early goings, much like TNG, but once the Dominion War plot arch started up, it went from good to truly great. No other Trek has been as dark and gritty as DS9 was, actually showing a real, unsanitized war with it's attendant ugliness, while portraying a federation that was, for a change, flawed and multifaceted. Pity it seems to get such a raw deal from a certain subset of the Trek fanbase.

    7. Re:Hmmm... by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but once the Dominion War plot arch started up, it went from good to truly great

      Yes, if by "truly great" you mean bailed out with a plot device (wormhole aliens) and don't stop to question why Captain Sisko seemed to be single-handily running the Federation's war-effort, ranging from commanding a fleet of some 600 ships on his own to commanding a ground battle that could have been ended in two minutes if any of the Trek powers had the equivalent of machine guns or artillery. Are there really no infantry weapons bigger than rifles in the 24th century?

      actually showing a real, unsanitized war with it's pretty special effects

      Fixed that for you.

      while portraying a federation that was, for a change, flawed and multifaceted

      That was actually one of the redeeming things about it. My favorite DS9 episodes were In the Pale Moonlight (Sisko and Garek assassinate a Romulan Senator to bring them into the war) and the various Maquis/Eddington episodes. Garek had the best character in the series (IMHO) and Eddington's critique of the Federation particularly damning:

      "Why is the Federation so obsessed with the Maquis? We've never harmed you. And yet we're constantly arrested and charged with terrorism. Starships chase us through the Badlands and our supporters are harassed and ridiculed. Why? Because we've left the Federation, and that's the one thing you can't accept. Nobody leaves paradise. Everyone should want to be in the Federation. Hell, you even want the Cardassians to join. You're only sending them replicators because one day they can take their "rightful place" on the Federation Council. You know In some ways you're even worse than the Borg. At least they tell you about their plans for assimilation. You're more insidious. You assimilate people and they don't even know it."

      It got to me to thinking. What is the Federation really? At least as written by Gene Roddenberry it seems to border on communism. Even DS9 continued this trend to a certain point -- mentioning "transporter credits" in one episode. Apparently the government doles out ration coupons to control how often the citizenry can move about. Where's the individual freedom and liberty?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    8. Re:Hmmm... by geobeck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But please get a better actor than Shatner.

      A bad actor he may be (who had his ass handed to him by Ricardo Montalban in that movie), but every captain of every TV or movie spaceship since has, and always will be, compared to Shatner's Kirk.

      Sometimes you don't need talent to achieve immortality; you just need to be recognizably unique.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    9. Re:Hmmm... by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No other Trek has been as dark and gritty as DS9 was, actually showing a real, unsanitized war with it's attendant ugliness, while portraying a federation that was, for a change, flawed and multifaceted.

      Strange ... you say that like it was a good thing. Some of us actually watched Trek *because* it was a vision of a cleaner, sanitized world, a better humanity where the ideals we strive for are seen in action actually solving problems. The darker, more flawed vision of the Trek universe in DS9, where the ends justify the means and everyone's a broken hypocrite underneath, undermined what seemed to me to be the whole point of the Trek universe.

      Also, the Dominion War had a tendency to have ships blowing up all over the place as eye candy, destroying the sense that each ship mattered, that each ship represented a huge investment of resources, a rich and meaningful history and a crew with stories of their own. In attempting to be a bigger, louder Babylon 5 (all while struggling to find a message beyond "life sucks" after it's writers failed to make the initial high-concept post-insurgency-peace theme compelling), DS9 ceased to be recognizable as Trek to me.

      Oh dear, I've become a person who argues Trek.

    10. Re:Hmmm... by geobeck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...showing a real, unsanitized war with it's attendant ugliness...

      Are you serious? DS9 was The Care Bears Fussy Day compared to the ugliness of a real war. The producers didn't have the budget or the political will from the network to add any real ugliness.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    11. Re:Hmmm... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, if by "truly great" you mean bailed out with a plot device (wormhole aliens) and don't stop to question why Captain Sisko seemed to be single-handily running the Federation's war-effort, ranging from commanding a fleet of some 600 ships on his own to commanding a ground battle that could have been ended in two minutes if any of the Trek powers had the equivalent of machine guns or artillery. Are there really no infantry weapons bigger than rifles in the 24th century?

      Meh, I never said the show was flawless. But it was, in those seasons, as good as the best TNG, IMHO, and far better than anything Voyager or Enterprise have ever offered.

      I agree, the wormhole aliens solution was a bit contrived (although, it makes sense in the context of the show... the aliens are supposedly a) all-powerful, and b) the custodians of Bajor... going to them for help isn't unreasonable). Then again, was Data's solution to the Borg problem in "Best of Both Worlds" any less contrived? And as for Sisko's role, well... you could just as easily level the same criticism against Picard in TNG leading the charge in any number of engagements.

      Garek had the best character in the series (IMHO) and Eddington's critique of the Federation particularly damning:

      I couldn't agree more. I also think the episode in which there was an attempted military coup on Earth was brilliantly executed.

      It's funny, though. You say that "portraying a federation that was, for a change, flawed and multifaceted" "was actually one of the redeeming things about it." To me, that's what makes the series brilliant.

      I mean, the goal of science fiction shouldn't be to present funny aliens, or to give nerds neat technology to drool over. It should be to use the setting as an environment in which one can then explore the human condition in a way that would otherwise be impossible. DS9 attempted to do that, exploring the decisions and compromises one must make during a time of war, and it did so better than, I think, any other other Trek, save for TNG.

    12. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous+Monkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was thinking that Data needs to become more artificial and less human. He is a completely new form of life, and no one has scratched the surface of what that means. So, in a bid to keep Data, and still get rid of old Brent I think that he should 'outgorw' his body, and need to be transferred to something bigger. He starts as a shuttle, becomes a star ship, and then changes 'bodies' when he gets a new job. One season he is a deep space probe, next year he is a war ship, later he is a holodeck program. Maybe he could copy him self into a probe and then reintegrate himself when he returns. I think I'm just tired of machines that try to be human, we need a machine try to be a machine.

      --
      We are the Borg...
    13. Re:Hmmm... by Gilmoure · · Score: 5, Funny

      The fact that Shatner is so iconic shows that, bad acting aside, he has presence. Sometimes, that's all you need. Will be interesting to see how the new guy plays Kirk.

      Eventually, the original Star Trek roles could become a kind of entrenched character set, similar to Shakespeare characters. A hundred years from now, folks will be arguing over different actor's interpretations of Kirk and Spock in Amok Time.

      And then there will be the inevitable Star Trek in the park productions and the all nude/gender swapped productions.

      I weep for the future.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    14. Re:Hmmm... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Star Trek for me was supposed to be an idealized future, and we are the good guys. It had to tread carefully to avoid becoming overly preachy (and failed on occasion), but I'm not sure I like a darker or more warlike federation.

      Ah, but that's not what DS9 ever portrayed. What they portrayed was an idealized future where the good guys were forced into war because, guess what, sometimes you have to fight to survive. And the minute your goal is survival, well surprise surprise, it's suddenly a lot harder to be idealistic.

      I find this fascinating, though. To me, the entire reason Trek was flawed was because it's idealistic future was so wildly unbelievable. I'm sorry, but even in a world of limitless energy, food, and freedom, with perfect, idealized human beings, there's still going to be individuals/groups/races out there try to eat the good guys' lunch... you know, like the Dominion. And the minute you admit that, you have to be open to the idea of conflict with those people. And who would believe in a real, war-like conflict that didn't involve compromising one's ideals on occasion? At minimum, odds are you're going to have to kill on occasion, and last I checked, that's not a terribly nice, idealistic thing to do.

      Then again, at least in my mind, this is the difference between sci-fi, as entertainment, and sci-fi as an actual intellectual genre. IMHO, Trek, in its idealized form, can only succeed in the former. To truly examine the human condition, a prerequisite to achieving the latter, you actually have to admit that humans are not, and will never be, perfect, idealized creatures living in a perfect, idealized world.

    15. Re:Hmmm... by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It got to me to thinking. What is the Federation really?

      One thing that no Star Trek series has gotten much into is the interaction between military and civilian life. It's really strange if you think much about it. You have this huge fascist/communist state with a seemingly pervasive military presence. They have tons of military vessels just patrolling around the galaxy in seemingly random ways, under the excuse of scientific research and exploration, but constantly poking their noses in everyone's business. They're using their military might to cause outcomes favorable to themselves on a regular basis.

      And then when you see civilian life, everyone seems to just be hanging around in restaurants and bars or running vineyards. It's a very pastoral but irrelevant civilian life.

      And for some reason, no one is disturbed by it.

    16. Re:Hmmm... by Wraithlyn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's why Cavil in Battlestar is so great. He's like the anti-Data.

      "I DON'T WANT TO BE HUMAN!!!"

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
  2. Star Trek/Lost Mix by Timberwolf0122 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sort of like Voyager then in that they too were Lost (in the Delta Quadrant)? Only this time I want 1,2,3,4,5,6,8 and 9 of 9.. In fact I see no reason to have any other cast member that a bunch of 7 of 9's... Well maybe a leather clad Janeway, hmmm I seem to have gone off topic.

    --
    In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
    1. Re:Star Trek/Lost Mix by kat_skan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well maybe a leather clad Janeway, hmmm I seem to have gone off topic.

      *shudder* I think what you've gone off is the deep end.

    2. Re:Star Trek/Lost Mix by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think I'm the only one, either.

      No, there's loads of other slashdotters who miss their mommies.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. Hmmmm. by khasim · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Fuller wrote twenty one Star Trek episodes over four years, two in Deep Space Nine's final season, and the rest for Voyager.

    And Voyager was such a great series. Sarcasm intended.

  4. Having written for voyager isn't a good thing by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unless you liked hearing about the latest Fucktoquadillion gigastream of pure hexashitrillic energy the borg were beaming at voyager's past timestream in order to attract the hirogen to hunt them and the leprosy dudes to steal their organs.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  5. Let the grim reaper do his job by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sometimes a soul should just be allowed to pass over. Let that field lie fallow for a decade or so at least.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  6. All I know by Luke+has+no+name · · Score: 4, Funny

    Rick Berman: TNG
    Bryan Fuller: Failed ABC series and Voyager

    OP loses credit

    1. Re:All I know by Ucklak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Rick Berman is the reason Star Trek became Star Twrecked. Let's get positions casted, put putty on someone's nose, rinse and repeat.
      TNG and DS9 didn't have a token vulcan so Voyager got a black vulcan and Enterprise had a female vulcan. The guy doesn't know how to put a character together.
      All his movies with the exception of First Contact sucked and got progressively worse.

      Part of the charm of TOS was the banter of Kirk, McCoy and Spock. It was 3 guys diametrically opposed at work in different situations. That was the formula that none of the other series had. Enterprise was the closest but didn't know what it had and failed to deliver.

      --
      if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
  7. Re:yeah right. by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Something tells me Fuller won't be nearly as big into the big-breasted ladies as you might think. I think we're more likely to see buff dudes.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  8. Trailer, Really? by vjmurphy · · Score: 4, Funny

    "If J.J. Abrams' reboot is successful (and the latest trailer suggests it will be!)..."

    Yes, because trailers are always the best source for determining a film's success. In fact, why bother releasing the movie, since its success is assured?

    --
    Vincent J. Murphy
    Spandex Justice
  9. I hope not? by EvilBudMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Voyager? Wasn't that the worst one of all? That machine should have been a little more banged up at the end but yet they had even more resources than when they started out. I know trek is BS but damn the same stories over and over get old after a while.

    Let it die for a few more years at least.

  10. Star Trek is in "The Future" by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Star Trek was always a fantasy to me as an engineer about what 'could be'. Just over the progression of TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY you could see incremental improvements in technology. Voice controls actually worked, bio-neural networks, etc. STOP recreating (and fucking up) the original story line.

    TOS happened, it's done with. Quit going before it. Stop milking the lives of Scotty, Kirk, or the beginning of the beginning of the federation.

    Set something 90 years out from the end of VOY. Put the first Cardassian (or other former enemy) on the bridge (Worf). Maybe bump up Warp speed or another method of going fast (But not Warp 10 retarded shit VOY broke out). Invite some scientists writers, the writers of Futurama, to the initial writings and get some pseudo-science based technologies. Just make up some new shiny tech. Don't fill it with too much technobabble. (Stargate was a good balance in my mind).

    You could easily make it dark too. DS9 is hands down my favorite series.
    Federation Civil War?
    Fall of the Federation?

    STOP GOING BACK IN TIME.

    1. Re:Star Trek is in "The Future" by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Federation Civil War?
      Fall of the Federation?

      Andromeda was, apparently, originally meant to be the sequel to ST:TNG. The Federation would be betrayed by one of its allies and collapse into a civil war and the story would follow an attempt to rebuild it.

      The folks at Paramount didn't want it. They felt it would be too dark for Star Trek and not have the hopeful feel that the rest of the series had.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. How do you reinvent Trek? by jollyreaper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You'd have to change the animal so much that it wouldn't seem recognizable. The old formula has become such a cliche that there's absolutely nothing you can reuse from it. Reset button at the end of the episode, lame. Space anomalies, lame. Gritty scifi future with lots of angst, made lame by overexposure on Galactica. Aliens who look exactly like us save for bumpy foreheads? I could buy it when I was younger but it's just ridiculous these days. (I'll probably be in the minority on this one.) Time-travel plots, squishy techno-babble science plots, holodeck plots, everything that makes Trek Trek is what's been killing it. It's like asking "Can we make a healthy Big Mac?" Yeah, and by the time you're done removing everything that's bad about that burger, you're left with nothing but lettuce and sesame seeds.

    I'd say Firefly was a great model on how to do a space show that wasn't Trek but it died after a season. I'm not really sure how that happened given the fan support, it must have just been Fox superdickery more than anything else. But aside from that, Firefly gave us a space show that was like Trek only in so much as there were spaceships -- everything else was as different from Trek as it was from other shows. Even the basic premise -- "Imagine you made a TV show about Han Solo before he and Chewie joined the Rebellion" -- even that description carries certain assumptions the show blew away.

    Galactica has good production values and good acting but the writing is a crime. Half of the uber-plot of the show is a mystery, what's the Cylon's angle? What are their motivations? Why did they do what they did? And a good mystery writer needs to know how it happened before the first chapter's written because support for the whodunnit has to be written in to every subsequent chapter. Not having a clue and just pulling it out of his ass at the end is cheap and unsatisfying and that's the approach Galactica's taken. Heroes as well for that matter, and Heroes season 1 was completely awesome, it was only the later post-Fuller seasons that turned into a giant crap sandwich. But as far as BSG goes, the original was completely derivative of Star Wars and the remake seems to draw a lot more from network dramas in terms of pacing and feel.

    I'd say Babylon 5 was the true post-Trek show. You could see the inspiration from Trek but it also drew on a hell of a lot of other sources, really steeped in scifi goodness. It moved beyond what Trek was and DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, they were all muddling around at the same level. They never really rose to the challenge. The times they tried, they were just ripping off B5 plots instead of doing something bigger, better, and smarter. And that's sad because for all of the greatness that was B5, there was still room for improvement.

    I remain in the "stick a fork in Trek and call it done" camp. I'll take a look at the new movie just to be charitable but my expectations are extremely low. I'm willing to be surprised. I just feel that if they really want to do a wonders of space exploration and discovery show, they should really nix the whole Trek thing and come up with something brand new. The CGI has come so far these days, they can get away with stuff that couldn't have been imagined.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:How do you reinvent Trek? by Jim+Hall · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You'd have to change the animal so much that it wouldn't seem recognizable. The old formula has become such a cliche that there's absolutely nothing you can reuse from it. Reset button at the end of the episode, lame. Space anomalies, lame. Gritty scifi future with lots of angst, made lame by overexposure on Galactica. Aliens who look exactly like us save for bumpy foreheads? I could buy it when I was younger but it's just ridiculous these days. (I'll probably be in the minority on this one.) Time-travel plots, squishy techno-babble science plots, holodeck plots, everything that makes Trek Trek is what's been killing it. It's like asking "Can we make a healthy Big Mac?" Yeah, and by the time you're done removing everything that's bad about that burger, you're left with nothing but lettuce and sesame seeds.

      As a fan, what I'd like to see is the Star Trek experience from another point of view. Don't keep giving us the "good guys", the Federation, with their Prime Directive.

      Give us a series based on, say, the Klingons (TNG era .. please skip the whole "TOS to TNG" evolution thing - TOS Klingons looked that way because of budget, that's it.) A story similar to Star Trek: Klingon would make a great pilot for a Klingon-based series - a young Klingon goes through the Rite of Ascension to become a true Warrior, joins a ship. Let the series experience the Star Trek universe through the lens of a young Klingon - not some goody Federation captain, which we've now seen more times than we need.

      As he experiences the universe as a Klingon warrior, so do we. Let a mentor show him the true path of a Klingon warrior. Show the audience the code of honor from the Klingons. Throw in some Klingon language (swearing in Klingon!)

      In this series, there's no Prime Directive. Very little diplomacy, no helping other cultures to better themselves. And it should go without saying: no journey of self-discovery, except for the central character as he learns what it means to be a true Klingon warrior.

      Hey, I'd watch that every week!

  12. It'll fail by Sqreater · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They just don't get it anymore. But I'll say it anyway. Science fiction and superhero comics are about satisfying male adolescent psychology. Stray from that with ass-kicking females wielding blasters and you will crash and burn. No female captains. No ass kicking female aliens. Male to male conflict. Have a strong, even arrogant male lead who is the ONE WHO IS QUICKER, SMARTER, almost all the time. It is NOT a group effort. It is about a superior male captain. Look to the original Kirk. Note that Spiderman succeeded and made a LOT of money. Unsure adolescent male becomes confident, capable, and powerful when he puts on the spiderman personality. And he saves the FEMALE....who does not kick his butt anywhere in the movies. Nor does she somehow acquire powers of her own to satisfy modern Political Correctness. As for a Vulcan, the Vulcan MUST be a blend of Vulcan and Human. It is not optional. The Vulcan exists entirely to explore human psychological and social truths. By itself, a Vulcan is a piece of cardboard.

    One more point of many more I could make. Science fiction has taken the depressing direction of the failure of humanity. Star Trek I was about the success of mankind. Get back to that. Apparently "serious" series makers did not feel very adult making a story in which mankind succeeds. Ok, do it again. Get them lost. Get them destroyed. Get them wandering around. Make the characters "real" by making them mean, nasty, slutty, jerks. Make them inferior and struggling. Have the female characters engage in comments about how stupid, inferior, ridiculous, juvenile male motivations and behavior are. Fail as a series.

    Oh, and don't engage in the ridiculous, like making a holographic doctor or having an alien doctor who knows more about human medicine than humans. Jeesh, who came up with that grating piece of nonsense? Someone making a job for a friend? And the sick bay should not be bigger and more technologically advanced than the bridge. etc etc etc.

    The future will be more of the same, only different. Remember that.

    --
    E Proelio Veritas.
  13. I vote for Kirk and Spock by tjstork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Frankly the whole charm of the TOS was that it wasn't -that- far into the future, and the basic characters just worked.

    By creating Kirk and Spock and the rest of the crew of the Enterprise, Roddenberry gave us the modern equivalent of a Hercules myth. We can milk Kirk and Spock for two thousands years, and, if we are as good as the Greeks, we should.

    And frankly, I'm sick of all the darkness in present science fiction. Science is advancing more all the time and if there was ever a time for optimism based on a scientific society, NOW is it. Humanity can improve, and will improve, and having a series that reminds us of what our future could be, if we chose to do it, and reminds us of our ongoing moral obligations, is a damned fine thing.

    Sick of all these moral halfwits running around in sci-fi these days. Poor Adam's crying again on Galactica. Big woosy. Poor Col Tigh's drinking again, and he's a fricking Cylon. That show had all sorts of promise and then they made Adam cry all the time and Tigh into a Cylon. What the frak is that. I'm sick of complexity in characters. I want -Gods-.

    --
    This is my sig.
  14. Re:Like what? by uberhobo_one · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fringe ignores word 'science' in SF :P

    I wish that's all Fringe did. Unfortunately, the writers of Fringe kidnapped, beat, and sodomized science in front of it's own children. Then, when done, gave each other high-fives for doing such a great job.

    It's like they have some kind of scientific buzzword dartboard in their office that they use to write the jargon that their characters use.

  15. Re:I saw Janeway by dr_dank · · Score: 4, Funny

    Rather, Kate Mulgrew entering a restaurant near Times Square a couple of months back.

    I heard the voice then I did a double take, and sure enough it was her.

    She looked old

    That was really Admiral Janeway who came from an alternate timeline to dine at Olive Garden.

    Fun fact: the ablative hull armor is actually made of stale Olive Garden breadsticks.

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  16. Re:Lost interest by porcupine8 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I disagree. In the past couple of years, my husband and I have been Netflixing all of TNG, as well as BSG (though we're caught up now) and, for a couple weeks, Babylon 5. We agree that while TNG was a very good show once it hit its stride in season 3, a bit more continuity would have made it really great. In fact, we're noticing the bits of continuity that we never noticed when it was on and we were in jr high (like Worf's several-season dealing-with-the-empire arc), and that alone is making the series even better for us. We love BSG for its serialness, and Babylon 5 we appreciated the serial nature but couldn't get past how bad each individual episode was.

    And there is definitely a happy medium to be found between "cliffhanger at the end of every episode" and "everything tied up with a neat little bow." To leave sci-fi, Scrubs strikes this balance very nicely. There are a lot of multi-episode arcs (often found in the subplots), and continuity in general is something that happens consistently rather than once a season, but the actual main plot line of each episode is almost always resolved at the end. You get actual character development over time, unlike many traditional sitcoms, but you can also watch a single episode and be satisfied at the end.

    --
    Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.