Would a new Star Trek series with the cast of the Enter Into Darkness movie be a good idea?
Options
GunTown
Members Posts: 3,489 ✭
Basically the same cast as in the movie from 2009 and 2013 being in a new series that would basically be like the 2014 version of the original
Comments
-
Id watch it. I was never a fan of star trek growing up but the new movies have been pretty cool imo. I doubt they would start a series, but if they did i would definitely check it out.
-
I'm curious as to how this will relate to Eminem. proceed...
-
ThirdEyeFive wrote: »I'm curious as to how this will relate to Eminem. proceed...
Eminem will play Captain Kirk -
Nah, if they do another Star Trek it should be even further in the future, maybe with them finally leaving the galaxy.
-
2014 version of the original? nah, I think ? needs to be original instead of repeating the same old ?
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Nah, if they do another Star Trek it should be even further in the future, maybe with them finally leaving the galaxy.
Nah that wouldn't work the original was short lived and with the the original a lotta the storylines were repeative but it still classic and wen u think about it in all classic shows a lotta the story lines are not anything spectacular be it Friends, Fresh Prince etc
It's the chemistry and acting that people buy into -
budgets on these episodes would have to be substantial
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »Nah, if they do another Star Trek it should be even further in the future, maybe with them finally leaving the galaxy.
Nah that wouldn't work the original was short lived and with the the original a lotta the storylines were repeative but it still classic and wen u think about it in all classic shows a lotta the story lines are not anything spectacular be it Friends, Fresh Prince etc
It's the chemistry and acting that people buy into
What does any of that have to do with my suggestion? Star Trek at its heart has always been about using the vehicle of space exploration as a means of exploring other issues and topics. What I suggested would just be foundation. On that foundation, the would place a good cast of characters and a few underlying storylines. -
Nobody is gonna fund that.
-
lol What are you talking about? They funded TOS, TNG, and Voyager which were all the same basic premise. Again, it's what Star Trek is supposed to be about.
-
No. Star Trek TV shows have always been drastically different from the movies in terms of execution and presentation. Even more so now a days when the Star Trek movies don't even touch on the classic Star Trek themes anymore and are a lot more action oriented and somewhat generic. If they made a new show I really doubt that it would appeal in anyway to fans of the JJ Abrams movies like you guys.
-
No. Star Trek TV shows have always been drastically different from the movies in terms of execution and presentation. Even more so now a days when the Star Trek movies don't even touch on the classic Star Trek themes anymore and are a lot more action oriented and somewhat generic. If they made a new show I really doubt that it would appeal in anyway to fans of the JJ Abrams movies like you guys.
Who are you're responding to? -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »lol What are you talking about? They funded TOS, TNG, and Voyager which were all the same basic premise. Again, it's what Star Trek is supposed to be about.
None of the actors on star trek were legitimate stars before star trek save Patrick Stewart. How much are you gonna pay Chris pine, Zoe saldana, Zachary Quinto, Karl urban, simon peg, and john cho to work a 16-20 episode season? These are all lead actors and most of them have box office hits before star trek except quinto but he has Heroes under his belt. Then there's paying for the set, CGI work etc. I don't doubt they could bring star trek back to television but not this group. Not based on what theyre doing now.
Star trek films in the TNG era did well because there was a upgrade in the presentation. It was bigger in every way and there was an already committed and engaged audience so it was an easy sell. You can't downgrade your ? and try to pass it off as the same thing. Won't work, and therefore nobody would want to fund it.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »No. Star Trek TV shows have always been drastically different from the movies in terms of execution and presentation. Even more so now a days when the Star Trek movies don't even touch on the classic Star Trek themes anymore and are a lot more action oriented and somewhat generic. If they made a new show I really doubt that it would appeal in anyway to fans of the JJ Abrams movies like you guys.
Who are you're responding to?
The thread title. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »lol What are you talking about? They funded TOS, TNG, and Voyager which were all the same basic premise. Again, it's what Star Trek is supposed to be about.
None of the actors on star trek were legitimate stars before star trek save Patrick Stewart. How much are you gonna pay Chris pine, Zoe saldana, Zachary Quinto, Karl urban, simon peg, and john cho to work a 16-20 episode season? These are all lead actors and most of them have box office hits before star trek except quinto but he has Heroes under his belt. Then there's paying for the set, CGI work etc. I don't doubt they could bring star trek back to television but not this group. Not based on what theyre doing now.
Star trek films in the TNG era did well because there was a upgrade in the presentation. It was bigger in every way and there was an already committed and engaged audience so it was an easy sell. You can't downgrade your ? and try to pass it off as the same thing. Won't work, and therefore nobody would want to fund it.
Oh ok, my bad. I thought you were talking about my idea since the conversation had shifted to that a little when you responded. I don't know if they would try and get that cast if they made it a TV series, but you're right there is no way they'd fund that even though TV series are working with some huge budgets compared to when the earlier Star Trek series came out.
