Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Tuesday November 03 2015, @05:41PM   Printer-friendly
from the where-no-internets-have-gone-before dept.

Cut and pasted shamelessly from StarTrek.com:

"CBS Television Studios announced today it will launch a totally new Star Trek television series in January 2017."

"The brand-new Star Trek will introduce new characters seeking imaginative new worlds and new civilizations, while exploring the dramatic contemporary themes that have been a signature of the franchise since its inception in 1966."

"The new television series is not related to the upcoming feature film Star Trek Beyond which is scheduled to be distributed by Paramount Pictures in summer 2016."


Original Submission

Related Stories

Star Trek: Renegades Kickstarting Two More Episodes 20 comments

Guess we came a bit late to this news, our subspace receiver must have failed..

After a promising 1st episode were produced of this Star Trek, the producers are looking towards crowdfunding again to expand the series with a further two episodes.
ST:Renegades follows the same universe set out in DS9/Voyager and pick up in year 2388 a decade after Voyagers return.
Many well loved trek actors return to reprise their roles in the ambitious fan production incl. Walter Koenig(Chekov), Terry Farell(Jadzia). Robert Beltran(Chakotay), Tim Russ(Tuvov). Just to name a few.
You can watch the first episode on Youtube here and judge for yourself is this is a worthy alternative or supplement to CBS new paywalled series.

The first episode is available on Youtube.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Celestial on Tuesday November 03 2015, @05:54PM

    by Celestial (4891) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @05:54PM (#258017) Journal

    What is not mentioned in the summary is that the series will be shown exclusively on CBS' own digital video streaming service, CBS All Access [soylentnews.org] (at least in the United States). I'm a huge Trekker, so I'm in. I wonder how many others besides myself will shell out the $6 per month just to watch new Star Trek episodes though. It's a big gamble on CBS' part. Part of me hopes that it succeeds because if it fails, it may doom Star Trek. "Whelp, only ten thousand people signed up for CBS All Access, so people obviously are no longer interested in Star Trek."

    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by draconx on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:05PM

      by draconx (4649) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:05PM (#258023)

      What is not mentioned in the summary is that the series will be shown exclusively on CBS' own digital video streaming service, CBS All Access (at least in the United States). I'm a huge Trekker, so I'm in. I wonder how many others besides myself will shell out the $6 per month just to watch new Star Trek episodes though.

      I took a look at what is required to subscribe, but apparently CBS All Access is only available to people in the USA, with a US credit card. It seems they are simply not interested in >95% of the world's population, including myself.

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by SanityCheck on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:17PM

        by SanityCheck (5190) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:17PM (#258026)

        Don't worry you can probably get the pirated version 30 minutes after this comes out.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by isostatic on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:54PM

          by isostatic (365) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:54PM (#258128) Journal

          The great thing about now, rather than 10 years ago, is that big TV shows are simulcast. Game of Thrones is shown at the same time (2AM) in the UK as on the East Coast. It's repeated in the evening too.

          It's been a long time from the 3 year wait for TNG season 1, or the year-long wait for Trek in the 90s. Heck the UK even got the most recent trek films earlier than the US.

          It is getting easier to watch TV legally now, sad that they aren't using this as an excuse to go for a single location for international rights like Netflix did with house of cards.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:24PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:24PM (#258029)

        Actually the US has slightly more then 5% of the world's population.

        I'm sure the show will be licensed in other countries on other channels and/or streaming services.

        • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:26PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:26PM (#258073)

          Actually the US has slightly more [than] 5% of the world's population.

          According to Wikipedia:

          • World population is estimated at 7.3×10⁹ people[1]
          • US population is estimated at 3.2×10⁸ people[2]

          Which means the US has an estimated 4.4% of the world's population, slightly less than 5%.

          [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population [wikipedia.org]
          [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States [wikipedia.org]

          • (Score: 3, Funny) by SanityCheck on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:22PM

            by SanityCheck (5190) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:22PM (#258171)

            Unfortunately a lot of older people still think the Earth has 6 billion inhabitants.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:56PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:56PM (#258182)

          You can take your correction, and shove it up your corectum.

    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:06PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:06PM (#258024)

      More than a years warning makes the press release very early for individual consumers to sign up, so I figured the "real" story was its a shot across the bow for other streaming providers, hello Amazon Prime Instant Video or Netflix or whatever, ya got a year to ink a content licensing deal...

    • (Score: 5, Funny) by LaminatorX on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:39PM

      by LaminatorX (14) <laminatorxNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:39PM (#258043)

      Sensors detect a binge-watch-during-a-free-trial-period-after-the-season-wraps-then-cancel decloaking off the starboard bow.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Wednesday November 04 2015, @12:24AM

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @12:24AM (#258213)

      If CBS wanted my money, they'd put this on Netflix. I'm not subscribing to a monthly service for a single TV show I may or may not like (doubtful I would, since this is done by the same buffoons who were behind JJ's crappy movies), so BitTorrent it is.

  • (Score: 5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @05:55PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @05:55PM (#258018)

    The pilot episode will air on TV, the rest will be available at your favorite torrent site.

    • (Score: 2) by mendax on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:28PM

      by mendax (2840) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:28PM (#258107)

      Very funny, but essentially accurate.

      CBS would be better off I think putting this series on broadcast TV, complete with the 20 minutes of obligatory commercials, and let everyone enjoy it. They can stream it without commercials, or with deleted scenes or some other added value to get the viewer to pay for the service.

      --
      It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 04 2015, @02:49AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 04 2015, @02:49AM (#258247)

        They can stream it without commercials, or with deleted scenes or some other added value to get the viewer to pay for the service.

        HAHAHAHAHAHA. This is CBS All-Access. You will watch even more commercials than on TV.

    • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:03PM

      by isostatic (365) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:03PM (#258134) Journal

      That's how most of the world watched Enterprise and Voyager -- I remember staying up very late when Broken Bow aired, DCCing it on a rockingly fast 10Mbit connection at uni. Far better than when I downloaded 100kbit/sec episodes of SG1 season 4.

      Back in the days of DS9 the only way to watch it was to buy the VHS tapes. At £13 for 2 episodes, or about $15 per episode in todays money. 33k modems at $1/hour (today's money) just weren't fast enough. On TV (Pay TV too - Sky) it was nowhere near US airdates, about 8 months delayed, but the only online community to talk about it was uk based (umtss) that wasn't too bad.

      Take Children of Time, DS9 season 5 near the end of the season. US air date May 5th, UK Tape release Sep 1st, Sky release the following February. It's never been on free UK tv.

      TNG didn't make the screens in the UK until after Best of Both Worlds part 2 was broadcast.

      For years, even since before the beta site of SN existed, we as an online non-us community have been demanding that companies take our money and show us the goddam show.

      Sadly it appears this will be another missed opportunity.

      • (Score: 1) by kazzie on Wednesday November 04 2015, @10:01AM

        by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 04 2015, @10:01AM (#258329)

        I recall watching DS9, (and TNG, VOY) on Free-to-view BBC2. Did they skip season 5?

        (I know for certain that season 6 was on BBC2, as I bought some Dominion War novels in Canada, and later saw the stories broadcast on TV in the UK)

    • (Score: 2) by jdavidb on Wednesday November 04 2015, @02:47AM

      by jdavidb (5690) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @02:47AM (#258245) Homepage Journal

      The pilot episode will air on TV, the rest will be available at your favorite torrent site.

      Who watches TV any more? I haven't had antenna since 2004 and haven't had cable or satellite since 2008.

      --
      ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by jmorris on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:24PM

    by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:24PM (#258028)

    Pass. Every Trek series has went downhill with the exception of parts of DS9 which bucked the trend. The problem is the producers are captured by SJWs. The original ST:TOS has a little Cultural Marxism but the later incarnations were rancid. Picard was a pussy who was content to just sit on his ass and watched an entire species die rather than lift a finger to save them. Hello! The Prime Directive was intended to prevent the real problems of culture shock when spacefaring civilizations come into contact with primitive societies, to allow them to develop into unique new civilizations worthy of contact and future membership in the Federation of Planets. Dead civilizations don't develop into anything.

    Then when it couldn't get worse than that, Janeway was so incompetent it was totally unrealistic that her crew didn't space the bimbo after the second or third time she kept them marooned on the other side of the galaxy. People who can shoot holes in a Federation warship are -not- protected by the Prime Directive! But then Enterprise doubled down on even that stupid. So they rebooted... the franchise that always claimed to be about the story more than the crap blowing up, with JJ Abrams, the guy who can't write a coherent plot to save his effing life. So what will this reboot look like? Pervasive buttsex wouldn't be shocking enough these days to condemn it to streaming so I really don't want to see what they will do with this trainwreck in the making.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:32PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:32PM (#258038)

      Aww, you figured out the theme in your last sentence.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:36PM (#258041)

      They lost me around season 2 in DS9.

      The last season of NG and Voyager were worth watching. Everything else after DS9 S1 (which was trying its hardest to be B5) is fairly much garbage with a few rare exceptions. It seems they only start doing scifi when they realize they are not getting renewed. They even retconed the entirety of enterprise away with a 2 min clip on the end saying it was just the NG people goofing off in the holodeck. Then the movie went all in on that idea with time travel.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by jmorris on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:46PM

        by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:46PM (#258048)

        Agree on the ripping off of B5. If you want to see what SciFi can be, watch Babylon 5. The low budget got in the way at times but the quality of the storytelling beat the snot out of all but a couple of isolated Trek scripts. Thank heaven it ended before 9/11 though because JMS would have probably had the same sort of problems as Enterprise had since he has fair amount of SJW tendencies too. (No, I don't put anybody on a pedestal, not even JMS or Joss Wheden.)

        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by VLM on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:24PM

          by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:24PM (#258070)

          has fair amount of SJW tendencies too

          I tried to B5 a couple months ago but it was simply unwatchable. The intro sequence voiceover is comically bluepilled, like its a parody of actual blue pill thinking expressed intentionally poorly to make it look bad. "a parody of Harvard and the UN from 1990 are running things in 2700 AD" or something like that. The other problem is the "hour" show is only 40 mins after commercials and then you have to subtract out the formula parts from each episode, the five minutes of "romance" that was clearly written by KV /r9k/ posters and is best skipped and the five minutes of fist fights. Seriously, every freaking episode at least in the early seasons had precisely five minutes of fist fight. Always fist fight. Must have been some weird anti-gun / blue pilled / network censors won't allow weapons thing. Its from an era before DVD box sets and bing streaming so each episode spends about 10 minutes rehashing past episodes, which is ironic because I missed the boat 20 years ago and was told there's no way I could jump into later seasons, its just too deep. Well, no, not really. Then you need ten minutes of filler to stitch all the crap that should be edited out together. That leaves about 20 minutes at best of watchable TV per episode.

          I was hugely disappointed by the first half of the first season and just couldn't go on with it anymore. My current binges are "Better off ted" which hits disturbingly close to home making it even funnier, and rewatching full metal alchemist which is as good as I remember it.

          B5 has the feel of a miniseries dissected into little short scenes of goodness then bulked up with barrels of formula and filler then stretched into a couple seasons. A five episode miniseries condensation of B5 would be pretty awesome. Maybe five movie version. I'd almost wish for a reboot, but I'd be scared what I'd get... There is a version of Star Wars Eps 1,2,3 where someone simply edited out all the shitty Jar Jar scenes and aside from making the movie a little shorter it brought the average quality level way up, and I get the feeling B5 could be given the same treatment and turned into a pretty awesome long feature film, just drop about 75% of the TV series on the cutting room floor and the remains of B5 would be pretty good.

          I was disappointed by the characters. Admittedly Garak was the high point of the entire Trek genre (bracing for incoming flames) so I can't expect perfection, but as politically incorrect as it sounds all the alien characters (except perhaps the flamboyant diplomat) were wooden indians who pretty much got wheeled on and off the stage and took up volume and oxygen and provided little else. The statue of the preying mantis, oh chills down my spine, oh wait, no he really was about as exciting to watch as drying paint.

          After I gave up hope on the series I "ruined" it for me by reading the plot on wikipedia and its the standard Trek style confusion of sci fi and magical fantasy. Then Merlin waved his wand and they went back in time. Aside from the magic fantasy the plotline reads kinda like world war one, sorta. Kinda distantly inspired by, anyway.

          For 20 years I've heard DS9 was a bad copy, but I kinda liked DS9 and rewatched it a few years ago and still liked it. If DS9 is in response to B5, its sort of a version 2.0 bug fix. Because I saw the bugfix version FIRST the original simply looks bad. That scene from DS9 was a lot smoother than the pitiful first attempt in B5, that sort of thing.

          If there's a reboot, please don't have a special police officer, that's just done. No need for the commander to be a magical voodoo priest.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by SanityCheck on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:58PM

            by SanityCheck (5190) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:58PM (#258085)

            To each his own. I loved both, but if I watched them for the first time now, I probably wouldn't be as into them for many reasons. Some reasons might have to do with being older, and a lot more jaded.

            Fact that it is hyped would probably lead me to look at it under microscope while blowing every negative out of proportion. And I would be comparing any positive to something similar but done better in another show... which is pretty crappy because I'm sure out of hundreds of shows or movies you can find one that did X better than the thing you are watching.

            But at the time when I watched it, the world was a much different place, and I was a different person. Due to this both have become shows that I cherish and re-watch often to try to go back in time and try to get that feeling again, often unsuccessfully.

            I am keenly aware that huge swathes of the shows were filler, and there was plenty of dues ex machina style cop-outs, especially by JMS where he would write himself into a corner and then try to act like he is clever. Other problems were simply life, like the fact that the main actor on B5 developed psychosis and could no longer continue with the show in first season because he was seeing shit, which only complicates a story and makes it hard to fix later on. But I still feel that overall both shows were excellent pieces of Sci-fi and storytelling. And they are precious to me :)

            • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:25PM

              by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:25PM (#258104)

              Fact that it is hyped would probably lead me to look at it under microscope while blowing every negative out of proportion.

              Yes I could see that point of view. If someone told me it was SG:U but the ship doesn't move, I'd be somewhat impressed with B5 in comparison. Or if it was compared to Andromeda. I suppose if someone claimed Knight Rider was sci fi because, after all, "talking car", then B5 would be pretty good in comparison. But its always claimed by its fans to be the best sci fi on TV and so forth. I'm not seeing it the same way.

              I also appreciate the time and place thing. In 1990 competing with the national badminton championship and reruns of Laverne and Shirley I suspect it kicked (relative) butt. But when anything ever made can be downloaded and/or streamed, or so it seems, the competition is going to be brutal.

              • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:05PM

                by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:05PM (#258163)

                Or if it was compared to Andromeda.

                Oh my god somebody else has heard of it! :)

                Damn shame they sacked Robert Hewitt Wolfe. He published a script of what the original ending of the show was supposed to be and it was way better than the incomprehensible fifth season.

                --
                "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
            • (Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:38PM

              by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:38PM (#258111) Journal

              A lot of this is 'age' dependent (the jaded thing) as well as personal interest... watch the first 4 episodes of the first Doctor (William Hartnell's Doctor Who): my daughter and wife think this kind of thing is unwatchable where as i thing "Unearthly Child" (and on) is amazing to watch. It is not only the 'birth' of the Doctor, but so telling when comparing to future Doctors.

              eg. Compare Tennants "I never would" Doctor to Hartnells "Yes I damn well would bash this cave mans head with this rock". The evolution, the flow (and putting aside that it was pirates that saved so many episodes That had been wiped/lost for future watchers.
              Doctor Who is a treasure, Tom Baker is my Doctor, Hartnell is the greatest Doctor (he was pre-'the Doctor has to be a role model' and could be as big a bastard as he wanted to be).....

              ...and some people CANNOT watch it: it is dreck to them... bleeech!

              I enjoyed B5, once i got past the 'weird' hair and costumes (again, like the Doctor, a lot came to budget) and once i got past Bruce Boxleitner SMILING CONSTANTLY AS IF HIS TEETH WERE THE FECKING MONEY MAKERS AND NO MATTER HOW MANY PLANETS WERE GOING TO BLOW UP I'LL JUST KEEP ON FECKING SMILING!!!

              A lot of people love Blakes 7, but for me it kind of fell apart when BLAKE was no longer in the show and it became Avon's show.

              To each his own.
              Keep calm and RUN!

              --
              --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
              • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:09PM

                by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:09PM (#258164)

                ...and some people CANNOT watch it: it is dreck to them... bleeech!

                Well, it was filmed in 1966. The quality of the picture, sets, etc. is shit.

                once i got past Bruce Boxleitner SMILING CONSTANTLY

                Heh. What, you mean it wasn't obvious he had multiple personality disorder? Happy Bruce who can't stop smiling and Angry Bruce who's contractually obligated to appear each episode and angrily lecture you about something with poor reasoning.

                --
                "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:21PM

            by jmorris (4844) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:21PM (#258102)

            The intro sequence voiceover is comically bluepilled...

            Remember that the show was a five year story from the start. It started in that unicorns and skittles world but without giving too much spoilage a later season opens with "The Babylon Project was our last, best hope for peace. It failed." It really is that sort of show. The first dozen episodes were intended to be stock scifi as the networks expected to see, after they used those to basically establish the universe behind some fairly vanilla plots things got a lot more interesting. But looking backward even those early shows had a lot of development that didn't make sense until later. Sinclair acting like Captain Kirk and just jumping into personal combat every episode like he was expendable or something became a major plot point. It didn't just go unnoticed.

            As noted below (spoilers) the lead changed after the first season. Some say it wasn't planned that way, JMS swears it was, but either way it improved the story. If nothing else it really drove home that nothing was untouchable, no character immune from elimination.

            • (Score: 2) by quacking duck on Tuesday November 03 2015, @11:43PM

              by quacking duck (1395) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @11:43PM (#258200)

              Some say [O'Hare's departure] wasn't planned that way, JMS swears it was, but either way it improved the story

              JMS swore at the time that it was, and I doubt many believed him, but in hindsight that was almost certainly to protect Michael O'Hare's secret mental illness, which JMS was allowed to reveal after O'Hare passed on.

          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:30PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:30PM (#258151)

            Lol at the person that judges B5 based on the first season.

            Try watching the first season of TNG. With a couple of exceptions it is cringeworthy bad.

            Season 3-4 of B5 is the best TV sci-fi we will ever see.

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Tork on Wednesday November 04 2015, @06:06AM

              by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 04 2015, @06:06AM (#258295)
              Can the show be started at season 3 or do we have to sit through the first two?
              --
              🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
              • (Score: 2) by Hawkwind on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:44PM

                by Hawkwind (3531) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:44PM (#258388)

                I started watching seriously a few episodes in to season two and it worked for me. Although at some point (during season three?) I did watch season one. There are events in season one that have significant payoffs later. I remember the season one stories being tough to watch on their own but boy did a lot of them pay off.

          • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:02PM

            by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:02PM (#258162)

            You may have been better off just skipping the first season, and from what I've heard even the creators were disappointed in several early episodes. B5 did admittedly take awhile to really get going.

            I ended up watching the show up until the fifth season. The thing that annoyed me the most was that once you hit the halfway point, it seemed like the Captain would pin you down and give you an angry browbeating lecture every damn episode. The people they were fighting weren't fun, but many of his arguments boiled down to appeal to authority :P

            And then there was the plot where Garibaldi was just an asshole for an entire season and we eventually find out "oops he was brainwashed." That reads like lazy writing to me.

            I'd almost wish for a reboot, but I'd be scared what I'd get

            Well, they are doing a new version. [screenrant.com]

            P.S: Who modded you Troll? Yeesh. "Disagree" at worst.

            --
            "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
          • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:01AM

            by Reziac (2489) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:01AM (#258251) Homepage

            I gotta agree, first season of B5 was fucking awful for just about any reason you can name. It got radically better later on, tho IMO was always rather uneven. But I thought the spinoff Crusade was generally pretty good, at least if you like character-driven stuff, and Peter Woodward was fantastic.

            I mostly liked DS9, tho the tail end made me want to slap someone, to the point that I stopped watching it (I heard later that a great deal of the unpalatable nonsense was mandated by Avery Brooks, who had a rather inflated opinion of Sisko's value to the universe), and I found myself wishing evil on Bajor as the most irritating people ever. Garak and Dukat were my favorites.

            --
            And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
      • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:40PM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:40PM (#258114) Homepage

        The early seasons of DS9 sucked. They were hokey and had a lot of the touchy-feely elements that ruined Voyager (at least from my perspective). This episode, [wikia.com] for example, was so terrible I'm surprised that the cast didn't walk right off the stage ranting about "not doing this fucking bullshit."

        Then Benjamin "Space-Shaft" [metroactive.com] Sisko shaved his head and became a bad-ass muthafucka playin' hardball with space-punks, they got Worf up in there, and then they did some Klingon shit and got a fast-attack ship up in a lot of wars while introducing a rogue element of Starfleet. The only mistake they made later is not killing off Nog instead of replacing Jadzia with an airhead.

        Nog was the Jar-Jar binks of DS9.

      • (Score: 2) by tibman on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:03PM

        by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:03PM (#258135)

        I don't remember that holodeck scene revising anything about the Enterprise. Commander Riker was "visiting" historic heroes for advice on a sticky issue. I actually liked how Enterprise tied into the other shows. The whole augments and Klingon thing was interesting.

        --
        SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
        • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:10AM

          by Reziac (2489) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:10AM (#258253) Homepage

          Yeah, Enterprise was kinda like reading a history book. Lots of "Oh, that's what happened" type background on the rest of the franchise, which I appreciated. It had its problems (I had to just ignore their one-note technobabble -- everything is a relay!) but the whole ended up surprisingly good.

          --
          And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
    • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:24PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:24PM (#258071)

      > The original ST:TOS has a little Cultural Marxism but the later incarnations were rancid.

      Lol, coming from you that's a pretty meaningless criticism.

    • (Score: 2) by mendax on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:44PM

      by mendax (2840) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:44PM (#258119)

      NG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise all had their problems, some more (Enterprise), some less (DS9), but I liked them all. However, I stopped watching Enterprise shortly after its second season because it got, in my opinion at the time, stupid. My view has since changed now that I own the DVDs and have watched them a couple times. The show got a lot better and much more interesting as it progressed, with some notable exceptions.

      Picard was not a pussy, just with different principles than Kirk, who was much more a man of action. And as one of the shows pointed out, Kirk would have been court martialed for some of his stunts if he did them a century later. Janeway in my opinion made the wrong decision (and perhaps violated the prime directive in the process) by electing to destroy the Caretaker's array instead of using it to get home. But it would have been unrealistic for her crew to ditch her after her gaffe. (And there would be no seven years of shows!)

      Star Trek has been more about stories that are excellent moral plays than mere science fiction. That's what I like about it. Hopefully, the next show will return to that and get away from this shit the latest round of movies has done.

      --
      It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
      • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:14PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:14PM (#258144)

        Picard was not a pussy, just with different principles than Kirk, who was much more a man of action.

        Picard has it all over Kirk. He's poised and measured and doesn't wear a cheap rug. Rather he accepts even baldness with a quiet cool that says: "I am in command. You are safe with me."

    • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:52PM

      by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:52PM (#258160)

      It sounds like you're a pragmatist.

      Star Trek is for idealists.

      That's not Star Trek's problem per se.

      --
      "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
      • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday November 04 2015, @12:07AM

        by jmorris (4844) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @12:07AM (#258208)

        I'm not seeing the idealism is being all high and mighty and allowing an entire planet of sentient beings to die of a natural disaster. Picard could have saved that planet, was told he could save them and not even have to tell them he was saving them and thus not interfere with their natural development. Nope he just said "think of it as evolution in action", let them die. Like it was their fault their planet was horked up; they were too primitive to have caused it so there wasn't even the potential for a global warming sermon. Lets just sit up here on our plush arses and collect sensor reading of the planet going foom.

        Then there was the even worse case on Enterprise in the second season. Planet sends out a ship to look for help with their plague problem and has the bad luck to find Enterprise. Again, Evolution in action, sucks to be you! Which was not only immoral but bad TV. The whole premise of Enterprise was it was to tell the early days of human spaceflight, the founding of the Federation, etc. Part of that should have been the idealistic helping that goes wrong that would lead to the Prime Directive being established. Instead, the very first time they encounter a species that the Directive might be construed to apply to they suddenly develop it on the spot. Lame.

        • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday November 04 2015, @01:40AM

          by tangomargarine (667) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @01:40AM (#258231)

          The second case was actually in the first season (coincidentally, I just watched it within the last week; s1e13). And Archer did seem rather out of character to just say "oh alright" under the circumstances.

          Although T'Pol for the entire show so far had been telling him to stop trying to help people who didn't ask for it. So it wasn't making up the Prime Directive on the spot. Hell, half the species they ran into so far told them to GTFO. However the species in question *did* ask them for help.

          The extra complication was that there was a second species who was immune to the disease that the first had been oppressing for a long time, who would due to evolution subsequently flourish. I suspect you forgot that part. Up until halfway through the episode, it was a "why aren't you helping these guys?" moment, until that.

          I haven't seen that much of TNG so I couldn't comment on the other one.

          --
          "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Snotnose on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:41PM

    by Snotnose (1623) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:41PM (#258044)

    As it's not on broadcast TV will they use any of the 7 words you can't say on TV? Or show some boobies?

    I can see it now. "It's fricken boobs. IN SPACE!."

    --
    Why shouldn't we judge a book by it's cover? It's got the author, title, and a summary of what the book's about.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:09PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:09PM (#258062)

      No gravity? I'm in.

      • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:50PM

        by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:50PM (#258084)

        No gravity? I'm in.

        How do star trek mini-skirts work in a space suit? Obviously 7of9 and Deana had special outfits. That and grav plate failures. I guess in a grav plate failure having almost no fabric to tangle up is a feature not a bug, in multiple ways, I guess.

        • (Score: 2) by tibman on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:51PM

          by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:51PM (#258125)

          Just so you know, there are guys who also wear the mini-skirt in Star Trek.

          --
          SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:43PM

    by frojack (1554) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:43PM (#258045) Journal

    Seems like a /dev/random story than a rehash story.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Celestial on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:53PM

      by Celestial (4891) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:53PM (#258052) Journal

      Well, if the new series will be anything like Into Darkness, "rehash" is appropriate. :P

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by maxwell demon on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:20PM

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:20PM (#258101) Journal

      No, it's really about Rehash. You know, in this new Star Trek series, the space ship, called USS Mighty Bussard, will be running on Rehash, and the replicators will replicate Soylent Green as food. The ship also won't be fueled by antimatter any more, but rather it will be ethanol-fueled. In episode 1, the space ship will be attacked by a horde of trolls, which they will fight using their moderation torpedoes.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  • (Score: 2) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:56PM

    by PizzaRollPlinkett (4512) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @06:56PM (#258055)

    This is like 1979 all over again. Star Wars is being hyped, so every also-ran science fiction series is being brought back. The articles mention a Star Trek movie next year, too. Did you guys see the news that a Battlestar Galactica movie is being shopped around? If Star Wars is successful, 2016, the off-year for the franchise with a filler movie, will be the year of second-rate science fiction launches to cash in on the interest in Star Wars. I guess the superhero thing was getting stale.

    --
    (E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:11PM

      by frojack (1554) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:11PM (#258064) Journal

      Yup. Even the SYFY network is rebooting some actual science fiction after doing nothing but chasing ghosts and bigfoot and vampires for a couple seasons. (all of them done badly - mostly the SYFY network has become unwatchable).

      The Dark Matter series http://www.syfy.com/darkmatter [syfy.com] was not all that bad for a first season show.

      Not going to call it Firefly-esq, but you can tell they were going for that.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:17PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:17PM (#258067)

        The SYFY network has gone to shit. Wrestling? Really? Put that crap on A&E along with the gay bounty hunter.

        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:17PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:17PM (#258100)

          FWIW, WWE Smackdown is moving to the USA Network sometime next year, IIRC.

          • (Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:52PM

            by frojack (1554) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:52PM (#258126) Journal

            The question remains, how the hell did it end up on SYFY in the first place?

            Just because TV wrestling is all fake and make believe doesn't make it SIFI.

            --
            No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday November 04 2015, @06:08AM

        by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 04 2015, @06:08AM (#258296)
        I still don't get why Ghost Hunters isn't considered science fiction.
        --
        🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:26PM (#258074)
    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:46PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @07:46PM (#258082)

      I got trolled on that in the discussion about Oct 21st and "back to the future" I assumed it was only being discussed because of the new reboot / sequel BTTF movie. You know, the one that surprisingly doesn't exist.

      Another one that surprisingly doesn't exist is Rambo, either the first where he's a pissed off war vet angry at his countries leaders, or the one where he's Afghanistani Taliban's BFF back when they were the good guys. Both would take some political editing for a 2015 release...

      Oh and Indiana Jones. The politically correct rewrite for the Indiana Jones remake would have to be something to be seen.

      How about Sorcerer from 1977? That might actually be a "go". That might be a decent remake. Its like "Incredible Journey" but with criminals instead of house pets and trucks full of nitroglycerin in a red pilled 3rd world jungle hell hole rather than the American countryside. Or maybe its the modern American South countryside, hard to say, complete with fraking oil wells and collapsed infrastructure. Other than that, yeah just like "Incredible Journey". I could see that being remade. Its a decent action flick.

      Another 70s/80s blissfully thankfully not being remade is Disco Fever. And Flashdance. Err, as far as I know they're not being remade.

      Given that virtually all current movies are 70s/80s remakes, its easy to see how one can get trolled into thinking all 70s/80s movies are being remade.

      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:03PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:03PM (#258091)

        Hey, did you hear about the Space 1999 movie they're working on?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:26PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:26PM (#258150)

          Actually, I did hear something about that. How about the British "UFO" show? There's one that hasn't been beat to death yet.

      • (Score: 2) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:39PM

        by PizzaRollPlinkett (4512) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:39PM (#258113)

        That and they probably are in discussion for being remade by someone someplace because the movie industry is so creatively bankrupt. I originally thought up the BSG thing as a joke, but searched Google and sure enough it turned up a real article from 2014 talking about a real movie.

        Still, Disco Fever... that would work. Disco is coming back, I just know it will.

        --
        (E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
        • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:41PM

          by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:41PM (#258179)

          Considering that after the main show wrapped, they did a TV movie, a spinoff show, and some sort of web series ("Bill Adama, younger and more emo!" or something like that), it's not surprising.

          --
          "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
      • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:47PM

        by isostatic (365) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:47PM (#258122) Journal

        Given that virtually all current movies are 70s/80s remakes, its easy to see how one can get trolled into thinking all 70s/80s movies are being remade.

        Don't forget the 90s remakes, Jurassic Park and Man From UNCLE this year.

        I'm looking forward to a matrix sequel - they really should have made it into a trilogy.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:33PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:33PM (#258152)

          Man from U.N.C.L.E. and 90's movie in the same sentence?? What are you smoking??

  • (Score: 1) by STDOUBT on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:00PM

    by STDOUBT (4634) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:00PM (#258089)

    I've been thoroughly enjoying these:
    http://www.startrekcontinues.com/ [startrekcontinues.com]

    I for one would prefer a re-visit like "Star Trek Continues", versus a re-imagination.
    Too bad some big fat corp. doesn't fund this excellent fan-fic. On second thought,
    they'd probably get it wrong...

    --
    We must not say that every mistake is a foolish one.~Marcus Tullius Cicero
    • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:45PM

      by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:45PM (#258120) Journal

      There are a bunch of these out there: some laughable, some really quite good! And yes, a budget would help: if only i had Warren Buffets money, lol.

      And i like the reboot: just park your brain at the door and enjoy (Spock!). I guess i've been Sherlocked! :)

      --
      --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
      • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:24AM

        by Reziac (2489) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:24AM (#258254) Homepage

        Considering they've had budgets of at best a few cents on the dollar, most of these fan-made episodes are pretty good. The plots tend to be rather more original than mainstream TV (and more willing to just go DO whatever), the acting a bit rough (sometimes a lot rough), the sets functional (sometimes leaving much to the imagination). I've decided to commit suspension of disbelief and enjoy 'em for what they are, rather than criticize 'em for what more time, more pros, and more budget would fix.

        --
        And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
    • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 04 2015, @01:38PM

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @01:38PM (#258357) Journal

      I came to say the same thing. I'd rather see more episodes of Star Trek Continues than anything JJ Abrams would do. STC gets it pitch perfect.

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
  • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:53PM

    by Hairyfeet (75) <{bassbeast1968} {at} {gmail.com}> on Tuesday November 03 2015, @08:53PM (#258127) Journal

    Since many involved are connected to the JJ "lens flares and boom booms" Abrams reboot, and when you add that to the fact that they haven't had a good series since DS9? Yeah not gonna hold my breath on this being good.

    Of course if it DOES suck at least we have the web shows like Star Trek: Of Gods and Men and Star Trek: Renegades and Star Trek Continues, all of which is IMHO better than Star Trek "good ship reset button" Voyager and Star Trek "crewed by insane people" Enterprise.

    --
    ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
    • (Score: 2) by Reziac on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:27AM

      by Reziac (2489) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @03:27AM (#258255) Homepage

      Renegades was really good. I've liked the Hidden Frontier productions too. Way more watchable than Lost In Trek, er, I mean Voyager. That's a funny take on Enterprise -- which I liked (initially hated it, but it grew on me), but yeah, some of these people have ...issues...

      --
      And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
      • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Thursday November 05 2015, @11:18PM

        by Hairyfeet (75) <{bassbeast1968} {at} {gmail.com}> on Thursday November 05 2015, @11:18PM (#259170) Journal

        Go watch the SFDebris reviews [sfdebris.com] of ST:Enterprise as he makes a DAMNED convincing argument that most of the crew of Enterprise was straight up insane or mentally challenged. A perfect example of which is when Archer is told the translator is down and Hoshi can't understand the other ship he yells at them in English like the problem is they are deaf NOT that they have no idea WTF he is saying LOL!

        BTW you'll also probably love the ST:Voyager reviews as he makes a damned funny but interesting case for Janeway being powermad, even has a hilarious explanation how Janeway could get her ship lost and just by getting home be made the third highest officer in Starfleet as seen in ST:Nemesis, it even explains why Picard was the smart thoughtful captain in the show but becomes John McClain in the movies. Funny stuff.

        --
        ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
  • (Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:02PM

    by SomeGuy (5632) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:02PM (#258133)

    Ug, "Rehash" is the right term for this sort of thing.

    One of the things I enjoy most about watching a science fiction show is exploring the universe someone has created.

    Unfortunately, Star Trek has been throughly beaten inside out and run through the ringer. Why not just create something new? Similar? Sure. Part of the exact same story? No. Do they have to have this specific branding for merchandise?

    There are all kinds of crazy and interesting directions a new sci-fi show could take, but limiting it to a well known and threshed out universe is boring.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @09:47PM (#258157)

      They are using the Star Trek branding to rope in existing Star Trek fans. That is a lot easier than building a new fan-base from scratch.

      I pretty much stopped being a Star Trek fan after the first season of Enterprise, and even getting through Voyager was a struggle. It would be best if Star Trek was killed off to make way for fresh ideas to come through. It may be possible to still get good stories out of the Star Trek universe, but I really gave up hope of that after the Star Trek movie reboot.

    • (Score: 2) by VanderDecken on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:13PM

      by VanderDecken (5216) on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:13PM (#258166)

      I'd suggest some Grey Lensman [wikipedia.org], other than I'm sure that the producers would f*ck it up like they did for Starship Troopers.

      I'm remaining hopeful for The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, but am bracing myself to be disappointed (imdb is calling it "Uprising").

      --
      The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 04 2015, @07:31AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 04 2015, @07:31AM (#258310)

        Just out of interest, why did folks not like Starship Troopers. I've heard a couple of people slating it. Was the humour too subtle?

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:28PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 03 2015, @10:28PM (#258176)

    "Please don't fuck it up....please don't fuck it up"

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by EvilSS on Tuesday November 03 2015, @11:18PM

    by EvilSS (1456) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 03 2015, @11:18PM (#258186)

    I mean, this is just weird. ONE episode on broadcast TV then death behind the CBS streaming paywall? This smells more like CBS was going to lose some TV rights back to Paramount or something and this is their "Fantastic Four" 2015. "Get SOMETHING out there now before we lose the rights!" Or worse that Wheel of Time abomination from earlier this year.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday November 04 2015, @01:42PM

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday November 04 2015, @01:42PM (#258359) Journal

    I don't care how many times the corporations try to re-tread Trek. They suck at it. Their writers clearly never know the canon and don't give a crap about it. They rely on cheap gimmicks like the stupid holodeck or transporter accidents. Their characters are cartoon-cutouts, not complex beings.

    They should fund Star Trek Continues and let the real fans take the reins.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.