MovieChat Forums > Star Trek (1973) Discussion > The Death of Star Trek

The Death of Star Trek


This is just my opinion

For about three years now I've been hearing about (and in some ways seeing) the death of Star Trek. I hear people say that the quality has dried up and the series have fizzled down to a weekly series of fan gratification. I catch Enterprise on occasion but truthfully, the feeling is that of a guest that is overstaying his welcome. I did catch Nemesis in the theater and the feeling was that I was spending time with a group of people that I don't feel like I know anymore. As a series, I think it's dead, as a product it will live on forever.

So here is a question for you: What can be done to save it?

reply

Only one thing can save Star Trek.

BRING BACK KIRK!

reply

Only one thing can save Star Trek.

BRING BACK DECENT WRITERS!

reply

only one thing can bring back star trek.....kill rick berman

Thunderbirds Aren't Slow

reply

[deleted]

i disagree with all the posters suggestions. while i dig TOS, i think shatner is one of the campiest performers ever to be involved in the franchise, as for rick berman, i think voyager, which he co-produced is the best of the lot, as for decent writers, i only watched a handful of "enterprise" episodes but the obviously decided to go in a "different direction", as the first post-roddenberry series, i give them a "e" for effort but i assume there will be others, lets hope theyare more in keeping with the look/feel/spirit of the series.

reply

Shatner's campiness is the soul of Star Trek and always will be! I just can't get enough of Kirk's bulging eyes and absurd mouthing as he doubles over in pain inflicted by some alien life form or machine. It's classic stuff. His death in ST7 was a big letdown-- the hammy death scenes Shatner did in The Fugitive and The Six Million Dollar Man were both much more satisfyingly Kirklike.

reply

Actually DS9 was the first "post-Roddenberry" series, and actually he was not that actively involved with TNG after the first few seasons, because of his health.

Personally I find Voyager to not only be the worst of all the series, but the only one that is near unwatchable. I've been revisiting all the Trek shows lately via DVD and Netflix, and catching up on Enterprise, which I didn't watch much of originally (mainly because Voyager completely turned me off of new Trek for years). TNG is my favorite, and still holds up after all these years. DS9 is terrific, and a truly unique Trek show, just as I had always remembered it. Enterprise is a surprisingly enjoyable show, even if it doesn't feel like it could actually be a prequel to TOS at all. TOS of course is dated, but highly enjoyable, and fun to watch. I find Voyager to be dull, uninspired, and lacking any charm in the cast, setting, or story departments, just as I remembered it on it's original broadcast.

The problems with Trek definitely came from having the same people doing the same things over and over for far too long. It hit a low point with Voyager because the cast was so boring, and the writting so phoned in and lazy. Enterprise picked it up a bit, but too little too late, as they had already driven big Trek fans like myself away with years of Voyager stinking up the joint, and weren't doing anything interesting enough to draw new viewers, or good enough to keep the ones they did. It's a shame because Enterprise is a good show, at least for the first two seasons that I've seen via Netflix, and from what I've heard it gets much better in the last two seasons as well.

reply

I think much of the problem is it's been continuing for too long. Bringing back the movies after the original series was huge because it was gone for so long. While TNG wasn't super popular at first it became big. Since TNG there have been 3 other Trek's back to back and overlapping. People get tired of it and move on. There is no reason why it can't make a return again after a long break. Star Trek is still my favorite Sci Fi on TV there ever was. None of the other Sci Fi shows can capture the same feeling. Most of the other Sci Fi shows end up seeming too much like people from current times thrown into a space ship. I like Star Trek because it created a future much unlike our own but with people that acted very human and had real conversations.

reply

I agree with the whole 'Bury Berman' thing.

Roddenberry would never have allowed a prequel to be made. And thats obviusly the major reason why it failed.

There needs to be a new series. One without the twits that have been in control so far. Something new, and fresh and creative. Like what Voyager did. That was Star Trek in a nut shell.


And bring back the writers from the start of TNG - towards the end they changed alot of the writers & it showed.

Personally I would love a (decent) CGI version of the animated series. The stories are absolutely brilliant.

On that note, someone should dig up the origional script for 'The infinate vulcan'. I would but I dont have Koenig's phone number! :)

reply

I say put Star Trek on hiatus for at least a decade. Give time to let the "Death of Star Trek" ideas time to die down. Then in about 10 years come back with a completely new concept, maybe 1000 years from the 24th Century.

I think the problem was the Star Trek kept repeating itself in an arena that now includes Stargate and Battlestar Galactica which are in step with the times.

reply

I stopped watching the movies after Star Trek VI, so as far as I'm concerned, Captain Kirk is still alive, you bozos! Nyaaaah. He's off on some planet having a fancy ole time with an Orion slave girl. Uhn, uhn, uhn, uhn...

Sorry, too much tranya in my tea this morning.

I agree that Battlestar Galactica dominates today (with good reason... that's a kickass show). But that's because of the cynicism of the times. BSG is a much darker, sinister production, whereas Star Trek always portrayed the future in an optimistic, colourful light. Today, cynicism dominates society, so audiences will shun the Gandhi-esque, nonviolent portrayal of the future, the way Gene Roddenbery saw things. The "death of Star Trek" through TNG, Voyager, DS9 & the movies, was a result of the incompatibility between the new cynical audience and the original Roddenberrian "hippy" ideal, which writers tried (unsuccessfully) to compromise.

It's a shame, but I'm confident that society will swing back again. 20 years I'd give it.

reply

Trek is dead.

reply

[deleted]

True. We need some time to let it rest. After Nemsis and Enterprise I'm on ST burnout. I say, give it a decade or so.

reply

What's with all the comments about how bad Nemesis and Enterprise were? I loved them both. I've been a trekker since it premired in the 60's. The only bad movie was ST5. The rest are fine. The so-called bad writers for Enterprise gave us some great historically significant episodes. We got to see CGI Gorns and Tholians! Come on, it was good. As for the perversion of Mr. Roddenberry's dream, he gave Mr. Berman his blessing to run with the franchise. He wouldn't have liked some aspects of the latter seires, but he wouldn't have hated them as some suggest.

"Funny how your feet, in dreams, never touch the Earth" -Nancy Wilson

reply

Enterprise started strong but it got weak very quickly. Nemesis was too little, too late. I'm done with Trek.

reply

Your loss, friend.

"Funny how your feet, in dreams, never touch the Earth" -Nancy Wilson

reply

I really don't consider it a loss. Star Trek ran out of energy years ago and I really have no reason to hang on to it. I had hoped that it could be shelved for a number of years to give it time to reinvent itself, then I heard about this new film that is coming up in 2008 and, well, I see that Paramount is still trying to breath life into what has clearly waned down to a tired "product".

Sorry, Trek is dead to me.

reply

You sure do talk a lot about it for it to be dead. If you are referring to the Starfleet Academy film, I'm afraid it WILL definitely kill Trek. I wouldn't be heartbroken if it did. Trek has had an amazing run. Modern science fiction TV and Movies (including Star Wars) owe their existance to it.

"Funny how your feet, in dreams, never touch the Earth" -Nancy Wilson

reply

Yes but Star Trek owes it's rebirth to Star Wars. In fact, the entire genre of Sci-Fi television and films of the late 70s and early 80s owes it's existence to Star Wars.

reply

Yes but Star Trek owes it's rebirth to Star Wars.


WRONG. This is a common misconception. Plans had been under way for Trek's revival before Star Wars ever hit theaters. SW's success merely made Paramount decide to scrap TV series plans and make the first Trek film. Now, admittedly, ST2:TWOK most likely may not have happened if not for SW. It is more accurate to say that Trek owes the outstanding success of its revival to SW. By the same token, the series Enterprise owes its failure to newer shows such as Babylon 5, Farscape, and Stargate: SG-1. The Trek mold had been broken. The truth of the matter is that Enterprise was Trek at its finest. It held the same fascination for me as the original series did. But in comparison to the other shows mentioned it was considered too dull; however, not by THIS Trekker; and I suspect by most Trekkers my age.
All the talk about the terrible writing was thrown about by younger sci-fi fans who thought either Babylon 5, SG-1 or Farscape was THE sci-fi series of all time. Sure, both B5 and Farscape had good runs, but neither can hold a candle to Trek's success. No spin-offs or movies except The Peacekeeper Wars for Farscape. B5 had several successful TV Movies and one failed spin-off. SG-1 has made an excellent mark for itself, however, with a spin-off and talk of a new theatrical film. I strongly doubt that very many Trek fans of my generation disliked Nemesis and Enterprise as much as you seem to. These are some, of course, but not nearly as many as those of us who loved it.

"Funny how your feet, in dreams, never touch the Earth" -Nancy Wilson

reply

Enterprise started strong but it got weak very quickly. Nemesis was too little, too late.


Actually, you've got it totally backwards. Enterprise started out weak just like the other spin-offs but got much better with age. I wasn't thrilled with the whole Xindi thing, but it did give us some intriguing episodes.
As for Nemesis, it is generally agreed that it would have done much better at the box office if not for being thrashed by Lord Of The Rings.
Did it have more violence than Mr. Roddenberry would have liked? YES. Does that make it a bad movie? NO. Actually, if all the cut material were to be restored to Nemesis, it may very well be one of the best Trek films ever made. TONS of small expository scenes about Dr. Crusher, Worf, and even Guinan and Wesley Crusher were snipped out. This kind of stuff is important to Trekkers and I hope that some one at Paramount realizes this in the future and gives us the extended cut of it we deserve.

"Funny how your feet, in dreams, never touch the Earth" -Nancy Wilson

reply

What can be done to save Star Trek?

Fire Rick Berman, give it a rest for a while, the revive it with writers who understand what STORY, DIALOG and DRAMA are! Just my take on it.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Some of you people who are lumping DS9 into the "death of Trek" category and act as though it wasn't made from a cynical viewpoint tend to make me think that you didn't watch it. DS9 was easily the darkest of all the Trek series. It was not a very upbeat show even from the beginning, despite it having probably the most comedic elements within a Trek series. Captain Sisko is quite certainly cynical.

reply

Well first off, Kirk (Shatner) was perfect for the time.....I think he was the 60's era man....I dont know what can save the series, but IMHO Voyager was by far the best of the newer series...At least from a concept view.....

Better Living Thru Chemistry

reply

Yeah, Voyager had a great premise and a lot of potential. Its too bad they didn't exercise that potential.

reply

ST will never get as good as it watch in the final seasons of DS9. VOY was good enough, ENT surprisingly good, especially the last season.

I love all Trek, but since I wasn't alive when TOS was on the air, I'm not as terribly nostalgic about TOS as some other people here. Kirk is dead, let him stay dead.

I have faith in JJ, he'll make ST XI a fine movie. And if he doesn't, we'll always have ST, it will just take a while.

reply

Yeah, and most probably Abrams will infuse it with 'realistic' characters with their conflicted human nature and their human stupidity and one liners (BSG) to try to capture the (non-thinking) mainstream market.

-----
Kid Rock:I dont need any water
Cameron Diaz:You need water 2 make beer
K Rock:Oh my God!

reply

[deleted]