Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

All Things Star Trek

88Comrade2000

By 88Comrade2000
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ron78

Ron78

Posted
Posted
On 1/1/2017 at 3:14 PM, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

Not a Trekie by any means.  I remember watching the original series re-broadcasts on Saturdays as a kid along with just about all the movies over the years (probably missed a couple in the Next Generation).  And watched some Deep Space Nine (is that the one with the borg?)  in college here and there as my roommate was a trekie.  

 

Anyhow, I've decided to watch all of them (movies included) in chronological order (show timeline - not actual release dates).  Been watching Enterprise the past few days.  So could someone with more knowledge than myself list out all the shows/movies in order to watch them?  I know Enterprise takes place long before the original series, so I started there.  I'm assuming that the movies (with exception to the reboots) tie into the order as well.  

 

On 1/19/2017 at 1:25 AM, PokerPacker said:

Voyager is the one with the borg.

 

As for chronological order, I believe it should go:
Enterprise

The Original Series

The Animated Series

Star Trek 1-6

Next Generation

Deep Space 9

Voyager (Next Gen, DS9, and Voyager all took place in the same era; not 100% sure of full chronological order, but Next Gen should be before DS9)

Generations

First Contact

Insurrection

Nemesis

 

You should watch the Generations and First Contact movies before watching Voyager.  There is some context in First Contact that becomes relevant in later seasons of Voyager.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
Ron78

Ron78

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, BRAVEONAWARPATH said:

 

 

It looks like crap.  I just watched "All Good Things" on Hulu.  I hadn't seen it in well over a decade and wanted to see if it still holds up.  Part of the appeal is nostalgia, but I still really enjoyed it.  I really missed those days of Star Trek.  This monstrosity bears no resemblance.

Edited by Ron78
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PokerPacker

PokerPacker

Posted
Posted

New trailer continues to look like crap.  Up is down and when you're lost you're found?  Oh, real deep!  I bet insanity is sane and illogic is logical, too.

 

And of course they can't help but retread old grounds by bringing back a character Star Trek fans of old are familiar with in Harry Mudd.  Of course like everything else, he seems to be a darker, edgier Mudd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, PokerPacker said:

New trailer continues to look like crap.  Up is down and when you're lost you're found?  Oh, real deep!  I bet insanity is sane and illogic is logical, too.

 

And of course they can't help but retread old grounds by bringing back a character Star Trek fans of old are familiar with in Harry Mudd.  Of course like everything else, he seems to be a darker, edgier Mudd.

I'm not sure the Trailers tells the whole story??  I watched some podcast where they said that some of the people we see in the trailer get killed in the first episode.   I'll give it shot but I am very leery like everyone  else.  Instead of going back in the past; they should've set the series in the future.  After TNG/DS9/Voyager.

Edited by Rdskns2000
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Xameil said:

Why am I getting increasingly skeptical of this?

Because everyone is skeptical of this.  It's going to really have to blow everyone away, or more than likely it's a one season and done show.

 

The fact they went 10 years before classic Trek, was a mistake.

 

It probably has more in common with the Kelvin Timeline Trek than the original vision. That will kill it, for a lot of people.

Edited by Rdskns2000
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dont Taze Me Bro

Dont Taze Me Bro

Posted
Posted
Just now, Rdskns2000 said:

Because everyone is skeptical of this.  It's going to really have to blow everyone away, or more than likely it's a one season and done show.

 

The fact they went 10 years before classic Trek, was a mistake.

 

It probably has more in common with the Kelvin Timeline Trek than the original vision. That will kill it, for a lot of people.

 

Why is it a mistake they went 10 years before the original ST series?  Elaborate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PokerPacker

PokerPacker

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, Kosher Ham said:

There is a reason that you leave it. 

 

Star Trek knows this. 

 

Enjoy it as it was. The Matrix...got it. 

I don't think it needs to be left... It just needs to be put into the hands of someone who can do it justice.  Alex Kurtzman is not the man for the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron78

Ron78

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 7/27/2017 at 4:51 PM, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

Why is it a mistake they went 10 years before the original ST series?  Elaborate.  

 

Because you have to walk a fine line between the style of a show set 10 years prior (that is made in the 2010's) and the style of the original series (which was made in the 60's).  They have done a good job of this with prior incarnations of Trek, but it doesn't even look like they are trying to make this series fit the Star Trek puzzle.  Everything looks completely different and incongruent with the timeline.

 

Also, there needs to be continuity in other ways (like the Klingons for example).  The Klingons were a significant part of the Star Trek story-line for basically it's entire existence.  Make up has changed them over the years, but now the Klingons they are introducing in this new series hardly resemble the Klingons we have known in the past (not out of necessity, but out of choice).  CBS is being lazy, and it is going to result in this series being a bust. 

Edited by Ron78
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron78

Ron78

Posted
Posted
Just now, nonniey said:

Well it certainly looks better than Next Generation, Voyager and Enterprise.

 

I don't agree.  Next Generation had some seriously good writing in its last 4 seasons.  Enterprise had a decent 1st season, and a strong 4th season.  Voyager absolutely sucked, but I would still take it over this Discovery crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 7/27/2017 at 6:50 PM, Ron78 said:

 

Because you have to walk a fine line between the style of a show set 10 years prior (that is made in the 2010's) and the style of the original series (which was made in the 60's).  They have done a good job of this with prior incarnations of Trek, but it doesn't even look like they are trying to make this series fit the Star Trek puzzle.  Everything looks completely different and in-congruent with the timeline.

 

Also, there needs to be continuity in other ways (like the Klingons for example).  The Klingons were a significant part of the Star Trek story-line for basically it's entire existence.  Make up has changed them over the years, but now the Klingons they are introducing in this new series hardly resemble the Klingons we have known in the past (not out of necessity, but out of choice).  CBS is being lazy and it is going to result in this series being a bust. 

Ron78 described it pretty good.   You are setting the show before the original show.  Your show has to show that time period. I'm not sure they are.  They may have some things in it, that place it beyond the original show's  timeline.

 

I just feel, any new show should've been set in the future; where you have a clean slate.

 

http://ew.com/tv/2017/07/28/bryan-fuller-star-trek-discovery/?utm_campaign=entertainmentweekly&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&xid=socialflow_facebook_entertainmentweekly

 

Bryan Fuller's original idea, might have hold some promise?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron78

Ron78

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Ron78 described it pretty good.   You are setting the show before the original show.  Your show has to show that time period. I'm not sure they are.  They may have some things in it, that place it beyond the original show's  timeline.

 

I just feel, any new show should've been set in the future; where you have a clean slate.

 

http://ew.com/tv/2017/07/28/bryan-fuller-star-trek-discovery/?utm_campaign=entertainmentweekly&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&xid=socialflow_facebook_entertainmentweekly

 

Bryan Fuller's original idea, might have hold some promise?

 

 

 

A post Voyager series that opened up the door for cameos of actors from previous Trek shows was the only way to go.  That might of had me purchasing a CBS subscription.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted

I'll give it a chance, but I agree it should not of been a prequel.  More artistic leeway coming after the timeline and more to play with.  Like I have zero expectation of seeing the Borg, though that's something I've wanted to see again since First Contact.   If they're going to do a prequel, can they please just do something on the Eugenics War?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...