http://www.latino-review.com/news/star-trek-exclusive-trek-is-going-to-return-to-tv

 

So, GREAT news, Trekkers, CBS is looking to bring Star Trek back to TV.

 

The last we heard of a Star Trek TV series, was around 2006 before the Abrams movie planted its flag and destroyed most of what we knew (except Spock and - presumably  the plot of Star Trek: Enterprise)  there were two competing versions: Bryce Zabel (writer, Dark Skies) and J. Michael Straczynski (Babylon 5, but I like crediting him as the good writer on The Real Ghostbusters) pitched a version called “Star Trek: Reboot the Universe” that actually made it online in PDF form.

 

The second was developed closer to the JJ reboot and was written by producer Geoffrey Thorne, novelist and writer on things like Leverage and Criminal Intent and was called Star Trek: Federation and was conceptualized with producer Robert Burnett, Bryan Singer (the X-Men director and producer of TV’s House among others) and Christopher (director of Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation). This other series wouldn’t reboot the Star Trek universe, but would vault it forward past the DS9 and Voyager series timelines into a far flung future where the Utopia Federation that we knew from other TV series had become boring and complacent.

 

Federation would have seen the titular group reduced to a mere peacekeeping force as the old ways broke apart. Vulcans withdraw from the United Federation of Planets and reunify with the Romulans, the Bajorans of Deep Space Nine would have also withdrawn and become a planet full of religious monks, like a “Tibet in space.” The Klingons wouldn’t be as warrior-obsessed anymore, but would instead be warrior mystics. The Ferengi would have a female Nagus. The Cardassians would have abandoned war and become an artist/philosopher race.

In essence, Federation would have advanced the timeline of the Star Trek Universe far enough in the future to re-define some of the characters that had been the same since the original series’ inception.

 

We don’t have too many details about the new Star Trek series CBS is going to get working on, but I spent some time filling you in on Federation, because it seems like the same people who made that pitch could be involved. Bryan Singer's name has been mentioned for the new CBS Trek as a possible Executive Producer through his Bad Hat Harry productions. While "Star Trek: Reboot the Universe" was invalidated by 2008's movie Trek, Star Trek: Federation still has a trio of enthusiastic producers, a script and a writer ready to go should CBS decide to give Singer the ahead to develop this new series. 

 

Robert Burnett is rumored to be working on a non-Trek project with Skydance Productions (Skydance worked with Paramount, McQuarrie and Bad Robot on M:I 5) and simultaneously keeping one foot in the Trek world. He's currently producing (one of the producers) a project independent of all previously mentioned parties,  Star Trek: Axanar, a 90-minute fan-made feature film about "The Four Years War," as mentioned in the TOS episode "Whom Gods Destroy." The film has scraped up and impressive cast and released “Prelude to Axanar” last year to show how this great venture can be pulled off on a fan-donated budget:

 

That’s the sort of Star Trek product Brunett can use as an example of how producing a reasonably-budgeted TV series set in the Star Trek Universe this day and age should be a piece of cake.

 

Back to our Federation three:

 

CBS is interested in Bryan Singer developing (and Singer reportedly loves Prelude to Axanar) and Federation co-conspirator Chris McQuarrie was still game for the project as of last December, if Twitter is to be believed.

 

As far as when to expect some sort of official announcement about who snagged the NEW Trek production job, that’s a bit tougher to predict.

 

Star Trek 3 seems to be the Trek Paramount would like us to focus on (Elba for Mogh of the House of Martok, right Simon Pegg?), Singer is only tweeting about making the new X-Men movie and McQuarrie is wrapping up the edit on Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation for later this year. The Star Trek: Federation story document still exists, though, and I’m told Geoffrey Thorne might have taken that treatment all the way to a pilot script before the project cooled, which would allow this show to get off the ground much faster.

 

For the sharp-eye’d Trek fan, all eyes are on Star Trek: Axanar (official site here) to show off what Trek on a budget can look like. If that can work and CBS can see it work, then we might get a riff on Star Trek: Federation. Either way, CBS is convinced it's a good idea to probe the idea of a Star Trek TV show, so TV Trek’s likely on the way.

 

I’ve been saying it since summer of 2005…

 

...no, I’ve been saying it since summer of 1990: There should ALWAYS be Star Trek on TV

 

Edited November 23, 20196 yr by The Unknown Poster

Science fiction is based on technology that we could have.  It's based around our actual reality.

 

Fantasy is not based in our reality.  It's magic, technology that can and can't be explained, etc...

 

Star Trek is Science Fiction.  Star Wars is Fantasy.  Yes they're closely related, but there's a reason there's 2 different sections in the book store.

 

I still hold by what I said.  Enterprise was not the Trek people wanted.  

 

So true, I just wanted some exploration dammit. The one ep they got right was when the Communication officer took a pet home and it was turning out well and they dropped it off on another planet.

 

One of the issues with Star Trek 09 film was what they did to the Enterprise.  The Kelvin in the opening scene was pretty cool and in keeping with a "TOS with modern effects" in my opinion.  But the Enterprise was three times as large as the original with the Apple-inspired iBridge and a sense of technology that was too advanced, too slick.

 

One of the writers explained this. The Kelvin scanned the Narada and all that future tech was put it into the memory banks which were saved when they left the ship.

 

Season 2 of TNG was spoiled by Pulaski. Ugh! What an old ***** she was.

 

Considering how much better 2 was she might have saved it. Course season 1 had some great TOS-type eps. The drug addiction one my fave.

 

I knew as soon as I saw the transporters that it wouldn't be long before they started using it all the time.  After all, who wants to watch them go down to a planet on a shuttle all the time?  Yeah, they had some things right, but like all prequels, they decide to change things in order to make their stories work, and that usually ends up in disaster.

 

Surprised you not bring up the 'holodeck' episode. Oh vey.

 

I never watched all of Enterprise so I missed the Holodeck episode.

Yeah they gave the tech to the Klingons.

No, they have to go past Voyager or stay in that era. Not go back. Just get rid of annoying & recurring Aliens like Q. And quit making the future look so antiseptic. The notion that all crime, disease & pestilence has been eliminated should be changed. DS9 was supposed to be more edgy & it was but still the space station was just too nice a place for the situation it was in & the beings that visited or inhabited it.. 

No, they have to go past Voyager or stay in that era. Not go back. Just get rid of annoying & recurring Aliens like Q. And quit making the future look so antiseptic. The notion that all crime, disease & pestilence has been eliminated should be changed. DS9 was supposed to be more edgy & it was but still the space station was just too nice a place for the situation it was in & the beings that visited or inhabited it.. 

I have zero desire to go past Voyager.  Fill in some of the blanks.

 

With this being a CBS production it will be interesting to see if they want to reassert their intellectual property (namely TOS and it's dirivitives) and if so, what will that look like or will they "respect" the films and stay away from that era and characters?

Hits on the nose:

 

The reaction from the New York Post:

 

Over the years, Trekkies began looking to Ronald D. Moore, a former “Trek” writer and creator of the fantastic “Battlestar Galactica” reboot, to bring his signature grit and modern take on sci-fi to a new “Star Trek.” But CBS has instead shackled us with the dude who co-wrote “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen.”

 

Nerd culture has finally escaped after-school “science fiction clubs” and worked its way into the mainstream. Everyone watches “Game of Thrones”; everyone is excited for “Star Wars”; hot guys like comic books.

 

These are salad days for geeks!

 

So why does CBS treat “Star Trek” — one of its most valuable and oldest brands — as second tier? Why are these network numbskulls giving “Star Trek” a midseason debut on a streaming service led by the guy who co-wrote “The Amazing Spider-Man 2”?

Science fiction is based on technology that we could have.  It's based around our actual reality.

 

Fantasy is not based in our reality.  It's magic, technology that can and can't be explained, etc...

 

Star Trek is Science Fiction.  Star Wars is Fantasy.  Yes they're closely related, but there's a reason there's 2 different sections in the book store.

I've seen this argument before, I don't agree with it. Genres really don't matter in writing. Science fiction and fantasy may be different sections in the bookstore but they're always right next to each other and the lines are ever blurring between them. Star Trek has always been fantasy regardless of being more grounded in reality than some other options. The key to good fiction of any kind is stories worth telling and characters people care about. The rest of it is just window dressing. 

Travelling at Warp 9.5 isn't fantasy? Scientists & physicists say that travelling at light speed is impossible so until someone invents the ability to travel at the speed of light then it's fantasy. Not based in reality.

Travelling at Warp 9.5 isn't fantasy? Scientists & physicists say that travelling at light speed is impossible so until someone invents the ability to travel at the speed of light then it's fantasy. Not based in reality.

 

Science Fiction implies that what is written in it is not real or it is imagined.  Or not based in reality.  The science part is mostly the fiction part.

 

So there was a time that the Earth orbiting around the Sun rather then the Sun orbiting around the Earth was pure fantasy?

 

The earth being round instead of flat was pure fantasy but now it is fiction??

 

At what point does fantasy become Science Fiction before it becomes reality?

 

To me Science Fiction revolves around some future or alternate world where these is advanced science and / or technology for the things they do, and usually involves outer space.  Fantasy is typically some land or different world that is still in or around the bronze / iron age, has no computers or combustion engines and has some sort of magic.

 

There are of course some works that blur the lines of both.

 

Travelling at Warp 9.5 isn't fantasy? Scientists & physicists say that travelling at light speed is impossible so until someone invents the ability to travel at the speed of light then it's fantasy. Not based in reality.

 

Science Fiction implies that what is written in it is not real or it is imagined.  Or not based in reality.  The science part is mostly the fiction part.

 

So there was a time that the Earth orbiting around the Sun rather then the Sun orbiting around the Earth was pure fantasy?

 

The earth being round instead of flat was pure fantasy but now it is fiction??

 

At what point does fantasy become Science Fiction before it becomes reality?

 

To me Science Fiction revolves around some future or alternate world where these is advanced science and / or technology for the things they do, and usually involves outer space.  Fantasy is typically some land or different world that is still in or around the bronze / iron age, has no computers or combustion engines and has some sort of magic.

 

There are of course some works that blur the lines of both.

 

 

 

Travelling at Warp 9.5 isn't fantasy? Scientists & physicists say that travelling at light speed is impossible so until someone invents the ability to travel at the speed of light then it's fantasy. Not based in reality.

 

Science Fiction implies that what is written in it is not real or it is imagined.  Or not based in reality.  The science part is mostly the fiction part.

 

So there was a time that the Earth orbiting around the Sun rather then the Sun orbiting around the Earth was pure fantasy?

 

The earth being round instead of flat was pure fantasy but now it is fiction??

 

At what point does fantasy become Science Fiction before it becomes reality?

 

To me Science Fiction revolves around some future or alternate world where these is advanced science and / or technology for the things they do, and usually involves outer space.  Fantasy is typically some land or different world that is still in or around the bronze / iron age, has no computers or combustion engines and has some sort of magic.

 

There are of course some works that blur the lines of both.

 

That works for me also. But if scientists says time travel or warp drive is impossible then it's still fantasy even in the future. 

Travelling at Warp 9.5 isn't fantasy? Scientists & physicists say that travelling at light speed is impossible so until someone invents the ability to travel at the speed of light then it's fantasy. Not based in reality.

Depends on the understanding of warp which was, understandably, not well fleshed out in the time of TOS.  Theortetically, faster-than-light travel is possible.

 

One way Star Trek's warp drive might be possible is its creating a warp bubble which is bending space.  So realistically its not actually speeding beyond light but appears to.

 

One such theory is the Alcubierre Drve.

 

Additionally, transporting was thought to be a crazy idea and yet they are working on it, obviously on a much small scale.

 

But I'd say something like faster than light travel is fair game in Science Fiction especially when it takes theorteical possibilities and expands upon them.  At least in Star Trek, Warping is has various degrees of danger depending on the era and technology and has always been portrayed as requiring immense energy and space allocated on a ship.

 

And in TNG, it was shown that warping actually negatively impacted a certain space-faring species and thus cruising speed was lowered.

 

Travelling at Warp 9.5 isn't fantasy? Scientists & physicists say that travelling at light speed is impossible so until someone invents the ability to travel at the speed of light then it's fantasy. Not based in reality.

 

Science Fiction implies that what is written in it is not real or it is imagined.  Or not based in reality.  The science part is mostly the fiction part.

 

So there was a time that the Earth orbiting around the Sun rather then the Sun orbiting around the Earth was pure fantasy?

 

The earth being round instead of flat was pure fantasy but now it is fiction??

 

At what point does fantasy become Science Fiction before it becomes reality?

 

To me Science Fiction revolves around some future or alternate world where these is advanced science and / or technology for the things they do, and usually involves outer space.  Fantasy is typically some land or different world that is still in or around the bronze / iron age, has no computers or combustion engines and has some sort of magic.

 

There are of course some works that blur the lines of both.

 

I always say Star Wars is Science Fantasy and Star Trek is Science Fiction.  A lot of Wars is science fiction too but they have the Force, ghosts, sith/jedi powers etc.  Its like a future dungons and dragons with science fiction technology while maintaining it's middle earth fantasy elements.

 

Trek is meant to be today's technology/civilization if we could take a look 100 years, 200 years and so on in the future.  It's US.  And ofcourse they take some liberties for creative and dramatic reasons.  But its quite amazing how much TOS got right and/or influenced technology.  Im sure we wont have Warp Drive in 50 years or transporters in 100 years but hey, they cant always be right.

There's also something called Hyperspace, which is what Star Wars uses.  This is the folding of space so it makes going from point A to point B a lot shorter.  It's a form of creating your own wormhole.  There are many other ways to travel faster then the speed of light, that they have theorized, without actually having to speed up your ship past the speed of light, if that is even possible.

Here are a few (and some might have seemed like fantasy to viewers in the 60's):

 

Cell Phones

Cell phones are a direct descendant of the communicators found on the show.  In fact, Martin Cooper has said that it was Captain Kirk's gold flip communicator that inspired him to create the first ever mobile phone.

 

Automatic Doors

One of the first pieces of technology to come out of Star Trek was the automatic door.  When an Enterprise crew member approached a door, it would automatically open.  Today, you can find that once futuristic technology at any corner store.

 

Universal Translator

While Spock and Kirk found themselves in many dangerous situations, Starfleet's Prime Directive was that of exploration and observation.  With that came the understanding of other alien languages thanks to the series' universal translator.  Sure with apps like Google Translate, we can type in and understand any conversation but now with tech like Microsoft's "Skype" translator, today's users no longer have to fear the language barrier.

 

Flat Screen TV

The giant viewscreen on the bridge of the Enterprise allowed Captain Kirk to communicate with other space ships and people on nearby planets.  Today, giant high definition televisions equipped with video cameras allow us to speak with people across the globe in real time.

 

Medical Tricorder

Doctor McCoy could measure someone's vital signs by waving a sensor over someone's body and looking at a read-out on his tricorder.  Today, "tricorders" really exist.  The "Scanadu" works by placing a tiny sensor on a patient's forehead. Through its sensor, and in a matter of seconds, the Scanadu measures heart rate, temperature, blood pressure, oxygen level and provides a complete ECG reading.

 

Voice Commands

Speaking to a computer in natural language -- and getting a quick response -- is one of Star Trek's greatest technology promises.

We're not quite there yet, but apps like Siri, Google Now and Cortana are getting close. They even have been programmed to have a sense of humor, which the Enterprise computer never fully mastered.

 

Transparent Aluminum

In the movie Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, Scotty and Bones provided a 20th century engineer the formula for transparent aluminum. It was in exchange for materials to build a whale tank. It's a long story....

Anyways, transparent aluminum exists today. The material, known as ALON, is produced by a company called Surmet.

 

HypoSpray

Dr. McCoy might have been cantankerous, but he didn't stick patients with needles. Instead, he used a device called a hypospray, which sprayed medicine into a patient's blood stream directly through the skin.  Hyposprays exist today, though they're called jet injectors. They're expensive, so they're still not as commonly used as needles. But they're less painful.

 

GPS

Before beaming people up, the crew of "Star Trek" had to first locate the likes of Kirk and Spock and the many red shirts on distant planets.  Crew location could be seen as a precursor to the Global Position System technology that many around the world now use daily.  GPS location technology may seem like a standard way of life, but back in the late sixties when the show first premiered it seemed as if it only belonged to the U.S.S. Enterprise.

 

Space Travel

When the show first premiered back in 1966, space travel was still a risky endeavor for mankind. However, a few years later man had walked on the moon.

Now, entrepreneur Richard Branson wants to use his space transportation company, "Virgin Galactic," to help send even every-day people into the final frontier.

 

iPad

There's a lot to remember when flying through space, which is why "Star Trek" used a PADD. The "Personal Access Display Device" was computer notebook of sorts.

This tech is almost identical to the dozens of computer tablets like the iPad and Microsoft Surface that people use today.

There's also something called Hyperspace, which is what Star Wars uses.  This is the folding of space so it makes going from point A to point B a lot shorter.  It's a form of creating your own wormhole.  There are many other ways to travel faster then the speed of light, that they have theorized, without actually having to speed up your ship past the speed of light, if that is even possible.

Hollywood fantasy... It's fun to watch & get into as a fan (which I enjoy) but nothing based on reality. A theory is just that, a theory. Therefore if that theory is used not based on scientific fact, it is therefore a fantasy.  

There are some theories out there that show how a warp bubble could be possible, the catch is that you'd need a power source unimaginable to us right now. So in Star Trek they came up with the fantasy power source and boom problem solved. It's all fantasy just to different degrees. 

 

There's also something called Hyperspace, which is what Star Wars uses.  This is the folding of space so it makes going from point A to point B a lot shorter.  It's a form of creating your own wormhole.  There are many other ways to travel faster then the speed of light, that they have theorized, without actually having to speed up your ship past the speed of light, if that is even possible.

Hollywood fantasy... It's fun to watch & get into as a fan (which I enjoy) but nothing based on reality. A theory is just that, a theory. Therefore if that theory is used not based on scientific fact, it is therefore a fantasy.  

 

Careful with the word "theory". Means different things to different people.

 

There's also something called Hyperspace, which is what Star Wars uses.  This is the folding of space so it makes going from point A to point B a lot shorter.  It's a form of creating your own wormhole.  There are many other ways to travel faster then the speed of light, that they have theorized, without actually having to speed up your ship past the speed of light, if that is even possible.

Hollywood fantasy... It's fun to watch & get into as a fan (which I enjoy) but nothing based on reality. A theory is just that, a theory. Therefore if that theory is used not based on scientific fact, it is therefore a fantasy.  

 

 

I understand.  Relativity is only a theory, so it is fantasy.

 

There's also something called Hyperspace, which is what Star Wars uses.  This is the folding of space so it makes going from point A to point B a lot shorter.  It's a form of creating your own wormhole.  There are many other ways to travel faster then the speed of light, that they have theorized, without actually having to speed up your ship past the speed of light, if that is even possible.

Hollywood fantasy... It's fun to watch & get into as a fan (which I enjoy) but nothing based on reality. A theory is just that, a theory. Therefore if that theory is used not based on scientific fact, it is therefore a fantasy.  

 

So anything that is not reality yet, to you, is Hollywood fantasy?  So I guess all the scientists out there who work in theoretical physics should just rename their field "Hollywood fantasyists".  I guess Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking should have probably taken up other fields of work, like juggling or something.

Science fiction is just science fact that has not happened yet.

 

 

There's also something called Hyperspace, which is what Star Wars uses.  This is the folding of space so it makes going from point A to point B a lot shorter.  It's a form of creating your own wormhole.  There are many other ways to travel faster then the speed of light, that they have theorized, without actually having to speed up your ship past the speed of light, if that is even possible.

Hollywood fantasy... It's fun to watch & get into as a fan (which I enjoy) but nothing based on reality. A theory is just that, a theory. Therefore if that theory is used not based on scientific fact, it is therefore a fantasy.  

 

 

I understand.  Relativity is only a theory, so it is fantasy.

 

Gravity is just a theory. I really wish the general public understood what scientists mean when they use the word theory. 

I have a new theory about the brontosaurus

As if it wasnt obvious:

 

The new Star Trek TV series, set to premier in January 2017, will not star Michael Dorn as “Captain Worf”. Dorn himself, confirmed to the audience at Rhode Island Comic-Con on Saturday that the series will not be the project he pitched to the network. The new series is being developed specifically for CBS All Access, the over-the-top streaming service.

 

“I can confirm it right now.” Dorn said. “CBS/Paramount is coming out with a television series in 2017 and from what I’ve read, it’s going to be the J.J. Abrams-universe. So, it’s going to be a different timeline and we are not in in.”

 

***Although it hasnt been stated anywhere that the series is "Alt Universe" and that will be difficult due to issues between CBS and Paramount.

So at this point it's a redo of TOS.

 

No Pon-Farr for Spock, he's already getting some.

So at this point it's a redo of TOS.

 

No Pon-Farr for Spock, he's already getting some.

Supposedly not using the ship Enterprise and not using any previously seen crew.  And likely not the movie universe though it might look more like the movie universe than any previous TV show.

 

I wouldnt be against using the Enterprise B or C or the Enterprise when it was new under the command of Robert April.  The Animated Series (which Roddenberry considered canon) established April as the first Captain of the new ship which was buolt around 2245 (Kirk commanded in 2265) and also that his wife Sarah was Chief Medical Officer.  They could use April without adhering to *that* depicition but it provides some interesting background.