←
→
rfunk: (Default)
Add MemoryShare This Entry

Alternate Trek Universes

posted by [personal profile] rfunk at 12:56pm on 19/06/2006 under ,
B5 fans may have heard that at one point J. Michael Straczynski worked on a treatment for a new Star Trek series. Now his cohort on that project has written about it and even posted the 14-page treatment as a PDF. This was to have been an alternate-universe Trek, retaining the elements they liked and ridding themselves of what they disliked.

From the article I also learned what I was apparently supposed to already know, that JJ Abrams (of Lost and Alias fame) will be doing a Star Trek prequel film. With him running things it should be good, but then again it'll be an odd-numbered Trek movie.....
←
→
There are 6 comments on this entry. (Reply.)
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] dachte.livejournal.com at 05:11pm on 19/06/2006
Odd/Even depend on the numbering. I think Star Trek 0 would be considered even..?
[link] [reply]
 

zero?

posted by [identity profile] rfunk.livejournal.com at 05:20pm on 19/06/2006
I haven't seen them all, but here's what I remember...

There was no zero.
The Motion Picture was 1. And bad.
2: Wrath of Khan was good.
Search for Spock was 3.
4: Voyage home was good.
5 was considered the worst as I recall.
Never saw 6.
After that they dropped the numbers, but the odd/even pattern has generally been considered to stick.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

Re: zero?

posted by [identity profile] dachte.livejournal.com at 05:24pm on 19/06/2006
Oh, I was meaning to say that one possible naming for a "Star Trek prequel" would be "Star Trek 0"....
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

Re: zero?

posted by [identity profile] rfunk.livejournal.com at 05:29pm on 19/06/2006
I see. I think that might be cheating, since they haven't been explicitly numbering them in a while anyway, and it would still be the 11th movie.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

Re: zero?

posted by [identity profile] nicosomething.livejournal.com at 08:02pm on 19/06/2006
In my opinion, one and three were not "bad", they just weren't very good. Five.... I wish I could pour enough bleach into my skull to erase the memory of five. Six was very good.

After that it gets murky. Generations and First Contact both had good and bad points. Most people seem to like First Contact more, I prefer Generations a little bit more, but while better than Three I don't consider either a great movie. Insurection was second only to Five for being utter crap.

I never saw Nemesis. I heard it wasn't bad, but not that great, and not really worth the effort to go see. A very sad ending to the legacy.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] loadhan.livejournal.com at 06:22pm on 19/06/2006
I was going to suggest the 0 thing too, heh. Maybe we can call it 12 since a lot of people thought the next movie was going to be about the Romulan War and written by the writer of A Band of Brothers. I also gave up trying to figure out numbering schemes once Final Fantasy came out with both an "X-2" and a "12". :P

Thanks for the links - I had heard about JMS wanting to do Trek but no details of what he wanted to do. Hopefully I can read through this in the near future.
[link] [reply]

April

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
        1
 
 2
 
 3
 
4
 
 5
 
 6
 
 7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
 
11
 
 12
 
 13
1
 14
 
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
18
 
 19
 
 20
 
 21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
25
 
 26
 
 27
 
 28
 
 29
 
 30