Does Star Trek Suck Now?

[Travoltron]

The answer is yes. Yes it does.

[Your Name]

On 2022-04-10 19:39:51 +0000, Travoltron said:

> The answer is yes. Yes it does.

It started sucking with the first idiotic reboot attempt "Enterprise"
and then got even suckier with the second reboot attempt by JarJar
Abrams. At this point real "Star Trek" has been long dead. :-(

[The Doctor]

In article <t2vkmf$mtv$1...@gioia.aioe.org>,

And then there is Chibnall and Doctor Who!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b
Overreacting has as much virtue as underreacting. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

[Ant]

In rec.arts.startrek.current The Doctor <doc...@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
> In article <t2vkmf$mtv$1...@gioia.aioe.org>,
> Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com> wrote:
> >On 2022-04-10 19:39:51 +0000, Travoltron said:
> >
> >> The answer is yes. Yes it does.
> >
> >It started sucking with the first idiotic reboot attempt "Enterprise"
> >and then got even suckier with the second reboot attempt by JarJar
> >Abrams. At this point real "Star Trek" has been long dead. :-(
> >

> And then there is Chibnall and Doctor Who!

Star Wars, etc.
--
Slammy Palmy Sunday! Also, Jesus' week!
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

[pehache]

Le 10/04/2022 à 21:39, Travoltron a écrit :

> The answer is yes. Yes it does.

Definitely

[pehache]

Le 11/04/2022 à 00:11, Your Name a écrit :
> On 2022-04-10 19:39:51 +0000, Travoltron said:
>
>> The answer is yes. Yes it does.
>
> It started sucking with the first idiotic reboot attempt "Enterprise"

"Enterprise" is not a reboot, rather a prequel. And in contrast to the
2009+ fake-trek, ENT is fully consistent with the existing universe, built
by TOS-TNG-DS9-VOY

[Your Name]

On 2022-04-26 09:44:38 +0000, pehache said:

> Le 11/04/2022 ą 00:11, Your Name a écrit :
>> On 2022-04-10 19:39:51 +0000, Travoltron said:
>>>
>>> The answer is yes. Yes it does.
>>
>> It started sucking with the first idiotic reboot attempt "Enterprise"
>
> "Enterprise" is not a reboot, rather a prequel.

It was both - it was a reboot set before Kirk's time. Beavis & Butthead
were trying to reboot the franchise due to supposed "franchise fatigue"
after TNG, DS9, VOY, and TNG movies.

> And in contrast to the 2009+ fake-trek, ENT is fully consistent with
> the existing universe, built by TOS-TNG-DS9-VOY

Not only did it not consisent with the then-existing universe, they
purposely tried to distance it by not calling it "Star Trek:
Enterprise", and then at the end tried to retro-fit it by making it all
a silly Holodreck fantasy.

[Travoltron]

Dark days. All our favorite "franchises' (hate that term) have been
entrusted to legit imbeciles.
These people have no life experience. They go right from university to
industry jobs that daddy got them. The most worthless, vapid people on
earth.

[The Doctor]

In article <t4a48b$180g$1...@gioia.aioe.org>,

Sounds like Chibnall being "Doctor Who" Showrunner.

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor@@nl2k.ab.ca
Yahweh, Queen & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism https://www.empire.kred/ROOTNK?t=94a1f39b

We cannot serve what we spend our energy running from. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

[pehache]

Le 26/04/2022 à 22:40, Your Name a écrit :
> On 2022-04-26 09:44:38 +0000, pehache said:

>> Le 11/04/2022 à 00:11, Your Name a écrit :
>>> On 2022-04-10 19:39:51 +0000, Travoltron said:
>>>>
>>>> The answer is yes. Yes it does.
>>>
>>> It started sucking with the first idiotic reboot attempt "Enterprise"
>>
>> "Enterprise" is not a reboot, rather a prequel.
>
> It was both - it was a reboot set before Kirk's time. Beavis & Butthead
> were trying to reboot the franchise due to supposed "franchise fatigue"
> after TNG, DS9, VOY, and TNG movies.
>
>
>
>> And in contrast to the 2009+ fake-trek, ENT is fully consistent with
>> the existing universe, built by TOS-TNG-DS9-VOY
>
> Not only did it not consisent with the then-existing universe,

What is not consistent, precisely ? I mean speaking about important
inconsistencies, not about inconsistent details that happened also in all
the previous shows and that are impossible to completely avoid during
almost 800 episodes and 10 movies.

On the other hand, Enterprise for instance :
- gave an explanation to the Klingon change of appearance between TOS and
TNG
- established how and why the human race took a kind of lead in the
Federation. This was given for granted in the previous, but was somehow
strange if you consider that the Vulcan for instance were much more
advance than the human at that times, both technologically and ethically.

> they
> purposely tried to distance it by not calling it "Star Trek:
> Enterprise",

Just a name... What is important is the content. "Discovery" and "Picard"
both display the "Star Trek" name, but are much less "Star Trek" than any
of the previous shows.

[DaveJohnson12@nomail]

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 12:39:51 -0700, Travoltron
<travo...@defender.uni> wrote:

>The answer is yes. Yes it does.

I gave up on STD after 4 seasons. It's too political and the main
character whispers most of her lines for dramatic effect. I don't like
her acting.
Season 1 of Peecard was alright asside from some of the woke aspects.
Season 2 became more obnoxious with the producer forcing his politics
on us. I hope I don't watch season 3.
Strange New World varied between okay and not interesting. Having a
man play the role of a slender woman will make some people happy. It's
part of the producer's politics. I didn't appreciate it.
CBS has mostly ruined Star Trek for many fans of the first 5 tv
series.

[Your Name]

There's only four TV series:

- Star Trek [the original show]
- Star Trek: The Next Generation
- Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
- Star Trek: Voyager

Five, I guess, if you include the original animated "Star Trek" show.

Plus of course the first few movies, although the 'save the whales' one
was rather silly.

After that it you get the ridiculous reboot garbage beginning -
"Enterprise" (note it doesn't even have "Star Trek" in the title being
a massive clue) and then followed by JarJar Abrams even worse movies.

[Elim Garak]

DaveJohnson12@nomail. writes:

>
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 12:39:51 -0700, Travoltron
> <travo...@defender.uni> wrote:
>
>>The answer is yes. Yes it does.
>
> I gave up on STD after 4 seasons. It's too political and the main
> character whispers most of her lines for dramatic effect. I don't like
> her acting.
> Season 1 of Peecard was alright asside from some of the woke aspects.
> Season 2 became more obnoxious with the producer forcing his politics
> on us. I hope I don't watch season 3.

Imagine if TOS had included woke bullshit. You would have had a black
woman on the bridge who wasn't there just to clean it. Or planets that
were just heavy-handed metaphors for US 1960s race relations.

Or if Deep Space Nine were woke... the Ferengi would have been quoting
Marx!

--
Elim Garak
Just a plain and simple tailor.

[dump...@hotmail.com]

It's not just Star Trek:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFz_00sC7mo7Zu5GSSj9hqJ8G3faYyhLK

[Your Name]

On 2022-09-11 21:44:12 +0000, dump...@hotmail.com said:
>
> It's not just Star Trek:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFz_00sC7mo7Zu5GSSj9hqJ8G3faYyhLK

The biggest reason is that Hollyweird is infested with a lazy,
talentless generation who *think* they know better than the original's
creator what it "should" be ... and 99.99% of the time prove they
haven't got a clue. :-(

[pH]

On 2022-09-11, dump...@hotmail.com <dump...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> It's not just Star Trek:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFz_00sC7mo7Zu5GSSj9hqJ8G3faYyhLK

If anyone has the courage to bravely do an "experimental" 1950's style hero
movie--Star Trek or otherwise--I predict it would be *very* successful
despite a firestorm of (predictable) criticism.

Do I hold my breath in hopes that this might actually occur?

......no.


pH in Aptos

[dump...@hotmail.com]

Hollywoke doesn't like Capt. Kirk and his ilk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heDoY1dALoA

[pehache]

Enterprise is fully part of the historical ST and retains all the spirit
of ST.


--
"...sois ouvert aux idées des autres pour peu qu'elles aillent dans le
même sens que les tiennes.", ST sur fr.bio.medecine
ST passe le mur du çon : <j3nn2h...@mid.individual.net>

[Your Name]

"Enterprise" was the first crappy reboot attempt. The idiots making it
even said they were making a "Star Trek" show to try to appeal to
non-Star Trek fans (hence leaving "Star Trek" out of the title) ...
what they ended up with was a show that didn't appeal to most Star Trek
fans either.

[pehache]

Le 13/09/2022 à 22:34, Your Name a écrit :

>>>
>>> After that it you get the ridiculous reboot garbage beginning -
>>> "Enterprise" (note it doesn't even have "Star Trek" in the title
>>> being a massive clue) and then followed by JarJar Abrams even worse
>>> movies.
>>
>> Enterprise is fully part of the historical ST and retains all the
>> spirit of ST.
>
> "Enterprise" was the first crappy reboot attempt.

It's not a reboot it's a prequel.

> The idiots making it
> even said they were making a "Star Trek" show to try to appeal to
> non-Star Trek fans (hence leaving "Star Trek" out of the title) ... what
> they ended up with was a show that didn't appeal to most Star Trek fans
> either.

Last time I asked, you have been unable to list any significant
inconsistency between ENT and the other shows.

[Your Name]

On 2022-09-16 19:04:17 +0000, pehache said:

> Le 13/09/2022 à 22:34, Your Name a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> After that it you get the ridiculous reboot garbage beginning -
>>>> "Enterprise" (note it doesn't even have "Star Trek" in the title being
>>>> a massive clue) and then followed by JarJar Abrams even worse movies.
>>>
>>> Enterprise is fully part of the historical ST and retains all the spirit of ST.
>>
>> "Enterprise" was the first crappy reboot attempt.
>
> It's not a reboot it's a prequel.

It's a supposed prequel that in reality is just another reboot.

It's possible to be termed both, or in other examples it can be a
sequel and a reboot. They do it often. Simply saying it is set
earlier/later in the timeline doens't actually mean it fits with
existing content or does not make idiotic changes for the sake of it.
The up-coming new "Quantum Leap" is supposedly a sequel, but similarly
is in reality just a reboot. Another example was the "Knight Rider"
(using a crappy Mustang).

>> The idiots making it even said they were making a "Star Trek" show to
>> try to appeal to non-Star Trek fans (hence leaving "Star Trek" out of
>> the title) ... what they ended up with was a show that didn't appeal to
>> most Star Trek fans either.
>
> Last time I asked, you have been unable to list any significant
> inconsistency between ENT and the other shows.

There are many lists available all over the internet of the problems
with "Enterprise", starting with the opening song and the lack of "Star
Trek" in the title, and going on from there (including the soft-porn
"oil me up, Scotty" decontamination scenes). Hell, even Beavis &
Butthead making it reportedly said they were making it for non-Star
Trek fans, which includes making idiotic changes.

[pH]

I went and watched this....thank-you for this link.

pH

[pehache]

Le 17/09/2022 à 00:42, Your Name a écrit :
>>> "Enterprise" was the first crappy reboot attempt.
>>
>> It's not a reboot it's a prequel.
>
> It's a supposed prequel that in reality is just another reboot.
>
> It's possible to be termed both, or in other examples it can be a sequel
> and a reboot. They do it often. Simply saying it is set earlier/later in
> the timeline doens't actually mean it fits with existing content or does
> not make idiotic changes for the sake of it. The up-coming new "Quantum
> Leap" is supposedly a sequel, but similarly is in reality just a reboot.
> Another example was the "Knight Rider" (using a crappy Mustang).
>

Still, Enterprise is a prequel, not a reboot.

If it had been a reboot, all the events of the previous series could
have been simply ignored and for example they wouldn't have bothered to
give an explanation to the change of look of the Klingons between TOS
and TNG. And it's just an example, Enterprise has considerably
consolidated the Star Trek worldbuilding (the episode with the Borgs,
that tell what happened to them after "First contact", the episode with
the Defiant that links to TOS "The Tholian Web", etc...)

>
>
>>> The idiots making it even said they were making a "Star Trek" show to
>>> try to appeal to non-Star Trek fans (hence leaving "Star Trek" out of
>>> the title) ... what they ended up with was a show that didn't appeal
>>> to most Star Trek fans either.
>>
>> Last time I asked, you have been unable to list any significant
>> inconsistency between ENT and the other shows.
>
> There are many lists available all over the internet of the problems
> with "Enterprise",

I am not asking the internet, I am asking you.

> starting with the opening song

With is the inconsistency introduced by the opening song?

> and the lack of "Star
> Trek" in the title,

Decision of Paramount, not of the showrunners. The title doesn't matter,
what matters is the content.

> and going on from there

Where's the list ?

> (including the soft-porn
> "oil me up, Scotty" decontamination scenes).

Sure, for instance we had never seen before in Star Trek sexy girls that
made the male audience crazy...

Oh, wait...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaASUaPVAAEV80e?format=png
https://i.imgur.com/kuYh7DP.jpeg

> Hell, even Beavis &
> Butthead making it reportedly said they were making it for non-Star Trek
> fans, which includes making idiotic changes.

I'd like to see a (supposed) citation in context, not interpreted.

During the last years of Voyager and during all Enterprise, Berman has
been constantly accused of being a temple guardian and denying
substantive developments in Star Trek. He resisted as much as he could
the studio's demands to make the show more mainstream.

I'm still waiting for a solid list, not just about a song or a title.

[Your Name]

On 2022-09-17 13:43:53 +0000, pehache said:

> Le 17/09/2022 à 00:42, Your Name a écrit :
>>>> "Enterprise" was the first crappy reboot attempt.
>>>
>>> It's not a reboot it's a prequel.
>>
>> It's a supposed prequel that in reality is just another reboot.
>>
>> It's possible to be termed both, or in other examples it can be a
>> sequel and a reboot. They do it often. Simply saying it is set
>> earlier/later in the timeline doens't actually mean it fits with
>> existing content or does not make idiotic changes for the sake of it.
>> The up-coming new "Quantum Leap" is supposedly a sequel, but similarly
>> is in reality just a reboot. Another example was the "Knight Rider"
>> (using a crappy Mustang).
>>
>
> Still, Enterprise is a prequel, not a reboot.

<snip>

Another braindead numbnut with the reading comprehension of a dried dog
poo for the killfile. :-\

[pehache]

Le 17/09/2022 à 23:47, Your Name a écrit :
> On 2022-09-17 13:43:53 +0000, pehache said:
>

>> Le 17/09/2022 à 00:42, Your Name a écrit :

And still no list of significant inconsistency that would make
Enterprise a reboot. You are barking like a dog "reboot! reboot!
reboot!" without knowing why you are barking.

[Travoltron]

I don't hate Enterprise. I've seen maybe half of the episodes, off and
on. But there were a lot of inconsistencies and canon violations.
Prequels almost always do this.

I recall contact with the Gorn, Ferengi, and Borg long before that
should have happened.

Also, why are the Xindi NEVER mentioned again in the other Trek shows,
even though they were a major power and fought a war with Earth? Again,
prequels cause problems.

Also, the idea that mind melds were forbidden was dumb.

[pehache]

Le 21/09/2022 à 00:44, Travoltron a écrit :
> I don't hate Enterprise. I've seen maybe half of the episodes, off and
> on. But there were a lot of inconsistencies and canon violations.
> Prequels almost always do this.
>
> I recall contact with the Gorn, Ferengi, and Borg long before that
> should have happened.

The point is "should have happened"... or not.

The Gorns: it was in the mirror universe if I remember correctly. Just a
one-shot encounter.

The Ferengis: in TNG it is not stated that this is the first contact
with them.

The Borgs: when Picard meets them in TNG, he could hardly make a link to
the species that briefly showed up 200 years and never again after
that... Time passes and humans forget.

> Also, why are the Xindi NEVER mentioned again in the other Trek shows,
> even though they were a major power and fought a war with Earth? Again,
> prequels cause problems.

This one is more significant, I agree. But actually it's not uncommon in
ST to have species that are set aside for a long time or even that never
show up again. Although a major threat, the Borgs do appear only in very
few episodes of TNG, not at all in DS9, and quite late in VOY. We have
to assume that Xindis were no longer a problem after that, and that they
did not seek to establish close relations with the Federation. And all
along ST new species are introduced, and very often we may also wonder
why they were never mentioned before.

> Also, the idea that mind melds were forbidden was dumb.

I don't think so... But anyway it's a detail.

I don't claim that Entreprise is a perfect prequel. But given all the
challenges to build a prequel, I find that they did really well.

[pehache]

Le 23/09/2022 à 22:05, pehache a écrit :

>
> I don't claim that Entreprise is a perfect prequel. But given all the
> challenges to build a prequel, I find that they did really well.
>

All the more if we take into account the pressure from the studio.

Berman didn't want to start a new serie right after Voyager, he was
feeling that the audience was less demanding after 14 years non-stop and
that waiting a few years before starting a new one would be wise.
Paramount ignored that and answered "we'll do it anyway, with or without
you".

The full Xindi arc was resulting from a demand of the studio after the
9-11.

The initial plan was at least a 7-seasons serie (or possibly more) to
develop all the events that led to the creation of the Federation and
explain many things that exist in TOS-TNG etc... Once cancelled, they
had to shrink everything into the 4th season, which was mission:
impossible...

[pH]

On 2022-09-24, pehache <peha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 23/09/2022 à 22:05, pehache a écrit :
>
>>
>> I don't claim that Entreprise is a perfect prequel. But given all the
>> challenges to build a prequel, I find that they did really well.
>>
>
> All the more if we take into account the pressure from the studio.
>
> Berman didn't want to start a new serie right after Voyager, he was
> feeling that the audience was less demanding after 14 years non-stop and
> that waiting a few years before starting a new one would be wise.
> Paramount ignored that and answered "we'll do it anyway, with or without
> you".
>
> The full Xindi arc was resulting from a demand of the studio after the
> 9-11.
>
> The initial plan was at least a 7-seasons serie (or possibly more) to
> develop all the events that led to the creation of the Federation and
> explain many things that exist in TOS-TNG etc... Once cancelled, they
> had to shrink everything into the 4th season, which was mission:
> impossible...
>

Well, this is diappointing to learn. Thank-you for this info, though.

I've not been watching anything "streaming"...just youtube segmets et. al.
these days.

BUT...I do have high hopes for ST Strange New Worlds. If they can just keep
their current vibe goind it will be the best (current) Trek yet.

pH

[Your Name]

On 2022-09-24, pehache <peha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 23/09/2022 à 22:05, pehache a écrit :
>>
>> I don't claim that Entreprise is a perfect prequel. But given all the
>> challenges to build a prequel, I find that they did really well.
>
> All the more if we take into account the pressure from the studio.
>
> Berman didn't want to start a new serie right after Voyager, he was
> feeling that the audience was less demanding after 14 years non-stop and
> that waiting a few years before starting a new one would be wise.

<snip>

Ahhh, the old "franchise fatigue" nonsense to explain away the fact
that they had no senisble ideas and simply wanted to do things they're
own way via a moronic "reboot" (because of course they "know better"
than Gene Roddenberry what Star Trek is "meant to be"). :-\

The reality is that the fans were not "tired" or "less demanding". They
were simply fed up with all the changes and garbage being funnelled out
by Beavuis & Butthead ... who then went and made even more changes and
garbage. Then the studio replaced them and JarJar Abrams made even more
idiotic changes and garbage.

Now the franchise is just a mess of conflicting different versions. :-(

[The Horny Goat]

On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 23:17:25 -0000 (UTC), pH <wNOS...@gmail.org>
wrote:

>> Hollywoke doesn't like Capt. Kirk and his ilk:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heDoY1dALoA
>
>I went and watched this....thank-you for this link.
>

Of course they don't - he was very much 'a girl in every port' type of
guy.

From the woke point of view his impregnation of the faux native maiden
was the last straw.

[pehache]

Le 25/09/2022 à 07:09, Your Name a écrit :
> On 2022-09-24, pehache <peha...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Le 23/09/2022 à 22:05, pehache a écrit :

>>>
>>> I don't claim that Entreprise is a perfect prequel. But given all the
>>> challenges to build a prequel, I find that they did really well.
>>
>> All the more if we take into account the pressure from the studio.
>>
>> Berman didn't want to start a new serie right after Voyager, he was
>> feeling that the audience was less demanding after 14 years non-stop and
>> that waiting a few years before starting a new one would be wise.
>
> <snip>
>

Weren't you supposed to killfile me???

> Ahhh, the old "franchise fatigue" nonsense to explain away the fact that
> they had no senisble ideas and simply wanted to do things they're own
> way via a moronic "reboot"

I'm still waiting for your list of significant inconsistencies that
would support your "reboot" theory (which until just looks like a flat
earth theory).

> (because of course they "know better" than
> Gene Roddenberry what Star Trek is "meant to be").   :-\

That's pure nonsense. Berman did handle and faithfully develop the
Roddenberry heritage during 14 years and 3 shows, and suddenly he wanted
to throw it away??

>
> Then the studio replaced them and JarJar Abrams made even more
> idiotic changes and garbage.

At least we can agree on that. But after all, JJA movies are claimed
reboots. Recent kurtzmanians shows are even more damaging, as they
contradicts events of the classic shows.

[Travoltron]

I know there was some talk about giving Takei his own Excelsior TV show.
That Voyager episode does seem to be a backdoor pilot for that.

I like Sulu and I love the Excelsior and would have loved to see THAT
show. I was so disappointed they went the way they did with Enterprise.

But Enterprise looks like Shakespeare compared to what Abrams, Kurtzman,
and Orci have cranked out since 2009. I do enjoy most of the episodes
that I've seen. It seemed to improve a lot in the last couple seasons.

[Travoltron]

On 9/25/2022 1:44 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:

> From the woke point of view his impregnation of the faux native maiden
> was the last straw.

Oh yeah, THAT episode is the fodder for a lot of bad-faith arguments
about TOS. It was just a sub-par season 3 episode and a product of its time.

Someone on the wiki is obsessed with these things and keeps adding in
quotes from this book:

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Trek_and_History:_Race-ing_Toward_a_White_Future

I don't even know why the hell that book and its author are on the wiki.
It's not an official product. It doesn't even belong on Memory Beta.

[Travoltron]

On 8/26/2022 8:26 AM, Elim Garak wrote:

> Imagine if TOS had included woke bullshit. You would have had a black
> woman on the bridge who wasn't there just to clean it.

Uhura was an excellent officer, but not a Mary Sue like Mikey Burnham.
Not woke.

> Or planets that
> were just heavy-handed metaphors for US 1960s race relations.

An episode that showed the cop AND the social activist as equally insane
as violent. Both sides refused to negotiate until their planet was
destroyed. Not woke.

Try harder next time.

[pH]

I wrote a letter to Paramount after that particular Star Trek movie came out
proposing that as well.

Oh well, what does one 'fan letter' amount to.

Only Takei, Koenig and Shatner are left from the old series....they better
hop on it if it's to happen. (Kind of like Bing Crosby dying just before
they were going to do one more "on the road" w/ Bob Hope).

pH in Aptos

[Your Name]

They're all too old to base a TV show around. Stewart is too old as
well, as "Picard" rather proves - he's now a doddery old man (or
perhaps that shold be even more doddery).

[pH]

Yes, I think you're right. I kind of noticed that about "Picard" as well.
Oh well....time marches on.

pH

[Travoltron]

They should never have killed off Kirk. Shatner obviously had so many
good and healthy DECADES after that. What a waste. And he wanted to
appear in JJ Trek and JJ squandered the opportunity.

[pH]

Yes. At age 91 it is now rather late in the game...but you never know.

It could have easily been done--this being Science Fiction, after all--by
doing something like: "Oh, look...Captain Kirk was caught in the Nexux after
all and he's actually fine after having popped back out."

I assume there was $$$ or lack of interest or hidden politics we'll never
know involved.

In the meantime, I *am* enjoying the "Strange New Worlds" clips on
Youtube...it's the most "real Trek" I've seen for along time.

pH in Aptos

[pehache]

Le 01/10/2022 à 02:14, Travoltron a écrit :

> But Enterprise looks like Shakespeare compared to what Abrams, Kurtzman,
> and Orci have cranked out since 2009.

Indeed...

> I do enjoy most of the episodes
> that I've seen. It seemed to improve a lot in the last couple seasons.

Yep, the first 2 seasons are somehow weaker. But this is case of all
other classical ST shows (TOS apart): in their first two seasons, TNG,
VOY, or DS9 are not at their best