What's the future of Star Trek after "Into Darkness?"

[Saquist]

there already IS a "darker and Edgier" thing close to trek.  Babaylon Five. Which is why I couldn't stand the thing (thought walt was deliciously deviled ham in there)

the problem I see with swapping away from the current format is that half of the people wouldn't "get" it, and the other half would call it boring.  there was all sorts of griping when they did DS9 'cause it wasn't on a ship.  the day to day stuff like routine patrols in known space would make insta-flops, S31 would come off as recycling James Bond. 
other ideas include
a planet based piece, which would be compared to DS9 AND called "boring"
a colonial started with civillians, which wouldn't pique interest;
diplomatic BS (everybody's kind of sick of politics right now)
Shipyards and misadventures of engineers (which people wouldn't get the reason for)

a good potential might be watching  cadette class adventures, but I suspect guys like me would start comparing it to "saved By The Bell", "buffy", 90210, etc.  imagie the cries of "recycled in HIGH SCHOOL"! 

Babylon 5 was better (by my estimation) The CGI was poor but the stories were extremely well written and conceived. I also don't see it as "dark" and there was nothing "edgy" about it.
Deep Space Nine was thought of as boring because it WAS boring. (Untill Season 3)

---

Section 31 would come off as James Bond ONLY if you did it like James Bond.

Examples:
 SGU Like BSG
 DS9 like B5
 SG-1 Like TNG
 

However:
 Deep Impact NOT LIKE Armageddon
 24 NOT LIKE James Bond
 James Bond NOT LIKE Mission Impossible
 Sherlock NOT LIKE Elementary
 Farscape NOT LIKE Space:1999
 Dark Knight NOT Like Batman Returns (I had to throw that in)

[King Class Scout]

well i saw it as "harland ellison's revenge".  i saw nothing but manipulation, conjobs and general evilness from ALL the species  even terrans were depicted as if they were the current congress!  that was NOT something you wanted to see in the 90's after the cold war ended.

why call it harland Ellison's revenge?  1. he was involved in it and 2. it struck me as Anti-trek.  he pitched a giant fit when his script for "city on the Edge of Forever" got tweaked.  the original had a drug dealer involved.  i thought it was quite topical for the time, but it definetly wouldna flown.  he made the original version of the script available.  it's a good read, but would only work NOW...it wouldn't work in the 60's

I'm sorry, but when the Psi corps showed up and it turned out everybody was manipulating everybody else, just like things had ALWAYS been, disguised under a thin veneer of "internationalisim" and cooperation, well...

[Saquist]

I don't know who harllan ellison is.

But Much like today self interest colors everything.  But they over came that to defeat ...not a true evil but other interest. 
It took a long time to see this point of view...but B5 was right...

When it comes to organizations, they are always self interested...Religion, Government, Science...all of it.
It is the individuals that make the difference.
-The Founding Fathers of the United States,
-The Students of Tienanmen Square
-First Century Christians
-Issac Newton
-Copernicus 

Babylon 5's Delenn, Sheridan, G'kar, Ivannova, Garibaldi
They all had the courage to not only fight their and other organizations but to also save them. 

That's a great story in my opinion.

[captain_obvious]

It's a shame they never filmed *that* G'kar/Londo ep.

[Shadowknight1]

I don't know who harllan ellison is.

He "wrote" City on the Edge of Forever.  The episode went through several re-writes to get to where it was, and was rather controversial.  You can read up on it here if you like.

[Saquist]

I've never understood why it was...controversial.

[TheConstable6]

As George Carlin so brilliantly remarked, "A cynic is a disappointed idealist," and there is a lot of cynicism bandied around here...rightly so. Saquist is right about everything.

[Shadowknight1]

I've never understood why it was...controversial.

Intentional drug use aboard the Enterprise.  Roddenberry didn't like that idea.

[Nighthawk]

I've never understood why it was...controversial.

a member of a military organization who happens to be a drug dealer

that's one reason.

although, I think TNG or DS9 did address that same plot some time...

[Saquist]

Drug use in City on the Edge of Forever....
I didn't remember that.

[Shadowknight1]

That's cause Roddenberry didn't like Ellison's original script and we ended up with what we have now.

[King Class Scout]

Like i said, it was perfectly topical, but a TV no-no. basically, this dealer on the side was the on who jumped into the guardian of forever and screwed history.

[Saquist]

Somehow I don't think we're talking about the same thing.

[FarShot]

The original script had a drug dealer on the Enterprise fleeing into the past, not McCoy.

[davies78]

Maybe better placed here
-
http://www.startrek.com/article/stid-tops-international-box-office-gross-of-star-trek-2009

[Saquist]

But ....what was the point in having a drug user on the Enterprise?

[captain_obvious]

But ....what was the point in having a drug user on the Enterprise?

[snark]Showing that even in a utopia there is still rot, perhaps?
[/snark]

[ShaunKL]

We have another winner in the box office I see.  The question remains how well Star Trek XIII will hold together.  We may or may not have Abrams and there's the temptation to write a continuity easter-egg fest for the 50th anniversary.

[Nighthawk]

50th anniversary

 :SWvST:

[JimmyB76]

interesting article...

10 Classic Star Trek Plot Devices That Could Inspire The Next Movie