Subj : Re: Rumor thread To : alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise From : The Merry Piper Date : Wed Sep 21 2005 05:25:26 From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:18:25 +1200, Anybody wrote: >In article <2jk1j1hg09fp9s6s4lub7vienn5pkov0fl@4ax.com>, The Merry >Piper wrote: > >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 12:58:44 +1200, Anybody >> wrote: >> >> >In article , >> >Wandering Wastrel wrote: >> > >> >> In article <1BNXe.15521$mH.24@fed1read07>, aevansjr3@cox.net says... >> >> > I dunno I read in sci-fi mag as well thier was a small hint it may come >> >> > back. I wish sci-fi channel would buy it and add it to thiier excellent >> >> > friday line up! >> >> >> >> If they would reimagine it the way they did BSG -- start over, get a new >> >> cast, leave out the Suliban/Future Guy time-traveling crap (and the >> >> idiotic Xindi arc) -- I'd watch. But if they just took up where they left >> >> off -- season four improvements notwithstanding -- why bother? >> > >> >Good God, NO! That was the entire basic problem with Enterprise, it WAS >> >the "re-imagining" of Star Trek. Beavis & Butthead were originally >> >trying to make a Star Trek that would also appeal to those who wouldn't >> >normall watch a "Trek" show - that's why it wasn't originally called >> >"Star Trek: Enterprise". >> >> TNG was re-imagining of "Star Trek" and it did just fine. > >Nope. TNG was a "continuation" / "sequel" and was basically the same as >TOS. It just had a different crew and a newer ship, but the style, etc. >was the same and not buggered up beyond recognition. :-) I understand your chain of reasoning and, believe me, I mean no disrespect but I see TNG as a re-imagining. The same concept, but spun in a new direction. It is my understanding this is why Gene set the show 80 years in the future, so he could change the look and feel of the Trek-Universe. Sequel, yes. But still re-imagined. -- The Merry Piper [http://tmpiper.livejournal.com] If you want to dance, you'll have to pay ... me! .