>mfw Bryan Fuller creates a Star Trek show that combines the best elements from both DS9 and TNG
>>67063142
God I hope you're right OP
That show already happened. It was called Battlestar Galactica.
>>67063257
crappy show
Pretty sure you mean TOS and DS9
don't mind me, just gonna casually save this franchise for the third time
bryan fuller is GOAT
Bryan Fuller ruined the character of Hannibal Lecter by transforming him from an intelligent, suave, and capable social navigator (IN AMERICA) to a pansexual marblemouthed creep who never doesn't exude a serial killer vibe. His Star Trek bona fides reside mostly in Voyager.
Trek2k17 is going to be an abomination.
>>67063455
>Bryan Fuller ruined the character of Hannibal Lecter by transforming him from an intelligent, suave, and capable social navigator (IN AMERICA) to a pansexual marblemouthed creep who never doesn't exude a serial killer vibe.
This is wrong but it's at least a wrong opinion
>His Star Trek bona fides reside mostly in Voyager.
This is objectively wrong. He wrote for DS9 (his favorite) and Voyager (which he hated)
>>67063455
you're a cuck
>>67063517
He wrote two DS9 eps and a fuckton of VOY, and I said mostly. Objectively wrong? More like objectively, unassailably correct.
>>67063521
I've heard it's the intelligent man's fetish.
>>67063690
>He wrote two DS9 eps and a fuckton of VOY, and I said mostly. Objectively wrong? More like objectively, unassailably correct.
He was in the writer's room for both shows and contributed equally to both. Those show were committee written, the credits usually went to the guys that were around the longest so they could get the pay bonus which is why he has more credits on the later show. You're objectively, unassailably an ignorant fuckwit.
> doubting Fuller
this is CBS we're talking about. the network that never met a risk it wouldn't sheepishly back away from. of all the actually realistic candidates we could've gotten, Fuller is probably the one with the best chance to stop Star Trek from being either totally Marvel-ized or turned into CSI: Space.
this is the guy who got mocked on the voyager staff for caring about continuity, after all. the guy who endeavored to make hannibal almost completely inaccessible to a wider market. it could've been some jerry bruckheimer hack, but at least we got someone who seems to give a shit about the integrity of the franchise, however nebulous a concept that might be.
>>67063828
That is not how television show writing or accreditation works. What you've described is contrary to what the WGA collaboration agreement explicitly states: http://www.wga.org/uploadedFiles/writers_resources/contracts/collaboration.pdf
It's too bad Star Trek threads are nothing but trolls and Pakleds these days. They used to be really, really entertaining.
>>67063910
That's exactly how television show writing and accreditation worked in the 90's. No one said that's the OFFICIAL policy but that is what was going on in the writers' rooms. There was just way too much content that had to be produced with way too little money for it to be done anyway but as a group.
>>67063843
>the guy who got mocked on the voyager staff for caring about continuity
As he should have been. Caring about continuity proves he DOES NOT understand Star Trek.
>>67064256
but every star trek series has some form of continuity and, even if you want to argue that TOS doesn't, the movies sure as hell do. wrath of khan, search for spock, voyage home, and undiscovered country are basically one continuous narrative. some of the finest moments from TNG, Voyager, DS9, hell even Enterprise all rely on continuity as an important asset for character study, world building, and storytelling. it's part of the fabric of the series. i'm not sure you understand star trek.
>>67063843
>>67064256
He didn't mock the Voyager staff for caring about continuity, it was the opposite. At the point of Voyager TNG had made the franchise huge again so a lot of the writers were just people looking for a high profile writing job that they could use it to break into the industry. Fuller hated Voyager because DS9 was a show by Trek fans and for Trek fans while the Voyager writers didn't give a shit about Trek and thought they were above it.
>>67064477
>but every star trek series has some form of continuity
Fuck continuity in Star Trek. Star Trek continuity ought to be makeshift in service of anthology stories. Roddenberry understood this.
You DS9 fans are so fucking cancerous, I can barely control my hatred.
>>67064013
What? They could have just gotten Harlan Ellison or some no namer to churn out episodes for pennies.
This sounds like some kind of elitist Union bullshit
>>67064688
>Hates DS9 and continuity
It's not even linear
>Excludes a Trek's fans as cancer
You sir, are the cancer. We sometimes have good threads when it isn't a series beatoff.
>>67064688
> continuity ought to be makeshift in service of anthology stories
this is probably the worst opinion i've ever read
roddenberry can be credited with some great ideas and really helping to establish the series on a strong footing, but it's not like he's infallible or he did it all alone. the first season of TNG is like a living testament to his bad ideas. of course i love the guy for creating this wonderful series, but it doesn't somehow grant him a monopoly on the show's true meaning. other people have picked up where he left off and done just as fine a job, if not better in some respects, so some sort of appeal to roddenberry as the final boss is just not gonna cut it. your ideological puritanism seems at odds with star trek's broader open-minded message. frankly, if you don't like some of the star trek series that's fine, but don't draw lines between trekkies to justify your own beliefs.
>>67064829
this guy gets it
>>67063142
>>67063243
>>67063257
>>67063305
>>67063306
>>67063306
Does anyone ( (you) ) even know any details about Star Trek 2k17 yet?
>>67065265
We know it's going to be on some kind of cbs subscription service that won't be good for anything else.
I'll likely kick in for it if it's less than $100 a year.
>>67065451
I don't think there is anything else on CBS worth watcing tbqh, I can barely stand to pay $10.00/month for Netflix and they actually have a big menu.
CBS will get no more than $6.00 a month for this, unless the Trek is really solid. And it won't be.
>>67065042
What is the source of the image you used for that post?
>DS9
>good
will this meme ever die?
>>67065594
it's mike from redlettermedia
>>67065529
"CBS All Access" is the worst name for a subscription tech product I've ever heard
>>67065861
Sounds like porn. I'm open to CBS making porn.
>>67065861
Sounds like a theme park ticket tier.
Which is perfect.
>>67065265
>Does anyone ( (you) ) even know any details about Star Trek 2k17 yet?
Rumor is that they create a new drive that allows them to explore other galaxies. Basically the book idea that once the Federation encompasses the entire galaxy there might be an enemy out there that has two galaxies.
>>67063142
>no mention of Voyager
>>67067164
Gonna be honest that sounds like a shit premise. Its blatant power creep that is gonna come back to bite them in the ass
>>67067918
>power creep
Voyager was the biggest power creep
>quantum slipstream drive
>galactic communication
>transphasic torpedoes
>hell the first season had tranwarp beaming!
>>67063843
He completely ruined Hannibal as a character and turned him into this faggot who is stuck in a world where dripping water and glittering vistas take over inordinate amounts of time to occur.
go watch first episode of season 1 and then first episode of the last season.
>>67063142
>a Star Trek show that combines the best elements from both DS9 and TNG
It already exists. It's called TNG.
