I actually have about a hundred Star Trek books, and some comics. But I think it's very different with those. For one thing, Trek always had this very clear cut policy that nothing except for the movies and tv shows is canon. So yes, there is a lot of stuff that doesn't fit together (in fact the very best Trek book I read, Federation, was later entirely contradicted by First Contact movie), but it doesn't really matter. For another, book and comics really only go to the more hardcore fans, so there is no danger of "confusing" the wider audience, and the fans can juggle all that stuff in their heads pretty well. I just don't think Trek would do well in a situation like Sherlock Holmes, with a dozen different versions of the character on screen. I don't think I want to see steampunk Picard or Lucy Liu playing Spock.

You can get star trek figures but they're generally aimed at adults and are quite expensive. He has my Enterprise D toy from when i was his age haha. But sadly they aren't making anything for his age group (8yrs) which is a serious shame. I hated the new Star Wars but one thing I'll say was that their marketing with toys, clothes etc was genius. Had Trek had this kind of exposure, I think kids would be all over it.

Star Trek will only have a future when they get back to the roots. We need Captains like Janeway, Picard and the true Kirk. And we need Vulcans like the original Spock.
Back to the roots, that´s all what counts!!!

Anything but Janeway. I liked Voyager, but I hate Janeway. Worst captain and worst character in Trek by a lightyear.

Also, going "back to the roots" is what fans may be saying, but when Enterprise did pretty much just that, a series as close to TOS model as possible, the fans piled on the hate like there was no tomorrow. Archer was the most Kirk-like of the captains, and with T'Pol and Trip they were obviously aiming at recreating the Kirk-Spock-McCoy trinity. And the series was forced by the fans to change a lot in the later two seasons.

Likewise Beyond is probably the closest to TOS the new movies got, with many people even saying it's like a TOS episodes with production values of a modern blcokbuster (I don't exactly agree, but I see wheere they're coming from). And it bombed. The fans keep saying they want Trek to go back to the roots, but when it does it tends to turn out that's not what they really wanted.

Star Trek works better as a TV series than as movies. Extended time for storytelling is important and 22 episodes a year gives a much better opportunity to do that than a 2 hour movie once every few years.

I am watching Voyager right now and I'm enjoying it way more then the original run through haha. She's not as bad as I remember. Though Harry Kim (despite being a good character) can't act for shit! The CGI is also impressively bad in the first couple of seasons.

Wait for the last couple of seasons. She's ok early on, but the last three seasons she does some shit I just couldn't stand. I think it starts with The Year of Hell in season 4 and only gets worse from then on. It's like she's constantly in the "Ahab" mode Picard was in First Contact, but is never shown how wrong she is. That said, I still really enjoyed Voyager a lot when I rewatched it last year.

Oh, and Harry (and the actor who played him) had a lot of behind-the-scenes problems. Basically there was some conflict between him and the producers, and they couldn't get rid of him because the character was popular, but they never really gave him much to work with, and it's also why the character never got promoted and remained an ensign all seven years. So I don't think the actor was always giving it his best, given that situation. When he did get better scripts for his character he actually did a pretty good job in my opinion (like the episode Timeless).

Ah yes I remember the change in tone with Janeway. I always saw it as she was fed up of the shit and couldn't give a damn lol and to be fair, in that situation, I couldn't be fucked with it either.

Despite everything going against Harry, I always liked his character. Chakotay and Harry were always well grounded likeable characters. Unfortunately they never got the time of day that Paris or Tuvok did. I like those characters a lot but I would of preferred to of seen more of Chakotay's spiritual side and Harry's general down to Earth attitude. I would of put Seven of Nine in the background a little more. Good character and great on the eyes but a little too much from her.

Old "Star Trek action" was mostly a minute of exploding consoles, plasma burn and the use of a skin regenerator (very old Star Trek action was diving suits and styrofoam rocks). It was always just a short moment in a few selected episodes. Even Voyager with its Delta Flyer and DS9 with the Defiant (a warship!!!) weren't that much about action.

I don't give a shit about "true fans". True fans are nothing but a very loud minority. And DS9 was probably the best Star Trek I've ever seen (I loved that the Federation wasn't purely good) ;) I just don't think it's a good idea to turn Star Trek into action movies (to be honest: I'm not a huge fan of the old movies either).
Chakotay would've deserved an own series with him as captain! One of my favorite Star Trek characters ever.

Seven was to Voyager what Worf was to DS9: A charater introduced to "save" the show. Voyager struggled quite a bit, so they made a few changes. That's where Seven came into play. And people (guys?) loved her...

Well, DS9 was no real Star Trek, it was a cheap Babylon 5 clone.

She was hot and to be fair a good character. I think they did well bringing her in. The Kes character ran its course and of course she was missed but Seven brought something fresh to the show. On the other hand, she was a good second character not a lead. Chakotay has so many things about him that I personally found interesting, easily one of my favourites despite the fact that apparently the actor purposely phoned it in on the last couple of seasons.
I couldn't agree more. Janeway and Chakotay have great chemistry, the episode where they're left on the planet by themselves was very well done. They played the possible romance to perfection in my opinion. It is a shame they ditched that dymanic later on.

Naomi Wildman, now there is a character I enjoyed. A nice simple innocent wee character. It was a nice change.

Oh, come on. There weere entire episodes like "Starship Mine" with Picard basically playing at "Die Hard", or a two parter Gambit that was pure adventure stuff. DS9 was full of battles and fights and episodes like The Siege of AR-558. Voyager's episodes like Year of Hell or Scorpion or Dark Frontier (all two-parters) were very action heavy. Enterprise's entire third season with the fight against Xindi was full of action episodes like Azati Prime. They even brought a squad of marines on board for more action.

And this is just some stuff that comes to mind now. And not getting into way more action-oriented movies. This is exactly what I mean about fans having a distorted image of the franchise. Action and adventure were always big parts the franchise. You may not like the new movies- that's fine, that's your prerogative. But all the talking about how it's not Star Trek anymore because it has action and explosions is just silly. There is nothing about those movies that warrants drawing the line on them.

You can definitely tell anything Trek from when Gene Roddenberry was alive and had a hand in it to the stuff made after his death. It went from being more cerebral and thought-provoking to "hey let's blow stuff up! (and use lots of lens flare)".

Yeah, becasue Roddenberry died just before Abrams and his scary lense flare took over. Horseshit, as McCoy would say :P

TOS had stuff like Spock's Brain, and TNG and DS9 were chock-full of thought provoking episodes. Those were long-ass series, there was time to have plenty of both action and high-brow stuff and comedy too. And let's be honest, with all due respect for Roddenberry- he was killing The Next Generation. The show really thrived after he left.

I think some people also fail to see that the perceived "lack of action" in TOS from todays point of view is often due to the limitations of 60s TV and what they could do. An episode like Arena would be very mcuh an action episode right now, not because it would be dumbed-down, but becasue it would be possible to make the fight with the Gorn look well.

Don't get me wrong- I'd love the next Trek movie to be something more like The Motion Picture of Interstellar. All I'm saying is that it's silly to write something off as not Trek just because it's action-adventure, as if that was somehow untrue of Star Trek. Being adventureus and entertaining was always a big part of Star Trek.

Now, let's try and move on from arguing about the past stuff, and argue about the future :D That's why I made the thread after all- to speculate about the shape of the next movie/tv show and share news and rumors.