I'm not sure but you seem to be unsure of what the Quantum Reality theory is about. Now I could be wrong in this assumption and if so I apologize in advance. However assuming your not familiar with it, and since it is canon that in Star Trek this theory is correct (TNG Parallels) I will give some examples to illustrate it...
I'd actually wager I've got a better understanding of quantum reality theory than you do, since you're using comic books to explain it rather than actual quantum science. I don't recall crossing paths with you before, but many here on 10F can attest that I do know what I'm talking about in these matters. Apology accepted, now take care not to insult my intellect again.
The fundamental flaw in your argument is that Star Trek as we know it takes place in ONE quantum reality - the Star Trek Prime Reality. The Star Trek Alternate Reality in which the most recent films take place branches from that reality, but still acknowledges its existence, thanks to Spock Prime crossing over. The creation of this alternate universe was necessary to pull off the reboot, but without the movie series' closeness to the branch-off point in terms of timeframe, the selection of characters and ship or the presence of Spock Prime, it would be unrecognizable as Trek.
You can say it's Trek, and you can say it's taking place in an alternate quantum reality (or a close-parallel reality, like the Mirror Universe) but without some tangible link to the Prime Reality - an iconic ship, or familiar characters - no one will accept it as being Star Trek.
The bottom line is Star Trek is self-definitive. You can't have Star Trek without acknowledging or building from established Star Trek canon. And Zephram Cochrane, despite being an important figure in Trek "history," is actually a very minor figure in Trek canon, appearing in only three episodes (two of which only briefly) and one film. Everybody's heard of Captain Kirk and Captain Picard, but if you ask your average non-Trekkie who Cochrane is, they'll have no clue. And if you ask your average Trekker if they'd buy a quantum reality that branches off before Cochrane makes First Contact as being Star Trek, they'll probably tell you what I'm telling you now: no.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
Star Trek is also appealing, because it is (or was) a look at our collective future. This was not a galaxy far far away, but the future we could all potentially have. Disconnecting that aspect of it also just makes it a random sci-fi show.
There was no Eugenics War in our 1996. There are no sanctuary districts. The Space program has been in decline. All of the things that attempt to establish humanity's pre-first contact history is all wrong. Further, there's that nagging issue of early Trek's understanding of the size of the Galaxy.
You could easily establish a new canon that takes things into account, but still have Klingons, Romulans, Vulcans, and a ship named Enterprise.
You forget, however, that writers today plain and simple suck. I know this is a provocative statement but I do think the overall positive outlook on humanities future, a future of cooperation and demilitarisation we had in the 60's still holds merit and is needed more than ever today, maybe. As uneven as Trek canon was sometimes, that has already beenw ritten and it was written rathe well, reflecting worries and fears but also hopes that haven't changed yet. We still are on the verge of desaster in 2016, we still don't get along, digitalization and technical revolution still threatens human core values as it did back then. As much as people would like to believe that, but we haven't developed in any significant way since 1966 - lookig at Europe and current political tensions we even came almost full circle with the 30s.
However, if you now take new, young writers into the boat rewriting all that from our today perspective you get the whole grimdark 9/11 terrorism nonsense ENT already tried to tie into Trek canon and I personally would rather not have that. You can write morality plays reflecting on today's problems with the established lore as well, sometimes it works but most of the times I don't have much faith in the writing staff that is either severly limited by network influence (keep it PG-13, no statements too polarising etc.) or go the whole lame weltschmerz dystopia route.
I wouldn't disagree about "writers today", even though that's a rather broad statement, LOL... but, I think this is why you now have names like Fuller, Meyer, and even Roddenberry attached to this new show. If the bar is set high, from the top, then the episodic writers will fall into line. If they can't ultimately write for Trek, then I think the PTBs simply won't work with them.
IMO there is no need for an alternate reality with this new series. The reason this was used for the JJ Trek films was to allow them to use established characters with an existing history and re-write them in a different way.
There is still plenty of stories out there in the prime universe to be told without needing to resort to a parallel universe.
I don't disagree. Good writers find a way to work within any number of constraints, whether it be established canon or studio meddling. Let's not forget, it was studio executives that decided DS9 needed a change in direction during the fourth season, and thought that Worf and the Klingons would be the solution. It was, but those ideas derailed the show's plans for the Dominion... so, it took some creative thinking, but Behr & Moore & Co. found a way to weave the demands of the studio into the show rather seamlessly. It was better for it, in the end, and everyone was happy.
The flip side of this, of course, is Enterprise. Nuff said.
It's still early, but on paper, I think this new team is more like the first example... they have the capacity to do good work. If they decide to stick to original canon, then I think they should do fine. If they base the show in the Abrams alternate reality, or do a hard reboot... I think they should do fine there, too.
I can see how an alternate canon can work and still be Trek. It all depends, of course, on whether you believe the essence of Star Trek lies in the sense of wonder and hope about the future, in a universe containing Humans, Vulcans, Andorians, Tellarites, and others in a great Federation of Planets which is occasionally in conflict with Klingons, Romulans, and perhaps Cardassians; or if you believe the essence of Star Trek lies in the particular characters, that it must include Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Picard, Worf, Data, Riker, Sisko, Kira, Odo, Janeway, Paris, and all those other folks we've seen on screen, and that it must include the history we've already been told even where it conflicts with reality.
Personally, I fall into the first group. I remember back when the original series came out, and they hadn't even decided yet just how far in the future it was supposed to be happening (I don't recall exactly when they nailed it into the 23rd Century in particular; I think that may have come up in the novels or the cartoon series in the '70s). And as long as the new show features a starship that's affiliated with the Starfleet of the United Federation of Planets, and as long as they include the species we've come to know and love over the decades, I could live with a reboot universe in which WW3 may or may not have actually occurred, and in which the Eugenics Wars (or, since now it'd be due to direct genetic engineering rather than the breeding programs that eugenics implies, the Genetic Wars) happen some time in the late 21st or early 22nd centuries. That could feature a Federation that's still brand new, still making its rules, and a Starfleet less than a century old, possible as little as fifty years or so (meaning that a young mustang like Kirk could do, well, Kirk stuff without having to face a court-martial every third episode as Kirk really should have).
OTOH, what I'm really plumping for here is a continuation, set at least 20-30 years after VOY, maybe longer, so we can go boldly into places Starfleet hasn't really explored while still having that solid foundation built up by the past fifty years of occasionally-shaky continuity. This would please me more, but either one would please me.
Just please, in the name of the Great Bird, no more prequels!
Does anybody have any good and helpfully reassuring evidence that this can be a Prime Universe show? I had read something a while back about discrepancies on licensing between Abrams' movies and TV rights. I really, really found it helpful that others had reason to believe there might be a time when the Trek world would come back to the light after the heretics took it astray. lol
I had really just assumed that the Prime universe was as good as dead considering some of the people who were coming to run the show.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"Star Trek: Rubicon" Season 1, Season 2 A new era, a new time, a new crew, a new ship, a new mission...
"I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment because it will never come again."- Jean-Luc Picard
Some people have mentioned quite a few times that there is 'bad blood' between CBS and Paramount - and they do not really co-operate with each other (as I suppose they are both in the same business competing for the exact same audience/customer).
If this is true, I am surprised that CBS has employed an employee (or former employee) of BadRobot/Paramount to work on the next episode of their franchise.
Les Moonves: When [CBS] split from Viacom ten years ago, January 1, 2006, one of the big sticking points, as you can imagine, was "Star Trek." You know, we both wanted it.
They said "It's a movie!" and I said, "No, no, no, it's a TV show." Actually, we're both right. So they kept the feature film rights, we kept the television rights; they have ["Star Trek Beyond"] coming out July 22.
Our deal with them is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn't be a confusion in the marketplace.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Les Moonves: When [CBS] split from Viacom ten years ago, January 1, 2006, one of the big sticking points, as you can imagine, was "Star Trek." You know, we both wanted it.
They said "It's a movie!" and I said, "No, no, no, it's a TV show." Actually, we're both right. So they kept the feature film rights, we kept the television rights; they have ["Star Trek Beyond"] coming out July 22.
Our deal with them is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn't be a confusion in the marketplace.
Like any Trek fan would be confused... <eye roll>
One would think by now TV Exec's would be over the "12 yo mentality" perception of their viewers.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Nah the best would be an entirely new timeline not connected to either the current Paramount films or the previous series. The existence of the TNG episode Parallels is all the justification they need that other timelines exist in a "Trek Multiverse", even setting aside the use of the Quantum Reality theory in 2009. This would eliminate any fear of canon contradictions and permit the show to be set in any time period.
In which case, why bother to even call it 'Star Trek'? Why not just come up with a completely new series to attract viewers, rather than relying on the existing fandom, if the intent is to not include the elements which said fandom are fans of? Doing a 'third timeline' would be nothing more than a hollow use of the name, and without including canon elements, would just be pi55ing on the history of the franchise it is riding on the coat-tails of by using the name 'Star Trek'...
Almost opposite reaction for me. I'm not a member of the "cult of holy twok" and I really hate that Meyer used ideas that were known to be scientifically impossible as major plot points and I fear with him on the new show that it will be more of the same.
It is called science fiction... That it be plausible or possible, is not a true criteria of the genre... The physical laws within the 'Verse of the writer's creation, relies on nothing but the author's intent for their story... They write to tell the story they have to tell because they want to tell it, not to have it picked apart by pedantic poindexters to be all "Nyah, that's not possible..." about it...
As for 'cult of TWOK, as films go, I can take or leave it, and am actually more inclined to 'leave it', as I far prefer the Motion(less) Picture and Search for Spock... Yes, there are somethings I like about WoK, but there are significantly more things which I dislike. Kirstie Alley as Saavik... Kirk continually addressing Saavik as 'Mister' to the extent that it is ludicrously notable... Khan being portrayed as some Ultimate Evil... Chekov... Stuff which makes me simply not enjoy it. But, I have more confidence in Meyer than I do in Berman or Braga, or JJ and his troupe of flying monkeys...
Nah the best would be an entirely new timeline not connected to either the current Paramount films or the previous series. The existence of the TNG episode Parallels is all the justification they need that other timelines exist in a "Trek Multiverse", even setting aside the use of the Quantum Reality theory in 2009. This would eliminate any fear of canon contradictions and permit the show to be set in any time period.
In which case, why bother to even call it 'Star Trek'? Why not just come up with a completely new series to attract viewers, rather than relying on the existing fandom, if the intent is to not include the elements which said fandom are fans of? Doing a 'third timeline' would be nothing more than a hollow use of the name, and without including canon elements, would just be pi55ing on the history of the franchise it is riding on the coat-tails of by using the name 'Star Trek'...
My thoughts exactly.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Frankly, I'll be disappointed if it's not set in the 25th century or later, I'm tired of Star Trek going backward.
This, SO much this !
I'm really excited about this show, BUT I'm hoping to God that they go back to story telling in the PRIME universe, in the timeline of Next Gen or later.
If they are to stay in the JJ'verse, It would be interesting to see how the JJ'verse rippled out in the next gen era, or beyond.
Les Moonves: When [CBS] split from Viacom ten years ago, January 1, 2006, one of the big sticking points, as you can imagine, was "Star Trek." You know, we both wanted it.
They said "It's a movie!" and I said, "No, no, no, it's a TV show." Actually, we're both right. So they kept the feature film rights, we kept the television rights; they have ["Star Trek Beyond"] coming out July 22.
Our deal with them is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn't be a confusion in the marketplace.
Like any Trek fan would be confused... <eye roll>
One would think by now TV Exec's would be over the "12 yo mentality" perception of their viewers.
actually it's kind of true...there are a lot of people that think the Batman in Batman v Superman is from the Christopher Nolan movies.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
So is it good news or bad news that a former producer from the rebooted trek films is now on the new series?
I don't know anything about them, so would be interested to know.
Personally, I thought it was a bad thing, but, from what I read, he wasn't solely responsible for everything bad about them, and has done solid work on other series... By himself, I would have been worried... But... With Meyer's collaboration, I would hope that will guide and temper his output, so I am now quietly optimistic
So is it good news or bad news that a former producer from the rebooted trek films is now on the new series?
I don't know anything about them, so would be interested to know.
It's neither "good news" or "bad news." Many have hit on these points earlier in the thread.
1. If the show is good, it won't matter what universe it is set in.
2. Alex Kurtzman has produced a number of "hit" TV shows. Most recently, he has produced a number of "hits" for CBS Network. He knows television, and this is likely why he (and his production company) got the job.
3. Bryan Fuller is the showrunner, not Alex Kurtzman. This is vital, because the showrunner heads the writer's room, and establishes the direction of the show.
4. As far as licenses go, it's my understanding that the new show can be in whatever universe it wants to be in. Bad Robot and Paramount owns the designs of the alternative universe, so as long as those designs don't show up in the new show, no license agreement would likely be necessary. This is very similar to the ideas of things like the USS Kelvin, the Jellyfish, the Narada, and the Hobus Supernova. All of those instances "occurred" in the Prime timeline, yet they are very much Paramount/Bad Robot designs. TL;DR it's not as simple as drawing a line in the sand.
5. MOST IMPORTANTLY... WE DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE NEW SHOW. With few exceptions, anyone who says they "know" are otherwise wrong. It's all speculation, at this point.
Les Moonves: When [CBS] split from Viacom ten years ago, January 1, 2006, one of the big sticking points, as you can imagine, was "Star Trek." You know, we both wanted it.
They said "It's a movie!" and I said, "No, no, no, it's a TV show." Actually, we're both right. So they kept the feature film rights, we kept the television rights; they have ["Star Trek Beyond"] coming out July 22.
Our deal with them is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn't be a confusion in the marketplace.
Like any Trek fan would be confused... <eye roll>
One would think by now TV Exec's would be over the "12 yo mentality" perception of their viewers.
actually it's kind of true...there are a lot of people that think the Batman in Batman v Superman is from the Christopher Nolan movies.
I doubt anybody who is a functioning Batman Fan, is confused about whether or not Affleck is a continuation of the Nolan Batman.
There might be folks out there who wish it was, because of it being an older version of the character, but it's pretty obvious from the publicity so far that this is a whole new version and ties directly to the Man of Steel movie.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Marcus, Saavik was called "mister" because in a military unit, one needs a way to address junior officers in a fashion that lets them know they're being chewed out, without being overt about it (there are regs about that sort of thing), and since Starfleet may include species with multiple genders, only one gender, or some other arrangement, and since the preferences of address aren't necessarily obvious to other species, the idea is that they've adopted "mister" as the generic reference. (In the real-life military, a female junior officer in such a situation may be addressed as "miss", but what form of address would you used for, for instance, the quad-gendered Andorians?
As for the delay of the new series to avoid confusion, that's obviously not to avoid confusion on the part of the old fans - but they can't exactly keep a new series running just on the "old fans" demographic, now can they? They have to rope in whole new fans, and they can't do that if folks are staring at the screen, going, "But this doesn't look anything like the movie! And where's Kirk?"
Nah the best would be an entirely new timeline not connected to either the current Paramount films or the previous series. The existence of the TNG episode Parallels is all the justification they need that other timelines exist in a "Trek Multiverse", even setting aside the use of the Quantum Reality theory in 2009. This would eliminate any fear of canon contradictions and permit the show to be set in any time period.
In which case, why bother to even call it 'Star Trek'? Why not just come up with a completely new series to attract viewers, rather than relying on the existing fandom, if the intent is to not include the elements which said fandom are fans of? Doing a 'third timeline' would be nothing more than a hollow use of the name, and without including canon elements, would just be pi55ing on the history of the franchise it is riding on the coat-tails of by using the name 'Star Trek'...
Almost opposite reaction for me. I'm not a member of the "cult of holy twok" and I really hate that Meyer used ideas that were known to be scientifically impossible as major plot points and I fear with him on the new show that it will be more of the same.
It is called science fiction... That it be plausible or possible, is not a true criteria of the genre... The physical laws within the 'Verse of the writer's creation, relies on nothing but the author's intent for their story... They write to tell the story they have to tell because they want to tell it, not to have it picked apart by pedantic poindexters to be all "Nyah, that's not possible..." about it...
As for 'cult of TWOK, as films go, I can take or leave it, and am actually more inclined to 'leave it', as I far prefer the Motion(less) Picture and Search for Spock... Yes, there are somethings I like about WoK, but there are significantly more things which I dislike. Kirstie Alley as Saavik... Kirk continually addressing Saavik as 'Mister' to the extent that it is ludicrously notable... Khan being portrayed as some Ultimate Evil... Chekov... Stuff which makes me simply not enjoy it. But, I have more confidence in Meyer than I do in Berman or Braga, or JJ and his troupe of flying monkeys...
Yes yes of course it's fiction, but, if you go around various Trek sites one of the things you will see continuously brought up as a complaint about the reboot films compared to the older films is that supposedly they have less scientific accuracy. Yet when you actually did into the facts of the matter both are on about the same level in terms of accuracy. TWOK in particular is frequently cited by these people as an example of writing with scientific accuracy when in fact it is one of the worst of the older films in that respect. Interesting that you mention liking TSFS more as I share that sentiment.
With regard the levels of scientific accuracy issue between JJTrek and other Trek, I would think that that's partly due to a real mangling of concepts such as cold fusion. When combined with other elements of the writing, such as the dressing down Pine gives Kirk and Spock, it's comes across as them 'writing stuff that sounds cool', rather than any true thought behind any of it, such as the DS-9 writing staff did when they considered a transporter-achieved placental transplant, so it just comes across (to me at least) sloppy writing in general. And also, a case of people simply not liking them, and trying to have something to back up their opinion beyond "I don't like it..." But my main point, was that there's a certain amount of suspension of disbelief required when dealing with works of fiction, and being too literal, just sucks the fun out of it... Take Jack and the Beanstalk, for example... I don't need to know how or why the Magic Beans work, and it's not really plot relevent how they work, just that they do work, so Jack can go climbing (clearly to an altitude where breathing equipment would be required ) But hey, Magic Beans and Adventures, and that's, for want of a better term, 'good enough'
For myself, those things I mentioned with WoK spoil the film enough for me to not even notice if the basic science of the film doesn't hold up... As for TSFS, I consider it a superior film in pretty much every way, and even the McGuffin of 'protomatter' explains some of the other science aspects which would otherwise be stretching suspension of disbelief a bit too far, but also, it introduced:
Also, with regards the multiverse concept, as mentioned above, without the existing canon, it simply wouldn't be Star Trek, but a shallow use of the IP. An example of this not working well, would be the most recent Fantastic Four. People were predicting it to be a failure before it was even released, and it's SJW supporters tried shouting them down with lazy accusations of racism, but when it was released, it was an unmitigated disaster... Had they just done a movie with some Supers in it, it might have been more favorably received, but because they were calling it 'Fantastic Four', people had a reasonable set of expectations, and the same goes for Trek... While the canon supports multiple quantum realities, the expectations existing fans have would still be for certain consistencies, which, if they're not present, as before, IMHO, it might just as well be any 'sci-fi show', rather than trying to ride the coat-tails of an established franchise to import a fanbase, which ultimately, I think would be more dignified...
Ok, so. Personally, I hope the new series is set post Nemesis, maybe 100 years or so. Why? Quite simply, freedom. Sure, we have the historical foundation of ENT through Nemesis, but there is no canon after Nemesis, with the *one* exception of Romulus blowing up from JJ-Trek. But after that point, it's completely open. Any new canon set post Nemesis can do pretty much anything it wants.
As far as STO goes, I'm not worried about a new TV show contradicting it. Anyone who ever though STO was canon was deluding themselves. If/when a new show/movie set anywhere near STO's time period happens, the writers definitely aren't going to be calling Cryptic for story notes. They are going to do what they want, as they should.
As far as STO goes, I'm not worried about a new TV show contradicting it. Anyone who ever though STO was canon was deluding themselves. If/when a new show/movie set anywhere near STO's time period happens, the writers definitely aren't going to be calling Cryptic for story notes. They are going to do what they want, as they should.
Well, to that point... with all of this time travel stuff, it would be quite easy to write off all of STO as it's own timeline.
Open some sort of rift or tech-tech, and BOOM, we're in the universe of the new show... WITH BRAND NEW C-STORE SHIPS!
Marcus, Saavik was called "mister" because in a military unit, one needs a way to address junior officers in a fashion that lets them know they're being chewed out, without being overt about it (there are regs about that sort of thing), and since Starfleet may include species with multiple genders, only one gender, or some other arrangement, and since the preferences of address aren't necessarily obvious to other species, the idea is that they've adopted "mister" as the generic reference. (In the real-life military, a female junior officer in such a situation may be addressed as "miss", but what form of address would you used for, for instance, the quad-gendered Andorians?
As for the delay of the new series to avoid confusion, that's obviously not to avoid confusion on the part of the old fans - but they can't exactly keep a new series running just on the "old fans" demographic, now can they? They have to rope in whole new fans, and they can't do that if folks are staring at the screen, going, "But this doesn't look anything like the movie! And where's Kirk?"
Aaaaahhhh... That makes a bit more sense, although I have to admit, most of the instances, didn't seem like times when Saavik need be spoken to in a disciplinary manner...
I know Mad Kathy would occasionally say "Miss Torres," but mostly, I was thinking that Kirk frequently refered to Sulu, Scotty, Chekov etc as 'Mister' (or Mister Worf) without the disciplinary tone, and that he never said "Mister Uhura," I think mostly I just found it incongruous, and used enough to be beyond reasonably noticeable... But with regards Andorians, writing has always said that they accept binary pronouns for ease of integration (or, to break my own rule of using headcanon as a point, why K'm'rn adopted the name 'Cameron', or I'K'rR'h's friends call her 'Cara', for ease of integration)
As far as STO goes, I'm not worried about a new TV show contradicting it. Anyone who ever though STO was canon was deluding themselves. If/when a new show/movie set anywhere near STO's time period happens, the writers definitely aren't going to be calling Cryptic for story notes. They are going to do what they want, as they should.
Well, to that point... with all of this time travel stuff, it would be quite easy to write off all of STO as it's own timeline.
Open some sort of rift or tech-tech, and BOOM, we're in the universe of the new show... WITH BRAND NEW C-STORE SHIPS!
Yes, that would probably be the most "politically correct" way to spin it(with the most honest being STO just isn't canon and not important enough to try to acknowledge or be adhered to in any future TV or movie). It's a fun game and I enjoy it, but that's really all it is.
Comments
The fundamental flaw in your argument is that Star Trek as we know it takes place in ONE quantum reality - the Star Trek Prime Reality. The Star Trek Alternate Reality in which the most recent films take place branches from that reality, but still acknowledges its existence, thanks to Spock Prime crossing over. The creation of this alternate universe was necessary to pull off the reboot, but without the movie series' closeness to the branch-off point in terms of timeframe, the selection of characters and ship or the presence of Spock Prime, it would be unrecognizable as Trek.
You can say it's Trek, and you can say it's taking place in an alternate quantum reality (or a close-parallel reality, like the Mirror Universe) but without some tangible link to the Prime Reality - an iconic ship, or familiar characters - no one will accept it as being Star Trek.
The bottom line is Star Trek is self-definitive. You can't have Star Trek without acknowledging or building from established Star Trek canon. And Zephram Cochrane, despite being an important figure in Trek "history," is actually a very minor figure in Trek canon, appearing in only three episodes (two of which only briefly) and one film. Everybody's heard of Captain Kirk and Captain Picard, but if you ask your average non-Trekkie who Cochrane is, they'll have no clue. And if you ask your average Trekker if they'd buy a quantum reality that branches off before Cochrane makes First Contact as being Star Trek, they'll probably tell you what I'm telling you now: no.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
I wouldn't disagree about "writers today", even though that's a rather broad statement, LOL... but, I think this is why you now have names like Fuller, Meyer, and even Roddenberry attached to this new show. If the bar is set high, from the top, then the episodic writers will fall into line. If they can't ultimately write for Trek, then I think the PTBs simply won't work with them.
I don't disagree. Good writers find a way to work within any number of constraints, whether it be established canon or studio meddling. Let's not forget, it was studio executives that decided DS9 needed a change in direction during the fourth season, and thought that Worf and the Klingons would be the solution. It was, but those ideas derailed the show's plans for the Dominion... so, it took some creative thinking, but Behr & Moore & Co. found a way to weave the demands of the studio into the show rather seamlessly. It was better for it, in the end, and everyone was happy.
The flip side of this, of course, is Enterprise. Nuff said.
It's still early, but on paper, I think this new team is more like the first example... they have the capacity to do good work. If they decide to stick to original canon, then I think they should do fine. If they base the show in the Abrams alternate reality, or do a hard reboot... I think they should do fine there, too.
Personally, I fall into the first group. I remember back when the original series came out, and they hadn't even decided yet just how far in the future it was supposed to be happening (I don't recall exactly when they nailed it into the 23rd Century in particular; I think that may have come up in the novels or the cartoon series in the '70s). And as long as the new show features a starship that's affiliated with the Starfleet of the United Federation of Planets, and as long as they include the species we've come to know and love over the decades, I could live with a reboot universe in which WW3 may or may not have actually occurred, and in which the Eugenics Wars (or, since now it'd be due to direct genetic engineering rather than the breeding programs that eugenics implies, the Genetic Wars) happen some time in the late 21st or early 22nd centuries. That could feature a Federation that's still brand new, still making its rules, and a Starfleet less than a century old, possible as little as fifty years or so (meaning that a young mustang like Kirk could do, well, Kirk stuff without having to face a court-martial every third episode as Kirk really should have).
OTOH, what I'm really plumping for here is a continuation, set at least 20-30 years after VOY, maybe longer, so we can go boldly into places Starfleet hasn't really explored while still having that solid foundation built up by the past fifty years of occasionally-shaky continuity. This would please me more, but either one would please me.
Just please, in the name of the Great Bird, no more prequels!
I had really just assumed that the Prime universe was as good as dead considering some of the people who were coming to run the show.
"Star Trek: Rubicon" Season 1, Season 2 A new era, a new time, a new crew, a new ship, a new mission...
"I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment because it will never come again."- Jean-Luc Picard
If this is true, I am surprised that CBS has employed an employee (or former employee) of BadRobot/Paramount to work on the next episode of their franchise.
Any thoughts?
Les Moonves: When [CBS] split from Viacom ten years ago, January 1, 2006, one of the big sticking points, as you can imagine, was "Star Trek." You know, we both wanted it.
They said "It's a movie!" and I said, "No, no, no, it's a TV show." Actually, we're both right. So they kept the feature film rights, we kept the television rights; they have ["Star Trek Beyond"] coming out July 22.
Our deal with them is that we had to wait six months after their film is launched so there wouldn't be a confusion in the marketplace.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Like any Trek fan would be confused... <eye roll>
One would think by now TV Exec's would be over the "12 yo mentality" perception of their viewers.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
It is called science fiction... That it be plausible or possible, is not a true criteria of the genre... The physical laws within the 'Verse of the writer's creation, relies on nothing but the author's intent for their story... They write to tell the story they have to tell because they want to tell it, not to have it picked apart by pedantic poindexters to be all "Nyah, that's not possible..." about it...
As for 'cult of TWOK, as films go, I can take or leave it, and am actually more inclined to 'leave it', as I far prefer the Motion(less) Picture and Search for Spock... Yes, there are somethings I like about WoK, but there are significantly more things which I dislike. Kirstie Alley as Saavik... Kirk continually addressing Saavik as 'Mister' to the extent that it is ludicrously notable... Khan being portrayed as some Ultimate Evil... Chekov... Stuff which makes me simply not enjoy it. But, I have more confidence in Meyer than I do in Berman or Braga, or JJ and his troupe of flying monkeys...
Yes, the fact that it is a cbs production. cbs is limited to prime universe productions as per the way licenses are distributed
My thoughts exactly.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Unless they're cooperating with Paramount. *shudders*
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
This, SO much this !
I'm really excited about this show, BUT I'm hoping to God that they go back to story telling in the PRIME universe, in the timeline of Next Gen or later.
If they are to stay in the JJ'verse, It would be interesting to see how the JJ'verse rippled out in the next gen era, or beyond.
actually it's kind of true...there are a lot of people that think the Batman in Batman v Superman is from the Christopher Nolan movies.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I don't know anything about them, so would be interested to know.
It's neither "good news" or "bad news." Many have hit on these points earlier in the thread.
1. If the show is good, it won't matter what universe it is set in.
2. Alex Kurtzman has produced a number of "hit" TV shows. Most recently, he has produced a number of "hits" for CBS Network. He knows television, and this is likely why he (and his production company) got the job.
3. Bryan Fuller is the showrunner, not Alex Kurtzman. This is vital, because the showrunner heads the writer's room, and establishes the direction of the show.
4. As far as licenses go, it's my understanding that the new show can be in whatever universe it wants to be in. Bad Robot and Paramount owns the designs of the alternative universe, so as long as those designs don't show up in the new show, no license agreement would likely be necessary. This is very similar to the ideas of things like the USS Kelvin, the Jellyfish, the Narada, and the Hobus Supernova. All of those instances "occurred" in the Prime timeline, yet they are very much Paramount/Bad Robot designs. TL;DR it's not as simple as drawing a line in the sand.
5. MOST IMPORTANTLY... WE DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE NEW SHOW. With few exceptions, anyone who says they "know" are otherwise wrong. It's all speculation, at this point.
I doubt anybody who is a functioning Batman Fan, is confused about whether or not Affleck is a continuation of the Nolan Batman.
There might be folks out there who wish it was, because of it being an older version of the character, but it's pretty obvious from the publicity so far that this is a whole new version and ties directly to the Man of Steel movie.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
As for the delay of the new series to avoid confusion, that's obviously not to avoid confusion on the part of the old fans - but they can't exactly keep a new series running just on the "old fans" demographic, now can they? They have to rope in whole new fans, and they can't do that if folks are staring at the screen, going, "But this doesn't look anything like the movie! And where's Kirk?"
For myself, those things I mentioned with WoK spoil the film enough for me to not even notice if the basic science of the film doesn't hold up... As for TSFS, I consider it a superior film in pretty much every way, and even the McGuffin of 'protomatter' explains some of the other science aspects which would otherwise be stretching suspension of disbelief a bit too far, but also, it introduced:
Also, with regards the multiverse concept, as mentioned above, without the existing canon, it simply wouldn't be Star Trek, but a shallow use of the IP. An example of this not working well, would be the most recent Fantastic Four. People were predicting it to be a failure before it was even released, and it's SJW supporters tried shouting them down with lazy accusations of racism, but when it was released, it was an unmitigated disaster... Had they just done a movie with some Supers in it, it might have been more favorably received, but because they were calling it 'Fantastic Four', people had a reasonable set of expectations, and the same goes for Trek... While the canon supports multiple quantum realities, the expectations existing fans have would still be for certain consistencies, which, if they're not present, as before, IMHO, it might just as well be any 'sci-fi show', rather than trying to ride the coat-tails of an established franchise to import a fanbase, which ultimately, I think would be more dignified...
As far as STO goes, I'm not worried about a new TV show contradicting it. Anyone who ever though STO was canon was deluding themselves. If/when a new show/movie set anywhere near STO's time period happens, the writers definitely aren't going to be calling Cryptic for story notes. They are going to do what they want, as they should.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Well, to that point... with all of this time travel stuff, it would be quite easy to write off all of STO as it's own timeline.
Open some sort of rift or tech-tech, and BOOM, we're in the universe of the new show... WITH BRAND NEW C-STORE SHIPS!
I know Mad Kathy would occasionally say "Miss Torres," but mostly, I was thinking that Kirk frequently refered to Sulu, Scotty, Chekov etc as 'Mister' (or Mister Worf) without the disciplinary tone, and that he never said "Mister Uhura," I think mostly I just found it incongruous, and used enough to be beyond reasonably noticeable... But with regards Andorians, writing has always said that they accept binary pronouns for ease of integration (or, to break my own rule of using headcanon as a point, why K'm'rn adopted the name 'Cameron', or I'K'rR'h's friends call her 'Cara', for ease of integration)
Yes, that would probably be the most "politically correct" way to spin it(with the most honest being STO just isn't canon and not important enough to try to acknowledge or be adhered to in any future TV or movie). It's a fun game and I enjoy it, but that's really all it is.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008