NuTrek spinoff series: you're the producer
- Thread starter The Mirrorball Man
- Start date
I'm sure you can, with some fake graph. But people generally agree, as far as I'm aware, that a new Trek series should be set in the original continuity future. I also think that would be the best way for a new Trek show to proceed. Star Trek's about the future, after all.
New show, new ship, new crew, original timeline. It's the best way to go, as long as we have writers with original voices that think outside the well worn out Berman/Braga formula.
Not setting a Star Trek show in the Star Trek universe is just fucking stupid.
Not setting a Star Trek show in the Star Trek universe is just fucking stupid.
Damn. My fake graphs plot has been unraveled.
Alright. No graphs. The old Star Trek continuity lives on in books, and that's all. It's never ever going back on television. From now on it's either the current continuity, the one which originated in Star Trek, or another reboot. Hollywood will not abandon something that works (back-to-basics Trek) in favor of something which has run its course and has been cancelled (old Trek).
Star Trek is, after all, about the future.
It's not "old" continuity, it's the continuity. The one and only in Trek. One cancelled Trek show doesn't mean the end of that original continuity, which, after all, is where Star Trek shows and films were set during their 40+ years existence. AbramsTrek does not represent any norm or standard for Trek. It's one thing to make a summer popcorn flick for the masses, and it's a completely another thing to make a permanent TV show. Yes, the original Trek continuity also lives on in books etc., but it will certainly continue in a new Trek show once it's made in the future. But first we have to say au revoir to Abr-Kur-Orc.
Yep. Boldly going forward, yet staying true to traditional values of Trek.
I'm sorry, I don't want to hurt your feelings, since you sound quite attached to that idea, but that's factually wrong. And stating it won't make it true.
Hollywood doesn't work that way, therefore in my opinion anyone who thinks that way is delusional, but I don't have to convince you, I'll just have to wait.
No, you're not hurting my feelings, it's just ridiculous what you are saying. You are implying as if all Trek prior to AbramsTreck was sucked into a black hole or something and as if the "old ways", whatever that means, don't work anymore. I know that's what you probably wish, but wishing it doesn't make it so.
As I said, there's a difference between summer action blockbusters and a TV show. I'd say it's delusional to expect from a TV series the same as from a big screen movie.
No one cares
Again No one cares.
How about one cancelled Trek show, one flopped Trek film, and ratings that show the people stopped giving a crap about Star Trek gradually since after TNG to the point said Trek show was cancelled.
Again, No one cares.
watch more TOS
Not if you want to actually make money off of it, which is what old Trek stopped doing.
At which point we probably get a new reboot [BECUASE NO ONE CARES ABOUT MEANINGLESS MINUTIA!
Which is exactly what this canon crap people keep going on about is meaningless minutia.
Speak for yourself.
By the way, you sound like a broken record.
Well, the studio bosses are to blame. Trek definitely needed a pause after Voyager, and none of that would have happened. And we probably wouldn't have this crappy sort-of-reboot now.
FYI, AbramzTrek is not TOS.
Why, it's possible to make a good quality sci-fi Trek show and make money off of it. The right people need to be hired.
Unlikely.
Yawn.
It was more than one cancelled series - it was a steady decline in ratings and intrest since The Next Generation ended. There are ratings charts on wikipedia, movie box office details etc.
As Star Trek (as well as all the other reboots out there) have proved is that people care more about characters than continuity. Seeing Kirk and Spock in their prime once again, out saving the galaxy, is far more awesome than the adventures of Captain Nobody in the 25th century.
Besides - who says Trek has been one continuity these past 45 years? Even discounting many excellent novels and comics that went in different directions to the movies and TV series', every incarnation of Trek has been declared uncanon by righteous fans at one time or another. The animated Trek, STV and Enterprise get it the worst. But take a look at the videos in my sig, and then try to explain how The Original Series and Voyager can be part of the same Trek universe. Or Deep Space Nine and TNG. They all imagine the Trek universe slightly differently, and it's only a huge dollop of willing suspension of disbelief that keeps it together.
Been a fan since 1975, it is the old continuity from a TV/film standpoint. It's over.
When the series of films produced by Bad Robot ends, another production company will come in and do their own spin on the Trek universe. No major writers/directors/producers want to be attached to seven-hundred hours of minutiae when writing a new series/film. Who would? The old continuity is a creative straight-jacket.
I still love the series that take place in the Prime timeline, owning TOS and currently purchasing TNG on Blu-ray as well as the films. But there's room in my head and my heart for more than one version of the Trek universe.
I submit that in a multiverse, it is all a single continuity, but separate universes.
Well, for those of us that are fans of the Star Trek universe rather than the JJ Abrams universe... we'd like to see a show set in that one.
A show set in the same era as the current remake series would feel like Star Trek has been set back almost 50 years. I preferred Trek as an evolving linear continuity. So many different people and ideas have been added to Trek since its inception that it is fun to analyse how the galaxy develops from The Cage until the end of DS9. And to then think where it can go from there.
It's kinda boring erasing all that evolution with a giant reset button shaped like JJ Abrams' face.
A show set in the same era as the current remake series would feel like Star Trek has been set back almost 50 years. I preferred Trek as an evolving linear continuity. So many different people and ideas have been added to Trek since its inception that it is fun to analyse how the galaxy develops from The Cage until the end of DS9. And to then think where it can go from there.
It's kinda boring erasing all that evolution with a giant reset button shaped like JJ Abrams' face.
And I perfer interesting characters going on fun adventures and couldn't give a rat's ass about "analyzing how the galaxy develops from The Cage until the end of DS9".
I pick good stories over obsession with continuity.
I don't get the continuity thing, either. It's like demanding that in every scene, a man eating a peach is off-screen just out of shot. It has no bearing on the story or the journey of the characters.
And that's ignoring the fact that Prime canon is a patchwork quilt riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions.
And that's ignoring the fact that Prime canon is a patchwork quilt riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions.
And since you already excluded the final 6 years in your own personal continuity(VOY, ENT, NEM), I imagine you won't have a problem excluding everything else too. The rest of us are glad someone has found a way to attract Star Trek to the larger audience that isn't interested in fanwank continuity porn.
Similar threads
