Section 31 and the Enterprise-C

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

I couldn't find the "Section 31" forum, so I'm posting here. Someone DM me if the thread movies, thanks.

The Enterprise-B is launched in 2293 with Generations mostly set in 2371 or 78 years later as state in the film.
The Enterprise-C was destroyed in 2344 according to TNG's "Yesterday's Enterprise."
Tricia O'Neil played "Rachel Garrett," the Captain of the Enterprise-C. The actress was 45 at the time.
In the upcoming Section 31 film, Kacey Rohl will play a younger "Rachel Garrett." She's 33.
Let's round off and say this is about 10 years before the Ent-C is lost to the Romulans.
This places the film around 2330-35 give or take.
I think it's fair to say the Ent-B has come and gone and the Ent-C is in service or about to be.
Do you think the film may reveal the fate of the Ent-B?
Do you think the film may reveal the Ent-C in some capacity?
Could this pull double-duty as a backdoor pilot to an Enterprise-C show?

 

[The Wormhole]

Do you think the film may reveal the fate of the Ent-B?

I doubt it.

Do you think the film may reveal the Ent-C in some capacity?

Possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[Firebird]

Do you think the film may reveal the fate of the Ent-B?
Do you think the film may reveal the Ent-C in some capacity?
Could this pull double-duty as a backdoor pilot to an Enterprise-C show?

Other than to provide unnecessary fan service, what relevance would any of this have to the plot?

I'd respect Section 31 more if they don't even bother to mention an Enterprise altogether.

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

Other than to provide unnecessary fan service, what relevance would any of this have to the plot?

I'd respect Section 31 more if they don't even bother to mention an Enterprise altogether.

Rachel Garrett is already fan service, makes no sense not to include or foreshadow the Ent-C.

 

[Firebird]

Rachel Garrett is already fan service, makes no sense not to include or foreshadow the Ent-C.

That's a false equivalency. You can use a character without having to bring up their entire future history.

 

[Dukhat]

I couldn't find the "Section 31" forum, so I'm posting here.

There is no Section 31 forum. Threads about that should currently go in the Future of Trek forum.

Could this pull double-duty as a backdoor pilot to an Enterprise-C show?

No, because

1. There’s already a show set on an Enterprise. Another one would be redundant.

2. This movie isn’t about the Enterprise-C. It’s about Mirror Georgiou and her merry band of Guardians of the Galaxy.

 

[Commander K]

This is an action movie, the only trek easter egg is just that...Rachel Garret. Can't see them playing to the crowd and having too many in-references. There are things to be blown up after all and every second counts in a movie

I am looking forward to it though. Always wanted to see something in that era...never know, we might get more..

 

[F. King Daniel]

Rachel Garrett is already fan service, makes no sense not to include or foreshadow the Ent-C.

With the subtlety of a sledgehammer, of course.

"Wow, you'll make a good captain one day"

*turns to the camera*

"Maybe even that new Enterprise-C they're building!" *wink wink*

*studio audience goes bananas*

 

[fireproof78]

With the subtlety of a sledgehammer, of course.

"Wow, you'll make a good captain one day"

*turns to the camera*

"Maybe even that new Enterprise-C they're building!" *wink wink*

*studio audience goes bananas*

Ah, the George Lucas prequel method

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

With the subtlety of a sledgehammer, of course.

"Wow, you'll make a good captain one day"

*turns to the camera*

"Maybe even that new Enterprise-C they're building!" *wink wink*

*studio audience goes bananas*

I will take it!!!!

 

[Dukhat]

With the subtlety of a sledgehammer, of course.

"Wow, you'll make a good captain one day"

*turns to the camera*

"Maybe even that new Enterprise-C they're building!" *wink wink*

*studio audience goes bananas*

You're probably not wrong. Logically, they should be using the Rachel Garrett character because she has something specifically to do with the plot. If she didn't, then they could have made the character any generic Starfleet officer. The fact that she is Garrett should at the very least tie in to the fact that she's going to be captain of the Enterprise-C someday, especially with the current Trek regime's hardon for Enterprises these days. How subtle or overt that tie-in will be is the question.

 

[Tosk]

With the subtlety of a sledgehammer, of course.

"Wow, you'll make a good captain one day"

*turns to the camera*

"Maybe even that new Enterprise-C they're building!" *wink wink*

*studio audience goes bananas*

"Hey Rach, you look good in red. It suits you."

(This being both a shitty reference to the monster maroon and her statue in PIC. )

 

[Dukhat]

"Hey Rach, you look good in red. It suits you."

(This being both a shitty reference to the monster maroon and her statue in PIC. )

I totally forgot about that statue. Was PIC season 3 produced concurrently with the Section 31 production?

 

[Tiran O'Saurus]

Section 31 has been in production in some way or another since Mirror Georgiou first appeared.

 

[Dukhat]

Section 31 has been in production in some way or another since Mirror Georgiou first appeared.

I was more specifically referring to when Casey Rohl was cast.

 

[The Wormhole]

The Garrett Statue in Picard S3 likely was a coincidence. Matalas didn't even know the Titan was featured Lower Decks when he wrote the scripts, making it extremely unlikely he'd be aware there was a plan to include Garrett in Section 31.

 

[HotRod]

The Garrett Statue in Picard S3 likely was a coincidence. Matalas didn't even know the Titan was featured Lower Decks when he wrote the scripts, making it extremely unlikely he'd be aware there was a plan to include Garrett in Section 31.

What!? Lord Terry wasn't aware of something Trek related!? How can this be!? For Thy Lord Terry IS Star Trek. He was sent from above by the Great Bird. If He does not know something, it can only mean it thy not be true or worth knowing! Truly, tis on this day we learn that Lower Decks has been cast from the franchise. If thy Lord Terry doesn't know, then it can not truly be part of thy franchise. Be gone Lower Decks!

 

[The Wormhole]

For Lord Terry's Trek is the One True Trek and there shall be no other Treks before it.

Praise be to Terry, blessed be His Name.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

They have apparently gotten better at sharing information between the shows and promoting future stories. Prodigy s2 ties in with the events of Picard s2 and 3, Disco and Prodigy have been hyping up Starfleet Academy for ages, Prodigy reintroduced the Doctor... I seem to be saying 'Prodigy' a lot. Anyway, I'd be surprised if Garrett's statue was a coincidence; it fits the pattern too well and seems like kind of a random choice of character without this extra context.

 

[The Wormhole]

But then you just circle back to, how could Matalas know there were plans to use Garrett in the franchise when he didn't know the Titan was already featured in one of the shows? It was during the immediate pre-production stages of S3 of Picard when Paramount began establishing coordination between the shows, which prompting the hasty rewrites where the Titan becomes the Titan A which is somehow a new ship and a refit that Shaw has commanded for five years despite the fact it was launched one year in the future, has that new ship smell but has engines that are twenty years old.

No, I find it far more believable the Garrett Statue was just a coincidence.