RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,049
Posts: 5,431,033
Members: 24,926
Currently online: 472
Newest member: In_Correct

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Beltran Introduces Shakespeare To Theater Group
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Burton To Be Honored at Facets Boo! Bash
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

New Trek Puzzles
By: T'Bonz on Oct 15

Star Trek Online: Delta Rising
By: T'Bonz on Oct 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Future of Trek

Future of Trek Discussion of future Trek projects.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 19 2013, 03:58 AM   #151
Geoff Peterson
Fleet Admiral
 
Geoff Peterson's Avatar
 
Location: 20 feet from an outlet
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
I'm not taunting you or saying 'neener-neener-neener!' anymore than anybody else here on this board is... ...play all of the video games based on the previous continuity as much as you want until you're blue in the face or your eyes bleed,


Not alot of us are saying that. Timewalker, if your eyes bleed seek medical attention.
...you'll all have to face facts; the old continuity is dead, gone, finished (except for fan fiction, novels and Star Trek Online) and that's it. Your dealing with this, or not, is up to you and those others.
Did you know they said the same thing about Kirk's Trek? If you believe 40 some years down the line, after the reboot craze (and that horrible 2030 fashion statement) ends, that a next gen reboot or throwback tv series is not even a possibility then try to open your mind a bit.
^ But it won't be set in the old continuity.

The reboot craze will never die. It's been with us since before we called it a reboot.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Geoff Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 04:37 AM   #152
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
The reboot craze will never die. It's been with us since before we called it a reboot.
They were merely remakes priorly, comic books were the first time they used the term. It was when they dropped the previous history and started the story afresh. They've done it many times and have gone back and continued previous stories. IMO Ultimate X-Men sucked but Astonishing X-Men (which was tied to Uncanny X-Men's earth) was great.

Last edited by bigboojeg; August 19 2013 at 06:27 AM.
bigboojeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 04:55 AM   #153
Timewalker
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
 
Timewalker's Avatar
 
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
Damn, you're bossy.

Did I EVER claim to speak for you? No, not even once. The only person I claim to speak for is ME. It's MY opinion that I hate the Abramsverse crap. I wasn't at this convention, didn't vote, and have no idea what it was about. In fact, I've only ever been to one fan event in the US - in the late '80s, when I met Sylvester McCoy at a Doctor Who event at the PBS TV station in Spokane, Washington. So kindly do not tar me with whatever animosity you hold for the people at this other event. And taunting me with "your version of Trek will never be on TV or in the movies again, neener-neener-neener!" is just childish.
I'm not taunting you or saying 'neener-neener-neener!' anymore than anybody else here on this board is-I'm simply agreeing with them when they say that the Prime Universe isn't coming back no matter how much you and other fans want to see it come back, and I stated it in as serious a tone as I could convey on the printed page, just like those others. That you choose to be offended is your prerogative. You and others here can choose to see the fan shows, watch all of the old episodes and movies, read all of the older novels/comic books, and play all of the video games based on the previous continuity as much as you want until you're blue in the face or your eyes bleed, but you'll all have to face facts; the old continuity is dead, gone, finished (except for fan fiction, novels and Star Trek Online) and that's it. Your dealing with this, or not, is up to you and those others.
FFS, of course you're taunting me. You're throwing it in my face that the kind of Star Trek I like will never be professionally produced for TV or movies again. You're also being pretty damned rude.

I have the right to like what kind of Star Trek I like. I know the original actors are aging, and even if Abrams wrote intelligent scripts, the actor chosen can't act worth a soggy paper bag. So... I will indeed read my novels and fanfic and music. I'll write my own. I'll look up the fan productions some day (never saw any yet, so have no opinion on their merits or lack thereof). I've never played the video games because I'm not into that kind of computer gaming.

What you fail to understand is that my saying this does NOT mean that I expect Abrams to immediately be contrite and write better movies and characters just because I don't like the drivel he's done so far. He can keep on doing it until HIS anatomy needs medical attention. I, on the other hand, will be enjoying the work of people who do write intelligent, thoughtful stories that are true to the characters. And never again will I come out of a theatre, wanting the last two hours of my life back.

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

They are the strongest characters, almost every other character has been a variation of those two. They are also the most popular. Which makes it a no-brainer that if Trek comes back to TV, it will feature Kirk and Spock.
I'm not doubting that possible outcome at this point, but their are tons of characters, like Picard, who were made to not be another variation of Kirk,
Picard is half of Kirk. The other half is Riker. Spock was split into Data, Troi and Worf. They even tried to take some Kirk away from Riker by making Picard into a action hero.
Well, they had to, because as a hero, Riker was pretty pathetic.
__________________
"Let's give it to Riker. He'll eat anything!"

For some great Original Series fanfic, check out the Valjiir Continuum!
Timewalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 04:59 AM   #154
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post

The reboot craze will never die. It's been with us since before we called it a reboot.
Bingo. Old series get restarted all the time. How many times has Zorro been "rebooted" onscreen? Or Tarzan? Or Dracula? Or Sherlock Holmes?

Hell, the old Rathbone/Bruce "Holmes" films started out in the Victorian era, but then the movie series "rebooted" itself so that it took place in the 1940s instead--just so Holmes and Watson could contribute to the war effort and fight the Nazis.

This isn't a craze. It's just standard operating procedure. No "timeline" or continuity is sacred. It's all just raw material to be reworked and reinvented every generation or so. And this applies to Trek as much as any other popular fiction.
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 05:08 AM   #155
Geoff Peterson
Fleet Admiral
 
Geoff Peterson's Avatar
 
Location: 20 feet from an outlet
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
The reboot craze will never die. It's been with us since before we called it a reboot.
They were merely remakes priorly, comic books were the first time they used the term. It was when they dropped the previous history and started the story afresh. They've done it many times and have gone back and continued previous stories. IMO Ultimate X-Men sucked but Astonishing X-Men (which was tied to Uncanny X-Men's earth) was great.
Been reading comics since the Sixities. Reboots didn't begin them. All sorts of franchises have been rebooted ( A term derived from computing, iirc) They change actors. They redo the origin. They change the setting. They revamp the concept. Creators were doing it before many people even knew how to use computers.

Ultimate X-Men isn't a reboot. The other X-men comics are still being published. The Ultimate version exists in a different continuity.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Geoff Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 05:47 AM   #156
Timewalker
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
 
Timewalker's Avatar
 
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post

The reboot craze will never die. It's been with us since before we called it a reboot.
Bingo. Old series get restarted all the time. How many times has Zorro been "rebooted" onscreen? Or Tarzan? Or Dracula? Or Sherlock Holmes?
The Robin Hood stories come to mind. I remember the black-and-white Richard Greene TV series. I used to watch it back when I was about 4 or 5 years old, and drove my mother nuts by constantly singing, "Robin Hood, Robin Hood, riding through the glennnn......" and then going on to sing about other things Robin Hood was riding through, including flower beds, sandboxes, and even the ketchup on my supper plate. Then along came Rocket Robin Hood. Fast forward a lot of years and there was the '70s sitcom starring Dick Gauthier. And then came Robin of Sherwood, which I absolutely love. Kevin Costner's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves had its good points and bad points, and as many times as I've seen Robin Hood: Men in Tights, I giggle all the way through. And it came full circle when the old Richard Greene series came back on YTV in Canada and I could enjoy it again from the perspective of an adult... but then I happened to catch the colorized version and wondered what the hell people were thinking, because NO adult male would EVER be caught dead or otherwise wearing THAT shade of green!

Some stories and characters are just timeless, and as long as whoever is producing it is respectful to the source material and doesn't twist it past repair, things are fine.

Same with Shakespeare. Some people complained when Kenneth Branagh started doing his Shakespeare movies. I loved Henry V - it was only in town for 6 days, and I saw it twice. Of course it helped that some of my favorite British actors were in it - Brian Blessed and Derek Jacobi. But there are people who will swear up and down that Laurence Olivier was the ultimate Henry V and how dare Branagh think he could do it better? I never saw the Olivier version, so can't compare them. But I do know that my grandmother and her friend - two elderly ladies who never read Shakespeare in their lives or ever saw a live performance - absolutely loved Branagh's Henry V.
__________________
"Let's give it to Riker. He'll eat anything!"

For some great Original Series fanfic, check out the Valjiir Continuum!
Timewalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 06:05 AM   #157
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
They were merely remakes priorly, comic books were the first time they used the term. It was when they dropped the previous history and started the story afresh. They've done it many times and have gone back and continued previous stories. IMO Ultimate X-Men sucked but Astonishing X-Men (which was tied to Uncanny X-Men's earth) was great.
Been reading comics since the Sixities. Reboots didn't begin them.
I'm not saying reboots began comics, I'm saying they started in them.
Creators were doing it before many people even knew how to use computers.
You do know comics pre-date modern computers, right?
Ultimate X-Men isn't a reboot. The other X-men comics are still being published. The Ultimate version exists in a different continuity.
Reboots are 'different continuities', and that teen reboot Wolverine Jimmy Hudson is no James (Logan) Howlet. I'm happy he doesn't exist outside of Ultimate X-Men and that Logan isn't dead.

Last edited by bigboojeg; August 19 2013 at 06:27 AM.
bigboojeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 06:14 AM   #158
Beyerstein
Captain
 
Beyerstein's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

THe Ultimate line is rumored to be ending soon.
Beyerstein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 07:57 AM   #159
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

thumbtack wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
the "bean counters" couldn't care less what universe Trek is set in as long as its something that gets people in theatres or people in front of their TVs (or whatever)
Precisely.

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
I think what really will determine what universe a new Trek production is set in will be the person hired to create it.
Exactly.

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
If that person wants to use the prime timeline, the Abrams timeline, or a new timeline of his/her own, that person will be given the keys to do so.
Absolutely.











Now do the math.


.

What math?
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 10:41 AM   #160
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
Much more. In the prime timeling (or a 25th century timeline) we'll explore new space, traversing the galaxy, instead of revamping the section of galaxy that older fans already seen, see old and newer species in an evolving galaxy and dealing with them bumping into each other, see newer technologies, and mainly adding to the existing mythos instead of discarding it and boldly going where some of us has already been.
That doesn't answer my question: how are those things we can't do with the new timeline ?

What was in "Into Darkness" that we haven't seen?
I can think of plenty of TOS episodes where I'd ask the same question.

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Yep, can't have viewers who might possibly have to exercise a couple of brain cells, at least enough to ask someone else a question or look up the answer online.
I has NOTHING to do with intelligence or using brain cells or not. It's simply about the amount of dedication to a franchise. Most people don't care enough about Star Trek to even know the difference. It's a fact, even if YOU personally know the difference.

Dumb down. To make smarter things more stupid, so they're not so difficult to understand or think about.
No, it's not. Please explain how it was dumbed down, don't assume that everybody agrees with you.

We could have more intelligent stories, and less character assassination.
Again, your opinion, not a fact.

It also doesn't answer my question.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 02:46 PM   #161
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Belz... wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
Much more. In the prime timeling (or a 25th century timeline) we'll explore new space, traversing the galaxy, instead of revamping the section of galaxy that older fans already seen, see old and newer species in an evolving galaxy and dealing with them bumping into each other, see newer technologies, and mainly adding to the existing mythos instead of discarding it and boldly going where some of us has already been.
That doesn't answer my question: how are those things we can't do with the new timeline ?
If Kirk was in the Delta or Gamma Quadrant, dealing with the Borg or Dominion, or started going transwarp speeds it would be confusing for all.
bbjeg wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Thing is, it's still just a variation on the same theme that we've seen seven-hundred plus hours of. That's kind of the problem.
What was in "Into Darkness" that we haven't seen?
I can think of plenty of TOS episodes where I'd ask the same question.
That's my point, stories have been retold and retold long before Star Trek's been doing it. Just because Pocahontas was made didn't stop Avatar from being one of the top ten grossing movies of all time.
bigboojeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 03:09 PM   #162
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Hell, the old Rathbone/Bruce "Holmes" films started out in the Victorian era, but then the movie series "rebooted" itself so that it took place in the 1940s instead--just so Holmes and Watson could contribute to the war effort and fight the Nazis.
Not the best example actually, the last two films in the series re-rebooted and where set back in the Victorian era after the war series didn't go down well with audiences.

I bought the box set months ago that has them in the original order, it's rather strange going from a war torn WWII London film to one set directly after the Adler affair back in Victorian times.

Even more so as in several scenes he goes between his Victoran and wartime hairstyles with little continuity.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 04:04 PM   #163
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Hell, the old Rathbone/Bruce "Holmes" films started out in the Victorian era, but then the movie series "rebooted" itself so that it took place in the 1940s instead--just so Holmes and Watson could contribute to the war effort and fight the Nazis.
Not the best example actually, the last two films in the series re-rebooted and where set back in the Victorian era after the war series didn't go down well with audiences.

I bought the box set months ago that has them in the original order, it's rather strange going from a war torn WWII London film to one set directly after the Adler affair back in Victorian times.

Even more so as in several scenes he goes between his Victoran and wartime hairstyles with little continuity.

Are you sure they reverted back to Victorian times? Granted, some of the later movies are less obviously concerned with the War and are more generic Holmes mysteries, but I don't believe they ever literally switched back to the gaslight era. (A foggy English estate, or dockside warehouse, looks much the same regardless if it's 1889 or 1945.)

For what it's worth, Wikipedia states explicitly that "the writers of the Universal series never reverted to the Victorian setting." Even if Holmes stopped fighting Nazis.

So no return to the "prime timeline" in that case either!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 04:31 PM   #164
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
That's my point, stories have been retold and retold long before Star Trek's been doing it. Just because Pocahontas was made didn't stop Avatar from being one of the top ten grossing movies of all time.
But there has to be a unique spin or other hook to get the audiences to come in. And there is one undeniable truth about the Trek spinoffs: with each new iteration, they became less and less successful.

They go to another galaxy and encounter yet another group of people with stuff glued to their faces isn't exactly going to be a recipe for success.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 19 2013, 05:03 PM   #165
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Hell, the old Rathbone/Bruce "Holmes" films started out in the Victorian era, but then the movie series "rebooted" itself so that it took place in the 1940s instead--just so Holmes and Watson could contribute to the war effort and fight the Nazis.
Not the best example actually, the last two films in the series re-rebooted and where set back in the Victorian era after the war series didn't go down well with audiences.

I bought the box set months ago that has them in the original order, it's rather strange going from a war torn WWII London film to one set directly after the Adler affair back in Victorian times.

Even more so as in several scenes he goes between his Victoran and wartime hairstyles with little continuity.

Are you sure they reverted back to Victorian times? Granted, some of the later movies are less obviously concerned with the War and are more generic Holmes mysteries, but I don't believe they ever literally switched back to the gaslight era. (A foggy English estate, or dockside warehouse, looks much the same regardless if it's 1889 or 1945.)

For what it's worth, Wikipedia states explicitly that "the writers of the Universal series never reverted to the Victorian setting." Even if Holmes stopped fighting Nazis.

So no return to the "prime timeline" in that case either!
The last two movies produced did not mention a war, nazies, or anything past the 1900 mark. The first opens with Watson mentioning Irene Adler, implying the adventure with her occured between the last specifically war themed movie and that one.

They were based off of the books again, not new war themed stories, so even if Universal doesn't state it explicitly, it's the intention of the penultimate and final movies.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
prime trek

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.