RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,387
Posts: 5,505,200
Members: 25,128
Currently online: 489
Newest member: krash661

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


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.

View Poll Results: Do fans want the prime timeline back?
I'm a fan and I want the Prime timeline back. 211 56.87%
I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back. 61 16.44%
I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back. 39 10.51%
I don't care, just give me Trek! 53 14.29%
I don't know. 7 1.89%
Voters: 371. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 17 2014, 02:02 AM   #1111
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Nero's Shadow wrote: View Post
I'd love a prime universe series. I'm sure it would work very well !!!
They never had to leave it, in my opinion. If they'd just had the balls to say, "we're rebooting STAR TREK. We know this decision won't be popular with a certain percentage of TREKKIES, but the rest of us are going to appreciate the changes.," then all of this "other/alternative universe" stuff wouldn't even have to be there. It's not even offering anything new, anyway. I mean ... the laws of physics are the same STAR TREK has used all along. It's not too late, you know, for them to a proper, "hard" reboot ...
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial. Even if they'd dispensed with the time-travel gimmick and simply rebooted the darn thing like any other series, we'd still be having the same arguments and a certain percentage of fandom would still be demanding the "real" Star Trek back and pining for the old "canon" and "continuity."
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com

Last edited by Greg Cox; April 17 2014 at 02:59 AM.
Greg Cox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 02:05 AM   #1112
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial. Even if they'd dispensed with the time-travel gimmick and simply rebooted the darn thing like any other series, we'd still be having the same arguments and a certain percentage of fandom would still be demanding the "real" Star Trek back and fretting about the old "canon" and "continuity."
True, but at least we may have been spared the endless geeky threads about alternatve timelines.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 02:38 AM   #1113
bountifulboxesjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bountifulboxesjeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial. Even if they'd dispensed with the time-travel gimmick and simply rebooted the darn thing like any other series, we'd still be having the same arguments and a certain percentage of fandom would still be demanding the "real" Star Trek back and fretting about the old "canon" and "continuity."
True, but at least we may have been spared the endless geeky threads about alternatve timelines.
This is the TrekBBS. Regardless of a hard or soft reboot, they'll be threads about alternative timelines.
bountifulboxesjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 02:51 AM   #1114
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial. Even if they'd dispensed with the time-travel gimmick and simply rebooted the darn thing like any other series, we'd still be having the same arguments and a certain percentage of fandom would still be demanding the "real" Star Trek back and fretting about the old "canon" and "continuity."
True, but at least we may have been spared the endless geeky threads about alternatve timelines.
Oh, I stopped reading those years ago!

It's like arguing over how many Organians can dance on the head of a pin!
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 03:15 AM   #1115
bountifulboxesjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bountifulboxesjeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

^I'd say two; the one balancing and the person they're holding.
bountifulboxesjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 07:39 AM   #1116
Bry_Sinclair
Commodore
 
Bry_Sinclair's Avatar
 
Location: Tactical withdrawl along the Klingon border
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Nero's Shadow wrote: View Post
I'd love a prime universe series. I'm sure it would work very well !!!
They never had to leave it, in my opinion. If they'd just had the balls to say, "we're rebooting STAR TREK. We know this decision won't be popular with a certain percentage of TREKKIES, but the rest of us are going to appreciate the changes.," then all of this "other/alternative universe" stuff wouldn't even have to be there. It's not even offering anything new, anyway. I mean ... the laws of physics are the same STAR TREK has used all along. It's not too late, you know, for them to a proper, "hard" reboot ...
Personally I'd want Trek to continue in the Prime Universe, there are many more stories there to tell--so long as the proper people were in place to help tell them.

But if given the option (reboot or alternate), I would've asked for a hard roboot of the franchise, rather than the wishy-washy twaddle of an 'alternate timeline'. At least it would've been more entertaining than Teen-TOS and TWOK2. I live in hope that NuTrek 3 will redeem them, but I'm not holding my breath.
__________________
Avatar: Captain Naya, U.S.S. Renown NCC-1415 [Star Trek: Four Years War]
Manip by: JM1776 (STPMA.net)
Bry_Sinclair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 11:23 AM   #1117
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Because of the episodic nature of so much - but not all - of STAR TREK, before I really understood fandom, or anything, I always just assumed everybody else figured the show's facts were pretty fluid, anyway. I don't believe I ever really got out of that frame of mind, to start with, I mean ...

For example, Spock in "Menagerie" Versus Spock in "Where No Man Has Gone Before," or even "Naked Now." Then there's "Vulcania" verses "Vulcan." Vulcan has no Moon, then TMP shows it has moons, plural ... And all down the line, these odd "growing pains" and arbitrary alterations that are just presented without a word of explaination or apology. How could anyone expect, much less demand, that the show be so literal?

Having said that, there are certain things I like that I don't want messed around with, but if they do ... I understand it's not always going to work in my favour. Unfortunately, though, the Marketing and Advertising Division of Paramount DID push STAR TREK '09 as being something totally fresh and unexpected, when, in fact, it was a little TOO close to home, for my tastes. I wanted something daringly different and instead, the only thing I got was that everything's prettier ... shinier ...
__________________
"― And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn." (Luke 2:7)
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 01:01 PM   #1118
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial. Even if they'd dispensed with the time-travel gimmick and simply rebooted the darn thing like any other series, we'd still be having the same arguments and a certain percentage of fandom would still be demanding the "real" Star Trek back and fretting about the old "canon" and "continuity."
True, but at least we may have been spared the endless geeky threads about alternatve timelines.
Oh, I stopped reading those years ago!

It's like arguing over how many Organians can dance on the head of a pin!
All of them. That's why they shed their corporeal forms.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1965½, 1966-1969, Jan. 21-23 1972, 1979-2001, 2003-2005, 2009-?
Herkimer Jitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 01:17 PM   #1119
mendelin
Lieutenant Commander
 
mendelin's Avatar
 
View mendelin's Twitter Profile
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Vulcan has no Moon, then TMP shows it has moons, plural ...
Vulcan still has no moon or moons. You saw Vulkan's sister planet and its moon

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Having said that, there are certain things I like that I don't want messed around with, but if they do ... I understand it's not always going to work in my favour. Unfortunately, though, the Marketing and Advertising Division of Paramount DID push STAR TREK '09 as being something totally fresh and unexpected, when, in fact, it was a little TOO close to home, for my tastes. I wanted something daringly different and instead, the only thing I got was that everything's prettier ... shinier ...
If new Star Trek show must be daringly different, how are you going to recognize it as a Star Trek (except label)?

Yes, continuity is a heavy thing, but it makes (or could make) Star Trek recognizable.
I started to watch DS9 after TNG and the pilot was interesting to me because of Picard and O'Brein. I continued to watch DS9 because of interesting plot, but start was given by familiar TNG-crew.
I can understand why it's necessary to reject continuity (not easy to support), but I can't understand people, who sincerely want this rejection.
mendelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 05:31 PM   #1120
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

mendelin wrote: View Post
2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Vulcan has no Moon, then TMP shows it has moons, plural ...
Vulcan still has no moon or moons. You saw Vulkan's sister planet and its moon
Dr. Evil: "Rrrrrriiiiiiight..."
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 06:28 PM   #1121
BigKrampus
Rear Admiral
 
BigKrampus's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there's BigJake.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial.
With a hard reboot, there would have been less sense that it was contaminating or ruining what preceded it by tying itself in, which is where a lot of the "Abrams has killed Trek" stuff seems to come from.

(I also think the commonplace contention that fan reaction to any possible product would have been precisely the same isn't very convincing. The actual quality of the product matters, in the short run and in the long run.)
__________________
Weasels rip BigJake's flesh!
"I wanna read more" - Dennis "I . . . agree with everything you said" - SPCTRE "I blame Cracked" - J. Allen "Take me off" - The Stig
BigKrampus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 07:07 PM   #1122
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BigJake wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Honestly, I don't think it would've made a difference. Hard or soft, any reboot was bound to be controversial.
With a hard reboot, there would have been less sense that it was contaminating or ruining what preceded it by tying itself in, which is where a lot of the "Abrams has killed Trek" stuff seems to come from.

(I also think the commonplace contention that fan reaction to any possible product would have been precisely the same isn't very convincing. The actual quality of the product matters, in the short run and in the long run.)
Oh, I'm sure the actual quality of any new Trek movies would be vigorously debated, just as they always are whenever a new movie or episode (or book) comes out.

But the endless debates about restoring or preserving the old continuity would have probably taken place regardless of the quality of the latest films. As well as the debate as to whether it was "necessary" to reboot the franchise at all.

And, honestly, once you start worrying about "contaminating" the precious bodily fluids of a movie or TV series, you may have lost perspective a little bit. You can't "ruin" something good by doing different versions.

Did JAWS:THE REVENGE "ruin" or "contaminate" the original Spielberg movie? Did PSYCHO 3 ruin the original Hitchcock film? Of course not.

The original versions are still just as good as they ever were. If you don't like the sequels or reboots, you can just ignore them.
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 07:22 PM   #1123
BigKrampus
Rear Admiral
 
BigKrampus's Avatar
 
Location: No matter where you go, there's BigJake.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
And, honestly, once you start worrying about "contaminating" the precious bodily fluids of a movie or TV series, you may have lost perspective a little bit. You can't "ruin" something good by doing different versions.
Yes and no. The existence of Nemesis doesn't affect my enjoyment of any of TNG's episodes, for example, any more than the existence of TSFS affects my enjoyment of TOS.

OTOH, it's perfectly possible to produce enough tripe in sequels and add-ons and "reboots" of a brand that you actually do real damage to the brand. That this happened to the Matrix series is why we're not currently swimming in an ocean of Matrix-related TV series, video games and merchandise. And that this happened to Trek is why it needed any kind of reboot at all; for that very reason trying to tie the reboot directly into the Prime continuity as an "alternate timeline" was an odd decision. (And really the ire of loyalists who feel it "ruined" Trek wasn't even the primary risk there.)
__________________
Weasels rip BigJake's flesh!
"I wanna read more" - Dennis "I . . . agree with everything you said" - SPCTRE "I blame Cracked" - J. Allen "Take me off" - The Stig
BigKrampus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 09:18 PM   #1124
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Vulcan has no Moon, then TMP shows it has moons, plural ...
My take is that what we saw in Vulcan's sky was a large gas giant and Vulcan is in orbit of that planet.

Basically Vulcan is a moon itself.

Merry Christmas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2014, 10:33 PM   #1125
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

T'Girl wrote: View Post
My take is that what we saw in Vulcan's sky was a large gas giant and Vulcan is in orbit of that planet.

Basically Vulcan is a moon itself.

That's Andor/Andoria's claim to fame! But, I'm cool with Vulcan "acquiring" a moon, whether by natural processes, or otherwise. Maybe the Vulcan government is inducing tides in the planet, for some reason.

mendelin wrote: View Post
If new Star Trek show must be daringly different, how are you going to recognize it as a Star Trek (except label)?

Yes, continuity is a heavy thing, but it makes (or could make) Star Trek recognizable.
I started to watch DS9 after TNG and the pilot was interesting to me because of Picard and O'Brein. I continued to watch DS9 because of interesting plot, but start was given by familiar TNG-crew.
I can understand why it's necessary to reject continuity (not easy to support), but I can't understand people, who sincerely want this rejection.
As I stated, I've always considered "canon" to be played rather "fast and loose," anyway, thoughout the series. Things are changed, or modified, like Trills, for example. Their look was radically changed, as were other aspects and nobody takes notice. Yet, when Scotty gets new plumbing in his Engine Room, in keeping with the new movies, fanboys are eating their own.

I think STAR TREK can change a lot and not be considered "in name only." For instance, why can't ENTERPRISE be equipped with Warp Speed AND the ability to Fold Space, for example? I don't know ... whatever ... just by adding more to the pot would be like a breath of fresh air, without giving up anything. Let's see a little more imagination and creativity from these writers ... I'll still call it STAR TREK. I think they should!
__________________
"― And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn." (Luke 2:7)
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
prime timeline, 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 03:31 AM.

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