RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,219
Posts: 5,405,170
Members: 24,762
Currently online: 501
Newest member: jeb1138

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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. 190 56.05%
I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back. 57 16.81%
I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back. 38 11.21%
I don't care, just give me Trek! 48 14.16%
I don't know. 6 1.77%
Voters: 339. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 9 2013, 09:44 PM   #631
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
Everybody died by the end of Hamlet. Unless you do a Shakespearean version of CSI, there's nothing more to be said.
Clearly, you haven't seen Rosencrantz and Guilderstern are Undead . . . .
The Blackadder made it work, every season finale TPTB killed off all the main characters, then brought them back at the beginning of the next season (ever so slightly changed).


l
T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 12:55 AM   #632
Timewalker
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
 
Timewalker's Avatar
 
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Who was this person, and what were his ideas?
I don't recall exactly where I read this. It could have been in a magazine article, or maybe Chekov's Enterprise, or some other "making of" book. Once I finish unpacking the rest of my ST books, I can check.

The ideas were to put some kind of Mayan/Incan mystical mumbo-jumbo in the movie, and when told that wasn't a good idea, the person shrugged and said (referring to the intended movie audience), "They'll never know the difference."

I really dislike it when TPTB in charge of making a movie or the authors of a book assume their viewers/readers are stupid.
What you've related here sounds like something where the industry corrected itself, so I don't see how there's any ax to grind in this case, regarding producers who think that the general public is too dumb to care. Not only is whoever it was with an itch to portray the paranormal not named, nothing ever came of his or her recommendation anyway, at least in Star Trek movies.
Would you please take note of my repeated statements that I'm angry that there were producers/studio idiots with some kind of input who thought the viewers were too dumb to KNOW THE DIFFERENCE? I've also said that this isn't the only time I read about this notion of inserting ancient mysticism into the movie script. When/if I find the other text I read, I will reference it here.

"Not caring" is not the same as "not knowing." The first is apathy; the second implies stupidity.

I am angry that whoever wanted this crap in the script thought the viewers were STUPID, not apathetic.

T'Girl wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
Everybody died by the end of Hamlet. Unless you do a Shakespearean version of CSI, there's nothing more to be said.
Clearly, you haven't seen Rosencrantz and Guilderstern are Undead . . . .
The Blackadder made it work, every season finale TPTB killed off all the main characters, then brought them back at the beginning of the next season (ever so slightly changed).
Yes, I've seen Blackadder. The thing is, that was a consistent in-universe thing they did. It's not like there were years, or decades going by between the series and completely different production and writing personnel making those decisions. I just thought of it as a form of reincarnation, coupled with the typically weird (but lovable) British humor.
__________________
"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 November 10 2013, 01:16 AM   #633
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
I don't recall exactly where I read this. It could have been in a magazine article, or maybe Chekov's Enterprise, or some other "making of" book. Once I finish unpacking the rest of my ST books, I can check.

The ideas were to put some kind of Mayan/Incan mystical mumbo-jumbo in the movie, and when told that wasn't a good idea, the person shrugged and said (referring to the intended movie audience), "They'll never know the difference."

I really dislike it when TPTB in charge of making a movie or the authors of a book assume their viewers/readers are stupid.
What you've related here sounds like something where the industry corrected itself, so I don't see how there's any ax to grind in this case, regarding producers who think that the general public is too dumb to care. Not only is whoever it was with an itch to portray the paranormal not named, nothing ever came of his or her recommendation anyway, at least in Star Trek movies.
Would you please take note of my repeated statements that I'm angry that there were producers/studio idiots with some kind of input who thought the viewers were too dumb to KNOW THE DIFFERENCE? I've also said that this isn't the only time I read about this notion of inserting ancient mysticism into the movie script. When/if I find the other text I read, I will reference it here.

"Not caring" is not the same as "not knowing." The first is apathy; the second implies stupidity.

I am angry that whoever wanted this crap in the script thought the viewers were STUPID, not apathetic
It would be helpful if you could find a reference to this "producer/studio idiot" calling viewers dumb. As it is, it sounds like someone might have been a Von Däniken fan and wanted to shoehorn that into the film.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 04:09 AM   #634
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
What you've related here sounds like something where the industry corrected itself, so I don't see how there's any ax to grind in this case, regarding producers who think that the general public is too dumb to care. Not only is whoever it was with an itch to portray the paranormal not named, nothing ever came of his or her recommendation anyway, at least in Star Trek movies.
Would you please take note of my repeated statements that I'm angry that there were producers/studio idiots with some kind of input who thought the viewers were too dumb to KNOW THE DIFFERENCE? I've also said that this isn't the only time I read about this notion of inserting ancient mysticism into the movie script. When/if I find the other text I read, I will reference it here.

"Not caring" is not the same as "not knowing." The first is apathy; the second implies stupidity.

I am angry that whoever wanted this crap in the script thought the viewers were STUPID, not apathetic
It would be helpful if you could find a reference to this "producer/studio idiot" calling viewers dumb. As it is, it sounds like someone might have been a Von Däniken fan and wanted to shoehorn that into the film.
Timewalker, it would indeed be helpful if you could find such a reference, because the account that you quoted from Roddenberry & Sackett doesn't mention anything about the person in question saying that the viewers were too dumb to know the difference. All one can suppose is that the person in question thought it would make the film more appealing.

Additionally, as I said, the industry corrected itself, since nothing ever came of the idea, at least in the Star Trek movies, although we'll never know whether including the recommendations would have hurt or helped a film that never got made. Moreover, the alleged incident took place circa 1975, in TMP's life as a prospective film before work on Phase II even began. Since that's twice removed from the TMP we got, I have a hard time seeing how this supports the idea that this unnamed person had "some kind of input". If we knew who the person was, and if he or she was still around for actual work on TMP, then one might be able to say that he or she tangibly had input.

So, why is knowing that there is one anonymous "bad man" in Hollywood who didn't get his way with a Star Trek film that never got made something to be angry about?
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 05:15 AM   #635
Timewalker
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
 
Timewalker's Avatar
 
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Have you ever read this book? Just curious, because it details all kinds of ridiculous ideas for the movie, some of which must have percolated in someone's mind, given the "let's go to the middle of the galaxy to find God" crap that was ST V.

There were some interesting ideas as well, involving time travel, and who knows if those could have worked?

As I've said, if/when I find the other reference I've mentioned, I will certainly post whatever information I have. For now, you will have to trust my word that I remember reading it, although after all these years I'm not sure exactly where. It may take awhile, since I'm doing NaNoWriMo this month and my reading time is limited.

I don't see why it's difficult to understand why someone (me, among many other hypothetical movie audience members) would be angry at being thought stupid, since that's what the studio individual did when he (assuming it was a "he") said the viewers would never know the difference.

The reason I said the person had "input" is because this incident was mentioned in the first place. If the person didn't have the right and authority to make suggestions, recommendations, or order the movie to include certain themes, it likely wouldn't have been deemed important enough for Susan Sackett to mention it in this book.
__________________
"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 November 10 2013, 05:42 AM   #636
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Have you ever read this book?
No. I'd have at least vaguely remembered the incident involving Harlan Ellison, if I had.

I don't see why it's difficult to understand why someone (me, among many other hypothetical movie audience members) would be angry at being thought stupid, since that's what the studio individual did when he (assuming it was a "he") said the viewers would never know the difference.
With over six billion people in the world, me, I make it a point not to get upset over the existence of people here and there who might think negative things about me.

The reason I said the person had "input" is because this incident was mentioned in the first place. If the person didn't have the right and authority to make suggestions, recommendations, or order the movie to include certain themes, it likely wouldn't have been deemed important enough for Susan Sackett to mention it in this book.
My point is that, while this unnamed person had input, it was input on a project that never got made. And, based on the information presented, it's hard to see how whatever influence he or she had circa 1975 carried over into Phase II once the '75 film project was abandoned, or into the film we got once Phase II was abandoned. It would help to know who we are talking about, and what role he or she played in both Phase II and the actual TMP. Not to mention, it would help to know what actually transpired between this person and Harlan Ellison.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 05:46 AM   #637
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Maybe it was joke the guy made while at the urinal with Harlan one day.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 08:58 AM   #638
BrownShatner
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Captain Jed R. wrote: View Post
Doctor Who was brought back in 2005 with fresh ideas, a frees perspective and brand new stories. It was also brought back without rebooting a damn thing.
Doctor Who had a long established "reboot" mechanism with regenerations and the notion that the sidekicks were temporary characters.

Even if it technically was never fully rebooted, I don't see how one could apply the Doctor Who method to most other television programs. "Captain Picard had a medical procedure and now he's a younger guy with a different personality." Not going to work.
BrownShatner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 09:22 AM   #639
BrownShatner
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Also, I have to wonder if the timeline really matters at all.

The only point of the NuTrek reboot was to bring back Kirk & Spock & the gang. If there was a new ship and new characters, how much would really change if it was set in the 23rd or 24th or 25th centuries?

The exploration stories would be the same
The alien of the week stories would be the same
The colony in danger stories would be the same
The Klingon stories would be pretty much the same
The Romulan stories would be the same, except Romulus blew up
The technobabble might be superficially different, I guess


My gauge of fan sentiment: Over the years a lot of people always wanted there to be some follow-up to Deep Space Nine, and are disappointed they never got one. But if they did bring back the Prime Universe, it's really unlikely they would reference the space opera politics of DS9 very much. It was somewhat complicated and obscure even when it was on the air, and that was a long time ago.

I suppose in the Prime universe, you would be more likely to see Cardassians and Ferengi, but they would be in the Nu Universe as well, along with Andorians and whoever else the writers wanted to use. Other than a few throw-away lines here and there, there probably would not be much if any difference between a Prime show and one set in the NuTrek reboot.
BrownShatner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 10:17 AM   #640
bbjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bbjeg's Avatar
 
Location: ˙ɐlnqǝu sıɥʇ uı ʞɔnʇS
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BrownShatner wrote: View Post
Also, I have to wonder if the timeline really matters at all.

... how much would really change if it was set in the 23rd or 24th or 25th centuries?

... Other than a few throw-away lines here and there, there probably would not be much if any difference between a Prime show and one set in the NuTrek reboot.
The state of Vulcan would be a huge difference.

And those throw-away lines could have meaning to those who understand its reference. I'm only using The Avengers as an example because I literally just saw it but there's a scene where Nick is telling Thor about the scepter that's able to turn people into the users own personal flying monkeys. Thor didn't get it but CA ringed in that he got that reference, and he felt great about it. The rest of the movie continues and those who got that scene, got it, and those who didn't, weren't going to storm away from the movie because they didn't. Plus a 25th century series would be foolish not to reference to prior series. When Admiral Jones tells Commodore Teton "We expect more casualties then the time Sisko retook DS9," those who got it would smile, those who don't could imagine it was a big battle, and those who want to find out can buy the (soon to be released HD) episode and see it for themselves. It'll be a source of revenue.

IMO throw-away lines gives stories replay value.

Last edited by bbjeg; November 10 2013 at 10:28 AM.
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 12:49 PM   #641
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

The state of Vulcan might make a difference, but it wouldn't make a "huge" difference. The overwhelming majority of episodes managed to to make it from teaser to closing credits without depending upon the existence of Vulcan in any way shape or form.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 04:03 PM   #642
bbjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bbjeg's Avatar
 
Location: ˙ɐlnqǝu sıɥʇ uı ʞɔnʇS
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

^It's a significant difference. If an episode of a 25th century series has a man walking on Vulcan, it's the Prime timeline, and if they refer to that time Nero imploded Vulcan, it's Abramsverse. I'm not saying they have to show or talk about Vulcan but if either are mentioned, it would tip the continuity either way.
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 04:07 PM   #643
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

BrownShatner wrote: View Post
Also, I have to wonder if the timeline really matters at all.

The only point of the NuTrek reboot was to bring back Kirk & Spock & the gang. If there was a new ship and new characters, how much would really change if it was set in the 23rd or 24th or 25th centuries?

The exploration stories would be the same
The alien of the week stories would be the same
The colony in danger stories would be the same
The Klingon stories would be pretty much the same
The Romulan stories would be the same, except Romulus blew up
The technobabble might be superficially different, I guess
Only if they brought back the same people involved in TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT. Different producers (which is a certainty) would make a show with a different "feel" - just as TNG had a very different feel to TOS.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 04:13 PM   #644
bbjeg
Vice Admiral
 
bbjeg's Avatar
 
Location: ˙ɐlnqǝu sıɥʇ uı ʞɔnʇS
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

^I'm all for that.
bbjeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10 2013, 04:25 PM   #645
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

There isn't a single TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, or VOY episode with scenes on Vulcan that couldn't have been set in the JJverse with at most only minor alterations. Or, if there is, I can't think of what it would be. ENT is already in the JJverse.

Even Amok Time could have easily been transplanted to New Vulcan. The line about the wedding site having been in Spock's family for generations was a throwaway line. Nothing depended upon it. Yesteryear took place when Spock was a child, and we know that Vulcan still existed then. The TNG episodes where the Enterprise-D went to Vulcan didn't depend upon the planet actually being Vulcan. Not even Amanda had to be there. Arguably, the episode that takes the greatest hit (over Vulcan-related issues) is Journey to Babel, but only because Amanda wouldn't have been there. But losing one episode in hundreds (or heavily rewriting it) is hardly what one can call significant.

The fact that hypothetical 25th century stories might be altered is of no significant consequence to anything we've already seen in canon continuity set in the Prime Universe.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain 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 04:10 AM.

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