Do fans want the prime timeline back? Part 2: Poll edition.

Discussion in 'Future of Trek' started by bbjeg, Sep 6, 2013.

?

Do fans want the prime timeline back?

  1. I'm a fan and I want the Prime timeline back.

    56.0%
  2. I'm a fan and I don't want the Prime timeline back.

    16.4%
  3. I'm a fan and wouldn't mind if it came back.

    11.1%
  4. I don't care, just give me Trek!

    14.6%
  5. I don't know.

    1.9%
  1. Last Redshirt

    Last Redshirt Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Location:
    On the Starship Enterprise
    Of course. I would much prefer one set in the prime universe but not bound by the constraints of what was laid before, but still acknowledging that it exists. Set it on the Enterprise-F or something, twenty or thirty years after the end of Nemesis, so it doesn't seem like it's a spin-off of TNG/DS9 but still acknowledging itself in the universe.

    Hell, you could have Picard or Riker as older admirals give the Enterprise her send-off like McCoy did in TNG.
     
  2. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    No more letters and no more callbacks.
     
  3. bbjeg

    bbjeg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Location:
    Right here buddy.
    ^Even NuTrek is doing callbacks (Scotty and Porthos, the Mudd incident, Khan, etc.)
     
  4. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    Okay? My biggest criticism of the Abrams films are their over reliance on past material*.

    *The Mudd Incident is from the current IDW comics overseen by Orci.

    I actually thought TNG got the callback pitch perfect. No press beforehand, no names and nothing that impacted the plot of the pilot episode. McCoy represented a nice Easter egg but the pilot episode still stands and falls on its own merits.
     
  5. Last Redshirt

    Last Redshirt Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Location:
    On the Starship Enterprise
    I disagree with the letters, but what I meant by callbacks was little easter eggs, like you said about McCoy.
     
  6. cal_nevari

    cal_nevari Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Location:
    Arizona
    I'd actually like to see a new series set about 50-60 years after the last DS9, that extrapolates the galactic scene after the events that occurred in DS9, TNG and Voyager. It'd be close enough to that era that it wouldn't be ancient history for the new characters (it'd be like the 1960-1970s history is to say - people living in 2016-2023) but it'd be far enough away that we wouldn't expect to see the same old faces we saw on DS9, TNG and DS9. There's also enough distance in time for the show to change the landscape as far as the balance of power in the galaxy, allies and adversaries, challenges and advances, without a total abandonment of 'Prime trek'. But heck, I'd even go for a Mirror Universe limited run series... of any era.
     
  7. Oso Blanco

    Oso Blanco Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2001
    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    That's what I want to see!
     
  8. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Mister Berman's return at this point is extremely unlikely. If anything I like to see more of a "return" to the original Roddenberry universe in terms of story ideas. A ship largely off by itself, frequently out of communications, stories about the Human condition, surrounded by a mysterious galaxy that they don't always understand.

    A crew of regular joes, not condescending superior beings. Guys who drink coffee on the job and rest their elbows on their consoles.

    Don't get me wrong, not a exact copy of TOS.

    This is my idea "universe" as well. The nice thing is, anything about what came before that the production team doesn't want to feature can quite simply be pushed into the extreme background.

    They for example don't have to even mention the Cardassians (please don't), the Romulans (please don't), section 31 (please don't), the Borg ...

    The Federation at almost any time period was/is going to have vast areas that we the audience never saw and never heard of. We don't need hyper-warp drives or voyages to Andromeda to have stories involving new situations and interesting aliens.

    It's really about the abilities of the writers, skills of the actors, and vision of the directors.

    Not about the setting.

    :)
     
  9. USS Triumphant

    USS Triumphant Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
    I'm a fan and I'm not seeing my option: I love the Prime Novelverse, and I love the nuVerse movies, and I'm just fine with BOTH continuing for as long as possible. And if they want to bring yet *another* take along in some form, as well, I'll give that a shot, too. But I do care. And then, I loved DC's Elseworlds graphic novels, and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy for which no two versions were EVER just alike and we LIKED it that way. :techman:
     
  10. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Did they ever start publishing adult nuVerse novels?

    :)
     
  11. Wingsley

    Wingsley Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Location:
    Wingsley
    The STARGATE TV franchise gave us 10 years of SG-1, plus additional series in ATLANTIS and SGU. That was a 14-year-run in a single continuity. Granted, STARGATE on TV wasn't exactly the same as STAR TREK, but continuity obviously wasn't the problem there; the newer series simply weren't as good as SG-1, so the stories didn't measure up, and the ratings declined.

    LAW & ORDER ran for 20 years on NBC, spawning multiple spin-offs. While continuity wasn't perfect, it was mostly contained in the same "universe" with SVU still in production.

    Why should continuity be seen as a negative? It's what Hollywood does with a given show, its creative agenda in terms of what stories it wants to tell, that makes a show appealing to an audience. When TOS was on NBC and later in syndication, it was obviously known for its commentary. It seemed that, with each new series, and especially the reboot, STAR TREK has become less oriented toward commentary and more toward action-adventure/explosions and further away from commentary. It seems, more and more, that Hollywood wants to milk TREK as a cash cow but also shy away from its roots.

    There's nothing wrong, in theory, to remaking/rebooting TOS but if you're unhappy with the kind of storytelling that TOS started to do then why remake/reboot TREK at all?

    For decades, soap operas have thrived on American daytime television, frequently producing years and years of episodes, five days a week, in a single show's continuity. It works. It's profitable. I doubt you would often hear anyone saying, "Let's cancel this soap, wait a few years, and reboot it with all-new cast and unrelated stories under the same name. The audience will think its fresh!" Seems unlikely. It seems more likely that a network/studio would cancel an old soap and replace it with an entirely new one that has no ties to the original.

    If you think the daytime soap opera analogy is inapplicable to a dramatic TV franchise like TREK, guess again: DALLAS and KNOT'S LANDING were on CBS spanning multiple decades, DALLAS starting in the late 1970s, both on through the 80's and clear into the 1990s. They commanded a large audience, even through creative stumbles, and never jettisoned their continuity.

    That's not to say that continuity is always precious and never to be challenged in any way. Actually, VOYAGER had the opportunity to renew the STAR TREK universe and the VOY makers obviously screwed it up. Starship Voyager was supposed to stumble into a trap that teleported both the Voyager and its Maquis adversaries across the Galaxy, where no familiar faces or past storylines ever to be seen, right? Well, then we see Voyager doing battle with the ill-conceived Kazon (who cares?) and when that didn't work, it's time to bring on the Borg! And we even wound up seeing the Ferengi from TNG's "The Price". (You remember the Ferengi from "The Price", don't you? Nah, neither did I.) So, what good did it do to show Voyager being snatched clear across the Galaxy in the first place? If VOY was supposed to represent an attempt to refresh the TREK universe by plucking a starship out of familiar space and showing it in an unknown void, they should've sent the ship to a completely different galaxy with no hope of ever returning home. Then you'd have to start over with a clean sheet of paper.

    And what did the JJverse give us? A reboot of TOS, with a tattooed Romulan nemesis. This represents a "new" continuity? Looks like a new and improved VOY instead.

    If continuity is such a bad word, wouldn't it be better to reboot STAR TREK with a completely clean sheet of paper? If Hollywood can't do that, then there really isn't anything wrong with the Prime Universe in the first place. It all depends on what a creative team wants to do with that Prime Universe. So far, none of the spin-off series or movies exhibited any coherent creative agenda that took the franchise, comprehensively, in a specific direction. Direction is what is needed, not repudiation.
     
  12. bbjeg

    bbjeg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Location:
    Right here buddy.
    It sounds like the third option is your choice.
     
  13. USS Triumphant

    USS Triumphant Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Location:
    Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
    No, because it's more than "I wouldn't mind". I WANT the Prime Timeline back. I just want to see where the nuVerse goes, TOO. :)
     
  14. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    I'd argue the Abrams films are the closest we've been to the roots of Star Trek since Star Trek III: The Search for Spock released in 1984.
     
  15. Wingsley

    Wingsley Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Location:
    Wingsley
    ^ Probably true, but the movies had already started straying before that.
     
  16. bbjeg

    bbjeg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Location:
    Right here buddy.
    I was going to say the first option is your choice because you do want it back but if you're saying you wouldn't want it back at the expense of the current timeline, the second option is your choice. Other than that, you could just claim fandom to it all with the fourth option. You care but you want it all just the same.

    If all else fails, the fifth option is there for the undecided, the unsure, and those on the fence concerned with the many variables that goes into bringing the Prime timeline back.
     
  17. Last Redshirt

    Last Redshirt Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Location:
    On the Starship Enterprise
    I disagree with the idea that we shouldn't see the Cardassians, or the Romulans, or the Klingons, or the Borg again. They're just too central to the franchise, the Romulans and the Klingons moreso. The franchise would be worse off without them in it, at least in an episode or two a season. I'm not asking for entire plot arcs written to just bring the Romulans in for the sake of it, but, you can't just throw them to the wind.

    Well, there's whole expanses of the Alpha and Beta Quadrants, if all my Star Charts books are to be believed, that haven't been even looked at yet. Send a ship to those parts, and bring back that TOS spirit of discovery and adventure, and pushing the human experience, while writing with the plots and continuity of DS9.

    Frankly, the days of TOS standalone episodes are really over. I mean, you can have the majority of the series have those while still maintaining a plot arc, but at the end of the day continuity is a must.

    As for writers, well, keep B&B, as well as everyone involved with Lensflare Universe as far away from the production as possible.
     
  18. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    alt.nerd.obsessive.pic
    I keep getting told this but I still think it all comes down to how entertaining is it? If it isn't entertaining, stand-alone vs. arc won't matter. If it is entertaining, stand-alone vs. arc won't matter.

    I just hope that if they go arc base, they don't try to drag out a paper-thin story over multiple seasons. Which is what many of these arc-based shows try to do.
     
  19. Shaka Zulu

    Shaka Zulu Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Location:
    Bulawayo Military Krral
    The right people who would do this would just pleasing fans that are aging and won't be around forever.
     
  20. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    I'm in my mid-twenties, and figure I have fifty or sixty years ahead of me.

    I would find a "return" to the prime universe very pleasing.

    :)