Trek Returning to TV in 2017!
- Thread starter Squiggy
- Start date
I'm all down for it. I don't care what universe it's set it, be it the original Prime universe, or the Abrams' era. I love all Star Trek. As long as the stories are good, and I am entertained, let the era be damned.
As for those who are whining and crying ONLY for the Prime Universe, well, I ain't too worried about you. Please, stop acting like Prime Trek is the "only Trek" or "True Trek" because, as always will be pointed out, especially by me... there is no such animal.
"Oh, Gawd, the producers are the same as for the Abrams movies!"
"Oh, Gawd, it won't be real Star Trek!"
"Oh, Gawd, everyone who enjoys Abrams' Trek are idiots, and are keeping us from our beloved Star Trek!"
"Oh, Gawd, my childhood is about to be raped again!"
Bring on Star Trek!
As for those who are whining and crying ONLY for the Prime Universe, well, I ain't too worried about you. Please, stop acting like Prime Trek is the "only Trek" or "True Trek" because, as always will be pointed out, especially by me... there is no such animal.
"Oh, Gawd, the producers are the same as for the Abrams movies!"
"Oh, Gawd, it won't be real Star Trek!"
"Oh, Gawd, everyone who enjoys Abrams' Trek are idiots, and are keeping us from our beloved Star Trek!"
"Oh, Gawd, my childhood is about to be raped again!"
Bring on Star Trek!
That strikes me as a remarkably sane and sensible attitude!
I can't see Trek surviving on network television nowadays, shows are too ratings dependent and I imagine the show would cost to much to make.
It has a better chance on cable. Should have been on Showtime. CBS owns that network right?
I can't watch streaming shows, so I doubt I can see this until after it comes out on dvd.
It has a better chance on cable. Should have been on Showtime. CBS owns that network right?
I can't watch streaming shows, so I doubt I can see this until after it comes out on dvd.
Could allusions be so vague as to apply to either Prime or JJTrek?
I won't be bothered by the series being in Abrams universe as long as it revives the explorative, cerebral writing style of the TV shows. I'm skeptical it will.
It certainly won't 'rape my childhood'. It won't affect prime universe Trek at all.
But if it's all 'PEW PEW PEW', and no 'Hey let's discover some new life!' it will suck.
It certainly won't 'rape my childhood'. It won't affect prime universe Trek at all.
But if it's all 'PEW PEW PEW', and no 'Hey let's discover some new life!' it will suck.
I think the Prime continuity ship has long sailed. I really don't see any future production (outside of fan productions) returning to the Prime continuity.
I think the best one could now hope for is some sort of soft reboot not dissimilar from what TNG did.
Isn't current Dr. Who something along those lines? They recognize parts of the Dr. Who mythology without acknowledging specifics?
I think the best one could now hope for is some sort of soft reboot not dissimilar from what TNG did.
Isn't current Dr. Who something along those lines? They recognize parts of the Dr. Who mythology without acknowledging specifics?
^^^
You realize you JUST DESCRIBED the majority of how Season 1 of TNG played out in 1987, right?
So, in order to watch our new trek....
You must have access to CBS. Probably cable or satellite TV to see the premier ... $$$$$$
Then in order to see the rest of the series, you need to pay for All Access CBS .... $$$$$
... of course you need to have internet access for that so ... $$$$$$
...and this "new deal" isn't even guaranteed to be commercial free. I'm sure a "deal" is forthcoming for extra $$$$$ for that privilege.
So, on a day I should be excited.... I'm not so excited.
Then on top of it, frakin Kurzman is producing.... with Orci along for the ride probably.
On a lighter note....
Did anyone already notice that you could write the start date of January, 2017 differently?
Like:
17.01
You must have access to CBS. Probably cable or satellite TV to see the premier ... $$$$$$
Then in order to see the rest of the series, you need to pay for All Access CBS .... $$$$$
... of course you need to have internet access for that so ... $$$$$$
...and this "new deal" isn't even guaranteed to be commercial free. I'm sure a "deal" is forthcoming for extra $$$$$ for that privilege.
So, on a day I should be excited.... I'm not so excited.
Then on top of it, frakin Kurzman is producing.... with Orci along for the ride probably.
On a lighter note....
Did anyone already notice that you could write the start date of January, 2017 differently?
Like:
17.01
No, the current Doctor Who is a direct continuation of the old show but it starts off directly with a new Doctor. There have been plenty of references to the old show. But the concept of the show allows a sort of reboot with every new Doctor, anyway. So I'm not sure it's a good comparison to Trek.
I think the new Trek movies are perfectly fine summer action movies.
They just don't access the same part of the brain I use to love Trek.
They just don't access the same part of the brain I use to love Trek.
That's how it was when it started, but it's changed since then. But it was always meant to be canon with the original series.
Ah, so I wasn't totally mistaken.
I'll watch it no matter where its set but I'm no fan of the alternate reality created by the JJ Abrams movies so my preference would be the Prime Universe but maybe 100 or 200 years after the TNG era so it can have a fresh start and build on the previous 700 episodes when appropriate just like TNG did back in 1987. A series set in an alternate timeline/universe seems pointless to me. Might as well just reboot the whole thing and be done with it. It would shut everyone up about continuity for a start.
That's the point of every show, including those 5 of which you have the DVDs.
I think that, because Doctor Who had been off the air and out of the general public consciousness for sixteen years (or something like that), at first they didn't want the new version to be tied down too much or do too many call-backs to specific details of the original series. That way it would make sense to the new audiences who may not have seen the originals.
Kor
It would be unfortunate to lose the benefit of 29 seasons of world building, but I don't blame them for not wanting to require new viewers to remember things.
For me the world of old Star Trek is far less crucial than the spirit of old Star Trek. If they can make it feel like TOS/TNG/DS9, it doesn't matter what timeline or era they use.
For me the world of old Star Trek is far less crucial than the spirit of old Star Trek. If they can make it feel like TOS/TNG/DS9, it doesn't matter what timeline or era they use.
Basically, they kinda eased their way into the mythology, by using the character of Rose (the Doctor's new companion) as an audience surrogate who gradually learns more about the universe of Doctor as she gets deeper and deeper into his world. So, if you'd never seen the earlier series, you could learn about it at the same time Rose did.
So that, for example, when the Daleks inevitably showed up, older fans knew who they were, but Rose (and younger viewers) could be introduced to them for the first time.
"Dalek? What's a Dalek?"
And, of course, the fact that regenerating Doctors are already built into the series makes recasting easier to swallow for both old viewers and new.
Imagine if TNG had been told from the POV of a newcomer to the 24th Century who didn't know who the Klingons or Vulcans or Starfleet were . . . .
Last edited:
Similar threads
