Trek Returning to TV in 2017!

[martok2112]

I hope this is set in the new timeline. Prime Trek had it's day, and should be left where it is.

Largely, I feel this way too.
I certainly won't be opposed if the show takes place in the prime timeline, but I would like to see more of the new timeline.

The bottom line of either time line is: Give us good stories, and give everyone a reason to love Trek again.

(passes the peace pipe around.... Terek Nor? )

 

[Drone]

BSG was lightyears better than Enterprise, and was a clear illustration of what Voyager should of been.

Yeah the show went slightly off the rails towards the end, but that understandable. The point is they raised the bar and then some.

That would be like taking any thoughtfully conceived, challenging sci-fi show taking place in space and saying, hey Trek failed because it wasn't put together the same way. BSG is totally not what Star Trek is about, past or hopefully future. OK, both Voyager and BSG are striving to reach Earth. However, the latter didn't represent a civilization that was forward looking, seeking betterment through understanding and tolerance, but instead was sent running for their lives essentially because of their unthinking hubris. In other words, pretty much us.

I'll support the idea that had Voyager suffered damage that didn't immediately disappear, lost a major character or two, and suffered deprivations of food and energy that really amounted to something, it would have represented development of the brand that would have been bracing. But in doing so, I think the showrunners would have been wholly justified in maintaining the spirit and ethos of Trek however straitened the conditions became. We saw a different vision in Equinox, which I would guess you would applaud, but I think the clear sense is that despite their dire situation compared to Voyager, Ransom and most of the crew showed themselves to be outliers by sacrificing principles instead of doing all they could, even give up the journey in settling somewhere, to not betray the norms and obligations of Starfleet.

The internecine conflict, Shakespearean intrigues, and intimation of a society on the edge of disintegration that marked BSG have no correlation with Voyager or Star Trek generally, or should it IMO. Not even mentioning the role that an ancient spiritual belief system plays in the former.

 

[Autistoid]

Some may enjoy it, and the majority of viewers might like it. I personally, don't need to watch something that makes me feel depressed and cynical about humanity. I see enough of that on the news, and you know what? I'll take one of my psych professor's advice: "Turn off the TV!"

Honestly I'd avoid learning much about detailed history if that's how you feel. I"m not big on the feeling of needing to escape reality. I kinda like things the way they are. I don't need a future utopia, I'd rather content being in a relative one.

 

[Autistoid]

The internecine conflict, Shakespearean intrigues, and intimation of a society on the edge of disintegration that marked BSG have no correlation with Voyager or Star Trek generally, or should it IMO. Not even mentioning the role that an ancient spiritual belief system plays in the former.

This is a bit of a strawman argument, you know full well I'm not sugguesting that star trek should of copied the piece note for note. AT the same time the should went to an effort to distance itself from ST. This becomes especially true when the series was trying to emulate the realities of a true global disaster.

Honestly I don't know how you can expect random people to watch trek if you can't appreciate the magic of bsg.

However many of the methods used in making the series were pretty dam good. Naturalistic sciencefiction is something that somehow gets completely forgotten about.

http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Naturalistic_science_fiction

Ironically the two biggest complaints of bsg are somewhat outside of the overall intent of the series. The final 5 ass pull of the cylons, and the thespian histrionics were exactly what the show was trying to avoid.

I think it's intensely hypocritical for people to be so hard on BSG, while at the same time just brushing under the rug all of the star trek flaws.

 

[fireproof78]

Some may enjoy it, and the majority of viewers might like it. I personally, don't need to watch something that makes me feel depressed and cynical about humanity. I see enough of that on the news, and you know what? I'll take one of my psych professor's advice: "Turn off the TV!"

Honestly I'd avoid learning much about detailed history if that's how you feel. I"m not big on the feeling of needing to escape reality. I kinda like things the way they are. I don't need a future utopia, I'd rather content being in a relative one.

There's a distinct difference between learning about history which can be applied to my life now, and is a fascinating topic to see humanity at work. I love comparing the contemporary USA to ancient Rome. The similarities are rather striking when one analyzes the cultural attitudes and proclivities.

BSG wasn't my escape so much as science fiction, which I love, and was hoping for characters to enjoy. I found that point rather lacking.

I don't watch entertainment of escapism. I watch it to think about different ideas, and see aspects of other people's imaginations, which I find very enjoyable.

BSG, on a technical level, is fascinating. But, the story and characters left much to be desired. All in my opinion, of course.

 

[Nightdiamond]

And Enterprise is probably the closest to the Abrams style universe than the others were.

Hmmm...

"Enterprise" was slow as molasses. It was like watching quadrotriticale grow.

As far as the P.U trek goes anyway, it was the closest. As far as style. It tried to be more sexual, more sleek, language, nudity, etc.

I'm actually agreed on that one, I stopped watching it after the first couple episodes. Enterprise felt more like an experiment than a show.

Well, we've got to remember that the TNG fans also rejected their last 2 movies and the last TV series .

It's not just blind loyalty to the series, it's simply how good it is. And Enterprise is probably the closest to the Abrams style universe than the others were.

It's not that's it NU trek that bugs some fans, I think. It's the style of it.

The hyperactivity-- the non stop action and the gimmicks, all design to appeal to the summer movie crowd.

And if that's probably what's worrying some fans. Are they going to be stuck with that version of Trek if turns out that way.


By the way--if it's going to be on paid streaming TV, I wonder if they're going to take off the handcuffs, and be more edgy and risky this time.

I'm cautiously optimistic. I don't think we're comparing apples to apples with the JJ films and this new show. The TNG films were for the most part not very good, and definitely lacked character development. First Contact aside they're not that great, and hardly represent the series. I'm not sure you'd look at those and say that the show would be great if you'd never seen it

That's my attitude towards it too. Not really bashing it before I've even seen it, I'm just REALLY curious to see what form it's going to take.

If it's too Nu Trek, I wonder what type, if any, of backlash will there be. And there probably will be.

Obviously, the regular series was seen as getting "boring" while Nu Trek is seen as a summer movie formula that polluted "prime" trek with a lot of endless action scenes and gimmicks.

So you've got these two different sides at each other. It's like watching history happen.

 

[Horizons96]

Obviously, the regular series was seen as getting "boring" while Nu Trek is seen as a summer movie formula that polluted "prime" trek with a lot of endless action scenes and gimmicks.

So you've got these two different sides at each other. It's like watching history happen.

Totally. What the producers of the new show need to realize is that regardless of the format they choose, one of the biggest advantages of being in the prime universe (rather than the gimmick-verse, or even an agnostic-verse) is the richness of the world that has already been created for them.

Rather than just a name, the prime-universe is in actuality a universe - a huge world that has been created by and added to by countless imaginative and creative minds over five decades. It would simply be illogical to try and expand either the two-dimensional JJverse, or some universe-agnostic new show that exists in a vacuum.

It can still be prime-universe without having to be bogged down with paying homage to every single nuance of every show's canon which came before it, but c'mon.... all that's required is some simple continuity.

This is a grand opportunity to create something fresh, for everyone, and can honestly bridge the divide between new audiences and primers that occurred with those ****** movies.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

They did a terrible (i.e. non-existent) job of explaining the lack of progress between Kirk's time and Janeway's time. Just awful. You can't just improve the sets and call it progress. Star Trek was on the verge of becoming a comedy about mankind's lack of advancement with each passing decade.

Was not looking forward to seeing the Enterprise-H was no more technologically advanced than the Enterprise-E.

At a point dont we just have to suspend belief? After a certain amount of time passes we should be able to go anywhere and do anything.

There were advances though, they went from switches to touchscreens!

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

The only way to know for sure is to give the show a chance (a few episodes of viewing) to see if the proof is in the pudding.

I'd rather reject it now, and hope many fans agree that this is likely a decline in quality for trek, and not a sign of improvement.

This is fantastic!

You can't make this stuff up.

Oh, how I have missed all of you...

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

The only way to know for sure is to give the show a chance (a few episodes of viewing) to see if the proof is in the pudding.

I'd rather reject it now, and hope many fans agree that this is likely a decline in quality for trek, and not a sign of improvement.

This is fantastic!

You can't make this stuff up.

Oh, how I have missed all of you...

It's the fandom that keeps on g[r]i[e]ving.

 

[JoeZhang]

[

Totally. What the producers of the new show need to realize is that regardless of the format they choose, one of the biggest advantages of being in the prime universe (rather than the gimmick-verse, or even an agnostic-verse) is the richness of the world that has already been created for them.

No - its a straitjacket - throw it out and make a show fit for 2015 rather than boxing yourself in from the start.

The writing room should have a big sign that says "F**K THE FANS" in it.

 

[lurok]

 

[Amaris]

Obviously, the regular series was seen as getting "boring" while Nu Trek is seen as a summer movie formula that polluted "prime" trek with a lot of endless action scenes and gimmicks.

So you've got these two different sides at each other. It's like watching history happen.

Totally. What the producers of the new show need to realize is that regardless of the format they choose, one of the biggest advantages of being in the prime universe (rather than the gimmick-verse, or even an agnostic-verse) is the richness of the world that has already been created for them.

Rather than just a name, the prime-universe is in actuality a universe - a huge world that has been created by and added to by countless imaginative and creative minds over five decades. It would simply be illogical to try and expand either the two-dimensional JJverse, or some universe-agnostic new show that exists in a vacuum.

It can still be prime-universe without having to be bogged down with paying homage to every single nuance of every show's canon which came before it, but c'mon.... all that's required is some simple continuity.

This is a grand opportunity to create something fresh, for everyone, and can honestly bridge the divide between new audiences and primers that occurred with those ****** movies.

I'm going to point this out, and it's very important for it to be received properly, so everyone needs to focus:

It's not a real universe.
It doesn't exist in real life and never will.
It exists to service the plot, whatever it may be.
It is not immutable, it is not constant.

It is a fabrication.

TL;DR - Sorry, Benny Russell, it's not real. In fact...

You know what that means? It means that the Abrams universe is just as "real" as the Prime universe.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Well, this thread is way too long to read the whole thing, so I'll just jump in here.

I don't believe for a microsecond that the series will go anywhere near the Prime Universe. The only reason this is happening at all is because the movies have been successful, so the show will either take place in the new universe or it will simply not reference any specific outside canon (but will probably still come far closer to the new universe than the prime universe in terms of style).

Now, I'm not a huge fan of the new movies, but I'm actually pretty ok with that. A tv show has opportunities and possibilities that a movie just doesn't, so I can definitely see a show that shares a similar style as the Abrams movies nonetheless having much better quality (especially in terms of depth). There are no guarantees, of course, but it's ridiculous to make final judgments with literally zero information.

Also, for the same stylistic reasons, I very much doubt this show will have anything to do with the 24th century or any of the characters from the 24th cen. shows. I can't even imagine how you could possibly do an abrams-verse version of TNG. Of all the shows there have been, TNG is almost certainly the farthest away from these movies in terms of style and sensibilities. It would basically just be some people who shared the same names as Picard and crew, but otherwise had almost nothing in common - what's the point in that?

So I assume that the series will stick to the 23rd cen., probably with a new crew on a new ship (maybe they throw in some random but moderately popular side characters as a bone for fans). I suppose they could be on the Enterprise - it's certainly a exec. kind of idea to say that it *HAS* to be the Enterprise - but it would also be rather weird to have two different Enterprises at the same time. The wishful thinking part of me hopes they might actually make it a Capt. Sulu series starring John Cho. He's one of my favorite parts of the new movies, and he's not such a huge star that he's beyond a tv show's budget. That probably won't happen though.

 

[StarMan]

Obviously, the regular series was seen as getting "boring" while Nu Trek is seen as a summer movie formula that polluted "prime" trek with a lot of endless action scenes and gimmicks.

So you've got these two different sides at each other. It's like watching history happen.

Totally. What the producers of the new show need to realize is that regardless of the format they choose, one of the biggest advantages of being in the prime universe (rather than the gimmick-verse, or even an agnostic-verse) is the richness of the world that has already been created for them.

Rather than just a name, the prime-universe is in actuality a universe - a huge world that has been created by and added to by countless imaginative and creative minds over five decades. It would simply be illogical to try and expand either the two-dimensional JJverse, or some universe-agnostic new show that exists in a vacuum.

It can still be prime-universe without having to be bogged down with paying homage to every single nuance of every show's canon which came before it, but c'mon.... all that's required is some simple continuity.

This is a grand opportunity to create something fresh, for everyone, and can honestly bridge the divide between new audiences and primers that occurred with those ****** movies.

I'm going to point this out, and it's very important for it to be received properly, so everyone needs to focus:

It's not a real universe.
It doesn't exist in real life and never will.
It exists to service the plot, whatever it may be.
It is not immutable, it is not constant.

It is a fabrication.

TL;DR - Sorry, Benny Russell, it's not real. In fact...

You know what that means? It means that the Abrams universe is just as "real" as the Prime universe.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lHgbbM9pu4[/yt]

 

[Amaris]

^ I was hoping someone would post that video.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I don't believe for a microsecond that the series will go anywhere near the Prime Universe. The only reason this is happening at all is because the movies have been successful, so the show will either take place in the new universe or it will simply not reference any specific outside canon (but will probably still come far closer to the new universe than the prime universe in terms of style).

Well I'm not sure we can say this is happening because the movies have been successful. I dont think it hurts but it could simply be they want to push their online service. Star Trek is one of their biggest properties and seems to be there go tofor this. They did it with Voyager for UPN, Phase 2 was meant to launch a network too.

It was inevitable they would do a series eventually, it just depended on when. Its also the 50th anniversary, good time to go for it.

[

Totally. What the producers of the new show need to realize is that regardless of the format they choose, one of the biggest advantages of being in the prime universe (rather than the gimmick-verse, or even an agnostic-verse) is the richness of the world that has already been created for them.

No - its a straitjacket - throw it out and make a show fit for 2015 rather than boxing yourself in from the start.

You can set it after our known timeline and give yourself freedom. Setting it in the JJVerse ties you into known events, yes they could happen differently but we have been there already.

Its not like when Star Wars ditched the EU, CBS has all this trek content they will want to keep relevant as its money to them.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I don't believe for a microsecond that the series will go anywhere near the Prime Universe. The only reason this is happening at all is because the movies have been successful, so the show will either take place in the new universe or it will simply not reference any specific outside canon (but will probably still come far closer to the new universe than the prime universe in terms of style).

Well I'm not sure we can say this is happening because the movies have been successful. I dont think it hurts but it could simply be they want to push their online service. Star Trek is one of their biggest properties and seems to be there go tofor this. They did it with Voyager for UPN, Phase 2 was meant to launch a network too.

It was inevitable they would do a series eventually, it just depended on when. Its also the 50th anniversary, good time to go for it.

Except that they've shown no interest in a ST tv show in years, this service they're 'launching' actually already exists now, and if this was supposed to be timed for the 50th anniversary, then their timing is terrible, because the actual show is going to miss that completely.

After Enterprise, Star Trek on tv was dead. It was inevitable that they would eventually try again, but without 2 successful movies and a 3rd (which they assume will be successful) set to hit this year, they almost certainly would not be there yet.

 

[Amaris]

I don't believe for a microsecond that the series will go anywhere near the Prime Universe. The only reason this is happening at all is because the movies have been successful, so the show will either take place in the new universe or it will simply not reference any specific outside canon (but will probably still come far closer to the new universe than the prime universe in terms of style).

Well I'm not sure we can say this is happening because the movies have been successful. I dont think it hurts but it could simply be they want to push their online service. Star Trek is one of their biggest properties and seems to be there go tofor this. They did it with Voyager for UPN, Phase 2 was meant to launch a network too.

It was inevitable they would do a series eventually, it just depended on when. Its also the 50th anniversary, good time to go for it.

Except that they've shown no interest in a ST tv show in years, this service they're 'launching' actually already exists now, and if this was supposed to be timed for the 50th anniversary, then their timing is terrible, because the actual show is going to miss that completely.

After Enterprise, Star Trek on tv was dead. It was inevitable that they would eventually try again, but without 2 successful movies and a 3rd (which they assume will be successful) set to hit this year, they almost certainly would not be there yet.

Indeed. If nothing else, the movies proved that Star Trek could still be popular, and make money.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I don't believe for a microsecond that the series will go anywhere near the Prime Universe. The only reason this is happening at all is because the movies have been successful, so the show will either take place in the new universe or it will simply not reference any specific outside canon (but will probably still come far closer to the new universe than the prime universe in terms of style).

Well I'm not sure we can say this is happening because the movies have been successful. I dont think it hurts but it could simply be they want to push their online service. Star Trek is one of their biggest properties and seems to be there go tofor this. They did it with Voyager for UPN, Phase 2 was meant to launch a network too.

It was inevitable they would do a series eventually, it just depended on when. Its also the 50th anniversary, good time to go for it.

Except that they've shown no interest in a ST tv show in years, this service they're 'launching' actually already exists now, and if this was supposed to be timed for the 50th anniversary, then their timing is terrible, because the actual show is going to miss that completely.

After Enterprise, Star Trek on tv was dead. It was inevitable that they would eventually try again, but without 2 successful movies and a 3rd (which they assume will be successful) set to hit this year, they almost certainly would not be there yet.

It does exist but its hardly been a huge success, it needs something big to make people get it. Yes they are missing the anniversary but only by a month and there could be a reason.

I guess we can agree to disagree on the movie part, I think if we hadn't had those movies at all, we could still be getting Star Trek now.