Trek Returning to TV in 2017!

[F. King Daniel]

Whatever form the new show takes, and whatever continuity it's set in, one thing's for sure: It will cherry-pick the bits they like from previous iterations of Trek, and dump what they don't. Trek's continuity exists in the minds of fans only, it's broad strokes. Just look at the videos in my sig for proof...

 

[RAMA]

I wonder what the title could be, "Star Trek" is taken...but I think they will try and keep it simple.

RAMA

I'm as hardcore as anybody on this entire message board about Trek. I have as much emotional interest in the new series as anyone else here.

But you don't know the established universe and continuity will get stomped upon. The series is at the earliest months away from going into production. We know nothing other than the venue which will broadcast it in the United States and that it'll be a new live-action Trek series that won't be connected to the events in the upcoming film.

That's it. Saying it's going to suck because of Orci or Kurtzman or anything else with more than a year to go before it even premieres is not only counterproductive but helps make the entire Trek fan community look bad. When the details emerge, then let's nitpick and see what's valid to criticize. But can't we wait?

Wanna complain about CBS All Access streaming service? Fine. I'm no fan of it myself. But the creative content of the series itself when we know close to absolutely nothing about it this early on? I don't get it. I know why it happens, but I just don't get it.

By setting it in JJ-verse than can avoid all that nasty stomping on the timeline because that was the original reason for separating from it..

...and the division in fandom caused by the reboot, especially Into Darkness, is a testament to that.

You do realize that the portion of the fandom that hates the Abramsverse that much is a pretty small portion, right?

Anywho, the goal is to expand the fandom, not to continue to cater to a shrinking fanbase.

I'm another. It's slam-bang mindless crap. It'd be so in any genre. It's lousy fiction, period, and Abrams' movies are bad movies first and bad Trek second.

Will have no interest in Kurtzman's dumbed down, formulaic anti-Trek.

It's not dumbed down more than any other Trek show, it just simplifies the backstory, which is a good thing at this period in time to get new fans aboard.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_into_darkness/

These are the facts my friends...critically acclaimed track record with $1.1 billion in revenue from BO and discs. That's what's going into this effort.

According to Les Moonves, the series already has made half it's money back through foreign distribution. This is a cash cow.

http://trekcore.com/blog/2015/11/cb...-and-star-trek-moving-to-first-run-streaming/

 

[cooleddie74]

Launching a new Trek series should be as smooth and accessible to all viewers as possible. Then once the show's running and can stand on its own you can begin to add the fan-favorite references and lore to the scripts, but let the show stand on its own at first. If the series is nothing but fifty TOS and TNG references from the first scene of the premiere episode to the end credits then we might as well just watch reruns of the first six series (including TAS) on Netflix and disc and forget about a new show.

 

[Campe]

Say what now?

That's more far-fetched than any trek episode I've seen.

No actually it's quite a basic premise.

If I made transporters capable of traveling part way across the galaxy in one episode, and they can't make it across a small moon on the next episode it's just crap writing.

We all know what I'm talking about.

No we don't that's just fluff - it's nothing to do with quality engaging writing.

Agreed. The idea that canon is "quality control" is bull. First, 700 episodes of existing canon is one thing = restrictive. The fans will bitch and moan if Ensign Smith doesn't hold her tricorder the exact same way as Geordi did when he was [TECHING] the [TECH] in episode 118. Second, it doesn't matter, because the writers would work their way around it if it suited their needs.

Case in point: TNG Romulans. First, we hear they're threatening an incursion into Federation space and there seemed to be no surprise there at all ("Angel One"). Then it's a pretty major surprise when they show up and the Federation hadn't heard from them in 53 years ("The Neutral Zone"). Then, a major episode is set upon the idea that a past Enterprise was destroyed by Romulans defending a Klingon outpost about 20 years before ("Yesterday's Enterprise").

So don't presume to consider canon to be quality control when the writers can't keep it straight in their own series.

 

[Myko]

Out of those 3 episodes, the 2 with "canon violations" were the good ones.

 

[cooleddie74]

And let's not forget that during early episodes of TNG there was a strong insinuation on the part of the writers and producers that the Federation and Klingon Empire had not only made peace with one another and become allies, but that the Empire had actually and formally joined the Federation as a member.

Wesley has a line in a Season 1 or 2 episode ("Samaritan Snare"?) where he asks Picard if something that happened to him took place before "the Klingons joined the Federation" and Picard nods his head in agreement. There's also a Federation symbol on open and prominent display next to the Klingon emblem on the bridge of the Klingon battle cruiser in "Heart of Glory," indicating a much closer relationship between the two powers than just a recent alliance and treaty of friendship.

 

[RapidoTrains]

I'm looking forward to the new series coming out, and then discovering its most vocal critics on this forum:

A) haven't actually watched it, and

B) haven't actually watched much Trek that was produced after 1969

I think there is a subset of fandom that aren't actually fans of the show. They are fans of participating on forums to talk (moan) about the show.

On the Doctor Who forum someone was bitching and moaning about a new episode in the new episode thread. Halfway down the thread he/she/it admitted that they hadn't actually had time to watch it yet...

-Jason

 

[Campe]

Out of those 3 episodes, the 2 with "canon violations" were the good ones.

Exactly. The writers didn't feel beholden to a throwaway line about the Romulans and created entertaining yarns about an alternate universe... and... a man with a... guitar named... "L.Q?"

That's why I'm okay with putting "canon" Trek (aka Prime Trek) behind us and doing something completely new.

No restrictions.

What I don't think people understand is just because they toss aside 700+ episodes, they can still draw from them. They can use races from these series. They can use ideas. They can do it in an entertaining way. The Romulan War could happen but it could be different. The original series could happen pretty much the same way but with tech that is above and beyond what we see now. Confining it to the Prime Universe and God forbid just pushing it 100 or 1000 years into the future of Trek? That's just not the answer.

 

[Greg Cox]

Watching the nerdrage from the folks who don't like a show that won't even go into production until sometime next year is going to be glorious. How about we wait until we know details before we start running to the zombie apocalypse bunkers and defending ourselves against the swarming hordes of rational fans? Sure, it might suck but then again it could turn out to be the best Star Trek series since the heydays of TNG and DS9 and become a worthy chapter in the franchise. And even if it's just "meh" Trek that's neither amazing nor awful, isn't new Trek that's decent and good enough to watch better than no new Trek at all?

I know, crazy talk, right? Breaking the warp barrier would be a greater possibility.

An imminently sensible attitude. I mean, seriously, people are already rejecting the new show on the basis of a vague press release?

And, again, it's not about giving the "fans" what they want, since we don't all want the same thing. There's no such thing as an official party line when it comes to the "core fanbase"--even though people keep talking as though there is.

And can we please stop sneering at "the masses." Since when was STAR TREK about snobbery and elitism? It's really not a good look for us . . . .

End of rant.

 

[Long Syntax]

I'm as hardcore as anybody on this entire message board about Trek. I have as much emotional interest in the new series as anyone else here.

But you don't know the established universe and continuity will get stomped upon. The series is at the earliest months away from going into production. We know nothing other than the venue which will broadcast it in the United States and that it'll be a new live-action Trek series that won't be connected to the events in the upcoming film.

That's it. Saying it's going to suck because of Orci or Kurtzman or anything else with more than a year to go before it even premieres is not only counterproductive but helps make the entire Trek fan community look bad. When the details emerge, then let's nitpick and see what's valid to criticize. But can't we wait?

Wanna complain about CBS All Access streaming service? Fine. I'm no fan of it myself. But the creative content of the series itself when we know close to absolutely nothing about it this early on? I don't get it. I know why it happens, but I just don't get it.

Agreed - but that's not what we do here (holy crap have I become jaded with this bbs)

 

[Campe]

And can we please stop sneering at "the masses." Since when was STAR TREK about snobbery and elitism?

From my estimation, about 2009.

 

[ihno]

I'm looking forward to the new series coming out, and then discovering its most vocal critics on this forum:

A) haven't actually watched it, and

B) haven't actually watched much Trek that was produced after 1969

I think there is a subset of fandom that aren't actually fans of the show. They are fans of participating on forums to talk (moan) about the show.

On the Doctor Who forum someone was bitching and moaning about a new episode in the new episode thread. Halfway down the thread he/she/it admitted that they hadn't actually had time to watch it yet...

-Jason

And this "someone" does allow you to say that everybody is like that?

I like your b) though, funny.

 

[RAMA]

I'm looking forward to the new series coming out, and then discovering its most vocal critics on this forum:

A) haven't actually watched it, and

B) haven't actually watched much Trek that was produced after 1969

I think there is a subset of fandom that aren't actually fans of the show. They are fans of participating on forums to talk (moan) about the show.

On the Doctor Who forum someone was bitching and moaning about a new episode in the new episode thread. Halfway down the thread he/she/it admitted that they hadn't actually had time to watch it yet...

-Jason

Yeah the the old fogies come out in force to tell us what we're supposed to like.

RAMA

 

[RAMA]

The music: I watched an old episode of Seaquest DSV the other day. I'd really like the music to sound like Debney please.

RAMA

 

[Long Syntax]

Yeah the the old fogies come out in force to tell us what we're supposed to like.

RAMA

Who are you calling an old fogie... and, get off my lawn!

 

[cooleddie74]

We're not old. We prefer to be called Cryogenically-Frozen Fans, thank you very much.

Now one of you kids get over here and help me chew these Starfleet food cubes.

 

[Greg Cox]

Yeah the the old fogies come out in force to tell us what we're supposed to like.

RAMA

Who are you calling an old fogie... and, get off my lawn!

I'm not a fogie! I'm a curmudgeon!

But, I like to think, a fairly open-minded one.

 

[RAMA]

CBS stock rose slightly (about two points) since the news was announced Monday morning, and the network doubtless waited until this week to announce the new Trek series to soften the blow among investors that the network had missed its quarterly earnings estimate because of a drop in ad revenue.

http://trekmovie.com/2015/11/03/wil...t-save-television-from-extinction/#more-41048

 

[RAMA]

Yeah the the old fogies come out in force to tell us what we're supposed to like.

RAMA

Who are you calling an old fogie... and, get off my lawn!

I'm not a fogie! I'm a curmudgeon!

But, I like to think, a fairly open-minded one.

I was trying to avoid calling you "purists". A dirty word.