• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Rumor: the show takes place between TOS movies and TNG

To me, Trek is not about "exploring new worlds and new civilizations." That is just an allegorical framework for exploring the human condition. And yes, geopolitics and war are part of the human condition.

Kor
Agreed. Exploring fictional worlds draws its appeal from the allegorical connections to our non fictional world.
 
Rahul, we started going down this rabbit hole when you said the equivalent of...

"Why should we care about anything if we already know how it ends?"

And when you say how "it ends" you're referring to just the most generic progression of canon, you know, Khitomer Accords and what not. So we includes you, right? You say you don't care about politics, while simultaneously saying you wouldn't care about any show set in a period where you already know how the political situation winds up--as though finding out that plot-point is the only reason to tune in each day.

It seems like you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth. It seems like you just started with a conclusion (a prequel series must be inherently "bad") and you're just clutching for reasons to back that up, even if they contradict.

Okay, seriously, whats your problem? Do you just don't understand, or do you purpusefully misquote?

I don't want a new series focussing on interspecies politics. Especially not if I already know the outcome of said diplomatic conflicts.
I don't mind some political episodes inbetween. In fact I appreciate a few of them. But I would prefer the new series focussing on exploring new stuff. And I really don't see the benefit of a prequel/inbetween-quel series for exploring new ideas. I really don't know what's your point against that or what you're arguing for, but I'm certainly interested in what yor point is, since at least now I can't recognize one.
 
Last edited:
The difference would be one where the new series could take place in a world Star Trek Beyond exists, and the other would be in waters which hasn't been produced for more than a decade.
The fact that we haven't had Prime Trek in more than a decade is a reason to do it. We haven't gotten it in 10 years, so let's got back to it and give us something that is a really good combination of the old and the new.
For me it isn't that we 'can't enjoy stories where we know the outcome' - dramas are made out of well known stories all the time and are very successful. The People vs OJ Simpson was very good and hugely successful and that focused on events most of the audience were alive for. United 93 had an even shorter lead in time from the story playing out and is still a compelling film.
What I am saying is that staying an open ended episodic series as a prequel is limiting and, I feel, unnecessarily so. Shows, good shows anyway, evolve and grow as writers get new ideas and take the story to different places. Prequels have a defined end, somewhere they have to get to by a certain point with all their ducks in a row. That is what I mean by limiting. Especially as I can't see what the writers would actually gain, creatively, from imposing such a limitation, over choosing a setting that is truly open ended.
This sums up my feelings pretty well too.
 
The fact that we haven't had Prime Trek in more than a decade is a reason to do it. We haven't gotten it in 10 years, so let's got back to it and give us something that is a really good combination of the old and the new.
I see that as a reason not to go back. Also, it's not exactly true. The last time we saw the Prime-universe was in Spock's mind-meld so it's been seven years (where did the time go?!) The only reason I could see to go back would be to deal with the aftermath of the destruction of Romulus.

The thing is though, the reason fans want to go back is because they want the same style as old Trek, but whatever universe it's in it will be much closer in style to the new movies.
 
I wouldn't mind if it was done in a more modern style closer to the new movies, I just prefer the Prime Universe.
 
I'm personally hoping for an anthology show, with multiple time periods. Not just post TUC/Pre TNG. I would love to see Post ENT/Pre TOS (Earth Romulan War), a "legitimized" Axanar-style pre TOS Federation/Klingon Conflict, a Tomed Incident/conflict, and a post Nemesis Klingon VS Romulan war.

I wouldn't mind if it was done in a more modern style closer to the new movies, I just prefer the Prime Universe.

If there's something good that can be said about the (presumed defunct?) Axanar fan film, is that it proved you can take Prime timeline ships and reimagine them with a JJ-Verse look and feel, and end up with something pretty decent.

I'd love to see a Constellation class reimagined somewhat like what we saw in Star Trek 2009. Or maybe a slightly reimagined Excelsior or Ambassador class, or even a completely new class that looks like it fits between TUC and TNG.
 
whatever universe it's in it will be much closer in style to the new movies.

It just doesn't have to be like nuTrek to be perceived as modern. NuTrek was just JJ's conception of what modern should be. I mean, I don't think people will tune-out if there's not enough lens-flare or the engine room doesn't look like a brewery.
 
It just doesn't have to be like nuTrek to be perceived as modern. NuTrek was just JJ's conception of what modern should be. I mean, I don't think people will tune-out if there's not enough lens-flare or the engine room doesn't look like a brewery.

I never said that. :confused:

Kor
 
You can't build 2 or 3 different Enterprise sets for an anthology and keep this show on budget, IMHO. Linear timeline, no anthology.

The same green screen room every season with a digital set? Sky Captain style. Could make it possible.
 
Has Star Trek ever had much that's well-observed or true to say about the human condition? I can think of one or two lines of dialogue written by Theodore Sturgeon, but you can get a lot more worthwhile out of reading his short stories (or those of Harlan Ellison, for that matter).
 
If the anthology rumour is true, I do wonder how they'll build a film franchise off of this show. It's far too premature to be thinking this far ahead about a film spinoff franchise of a TV show that could so easily die and burn after one or two seasons, but I can't be the only one with it at the back of my mind. Each "reboot" of Star Trek has gotten a film franchise, the original, the spinoff and the reboot of the original. And with the rights being split for movies and television between two different companies, it makes it even more likely.

Paramount must be looking at the idea of an anthology Trek series and wondering. You can't really build a film franchise around thirteen episodes of characters (although, some will definitely disagree here), and they sure as hell can't keep making modern reboots of old shows in the shell of a blockbuster action flick. A TNG reboot would be pushing it, and a DS9/VOY/ENT reboot would be a killer.

Again, premature thinking when we haven't seen a second of the show and have little to no information, but just a thought.
 
Section 9 has a good point, about the extra sets being unaffordable. (Unless the show is animated). I'm sure that The Powers That Be will be aware of this, as they must be concerned with the bottom line.
 
Why does the ST'17 streaming television show need a separate film franchise based on it? I'd rather it just stay on TV for as long as Law & Order if it's good.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top