Only on the rare occasion. We're talking maybe once (maybe twice at a stretch) a season of TOS, TNG and DS9.
To be honest Babylon 5 did a better job, partly because the human race wasn't written as if they'd solved all their problems.
Rumor: the show takes place between TOS movies and TNG
- Thread starter AvBaur
- Start date
Only on the rare occasion. We're talking maybe once (maybe twice at a stretch) a season of TOS, TNG and DS9.
To be honest Babylon 5 did a better job, partly because the human race wasn't written as if they'd solved all their problems.
I would outright prefer a post Nemesis, let's get on with it, setting. Even though I read the novel relaunches, and hate how Disney has handled their book range on Star Wars (its not a Canon thing, but the new post JeDi books all have blurbs that could have come from the ones they jettisoned...so what's the point again?) I don't mind if they ignore the continuity that has been going on there.
I don't mind a Lost Era series, though I always think prequels and midway set stories rarely work out for the best (no galactic or planetary peril, we know it all works out. Or you have to shoe in something like a temporal cold war.) I also know that a big chunk of the fan base would enjoy it, and that is a good enough reason to pursue that avenue in some ways.
I would not want another reboot or anything set TOS. The reboot movies have that covered for those who want that, and speaking as someone of a particular generation of fan (one that seems to be the popular target demographic given modern trends in TV and elsewhere) TOS is not really our Trek in the way that what could be called the 'Berman' era was. (I almost don't count Enterprise in that....that felt like an attempt to grab a newer generation of viewers, and was an attempt at passing on to a Braga era that never happened. It failed, love it or hate it.)
The thing about cashing in on nostalgia, and particularly about celebrating an anniversary in your marketing, is that it has to be honest. Reboots are not, by definition, a continuation of a thing. If you are saying to audience 'hey remember that thing you watched when you were younger! It's back!' Then it has to be that thing they watched when they were younger in some quantifiable way. (Tng launched with practically the same production staff as TOS, and a guest star cameo, X files and eventually Twin Peaks are literally bring back everyone, over in Movie land, Jurassic World is the same setting location, and Star Wars wheeled out the classic class, even Lando turns up in Rebels) If it's just 'here's something similar!' as it would be with a clean break reboot, then we may as well celebrate the anniversary by watching 'Dark Matter' (it has Tng style corridors with HR Giger wallpaper, the Android gets all the left over gags we didn't see with Data, and it's techno babble is so clearly Trek inspired. It's also like it fell through a wormhole from 1997, as it isn't as graphic as modern TV for the most part, and has a chunk of fun in with its gritty.)
If, as the names, and current promo material suggest, you are looking to cash in on a fifty year legacy, then ultimately it rings hollow if you reboot again or even follow the most recent reboot continuity wise. The last thing you want to do with a reboot is draw too much attention to the source material unless you are damn sure you are at least equalling it (this is one of Into Darkness failings in my and others opinion) and hopefully bettering it to show why you remade it in the first place (battlestar galactica show this)
In short (which is TL; DR from the old days) anything but Prime Universe in some way would be a misfire, as they are using the heritage to market the new show. And we already have a failed prequel series (love it or hate it, it didn't get its seven years) and a reboot that is flawed and doesn't belong to CBS.
Tuppence please.
I don't mind a Lost Era series, though I always think prequels and midway set stories rarely work out for the best (no galactic or planetary peril, we know it all works out. Or you have to shoe in something like a temporal cold war.) I also know that a big chunk of the fan base would enjoy it, and that is a good enough reason to pursue that avenue in some ways.
I would not want another reboot or anything set TOS. The reboot movies have that covered for those who want that, and speaking as someone of a particular generation of fan (one that seems to be the popular target demographic given modern trends in TV and elsewhere) TOS is not really our Trek in the way that what could be called the 'Berman' era was. (I almost don't count Enterprise in that....that felt like an attempt to grab a newer generation of viewers, and was an attempt at passing on to a Braga era that never happened. It failed, love it or hate it.)
The thing about cashing in on nostalgia, and particularly about celebrating an anniversary in your marketing, is that it has to be honest. Reboots are not, by definition, a continuation of a thing. If you are saying to audience 'hey remember that thing you watched when you were younger! It's back!' Then it has to be that thing they watched when they were younger in some quantifiable way. (Tng launched with practically the same production staff as TOS, and a guest star cameo, X files and eventually Twin Peaks are literally bring back everyone, over in Movie land, Jurassic World is the same setting location, and Star Wars wheeled out the classic class, even Lando turns up in Rebels) If it's just 'here's something similar!' as it would be with a clean break reboot, then we may as well celebrate the anniversary by watching 'Dark Matter' (it has Tng style corridors with HR Giger wallpaper, the Android gets all the left over gags we didn't see with Data, and it's techno babble is so clearly Trek inspired. It's also like it fell through a wormhole from 1997, as it isn't as graphic as modern TV for the most part, and has a chunk of fun in with its gritty.)
If, as the names, and current promo material suggest, you are looking to cash in on a fifty year legacy, then ultimately it rings hollow if you reboot again or even follow the most recent reboot continuity wise. The last thing you want to do with a reboot is draw too much attention to the source material unless you are damn sure you are at least equalling it (this is one of Into Darkness failings in my and others opinion) and hopefully bettering it to show why you remade it in the first place (battlestar galactica show this)
In short (which is TL; DR from the old days) anything but Prime Universe in some way would be a misfire, as they are using the heritage to market the new show. And we already have a failed prequel series (love it or hate it, it didn't get its seven years) and a reboot that is flawed and doesn't belong to CBS.
Tuppence please.
I had a crazy idea the other day that probably won't happen, but could be fun. What if it is an anthology where each season is in a different universe. Kind of like Myriad Universes book series.
We could start with the Prime Universe as kind of an intro to the characters, but then each season follows a different universe's version of the characters and ship. That way they could use the same cast and sets, but still do something different each season.
We could start with the Prime Universe as kind of an intro to the characters, but then each season follows a different universe's version of the characters and ship. That way they could use the same cast and sets, but still do something different each season.
Yeah, Twilight Zone was an utter disaster.
Maybe you think this is an unfair comment, being such an old series from days long gone. But I hear good things about Black Mirror and Fargo. It's all up to the quality and execution. Maybe such a show for Star Trek would catch a wave.
Last edited:
Twilight Zone is nearly sixty years old and I think we can all agree the business has changed somewhat since then.
As far as the other two go, I've heard of one and haven't seen it. But, could it work? Sure it could. Will Star Trek work as an anthology? I don't know? It would have to be incredibly well done and have a way to minimize set costs as amortization spread out over numerous seasons has been how Trek has traditionally paid for their elaborate sets.
It depends. Prequels that try to explain how this or this happened rarely, if not never, don't suck.
Films/shows with their own unrelated story that just so happen to be set before this other film/show can be just as good as any sequel, depending on who's working on it.
For example, Hannibal Rising is a prequel to the first book, and it focuses on young Hannibal Lecter and shows us his origin, how he came to be. It was a massive critical failure. The show, Hannibal, was about the relationship between Hannibal Lecter and Will Graham and just so happened to be set before Red Dragon. It was a massive critical success.
If this show is set before TNG, and tries telling us how this and this happened in TNG, rather than forming its own story and plot, it could suck.
So, I'm guessing this show is still on the air, and I can still see this so called success? Where is it on network and cable currently run programming? And what time can I see this massive critical success show on those networks?
Seriously?
On a Star Trek forum of all places, you go judging a show on its quality by looking at the ratings?
The irony
Who's talking about ratings??? I had no idea the show existed. Success is subjective.Seriously?
On a Star Trek forum of all places, you go judging a show on its quality by looking at the ratings?
The irony
Still had no idea the show existed. What is there to be fair about???To be fair, HANNIBAL ran for three, low-rated seasons on NBC--just like a certain cult science fiction show back in the 1960s.
You know, the one with the guy with the pointed ears.
Doctor Spock?To be fair, HANNIBAL ran for three, low-rated seasons on NBC--just like a certain cult science fiction show back in the 1960s.
You know, the one with the guy with the pointed ears.
The one and only.
Yeah, and if M*A*S*H was as good as everyone says it is, how come it's not still on the air? Why aren't Friends, Seinfeld, or the Sopranos still on the air if they were so good?
Forget about judging a show's quality based on ratings --- you're judging a show's quality based on whether it is presently airing. That attribute is completely meaningless to judge quality as fans of the Cosby Show and Cheers would attest.
In case you never heard of any of these shows above, they're all not on the air anymore and pretty much everyone loves them (that's obviously a generalization, yes, but we're all adults here).
I think that's sort of my point....while it is possible for a prequel not to be naff, there's a greater chance it will be.
(hannibal was quite popular over here, usually shown after elementary. It's not my cup of tea though.)
When you transplant it over to the Trek universe though, it automatically removes some of the options for story telling.....if it's definitely in the prime universe, none of the major planets can be threatened. Now, while 'saving the planet/universe' doesn't crop up so much in Trek, it automatically precludes any of that....there can be no 'best of both worlds' there can be no Dominion War style arc, there can be no existential threat to the federation...because we know the federation is fine, it's planets are in place.
Now admittedly, we always know things will be OK because our heroes always win, but that slight possibility of 'maybe not this time' goes out the window.
Can it work? Yeah, I think it could work. Lost Era set prequel is something I can see working, looking at forging the peace with the Klingon Empire, or even just doing its own thing. It just wouldn't get it's Big Moments like those I mention, at least not with all the potential tension.
So yeah, you are right, but for every successful prequel (and viewed objectively, the most famous of 'bad' prequels, the Star Wars ones, aren't even that bad) There's more that didn't work out so well. (caprica...enterprise...)
Perhaps it's because the audience that doesn't mind a predestined end just isn't big enough compared to those lost that get turned off by that sort of storytelling.
So, yeah....I would still prefer post Nemesis, wouldn't mind Lost Era, but anything before that wouldn't appeal and another reboot would have to really persuade me it was amazing to bother watching at all, (though if it's family friendly my toddler guarantees it will be watched religiously.)
Fingers crossed eh.
Twilight Zone is nearly sixty years old and I think we can all agree the business has changed somewhat since then.
.
As much as I hate to even lend credence to a "rumor" by discussing it, let it noted that a "seasonal anthology" like FARGO or AMERICAN HORROR STORY is not at all the same thing as an old-fashioned anthology series like TWILIGHT ZONE or THE OUTER LIMITS (or today's BLACK MIRROR).
You have the same characters, sets, and and props for an entire season, telling one long story over the course of the season, so it's really not more expensive than producing one season of any other space opera. (And note that both FARGO and, often, AHS are period pieces, which means lots of vintage clothing, sets, automobiles, etc. None of which necessarily comes cheap.)
Is the new TREK going to be another such seasonal anthology. Who knows? I regard all internet rumors as bullshit until I hear something official. But seasonal anthologies are indeed a thing these days and can be quite successful, both commercially and artistically.
FARGO, in particular, is one of the best shows on TV these days. If you haven't watched it yet, do yourself a favor and check it. (AHS is wildly uneven, and tends to fall apart at the end of every season, but has moments of sublime weirdness . . . and Jessica Lange is pretty much amazing every season.)
As for prequels, let it also be noted that BATES MOTEL is currently in its fourth season and remains quite compelling even though we all know that things won't end well for poor Norma and Norman. If anything, the knowledge of the horrible fate bearing down on the characters gives the show the feel of a Greek tragedy playing out in slow-motion. The knowledge that the fruit cellar awaits gives even the hopeful scenes a heart-breaking, poignant quality, since we know that the characters' inevitable doom is getting closer and closer . . . .
(I suppose there is some segment of the audience that has never seen or read PSYCHO and doesn't know what's coming, but it's hard to imagine that are many such viewers.)
Last edited:
I love Bates Motel and am very familiar with the Psycho franchise, but I have relatives who watch it and have never seen Psycho and have no idea what's coming.
I find it hard to understand how any fan of Bates Motel wouldn't have watched Psycho after four seasons, but they haven't.
I'm really looking forward to the new series whenever it's set. I think there's plenty of room for tension and surprises even in a prequel (or mid-quel, as the case may be.)
I find it hard to understand how any fan of Bates Motel wouldn't have watched Psycho after four seasons, but they haven't.
I'm really looking forward to the new series whenever it's set. I think there's plenty of room for tension and surprises even in a prequel (or mid-quel, as the case may be.)
