Except several times in the past.
The Problems with Prequels...
- Thread starter stueyross
- Start date
10 years before Tos seems a little too close IMO. Everyone will be looking for the younger versions of the TOS crew to show up in the DIS. Maybe they could get Pine or Quinto to do a guest appearance since they already portray younger versions of Kirk and Spock in the films.
Speaking of the films, I wonder how Abrams feels about this series not talking place the Kelvin Timeline? In that timeline in 2255 Kirk would have been joining Starfleet etc.. In the prime timeline Kirk is a LT on the Farragut, and Spock on the Enterprise with Capt Pike. I remember there being an issue with Abrams being upset that CBS would not embrace the new timeline a couple years ago.
Speaking of the films, I wonder how Abrams feels about this series not talking place the Kelvin Timeline? In that timeline in 2255 Kirk would have been joining Starfleet etc.. In the prime timeline Kirk is a LT on the Farragut, and Spock on the Enterprise with Capt Pike. I remember there being an issue with Abrams being upset that CBS would not embrace the new timeline a couple years ago.
I'm skeptical, but I'm willing to give it a shot. I *really* wanted it in the Kelvin Timeline, but it ain't my show.
Corrected: Terracentric a show (TOS) that never once showed us 23rd century Earth.
Please, anything but that!!! The Kelvin "Timeline" is like the Mirror Universe, it's fun for a couple of episodes or movies but that's about it.
Real fun, all three have made almost a billion dollars.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the concept of a prequel. But I have yet to see a prequel I think way good. Part of the problem is that not only should your story be consistent in what it shows, but how it shows it as well. Take Star Wars for example. In Episode 4 (I assume no spoilers are necessary) Obi Wan says that Darth Vader was a pupil of his until he turned to evil and that he then killed Anakin Skywalker. We then learn later that Obi Wan was just relating event from a certain point of view and that Darth Vader only metaphorically killed Anakin because they were the same person. This is revelation for us as well as Luke. So the prequels should have followed Obi Wan's narrative in order to maintain the surprise reveal. It should have shown Anakin's transformation into Darth Vader in a way that makes you think they are two different people, but they're never seen together.
Or take the Skywalker twins for example. We don't learn until Episode 6 that Luke and Leia are twins. So any prequel depiction of the birth of the Skywalker twins should be done ambiguously enough so that on an initial viewing we would assume there was only one child.
Enterprise really didn't have many restrictions like this. Yes, they had restrictions in events and technology, which could have easily been navigated, while still looking futuristic. Yes, the ship should have looked like the ringship from TMP. The only big narrative restriction I can think of would be not depicting Romulans. In order to maintain the reveal in Balance of Terror, neither our heros nor the audience should see Romulans in a prequel.
Or take the Skywalker twins for example. We don't learn until Episode 6 that Luke and Leia are twins. So any prequel depiction of the birth of the Skywalker twins should be done ambiguously enough so that on an initial viewing we would assume there was only one child.
Enterprise really didn't have many restrictions like this. Yes, they had restrictions in events and technology, which could have easily been navigated, while still looking futuristic. Yes, the ship should have looked like the ringship from TMP. The only big narrative restriction I can think of would be not depicting Romulans. In order to maintain the reveal in Balance of Terror, neither our heros nor the audience should see Romulans in a prequel.
The Transformers have made almost 4 billion dollars but I sure wouldn't want Michael Bay, Roberto Orci or Alex Kurtzman in Star Trek. Oh, wait…
What about The Cage? Granted, it was part of Pike's hallucination, but it's still 23rd century Earth.
HAHAHAHAHA.
The Transformers have made almost 4 billion dollars but I sure wouldn't want Michael Bay, Roberto Orci or Alex Kurtzman in Star Trek. Oh, wait…
How do you watch any movie then? A lot of movies, no matter what the obstacle/threat/issue is, have the hero character(s) usually overcome it by the end. It's practically a given the good guys win and keeping that in mind would make any movie be unsuspenseful.
To me, it's not the outcome of a movie or a TV show but how characters get there that makes something worth watching.
Also the "fugly" ship seen in the teaser is not a final design, so the Discovery might turn out just fine.
TOS never showed Earth but it gave the impression Spock was the only non human on a ship of 400 crew (Ok we know this was due to real tv budget constraints and 'The Federation' was not clearly defined in the ST universe)Terrancentric a show (TOS) that never once showed us Earth. And with Fuller stating to expect the most alien diverse crew ever!
Federation-Sheliak War setting CONFIRMED!!!
Unfortunately the writers of the show never took advantage of the technology "restrictions". They just substituted phasers with phase pistols/cannons, photon and quantum torpedoes with spatial and photonic torpedoes, deflector shields with polarized hull plating, replicators with food synthesizers, etc. And it was late 90's Stale Trek all over again.
…Or like the Daedalus-class. But imagine how Trek fans would have reacted with such an "ugly" starship! They would bitch all over the internet!
I can honestly understand this viewpoint given that you don't care about the larger perspective. And, making people care about the characters will always improve a work of fiction. But, some of us do care about the larger perspective, and a prequel limits what can be done with that larger perspective.
That said, I'm still very much looking forward to the new series. The main thing is that we have a new Star Trek series to look forward to! Overall, I love what I'm hearing. TOS is still my favorite series so having a connection to that isn't a bad thing. Roll on January!
Mr Awe
Untrue. Captain Pike experienced a recreation of Mojave that he found thoroughly convincing, so we were at least shown what that looks like. That was in the very first pilot, too, ironically. Of course, it's true that none of the characters ever visited 23rd century Earth on-screen during TOS.
I would have loved a series set right after the destruction of Romulus. Even a series set in the Kelvin Timeline that explores another ship and another crew. But a TOS prequel? Why? That seems to be the most stupid thing they could come up with.
It seems to me that the problems that crop up with prequels are really due to hacky writing that tries to hype up dramatic tension with universe shattering events.
We don't consider it overly difficult to write a novel set in the '70s because everyone already knows the world didn't blow up or none of the characters become President or invent anything that changes the world.
Hopefully DSC will have a sensible narrative scope at the outset and stay within it. It's very possible.
We don't consider it overly difficult to write a novel set in the '70s because everyone already knows the world didn't blow up or none of the characters become President or invent anything that changes the world.
Hopefully DSC will have a sensible narrative scope at the outset and stay within it. It's very possible.
One of the greatest things about TNG was that it was a dynamic leap FORWARD from what we had seen before. In many, many ways. Part of the enjoyment was in seeing the evolution of everything from the Kirk-era series and films -- how had Starfleet and the Federation changed, what happened to all the Enterprises in between, what had changed with the Klingons, what was the Enterprise's mission now... on top of the fun of seeing new phasers, communicators, tricorders, uniforms, graphics... it build upon and evolved the Trek asthetic at the same time that it created it's own foundation by progressing the Trek universe into the 24th century.
The Trek universe was expanded, not contracted.
A big problem with trapping another series into a previous part of confined Trek history (as others have pointed out) is that at every turn, at least a dozen times an episode, we are going to be taken out of the story they are telling but bumping into pre-established cannon, story points, or visual contradictions ("well, they look like the old phasers, but they seemed re-imagined... but more modern... and powerful... oh wait, is that a Romulan logo... how could then know what a Romulan looked like at this point... weren't the Constitution class ships the only big guns out there at this point...etc, etc").
There will be so much fan-service to the "look and feel" of Pike's era, but it won't really match up in a cohesive way, because the producers will need their creative freedom to do and try anything new -- which they should! So there is always going to a be a push and a pull -- only because the previous incarnations of Trek did such a remarkable job of maintaining a 40 year dramatic continuity. A continuity that should be built upon, not overstuffed.
It was like Phlox on Enterprise... I could never get over "why have we never heard about his species before". It just seemed off-kilter in so many fundamental ways.
This was grand opportunity to do what Trek does best... go forward. Show us something new and let it feel fresh and unknown. And they may still do that in a unique and innovative way, who knows... we'll have to see how it turns out. I just feel in my gut that a post TNG era timeline had the most potential for original, compelling Trek storytelling at this point.
The Trek universe was expanded, not contracted.
A big problem with trapping another series into a previous part of confined Trek history (as others have pointed out) is that at every turn, at least a dozen times an episode, we are going to be taken out of the story they are telling but bumping into pre-established cannon, story points, or visual contradictions ("well, they look like the old phasers, but they seemed re-imagined... but more modern... and powerful... oh wait, is that a Romulan logo... how could then know what a Romulan looked like at this point... weren't the Constitution class ships the only big guns out there at this point...etc, etc").
There will be so much fan-service to the "look and feel" of Pike's era, but it won't really match up in a cohesive way, because the producers will need their creative freedom to do and try anything new -- which they should! So there is always going to a be a push and a pull -- only because the previous incarnations of Trek did such a remarkable job of maintaining a 40 year dramatic continuity. A continuity that should be built upon, not overstuffed.
It was like Phlox on Enterprise... I could never get over "why have we never heard about his species before". It just seemed off-kilter in so many fundamental ways.
This was grand opportunity to do what Trek does best... go forward. Show us something new and let it feel fresh and unknown. And they may still do that in a unique and innovative way, who knows... we'll have to see how it turns out. I just feel in my gut that a post TNG era timeline had the most potential for original, compelling Trek storytelling at this point.
I really don't care if it is a prequel or sequel or in-betweener, what I care about is that we have a good story, a good cast of characters with good actors and depth. They can set it whenever they want if they execute it right. Maybe this era will bring them some uniqe opportunities moving slowly toward the USS Enterprise 5 year mission. And also even though for example there were no Romulan-Earth contact since 100 years we could have some Romulan episodes with covert ops and also as it is covert ops we can have them see the Romulans but not have an official entry in the Federation database because of the secret matter of that mission. So as long the characters are good and have depth and the stories are clever enough not to contradict some small details of TOS/TNG and later Trek I don't care ... Lucky for us we know very little before the selected time period, we know the Enterprise was in service with Christopher Pike, we know about the Federation Sheliak War and correct me if I'm wrong but that's about it from the 2250's ... Oh yeah, we have a Federation-Klingon Cold War that could set up some interesting episodes. And that's it ...
I have a sick feeling in my gut. I hope I'm wrong, but why do a TOS prequel? I can think of a million of them after hearing some of the details Fuller released yesterday. And all of them can be summed up in one word.
AXANAR.
Enough people wanted to see it that they donated a million dollars to make it happen. And that was for a one off fan made movie. Can you imagine what CBS thought seeing that? I can... dollar signs.
It would make even more sense(beyond the obvious) of why they shut down Axanar. It would line up with the story taking place roughly 10 years before the first 5 year mission of TOS, since it is widely assumed Axanar takes place in 2254. And it would explain why they think doing a TOS prequel would possibly be a good idea.
Like I said, I hope I'm wrong. Either way, I'm still optimistic and looking forward to Discovery.
Exactly my thoughts.
Yeah lets all just keep hanging onto that thread.......Its getting thinner all the time
Similar threads
