What are your thoughts about seeing the prime universe again?
- Thread starter The Rock
- Start date
Like TNG did after TOS. I agree.
Except this time, it will likely overwrite the look of an already established piece of the franchise.
Also the Viacom split happened in 2005. Once CBS and Paramount became different corporate entities everything became more convoluted. That's one of the reasons why I was sure the "PrimeVerse" would return (in one form or another). CBS wouldn't want to mess with Paramount's IP no matter how much two companies are in good terms. That's also the reason why every event in the Abramsverse (even the "Prime" ones) are off limits to Pocket Books Trek novels.
How do you know? There's nothing in the film the specifically or inherently connects it to the series. And, no, the actors don't count. Even the marketing was vague. The story, however, is completely independent and not beholden to anything that happened during the series.
And say, for example, all the characters were replaced with new actors. For all intents and purposes, one could then easily (and legitimately) argue TMP was just as much a reboot (or whatever) as the Abrams films.
They're only apart of the same canon because you want to be. Now, obviously, they're officially considered part of the same time-line, but again, only by outside material and not inherently by the film itself. Hell, one could even make a similar argument for WOK, because, despite the story being directly connected to an episode, there's actual on-screen evidence that contradicts the series. And herein lies the big problem with all of this.
It's the difference between continuity of concept and continuity of canon. The former promotes familiarity and encourages creativity. The later promotes confusion through needless obfuscation, which only stifles creativity.
This is why is best to favor concept over canon, and why Fuller stating so strictly it's part of Prime was a mistake. Because it suggests he's trying to wedge into a specific hole.
...Unless he doesn't, in which case it's just as I said. Pandering.
ETA:
Except it's not Paramount's IP.
I don't expect that to happen. I've read all the quotes and everything Fuller has said about the show, and I still have full faith in him and the rest of the production crew being faithful to the original canon while also bringing something new into the picture.
Trekkies can fit anything into canon without retconning if push comes to shove.
He (Fuller) said they were "reimagining" the look. No one twisted his arm to make him say that. He (Fuller) said they were changing the looks of aliens. No one twisted his arm to make him say that. He (Fuller) said the uniforms would be completely different. No one twisted his arm to make him say that.
This isn't a case of Fuller saying something to make people shut up. This is Fuller letting people know this may not be what they are expecting.
Yes it is.
This thread has officially jumped the shark.
You put it right there: They're reimagining the look of Star Trek. They're not reimagining Star Trek.
Look at the Andorians in Enterprise. Then look at the Andorian in my profile picture (from TOS). The make-upt is clearly not the same. It's re-imagined. Despite that, I think it has been made plenty clear they are the same Andorians, with the same history, in the same universe.
@BillJ : Your superficial complains are the exact reason why JJ. Abrams felt the need to completely reboot the franchise, because some nerds on the internet WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT COSTUMES THEY HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN YET.
I originally thought nobody would bat an eye, if they just had made a prequel to TOS, where younger actors played the same roles, with modern effects. You have convinced me that fans would have gone completely apeshit... HOW CAN IT BE THE SAME IF IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WAS MADE IN THE 60s????
I originally thought nobody would bat an eye, if they just had made a prequel to TOS, where younger actors played the same roles, with modern effects. You have convinced me that fans would have gone completely apeshit... HOW CAN IT BE THE SAME IF IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WAS MADE IN THE 60s????
The Star Trek IP belongs solely to CBS. Paramount just has first dibs on any movies.
I wouldn't be so sure. But we'll find out in the years to come.
Yeah, they have told us what they are doing. In terms of prime universe setting even pretty exactly, where it will take place, but that they will modernize the looks of things. I'm pretty sure they will stand by that. And I especially don't get the hate and conviction that Fuller lied to has considering they haven't even started filming.
That didn't look like a finished make-up appliance. And ENT showed us different Andorians.
There's no such thing such as first dibs. Paramount has movie rights. CBS has TV rights. The KelvinVerse is Paramount's (and Bad Robot) IP. Pocket Books novels won't reference the destruction of Romulus because they get their license from CBS.
https://www.change.org/p/cbs-cancel-the-new-star-cbs-star-trek-series-now
Last edited:
Paramount was given a license by CBS to produce Trek films. CBS could just as easily take that license away, and Paramount would not be able to produce Trek films anymore. But obviously they're not going to do that.
That's a fake joke petition created by Samuel T. Cogley, a member of this board. What's the point of posting it?
I never said this wasn't a reimagining. I just said it'd remain faithful to TOS, despite how the Romulans or Klingons' foreheads look or if the uniforms are turtlenecks or not. It's not as superficial as that.
I think it's a little more complicated than that. You imply that any film studio has the permission to make Trek movies as long as CBS allows it, which isn't true. CBS needs Paramount as much as Paramount needs them.
I wish that was the case. That would mean we would be able to see a Trek movie by a more competent studio like Disney, Warner Bros or Sony. Sadly it's as I posted it.
As a joke obviously!
The most stress-inducing, anxiety-provoking, cruel thing that you can do to a Star Trek fan is to announce a new Star Trek series/movie. See above if you don't believe me. 
If you thought I implied that, it wasn't my intention. The point I was making was that Paramount does not have "rights" to the Trek movies (other than the Trek movies they've already made.) They have a license from CBS to make Trek movies, the content of which then becomes their property, which is why what happens in the nuTrek films cannot be referenced in novels owned by CBS. But CBS does not have to give Paramount that license; they do so, as you say, because it's mutually and financially beneficial for them to do so.
