Why do they keep going back to the Kirk era?

[BillJ]

Here's a question:

Who is more widely known?

Captain Picard or Professor Xavier?
I would argue Picard.

Avery Bullock.

The only time Trek, in its natural home on TV, was not under constant threat of cancellation was when it was set in the 24th century. TOS itself died very quickly. Enterprise scarcely did better.

Voyager and Deep Space Nine would've both been canceled during their runs if they had been on traditional US networks. TNG likely would have too.

Only accounting for TOS first run, you miss it becoming a cultural phenomenon here in the US.

 

[The Wormhole]

She had enough personal brand recognition to appear in Nemesis

Sloppy second. They wanted Seven of Nine, but Jeri Ryan wasn't interested.

 

[1001001]

I am willing to watch a good show, wherever and whenever it's set.

My personal opinion is that I'd prefer they go forward from the TNG/VOY/DS9 timeline. Prequels generally (not always) feel shoe-horned in, and we know the outcome. Obviously the new movies found a way around that by creating a new timeline (so now Spock yells "KHAN!!" instead of Kirk). Also I just don't have the nostalgia for TOS like others do (TNG and VOY were "my Trek"). I loved the TOS movies, though.

I don't know...I recognize there are many factors involved (mostly business/money stuff). I am totally open to enjoying Discovery. I hope I do. I enjoyed 2 of the 3 new films, so that's pretty good.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

I am willing to watch a good show, wherever and whenever it's set.

My personal opinion is that I'd prefer they go forward from the TNG/VOY/DS9 timeline. Prequels generally (not always) feel shoe-horned in, and we know the outcome. Obviously the new movies found a way around that by creating a new timeline (so now Spock yells "KHAN!!" instead of Kirk). Also I just don't have the nostalgia for TOS like others do (TNG and VOY were "my Trek"). I loved the TOS movies, though.

I don't know...I recognize there are many factors involved (mostly business/money stuff). I am totally open to enjoying Discovery. I hope I do. I enjoyed 2 of the 3 new films, so that's pretty good.

Yeah even though I adore TOS, I'm not particularly nostalgic for it (I'm also 28 years old so...) I'm excited for DSC only because it's new Star Trek (!!!), it looks promising, and it's being made by competent writers, producers, directors, and actors. Time period doesn't make much difference to me given those three major factors.

 

[F. King Daniel]

What's funny is that I don't think STD, based on the trailers, will appeal to TOS fans just because it's set in that general era. The problem is that STD looks nothing like TOS, it looks dark, gritty, depressing. This could have been set in literally any era.

It looks like a TV spin-off of the recent movies, to me.

 

[KennyB]

What's funny is that I don't think STD, based on the trailers, will appeal to TOS fans just because it's set in that general era. The problem is that STD looks nothing like TOS, it looks dark, gritty, depressing. This could have been set in literally any era.

Dying breed..........I'm 47 grew up on TOS, and I am excited.

 

[KennyB]

It looks like a TV spin-off of the recent movies, to me.

Which makes sense since they were produced within 24 months of each other.............

 

[Herbert]

The show hardly looks like TOS to begin with.

It looks like a TV spin-off of the recent movies, to me.

It hardly looks like any of the series produced so far. It resembles (too much for my tastes) the look of the Kelvin stuff. I realize that looks and effects can't remain static but I'm not really liking the look all that much. However, I will watch at least the first episode.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

TOS is the most popular. Pocket Books has confirmed their TOS novels set in the TV series era are the best selling Trek novels, and back in 2009 the fact that Trek XI was bring back Kirk Spock and the gang was a big deal and the movie's selling point, regardless if they were played by different actors. TOS is the Star Trek that continues to generate money even fifty years after its premiere, so it's the one that's going to be revisited. It really is that simple.

Indeed it is the most financially successful and the only part of Trek that has burned into popular consciousness.

At the QMX booth at Comic Con, I overheard from an employee that their TOS Master Series figures were flying off the shelves (so to speak) but they were having a hard time moving their TNG Master Series Picard figure.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Because when normal people think about Star Trek they think about Kirk, Spock, Klingons, Khan, Tribbles, and "The One With The Whales".
Why do you think the NuTrek movies shoved each of those in? (Space whales will be saved for Trek 14)

I would actually like to see them tackle the Mirror Universe in a movie (as has been done in the monthly IDW comic book) even to the point of bringing back Benedict Cumberbach as a good guy Khan fighting against the Terran Empire. I don't think that they have to do The Voyage Home just yet, but they could do others. At least Star Trek Beyond was about a whole new story and villain that had a partial reference to Enterprise.

 

[Tesophius]

It looks like a TV spin-off of the recent movies, to me.

Not to me, the new TOS movies are pretty bright and are at least neutral in overall outlook, while STD looks dystopian and gloomy.

 

[Greg Cox]

TOS only lasted three seasons on NBC, true, but then it was rerun in syndication forever, which is when it really caught on.

Granted, this is partly a generational thing. I suspect that TNG will get rebooted eventually, when the people who grew up on that show are running the studios. All you really need is one Big Name director or producer, with plenty of clout, to decide that his dream project is a new version of TNG and, voila, you have a green-light. (I believe that's basically why a new DOCTOR WHO finally happened, after the show had been off the air for a generation or so.)

But note that when Nimoy died, it was front-page news all around the world. I lost track of the number of tribute magazines I saw on sale at grocery stores, supermarkets, drug stores, etc. Not just sci-fi specialty shops, mind you, but the check-out aisle at the grocery store, next to PEOPLE magazine and TV GUIDE. Spock at least was definitely known to the general public, not just us hardcore Trekkies.

And let's not be too quick to dismiss the general public. Star Trek is not just for the hardcore Trekkies and never has been. We need to appeal to general audiences, casual fans, and newcomers as well.

 

[Balok's Decoy]

If you ask literally any random person on the street, "Quick! Name a character from Star Trek. First name that pops in your head!" I guarantee you that the vast majority (say, 90%?) will say Spock. You might get some Kirks. You might get some Picards. But Spock practically represents the franchise. He's like Sonic for Sega, Mario for Nintendo, etc.

 

[Greg Cox]

Janeway did become pretty well known. She had enough personal brand recognition to appear in Nemesis

I'm not sure a cameo in a movie nobody saw really counts as a high-profile gig.

 

[Prax]

I would actually like to see them tackle the Mirror Universe in a movie (as has been done in the monthly IDW comic book) even to the point of bringing back Benedict Cumberbach as a good guy Khan fighting against the Terran Empire. I don't think that they have to do The Voyage Home just yet, but they could do others. At least Star Trek Beyond was about a whole new story and villain that had a partial reference to Enterprise.

It appears there may be a mirror universe episode on Discovery. On IMDB, for episode ten under the cast and crew, there's an actor playing "ISS Discovery Captain"

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt6011050/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_1

 

[Prax]

If you ask literally any random person on the street, "Quick! Name a character from Star Trek. First name that pops in your head!" I guarantee you that the vast majority (say, 90%?) will say Spock. You might get some Kirks. You might get some Picards. But Spock practically represents the franchise. He's like Sonic for Sega, Mario for Nintendo, etc.

If you asked them to name 5, what would they say?

 

[Starfury]

If you asked them to name 5, what would they say?

Spock, Kirk, Vader, Gandalf, and, um...

 

[fireproof78]

You seem to have a lot of faith in these studio projections. If one presented an example of a studio doing their homework, investing a great deal of money, and producing an utter flop, would that cause you to question the idea that studios "know what's going to appeal?" If other studios have failed to forecast audience tastes accurately, is it possible Paramount and CBS suffer from the same lack of information?

That's always a possibility and that's the risks studios will take. And, if in doubt, they will go with the more familiar part of a brand in order to hedge their bets.

But, guess what? They still do their homework, have teams of people studying this stuff, and what they are willing to take a risk on. It's their money, and its clear from the marketing, merchandising and the like that the Kirk era is most well known in public consciousness.

So, yes, I have faith in the studios, in so far as they do this for a living, and I'm just a viewer from Idaho.

 

[Kor]

I'm part of the generation that grew up with TNG and came of age with VOY and DS9, but I always appreciated TOS the most. I got burned out on 24th-century Trek a long time ago. I never want to see any more of it again for as long as I live.

To me, the 23rd century era is true Star Trek. Since we got so little material, there is still a vast wellspring of untapped storytelling potential, a whole universe that we barely got to explore. I desperately thirst for more TOS-era stories, and I'm glad that we finally get a whole new series set in that general timeframe.

Kor

 

[Balok's Decoy]

If you asked them to name 5, what would they say?