It seems there is a reason for the visual reboot and the producers aren't being honest about it.

I guess licensing them for merchandising is different than actually using the stuff for a live-action TV show.

 

They re-rerecorded it for TOS Remastered. But that was over 10 years ago.

That is my thought as well.

 

No wonder the show is as bad as it is. Designed and produced by lawyers.

 

It's confirmed the rights diversion happened after the end of ENT. At the same time around when the studio destroyed ALL their Star Trek props and sets instead of archiving them.

I'm beginning to believe those numbnuts REALLY thought there would never be a "Star Trek" again, ever, and just sold the rights to everything left and right (except for merchandise - because those were already sold earlier). If true, Trek might never be able to be completely repaired again...

 

Save for the ones that went to auction.

 

The question if you want ti simplify it I think would come down to this. Are they making changes in the way Nic Locano became Tom Paris on "Voyager" or how T'Pau became T'Pol on "Enterprise." If it was done so as not to pay someone who created the first desiign or invented it for their story then at least it can't be said that this has happened on a lower scale, before in Trek.

Jason

 

They still should've simply done a reboot. In my mind, the question becomes: with everything they knew about the legal issues, why didn't they just do a reboot?

If there are rights issues, I can't believe they won't run into them at some point with the story elements.

 

I mean, the Discovery herself is at least 25% different from the Ken Adam/Ralph McQuarrie sketch it was based on....

So there would be already precedence in this show.

 

Now the big question: was the legalities involved the reason Fuller was fired? From everything I've read, he wanted something that looked closer to TOS.

 

I thought I saw a "Star Trek" special where lots of the old sets and props where sold at a auction? That Christie's playhouse or whatever the place was called. I recall this because I was disapointed when I watched this special because it ended up being one big commerical for their auction.

Jason

 

If they did a reboot, they would probably walk int othe very same rights issues, even more harder: From a reboot, it's usually expected to have the same characters again (Kirk, Spock, ...). An entirely new crew wouldn't make much sense in a reboot. And then there would be legal traps EVERYWHERE.

 

Fuller is also the one who told Eaves not to use round nacelles.

 

Yeah, they sold everything they could.
But there are also tragic images of construction vehicles flattening the NX shuttle models, the klingon bridge set, all the background phasers and disrupters,. .... Basically, their entire Star Trek library, except for some selected pieces they thought they could make money from.

 

But legal traps the Abrams films, which Kurtzman was part of, were able to navigate.

 

That's crazy! For starters how do you not make money off any of that stuff. People will buy fake phaser toys but not props that were used on the shows. It boggles the mind.

Jason

 

That isn't that unusual in Hollywood. Even GL destroyed a lot of sets from TPM.

 

I understand this for most show. I mean who really wants to own a gavel used in several "Law and Order" shows. Trek being Trek though you would think people even in the early 80's would realize that those Trek props and sets are going to have value. I guess though this was before merchandising was a big thing or was starting to just catch on because of "Star Wars" and not evryone was't as aware of this at the time. Proably by the type of people who don;t know the difference between Trek and Star Wars and whose entire knowledge of Trek comes from it being the show "with the pointy eared guy."

Jason

 

You can sell one very detailed but also very exclusive prop of a klingon disruptor for the same (or more!) money than if you sell 200+ of cheap, wooden background distruptor attrapes and a few good ones.

It might actually be economical to destroy the majority of duplicated items, and only sell the best, remaining ones as exclusive items. It's bonkers. But what a company would do.

 

Because the Prime Universe is a security blanket that brings comfort and joy to the fans. Why else would they keep going out of their way to mention it in the media blitz prior to the premiere?

 

The only places I saw it mentioned in were fan sites and convention recaps.

Official press releases released by CBS and such never said the terms Prime Universe. None of the corporate marketing mentioned the universe.