Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?

[ITDUDE]

I want another reboot - another good one.

I want nuBSG, but Star Trek. I want Jane Kirk with Andorian Spock and I guess Bones could be a girl too. Make it with good writing, serialized if they want to, make it build a universe.
Then they can spin off, prequel, do wtf they want after it based on the nuTtrek. Except don't air it on Network TV as it's won't live long (I am still pissed off Caprica was cancelled, that was one awesome show)

 

[cultcross]

Let's find out. Searching...

YES! Here it is!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That's a Klingon? I thought this was meant to be Prime!

 

[Lord Garth]

I am still pissed off Caprica was cancelled, that was one awesome show

Yes, it was. Especially with the surprise twist at the end that none of us saw coming.

 

[Mudd]

Sorry, but the Abrams reboot was better than most of the sequels.

Lost In Space is a remarkably good reboot. I'd much sooner see people like that take an independent stab at the original Star Trek than anything CBS has cooked up for Trek on TV in ages.

For that matter, at this point Trek would probably be better off sold to a studio that can competently develop franchises that work. CBS and Paramount both are being lost to old thinking and management.

 

[Lord Garth]

Sorry, but the Abrams reboot was better than most of the sequels.

"Most"? I'm actually surprised you didn't say "all".

 

[ITDUDE]

For that matter, at this point Trek would probably be better off sold to a studio that can competently develop franchises that work. CBS and Paramount both are being lost to old thinking and management.

Won't happen with Moonves in charge and not before CBS/Viacom merger. BUT if/when CBS/Viacom merge, and IF the merger is a complete failure (i.e they can't compete with Disney's of the world) and they decide to sell off assets, I can see Disney picking up Star Trek for spare change they have in their cushions. Now imagine THAT, Star Wars and Star Trek and MCU owned by one company. Maaaaajor cross-over event, just begging to happen.

 

[Krandor]

The problem Trek has by the time enterprise came about is by that time the same show Runner were in charge too long. It needed fresh ideas.

Trek at a minimum should take a bbc/doctor who appproach and change show runners every few years. I’d alsi like to see more cast turnover. Not realistic for the same crew to stay together for 7 years. We are already going to see sone of that on dsc with a new season 2 captain. Center the show on one ship but have change in personnel.

 

[Lord Garth]

The problem Trek has by the time enterprise came about is by that time the same show Runner were in charge too long. It needed fresh ideas.

That's why I call ENT "New Trek by the people who brought you Old Trek!" They wanted to have a fresh start but it was done by people who'd been at it forever and ever.

DSC is what I wanted. I just didn't know it yet.

 

[-Brett-]

Won't happen with Moonves in charge and not before CBS/Viacom merger. BUT if/when CBS/Viacom merge, and IF the merger is a complete failure (i.e they can't compete with Disney's of the world) and they decide to sell off assets, I can see Disney picking up Star Trek for spare change they have in their cushions. Now imagine THAT, Star Wars and Star Trek and MCU owned by one company. Maaaaajor cross-over event, just begging to happen.

Disney wouldn't do anything with Star Trek. Only reason they might buy it would be to crush the competition.

As far as the general public is concerned, Trek and Wars are the same thing. Why would Disney care about the one that's less successful and less popular?

 

[Mudd]

Disney wouldn't do anything with Star Trek.

Of course they would.

They might even start by giving Bad Robot a free hand with it.

Only reason they might buy it would be to crush the competition.

I doubt that there's anybody in the movie business today who views Star Trek as "competition."

 

[cooleddie74]

ENT is an imperfect series made by people who even by the time the first prequel show went into production had already been on the job for a decade or more and had hundreds of episodes and films under their belt. There was going to be a less-than-fresh feeling once the series got out of the gate because Rick Berman and Brannon Braga had been at it to one degree or another ever since the late 1980s and had done practically every imaginable story idea at least once and by 2001 had begun to run out of truly fresh concepts for a Star Trek series. Given how tired they were after seven years of VOY (and in Berman's case, fourteen years of TNG, DS9 and VOY) and being involved in three major theatrical films on top of all those television episodes it's a near-miracle that ENT was as good and as solid as it was.

 

[MakeshiftPython]

ENT is an imperfect series made by people who even by the time the first prequel show went into production had already been on the job for a decade or more and had hundreds of episodes and films under their belt. There was going to be a less-than-fresh feeling once the series got out of the gate because Rick Berman and Brannon Braga had been at it to one degree or another ever since the late 1980s and had done practically every imaginable story idea at least once and by 2001 had begun to run out of truly fresh concepts for a Star Trek series. Given how tired they were after seven years of VOY (and in Berman's case, fourteen years of TNG, DS9 and VOY) and being involved in three major theatrical films on top of all those television episodes it's a near-miracle that ENT was as good and as solid as it was.

I think what it needed was a stronger sense of direction and a new influx of writers, which didn't happen until later after the ratings took a deep plummet. From what I understand, Berman & Braga practically did the beginning of the show on hand which is why they have so many writing credits. That had to be very tiring and they may have had to rely on using old Trek tropes in order to create content for production, which is probably why it feels more like an extended season of VOYAGER.

Posters above bring up the decline ratings that had been happening since DS9. Sure, we could lump ENTERPRISE into that, but at the same time it has to be acknowledged that the show had a very strong premiere, showing that there were audiences open to seeing a new Trek show after DS9 and VOYAGER. But given what we saw of the first season, it's not surprising its ratings took a freefall. I was with the show from the start, but after eight episodes lost commitment. I didn't consciously decide to give up on the show, I simply forgot it, and when I realized that I didn't miss it much.

Funnily, TNG reruns had begun playing on TNN/Spike around the same time ENTERPRISE premiered and that was the first time I really got to watch that show from start to finish. I must admit, when Wednesdays came up and I had to chose between the shows on what I wanted to watch (they both aired at 8pm), I usually ended up picking TNG.

 

[Rahul]

I want nuBSG, but Star Trek. I want Jane Kirk with Andorian Spock and I guess Bones could be a girl too. Make it with good writing, serialized if they want to, make it build a universe.
Then they can spin off, prequel, do wtf they want after it based on the nuTtrek. Except don't air it on Network TV as it's won't live long (I am still pissed off Caprica was cancelled, that was one awesome show)

Honestly? Female Jane Kirk, Andorian sidekick, female doctor on a new Enterprise - that's not a reboot. That's an entirely new show. This could be a new spin-off show, and no one would notice the original idea was a reboot.

I see no need to make another attempt at getting rid of the continuity - continuity really is only hamstringing you, when you directly reference it. As such, I would be much more interested in those characters if they would be the "new" show, instead of the tired "new clothes for an old show". We already got that.

 

[Tosk]

continuity really is only hamstringing you, when you directly reference it.

I wish more people would get that!

 

[Dukhat]

ENT is an imperfect series made by people who even by the time the first prequel show went into production had already been on the job for a decade or more and had hundreds of episodes and films under their belt. There was going to be a less-than-fresh feeling once the series got out of the gate because Rick Berman and Brannon Braga had been at it to one degree or another ever since the late 1980s and had done practically every imaginable story idea at least once and by 2001 had begun to run out of truly fresh concepts for a Star Trek series. Given how tired they were after seven years of VOY (and in Berman's case, fourteen years of TNG, DS9 and VOY) and being involved in three major theatrical films on top of all those television episodes it's a near-miracle that ENT was as good and as solid as it was.

To add to that, ENT was also hamstrung by UPN who took a hands-on approach to the show because they thought they knew better than the people actually producing the show. TNG and DS9 had none of that because they were syndicated. VOY had it to a degree in its later seasons, and ENT had it for its entire run.

 

[fireproof78]

I wish more people would get that!

Continuity is a dual edged sword. It is less remarked upon if the work is considered entertaining, but that doesn't mean continuity was maintained. It just means that it was "close enough" for any mistakes to be unremarkable. And, on the flip side, if the show is less entertaining the issues that would be ignored otherwise stand out.

Continuity, for me, isn't just when it is directly referenced. Part of world building is the consequences of said choices and tech. The Genesis device is an oft mentioned example because the implications are rather large in terms of what could happen in universe.

Continuity is an issue-period. It is a question of how the writers want to approach it that makes it a problem or an opportunity.

 

[starsuperion]

Sorry, but the Abrams reboot was better than most of the sequels.

Lost In Space is a remarkably good reboot. I'd much sooner see people like that take an independent stab at the original Star Trek than anything CBS has cooked up for Trek on TV in ages.

For that matter, at this point Trek would probably be better off sold to a studio that can competently develop franchises that work. CBS and Paramount both are being lost to old thinking and management.

maybe the ownership of trek should come back under 1 roof. then there won't have to legally be a 25% difference rule, which proves to me that STD is actually 25% alternate timeline probably caused by the Kelvin timeline, or is a Kelvin 2.0 timeline..

lost in space is amazing tho! love it.

 

[cooleddie74]

To add to that, ENT was also hamstrung by UPN who took a hands-on approach to the show because they thought they knew better than the people actually producing the show. TNG and DS9 had none of that because they were syndicated. VOY had it to a degree in its later seasons, and ENT had it for its entire run.

One of the most annoying and infuriating stories one of the ENT writers told was of the transporter accident in "Strange New World" that fuses rocks, twigs and leaves to the body of Crewman Novokavich and almost kills him. The show's producers wanted to show that early transporters could be dangerous and they wanted to kill somebody off to demonstrate how scary they could be during this timeframe. The network in no uncertain terms told the producers and writers that no, the transporter works just fine. Nobody is going to get killed by it. The writers disagreed strongly, thinking that the whole point of a prequel series set at the dawn of the Star Trek universe we know and love is to show how dangerous and unpredictable exploration and technology were at that point in history, and having a crewman die in a transporter accident would be a way to show that to the audience and up the stakes.

Nope, the suits told them. It works just fine. UPN just didn't care or didn't understand or both.

 

[Lord Garth]

maybe the ownership of trek should come back under 1 roof. then there won't have to legally be a 25% difference rule, which proves to me that STD is actually 25% alternate timeline probably caused by the Kelvin timeline, or is a Kelvin 2.0 timeline..

lost in space is amazing tho! love it.

I see the 25% as a gift. The only good thing to come out of the legalese is that whenever someone says "But that contradicts this!", then I can hand-wave the differences as being part of the 25%.

Or, to paraphrase Garak, "You got what you wanted: a way out of arguments about the nitty-gritty details of Canon. You'll be able to explain away any differences you see between Discovery and earlier Trek and all it cost was it having to be at least 25% different. I don't know about you, but I call that a bargain."

I know a deal when I see one, and I'll take it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The 25 percentiverse