Alex Kurtzman Gets New Deal With CBS, Will Expand 'Star Trek' TV

[Jinn]

Here you go
Size

"The dimensions of the Constitution-class, 947 feet (289 meters) long for the original configuration and 1,000 feet (305 meters) for the refit-configuration, have been set in stone in time immemorial as far as Star Trek lore is concerned"

I love it when Memory Alpha gets dramatic!

 

[Hythlodeus]

Okay, my last attempt to give my view on that topic:
Yes, the Enterprise is a character as is Cpt. Pike btw.
They recast Pike for obvious reasons, so he looks different than before. Does that mean it is a reboot? No, it's just a recast.
And if it's not a reboot if one character looks slightly different, then why should it be a reboot if another character looks slightly different. See it as a recast. They recast the old model that played the Enterprise with a younger CGI model

 

[dahj]

Also, as I’ve brought it up:

1. What if Kurtzman et al. made a Jane Kirk show?

What's a "Jane Kirk show" anyway?

It's not like Jim Kirk is the God of Thunder(that's his dad ) and there can only be one, his backstory is pretty generic. He's just a guy who went to Starfleet Academy, was kinda alright and earned his command. Heck, Janeway already has the exact same backstory, so how's "Jane Kirk" different from "New Female Captain."

Even if you really want "brand recognition" with the Kirk name, there's still no need for a reboot. Just make her his never before mentioned adopted Vulcan sister...

 

[Jinn]

What's a "Jane Kirk show" anyway?

Issue 29 of IDW's Star Trek ongoing?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Even if you really want "brand recognition" with the Kirk name, there's still no need for a reboot. Just make her his never before mentioned adopted Vulcan sister...

J'Ayn Kirk

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Here you go
Size

So in reality nobody knows how big the thing is? Thanks for this

I suppose the upscaling of the Enterprise either doesn’t matter or can’t ever be verified (so therefore doesn’t matter) as there were never any firm dimensions for her in the first place. Viewpoint changed

 

[Groppler Zorn]

he looks different than before. Does that mean it is a reboot? No, it's just a recast.

He looks different. I.e. he is visually different. Thus part of the visual reboot. Hence, reboot.

I’m only kidding now

 

[Groppler Zorn]

so how's "Jane Kirk" different from "New Female Captain

She wouldn’t be a new female captain. She’d be Captain Kirk. The same Captain Kirk as in TOS just female.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Issue 29 of IDW's Star Trek ongoing?

I haven’t actually read that - but I am aware of it (thanks trekmovie!). Would it make a good series if they put it on tv d’you reckon?

 

[Jinn]

I haven’t actually read that - but I am aware of it (thanks trekmovie!). Would it make a good series if they put it on tv d’you reckon?

I'm afraid I'm still at the first trade of the series and haven't gotten to Jane Kirk yet, but I'm anticipating it!

 

[F. King Daniel]

There was an awesome clip of women re-enacting the Pike/Kirk recruitment scene from ST'09 but its vanished from YouTube

It was amazing. Really good prodiction values too. Where's it gone??

 

[Mirror Tuvix]

Them trying to bolt on their pet project to a fifty year old show irks me. It would irk me if they completely changed the look of TNG and gave Data a human sister. It comes across as creatively uninspired.

Bingo bango.

BTW, I hope everyone remembered to PayPal their $25 to Mark Altman and friends of the Saturn Awards so as to vote for Star Trek: Dark Mirror.

 

[Nerys Myk]

But, don't let CBS tell you what it is.

Uh, it's their show. They can call it what they want. I don't think we get define other people's property.
You don't have to like it but remember, it's not your's.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

There was an awesome clip of women re-enacting the Pike/Kirk recruitment scene from ST'09 but its vanished from YouTube

Yeh I remember seeing that - I think trekmovie did a piece on it at the time.

The way I look at it is that there’s nothing intrinsically or inherently male about Captain Kirk. The character is heroic, an adventurer, loyal to friends, an explorer, a by the book officer (at least in TOS) and an extremely proficient and competent commanding officer. There’s no reason Kirk couldn’t be female. And for that to be the same Kirk as we saw in TOS. If they made that a show I would totally watch it.

 

[Rahul]

I'm extremely interested in how they depict the Trek universe if they go back to the 24th century, especially if they ever do that Picard show (god, I SO hope for this one!). THAT'S for me the point where it will show definitely whether these new shows are indeed in the "prime" universe, or actually a reboot.

The TNG era is not that long ago - you really can't make an argument the TNG movies like "Nemesis" are "so old" that they "need" a visual upgrade. They are higher-budget and better looking than Discovery. So we shall see. If the Picard show is set in a universe which is a reasonably continuation of the TNG one - e.g. "normal" sized and looking starships, viewscreens, Worf with hair and everything - then DIS will probably simply go down as an anomaly in the Trek franchise - like TAS, which stories definitely count, is a genuine Trek show, but where not every single little technical detail has to be treated as first class canon.

If on the other hand they reboot the visuals of the Picard show as well - have klingons (Worf ) with that new mullrat-look, Kelvin-timeline aesthetics and technology - then... I don't know really. Then this will probably be our new Trek universe: Utterly self-referential, while at the same time being in direct conflict with the original work it references so heavily. (Will it even be the original Picard? Or will this be the goodby to an alternate version of Picard?) Which is fucking WEIRD to be honest. But that's where we are right now...

 

[Jinn]

I'm extremely interested in how they depict the Trek universe if they go back to the 34th century (the Picard show). THAT'S for me the point where it will show definitely whether these new shows are indeed in the "prime" universe, or a reboot.

Nah, if the 34th century looks like it used to people will just say "it's in the same timeline as Enterprise"

And yes, I know you meant 24th century, but far be it from me to not misrepresent other posts in order to make a joke!

 

[Mirror Tuvix]

Uh, it's their show. They can call it what they want. I don't think we get define other people's property.
You don't have to like it but remember, it's not your's.

I'm not going to get into a fruitless philosophical debate, but that kind of corporate fealty comes across as, at least, reductive and simplistic, especially considering a pop culture entity that was kept alive only by fans during the 1970s, and considering Kurtzman has no ties to the original tree or its branches. (whereas Berman, Piller, Behr, Moore all knew and worked with Roddenberry.)* I mean, let's say a Russian mining consortium bought Lucasfilm and turned Star Wars films into state propaganda for Putin - at a certain point, that would stop being Star Wars, despite legal claims of ownership.

*I'm not claiming Roddenberry is the be all & end all of Star Trek, but to continue the Star Wars comparison - Disney Lucasfilm is run by and has employed close associates of George Lucas (Kennedy, Kasdan, Howard) - whereas with B. Fuller long gone, Kurtzman Trek is currently disconnected from the primary tree of life (sorry, Nero & Keenser don't have essential dogmatic status just yet) and thereby has to earn its Trek status in the minds of devotees- it doesn't get that automatically by the royal decree of Moonves.

I probably could write another draft of this, but oh well.

 

[Jinn]

I'm not going to get into a fruitless philosophical debate, but that kind of corporate fealty comes across as, at least, reductive and simplistic, especially considering a pop culture entity that was kept alive only by fans during the 1970s, and considering Kurtzman has no ties to the original tree or its branches. (whereas Berman, Piller, Behr, Moore all knew and worked with Roddenberry.)* I mean, let's say a Russian mining consortium bought Lucasfilm and turned Star Wars films into state propaganda for Putin - at a certain point, that would stop being Star Wars, despite legal claims of ownership.

*I'm not claiming Roddenberry is the be all & end all of Star Trek, but to continue the Star Wars comparison - Disney Lucasfilm is run by and has employed close associates of George Lucas (Kennedy, Kasdan, Howard) - whereas with B. Fuller long gone, Kurtzman Trek is currently disconnected from the primary tree of life (sorry, Nero & Keenser don't have essential dogmatic status just yet) and thereby has to earn its Trek status in the minds of devotees- it doesn't get that automatically by the royal decree of Moonves.

I probably could write another draft of this, but oh well.

Well, Russian propaganda Star Wars is morally objectionable. Star Trek: Discovery isn't, per se.

 

[Mirror Tuvix]

Well, Russian propaganda Star Wars is morally objectionable. Star Trek: Discovery isn't, per se.

Debatable. Hehoha. I just have an "issue" with the weird notion of corporate loyalty some fans seem to possess, especially with properties nigh-wholly divorced from original architects or even apprentices of original architects.

But enuff about that, Ruk said to discuss the Hawaii Five-0 reboot. I hear it's a heckuva show.

 

[cooleddie74]

I'm not the biggest fan nor defender of JJ-style window viewscreens on starships but there is at least one example of a window with pop-up displays that can be projected on it in Berman Trek. The window facing the Warp Five Complex drydock in "Broken Bow, Part I(ENT)" upon which a pop-up containing Zefram Cochrane's dedication speech for the Complex is shown.

So Berman Trek pre-JJ and DSC does have windows with very similar features but with those producers it was more of a one-off.