Are producers afraid of writing new canon?

[Krog]

Hear me out… all new shows have been taking place more or less within the already established frameworks of what we knew from previous series. Even Discovery after jumping 900 years into the future has been extremely vague on the future political make up of the galaxy.

MSP my question is: why doesn’t Star Trek set a series say 80 years post TNG and tells us how the Galaxy has evolved? It surely would give writers freedom to expand on what’s been already established and the opportunity to write new stories still tied to previous shows?

 

[fireproof78]

It's all new canon.

And yes they are afraid. Of the audience.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

Never underestimate Star Trek fans and their desire for the familiar while yet also demanding something new at the same time.

 

[drt]

Never underestimate Star Trek fans and their desire for the familiar while yet also demanding something new at the same time.

Yes. You forgot to add, "and then get irrationally angry when that something new isn't what they would have done."

 

[C.E. Evans]

if the real question is "Are producers afraid of leaving the TOS or TNG eras?" I don't think they are, but I do think producers want to capitalize on those eras right now, especially to bring in as many subscribers to Paramount+ who are fans of those eras or at least somewhat familiar with them. In that regard, it's more of a business decision than a creative one, and the entertainment industry is as much of a business as any other industry. Add to that, the landscape has changed quite a lot since 1987...

Yes, it's more of a risk to do a new Trek series in an all-new era that's never been visited before, but I do believe it will eventually happen and it's more an issue of when rather than if, IMO. Maybe once the current crop of TOS- and TNG-derived shows have run their course perhaps. But right now, though, Trek definitely is working with those familiar eras, although they are also expanding upon them with different characters and different situations for them to deal with inside of the established continuity.

 

[Mudd]

Hear me out… all new shows have been taking place more or less within the already established frameworks of what we knew from previous series. Even Discovery after jumping 900 years into the future has been extremely vague on the future political make up of the galaxy.

MSP my question is: why doesn’t Star Trek set a series say 80 years post TNG and tells us how the Galaxy has evolved? It surely would give writers freedom to expand on what’s been already established and the opportunity to write new stories still tied to previous shows?

What's the point? Nothing important changes from one Trek era to another. Who are we allies with now? Who are we fighting, now? What does a transporter look like, these days? Our ships always have gone as fast or slow as we needed them to for the story, but what speeds shall we claim they're attaining, this time?

 

[FredH]

Odd question. By definition, every new episode creates new canon.

 

[Lord Garth]

iI do think producers want to capitalize on those eras right now, especially to bring in as many subscribers to Paramount+ who are fans of those eras or at least somewhat familiar with them. In that regard, it's more of a business decision than a creative one, and the entertainment industry is as much of a business as any other industry.

Exactly this.

It's why I'm grateful that we're even managing to get DSC S3-35 and SFA. Also have to mention "Calypso". I agree with the idea that Star Trek needs to move past the TNG Era, but redoing TOS over and over again isn't the only answer. At least not on Streaming TV.

Films are a different story. And from 2005/2006 with Batman Begins & Casino Royale, until 2023 with Barbie & Oppenheimer, a reboot was the answer for movies too. A TOS Reboot was way to go. In a post-2023/post-Barbenheimer landscape, I don't think Star Trek needs to do a reboot per se, I think it needs to go outside the box. Maybe a movie about Gene Roddenberry making Star Trek in the 1960s. All the behind-the-scenes craziness is great fodder for a film all by itself. And it won't happen, but a Quentin Tarantino Star Trek movie would've been out there enough that it would've drawn people to see it even out of curiosity alone. Anything that doesn't look like "business as usual". Which, by the third Kelvin Film, Trek movies had become again.

Picard Season 1, love it or hate it, was about Ex-Starfleet and Non-Starfleet characters on a ship that wasn't Starfleet at all. Despite the connection to TNG, it was outside of the Star Trek box too. I can't see them doing anything like PIC Season 1 now, even just a few years later.

 

[Krog]

Great to see engagement on this! I do realize everything is new canon - yet we are stuck with the same baddies and the constraints that stories already told bring. Fair to say that they have done a good job so far in writing new stories that expand on those eras, but to me settign a new show 50-100 years past Picard would open up so many new opportunities creatively speaking.

 

[Lord Garth]

Great to see engagement on this! I do realize everything is new canon - yet we are stuck with the same baddies and the constraints that stories already told bring. Fair to say that they have done a good job so far in writing new stories that expand on those eras, but to me settign a new show 50-100 years past Picard would open up so many new opportunities creatively speaking.

The 26th-31st Centuries sound more like Time Trek than Star Trek, so the 25th Century looks like the last century to have Star Trek Star Trek until Discovery shows up after The Burn.

 

[The Wormhole]

why doesn’t Star Trek set a series say 80 years post TNG and tells us how the Galaxy has evolved?

To paraphrase Rick Berman: what does that mean besides tighter spandex and smaller tricorders?

 

[Lord Garth]

To paraphrase Rick Berman: what does that mean besides tighter spandex and smaller tricorders?

Well, he was the one creating Star Trek at the time, so he had the power to make it not be that if he'd have wanted to. Not that I'm for the idea, but it all comes down to the cast, characters, and execution. Just like everything else.

And the "tighter spandex, the further we go into the future!" argument doesn't hold. The SNW and early-DSC uniforms are more form-fitting than the TNG/DS9/VOY uniforms. Obviously not including TNG's first two seasons. The uniforms in the series that are set Post-NEM don't look "sprayed on" either. Rick Berman gave a lazy answer because he was burned out and his time was up.

 

[fireproof78]

Great to see engagement on this! I do realize everything is new canon - yet we are stuck with the same baddies and the constraints that stories already told bring. Fair to say that they have done a good job so far in writing new stories that expand on those eras, but to me settign a new show 50-100 years past Picard would open up so many new opportunities creatively speaking.

To be blunt, at least from where I sit, the tendency is to see push back for anything new and creative. So, I think the writers are moving in a more conservative direction, keeping things closer to what is considered recognizable as Star Trek. The closest we might get is with the Academy show or Season 5 of Discovery.

 

[Paul755]

I don’t think they are afraid to write new canon or even overwrite/tweak existing canon. And they’ve done one or both in all the nu-Trek series. But it’s always a fine line they have to walk in trying to appease the current fanbase and also draw in “new customers”.

and for now it seems like they’ve decided to try an appease the established fanbase first.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It's all new canon.

And yes they are afraid. Of the audience.

This. They change things, people freak out and in the case of Picard, spend a whole season getting back the old status quo.

They keep things the same, and you get posts like the OP. They're stuck.

How to fix it? Stop pandering to fans and just tell their stories. Trek is far too reactionary to what the fans think. People don't know what they want until they see it, and if it conflicts with how they imagined it they can just stop watching.

 

[Lord Garth]

This. They change things, people freak out and in the case of Picard, spend a whole season getting back the old status quo.

I think this is half-true. I honestly believe Terry Matalas knew what he wanted to do with Picard before he even started. After the mixed reaction to Season 1, Alex Kurtzman let him do it.

Terry Matalas' entire mode of thought heading into Season 3 was, "Fuck the TNG Movies! I'm doing what I want!" I was happy to go along with it because I don't like most of the TNG Movies either. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," and all that.

Some of the changes stuck. The coarser language, the much less sterile feel, yes the better costuming, the acknowledgement of culture after 1955, etc... PIC changed everything I didn't like about TNG/DS9/VOY, and it was true of all three seasons.

 

[Farscape One]

PRODIGY also sort of goes out of the box in that none of the main characters are human. Even Janeway is a hologram and not real. (We don't really get the real Janeway until the back half, and she was only part of the arc.)

Maybe it's time to do things in reverse. What I mean by that is sort of how VOYAGER was pimped out at the beginning... exploring strange new worlds like TOS and TNG, but heading back to Federation space instead of going outward from Federation space.

How about taking it a step further? A series that takes place entirely outside the Federation... hell, make it a different galaxy. Aliens see indications of a vast organization they want to check out because they are curious. And it's the Federation they are looking at. They could have found remnants of a Starfleet ship on a world in their galaxy, and the aliens decide to head in that direction, all while exploring other worlds inside their home galaxy before heading to ours. You can tie it in to TNG by having that ship be the Hera, or any number of other lost ships over Starfleet's history... hell, we don't know the fate of the Enterprise-B, so make it that ship to truly keep it STAR TREK. (Since that was ultimately why the series was just called ENTERPRISE during the first 2 seasons... it's the most widely recognized name that says 'Star Trek' without actually saying STAR TREK.) You can even use an already established extragalactic race as one of the aliens... the Kelvans. And make it take place in the Andromeda galaxy.

This has the benefit of BOTH heading back to and going out of the Federation at the same time. (As the audience, we are heading back to a galaxy we know, but we are also exploring a new galaxy with the characters going outward.)

We've got the technology and practical effects and makeup now to make it happen. And even if they don't want to do it with live action, you can do it with animation.

 

[Nerys Myk]

MSP my question is: why doesn’t Star Trek set a series say 80 years post TNG and tells us how the Galaxy has evolved?

Because that's never been what Star Trek is about.

 

[Sketcher]

Is... is Discovery not set in the 32nd century? About as far from the TOS and TNG eras as you can get.

 

[Danja]

Maybe it's time to do things in reverse. What I mean by that is sort of how VOYAGER was pimped out at the beginning... exploring strange new worlds like TOS and TNG, but heading back to Federation space instead of going outward from Federation space.

How about taking it a step further? A series that takes place entirely outside the Federation... hell, make it a different galaxy. Aliens see indications of a vast organization they want to check out because they are curious. And it's the Federation they are looking at. They could have found remnants of a Starfleet ship on a world in their galaxy, and the aliens decide to head in that direction, all while exploring other worlds inside their home galaxy before heading to ours.

You've just described Prodigy (a group of aliens who've never heard of Starfleet or the Federation discover the wreckage of the USS Protostar crashed on an alien planet).