What do you consider to be the Prime Timeline?

[Dukhat]

Batman is hardly a good comparison as the character has had dozens of different runs of the character, with no connections between them. A serial from the 40's has nothing to do with a comic from the 50's, which has no connections with a show from the 60's, which has no connections with another comic run from the 70's, which has nothing to do with Tim Burton movies from the 80's/90's, which had no connection with Nolan's trilogy, or the Matt Reeves The Batman. Batman has had dozens of timeline. Star Trek has two.


No.

That’s entirely missing my point. No one in their right mind would ever think the Nolan Batman films take place in the same continuity as the ‘60’s TV show, or that Christian Bale’s Bruce Wayne is supposed to be the same guy as Adam West’s Wayne, even if Nolan came out and said that. But that’s what CBS is basically saying with DSC/SNW and TOS. If that works for you, fine. It doesn’t work for me. I choose to interpret this fictional universe as being a little less cut-and-dried than just ‘it’s all the same.’ YMMV.

Anyway, these opinion-based topics always seem to devolve into people telling other people that their opinions are wrong, so I think I’ll just bow out now.

 

[HotRod]

That’s entirely missing my point. No one in their right mind would ever think the Nolan Batman films take place in the same continuity as the ‘60’s TV show, or that Christian Bale’s Bruce Wayne is supposed to be the same guy as Adam West’s Wayne, even if Nolan came out and said that. But that’s what CBS is basically saying with DSC/SNW and TOS. If that works for you, fine. It doesn’t work for me. I choose to interpret this fictional universe as being a little less cut-and-dried than just ‘it’s all the same.’ YMMV.

Anyway, these opinion-based topics always seem to devolve into people telling other people that their opinions are wrong, so I think I’ll just bow out now.

Yes, it works for me.

I have no problems suspended my disbelief when connecting SNW to TOS. A very clear effort was made to connect the two. From the interior design, ship designs, costumes, episode structure, etc.

No problem whatsoever.

 

[fireproof78]

You’re welcome to your opinion.

And you are welcome to yours.

 

[James Cole]

Show some random person off the street an episode of TOS, an episode of SNW, and one of the Kelvin Movies, and they'll say it's three different versions of the TOS Era.

As far as the Rights Holders, I'll cut-and-paste what I said about them elsewhere:

They're filthy rich Corporate Democrats or Country-Club Republicans, waiting to see who the Koch Family or Wall Street tells them to support, hanging out on their yachts after a "tough" day of playing golf. They've never seen an episode of Star Trek in their lives. Their decree in the late-2010s that CBS-brand Star Trek was "Prime" was a business decision, that was probably recommended by those "in the know" who were beneath them, and nothing more. It doesn't take into account any new developments because they hadn't happened yet. And I doubt they care about any new developments. They made their business decision, and they'll stick to it until it makes business sense to change it.

One thing to keep in mind too... there's a fairly decent chance JJ Abrams / Bad Robot own a percentage of the Abramsverse films. And Alex Kurtzman / Secret Hideout might have a percentage of the post-2017 series.

Yes, I'm going to go there... on the STLD season 3 commentary, Mike McMahan specifically mentions that they had to pay to license the Regula I lab and the Project Genesis video. Now, is that because TWOK was a Paramount film... or because it was classic Trek?

And when Kurtzman's era is up... would future series and films then have to pay Kurtzman licensing fees to use anything he developed? In which case the multiverse might be a good way to handle that, and why certain things might not be followed up on.

 

[JesterFace]

All the good episodes are in the prime timeline.

 

[C.E. Evans]

To me, the Prime Timeline always had a certain level of fluidity to it with discrepancies that some fans actually liked to explain and/or speculate why. The only thing that Kurtzman-era Trek has done was introduce a general continuity to the Prime Timeline rather than a 100% visual one. It makes it harder for some fans to accept how this show connects to that show, but they actually do if you accept that some shows are products of the real world times they were made in but are all part of an overall narrative.

I see the SNW Enterprise and the TOS Enterprise the same way I see two actors playing the same role. There can be a resemblance, but they don't have to look exactly alike to be the same character, IMO.

 

[at Quark's]

I don't think there is any prime timeline to begin with.

(All stardates seem to be rational, and those few that seem to be integer too (i.e. that end in .0) seem to be composite rather than prime).

 

[Uhura's Song]

This is not a difficult question:

TOS > TAS > TOS Films > TNG > DS9 > TNG Films > VOY.

Easy peasy. Yes, I am aware there is overlap there.And caveats here and there (the future timeline in "All Good Things" isn't Prime, nor some alternate timeline stuff in VOY, "Timeless," "Deadlock," "Year of Hell.").

ENT is very much Prime, with some Time War detours. DISCO is Prime, with some Red Angel/Mirror U detours, of course. SNW is Prime. LD is Prime. Picard is Prime with a S2 detour into alternate courtesy of Q (as he did in TNG sometines, "Tapestry." PRO is Prime.

What is not is the Abramsverse/Pine stuff.

 

[Lord Garth]

One thing to keep in mind too... there's a fairly decent chance JJ Abrams / Bad Robot own a percentage of the Abramsverse films. And Alex Kurtzman / Secret Hideout might have a percentage of the post-2017 series.

Yes, I'm going to go there... on the STLD season 3 commentary, Mike McMahan specifically mentions that they had to pay to license the Regula I lab and the Project Genesis video. Now, is that because TWOK was a Paramount film... or because it was classic Trek?

And when Kurtzman's era is up... would future series and films then have to pay Kurtzman licensing fees to use anything he developed? In which case the multiverse might be a good way to handle that, and why certain things might not be followed up on.

They won't dare admit it during this production era but for the next production era, they'll 100% go full-on into the multiverse route. From what I can tell, that seems to be the general direction everything's moving in, across franchises. More and more, there are entries that ignore other entries within the same franchise.

 

[Citiprime]

They won't dare admit it during this production era but for the next production era, they'll 100% go full-on into the multiverse route. From what I can tell, that seems to be the general direction everything's moving in, across franchises. More and more, there are entries that ignore other entries within the same franchise.

I can see the multiverse angle or doing something similar to what some franchises have done (e.g., Halloween or some of the DC movies) and basically choosing a cutoff point to advance from. Telling the audience the next movie/series ignores everything after Superman 2 or Halloween 2.

I can especially see it happening if ownership of Star Trek ever changed hands, and the new IP holder wants to create their own thing that has connections to TOS and TNG but not be burdened with all of the choices that have been made over the years.

I think it’s in the commentary to First Contact but I remember Brannon Braga and Ron Moore spend some time advocating a total reboot of Trek, and that’s 20 years of Trek lore ago too. Their argument was the timeline had basically become too complex and detailed to remain coherent while also boxing in a writer’s ability to make choices about a story. That you shouldn’t have to wonder whether something violates a line of dialogue from season 2 of TOS or season 4 of DS9 if you’re trying to write a Star Trek story. Also, the timeline is a double-edged sword. For some it’s a rich fictional future history that adds depth to the story. But, for others, it might make Trek seem hard to jump into. If in order to totally understand an episode of Strange New Worlds, I need to have watched Star Trek V to know who Sybok is, some people might think that’s a problem.

And Moore has said similar things in recent interviews while promoting For All Mankind:

“When I left the show, I felt like there had been so much Star Trek and it was so much continuity and so many things to keep track of, that it was hard to come up with new stories. You’d be in the writers room pitching stories and you’d have to stop and go, “But does that contradict episode twenty-five?” It was a burden. All the backstories of Romulans and the Klingons and Starfleet and the history and all the franchises … It was just an enormous burden and I really felt like it was becoming impenetrable to the audience. Especially if you weren’t a completely dyed-in-the-wool fan who watched every episode and knew the stuff backward and forward.”​

 

[fireproof78]

When I left the show, I felt like there had been so much Star Trek and it was so much continuity and so many things to keep track of, that it was hard to come up with new stories. You’d be in the writers room pitching stories and you’d have to stop and go, “But does that contradict episode twenty-five?” It was a burden. All the backstories of Romulans and the Klingons and Starfleet and the history and all the franchises … It was just an enormous burden and I really felt like it was becoming impenetrable to the audience. Especially if you weren’t a completely dyed-in-the-wool fan who watched every episode and knew the stuff backward and forward.”

While I appreciate the depth, and often used the Star Trek encyclopedia to my advantage, I am inclined to agree with Moore. Star Trek is moving towards impenetrable or at least daunting enough that casual viewers will find it not worth the effort. And that's my big thing is making a Trek that appeals to as large of an audience as possible, not just attention to detail loving built in fans.

 

[Lord Garth]

If in order to totally understand an episode of Strange New Worlds, I need to have watched Star Trek V to know who Sybok is, some people might think that’s a problem.

If they show Sybok again, I'm pretty sure SNW will develop him on their own terms so you don't have to see TFF. Although, let's be real, if you're watching Streaming Trek, you've seen the TOS Movies.

But otherwise, I agree with everything else you posted.

I have friends IRL who are interested in watching Star Trek but think it's impenetrable. I'll have to guide them through it. I figure I'll show them TOS, show them TNG, show them all the movies, not necessarily in that order (I myself started off with the movies), but that's what they're already aware of through Pop Culture anyway...

... and then from there I'll ask them which of the other series sounds interesting to them. I won't use my personal preferences to influence what they want to watch.

 

[Sci]

The Prime Timeline consists of:

• Star Trek: Enterprise
• Star Trek: Discovery
• Star Trek: Short Treks
• Star Trek: Strange New Worlds
• Star Trek: The Original Series
• Star Trek: The Animated Series
• Star Trek: The Motion Picture
• Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
• Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
• Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
• Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
• Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
• Star Trek: The Next Generation
• Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
• Star Trek: Generations
• Star Trek: Voyager
• Star Trek: First Contact
• Star Trek: Insurrection
• Star Trek: Nemesis
• Star Trek: Lower Decks
• Star Trek: Prodigy
• Star Trek: Picard

 

[at Quark's]

ENT is very much Prime, with some Time War detours. DISCO is Prime, with some Red Angel/Mirror U detours, of course. SNW is Prime. LD is Prime. Picard is Prime with a S2 detour into alternate courtesy of Q (as he did in TNG sometines, "Tapestry." PRO is Prime.

I don't see ENT as entirely prime (*). After all, there's the time travel from First Contact.

Now you can reason in two ways:
A) This predestination loop was always there, Cochrane was always supposed to meet Riker and co., the NX-01 always was supposed to look this way (resembling the ENT-E), and therefore it's part of the prime timeline. There never was any timeline in which this did not occur. The Cochrane we see in TOS remembered meeting Riker and Troi;
B) We shifted to a different timeline the moment FC occurred and most we see from that time forward is part of the new timeline.

A) would be true for an inside-universe observer (with no access to knowledge of alternate timelines), but for me as an out-of-universe observer, I choose B) since the TOS Cochrane I see obviously wasn't written with First Contact in mind, or the Borg in Q Who who weren't written with the idea in mind they already could know about humans or the location of Earth (save perhaps from those Neutral Zone raids from S1).

(*) I interpret 'prime timeline' as 'original timeline' in this post. If you interpret 'prime timeline' as 'most important/ main' timeline or 'standard' timeline, then ENT most definitely is part of the prime timeline, imho.

 

[BillJ]

Picard season three is dumb as fuck, but incredibly entertaining.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Picard season three is dumb as fuck, but incredibly entertaining.

Half right.

 

[BillJ]

Half right.

I put that comment in the wrong damned thread!

 

[HIjol]

This is not a difficult question:

TOS > TAS > TOS Films > TNG > DS9 > TNG Films > VOY.

Easy peasy. Yes, I am aware there is overlap there.And caveats here and there (the future timeline in "All Good Things" isn't Prime, nor some alternate timeline stuff in VOY, "Timeless," "Deadlock," "Year of Hell.").

ENT is very much Prime, with some Time War detours. DISCO is Prime, with some Red Angel/Mirror U detours, of course. SNW is Prime. LD is Prime. Picard is Prime with a S2 detour into alternate courtesy of Q (as he did in TNG sometines, "Tapestry." PRO is Prime.

What is not is the Abramsverse/Pine stuff.

I don't see ENT as entirely prime (*). After all, there's the time travel from First Contact.

Now you can reason in two ways:
A) This predestination loop was always there, Cochrane was always supposed to meet Riker and co., the NX-01 always was supposed to look this way (resembling the ENT-E), and therefore it's part of the prime timeline. There never was any timeline in which this did not occur. The Cochrane we see in TOS remembered meeting Riker and Troi;
B) We shifted to a different timeline the moment FC occurred and most we see from that time forward is part of the new timeline.

A) would be true for an inside-universe observer (with no access to knowledge of alternate timelines), but for me as an out-of-universe observer, I choose B) since the TOS Cochrane I see obviously wasn't written with First Contact in mind, or the Borg in Q Who who weren't written with the idea in mind they already could know about humans or the location of Earth (save perhaps from those Neutral Zone raids from S1).

(*) I interpret 'prime timeline' as 'original timeline' in this post. If you interpret 'prime timeline' as 'most important/ main' timeline or 'standard' timeline, then ENT most definitely is part of the prime timeline, imho.

@Uhura's Song and @at Quark's
Full Disclosure, I have no idea how it happened, but the quote you attributed to me was from Uhura’ Song.

 

[at Quark's]

@Uhura's Song and @at Quark's
Full Disclosure, I have no idea how it happened, but the quote you attributed to me was from Uhura’ Song.

My apologies. Not sure how it happened, but I guess I added you to my 'quote' buffer from one of your posts, then a post from Uhura's Song, and then edited/deleted the wrong part

 

[Nerys Myk]

I put that comment in the wrong damned thread!

It has my vote for being excised from the Prime Timeline.