Which series would you want next?

[Daedalus]

A series that actually lines up with canon that Gene Roddenberry, Rick Berman and Brannon Braga which takes the lore of Star Trek Online and takes place 2409-2410 or stretched out further like 2409-2420. Then have three mini-series from that one that follows the Klingons, the Romulans, and the Dominion separately. I want a series that directly correlates with the lore of STO because I don't want that lore to disappear when STO shuts down. It is good enough to be canon and entirely lines up with the Star Trek Series up to Enterprise in 2005, unlike any of the new series since Discovery.

STO does also include Discovery lore, so by hoping to canonise it (or canonise via the back door through references) you'll also include the show anyway.

At this stage, I think we were lucky to get the Enterprise F and a few other STO ships, and not forgetting a recent depiction of mirror Janeway. (I'd be happy to see Emperor Crusher included one day, as I've always thought the name worked well for a malevolent tyrant)

 

[The Wormhole]

A series that actually lines up with canon

Right off the bat you're asking the impossible.

I want a series that directly correlates with the lore of STO

That's never going to happen. The tail does not wag the dog. Given only 1% of the fandom is familiar with tie-in material like the novels, comics or STO, it makes absolutely no sense to make a TV series where the goal is to bring in a new audience and only make it accessible to 1% if the existing fandom.

But then I see this behavior among the novel fans all the time. "It's what I like and therefore deserves to be canon." Yeah, no. Canon does not work like that.

I don't want that lore to disappear when STO shuts down.

Well, it's going to. Better learn to accept that.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

There’s loads of TV Star Trek I don’t like.

It’s all canon though.

The very concept of ‘canon’ is BS anyway.

 

[FederationHistorian]

I think the bigger question is why is Matalas the only way forward? What is it that he has said or done with Seven that excites people?

I get that Seven appeals for many reasons but what does Matalas actually offer?

Seven as a Starfleet captain. And in particular, captain of the Enterprise. Which is more interesting than her career as a Fenris Ranger in the eyes of some.

And the interesting proposal that it's Matalas or nothing. So why just Matalas?

He wrote one great season of Star Trek, which was treated as a diamond in the rough when compared to the earlier season of PIC and compared to DIS in general.

Personally, they could have just kept PIC going by trading Patrick Stewart playing Picard for a ship called USS Picard and continued the show that way. and bring Seven, Raffi, Jack and Sydney aboard the USS Picard (like Pike boarding Discovery in DIS S2) and do all the nostalgia stuff there that Matalas wanted.

At least if Matalas had a second hit season in a row, it would show that he really should helm Legacy and it shouldn't be delayed anymore.

A Birth of the Federation series, set in the immediate aftermath of the Romulan war, would present so many opportunities for rich and interesting characters, with a backdrop begging to be explored.

We'd see the relationships forming between the founding members l of the Federation, which could give way to some interesting political drama.

We could see the xenophobia of the species being cast aside and giving way to cooperation and trust between the races.

Early deep space missions taking our characters to wonderous sights they couldn't imagine and bringing back a real sense of exploring the unknown.

The Romulan War with ENT cast seems impossible to me. It's been almost 25 years since Enterprise last aired. Maybe something on a different NX ship?

The could do a show/film with the cast & characters set in the 2180s. Not an Era that has been explored. Archer is supposed to be on the Fed Council, IIRC.

These ideas seems like they could be one and the same.

 

[Nerys Myk]

These ideas seems like they could be one and the same.

They could be combined. Use the ENT characters and some new ones in story set in the 2180s.

Conversely a story set in the 2160 on a different ship could also be done.

 

[fireproof78]

Seven as a Starfleet captain. And in particular, captain of the Enterprise. Which is more interesting than her career as a Fenris Ranger in the eyes of some.

But...anyone could have done that.

He wrote one great season of Star Trek, which was treated as a diamond in the rough when compared to the earlier season of PIC and compared to DIS in general.

Yes, but the poster I'm responding to say "Matalas or let Trek rest."

I get that Season 3 of Picard hit the all the right notes for people but why is that the only way forward?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

At this stage, I think we were lucky to get the Enterprise F

Still bummed that Starfleet retired it, though.

Why would they do that? The F ididn't look damaged or worn out or anything like that. And since Worf (relatively) recently lost the E, the F couldn't have been in service that long!

What happened to the days when starships, particularly Enterprises, were supposed to last decades?

 

[Daedalus]

Still bummed that Starfleet retired it, though.

Why would they do that? The F ididn't look damaged or worn out or anything like that. And since Worf (relatively) recently lost the E, the F couldn't have been in service that long!

What happened to the days when starships, particularly Enterprises, were supposed to last decades?

Yeah, it looked fresh out of Drydock.

I'm pretending that, as with the Titan's predecessor, the ship forms the basis of a new class of starship. She's rebuilt as the Yorktown class and is rechristened as the USS Yorktown. The 25th century is all about recycling, it seems.

So, in effect, she's still out there.

 

[fireproof78]

What happened to the days when starships, particularly Enterprises, were supposed to last decades?

The galaxy is a dangerous place.

 

[Deidesheim]

Right off the bat you're asking the impossible.

It was possible from 1966 to 2005, it just takes good oversight from producers who immerse themselves in every little detail. It doesn't mistakes wont happen, but the care to preserve the illusion of a united universe is there. That is what Rick Berman and Brannon Braga achieved after the passing of Gene Roddenberry. It's really not difficult. It is but yet it isn't. Out of the entire series until 2005 when Enterprise ended, the only really grave mistake that was clear at least was with the Voyager episode "Threshold" where they went warp 10 in the episode and basically turned into salamanders when in later episodes this was not the case. That is literally the only huge mistake in the entire series until the 2005 cancellation. In contrast, nearly every episode of Star Trek Discovery and Strange New Worlds have absolutely lore-breaking content. I had a much better memory when Star Trek: Discovery just came out with season 1 and I was unable to do much of anything do to a spinal shift that occurred to me, and so I binge watched every episode of Star Trek Voyager. When I was done I switched to watching Discovery season 1 and I remember pointing out every little thing that was utterly contradictory thinking about that one single problematic episode of Voyager and attributing that level of error to every single Discovery episode. I did the same with Strange New Worlds later on. Even the first episode is shocking when Spock is emotional and in bed with T'Pring before marriage. The producers clearly want to make a big slap to the face of any caring Star Trek fans throughout the years and re-write the series in their image. If I'm being honest I think Strange New Worlds is far worse than Discovery even.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Yes, but the poster I'm responding to say "Matalas or let Trek rest."

I get that Season 3 of Picard hit the all the right notes for people but why is that the only way forward?

Well, who, since Discovery premiered back in 2017, is considered a better writer/showrunner for Star Trek than Matalas?

Or is this more a case of wanting Ronald D. Moore back to write?

 

[fireproof78]

Well, who, since Discovery premiered back in 2017, is considered a better writer/showrunner for Star Trek than Matalas?

I hear good things about the guy running Lower Decks or the people running Prodigy.

So...other people too. I don't think it's Matalas or Nothing*



*All due respect to Nerf.

 

[Deidesheim]

STO does also include Discovery lore, so by hoping to canonise it (or canonise via the back door through references) you'll also include the show anyway.

I'm aware of that but the Discovery lore in STO is actually not bad in comparison to the show itself. With that said it's pretty clear that the Discovery episodes were added because of the show and not to give sustenance to the lore that they had been working on for STO, but to promote the series and because they had to.

 

[fireproof78]

ere added because of the show and not to give sustenance to the lore that they had been working on for STO,

You have to feed lore?

 

[FederationHistorian]

I hear good things about the guy running Lower Decks or the people running Prodigy.

So...other people too. I don't think it's Matalas or Nothing*



*All due respect to Nerf.

The ones running Lower Decks and Prodigy, respectfully, are both specialists in animation.

Unless there are plans for Legacy to be animated, I don't know what the odds are that they'd helm the show in place of Matalas.

 

[fireproof78]

The ones running Lower Decks and Prodigy, respectfully, are both specialists in animation.

Unless there are plans for Legacy to be animated, I don't know what the odds are that they'd helm the show in place of Matalas.

You asked for the best. I stated what was consider to be the front runners based upon current productions. Though, even SNW has been receiving accolades as well.

Point is that Matalas is hard the only one or even the best one. Why his vision only is still the question.

 

[The Wormhole]

It was possible from 1966 to 2005,

Take off the rose tinted glasses. Nothing was ever consistent about Star Trek in those days. That's even noted by the Okudas (who apparently have attained the status of blessed saints in modern times) in their Encyclopedia editions and Chronology editions. I mean, hell, season 1 of TOS couldn't even remember which century they were supposed to take place in!

That is what Rick Berman and Brannon Braga achieved after the passing of Gene Roddenberry.

Wow. A lot to unpack there. Rick Berman was never really a creative on the franchise, despite being a credited co-creator on three series. He was more the executive in overall charge. Meanwhile Brannon Braga's authority is limited to Voyager's fifth and sixth seasons and Enterprise's run.

Besides, I'm old enough to remember twenty years ago when fandom vilified Berman and Braga as the Destroyers of the Franchise who were pissing all over Canon making an incoherent mess out of that which "held together reasonably well before now." And now, they're being held up as the ones who "helped create a consistent world." I guarantee, twenty years from now people will be saying Kurtzman was the one who respected Canon and the current producers are the Anti-Gene Demons or some such nonsense.

Out of the entire series until 2005 when Enterprise ended, the only really grave mistake that was clear at least was with the Voyager episode "Threshold" where they went warp 10 in the episode and basically turned into salamanders when in later episodes this was not the case.

Yeah, okay. I'm really starting to question if you actually Star Trek. Like, do you even Star Trek?

If I'm being honest I think Strange New Worlds is far worse than Discovery even.

Good god, wut? While Disco may not be as bad a show as many claim, I will admit it is extremely flawed. But SNW is "far worse"? WUT??? SNW is by far one of the best Star Trek series to be produced. That show is literal perfection as far as Star Trek is concerned. Even if it were a "lore breaking slap in the face" as you claim (which it most certainly is not) so what? It's a fucking amazing show to watch and if they have to contradict some throw away reference from the 1960s written by someone who never knew their work would still be referenced and built upon in the 2020s, than fine by me. Besides, as current Doctor Who showrunner Russell T Davies stated in his book The Writer's Tale, if it comes down to a choice between serving the story or preserving continuity, serving the story should win every time. The story is what matters, canon and continuity are expendable.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Still bummed that Starfleet retired it, though.

Why would they do that? The F ididn't look damaged or worn out or anything like that. And since Worf (relatively) recently lost the E, the F couldn't have been in service that long!

What happened to the days when starships, particularly Enterprises, were supposed to last decades?

Personally--and I'm speaking just for myself--I would love an Enterprise-F series as part of a "Lost Era." The Odyssey-class is my personal favorite starship design, and I was beyond thrilled it was made canon. Do I think such a series will happen? No way in hell, but I can still dream about an Enterprise meant to match the much bigger ships in the Galaxy from foreign powers. Even though the Enterprise-F was only in service for about fifteen years, that's more than enough to tell an entire series worth of untold adventures with a crew we've never seen before.

 

[Finn]

It was possible from 1966 to 2005, it just takes good oversight from producers who immerse themselves in every little detail.

No. TOS contradicted itself. The shows within that time period contradicted with each other as well as themselves.

 

[HotRod]

Well, who, since Discovery premiered back in 2017, is considered a better writer/showrunner for Star Trek than Matalas?

Akiva Goldsman and Henry Alonso Myers.

The Prodigy Guys.

Mike MacMahan.