Spoilers STAR TREK: SECTION 31 - Grading & Discussion

[Citiprime]

My protest against classic Trek is not format but the "Where are they now?" style stories suggestions of visiting the Klingons, the Romulans, the Trill, the Dominion, etc.

I think it would depend on what they want to say with the "Where are they now?" stories.

If it's just to have the Klingons show up and be the same old Klingons to drop mentions of Martok and Worf, I agree with you.

If it's a story involving the Klingons where they do something like use some fundamental change in Klingon society as an aspect of a story to explore more about how Klingon honor conflicts with some sort of progress, I'm not opposed to that if they can make it interesting.

There was a pitch during the period between the end of Enterprise and Star Trek (2009) by Bryan Singer that envisioned a version of Star Trek set in the 31st century, where part of it was exploring the changes to the galaxy. If I remember right, part of the pitch would be the Klingons shifting from "Viking Bikers" to more Zen Buddhist warriors that had redefined what honor meant.

 

[Danja]

That's what I'm thinking. If they didn't want to bump against canon, they could've just set DISCO in the 25th or 26th centuries. Doing that would've also cut out some of the initial fandom heartburn. That way Burnham wouldn't have been Spock's sister, and I think there might have been less consternation over the DISCO Klingons and the technology. Heck, they could've also just had Section 31 out in the open with no problem.

25th century: Colliding with Picard
26th century: Picard runs into Disco

There was a pitch during the period between the end of Enterprise and Star Trek (2009) by Bryan Singer that envisioned a version of Star Trek set in the 31st century, where part of it was exploring the changes to the galaxy.

Disco incorporated that with its jump to the 32nd century.

If I remember right, part of the pitch would be the Klingons shifting from "Viking Bikers" to more Zen Buddhist warriors that had redefined what honor meant.

Worf was definitely the Zen warrior on Picard S3.

 

[fireproof78]

That's what I'm thinking. If they didn't want to bump against canon, they could've just set DISCO in the 25th or 26th centuries. Doing that would've also cut out some of the initial fandom heartburn. That way Burnham wouldn't have been Spock's sister, and I think there might have been less consternation over the DISCO Klingons and the technology. Heck, they could've also just had Section 31 out in the open with no problem.

I want someone to do the rewrite and same stories and lines and trip to the MU and see no problems.

I doubt that.

 

[Tosk]

The reason they kept "bumping against canon" is because they always wanted to do gigantic galaxy-endangering stories. If they told stories with stakes that weren't so grand it wouldn't be a problem.

Well, that and abandon their need to link people to existing characters. They wanted their cake but were annoyed by the way they had to eat it.

- Olatunde Osunsanmi is a bad director.

"That much is certain." - Spock.

 

[HotRod]

Which is really annoying when you consider that they probably could have done Legacy for less than Picard and it could have been about as if not more successful.

Oh, I dunno about that. Sure, the move to film in Canada would certainly save a penny or two, but they'd still need to rebuild EVERYTHING from scratch. The money they'd have to spend on lighbulbs alone would balloon the cost, compared to Picard. Nevermind the barrage of guests stars Thy Lord Matalas would want to appear in at least every other episode.

 

[fireproof78]

Oh, I dunno about that. Sure, the move to film in Canada would certainly save a penny or two, but they'd still need to rebuild EVERYTHING from scratch. The money they'd have to spend on lighbulbs alone would balloon the cost, compared to Picard. Nevermind the barrage of guests stars Thy Lord Matalas would want to appear in at least every other episode.

I'm sure we all here know exactly the financials of Paramount to know that Legacy would be cheaper and make enough money to offset the USA national debt.

 

[Fateor]

Oh, I dunno about that. Sure, the move to film in Canada would certainly save a penny or two, but they'd still need to rebuild EVERYTHING from scratch. The money they'd have to spend on lighbulbs alone would balloon the cost, compared to Picard. Nevermind the barrage of guests stars Thy Lord Matalas would want to appear in at least every other episode.

Not from scratch, they would have broken down the already existing sets and transported them to Canada.

Which they probably did anyways since most of the set dressing could probably be reused in SFA since it's basically just the 25th century with an Apple redesign.

 

[HotRod]

Not from scratch, they would have broken down the already existing sets and transported them to Canada.

Everything but the Enterprise-D bridge was scrapped.

 

[James Cole]

Also, what we've had with the strategy that Paramount has pursued for Star Trek on Paramount+ has been slicing the niche of Star Trek down even further to appeal to a smaller segment of the market with shows targeted to specific demos, instead of something with broad appeal meant to cover all 4 corners of the audience.

And again, this is the streaming era. You'd want Star Trek fans to be sufficiently happy to be subscribing year round. DS9 and VGR are certainly different shows, but were made for the same audience. But take DISCOVERY and PICARD season 3. Faaaaaar different shows, with very different audiences, yet very high budgets. A niche thing like PRODIGY makes more since with a children focused animated budget.

The problem with trying to appeal to everyone with a single offering is that you end up with a bland, boring mess that appeals to no one.

This was the model used for TNG, DS9, VGR, and ENT. It by and large worked. Yet it didn't with S31, as the inputs and intended audience was so greatly miscalibrated.

 

[Fateor]

Everything but the Enterprise-D bridge was scrapped.

No it wasn't, studio's never scrap everything because at a minimum they can sell off the props at a prop auction.

Mind, on second thought I'm not sure they would even need to film in Canada since Picard filmed in LA and was actually 3-4m cheaper then the 12m per episode that's being floated for SFA.

 

[HotRod]

No it wasn't, studio's never scrap everything because at a minimum they can sell off the props at a prop auction.

Nope. Everything was binned. Forget where it was stated as it's been a while, probably Dave Blass. But everything was chucked. Storage is expensive. And even if they had kept it, the cost of shipping and rebuilding would be prohibitive, and they'd probably rebuild everything anyway. Just look at the JJ movies. Not sure about Into Darkness, but for Beyond, they rebuilt the bridge of the Enterprise from scratch, rather than ship anything to Vancouver.

 

[HotRod]

Mind, on second thought I'm not sure they would even need to film in Canada since Picard filmed in LA and was actually 3-4m cheaper then the 12m per episode that's being floated for SFA.

Oh, and the only reason they filmed in L.A. was because Patrick Stewart wanted to be able to go home every night. If you can be sure of anything, you can be sure that any Star Trek series produced will be filmed in the GTA for the forseeable future. CBS has invested a lot of money in the area.

 

[Sigma101]

I'm actually surprised it got a lot of scores in the 4-6 range. I gave a 2/10 myself with 1/10 being justified as well. Literally the worst non fan fiction Star Trek (has to be said) I have ever seen. I am more interested in why somebody wouldn't think this is bad. The banter was fan fiction level as in they know what they wanted just not how or why "witty" banter and group dynamics is so fun. Like I get what they were trying to do, the writers were complete hacks. Judging by these scores, just seeing a group interact like that was enough. The dialog was so bad that it really stood out.

Also the action was complete garbage as well. They just don't understand what makes good action. Things like conveying an uncertain outcome, making all the struggle on screen pointless when you know the exactly how it's going to play out. There's ways to show to make it feel uncertain even when knowing the good guys will win, but the writers/editiors and everyone involved were complete hacks. Another clue is that when characters get stressed it means nothing, hack writing.

 

[Fateor]

Nope. Everything was binned. Forget where it was stated as it's been a while, probably Dave Blass. But everything was chucked. Storage is expensive. And even if they had kept it, the cost of shipping and rebuilding would be prohibitive, and they'd probably rebuild everything anyway. Just look at the JJ movies. Not sure about Into Darkness, but for Beyond, they rebuilt the bridge of the Enterprise from scratch, rather than ship anything to Vancouver.

You can literally google the Picard prop auctions proving they did not bin everything.

 

[Danja]

And again, this is the streaming era. You'd want Star Trek fans to be sufficiently happy to be subscribing year round. DS9 and VGR are certainly different shows, but were made for the same audience. But take DISCOVERY and PICARD season 3. Faaaaaar different shows, with very different audiences, yet very high budgets. A niche thing like PRODIGY makes more since with a children focused animated budget.


This was the model used for TNG, DS9, VGR, and ENT. It by and large worked. Yet it didn't with S31, as the inputs and intended audience was so greatly miscalibrated.

We're talking about broadcast TV.

Back then, the mass audience was everything. Streaming did not exist. There was nothing BUT TV.

Trek had to sacrifice a great deal in order to appeal to the masses (LGBTQ+ erasure. Women reduced to being help mates for the guys.)

 

[Fateor]

Oh, and the only reason they filmed in L.A. was because Patrick Stewart wanted to be able to go home every night. If you can be sure of anything, you can be sure that Star Trek series will be filmed in the GTA for the forseeable future. CBS has invested a lot of money in the area.

Things will be filmed where there's the best deal to film them.

Fallout literally moved it's entire production across country for a 25 million filming incentive.

 

[fireproof78]

I heard a quote on a radio show that reminded me of Trek fans "People don't know what they like but like what they know."

 

[HotRod]

You can literally google the Picard prop auctions proving they did not bin everything.

I'm talking sets. Big things. Expensive things. Nevermind the fact you kinda proved my point. If they're auctioning stuff off, it's not being used in future productions.

 

[Tosk]

 

[Danja]

Things will be filmed where there's the best deal to film them.

Fallout literally moved it's entire production across country for a 25 million filming incentive.

Moving sets is expensive (It's one reason Birds of Prey was cancelled. The WB ordered the show moved from Toronto to L.A.; they moved the sets and blew the budget.)