The 60th Anniversary??
- Thread starter Danlav05
- Start date
Sure, why not?Maybe I'll up date this for the 60th
I'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but "Infinite Diversity In Infinite Combinations."
It is my hope as a lifelong Star Trek fan (born in '76 and grew up with TOS reruns, movies, and all spin-offs as they aired) is that we will see dramatic decisions made regarding tone and continuity.
I don't want to cause arguments about what is and isn't Trek, so I'll avoid that by saying that I'd like to see some radical ideas explored going forward. For example, the rights holders (may not be CBS) could decide to ignore everything since 2009 and do a continuation of the Berman era of Trek. Such an approach could mean that Nemesis was the last we saw of the 24th century and a new series is set on an Enterprise fifty to a hundred years after.
Another idea would be to set a series in between the TOS film era and TNG era, including the Enterprise-B and/or another starship during that time.
Outside of a full reboot (not an alt universe or "not really a reboot but a reboot" Kurtzman approach) the other radical direction would be to look at the franchise and say that everything after The Undiscovered Country is open: the future is not written. The TOS era has been the primary focus of both Abrams and Kurtz, so the new approach could be a new take on "The Next Generation." Maybe this new series is set on the Enterprise-B and expands the TOS movie lore into a new potential franchise. Maybe the series is set on a new Enterprise-C, with Captain Garrett but no Narendra III.
I know that Paramount/Whomever won't throw away characters like Picard and the TNG crew, but at this point, they're also largely played out. The closest we've had to a new Enterprise and crew was the bizarre Picard Season Three approach to a "Next Next Generation." It was underwhelming to say the least and still relied on the TNG crew. I feel it's time to go forward and do for Star Trek what the TOS films and TNG series did for Trek at the time.
It will be interesting to see what the sale to Skydance means for Star Trek. Hopefully, they'll clear the decks creatively, consider contacting people that truly understand Trek (Ronald D. Moore, for example) and be fearless in terms of tossing out past iterations, even if they were successful.
It is my hope as a lifelong Star Trek fan (born in '76 and grew up with TOS reruns, movies, and all spin-offs as they aired) is that we will see dramatic decisions made regarding tone and continuity.
I don't want to cause arguments about what is and isn't Trek, so I'll avoid that by saying that I'd like to see some radical ideas explored going forward. For example, the rights holders (may not be CBS) could decide to ignore everything since 2009 and do a continuation of the Berman era of Trek. Such an approach could mean that Nemesis was the last we saw of the 24th century and a new series is set on an Enterprise fifty to a hundred years after.
Another idea would be to set a series in between the TOS film era and TNG era, including the Enterprise-B and/or another starship during that time.
Outside of a full reboot (not an alt universe or "not really a reboot but a reboot" Kurtzman approach) the other radical direction would be to look at the franchise and say that everything after The Undiscovered Country is open: the future is not written. The TOS era has been the primary focus of both Abrams and Kurtz, so the new approach could be a new take on "The Next Generation." Maybe this new series is set on the Enterprise-B and expands the TOS movie lore into a new potential franchise. Maybe the series is set on a new Enterprise-C, with Captain Garrett but no Narendra III.
I know that Paramount/Whomever won't throw away characters like Picard and the TNG crew, but at this point, they're also largely played out. The closest we've had to a new Enterprise and crew was the bizarre Picard Season Three approach to a "Next Next Generation." It was underwhelming to say the least and still relied on the TNG crew. I feel it's time to go forward and do for Star Trek what the TOS films and TNG series did for Trek at the time.
It will be interesting to see what the sale to Skydance means for Star Trek. Hopefully, they'll clear the decks creatively, consider contacting people that truly understand Trek (Ronald D. Moore, for example) and be fearless in terms of tossing out past iterations, even if they were successful.
I see only two real possibilities, no matter who is in charge: Either they will continue to produce more of the same stuff CBS/Paramount is currently producing, or they will make something else unrelated. But what I don't see happening is some sweeping dictate to de-canonize whatever came before it, because that's not the way to endear yourself to your fans.
That won't happen. Trek XI was a pretty popular movie and the current shows have pulled their weight at bringing revenue in for the franchise. No one is going to remove all that just to revert to the status quo of twenty-five years ago.
Ron Moore won't do Star Trek again unless he can have carte blanche with what he wants to do. And even were this Libertarian's Star Trek you seem to be outlining, there's undoubtedly going to be studio oversight mainly because no studio gives anyone carte blanche with one of their most renowned IPs.
There's no logical reason to toss out successful iterations in an effort to be "fearless."
Boimler and Mariner in an episode of TOS might have been funny, but the show's over and the idea might be seen as too similar to Trials and Tribbleations and the SNW Crossover episode.
That's only fearless by Sir Robin's definition: bravely running away.
Please explain how you managed to read "Libertarian" in anything I wrote. Also, it's not hard to imagine Ron Moore receiving carte blanche when he's produced vastly more creative and endearing content than Abrams and Kurtzman have combined.
It was just a sarcastic drive-by comment related to the fact you want the franchise to abandon what clearly works just so it can reset to 1990s life. Like how libertarians like living in the past cut off from all modern technology and conveniences. And given my post got five Likes, I'm guessing there are others who agree with my context of the word "Libertarian."
That's nice. But, when you get down to it, Star Trek is one of Paramount's leading IPs. Do you really think they're going to sit back and let anyone, regardless of how talented they may be or how creative and endearing the content they've produced in the past may be, have their unfettered way with it without having to consult with them? If you do, you really have no idea how Hollywood operates.
Besides, filthy though you clearly consider Abrams and Kurtzman to be, Abrams did and Kurtzman does make Paramount money. What compelling reason does Paramount have to toss away that money just to revert to the status quo of thirty years ago?
Because the fans said so.
I won't. Paramount is struggling badly, can't get a proper theatrical film made to save their lives and are making cuts everywhere prior to their sale.
We'll probably get a crossover episode of one of the TV shows at best.
Which will probably be the Academy cadets interacting with the SNW cast on the holodeck, with maybe a cameo from a Berman era character (also on the holodeck) thrown in.
With the Doctor involved it will probably be Neelix.
Truly, a Valentine to Fans
Pretty simple answer - nothing substantive will happen for the 60th.
Long answer - They're far too deeply embroiled in this grab-asstical goat-rope of a merger. If there is anything, it will probably be a new book or two, or a re-re-repackaging of existing movies and episodes on BRD. Maybe AMT/ERTL will re-re-re-re-release all its kits with new box-top art. Or does Polar Lights have all the rights to the kits now? Doesn't matter. Nothing will happen. And when the merger finally does finish, there will be continued months of the requisite "synergizing" when the two entities try to come together, in an effort to eliminate corporate redundancy. By that time, we'll probably be in the 61st year and it won't matter anymore.
This has all happened before; this will all happen again. Rinse and repeat.
Long answer - They're far too deeply embroiled in this grab-asstical goat-rope of a merger. If there is anything, it will probably be a new book or two, or a re-re-repackaging of existing movies and episodes on BRD. Maybe AMT/ERTL will re-re-re-re-release all its kits with new box-top art. Or does Polar Lights have all the rights to the kits now? Doesn't matter. Nothing will happen. And when the merger finally does finish, there will be continued months of the requisite "synergizing" when the two entities try to come together, in an effort to eliminate corporate redundancy. By that time, we'll probably be in the 61st year and it won't matter anymore.
This has all happened before; this will all happen again. Rinse and repeat.
SNW S4. That’s a given.
The first season of Starfleet Academy might be airing by this time, if it does not air this year.
A Trek streaming film, if the merger gets finalized is possible; a film could stream in September 2026 if filming begins this September.
A theatrical film has the same window of a premiere in September 2026 if they start filming in September 2025 and the merger is finalized.
Maybe an Archer autobiography, in the vein of the Spock, Kirk, Picard and Sisko Autobiographies. The 60th Anniversary does coincide with the 25th of ENT, and considering the callbacks to ENT in the newer Trek shows and films, it’s worth bringing up.
There is the overlooked Star Trek: Legacy game that was released for the 40th anniversary, which was the only time there was a crossover involving (at the time) all five captains. But yes, there was nothing in the tv or film department.
The 40th anniversary was a year after Enterprise ended when the franchise wasn't exactly at its height of popularity. Hardly a surprise there weren't any celebrations.
I forgot about that. It seems the only anniversary that was worth anything in "recent memory" was the 25th.
How sad...
How sad...
I don't understand why people who hate the current iterations of trek would want Ronald D Moore to be in charge. He has been very outspoken about the weaknesses of the Berman era. Battlestar Galactica was created by Moore as a direct consequence of how creatively stifled he was by writing for 90's trek.
If RDM did take over, you would most likely get a much darker take that hues much closer to BSG than the trek you want. People hate on Discovery but season 4 of that series was the most star trek, star trek has been in 25 years.
It really doesn't matter who is in charge. The people mad at kurtzman were the same people who used to be mad at Berman and Braga. star trek didn't get cancelled in 2004 for no reason. When someone else takes over you will probably hate that trek as well.
Similar threads
