What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Timeline

[Jackson_Roykirk]

First, let me say I enjoyed this film...it was fun.

That being said, and after all this talk about the TOS timeline being destroyed, I ask: what is really preventing a future movie-maker from making a film that takes place in the "Prime" timeline, say a post-Nemesis film? I say nothing is preventing it, even if Abrams' movie "destroyed" that timeline "in-film". I'm talking about a film produced sometime after Abrams is all "sequeled out".

Believe me, if a film maker thought that he or she could make a commercially successful Star Trek film taking place in the Prime timeline, they would simply ignore the events of ST:XI and its potential sequels and "just do it".

I think they can do so without and "in-film" explanation. Abrams' film actually destroyed nothing. The TNG mythology is still known; the TNG universe is still known. Even if a new batch of fans don't know the TNG mythology, create a post-Nemesis film that requires little knowedge of the mythology, and make like Abrams' Star Trek movies never happened. It can be done.

Seriously, the only people who may have a problem with this are the same people who have a problem with Abrams film "Destroying the Prime Timeline" in the first place -- and that problem would only be a matter of principle, that principle being "...but, but you can't keep making films that ignore established Star Trek history -- not even Abrams' Star Trek history."

If, in several years, someone made an enjoyable Prime Timeline Star Trek movie that for all intents and purposes ignored Abrams' film then I would say "fine with me" (even though I enjoyed Abrams' film).

I'm not saying I want this to happen -- I'm just want to ask two questions to those who are lamenting the "permanent loss" of the Prime Timeline, and vilifying Abrams for it:

What commercial factors do you think are preventing a 'Prime Timeline' film from being made (sometime after Abrams is finished with his sequels)

and

What would prevent you from accepting another 'Prime Timeline' story?

 

[Chess Piece Face]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

There is nothing stopping it other than it being potentially confusing and a generally bad idea.

Example - The crisis events in DC comics. Once you make a universal change, going back is never anything but a mess.

 

[thumbtack]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

It would be a combination of common sense (old universe= flop / newuniverse= hit) and the fact that the exact same people will write and produce the next one.

 

[Saga]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

the only thing that prevents it is money.

 

[Danoz]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

What's preventing it is the fact that it's a bad idea. I've come to accept that the esoteric world I know and love (trek-lore from TNG, DS9, VOY era) is best kept in the world of well-written, well-coordinated novels, never to be attempted on the big screen again. This new series should stand alone, no reason to try and pick up in the "prime" universe when the novels are doing it so well.

 

[James Pike]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

Well probably because Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Scotty are household names and people not even familiar with Star Trek, will go see a movie about those characters. I don't think that The TNG characters are as iconic and revered as to have enough following and pull to be successful. anymore.
Besides, we now have a blank slate for a good 40 years to run Star Trek with Kirk at the helm.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

You could do a movie about a non-Starfleet ship - say, some cargo ship named Serenity or something - set it sometime between this movie and the 24th century and if you stayed out of the way of the big space navy guys could avoid defining it as being in one continuity or the other.

 

[RoJoHen]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

The only way a "prime universe" movie would work is if it told a story about a brand new crew, set after the events of Nemesis. The TNG/DS9/VOY crews are done.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

There is nothing stopping it other than it being potentially confusing and a generally bad idea.

Example - The crisis events in DC comics. Once you make a universal change, going back is never anything but a mess.

Really?

Were people who saw both Tim Burton's 1989 Batman and 2005's Batman Begins confused by the different details in the origin stories? Would they be confuse if in 2015 another director takes a crack at a Batman Origin story -- one with different details again?

If someone wanted to make a "TNG-style" Star Trek TV show or movie set in the 25th century with a whole new crew, how do the events of this film really affect that new series/film -- even if they decided NOT to ignore Abrams-Trek? Perhaps there would be no

Spoiler: Spoilers about Abrams' Film

Planet Vulcan or Romulus,

but besides that, what else?

And even if those items I mentioned and the rest of Abrams-Trek were ignored, so what? If everyone was told it is a "totally separate Star Trek than Abrams-Trek", then what is the problem?

I don't think the type of people who would be confused by this (meaning non Star Trek fans) are the type who would be bothered by

Spoiler: Spoilers about Abrams' Film

the sudden resurrection of Vulcan and Romulus

anyway. They would be the type of people who don't follow the mythology that closely -- or even care about the mythology in the first place (just like 1989 Batman and Batman Begins)...and the fans who do follow that stuff would know it is simply a totally separate mythology.

 

[JoeZhang]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

What commercial factors do you think are preventing a 'Prime Timeline' film from being made (sometime after Abrams is finished with his sequels)

The films sucked, made far less money and eventually killed off the franchise? Why would they returned to that poisoned well?

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

What's preventing it is the fact that it's a bad idea. I've come to accept that the esoteric world I know and love (trek-lore from TNG, DS9, VOY era) is best kept in the world of well-written, well-coordinated novels, never to be attempted on the big screen again. This new series should stand alone, no reason to try and pick up in the "prime" universe when the novels are doing it so well.

That's a good answer -- and that's not Abrams' fault.

I realize you never said it was Abrams' fault; I'm just making the point that Abrams' film in particular is not the sole reason preventing a post-Nemesis film in some people's opinion -- i.e., the in-film destruction of the timeline by Abrams' film is not the culprit.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

The box office of this movie are what's preventing future films from being in the Prime Timeline

 

[Kane_Steel]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

It would be too confusing for general audiences now..


The Prime Timeline is over people.. (at least when it comes to movies).

 

[jamestyler]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

If someone wanted to make a "TNG-style" Star Trek TV show or movie set in the 25th century with a whole new crew, how do the events of this film really affect that new series/film -- even if they decided NOT to ignore Abrams-Trek? Perhaps there would be no

Spoiler: Spoilers about Abrams' Film

Planet Vulcan or Romulus,

but besides that, what else?

I actually think that's the launch pad - right there. Even in the TNG timeline the events there would make dramatic changes. Get some new people in and you can use that to set a new tone, new mission and have a whole new arc for an opening series.

Update it with some up to date storytelling and boom! Two timelines linked and a whole season (maybe more) to tell the idiots why Kirks future does not shape up to be Star Trek: New Stuff's past.

Though I object to it being done as I just know in my heart something to go wrong. Leave it all on the big screen for now and see what happens. Trek needs a long break from TV.

 

[gh4chiefs]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

That being said, and after all this talk about the TOS timeline being destroyed, I ask: what is really preventing a future movie-maker from making a film that takes place in the "Prime" timeline, say a post-Nemesis film?

Economics. We're seeing the financial success of this film and this timeline/universe. The studio will never go back to the "old ways." And I don't blame them for that.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

The box office of this movie are what's preventing future films from being in the Prime Timeline

Not in ten years. Seven years ago you would have said that the box office would prevent ANY Star Trek from being made. Who's to say that in ten years a reveival of the prime timeline would not be something that is commercially viable...

...and I'm not talking about "Berman-style Trek" -- I'm simply talking about the prime timeline from a canon standpoint. Again, I don't necessarily want or need this. I'm just saying that if someone DOES want or need this, then how does this film prevent it.

I'm not buying the arguments about it being too confusing for general audiences...I don't think general audiences really care about continuity between films made several years apart.

 

[Kpnuts]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

The idea that the sequel will take place in the Prime timeline as opposed to the newly created one is laughable, naive, and pathetic.

Come on FFS, of course it will take place in the new timeline!!

 

[seigezunt]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

Well probably because Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and Scotty are household names and people not even familiar with Star Trek, will go see a movie about those characters. I don't think that The TNG characters are as iconic and revered as to have enough following and pull to be successful. anymore.
Besides, we now have a blank slate for a good 40 years to run Star Trek with Kirk at the helm.

Yay!

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: What's preventing future films from taking place in the Prime Time

The box office of this movie are what's preventing future films from being in the Prime Timeline

Not in ten years. Seven years ago you would have said that the box office would prevent ANY Star Trek from being made. Who's to say that in ten years a reveival of the prime timeline would not be something that is commercially viable...

...and I'm not talking about "Berman-style Trek" -- I'm simply talking about the prime timeline from a canon standpoint. Again, I don't necessarily want or need this. I'm just saying that if someone DOES want or need this, then how does this film prevent it.

I'm not buying the arguments about it being too confusing for general audiences...I don't think general audiences really care about continuity between films made several years apart.

No, you're right. There's no in-story reason why someone couldn't do a post-NEMESIS movie at some unspecified point in the future.

As a practical matter, however, I don't see that happening . . . .