truTrek TV series? New movie?

[ChristopherPike]

I would just test the water with an Enterprise era mini-series. 2 or 3 connected TV specials with the same "threat to Earth, human colonies and allies" story. Seeing as the 22nd Century has a foot in both universes. Some revisions to the look, because all the sets are gone and any rebuild would likely be more like the Kelvin. Romulan War and Birth of the Federation arc content, with some future references to the Abramsverse. The NX-01 gets as radical a refit as Kirk's did in TMP and becomes the NCC-01, with others of the type renamed Enterprise class. It goes further along the line toward the Original Series with a small secondary hull. The NX prefix being passed to an experimental Daedalus ship in construction.

If it has enough studio support for more Trek beyond that, redress the sets again and use them for a full series set on the Daedalus or skip ahead to the early 23rd Century. I say support because depending on where it's shown, ratings can be pretty much irrelevant... as in ENT got a couple of million viewers, and is allowed to go under and BSG thrives at the same level. Not that here and now, I would expect anything brand new with the name Star Trek attached would dip that low.

Star Trek on the big screen with new versions of Kirk and Spock, in their new shiny NCC-1701 are the pinnacle of the franchise right now. I can't see a 25th Century show because it would steal the movie era's thunder by being so much more advanced. TV equals less than feature-film and always will, particularly with sci-fi. Conversely TV can pull off miracles, making do with a fraction of that budget spread out over a much longer length. Season 4 of Enterprise got made with what it took to put 30 minutes of the current film on the screen. Maybe 45 minutes, if you want to factor in everything originally built in 2001.

 

[DataLives]

This thread would have a lot more credibility, IMO, if it didn't contain disparaging phrases like "TruTrek" and "real timeline".

People should be allowed to like the new movie without being villified by those who didn't, and vice versa.

Hello,

I agree with you and I beg your pardon. I am not used to the lingo used on this board yet.

So, my truTrek is called "Trek Prime" here??

I will still call it the "real" timeline, though, since that is what makes the most sense to me, even though we are dealing with fiction.

I use "real"" in the context that the Abrams movie is more like a "What If" comic in my mind.

While I am totally puzzled as to how anyone actually liked that movie, other than the publicity for the Star Trek name, I do not want to alienate (sorry!) any Trek fans.

I do not intend to degrade or name-call. If you enjoyed the Abrams movie and still love Trek Prime, please, feel free to contribute your ideas.

The ideas already expressed here are excellent food for thought.

My personal favourite time period is the immediate post-World War III Earth era, the one glimpsed in First Contact. I think the story of a post-apocalyptic human race struggling to make things right, forming Star Fleet and reaching out to the galaxy really inspiring. Just imagine Mad Max with a happy ending!

Really neat ideas here.

DataLives.

 

[Joshua Howard]

My personal favourite time period is the immediate post-World War III Earth era, the one glimpsed in First Contact. I think the story of a post-apocalyptic human race struggling to make things right, forming Star Fleet and reaching out to the galaxy really inspiring. Just imagine Mad Max with a happy ending!

One problem with going down that road is that as we get closer to the future, we run the risk of making a show that doesn't really mesh with real world events. For example, April 2065 (First Contact) isn't that far away. When that date comes and the world didn't experience WWIII, will the title suddenly feel dated? We could probably explain timeline distortion between real life and Trek Canon somehow, but the point I am making is that Star Trek needs to have a certain timeless feel about it. That is easier to do if current productions are moving further into the future, instead of closer to present day.

There is also the risk - the closer to current times a show moves - that metaphor and allegory starts getting dropped and exchanged for preachy politicized maneuvers directly addressing current issues. As an example, it is one thing to have Klingons who seem to vaguely mirror the USSR... but it is dangerous territory if an episode makes a stated or alluded prediction about a real world Nation/entity.

 

[DataLives]

There is also the risk - the closer to current times a show moves - that metaphor and allegory starts getting dropped and exchanged for preachy politicized maneuvers directly addressing current issues. As an example, it is one thing to have Klingons who seem to vaguely mirror the USSR... but it is dangerous territory if an episode makes a stated or alluded prediction about a real world Nation/entity.

Well taken. Good points.

I should probably stick to the books for that then...

I really love your 25th Century STAR TREK: The Third Generation idea. We would need a really strong crew cast lead by a great captain (Patrick Stewart-quality, but not a clone) Do a two hour special like you mentioned. I think that would do well. I appreciated the Titan books where they got into so many different species and their involvement with the Federation, now that CG has progressed so much, they could have a much more varied crew on TV.

DataLives.

 

[Traveller]

^ But how would that be substantially different from 24th century Trek? It would be just different aliens, since the Federation can't be anything less than perfect. I wouldn't want to watch that - again.

Nah, I like the TrekSliders idea best (naturally, since it's my own ).

 

[Nerys Myk]

Just split the difference and have a show set in the Kelvin era.

 

[Greg Cox]

It will never happen. We won't see the Prime Universe on screen again. It's about as likely as Connery or Brosnan doing another Bond film, or Adam West doing another Batman series. As much as I'd like to see what Picard or Janeway or the Sisko are up to, it won't happen.

The new film is the start of a new chapter for Trek. For now, at least, it seems that we will have several years wait between films. And that isnt necessarily a bad thing. Making Trek a biannual event, rather than a show every week, sounds like a good idea for the well being of the franchise.

Well put.

 

[RoJoHen]

I think Trek should take a hint from Doctor Who. Just have short seasons following around one ship. At the end of the season have the universe in peril. The ship saves the day. Then have a Christmas special. Then start a new season aboard a new ship.

OR

Have it be the same ship. A training ship! Keep a couple random instructors or professors onboard, and then swap out the cadets every season.

 

[SilentP]

I'm quite partial to those ideas, RoJoHen, it does allow for a lot more flexibility in the casts, something that had been a criticism of the other Treks (career advancement freeze). Not sure which of the two I'd prefer though.

 

[startrekrcks]

Let people like Nutrek me included because it would be good to have both a NuTrek tv series and a prime universe Tv series don't bash NuTrek lovers if that is ok.

 

[Shazam!]

don't bash NuTrek lovers if that is ok.

I don't think specific bashing of nuTrek or PrimeTrek lovers ever actually takes place. Often there can be heated arguments but I doubt anyone loses any sleep over some internet conversations. It's all banter, really.

 

[thumbtack]

It will never happen. We won't see the Prime Universe on screen again. It's about as likely as Connery or Brosnan doing another Bond film, or Adam West doing another Batman series. As much as I'd like to see what Picard or Janeway or the Sisko are up to, it won't happen.

The new film is the start of a new chapter for Trek. For now, at least, it seems that we will have several years wait between films. And that isnt necessarily a bad thing. Making Trek a biannual event, rather than a show every week, sounds like a good idea for the well being of the franchise.

Well put.

And it gives the angry persons many years to get over it or take up something else.

 

[Nerys Myk]

This the internet and Star Trek. Letting go is not a option.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I think Trek has reached the point where--like the Batman and Spider-man franchises--that it will now exist in multiple versions rather than multiple spinoffs, IMO...

This.

As for the OP (truTrek comments aside... ):

Do you think we will ever have another TV series or film based within the real Star Trek timeline?

Everything is possible. But not in the short run.

I would love to see one last TNG film, but, I realise that is unlikely.

No, I don't think so. Nemesis was the last TNG movie, at least in this incarnation. Maybe they'll do another take on TNG in the future, but with different actors.

What about a movie based on the Reeves-Stevens book Federation?

God, I hope not.

What about a TV series with Captain Riker aboard the Titan, based on the novels?

Not live-action, but I don't think that an animated series with the original voice actors is impossible. What are Frakes and Sirtis doing these days?

What about a TV series from the viewpoint of some NEW captain aboard a NEW star ship? Starfleet is massive, let's look at it from the lower decks of some other ship!

Possible in the long run, but actually I think that if they want to tell the "new adventures", they'll just do another take on TOS again.

What about a Firefly - United Federation of Planets cross-over!? (just kidding.... kind of)

Not a real crossover, but I think that a series based on a civilian ship would be cool.

Will we ever have another on-screen incarnation of real Star Trek?

With the same actors? Not really.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Re: truTrek TV series? New movie?

And it gives the angry persons many years to get over it or take up something else.

Being a Star Trek fan isn't something you can ever just get over.

Back when TNG started, Original Series fans went through several stages of anger, denial and acceptance. But of course, that was slightly different situation with a new incarnation existing alongside its immediate predecessor for a time, culminating in several crossovers. That was repeated across the franchise, easing each successive transition.

As for taking up something else... what would you suggest? Basket weaving?

 

[Sector 7]

Just split the difference and have a show set in the Kelvin era.

This is probably the most workable option. It relates to the successful movie(s) without interfering with same.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

Said before...

I don't dislike NuTrek, I simply prefer PrimeTrek, a lot.

That said, no I don't think there will be any more PrimeTrek series nor movies. At least not any time soon.

I would be supremely happy if the NuTrek ruled the Silver Screen (as it works so well as a big budget blockbuster) and PrimeTrek lived on the Small Screen (as I think that is the only media that it could survive on right now). But that won't happen and we all know it.

 

[Pauln6]

I don't know why Trek producers were so anti producing tv movies or mini-series. Granted the B5 movies were a bit hit and miss, although in my view that was partly because of JMS' reluctance to tell stories that we wanted to be told (plugging the gaps in the narrative) featuring characters we wanted to see.

Stargate, Farscape, and Dr Who managed to keep the ball bouncing in this way recently.

 

[Greg Cox]

I don't know why Trek producers were so anti producing tv movies or mini-series.

But why bother with some low-budget tv-movies when you have a shot at a blockbuster movie series? The idea was not to keep a sputtering flame alive for a diminishing audience of hardcore fans, but to create a brand new generation of Trekkies.

Rebooting the franchise was a risky move, but it obviously paid off . . . .

 

[AnyStar]

Well, AbramsTrek is the "true" Trek now, like it or not.

i'm not sure i agree with that...

but i doubt an abrams interpretation would make either an audience OR a studio happy.

a new series should exist in the established timeline, not the newest films fantasy universe.

just like voyager and enterprise it should strike out in unknown territory, but for christs sake, no more "prequel" or "alternate" crap.


as far as the films go, i dont really care anymore. let the movies go in the new direction. nobody says i have to like it, but i'm not the director am i?