OT: I can't stand the term ST 09 for the movie that came out last year. ST '09, maybe, but ST 09 is Insurrection.
JJVerse Novels - Why they were cancelled
- Thread starter DorkBoy [TM]
- Start date
Except that nobody would use "09" for Insurrection. They'd call it ST 9 or ST IX. "ST09" (with no space) strikes me as a reasonable initialism for "Star Trek (2009)," with the zero serving to distinguish it from "ST 9." Zero is not nothing; its value is as a placeholder.
Of course, that abbreviation doesn't work as a reference to its overall timeline, or at least it won't once there's a second movie.
Of course, that abbreviation doesn't work as a reference to its overall timeline, or at least it won't once there's a second movie.
My personal favourite is "NewTOS". Sounds and loks still a bit strange, but imo way better than "JJverse" or "Abramsverse"
So that means none of us will know about the books until after a storyline has been decied for the sequel. Anyways, how would these stories be reworked into the prime universe if these didnt' fit into the Abramsverse? Wouldn't these books have to be all rewritten and the storyline changed in order for it to be in the prime universe? These books were mainly to go into the timeline of last years movie not the prime universe,because the prime universe is not alltered like the new timeline is. The new timeline has been altered because of the destruction of the ship Kelvin and the planet Vulcan, and the deaths of Kirk's father & Spock's mother.All this was caused because Nero's hatered toward Spock Prime, who is now stuck in the past (new timeline). I just don't see how these stories would work in the prime because nothing has been changed or altered.
But I gather that the "Nu-" prefix tends to carry a derogatory connotation to many fans. It's also an unpleasant construction, like a cheesy brand name (which is, I believe, part of the derogatory intent). It's certainly no better than the other options.
It's too early to assume that. Don't mistake my speculations for definitive statements. It's possible that a decision will be made about the books once the sequel story is decided upon, but that's conjecture, not fact. We don't know anything for sure at this point.
Yes, which is why I specifically said "At least it would probably require major rewriting" in the post you just quoted.
Yes, I know. I wrote one of them.
You don't even know what the stories are, beyond at most some inaccurate cover blurbs that have been posted online.
But most of the books were conceived as standalone tales -- building on the characterizations of the movie but telling self-contained adventures. That's why I think most of them could conceivably be reworked for the Prime timeline. The character dynamics would have to be changed but it might be possible for the basic plots to be reused. That's something writers do all the time. Larry Niven took his Known Space novella "The Soft Weapon" and changed the characters to turn it into a TAS episode, "The Slaver Weapon." The TrekBBS's own Dennis Bailey and his collaborator David Bischoff rewrote their original novel Tin Woodman into the TNG episode "Tin Man," heavily reworking the background and characters but using the same basic concept and plot. The TNG episodes "The Child" and "Devil's Due" were rewrites of scripts created for the unmade Phase II TOS sequel series. Some writers have reworked unused Star Trek ideas into original works in other SF universes, such as David Gerrold's Blood and Fire, a TNG script that he rewrote as a novel for his Star Wolf universe (and again as a TOS fanfilm).
Of course, I'm not saying that's the ideal option here. I'd certainly be happier if we could get all four books published as Abramsverse books, since it would let us preserve far more of the work we did. I'm just speculating about a possible fallback position if that didn't happen.
JJverse, Abramsverse, Abramstrek, Abramsprise, JJprise, nuTrek, nuPrise... can't blame the fans for using it, since it's obvious there is a major difference between the original Trek (from 1966 to 2004) and this new one. The creators themselves pushed the idea that they were doing something new and rebooted with every piece of promo material they released.
I can't remember ANYONE calling DS9, VOY or even ENT "Bermantrek" or "Bermanverse", or "Bragaverse", "Pillertrek". The transition was smooth. The NX-01 was labelled "Akiraprise" because her design was a rip off, but that's about it. Nobody called the Enterprise-E "Bermanprise" or even "Eavesprise", simply because it was a continuation of the original, but I've seen many fans calling the rebooted one "Abramsprise" or "Churchprise" because it's a cut, reboot and overwrite that people need to differentiate.
But what I'm saying is that we need a name that isn't some snarky fan nickname -- something that's straightforward, descriptive, unbiased, and practical for long-term use. We've been given "Prime timeline" as a designator for the original continuity, and that works reasonably well. What we need is a corresponding designator for the new continuity, one that isn't based on the director's name (since there could be future productions in this continuity even after Abrams moves on). "New timeline" or "New universe" is a possibility, I guess, though it's kind of generic and the latter is too Marvel-ish.
I *HATE* the term "JJ-whatever" for the new Trek stuff. The guy's ego is big enough as it is. I love the film, but JJ's unending self-promotion is really annoying (in other words, I think i'll be giving the STXII DVD behind the scenes stuff a miss)
I call it nuTrek. Memory Alpha calls it "Alternate Universe". Cooler names include "Second Star Trek" and "Second History" (from Killing Time), but Bad Robot chose not to ask this random internet fan.
Now back on topic...
I call it nuTrek. Memory Alpha calls it "Alternate Universe". Cooler names include "Second Star Trek" and "Second History" (from Killing Time), but Bad Robot chose not to ask this random internet fan.
Now back on topic...
I'm a computer guy, so I just go with "Trek 2.0" when distinguishing between the two. Not the sexiest nickname out there, probably, but the meaning is plain without being snarky about it.
Ah, Marvel's New Universe. I was a big fan, but it wasn't the right time for that.
Didn't they use that as a promotional title for the enhanced TOS eps? Or was it someplace else I'd seen that?
How does JJ self-promote any more than other popular, successful producer/directors?
If anything, it's his fans that do all the promotion of his successes, not JJ himself. Seems to me that James Cameron, George Lucas, Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, et al, have higher or similar profiles, or do they also do too much "unending self-promotion"?
Agreed. And chances are, it's the marketing departments behind his various projects that want to keep stressing his involvement. "From the creator of LOST!"
That's not ego. That's just good marketing. The same thing goes on in publishing. I'm going to keep plugging Richard Matheson as "the New York Times bestselling author of I AM LEGEND" until the day I die . . . .
Trust me, it's not because Richard insists on this. It's because I want to sell books.
That's not ego. That's just good marketing. The same thing goes on in publishing. I'm going to keep plugging Richard Matheson as "the New York Times bestselling author of I AM LEGEND" until the day I die . . . .
Trust me, it's not because Richard insists on this. It's because I want to sell books.
Yeah, but only like 13 people ever watched that, so I figure it's still a perfectly good moniker.
Exactly. And, since hardly anyone ever stays in cinemas to read ANY closing credits these days, why should big name directors and producers keep their involvement a secret?
Similar threads
- Poll
