Where was the Enterprise during the Dominion War?

[Christopher]

Christopher, pardon me if this has already been asked (for I'm virtually certain it has been), but...has there been any Paramount talk of making a Trek movie based off the events of "Destiny"?

Casting and exorbitant salary negotiation aside, with the advances in CGI and 3D, it would seem the time is ripe.

I'm sure there'd be absolutely no interest in doing anything of the sort. Paramount is making TOS-era movies produced by J. J. Abrams. Their first such movie was a huge box-office success, so naturally that's going to be their focus for as long as Bad Robot and the new cast are willing to participate.

Also, let's not forget that the books are read by only a tiny fraction of the moviegoing audience. Star Trek Online almost certainly has a larger audience (it had a million registered users when it first launched), and Destiny contradicts its continuity. As much as we love the books, we have to recognize that they're a niche market. In the unlikely event that Paramount had any interest in returning to the 24th century for movies, they'd probably either go with the STO continuity or, more likely, ignore it and do their own thing.

 

[JarodRussell]

Christopher, pardon me if this has already been asked (for I'm virtually certain it has been), but...has there been any Paramount talk of making a Trek movie based off the events of "Destiny"?

Casting and exorbitant salary negotiation aside, with the advances in CGI and 3D, it would seem the time is ripe.

I'm sure there'd be absolutely no interest in doing anything of the sort. Paramount is making TOS-era movies produced by J. J. Abrams. Their first such movie was a huge box-office success, so naturally that's going to be their focus for as long as Bad Robot and the new cast are willing to participate.

Also, let's not forget that the books are read by only a tiny fraction of the moviegoing audience. Star Trek Online almost certainly has a larger audience (it had a million registered users when it first launched), and Destiny contradicts its continuity. As much as we love the books, we have to recognize that they're a niche market. In the unlikely event that Paramount had any interest in returning to the 24th century for movies, they'd probably either go with the STO continuity or, more likely, ignore it and do their own thing.

But are the stories worse just because they have been written in a niche market book series? I don't see why it would be less accessible to movie goers just because it was in a Trek novel first.
I know that seems to be the logic a movie producer follows, but I don't agree with it.

 

[Captaindemotion]

And unfortunately, the creators of Star Trek 2009 fell in exactly that trap. A lot of stuff that would have been normal for a movie was left out because they feared "the audience wouldn't get it". Which is stoopid.

Actually they included a ton of continuity references, from Spock's "Yesteryear"-based childhood to McCoy's divorce to the whole Kobayashi Maru thing to Rura Penthe to the tribble on Scotty's workbench to character names from the novels to cameos by Admiral Komack and Captain Chandra (at Kirk's Academy hearing). Spock Prime's whole backstory, his involvement with the Romulans, was implicitly a continuation of "Unification." They even included continuity refs that didn't quite make sense, like naming a planet Delta Vega.

Not to mention Admiral Archer's beagle, Sulu fencing, the names of Kirk's parents, etc.

 

[JD]

Christopher, pardon me if this has already been asked (for I'm virtually certain it has been), but...has there been any Paramount talk of making a Trek movie based off the events of "Destiny"?

Casting and exorbitant salary negotiation aside, with the advances in CGI and 3D, it would seem the time is ripe.

I'm sure there'd be absolutely no interest in doing anything of the sort. Paramount is making TOS-era movies produced by J. J. Abrams. Their first such movie was a huge box-office success, so naturally that's going to be their focus for as long as Bad Robot and the new cast are willing to participate.

Also, let's not forget that the books are read by only a tiny fraction of the moviegoing audience. Star Trek Online almost certainly has a larger audience (it had a million registered users when it first launched), and Destiny contradicts its continuity. As much as we love the books, we have to recognize that they're a niche market. In the unlikely event that Paramount had any interest in returning to the 24th century for movies, they'd probably either go with the STO continuity or, more likely, ignore it and do their own thing.

But are the stories worse just because they have been written in a niche market book series? I don't see why it would be less accessible to movie goers just because it was in a Trek novel first.
I know that seems to be the logic a movie producer follows, but I don't agree with it.

I don't think he's saying that they wouldn't do the story because it was done in a book, he's just saying that the books are such a small part of the franchise money wise, that they probably wouldn't even bother looking at them.
Personally, I would have love to see a Litverse Titan DVD movie, but I realize that there is almost no way that would ever happen.

 

[Christopher]

Actually what I'm saying is that if the filmmakers were to draw on tie-in material rather than telling an original story, they'd probably go with the material that's familiar to a larger audience, which is ST Online, rather than something less well-known that takes a contradictory approach. Of course, that's just hypothetical, because it's vastly more likely that they'd create their own original story.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I would have love to see a Litverse Titan DVD movie, but I realize that there is almost no way that would ever happen.

I'm sure that when Riker and Troi were added to the finale of ENT, Paramount/CBS were hoping for a significant ratings spike from TNG fans tuning in to see what the fuss was all about. If there had been such a spike of interest, a Frakes/Sirtis-led telemovie might have been a possibility. The ENT finale would probably have worked so much better as a Rikers-on-the-Titan framing story instead of trying to sandwich it into an old TNG episode, as they did, but it's totally understandable that designing a whole new ship for a few seconds of TV wasn't really viable either.

But... even if a "Titan" spin-off was developed for TV or the big screen, they'd hardly go to the "Titan" novels, read by about 1% of the old TNG audience. More likely, someone would start afresh, from canonical clues offered in "Nemesis".

As for a "Destiny" movie, just imagine the cost of reuniting casts (and their salaries), sets, alien makeups, costumes, locales... That's why such an epic story works best as a novel trilogy. Imagination is free.

 

[kkozoriz1]

As for a "Destiny" movie, just imagine the cost of reuniting casts (and their salaries), sets, alien makeups, costumes, locales... That's why such an epic story works best as a novel trilogy. Imagination is free.

Don't tell the editors that, they'd expect the authors to work for free!

 

[Christopher]

The ENT finale would probably have worked so much better as a Rikers-on-the-Titan framing story instead of trying to sandwich it into an old TNG episode, as they did, but it's totally understandable that designing a whole new ship for a few seconds of TV wasn't really viable either.

I dunno -- they had to do a lot of work to reconstruct the TNG sets as exactly as possible and build a new digital model of the Enterprise-D. It wouldn't have been that much harder to design and build the equivalent sets for Titan.

That's why such an epic story works best as a novel trilogy. Imagination is free.

Right. What works well in one medium doesn't necessarily translate to another. Each has its own strengths.

 

[Destructor]

The ENT finale would probably have worked so much better as a Rikers-on-the-Titan framing story instead of trying to sandwich it into an old TNG episode, as they did, but it's totally understandable that designing a whole new ship for a few seconds of TV wasn't really viable either.

I would have absolutely loved that. I think the best hope for a Titan DVD would be as an animated production and, as I've stated, I'm really surprised someone hasn't jumped all over that idea. Would kick the ass of half the animated shows currently in production.

 

[JD]

Or a digital backlot movie ala Sky Captain or Sanctuary. With the amount of complex aliens and sets required I really think it would be the best way to do it. Yes, I know this isn't going to happen but it's still fun to talk about as a theoretical concept.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I think part of the reason why the ENT-D and the TNG crew appeared in the Enterprise finale was to bring 'modern' Trek back full circle, to bookend the most recent series - if chronologically earliest, in Trek time - with the oldest and arguably most popular of the modern Trek shows. Showing Titan wouldn't have had the same effect, IMHO.

 

[JarodRussell]

I think part of the reason why the ENT-D and the TNG crew appeared in the Enterprise finale was to bring 'modern' Trek back full circle, to bookend the most recent series - if chronologically earliest, in Trek time - with the oldest and arguably most popular of the modern Trek shows. Showing Titan wouldn't have had the same effect, IMHO.

Showing the Enterprise-E maybe?

 

[Christopher]

I think part of the reason why the ENT-D and the TNG crew appeared in the Enterprise finale was to bring 'modern' Trek back full circle, to bookend the most recent series - if chronologically earliest, in Trek time - with the oldest and arguably most popular of the modern Trek shows. Showing Titan wouldn't have had the same effect, IMHO.

Then at the very least, they should've made it Riker and Troi on the Enterprise-E shortly before Nemesis. That would've been more convincing given their ages.

 

[Paris]

Then at the very least, they should've made it Riker and Troi on the Enterprise-E shortly before Nemesis. That would've been more convincing given their ages.

Amen. They looked fine, but definitely 10 years older than they should have. If they had them on the EE in 2379 before Nemesis, then the Data voice cameo would have been fine as well...

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Hey, I'm not defending the age thing; podgy old Riker was in no way convincing as, er, podgy young Riker. I'm just re-hashing the logic which TPTB explained as being behind having Riker & Troi in the episode.

But yes, an ENT-E appearance would have made a lot more sense (never got the point of retconning that storyline into the middle of that episode with Terry O'Quinn).

 

[captcalhoun]

that's one of the legion of reasons i hate TATV.

1. it makes Riker look a dick because he needs to play holodeck to decide to do the right thing and tell Picard about the illegal cloak.

2. it's a fucking TNG episode stealing away ENT's finale.

3. i hate the way Shran goes from being a great noble hero to a suzzy jewel thief and is mentioned as 'the Andorian' by Riker and Troi even though he should be a historically famous figure.

4. the shitty Trip death. nuff said.

5. the lame-ass 10 year jump where everyone's the same rank and the only changes are extraneous patches on the uniforms and poles on the bridge.

6. need i go on?