After Trek 11 replace TOS 1701 with prequel Enterprise

[TigerOfDarkness]

Maybe Archer started out as the Federation President equivalent of Lincoln or Washington, but ended up the equivalent of Nixon and no one wanted to talk about him anymore?

In TOS, it is established that Pike was very important in the history of Space Exploration, but he was only mentioned in the Menagarie and AFAIK never in TNG, DS9 or VOY.

 

[Warped9]

Woulfe said:
I have a better idea, how about we replace DumbDumb2007 with the new ship so we no longer have to deal with his strange questions like this one here ?

- W -
* It's just a thought, and a random one at that *

An excellent suggestion! :thumbsup:

 

[cooleddie74]

TigerOfDarkness said:
Maybe Archer started out as the Federation President equivalent of Lincoln or Washington, but ended up the equivalent of Nixon and no one wanted to talk about him anymore?

In TOS, it is established that Pike was very important in the history of Space Exploration, but he was only mentioned in the Menagarie and AFAIK never in TNG, DS9 or VOY.

Well, TECHNICALLY he was in TNG and DS9. In "The Most Toys," the Enterprise-D shuttle flown by Data when he is kidnapped is named "Pike." And in DS9 Sisko is awarded a Starfleet medal for valor named for Christopher Pike during the Dominion War.

 

[ST-One]

cooleddie74 said:

TigerOfDarkness said:
Maybe Archer started out as the Federation President equivalent of Lincoln or Washington, but ended up the equivalent of Nixon and no one wanted to talk about him anymore?

In TOS, it is established that Pike was very important in the history of Space Exploration, but he was only mentioned in the Menagarie and AFAIK never in TNG, DS9 or VOY.

Well, TECHNICALLY he was in TNG and DS9. In "The Most Toys," the Enterprise-D shuttle flown by Data when he is kidnapped is named "Pike." And in DS9 Sisko is awarded a Starfleet medal for valor named for Christopher Pike during the Dominion War.

And don't forget that Siskos brother in law played for the 'Pike City Pioneers'.

 

[cooleddie74]

^
Correct! :thumbsup:

And that one reference is actually a DOUBLE whammy because it not only references Pike but also Cestus III...the Federation colony from the Gorn episode of TOS, so in a way it's also an indirect Kirk nod!

 

[comsol]

Ronald Held said:
Without any flaming or being banned, does anyone accept that the alledged changes result from the timeline changes made during FC?

Personally, I just see this movie as being in a parallel universe, like the old Earth-One and Earth-Two from DC comics (pre-Crisis that is).

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

cooleddie74 said:

TigerOfDarkness said:
In TOS, it is established that Pike was very important in the history of Space Exploration, but he was only mentioned in the Menagarie and AFAIK never in TNG, DS9 or VOY.

Well, TECHNICALLY he was in TNG and DS9. In "The Most Toys," the Enterprise-D shuttle flown by Data when he is kidnapped is named "Pike." And in DS9 Sisko is awarded a Starfleet medal for valor named for Christopher Pike during the Dominion War.

I stand corrected, then. Thanks.

There was a starship called Archer in a TNG episode or movie, wasn't there? In which case Archer gets almost as much mention as Pike.

 

[mada101]

I think it's pretty clear from what (little) we have seen so far that the new movie is at the very least a visual reboot. The new Enterprise cannot realistically be placed into the exiting design lineage of the NCC-1701 (it looks more akin to a stage between the TOS and TMP ships than a TOS prequel). Therefore, there are three possible outcomes:

- This is now the way we are all supposed to consider TOS looking. This could happen, but I think that for the sake of merchandising (who will want to create both the old and new Enterprise' as sellable models), it's unlikely. Besides, it would annoy too large a portion of the fanbase (the 'purists'), and Abrams is too much of a savvy producer to do that.
- This will be an altered timeline created by some part of the film's alleged time-travel story. This is my personal 'most likely', as Robert Orci is on record saying that every change in the new movie from existing canon will have an explanation.
- It's a total reboot, with no consideration given to the old canon (1966 - 2005). I don't deem this likely, either, as many of the people involved in the project have said otherwise.

 

[Son_of_Soong]

So... Wesley Crusher travels back in time with the help of the traveller and edits the Enterprise design schematics while their building it?

 

[Captain Robert April]

mada101 said:
I think it's pretty clear from what (little) we have seen so far that the new movie is at the very least a visual reboot. The new Enterprise cannot realistically be placed into the exiting design lineage of the NCC-1701 (it looks more akin to a stage between the TOS and TMP ships than a TOS prequel). Therefore, there are three possible outcomes:

- This is now the way we are all supposed to consider TOS looking. This could happen, but I think that for the sake of merchandising (who will want to create both the old and new Enterprise' as sellable models), it's unlikely. Besides, it would annoy too large a portion of the fanbase (the 'purists'), and Abrams is too much of a savvy producer to do that.

We'd be marching on Paramount within a week, burning him in effigy.

- This will be an altered timeline created by some part of the film's alleged time-travel story. This is my personal 'most likely', as Robert Orci is on record saying that every change in the new movie from existing canon will have an explanation.

Which better include everything being put back where, and how, it belongs by the end of the last reel, or they can kiss their franchise goodbye.

- It's a total reboot, with no consideration given to the old canon (1966 - 2005). I don't deem this likely, either, as many of the people involved in the project have said otherwise.

It'd have to be the best thing since Edison invented the film projector, because you can't start off a reboot by pissing off a bug chunk of the existing fanbase and essentially telling them, "you don't count anymore, don't let the door hit ya on the way out." Just ask Berman and Braga how well that strategy worked out.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

Captain Robert April said:

- It's a total reboot, with no consideration given to the old canon (1966 - 2005). I don't deem this likely, either, as many of the people involved in the project have said otherwise.

It'd have to be the best thing since Edison invented the film projector, because you can't start off a reboot by pissing off a bug chunk of the existing fanbase and essentially telling them, "you don't count anymore, don't let the door hit ya on the way out." Just ask Berman and Braga how well that strategy worked out.

I don't know, it seems to have worked pretty well for Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica.

 

[David cgc]

Captain Robert April said:

- This will be an altered timeline created by some part of the film's alleged time-travel story. This is my personal 'most likely', as Robert Orci is on record saying that every change in the new movie from existing canon will have an explanation.

Which better include everything being put back where, and how, it belongs by the end of the last reel, or they can kiss their franchise goodbye.

Ah, yes, the "Why bother even making a damn movie at all?" school of thought. Am I to assume, then, that the last page of your Enterprise blueprints will have an afterward describing how the ship was immediately remodeled to adhere to the Franz Joseph plans the week before it was launched? We wouldn't want all those fans who bought that blueprint set to be nonplused at being told what they already had didn't count anymore. They'd turn their backs on Star Trek forever.

It's not like the ratings of the last television series and box office take of the last movie made it clear they already had or anything crazy like that. No, Star Trek is doing fine as far as the vast majority of people are concerned, and only an idiot would try to mess with it now, when everything's going so well.

It'd have to be the best thing since Edison invented the film projector, because you can't start off a reboot by pissing off a bug chunk of the existing fanbase and essentially telling them, "you don't count anymore, don't let the door hit ya on the way out." Just ask Berman and Braga how well that strategy worked out.

I'd rather ask Daniel Craig or Ron Moore. In any event, the existing fan base isn't that important. Most of the people who see a Star Trek movie, any Star Trek movie, wouldn't describe themselves as fans. Certainly not the kind of fans who go over Star Trek on the internet and make pictures based on it, like you or I. We're not representative of any large body of people.

 

[cooleddie74]

TigerOfDarkness said:

cooleddie74 said:

TigerOfDarkness said:
In TOS, it is established that Pike was very important in the history of Space Exploration, but he was only mentioned in the Menagarie and AFAIK never in TNG, DS9 or VOY.

Well, TECHNICALLY he was in TNG and DS9. In "The Most Toys," the Enterprise-D shuttle flown by Data when he is kidnapped is named "Pike." And in DS9 Sisko is awarded a Starfleet medal for valor named for Christopher Pike during the Dominion War.

I stand corrected, then. Thanks.

There was a starship called Archer in a TNG episode or movie, wasn't there? In which case Archer gets almost as much mention as Pike.

Yeah. In NEMESIS. One of the starships sent by Starfleet to help confront Shinzon's super-weapon is the USS Archer. It's never seen on-screen, but the name and registry of the ship are visible on a tactical display on the Enterprise-E.

 

[The Doctor]

Captain Robert April said:
We'd be marching on Paramount within a week, burning him in effigy.

What, all three of you? I'm not sure that a trio constitutes a 'march.'

Don't think for a moment that the numbers of the 'hardcore' Trek fans come close to cracking into six digits, let alone the numbers that would have a hope in hell of sustaining a new show.

You're not the target demo.

 

[Ronald Held]

And that is one of the problems.

 

[ST-One]

Captain Robert April said:

mada101 said:
I think it's pretty clear from what (little) we have seen so far that the new movie is at the very least a visual reboot. The new Enterprise cannot realistically be placed into the exiting design lineage of the NCC-1701 (it looks more akin to a stage between the TOS and TMP ships than a TOS prequel). Therefore, there are three possible outcomes:

- This is now the way we are all supposed to consider TOS looking. This could happen, but I think that for the sake of merchandising (who will want to create both the old and new Enterprise' as sellable models), it's unlikely. Besides, it would annoy too large a portion of the fanbase (the 'purists'), and Abrams is too much of a savvy producer to do that.

We'd be marching on Paramount within a week, burning him in effigy.

- This will be an altered timeline created by some part of the film's alleged time-travel story. This is my personal 'most likely', as Robert Orci is on record saying that every change in the new movie from existing canon will have an explanation.

Which better include everything being put back where, and how, it belongs by the end of the last reel, or they can kiss their franchise goodbye.

- It's a total reboot, with no consideration given to the old canon (1966 - 2005). I don't deem this likely, either, as many of the people involved in the project have said otherwise.

It'd have to be the best thing since Edison invented the film projector, because you can't start off a reboot by pissing off a bug chunk of the existing fanbase and essentially telling them, "you don't count anymore, don't let the door hit ya on the way out." Just ask Berman and Braga how well that strategy worked out.

Well, since you are wrong about Edison and the film projector...

 

[The Doctor]

Ronald Held said:
And that is one of the problems.

Not if JJ and Paramount actually want to make money on this sucker.

 

[Outpost4]

Exactly. It's twenty somethings and younger that go out to movies. Sorry, Ron, it isn't you and me, or at least enough yous and mes.

 

[Holytomato]

"t'd have to be the best thing since Edison invented the film projector,"

Edison was The Ripoff Artist of Hershey Park.

"you can't start off a reboot by pissing off a bug chunk of the existing fanbase and essentially telling them, "you don't count anymore, don't let the door hit ya on the way out." Just ask Berman and Braga how well that strategy worked out."

Was Nemesis and Enterprise successful?

No.

 

[Warped9]

Outpost4 said:
Exactly. It's twenty somethings and younger that go out to movies.

I think thats a gross generalization and somewhat erroneous assumption. I suspect there are still a lot of 30+ folks still going to the movies even if they are more particular about what they're going to see then they were in their younger days.

True with the advent of DVD and home theatre systems and big screen TVs a lot of feature films can be enjoyed just as well at home as at the cinema. but a lot of folks still like to see visual spectacles on the silver screen first to really get the larger-than-life experience.

I don't see this as either/or. A new Trek film could be made that appeals to a broad demographic. And there have been a number of big budget features films that have done so successfully: Spider-Man, Batman Begins, Casino Royale and a number of other adventure/action visual spectacles.

To aim a Trek film at a narrow demographic would be stupidity of the highest order. Of course I wouldn't be surprised if TPTB did just that.

This new film won't be like TOS, but it could still make an effort to resonate with established fans. It would be very short-sighted not to do so.