Why would that be necessary? Any new series would stand its own, just as all Star Trek series have, and this is a full century post-Nemesis.
Alex Kurtzman: 'Star Trek: Discovery' Will Spark Debate And Adhere To Canon
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
For me the new "Ghostbusters" was a good example of m
I'm curious about the legal rights in regards to Nimoy's Spock? Isn't he both a Prime and Kelvin Universe character? If someone wanted to do a story in the prime universe about how Spock is no longer in it, would they have to pay Paramount even though Nimoy's Spock isn't just a Kelvin Universe creation? If that is the case then wouldn't that mean that the connection we think their is between the Kelvin and Prime isn't real.? Nimoy was basically playing a different version of the Spock that we have never seen before?
Jason
I'm curious about the legal rights in regards to Nimoy's Spock? Isn't he both a Prime and Kelvin Universe character? If someone wanted to do a story in the prime universe about how Spock is no longer in it, would they have to pay Paramount even though Nimoy's Spock isn't just a Kelvin Universe creation? If that is the case then wouldn't that mean that the connection we think their is between the Kelvin and Prime isn't real.? Nimoy was basically playing a different version of the Spock that we have never seen before?
Jason
Of course they won't. But apparently they'll watch a series that has a 70s-retro starship, a steampunk /Flash Gordon transporter room and Elizabethan fantasy-armor-wearing aliens. Because all that will make it palatable to the audience that is watching it now.
CBS owns Star Trek. Period. It owns the trademark on the title, the universe, the characters, the terminology, the iconography, all of it. Paramount, as part of the terms of the Viacom split, retains the license to make movies based on that property as long as it continues to exercise that license. It owns the copyright on the specific story and events of the movies it makes based on CBS's trademarked universe and characters. Spock is a CBS-owned character, but the things he says, does, and experiences in a Kelvin movie are part of a story copyrighted by Paramount. (A trademark is on a term or symbol or object; a copyright is on an entire story.) They're different types of rights that are both in play in their own different ways.
Granted, I don't know the actual terms of the contracts, so this is essentially a best guess. But I would suspect that CBS would have the right to use Kelvinverse ideas in their productions, since they own it all, but they'd have to pay Paramount and Bad Robot a fee or a royalty for their use. Ownership and royalties are two different things. So it wouldn't be about legality, necessarily, just about whether they want to spend the extra money. (For comparison, MGM owns all Stargate properties, but Stargate Atlantis tended to avoid having guest appearances by movie characters like O'Neill and Jackson and SG-1 characters like Carter and Teal'c in the same episode, because they'd have had to pay royalties to two different sets of creators at the same time.)
Of course not, because it's a matter of business and money and contracts, not a matter of the creative or conceptual content of the stories. Storywise, it's the same Spock. It's just that some of the stories about him are copyrighted by different people than others.
Really? TV has been getting progressively complex in the world-building department, hence your Game of Thrones (which Discovery is modeling to some extent). Sure, GoT doesn't have 50 years of canon but you also can't just drop in and watch an isolated episode and know WTF is going on. So I don't think your market analysis is on-point.
It doesn't have 50 years of canon but it does have more than 5,000 pages of backstory. So your point is even more valid.
If it walks like a reboot, talks like a reboot, it's a reboot. What they call it has more to do with marketing than what it actually is. I suspect this confusion between what they call it and how it is perceived will be what people argue about for years to come.
Some fans are overly obsessed with labels and what to call things. Creators are more concerned with actually making them. What you do is more important than what somebody calls it. And your average TV viewer probably couldn't care less about the difference between a "reboot" and a "revival" or whatever. They just want to see the stories.
TMP, TWOK, and TNG were all approached somewhat as what we'd now label a "reboot" -- a fresh, updated start that had a loose relationship with prior continuity. But later creators made more of an effort to tie the pieces of the franchise into a continuous whole and gloss over their inconsistencies, essentially "debooting" them, as it were. And that philosophy has governed the franchise ever since, Discovery included. It's all treated by the creators as one reality (even the Kelvinverse, being an alternate timeline within that reality) whose visual and technical details are subject to variant interpretations but that's all still presumed to fit together in broad strokes.
Let's see in action first. Sometimes set photos look different than it does in video. If it looks like crap, I'll be the first to agree. Also, keep in mind that it is also on the older ship. We haven't seen Discovery's transporter yet.
If it looks fantastic, there are going to be fans complaining that it doesn't look crappy enough.
I tried to watch GoT from the beginning and was still confused. So, no, it really doesn't hold up as a comparison.
Wasn't that his point?
I'm not certain, as I have family members who have stepped in to Star Trek (through DS9, VOY or ST 09) without feeling lost.
Please don't get overly used to compliments from me, but on this occasion well said sir.
Oh come on - Tank Girl was fun.
I think of it like how the ships in Axanar remined me of the Kelvin universe but it was set in the prime timeline.
I still don't understand why DSC isn't either set a decade or so after Generations or a few decades after NEM. If TPTB decided on a near-TOS setting to appease fans, they ended up shooting themselves in the foot. Either of the settings I just mentioned would allow much more room for "updating." That said, I have a strong feeling DSC is a second dimensional spin-off from the Prime timeline.
Because they want to do: Star Trek
Not Star Trek: The Next Generation (season 22)
Similar threads
- Locked
