If Kirk was in the Delta or Gamma Quadrant, dealing with the Borg or Dominion, or started going transwarp speeds it would be confusing for all.
That's my point, stories have been retold and retold long before Star Trek's been doing it. Just because Pocahontas was made didn't stop Avatar from being one of the top ten grossing movies of all time.
Not the best example actually, the last two films in the series re-rebooted and where set back in the Victorian era after the war series didn't go down well with audiences.
I bought the box set months ago that has them in the original order, it's rather strange going from a war torn WWII London film to one set directly after the Adler affair back in Victorian times.
Even more so as in several scenes he goes between his Victoran and wartime hairstyles with little continuity.
Not the best example actually, the last two films in the series re-rebooted and where set back in the Victorian era after the war series didn't go down well with audiences.
I bought the box set months ago that has them in the original order, it's rather strange going from a war torn WWII London film to one set directly after the Adler affair back in Victorian times.
Even more so as in several scenes he goes between his Victoran and wartime hairstyles with little continuity.
Are you sure they reverted back to Victorian times? Granted, some of the later movies are less obviously concerned with the War and are more generic Holmes mysteries, but I don't believe they ever literally switched back to the gaslight era. (A foggy English estate, or dockside warehouse, looks much the same regardless if it's 1889 or 1945.)
For what it's worth, Wikipedia states explicitly that "the writers of the Universal series never reverted to the Victorian setting." Even if Holmes stopped fighting Nazis.
So no return to the "prime timeline" in that case either!
Not the best example actually, the last two films in the series re-rebooted and where set back in the Victorian era after the war series didn't go down well with audiences.
I bought the box set months ago that has them in the original order, it's rather strange going from a war torn WWII London film to one set directly after the Adler affair back in Victorian times.
Even more so as in several scenes he goes between his Victoran and wartime hairstyles with little continuity.
Are you sure they reverted back to Victorian times? Granted, some of the later movies are less obviously concerned with the War and are more generic Holmes mysteries, but I don't believe they ever literally switched back to the gaslight era. (A foggy English estate, or dockside warehouse, looks much the same regardless if it's 1889 or 1945.)
For what it's worth, Wikipedia states explicitly that "the writers of the Universal series never reverted to the Victorian setting." Even if Holmes stopped fighting Nazis.
So no return to the "prime timeline" in that case either!
The last two movies produced did not mention a war, nazies, or anything past the 1900 mark. The first opens with Watson mentioning Irene Adler, implying the adventure with her occured between the last specifically war themed movie and that one.
They were based off of the books again, not new war themed stories, so even if Universal doesn't state it explicitly, it's the intention of the penultimate and final movies.
Some of the mudslinging towards newer fans that came in through the JJ movies really irks me. Star Trek is not the pinnacle of intelligent sci-fi. There are so many superior examples of that, and it is embarrassing that to hold Trek up high at a level that it is not meant to be at.
What Trek is is entertainment: adventures with phasers, starships, alien planets and all, and the characters that go through those adventures together.
So as to which universe Future Trek should be set in, I don't mind either way, but I do think the alternate reality is the way to go. It's already been set up and a series set in the same universe has the potential to go anywhere in terms of world-building.
At this point I think I'll be happy with whatever new Trek we get.
Don't get me wrong, I like NuTrek, "In to Darkness" too, but back then, show like TOS and TNG opened viewers minds, braking racial barriers, broadening their imaginition, with a moral base (and it got a bit preachy at times). Television had this revolutionary idea that the TV should educate rather then just entertain. Then reality shows popped up and people became more concerned with who is going to stab who on Big Brother. People hold it in a high regard probably because it's somthing that modern TV is just missing.
Prime trek doesn't mean the same old stories. I stated that in my Opinion to your post in this quotes link:
I'm not saying go back to the way they were, because those ships have passed, I'm saying press forward. They could have and still can, we'll see after the next NuTrek installment.
Actually, no one can speak with any certainty on this issue whatsoever unless they happen to run either CBS or Paramount.
Are you sure they reverted back to Victorian times? Granted, some of the later movies are less obviously concerned with the War and are more generic Holmes mysteries, but I don't believe they ever literally switched back to the gaslight era. (A foggy English estate, or dockside warehouse, looks much the same regardless if it's 1889 or 1945.)
For what it's worth, Wikipedia states explicitly that "the writers of the Universal series never reverted to the Victorian setting." Even if Holmes stopped fighting Nazis.
So no return to the "prime timeline" in that case either!
The last two movies produced did not mention a war, nazies, or anything past the 1900 mark. The first opens with Watson mentioning Irene Adler, implying the adventure with her occured between the last specifically war themed movie and that one.
They were based off of the books again, not new war themed stories, so even if Universal doesn't state it explicitly, it's the intention of the penultimate and final movies.
But Irene Adler never appeared in the Rathbone movies, so we have no idea when that timeline's version of her story took place. If Moriarity and Lestrade and Mrs. Hudson are all running around in the forties, there's no reason Irene Adler couldn't have been as well. Maybe Rathbone's Holmes stopped Irene Adler from blackmailing Winston Churchill.
And just because they didn't mention Nazis, and referenced characters from the books, doesn't mean that, hey, they're back in the 1880s again! Granted, it's been a few years since I've seen Terror by Night or Dressed to Kill, but are they really catching horse-drawn cabs and eschewing electricity in those films? And why would Universal, which had NEVER set their Holmes films in anything but the present-day (as opposed to the first two films from Fox) change course at that late date? My understanding is that they kept the movies set in the present but gradually segued away from wartime themes.
Universal often took a laissez-faire approach to settings back in that era. Just try to pin down exactly when their Frankenstein or Wolf Man movies took place; they're mostly set in some foggy, timeless, mythical Eastern Europe that has modern-day phones and trains--and superstitious peasants and roving bands of gypsies.
And don't get me started on the chronology of the Mummy series, in which decades pass between the movies ("Twenty years ago, your father uncovered an Egyptian tomb . . . ") and yet it always seems to be the present-day 1940s!
Clearly, there was no internet back then. Can you imagine modern-day fans trying to make sense of those "timelines"?
("But wait! How can Moriarity be working with the Nazis in the forties when we clearly saw him stealing the crown jewels back in Victorian times? Canon violation!")
Some of the mudslinging towards newer fans that came in through the JJ movies really irks me. Star Trek is not the pinnacle of intelligent sci-fi. There are so many superior examples of that, and it is embarrassing that to hold Trek up high at a level that it is not meant to be at.
What Trek is is entertainment: adventures with phasers, starships, alien planets and all, and the characters that go through those adventures together.
So as to which universe Future Trek should be set in, I don't mind either way, but I do think the alternate reality is the way to go. It's already been set up and a series set in the same universe has the potential to go anywhere in terms of world-building.
At this point I think I'll be happy with whatever new Trek we get.
Agreed.
I like Trek, and have for over 40 years now. But I realize that it is (for the most part) just space opera.
The main bitch against JJ Abrams and his version of Trek seem to boil down to: "They're not liking Star Trek the right way!"
To one degree or another the same basic crap has come everytime there has been a new version of Star Trek. TAS, TMP, TNG, DSN, VGR, ENT, ad nauseum. There were all met with the cries of panic and derision that they were "ruining ST", and how dare they, and we want the "real" Star Trek back. A lot of Trek fans really do not handle change in their world too well at all.
It really gets tiresome. There's a lot of Star Trek I personally don't care for, so I tend to not pay too much attention to it. Star Trek: Voyager, for example. there are big chunks of it I've not seen to this day. Might get around to it someday, maybe not. But I got nothing against folks who think it's the alpha and omega of all things Star Trek.
Get over it already. No matter what happens on-screen (or in print), Star Trek is still whatever Star Trek is to you. No nobody is gonna come take away your DVD's or the stack of books over there on the shelf. Or erase your memory. So just knock it off and go enjoy whatever flavor of Star Trek you happen to like, and don't worry about the people that like other flavors of Trek.
And to answer the OP: No, because the "prime timeline" hasn't gone anywhere. Folks need to stop trying to stir up controversy where there ain't any to begin with.
Like I said before, they said the same thing you are now about Kirk's Trek. If you believe 40 some years down the line that a next gen reboot or throwback tv series is not even a possibility then try to open your mind a bit.
I think it really depends on who is behind it. If that person is a big fan of the Prime Timeline and wants to go back there, I don't think anyone is going to tell him or her no. I doubt they care--like the majority of non-Trekkies--if Kirk was born in Iowa or aboard a shuttlecraft from the Starship Kelvin, or what age Chekov was when he was first assigned to the Enterprise. That's stuff for Trekkies to fight over in places like this board.
