That's not an accurate version of events at all. Enterprise was a prequel because Berman and Braga became burned out from the 24th century and genuinely wanted to do a series set a century prior to TOS. Paramount was vehemently against the idea, wanting themselves either another 24th century show or a 25th century one. They eventually relented and agreed to a prequel, though they forced a lot of compromises on Berman and Braga, including rejecting their originally proposed story arc for the first season set exclusively in Earth's solar system and being about the NX-01's construction and forcing the Temporal Cold War into the show.
I can't believe this needs to be explained. The Powers That Be do not
just equal the direct showrunner(s). It's also the studios backing them/interfering with the plot.
You quoted what I said and then put a positive, coincidental spin on each example. As if it was by pure
chance that The Powers That Be ran away from the 24th century for nearly 20 years and retreated into past eras just cause reasons ...
Berman and Braga did not just coincidentally want to do another era of Star Trek because of random burn out from the 24th century. They wanted Trek to rest after VOY both citing "franchise fatigue" as the reason VOY/DS9 was not as well received as TNG. The ratings disparity between DS9/VOY and TNG was well known. You make it sound like they just arbitrarily were tired of the 24th century and its many television/film successes. If VOY/DS9 had the ratings of TNG and were churning out successful films, it's not likely they would pivot to a solo-solar system as their next Star Trek story.
Paramount wanted another Trek show to be made during VOY's run, not necessarily that it
had to be 24th century. B&B wanted Trek to rest and did not relent until VOY ended. The reason the studios interfered in their original plan was because their ideas were seen as too much of a departure of the original Trek "model" like DS9 was. They
panicked at the idea and nixed it. Guess why they did not want to do more "out of the box" Trek and wanted a return to the familiar?
The Abrams movies were a reboot of TOS in reaction to the franchise's collapse in popularity and the belief that by revisiting TOS they would reinvigorate the franchise. Which it did. Well, Trek XI did anyway. A failure to capitalize on that success and strike while the iron was hot led to the other two movies getting more tepid reception at the box office.
That's literally what I said ... They ran back to TOS as it was the safe option ...
Abrams got approval for it because it was going back to the basics (TOS). If he pushed for a VOY/DS9 film or a post-TNG film to restart the franchise, the studios would likely have said no or expressed apprehension. Why? One more time: ratings. That's just a fact. It wasn't some random coincidence that Abrams picked TOS to reboot everything.
Disco began in the 23rd century because Bryan Fuller had a very specific connection to a TOS storyline in mind when he planned the show, though after he left his replacements were either unaware of it or dropped it. While SNW is more or less a direct reaction to the positive audience reaction to Anson Mount as Pike in Disco's 2nd season and therefore would need to be set in the 23rd century.
Fuller having a specific storyline doesn't disprove what I said. He chose a storyline
connected to TOS. Again, if they went back to the TNG-era where Burnham was Riker's secret sister, the show would likely not have been greenlit. At least not without a million restrictions behind it.
It's just a fact that TOS/23rd century is seen as "safe" Trek. All deviations from it are, unfortunately, seen as a risk.
I'm not saying this to be anti-TOS. I respect that without it, we wouldn't have any Star Trek. It's not a bad era, but I definitely don't agree that it should be the center of such a vast franchise. TOS is the Star Wars: Original Trilogy-era equivalent for Star Trek. There is a constant urge to return to this singular point because it is "safe".
Going back to the actual topic - as long as TOS is "safe" Trek, the writers will always invoke the Enterprise/Klingons/Kirk/Spock. Even DISCO which could have been about something radically different brought in Spock/Sarek and the Enterprise in season 1. They couldn't even go a single season without invoking that part of TOS. So if Trekkies are raising an eyebrow at the cynical "mining" of past Trek - literally the only way out of it is to move beyond this era.
