Evidence of SNW being a possible alternate timeline from TOS

[BillJ]

That's the exact same argument I heard back in the 80s.

Then The Next Generation came along which paved the way for more series and new movies. Thank goodness the TNG creative team didn't have such a limited imagination or the franchise would have ended after TUC.

Limiting the entire Star Trek Universe to Kirk, Spock and McCoy would be like limiting the entire Marvel Universe to the Fantastic Four.

There’s a difference between 79 episodes and a thousand. The material becomes dense and contradicting. I do wonder if there’s any numbers on how many fans Star Trek has picked up in the last decade of deep nostalgia.

 

[ichab]

How many James Bond’s have there been?
How many Sherlock Holmes?

Those shows were based on novels about one character. Neither are science fiction series about an entire universe.

You mentioned Marvel above. How man times have both Marvel and DC comic series been rebooted?

So I respectfully disagree.

None of which stopped making new characters after a few successes. Good thing Stan Lee didnt say," Well, Fantastic Four was a hit so let's not worry about making anything new.

Nobody had heard of Guardians of the Galaxy until the James Gunn film. So dont tell me that new cant be done . We have an entire MCU that says you're wrong.

 

[BillJ]

None which stopped making new characters after a few successes. Good thing Stan Lee didnt say," Well, Fantastic Four was a hit so let's not worry about making anything new.

I see this and wonder how you can’t see the difference between the two? There aren’t just four characters in Trek. There are 11 TV series and 14 movies.

 

[fireproof78]

Thank goodness the TNG creative team didn't have such a limited imagination or the franchise would have ended after TUC.

More's the pity.

 

[ichab]

I see this and wonder how you can’t see the difference between the two? There aren’t just four characters in Trek. There are 11 TV series and 14 movies.

No kidding. So why reboot the same characters a second time? Why is it so difficult to create a new ship with a new crew written by competent people?

I seriously hope whomever takes this over has better imagination than another alternate reality or a reboot.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

I do wonder if there’s any numbers on how many fans Star Trek has picked up in the last decade of deep nostalgia.

I can only say for sure the answer to that question is at least 1. My housemate had a very meh opinion of star trek and could take it or leave it. But has been subjected to the streaming era shows and really likes SNW and Academy and absolutely loved Lower Decks.

 

[Campe]

None of which stopped making new characters after a few successes. Good thing Stan Lee didnt say," Well, Fantastic Four was a hit so let's not worry about making anything new.

Nobody had heard of Guardians of the Galaxy until the James Gunn film. So dont tell me that new cant be done . We have an entire MCU that says you're wrong.

I never said it CAN’T be done. Like I said, there needs to be a balance. Modern Trek, like it or not, has had a balance. 23rd century in seasons 1 and 2 of Disco and SNW. 24th/25th century with Picard, Lower Decks and Prodigy. Both eras very much steeped in past Trek trying to keep the levels of fanbase happy. And seasons 3-5 of Disco and SFA pushing into the future and sure, having tendrils into the past, but also trying to do new things. But none of it has worked as well as I think they’ve wanted it to. But does that say more about the content itself? Or the franchise as a whole? I think you could make the argument either way and probably at least be partially right.

As for the MCU, particularly post-Endgame, there have been far more misses than hits. Even that winning formula (and I do mean formula) got stale after awhile. So much so it’s more than likely post-Secret Wars, there’s going to be some level of reboot.

At the end of the day, everything gets stale given time and exposure.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Those shows were based on novels about one character. Neither are science fiction series about an entire universe.

Holmes has his own "universe" with various characters coming in and out. Even spinoffs based on those character and ones based on brand new characters with ties to Holmes.

 

[fireproof78]

Holmes has his own "universe" with various characters coming in and out. Even spinoffs based on those character and ones based on brand new characters with ties to Holmes.

Same thing with the Dresden Files and the interweaving of mythology and fantasy in the real world.

 

[Mudd]

DS9 and the rest never got an oppertunity on the big screen. Berman TV style got old and lost viewers because it didnt stay fresh. . The Kelvin films did fine, but if you reboot that cast again its only going to lead to diminishing returns. You cant keep recycling the same characters and concepts over and over and expect different results. All characters and stoylines have a shelf life and the Kirk crew passed its shelf life a very long time ago.

Nope.

Every new creative team they bring in has circled back to the Enterprise and some close variation of the original characters.

Not the same producers repeating themselves. Every new team.

Because to new people, what works and what matters to non-Trekkies is obvious.

Trek doesn't "explore a universe." It repeats a few skiffy tropes dating back at least to the 1940s, within a familiar and reassuring context constructed using a few formulas that work for them.

It's become a comforting narrative. And nothing's likely going to make it new again - at least, nothing that won't alienate the audience it has.