If there's a new show

[entity]

Which timeline should it be set in?

As some of you know I'm watching all Star Trek chronologically, but I'm also leery about becoming a nutrek hater, so when there's either a new alternate timeline show or a prime timeline show, what order should they go in on that list that's on my first thread?

 

[BillJ]

How could anyone know at this point?

 

[The Wormhole]

Which do I think it should be set in? The Prime Universe. Realistically, I think it more likely it'll take place either in the Abramsverse or a whole new timeline.

 

[MacLeod]

Don't really care when they set it, so long as it's of high quality.

 

[Chronos]

Hopefully it will be set in the Prime Universe. As far as the timeline is concerned, there's a lot of space between ENT/TOS and TOS/TNG, it it could take place in the post-VOY era, perhaps even focusing the adventures of a timeship crew.

 

[Shawnster]

The way Hollywood is reboot crazy these days, I wouldn't be surprised if it's set in a rebooted TOS universe with Kirk, Spock and McCoy.

 

[Disco]

I'd love it set post TNG/DS9/VOY with links and cameos

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

Ideally the Prime Universe. As for when, pre-TOS would be interesting, as would "the lost era" between TOS and TNG.

If not then I'd prefer a whole new one which has nothing to do with NuTrek.

 

[Sector 7]

The way Hollywood is reboot crazy these days, I wouldn't be surprised if it's set in a rebooted TOS universe with Kirk, Spock and McCoy.

Agreed. A TOS/JJverse animated series would be awesome.

 

[Dukhat]

Logical deduction:

CBS doesn't give a shit what universe a new Trek show would be set in. All they care about is if it will be profitable. And profitability starts with cost-cutting measures. The sets, props, wardrobe, and CGI for the Abrams films already exist. CBS wouldn't need to spend money creating things that already exist.

Now does that mean that reusing all that stuff automatically means that the new show would take place in the Abramsverse? No, not necessarily. But like I said, CBS doesn't care about that. So any new show, whether it's in the Prime universe, the nuUniverse, or yet another new universe entirely, will most likely have the attributes of what we've seen in the new films, just like TNG had attributes from the TOS films.

 

[T'Girl]

It will be set in it own universe/timeline, with references to the history of the prime universe canon as the writers see fit.

If they can save money by redressing existing movie sets okay, hopefully with considerably less gloss white. Personally I would prefer new costumes and props. Don't get me wrong, the costumes are great, but I've never been impressed with the small props (like the phasers).

 

[arch101]

A thousand years after the TNG era. I don't think the next Trek should be tied down by having to acknowledge all the little details of the 29 previous seasons.
That said, some kind of future version of Data might exist in that era as the sole tie to the old.
Familiar civilizations might be significantly different by that time so comparisons to previous interpretations won't seem old and tired.

 

[Finn]

I miss the 24th Century. If they kept doing the 24th century shows after Voyager, we would be in the 2390s. Some of the kids we saw on TNG would be Starfleet commanders by now.

But, I agree it would be probably be a TOS reboot or something like it.

 

[Jedman67]

Logical deduction:

CBS doesn't give a shit what universe a new Trek show would be set in. All they care about is if it will be profitable. And profitability starts with cost-cutting measures. The sets, props, wardrobe, and CGI for the Abrams films already exist. CBS wouldn't need to spend money creating things that already exist.

Now does that mean that reusing all that stuff automatically means that the new show would take place in the Abramsverse? No, not necessarily. But like I said, CBS doesn't care about that. So any new show, whether it's in the Prime universe, the nuUniverse, or yet another new universe entirely, will most likely have the attributes of what we've seen in the new films, just like TNG had attributes from the TOS films.

I think this is the most likely. On the other hand, such large cinematic sets may not work so well for a TV series and probably scale them down. So probably a "post kirk" in the new films universe.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Logical deduction:

CBS doesn't give a shit what universe a new Trek show would be set in. All they care about is if it will be profitable. And profitability starts with cost-cutting measures. The sets, props, wardrobe, and CGI for the Abrams films already exist. CBS wouldn't need to spend money creating things that already exist.

Now does that mean that reusing all that stuff automatically means that the new show would take place in the Abramsverse? No, not necessarily. But like I said, CBS doesn't care about that. So any new show, whether it's in the Prime universe, the nuUniverse, or yet another new universe entirely, will most likely have the attributes of what we've seen in the new films, just like TNG had attributes from the TOS films.

I think this is the most likely. On the other hand, such large cinematic sets may not work so well for a TV series and probably scale them down. So probably a "post kirk" in the new films universe.

One thing to consider though, is that those sets, props, and costumes aren't owned by CBS, but Paramount (Trek's TV and movie divisions are split between the two studios now). Back when TNG was being made, Trek was under one studio and sharing production facilities & materials with another studio wasn't much of an issue.

 

[Granola Gwen]

Prime universe definitely. I like what TNG did with reintroducing the basic Trek knowledge to its' new fans. But like what arch101 said, an era that isn't tied down to the other series so that new audiences aren't puzzled and don't have to come into the series with much foreknowledge of the other series. (Maybe an occasional TOS or TNG reference would be nice though.) A fresh, clean slate of new characters that others can really get into.

 

[Dukhat]

A thousand years after the TNG era. I don't think the next Trek should be tied down by having to acknowledge all the little details of the 29 previous seasons.

The problem with the "a thousand years after TNG" scenario is that in Star Trek, pretty much any time period is going to look the same. You'll still have Starfleet officers aboard a starship exploring new worlds. The time period for such a thing is irrelevant. TNG didn't look all that different from TOS. ENT didn't look all that different from VOY, which didn't look all that different from the episode with the 29th century time Starfleet.

If you don't want to be tied down to 30 years of previous Trek canon, the answer isn't to set the show a thousand years in the future. The answer is to reboot the show.

On the other hand, such large cinematic sets may not work so well for a TV series and probably scale them down.

All they'd need is the existing bridge, corridor and crew quarter sets. Things like the brewery for Engineering could have a newer, smaller set.

One thing to consider though, is that those sets, props, and costumes aren't owned by CBS, but Paramount.

Oh, I'm aware of that. But it would be a fraction of the cost to buy them from Paramount instead of making all new sets, props and costumes from scratch, not to mention the time it would save.

 

[Ember]

Prime-Universe.

No more shows. Mini-series instead. That gives you more time to tell a story than a movie, but you won't have to worry about running out of story content as you would with yet another show.

 

[Bry_Sinclair]

^ Have to agree it should be either mini-series or definitely have no more than 13 episodes, to avoid weak fillers. Just look at what other series' manage to do with just six or twelve episodes these days!

Condense the Trekness to give us quality stories with compelling characters.

 

[Arpy]

The show I wanted to see was one with a gay/bi/trans captain set after VOY.

The show I'd see getting green-lit now is an Abramsverse reboot of TNG. They can't afford Chris Pine & Co. for the small screen, and they don't want another TOS reboot for the small screen while the one they've got is still making money on the big screen. On the other hand, TNG is both distinct from nuTOS (won't confuse the casual viewer) and it remains popular across the board. The Abramsverse also doesn't have to concern itself with fitting into canon, and it can shed whatever aspects of the Prime Universe current tastes consider not as cool.

Again, that's what I'd see getting green-lit now. If they wait till the Chris Pine & Co. finish their big picture run, they could recast nuTOS for the small screen, probably keeping it in an unconstrained alternate timeline. Heck, they just recast Spiderman for the big screen making Tom Holland the third Spiderman in under a decade...reboots seem to be the norm these days.