Star Trek: Cameos The Series.
I'd rather not. Sounds like pure fan wank.
Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?
- Thread starter ELCHawk
- Start date
Star Trek: Cameos The Series.
I'd rather not. Sounds like pure fan wank.
I think most of us are resigned to the idea that something post 24th century is going to happen. And honestly, that's fine.
What I would love to see is that it stands on its own. I admit that not doing so is something that all of this era of Star Trek is guilty of (including SNW). Let's not have the sons and daughters of all of our heroes from the TNG era as the leads, let's not have the entire pitch be to go back and check in on Bajor and Cardassia or the Klingon Empire or whatever. Let's head in a new direction. Let's let it stand on its own.
Just like Roddenberry did in 1987.
Yeah, early on, he brought in De Kelley for a cameo in "Encounter at Farpoint." Yeah, there was "The Naked Now" (shudders) but that series largely built its own legacy. Sure, it stood on the shoulders of TOS, but it didn't feel the need to constantly go back to that material for inspiration. Maybe every once in awhile but not every week. It charted its own course.
If we're going to do another show on another Enterprise, make it something different. That's honestly all I would like to see. Hell, its what I wish its what we got back in 2017. Its certainly not all been perfect and I've enjoyed a great majority of what we've gotten, but I would have loved to see them take some real risks and do something completely new. I don't think that's too much to ask.
But the market right now is calling for nostalgia-based series from long-running franchises, so that's what Legacy will likely be. And it is what it is.
Always up for a "torch passing" moment in the first episode, but imagine TNG where it spent half the time looking for the descendents of Kirk, Uhura, Spock etc. Imagine if Voyager's engineer was Worf's younger cousin, imagine Enterprise where instead of T'Pol we had an ancestor of Tuvok
I think part of the problem now is we don't get the length of time with the characters on a new series. We had 20 episodes with Rios or Jurrati, just 10 with Dhaj. Even the 27 we've had with Raffi was about the number of episodes we had with anyone in TNG Season 1.
13 episode seasons are clearly far cheaper to produce and far less stress on the cast and crew, but it also means we don't get as comfortable seeing the same characters week in, week out.
That said I've felt more attachment to the SNW crew in 20 episodes than I had to the TOS crew in 79 episodes, so it can be done.
Comparisons with 1987 are a bit different though. In 1987 there was 88 "hours" of backstory, by the time 1990 finished there was more trek in the 24th century than in the 23rd. Today there's a backstory of 908 episodes, nearly 10 times as much screen time as the original TOS, and its not increasing anywhere (percentage wise) near the rate of the late 80s and 90s. Can't just be a carbon copy, and TNG did have Klingons, and Romulans turned up early too. Just no descendents, no personal history.
I think part of the problem now is we don't get the length of time with the characters on a new series. We had 20 episodes with Rios or Jurrati, just 10 with Dhaj. Even the 27 we've had with Raffi was about the number of episodes we had with anyone in TNG Season 1.
13 episode seasons are clearly far cheaper to produce and far less stress on the cast and crew, but it also means we don't get as comfortable seeing the same characters week in, week out.
That said I've felt more attachment to the SNW crew in 20 episodes than I had to the TOS crew in 79 episodes, so it can be done.
Comparisons with 1987 are a bit different though. In 1987 there was 88 "hours" of backstory, by the time 1990 finished there was more trek in the 24th century than in the 23rd. Today there's a backstory of 908 episodes, nearly 10 times as much screen time as the original TOS, and its not increasing anywhere (percentage wise) near the rate of the late 80s and 90s. Can't just be a carbon copy, and TNG did have Klingons, and Romulans turned up early too. Just no descendents, no personal history.
Last edited:
It's not just them.
It's also the new characters like Mura, Esmar, Dr. Ohk, and whoever they get to fill T'Veen's slot.
Agreed.
No more going back down memory lane. Enough of the "Where are they now?" nonsense.
Fans were complaining back then that "There is no Trek without Kirk and Spock!"
You're not going to please everyone no matter what you do.
Last edited:
This. This is my biggest sticking point. It's not that I am opposed to Legacy, or opposed to nostalgia, since both are useful tools. Again, the biggest draw for me with SNW is seeing more of Pike, a captain I have enjoyed since watching the Cage on VHS in the 90s.
What gives me pause is two fold; one, is the overreliance on this idea of a reunion tour. Instead of looking for something new, it's inviting in all the old characters for a check in and for us to feel warm just by their mere presence. It's not really earned endearment. Second, is as you say, not really allowing it to stand on it's own. It prides itself on deep Trek knowledge without character depth. And that's fine but doesn't excite me. It doesn't make the world feel bigger but actually a lot smaller.
To use a point of contrast, it's kind of like Star Trek Into Darkness. The plot of the film would do well with John Harrison as John Harrison. But, instead they brought back Khan, which makes Khan feel rather inevitable, and also that the Trek universe isn't that big. It's a good movie, but it's need to call back to other Trek makes it feel smaller.
Hopefully that makes sense.
This is very true.
Dollars to donuts they make him related to Kira.
Maybe. Let’s just be honest: maybe.
Thats the crew we see at the end of “The Last Generation,” sure. But we have a much different bridge crew in Strange New Worlds than we saw at the end of “Such Sweet Sorrow.” I would not be surprised if some of those characters return. But I also wouldn’t be surprised if we have some sort of combination of Seven, Raffi, Jack, Kestra, Soji, Alexander and the LaForge sisters. Real life will have to make changes because getting all of the actors back under contract might prove difficult.
Oh, no doubt. I’m just saying what I’d like to see. But apparently I’m in the minority. And that’s okay.
Absolutely. I want to be challenged by Star Trek, not just feel the warm and fuzzies. If Terry wants to do something that would completely blow my mind, I’d be all for it. But the experience of Picard season 3 makes me think that while it might be a nice treat seeing all of these reunions, it would not be all that fulfilling in the end. Think of it as a McFlurry vs a steak dinner. Sure the McFlurry might taste good, but it wouldn’t be as filling and ultimately satisfying as that steak would be, and honestly probably could make you sick in the end.
Or Shax.
Yes!
Even Disco (the show that was supposed to make a break from the past) brought back Pike and Spock.
TPTB went so far as to make Burnham Spock's adopted sister!
Given the events of "Those Old Scientists," that's NOT an outside possibility.
TPTB went so far as to make Burnham Spock's adopted sister!
Given the events of "Those Old Scientists," that's NOT an outside possibility.
Last edited:
Coming next fall to Paramount+
I would prefer to limit it to Jack and the La Forge sisters.
Anything more would be excessive.
If Sarek and Spock were part of Burnham's character DNA, how was it supposed to make a break from the past? It was there from the start and wasn't a secret. I'll even add that the Sarek stuff was some of the better in those early seasons, not at all because of nostalgia but because of casting and writing (you CAN do nostalgia right, doesn't all have to be superficial fluff).
Also, Kirk was never in Disco.
Absolutely. No where would I say otherwise. My hesitance is strongly around the idea that increasing the number of familiar characters is, by default, sufficient. And Picard Season 3 is thrown up as the example, since it didn't just bring back the crew but brought them back and put them back in familiar positions. Now, the details are important in the story, but, in my opinion, Season 1 had a similar effect but was a stronger, deeper, story.
Would/Should Starfleet even allow siblings to serve aboard the same Starship?
Besides a possible "Sullivan brothers situation," having siblings serve under the same chain of command would create a possible conflict of interest.
Granted, off the top of my head, we have the example of the Delaney sisters on Voyager. Though my memory is hazy if they were regular Starfleet, or if they were part of the Maquis?
Plus, while not siblings, we have the even more egregious example of Riker having his wife serve under him on the Titan.
There was also Jack (Sr.) and Beverly serving on Stargazer together (in addition to Wesley and his mom on the E-D).
This might be "more evolved" 24th Century thing. Starfleet doesn't think it's a good idea but considers their members mature enough to make their own decisions on the subject.
I didn't think they ever outright said she served onboard the Stargazer. Nor do I remember Wesley ever serving on the Enterprise as anything more than an "acting Ensign" or a cadet.
Yup. That’s exactly why I wouldn’t be surprised if it happened.
Similar threads
