• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?

I would've been fine with that before they started shoving SNW down my throat for the past several years and telling me everything else I like sucks or that they shouldn't be doing it. First it was Section 31 they were trying to stop, then it was Discovery they trashed non-stop once they had SNW, then they moved on to trashing Picard, and now they're trying to stop Legacy. Doesn't matter what anyone might think of those projects, the point is every time there's been something I've looked forward to or wanted to see, they've been like, "Nope! Nope! Let's have Strange New Worlds!"

Now, they're trashing SNW ("Nurse Chapel done gone woke! Why is Spock eating bacon? He's supposed to be Jewish!" :rolleyes: )

There's a there is a thread on Twitter devoted to the Spock-eating-bacon controversy (FTR: Leonard Nimoy was Jewish. Spock the character was not.)

There's just no pleasing some people. :shifty:
 
Last edited:
And, yes, ST09 made money... but it was unsustainable in the long run.
It wasn't unsustainable, they just waited too long to do a sequel which drove the franchise off the public radar. If they had a sequel out within two or three years (as was the original plan) we might be seeing different results.

It also didn't help a cone of silence and secrecy surrounded STID to the point that the villain didn't even have a name released to the public until ten months after he was cast. Beyond was further hurt by the fact that no effort was put into promoting the movie at all until a month before release and that wasn't planned at all since it was due to Anton Yelchin's accident that caused Paramount to start talking about the movie begging the question, when were they planning to promote the film otherwise?
 
It wasn't unsustainable, they just waited too long to do a sequel which drove the franchise off the public radar. If they had a sequel out within two or three years (as was the original plan) we might be seeing different results.

It also didn't help a cone of silence and secrecy surrounded STID to the point that the villain didn't even have a name released to the public until ten months after he was cast. Beyond was further hurt by the fact that no effort was put into promoting the movie at all until a month before release and that wasn't planned at all since it was due to Anton Yelchin's accident that caused Paramount to start talking about the movie begging the question, when were they planning to promote the film otherwise?
That's like me saying, well, if ENT hadn't sucked out of the gate and if NEM had better writing / directing, maybe the Berman era would have lasted far longer. Or for that matter what if Bryan Fuller wasn't forced out?
 
There's one final thing: "We're sick of the 24th Century!" basically means "We're sick of the Berman Era!" And I have a few things to say about that.

1. I was sick of the Berman Era too... in 1999. That was 25 years ago! I'm over that now. The Berman Era ended in 2005. Almost 20 years ago. If someone's still sick of it after 20 years, then that's not on Rick Berman. He did some horrible things and he made a lot of decisions I don't agree with, but... It was 20 years ago and he's not in charge anymore! Whatever it is some of you can't get over, I only have one thing to say to you: Let it go.

2. "Sick of the Berman Era" wasn't the same as "Sick of the 24th Century!" for me. Not then, not now. Otherwise, I wouldn't have been interested in Picard at all. Whether it was Michael Chabon in charge or Terry Matalas.

3. "We've had so much of the 24th/25th Century!" Yeah, we did. Once again, over 20 years ago! Not lately. Since the fall of 2001, we've had Nemesis and 23 out of Picard's 30 episodes, the Short Trek "Children of Mars" too, and I guess you can include "These Are the Voyages" if you really want to. So, since Fall of 2001, we've had 26 hours total in the 24/25th Century. That's it.

[EDITED TO ADD: At least as far as live-action. Personally, to me, as much as I like Prodigy, animation just isn't the same. But even if we include Lower Decks and Prodigy, that's 60 episodes or 30 hours including commercials and doesn't change my point.]

On the other hand, we've had 98 episodes of ENT, three Kelvin Films (alternate 23rd Century but still 23rd Century), the first 29 episodes of DSC, and 20 episodes so far of SNW. 147 episodes in the 22nd or 23rd Century and a full trilogy. 153 hours versus 26 (or 56). Hmmmm. Gee, I wonder which one has had more representation in the past 22.5 years? I don't know, that's a toughie....

4. Once again, it's been OVER 20 YEARS. That's more than enough time to miss anything from TNG/DS9/VOY. That's more than enough time to shake things up. That's more than enough time to have had lots of things happen in the interim. So, it's not picking up exactly where things left off, as if Bill Clinton was still President.

5. No, it's NOT because of "Terry Worship!" I liked Picard before he was even involved. If they made a 25th Century series and Terry Matalas wasn't involved, I'd still be interested. If he starts off Legacy and leaves before it ends, I'd still be interested in what his replacement would come up with.

6. It's the 2020s. More and more, the people in these Writers Rooms will be people who grew up with TNG. Even if Legacy doesn't happen, this fact will not change. And if he doesn't do a follow-up, someone else eventually will.

7. When most people are following a story, they want to see what happens next. To quote Sisko, "It's the unknown that defines us. If we knew how the game ended, it wouldn't be worth playing." I'm probably paraphrasing, but that's the main idea. With prequels, we already know what the ending is. I want to go into a series and not know how it ends. I can guess, I can anticipate, but I don't know. In ENT, the Federation has to be founded. In SNW, Kirk has to become Captain. When DSC was a prequel, the Spore Drive couldn't take off and everything Discovery discovered had to be classified. Knowing what the outcome has to be sucks out the anticipation, it sucks out the oxygen. At least for me. So, you'd better be pretty masterful if you're going to distract me from that. Disagree with me? Fine. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I'm glad I've gotten this and everything else I've posted off my chest.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad I've gotten this and everything else I've posted off my chest.

Being as I cannot help but feel that alot of this is aimed in my direction, I guess I should respond.

My....malaise over the 24th century, and by extension, the 25th, has little to do with the likes of Rick Berman. My issues with the era have more to do with the general feeling, character attitudes, and design aesthetics that come from the timeframe.

In my opinion, one of the things that made Trek great was the sense of adventure. The exploration of the unknown was both exciting and potentially terrifying. There was a swashbuckling feel to early Trek that has been all but absent from the 24th century characters. The whole era feels like a type of gentrification. Gone is that sense of grand adventure, of wonder, of going boldly into the unknown. Replaced by characters who somehow manage to make space travel feel.... mundane.

Now this isn't a blanket statement. I've liked a great deal of 24th century Trek. I like ALL Star Trek. But as I've gotten older, I find myself drawn more and more towards "older Trek." By older, I don't mean when it aired, but that older, swashbuckling attitude. TOS had it. Enterprise certainly at least tried to have it. Even Discovery tried, and at times, succeeded in its attempts. And yes, SNW has it.

I could even argue that the first season of Picard made a real effort, only to be somewhat torpedoed by its own third season.

Also, just from a design point of view, I've become bored with "look" of the 24th century. The ships, the uniforms, the tech, the aliens. I'm ready for something different. For over 600 episodes we've had this design aesthetic. Nothing feels new. It's like looking at an iPhone. Updated ever so slightly with each passing year, and a slightly bigger screen.

One thing I appreciate about Discovery is that they were willing to go with drastically different design aesthetics, in both its eras.

In regards to my desire for perhaps another prequel series, preferably set during the early years of the Federation. Yes, we might know that in the end the Federation will survive and thrive, but I'd personally love to see the hardships and characters involved in getting to that point. It's no doubt a cliché to say, but I'll say it anyway; It's not the destination, it's the journey. Besides that, any potential series that took place in this era would no doubt have a cast of characters that we've never heard of. We'd have no ideas of what could lay in their futures.

But anyways, I've barely touched the surface of what I'm wanting to convey, but work calls. I'll say this again. I love Star Trek. All of it. Even the stuff I don't like that much. I'll watch, and probably enjoy, to atleast some extent, anything they throw at me, including a Picard continuation. These are all just my opinions on what I want out of Star Trek. They are in no way obligated to appeal to me and me alone.

It takes all sorts of Trek to make the world go round.
 
Last edited:
Believe it or not, the 24th century/Berman era is "my Trek" meaning it was the Star Trek I was introduced to, the Trek which I grew up watching, by virtue of being what was producing new content during my formative years. I have watched and rewatched TNG, DS9 and Voyager specifically so often I've gotten sick of them, fallen in love with them again and gotten sick of them again, and this pattern has repeated itself several times. Yeah, nostalgia is a hell of a drug, who doesn't enjoy putting on an old favorite episode and basking in the memories it conjures up? This is all fine and good, and while there's nothing wrong with indulging in the old favorites, eventually the current entertainment needs to move on.

Now while the current era of Trek can at times be accurately accused of indulging in nostalgia a bit too much, and while the quality may not have always been the best, the truth is for the most part, they've all brought something new to the table. Maybe that new content hasn't always been well received, but it was at least an attempt in the right direction. Season 3 of Picard brought nothing new, it literally reveled in a thirty year old TV show to the point of faithfully recreating its rather dated looking set. I won't deny seeing the old gang on their old bridge brought me warm fuzzies, but those warm fuzzies are not enough for me to declare that THE BEST THING EVER!!! like so many others have. And if a proposed Legacy spinoff is just going to be more of that, which interviews seem to indicate what with Matalas talking about revisiting Martok and Armus and Nagilum and Naomi Wildman and whoever, that simply does not interest me at all.

And on a final note, a thought I had while watching the recent Doctor Who specials which were in some way a nostalgia driven revisit to the era when David Tennant's Tenth Doctor was on adventures with Catherine Tate's Donna Noble is that this is how you do nostalgia and revisiting a past era correctly. Honestly something like that should be required watching for Terry Matalas to see how that sort of thing should be done correctly.
 
I grew up in late 80s and through the 90s but despite that didn't really get in to TNG, and preferred TOS, which I would often rent from the library. While I tried to jump in to TNG watching Picard shoot himself in a time travel episode was rough. I did enjoy early DS9 and VOY but really didn't get in to DS9 until "Trials and Tribble'ations," and read the novel. It got me more in to DS9 and I would appreciate more of the other Berman era.

My biggest frustration with any follow up is the feeling of sameness. That humans have to be the same, characters have to have this follow up, and on and on. It doesn't feel very new in terms of exploring something different. I can appreciate the lore, but it has become more and more restrictive in terms of what is considered Star Trek, and then go back and revisit it to bring in the familiar. And, if they do try something new it's always questioned as to why humans are acting a certain way, or where are all these other peoples and aliens. And...I find that frustrating at times.

If Legacy brings in familiar characters and does something new then I'm on board to give it a shot. But, Season 3 wasn't the inspiration that it was for others.
 
The problem with the 22nd/23rd century is that you eventually bump up against events in TOS (which is why Disco jumped to the 32nd century).
If that were the reason, they wouldn't have made SNW.

I have reluctantly cone to terms that there will be no Legacy. Big mistake IMO.
Strange New Worlds wasn't officially announced until year after Discovery Season 2 started.
 
If that were the reason, they wouldn't have made SNW.

SNW has seen fit to bring in Spock, Kirk, Chapel, Scotty, and Uhura.

I can't wait for cameras to roll on the TV Movie for Section 31 next month.

And I'm really looking forward to when Legacy is greenlit. When.


Star Trek: Section 31 will begin filming on Monday, January 29th. The production is planned for six weeks, wrapping up on March 13. The streaming movie was written by Craig Sweeny and is being directed by Olatunde Osunsanmi.

https://trekmovie.com/2023/12/19/michelle-yeoh-talks-prepping-for-star-trek-section-31-movie/
 
Last edited:
I'm not super stoked for Legacy but I also wouldn't have a problem if it happened. Why? Star Trek is a big tent.

  • There is room for a series to jump back and do the before Kirk thing with SNW.
  • There is room for a series to jump way ahead and see what's way down the road with Disco.
  • There is room for a series to attempt to appeal to a much younger audience with Prodigy.
  • There is room for a comedy with Lower Decks.
  • There is room for an espionage/thriller with the section 31 movie.
  • There is room for a teenage angsty show (if that's how they go with it) with Starfleet Academy.
  • There is room for going down the nostalgia trip to 80s/90s/early 2000s with Picard and Legacy.

One doesn't have to like all of these for there to be room for them to happen. Its about inclusion and about allowing other audiences than just YOUR interests. Or my interests. Or whoever's. The point at the end of the day is: Its not all about you and your likes. Others can like Star Trek for different reasons. I have little interest in the concept of Legacy but I'll give it a try if it happens. I'll probably watch it because its kinda what I do. But if I don't like it, my world will not come crashing down. Star Trek will not be dead to me. I just won't like every incarnation. And that's really okay.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top