• 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!

Paramount going ahead with ST4 according to Engage

It's ALL "real" (or none of it is "real"--depends on one's point of view). Trek is like ice cream--comes in many flavours and individuals often prefer one or a few over the whole range. Nothing wrong with that. But just as pistachio ice cream (despite my utter loathing of it) remains "real ice cream", any and all officially produced Trek is "real Trek".

Try expressing it in terms of flavours you enjoy more (or less) rather than "real Trek" vs. "whatever flavour I don't like so it isn't 'real'". Leads to much less angst and sniping.


Nicely put. And, along the same lines, there's no such thing as "real" STAR TREK fans versus fans who prefer different flavors of Trek.
 
That being said - Kirk was the cowboy of ST... That is without question
I question it. It's an appellation applied by others, in universe and out.

Real Trek in my opinion is the combination of philosophy, the usual 'geekery' and a fair mix of intrigue, diplomacy and violence. Not every episode had an enemy to fight - some were encountered anomalies or interpersonal storylines...

New Trek is action interspersed with tidbits of storyline and humor.

Maybe claiming no new Trek is real would be flawed in general -
Most Trek films are "action interspersed with tidbits of storyline and humor". Starting with TWOK. It's pretty much the formula for movie Trek. The philosophy pool is pretty shallow in Trek films. The newer films might actually be an inch or two deeper in this regard.

I'm just glad I watched all the Kelvin movies.. If I hadn't, and just read the synopsis and criticisms, I would be some sort of Trek-Curmudgeon.. the movies were enjoyable. But the deeper plot implications and holes irk me. Perhaps ST4 will solve the problems created by the first 3... However, as already posted..
We've been nitpicking Star Trek's plot holes for the better part of five decades. Lets not pretend they suddenly cropped up in 2009. Have any really tried to solved the "problems" left by the previous films? That's purview of fans. When the pros do it, it always upsets a fan of two. :lol:
 
We've been nitpicking Star Trek's plot holes for the better part of five decades. Lets not pretend they suddenly cropped up in 2009. :lol:

Amen. Heck, there were at least two volumes of Nitpicker's Guides published long before the reboot was a gleam in anybody's eyes. :)

I mean, I love WRATH OF KHAN dearly and still maintain that it's the greatest TREK movie to date, but it's full of plot holes and coincidences that would be considered deal-breakers (by some) if they were found in one of the new movies. Ditto for ALIENS, PLANET OF THE APES, CASABLANCA, and any number of classic films, including (famously) THE BIG SLEEP, where even the screenwriter wasn't sure who committed one of the murders!
 
Mantz speculates in the podcast that it could be the mirror universe. Personally, I'm expecting something really convoluted where George Kirk was beamed out at the last second and lived some horrible tortured life for 25 years before being found and rescued by Jim:lol:
I dont think they'll go Mirror.. Im thinking more adapting the lost Orci3 so instead of Kirk Prime, Pine Kirk somehow comes into contact with George-Prime ? (who Spock-Prime talked to him about in ST09)
 
Probably not - there is more money in ignoring real Trek, and just skimming the edges with the shiny things associated with Trek. Can you imagine today's generation sitting through a Picard speech? They would be looking at their phone 2 minutes in and waiting for the next explosion.

But hey - one can dream..
Not even the TNG movies stuck with Picard speeches. The only speech he gave in the movies was First Contact where he was yelling and screaming, angry and swinging a rifle around breaking display cases and model starships.
What's "real" Trek?
If I like it, it's Real Trek. If I don't, it's not.
 
Not even the TNG movies stuck with Picard speeches. The only speech he gave in the movies was First Contact where he was yelling and screaming, angry and swinging a rifle around breaking display cases and model starships.

Let us not forget the speeches between Picard and Admiral Dougherty in Insurrection, his long dissertations with the Baku and the Sona... And of course, the priceless pleadings with Shinzon that he too - can be better than a vengeful clone...

I get it though, continuity is sort of a suggestion. After all, in ST4 Picard could be in an escape pod, or it could have all been Q playing a game. We kinda have nothing to go on unless they unleash somethingg new.
 
Even without Kelvin involved, STD (just noticed how awful that looks as an acronym) would be unaffected.. it takes place before the Narada/Kelvin incident anyway.
 
Even without Kelvin involved, STD (just noticed how awful that looks as an acronym) would be unaffected.. it takes place before the Narada/Kelvin incident anyway.
DSC is the official abbreviation.

The Kelvin timeline starts with the birth of James Kirk. DSC takes place after Kirk's birth. 10 years prior to TOS, not 10 years prior to Kirk.
 
DSC is the official abbreviation.

The Kelvin timeline starts with the birth of James Kirk. DSC takes place after Kirk's birth. 10 years prior to TOS, not 10 years prior to Kirk.

True - all the information says this you are right.. I had thought it was closer to Archer in timeframe than Kirk.. My mistake... Thanks for pointing that out.

DSC would indeed be different in Prime and Kelvin - due to the technology advancing differently in Kelvin (thanks to the Narada) vs Prime... Either way though, the technology will probably look more advanced than TOS era tech.. But that is not based on Kelvin or Prime - more like - production in 2016 vs 1960's. Which is why I maintain that the movies have to literally wrap up Kelvin - otherwise a series will end up overlapping at some point.. Unless there are ALWAYS going to be a Prime V Kelvin situation..

Which I do not necessarily relish.
 
I quite like the idea of the Kelvin timeline being wrapped up. I think a story which sees NuKirk rescue his father and sacrifice himself in the process, would be very compelling. Perhaps somehow as part of the story NuSpock could find himself in the Prime Universe at the time of Spock Prime's departure, taking his place and continuing his legacy.

I'd rather it not just be a case of Pine and Hemsworth meeting and then just going their separate ways, or the uber predictable outcome of George sacrificing himself again after finding out what his son became.
 
I'm excited by the news, and hope it comes sooner rather than later.

I think that they can move on to a new adventure, with Kirk's development arc being neatly wrapped up in Beyond. I'm hoping that Spock and Uhura get a little more time, and explore something a little bit different.

Please, no time travel!

Spock and Uhura should have a mixed vulcan (who might actually look like a more realistic version of a human/vulcan hybrid ) so the reboot haters will officially have a new character that creates the 'threat' that nutrek doesn't even end with this cast as we might get the next generation too.

(kidding aside, it would be a great and fitting way to wrap these movies but the people behind this trek like to placate tos purists so much now and I have no hope the next movie won't go even more backwards with the characters and dynamics than Beyond did)

I quite like the idea of the Kelvin timeline being wrapped up. I think a story which sees NuKirk rescue his father and sacrifice himself in the process, would be very compelling. Perhaps somehow as part of the story NuSpock could find himself in the Prime Universe at the time of Spock Prime's departure, taking his place and continuing his legacy.

I'd rather it not just be a case of Pine and Hemsworth meeting and then just going their separate ways, or the uber predictable outcome of George sacrificing himself again after finding out what his son became.

sounds exciting.
and a movie like that would be a 100% success and it wouldn't alienate reboot fans and critics all the more.

I don't know. I don't see the point of setting up a whole new STAR TREK continuity just to shut it down after four movies.

Why can't we have multiple versions of STAR TREK?

¯\ _(ツ)_/¯

i'm still trying to understand how you can 'reset' or fix the timeline when the reboot is a separate, parallel, reality and there is no need to fix tos (prime reality) that still exists on its own. According to the time travel theory used in the reboot, if they got back in time and prevented some events from happening..rather than modifying their future they'd only create infinite alternate realities of the reboot.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top