Spoilers Possible Enterprise focused Short Trek?

[Lord Garth]

I agree with some of what you say, but not all of it.

Star Trek: The Early Voyages, speaking of wishes, should recapture the spirit of early Star Trek (before Menagerie). No long arcs, serialized, or recurrences. It should feel strange, standalone, with longer edits and no blunt music.

The character of Pike is headed for burnout. Spock is emotional and has to earn a bond with Pike.

Okay.

Number One should build a case for why she should be on the bridge

That kind of crap about how Pike "can't get used to having a woman on the bridge" should stay in 1964 where it belongs. I wrote an article once on my views about the misogyny in "The Cage".

Perhaps a character that pushes the limits of exploration, is brash and unafraid, but ultimately dies by not adhering to the rules. Give him qualities that Spock would see in Kirk, and think he might be headed to the same fate. A psychological wrinkle to counter Burnham's call to respect differences and find friendship. So, the conflict in Spock is seeing these two realities and, from week to week, this is playing out in Spock, in TOS. He may even befriend him in the way Burnham suggests, but Spock is burned by his own conduct influenced by this character, and by eventually losing him.

That would be interesting.

Hey, Burnham and Uhura are practically twins. Why not an early Kirk, psychologically?

TOS Uhura wasn't the alpha go-getter that Burnham is. Not just because it was the 1960s. I could see someone like Areel Shaw in "Court Martial" as having an alpha personality. Kelvin Uhura can stick up for herself but she's also not a natural born leader like Burnham is. And I can't see either version of Uhura turning on Captain Georgiou the way Burnham did. Burnham goes to extremes, Uhura doesn't.

As for themes? Keep it exploration.

That would work.

 

[HaventGotALife]

Lord Garth,

I want her to face sexism. It is in the spirit of the character. In this era--from politics to gamers, to college assaults, to men in power assaulting women--we need this voice. I don't want Pike to repeat his lines. I want Star Trek to build a character that has to earn her stripes, but face sexism, too. So, with a strong case for why she is there, without becoming a Mary Sue, is on my wish list.

Star Trek can't just whitewash this issue out of existence. They have confronted so many. Star Trek's history with sexism is as old as 1964. And volumes could be written about it. So, if you want to apologize, it's not just competency in Burnham. It's having competency face sexism.

 

[Lord Garth]

They have confronted so many. Star Trek's history with sexism is as old as 1964. And volumes could be written about it. So, if you want to apologize, it's not just competency in Burnham. It's having competency face sexism.

I don't want to apologize because I stand by what I say. I think Star Trek should adapt to its times. And in 2019, such sexism 240 years in the future is regressive and dystopic. But I'll agree to disagree with you.

If it were explored on a planet-of-the-week that would be different. But in the society we should be rooting for like the Federation? No.

 

[HaventGotALife]

I don't want to apologize because I stand by what I say. I think Star Trek should adapt to its times. And in 2019, such sexism 240 years in the future is regressive and dystopic. But I'll agree to disagree with you.

No, I wasn't asking you to apologize. I was asking Star Trek to apologize. I'm sorry for the confusion.

 

[Gonzo]

If they can't tell they've struck gold with Mount and Peck, I don't think Short Trek's are going to make them somehow see the light.

It looks like Ethan Peck has got himself a spot on the Penny Dreadful sequel which doesnt help matters.

https://www.spoilertv.com/2019/06/penny-dreadful-city-of-angels-michael.html

It would indicate CBS are not intending to or cant proceed with a Pike/Spock/1 show as I would have expected them to contract him up so he is available.

Bit of a wasted opportunity if so.

They could have called it Star Trek Destiny based on Pike already knowing where he is going.

It would certainly sound better than calling it Star Trek (Insert Surname here).

 

[Noname Given]

It looks like Ethan Peck has got himself a spot on the Penny Dreadful sequel which doesnt help matters.

https://www.spoilertv.com/2019/06/penny-dreadful-city-of-angels-michael.html

It would indicate CBS are not intending to or cant proceed with a Pike/Spock/1 show as I would have expected them to contract him up so he is available.

Bit of a wasted opportunity if so.

They could have called it Star Trek Destiny based on Pike already knowing where he is going.

It would certainly sound better than calling it Star Trek (Insert Surname here).

^^^
It means Ethan Peck is an actor and is acting and finding work (good for him). CBS could very well decide to to some sort of 'Captain Pike' project (Telefilm, Mini-Series, Series, etc.) All they have to do is work out a schedule that works for any commitments Mr. Peck has.

Right now CBSAA is filming (in this order per comments by Alec Kurtzman):
- 6 Short Treks (4 Live Action, 2 Animated; and some of the Live action ones might be in the can already and in Post Production)

- Star Trek: Picard (10 episodes - 3 'in the can')

- Star Trek Discovery Season 3 (Probably 13-15 episodes based on the two previous ST: D seasons.)

- Star Trek: Section 31 (with Michelle Yeoh as the lead - probably 10-15 episodes for Season 1.)

(And somewhere in all that above, two full animated series - "Lower Decks" and a series for Nickelodeon aimed at a younger audience.)

My point?

CBS is already committed to producing A LOT of Live Action (and animated) Star Trek already. <--- This ain't cheap, so they probably want to get that out over the next year and see how it does before committing IMMEDIATELY to a fourth Live action series/tele-film, whatever. They have a lot on their plate already (and yes, if the above are well received will continue to expand.

So, yeah, Ethan Peck having other acting jobs doesn't automatically mean CBS doesn't want; or can't do a 'Pike' related project that includes him as 'Mr. Spock' - it just means he's a working actor; and if things work out, he'll have a lot of work down the road in a year or so (if they can work out scheduling, which they do ALL THE TIME.)

 

[Gonzo]

^^^
It means Ethan Peck is an actor and is acting and finding work (good for him). CBS could very well decide to to some sort of 'Captain Pike' project (Telefilm, Mini-Series, Series, etc.) All they have to do is work out a schedule that works for any commitments Mr. Peck has.

Right now CBSAA is filming (in this order per comments by Alec Kurtzman):
- 6 Short Treks (4 Live Action, 2 Animated; and some of the Live action ones might be in the can already and in Post Production)

- Star Trek: Picard (10 episodes - 3 'in the can')

- Star Trek Discovery Season 3 (Probably 13-15 episodes based on the two previous ST: D seasons.)

- Star Trek: Section 31 (with Michelle Yeoh as the lead - probably 10-15 episodes for Season 1.)

(And somewhere in all that above, two full animated series - "Lower Decks" and a series for Nickelodeon aimed at a younger audience.)

My point?

CBS is already committed to producing A LOT of Live Action (and animated) Star Trek already. <--- This ain't cheap, so they probably want to get that out over the next year and see how it does before committing IMMEDIATELY to a fourth Live action series/tele-film, whatever. They have a lot on their plate already (and yes, if the above are well received will continue to expand.

So, yeah, Ethan Peck having other acting jobs doesn't automatically mean CBS doesn't want; or can't do a 'Pike' related project that includes him as 'Mr. Spock' - it just means he's a working actor; and if things work out, he'll have a lot of work down the road in a year or so (if they can work out scheduling, which they do ALL THE TIME.)

Your post doesnt say anything I am not already well aware of.

The longer they leave any decision about the show the less likely it is to happen as the interest will go down over time and the ending of S2 of Discovery screamed lead in to a Pike/Spock/1 show, CBS needs to strike while the iron is hot or the opportunity and momentum will be lost, otherwise I can only assume they are not interested or not able to take that route at this time.

Seeing main actors for such a show like Ethan Peck who are actively looking for work and getting roles tends to indicate that they have not been contracted by CBS to make sure they are available (which happens a lot behind the scenes to ensure a project can go ahead, insurance reasons is a big one), actors reluctantly declining roles happen quite often just because they are not available when they are needed, especially if there are multiple actors that are essential for a project and they just cant get everyone's schedule to match up due to prior engagements, family matters or health issues.

I just posted the link as I felt it would be of interest to the forum as a clear indicator that nothing has moved on the matter, I wasnt really interested in being told how to suck an egg.

Then again knowing this forum it shouldnt really surprise me.

 

[Noname Given]

Your post doesnt say anything I am not already well aware of.

The longer they leave any decision about the show the less likely it is to happen as the interest will go down over time and the ending of S2 of Discovery screamed lead in to a Pike/Spock/1 show, CBS needs to strike while the iron is hot or the opportunity and momentum will be lost, otherwise I can only assume they are not interested or not able to take that route at this time.

Seeing main actors for such a show like Ethan Peck who are actively looking for work and getting roles tends to indicate that they have not been contracted by CBS to make sure they are available (which happens a lot behind the scenes to ensure a project can go ahead), actors reluctantly declining roles happen quite often just because they are not available when they are needed, especially if there are multiple actors that are essential for a project and they just cant get everyone's schedule to match up due to prior engagements, family matters or health issues.

I just posted the link as I felt it would be of interest to the forum as a clear indicator that nothing has moved on the matter, I wasnt really interested in being told how to suck an egg.

Then again knowing this forum it shouldnt really surprise me.

In what way did I tell you to "suck an egg"?

If you "were aware of all this", as you say, that DIDN'T come across in the your post I replied to. Not everyone knows how Production realities work. It was nothing personal against you.

 

[XCV330]

They probably don't want to give anything away of DSC's new time-frame, other than what we've already seen in "Calypso", so Pike and the Enterprise are perfect to go with in lieu of that.

and if they DO decide to put the Enterprise sets in the warehouse, at least they got one last good use out of them.

 

[Gonzo]

and if they DO decide to put the Enterprise sets in the warehouse, at least they got one last good use out of them.

Bit of a waste though, they looked pretty good and most agreed that they looked great.

Which is pretty unique in and of itself.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Lord Garth,

I want her to face sexism. It is in the spirit of the character. In this era--from politics to gamers, to college assaults, to men in power assaulting women--we need this voice. I don't want Pike to repeat his lines. I want Star Trek to build a character that has to earn her stripes, but face sexism, too. So, with a strong case for why she is there, without becoming a Mary Sue, is on my wish list.

Star Trek can't just whitewash this issue out of existence. They have confronted so many. Star Trek's history with sexism is as old as 1964. And volumes could be written about it. So, if you want to apologize, it's not just competency in Burnham. It's having competency face sexism.

I really don’t think it would be acceptable for Starfleet or the Federation to ever be depicted as sexist ever again. By that point, it’s a distant memory and left in the past like the rest of humanity’s sins like racism and bigotry. It’s a future that we’re supposed to strive towards, a future where sexism continues isn’t one worth having. It’s really not needed with different cultures either, TNG tried that with Tasha Yar and made some of the most racist cartoons this side of Looney Toons short from the 30s. We don’t need very special episodes to explain to people that sexism is bad, just showing that it’s no longer an issue is more powerful.

Just like Stamets and Culber don’t deal with homophobia, it’s no longer issue and they’re treated as ordinary and accepted without comment just like a straight couple would be.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It looks like Ethan Peck has got himself a spot on the Penny Dreadful sequel which doesnt help matters.

https://www.spoilertv.com/2019/06/penny-dreadful-city-of-angels-michael.html

It would indicate CBS are not intending to or cant proceed with a Pike/Spock/1 show as I would have expected them to contract him up so he is available.

Bit of a wasted opportunity if so.

They could have called it Star Trek Destiny based on Pike already knowing where he is going.

It would certainly sound better than calling it Star Trek (Insert Surname here).

CBS already have a 5-year plan. If there is a Pike/Spock/Enterprise show, it'll be part of CBS-AA's phase 2.

That said, they can crop up in the S31 show too.

 

[Cake]

Number One should build a case for why she should be on the bridge

Not necessary. In the short time we already saw her it was clearly shown that she is a badass first officer. So she is on the bridge, because she is qualified for the job and deserves to be there.

 

[HaventGotALife]

Not necessary. In the short time we already saw her it was clearly shown that she is a badass first officer. So she is on the bridge, because she is qualified for the job and deserves to be there.

I want backstory. And, without trying, sexism exists in the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th centuries.

Janice Rand is a female Yeoman.
"What's the matter, Jim, don't trust yourself?" She is later assaulted, as is another in "Shore Leave."

"The women!"

Troi has a mother annoying Picard with emotion. In the same type of situation as Rand, Beverly Crusher practically does a lap dance on Picard, begging him to satisfy her "needs" and Tasha Yar does the same. But, at least Tasha is talking about emotional connection, not physical needs. The only relationship to power (Picard, Riker) is to sleep with it. Troi has to be lectures about making sacrifices, by Riker, when taking an exam on Command. Crusher kisses, marries, and divorces Picard is the celebrated Series Finale.

"Can you feel me, Imzadi?"

Troi is a counselor, Beverly a doctor. Caring fields. Tasha is killed of like 18 episodes into its run to be replaced by Worf, the most Macho of the TNG characters. Fights. BDSM. Hookup that leads to a son. Violence.

Behind the scenes, Terry Farrell's makeup was changed because it "ruined her looks." Pulaski was on the show because Gates McFadden left the show over sexist concerns. The catsuit Jeri Ryan wore, caused her to pass out 8 times in three weeks because it restricted her breathing in 12-15 hour days. Jolene Blalock was put in a catsuit, rubbed down with gel, in the series premiere of Enterprise. 2002. In 2009 and 2012, two actresses had to give mission briefings in their underwear, on-screen.

So, sexism exists, already. Since it began with number one, I want her to tackle it, head-on, in Star Trek. Just writing better characters doesn't admit that Star Trek, fanboys cultures, and those position of power in 2019, are guilty of being less than egalitarian.

She is capable. But, I want the characters around her, to not see it because of her being a woman. In backstory.

Does that make sense?

 

[Lord Garth]

HaventGotALife responded with his latest post while I was typing this one. I'll edit what I was typing (while I'm typing) to accommodate.

We've already seen the Disco-Enterprise bridge in "Such Sweet Sorrow". Lots of women are already on there. I know what HaventGotALife is getting at, but I think the Pike Series should match up with what we've already seen in DSC not "The Cage". Moreover, if DSC Pike were sexist like TOS Pike, he sure did a good job of hiding it. You'd never be able to tell. Cornwell above him, Burnham and a lot of the bridge crew under him. Pike seemed completely fine with it. If he wasn't, he should've gone into acting as a career, not Starfleet, because he had me completely fooled.

Certain parts of TOS have been revised. The Enterprise and sexism included. They already decided how to approach the TOS Era two years ago.

 

[Cake]

...

I get what you are saying and I agree that the makers of past series (even DIS is still lacking there) were numerous times really sexist and it also influenced in some parts what ended up on screen.

That said I am all for portraying humans as a whole as being better in the future of the Star Trek universe than they are now. Outside of some asshole or villain characters, I think humanity as a whole should have overcome a lot of the more negative stuff of today, sexism included. I just prefer to see a future portrayed which is worth to aspire to. An idealized world and pretend that it all got better in the times before the series.

 

[Tuskin38]

The press release for Chabon being Showrunner for Picard mentions him writing short trek called ‘Q&A’, if that isn’t a mistake, this might be it.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I want backstory. And, without trying, sexism exists in the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th centuries.

Janice Rand is a female Yeoman.
"What's the matter, Jim, don't trust yourself?" She is later assaulted, as is another in "Shore Leave."

"The women!"

Troi has a mother annoying Picard with emotion. In the same type of situation as Rand, Beverly Crusher practically does a lap dance on Picard, begging him to satisfy her "needs" and Tasha Yar does the same. But, at least Tasha is talking about emotional connection, not physical needs. The only relationship to power (Picard, Riker) is to sleep with it. Troi has to be lectures about making sacrifices, by Riker, when taking an exam on Command. Crusher kisses, marries, and divorces Picard is the celebrated Series Finale.

"Can you feel me, Imzadi?"

Troi is a counselor, Beverly a doctor. Caring fields. Tasha is killed of like 18 episodes into its run to be replaced by Worf, the most Macho of the TNG characters. Fights. BDSM. Hookup that leads to a son. Violence.

Behind the scenes, Terry Farrell's makeup was changed because it "ruined her looks." Pulaski was on the show because Gates McFadden left the show over sexist concerns. The catsuit Jeri Ryan wore, caused her to pass out 8 times in three weeks because it restricted her breathing in 12-15 hour days. Jolene Blalock was put in a catsuit, rubbed down with gel, in the series premiere of Enterprise. 2002. In 2009 and 2012, two actresses had to give mission briefings in their underwear, on-screen.

So, sexism exists, already. Since it began with number one, I want her to tackle it, head-on, in Star Trek. Just writing better characters doesn't admit that Star Trek, fanboys cultures, and those position of power in 2019, are guilty of being less than egalitarian.

She is capable. But, I want the characters around her, to not see it because of her being a woman. In backstory.

Does that make sense?

I think it should be treated as a problem with the time they were produced and not the actual setting. The Federation and Starfleet isn't sexist, the people who were making Star Trek were. We should just ignore it like special effect failures, James R Kirk and other issues.

The no female captains in Starfleet has been retconned without comment. Enterprise even showed that the the second Starfleet captain was female. Shows are a product of their time. TOS was made in a highly sexist time and it shows. TNG-ENT were less so, but it's still present in how female characters were depicted. That era was extremely homophobic to the point where they can't really blame the studio by the time of Enterprise and arguably Voyager, we can only blame the producers on that. But that doesn't mean that LGBTQ people didn't exist in the future, we just never got to see them until Discovery.

 

[Beckerjr]

I think it should be treated as a problem with the time they were produced and not the actual setting. The Federation and Starfleet isn't sexist, the people who were making Star Trek were. We should just ignore it like special effect failures, James R Kirk and other issues.

This. The people making ST today shouldn't be required to apologize in some way for a show was made 50 years ago. ToS had hypocrisy in that it was supposed to be in a more progressive future but clearly had parts that reflected the times it was made in. That's just reality. The job of the show producers today is to make the best TV series they can now.

 

[Awesome Possum]

The current producers are doing a great job at representing that future that Trek promised, more so than any other production so far. It shows that human diversity and the diversity of the other species is so accepted that it isn’t even commented on because it’s seen as normal and that’s powerful. All the bullshit that certain people have to deal with now because we live in shitty times is a distant memory and we all work together to make things better for everyone.