Of course it's about the journey. But frankly, who cares about the journey if we all are already familiar with the destination and how we got there?
Rumor: the show takes place between TOS movies and TNG
- Thread starter AvBaur
- Start date
Of course it's about the journey. But frankly, who cares about the journey if we all are already familiar with the destination and how we got there?
Naw. It was a backdrop-event to hint why the bad-guy was angry. From an alternate future universe at that. It was carefully craftet to not affect any other characters or plotlines in the movie. Could have said "Future-Nimoy dropped a piano on Nero's mom", and it would have had the same overall weight and importance to the story of Trek09.
Until it was brought up right now I didn't even remembered Romulus was destroyed...
Last edited:
Titanic did a billion dollars, and we know the boat sank. The Star Wars prequels were all monster hits and we knew about the rise of the Empire and Vader. So, obviously, people are okay with knowing the end result.
Don't mix movies during a historical setting (What did people onboard the Titanic experience? What happens to those specific characters?) with fictional character history (What childhood Trauma turned Freddy Krueger/Anakin Skywalker evil?).
And especially don't mix movies (a singular, painstackingly crafted story) with a television series (an ongoing, open-ended string of stories, that is mostly tied together because we want to see what happens with the characters)
Also: Star Wars is a completely different thing. They could show Boba Fett playing cards for two and a half hours, and it would make half a billion dollars. But nobody was especially creatively satisfied with the prequels. And name ONE instance were a prequel-television series was successfull?
Edit: "Better call Saul". Although it's more akin to a spin-off, and is way more character driven than a science fiction show. But it's really the only example I can think of. And it is so indepentant from continuity it would work even if Breaking Bad never had existed, so it's the one counter-example that proves the rule...
And especially don't mix movies (a singular, painstackingly crafted story) with a television series (an ongoing, open-ended string of stories, that is mostly tied together because we want to see what happens with the characters)
Also: Star Wars is a completely different thing. They could show Boba Fett playing cards for two and a half hours, and it would make half a billion dollars. But nobody was especially creatively satisfied with the prequels. And name ONE instance were a prequel-television series was successfull?
Edit: "Better call Saul". Although it's more akin to a spin-off, and is way more character driven than a science fiction show. But it's really the only example I can think of. And it is so indepentant from continuity it would work even if Breaking Bad never had existed, so it's the one counter-example that proves the rule...
Last edited:
Either way, people will show up. We all know the end game of Rogue One (and have for forty years) and people will show up for it. Whether it is done well, is another story.
If we had flip-flopped Enterprise and The Next Generation, I guarantee Enterprise would be remembered as fondly and done roughly the same viewership numbers as TNG. The fact that people were burned out on Trek shouldn't be held against Enterprise. Or prequels.
With the right writers, it won't matter whether it is Star Wars or not. The new Batman is going to be pre-Dawn of Justice. I don't think they'll have trouble selling tickets. As far as open-ended TV series, Enterprise wasn't as bad as people would have you believe.
What about Clone Wars? Yeah, you can argue that it's not open-ended, but it was a television show that lots of people watched anyway, regardless of the fact that they already knew the outcome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_(TV_series)#Critical_reviewsThe fact that you can't produce any data whatever to support your assertions and have to resort to that kind of a comeback tells me...pretty much what I already knew from your previous posts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_(TV_series)#Awards_and_accolades
Because a ratings system that's been inaccurate since the 90s is a reliable indicator of how good a show is!
Hilarious coming from a Star Trek fan too. TOS was cancelled after three seasons just like Hannibal, probably isn't worth your time either, right?
Honestly.
Who gives a flying fuck about which universe it's set in if the writing is bad?
"At the present time (although it can always change in the future), 1701News is NOT going to present this as a viable rumor"
Well then it's unviable
Next!
Last edited:
The Star Wars prequels were shit though. But I agree with your overall point, it was not because they were prequels. Being a prequel was not a problem with Enterprise either, it had other issues.
People constantly enjoy stories they roughly know the outcome off. Does anybody watching a James Bond movie seriously suspect that maybe this time the bad guy manages to kill Bond and their nefarious plan will succeed?
Last edited:
JJ Abrams a producer according to Brent Spiner...
http://1701news.com/node/1146/newest-producer-trek-tv-jj-abrams.html
http://1701news.com/node/1146/newest-producer-trek-tv-jj-abrams.html
Make the new show start at 2400. A nice round number, a new century for the new show. And if there will be cameos by actors from the older shows, eight years is not a problem as in the future people age slower.
I'm pretty sure everyone going to see Titanic knew the boat was going to sink. And the first minutes of the film established that Rose lived. It didn't seem to hurt Titanic's ticket sales.
Spiner seems to have debunked that himself, or perhaps just jumped the gun on the announcement.
Personally, I think Abrams is pretty much done with Star Trek. But him being a producer on the new TV show would have hilarious implications for fandom.
That would be me.
