• 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!

Rumor: the show takes place between TOS movies and TNG

BillJ, please include that your words are your own personal opinions. You might have a few souls agreeing with what you're saying, but you don't have 100% of the Star Trek fanhood behind you on your argument. Please note that you don't speak for all of us. I don't agree with what you're saying, but I am not inclined to contest your statement. I could care less that you think negatively of the Voyager script because I enjoyed Voyager, but it IS YOUR opinion. You are entitled to your opinion, but please don't start forcing us to agree with your statement.

Whether or not you think (or I think) Voyager is a good show, that is an opinion. That people were tuning out, that is a fact that is backed up with ratings data that has shown up here on these forums on multiple occasions.

Welcome to the board.
 
As much as I like the idea of a TOS-movie era show with Nick Meyer involved, this rumor strikes me as fan generated bs.
 
So a newbie who just joined yesterday feels he can tell a veteran member how he's supposed to act here? Hilarious.

So we're back to judging a post not by the content of the post itself, but by the amount of messages the poster has flooded the forum with previously? Seems legit...

Whether or not you think (or I think) Voyager is a good show, that is an opinion. That people were tuning out, that is a fact that is backed up with ratings data that has shown up here on these forums on multiple occasions.

Welcome to the board.

What a stupid post. Every show has declining viewership. Even Game of Thrones (aka: the most successfull show right now). Voyager ran for seven seasons. It had better ratings than DS9 (which few people consider a 'failure'), and better ones than most other television series at the time. Massively better ones if compared to how many viewers are considered a "success" today. It spawned another spin-off series, it still has a large following, and right now it has quite the success in streaming. I would say: not bad for something that is essentially a spin-off series from a more popular series...

Voyager (like most of Trek) looks only weak compared to TOS or TNG. Not bearing in mind that those two are giants of television, pop-cultural icons, and largely some of the most successfull television shows of all time. VOY is "just" successfull. Not bad. Not great. Just a mostly enjoyable, long-running television series.

Saying Voyager (or Enterprise for that matter) was a "total disaster" is as dilusional and out of touch with reality as those people claiming the new JJ-movies to be a total failure...
 
Last edited:
Heh. I have a vision of Alex Kurtzman and Bryan Fuller rubbing their hands together while conspiring to "leak" a series of conflicting rumors.

This was recently quoted somewhere else on these forums, but it's worthwhile here:
Bashir: You know, I still have a lot of questions to ask you about your past.
Garak: I have given you all the answers I'm capable of.
Bashir: You've given me answers all right; but they were all different. What I want to know is, out of all the stories you told me, which ones were true and which ones weren't?
Garak: My dear Doctor, they're all true.
Bashir: Even the lies?
Garak: Especially the lies.
 
Last edited:
My personal preference:

A show that is set post-Nemesis. But it shouldn't look or feel post-Nemesis.Nor should it look like a JJverse show.
It should look and feel like a believable future.

Not a continuity reboot. But a complete stylistical and aesthetical revamp.


So what are our options now?
A jjverse show vs. a prime pre-TNG show vs. a prime post-TNG show?
I would say:

:LET' EM FIGHT!
 
Saying Voyager (or Enterprise for that matter) was a "total disaster" is as dilusional and out of touch with reality as those people claiming the new JJ-movies to be a total failure...

I never said Voyager was a total disaster. :rolleyes:
 
That universe that fewer and fewer people were watching every week. The writing was on the wall during Voyager's run and people were leaving en masse. Sinking more money into the 24th century would've been a poor choice.
 
...A show that is set post-Nemesis. But it shouldn't look or feel post-Nemesis.Nor should it look like a JJverse show. It should look and feel like a believable future.
There's a good chance that warp drive is not achievable or possible. How believable?
 
There's a good chance that warp drive is not achievable or possible. How believable?

"believable" =/= "completely realistic"

Warp drive as presented in Star Trek is pretty much impossible. But IF, say, interstellar travel would ever be feasable, it's pretty likely it would be a complicated, science-y, tech-yy thingy in need of professional personal and equipment, with established safety precautions and emergency protocols (as previously presented in traditional Star Trek). Contrary to, say, use of interplanetary travel by a bunch of cowboys transporting cows (looking at you, lovely Firefly). Not that there's something wrong with that. I love the pure escapism of that. Same with the space-rocket-moped from Flash Gordon. But Star Trek should be a bit more 'realistic'. And since that's pretty much impossible, considering Faster-Than-Light-Travel, telepathy, time-travel and what-not, it needs to be at least believable realistic.
 
Last edited:
Whether or not you think (or I think) Voyager is a good show, that is an opinion. That people were tuning out, that is a fact that is backed up with ratings data that has shown up here on these forums on multiple occasions.
Was it the timeline though?

I have to believe that people weren't tuning out because the setting was a universe where Vulcan happened to exist, Kirk was born in Iowa, and the Enterprise was the ship that found the Botany Bay.

If people tuned out, it was because they thought it sucked, they thought the writing was bad, or any number of reasons that any average person tunes out of a TV show. They certainly didn't tune out of the show because the characters had a particular quantum resonance signature.
 
So we're back to judging a post not by the content of the post itself, but by the amount of messages the poster has flooded the forum with previously? Seems legit...

Maybe you should go back and actually read what I was responding to before you get all huffy.


I'll just repeat myself here...

Rule #1: Wait until you read an official press release from CBS about their new Trek show before believing any internet BS.

Rule# 2: Repeat Rule #1.
 
I was considering Rahul's remarks.

For the craft of fiction a writer would seek The Willing Suspension of Disbelief on the part of the reader. If the writer is good at this it is possible to draw a reader into an outright fantasy.

If a science fiction television show should achieve this Suspension of Disbelief, it is possible to draw viewers into fantastic stories. This might be helped if the show attempts a certain degree of verisimilitude.
 

Brace yourselves. We're probably going to getting new and frequently contradictory rumors for the next several months. In the absence of any actual news, expect folks to project their own fears and wish-lists onto the void.

As Dukhat said, don't believe anything any "reports" that aren't official. It's all just hot air as this point . . ..
 
Don't know why you attributed this quote to me since you're clearly feuding with BillJ

I'm sorry, I don't know how that happened ... :shrug:

A single continuity makes for a stronger narrative, since everything that happens actually has consequences. That's a big part of the appeal of for example the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Every change actually feels real. (and yes, it's a difference if a character "dies" and is resurrected by the plot (timetravel, clones etc.), or if someone dies and is resurrected via "we don't give a shit about this story anymore and start from scratch again")

The MCU is a perfect example of how the Star Trek franchise should be handled. Multiple movies and tv shows set in the same continuity ... but that will remain a dream ... :sigh:
 
They can't be so stupid that they just abandon all of that and try to create some TOS before TOS. It would be as stupid as if a record company totally abandoned modern technology and would start to make 78 rpm records with the same technology as in 1930", I thought.

And then came ENT! :eek:
And then vinyl made a come-back! :D

Semantics...
Grammar.
 
Last edited:
The MCU is a perfect example of how the Star Trek franchise should be handled. Multiple movies and tv shows set in the same continuity ... but that will remain a dream ... :sigh:

The MCU is a poor example for your point since it was in fact a complete reboot of the existing comics continuity.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top