Should they revisit TOS, in the next series?

[Wowbagger]

Why do we need a specific time period at all? TOS wasn't canonically established as taking place in the 23rd century until Star Trek II came out. Until then, chronology was all guesswork and contradiction ("The Squire of Gothos," for instance, clearly sets TOS in the 27th century). Stardates were created to obfuscate the point.

So, to heck with it. The premise of Star Trek is, "They go exploring. Stuff happens." If they're doing it right, they can have their cake and eat it, too--set it in an ambigious time frame with a TOS flavor, and be free from the canon limitations imposed by a prequel while still getting all the cool TOS bling that comes with.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

But if Viacom wanted to make a TV series based off of Star Trek XI, they probably couldn't for legal reasons.

Right, so there's only one entity that could make a TV series and there's only one approach that it likely to result in a TV series that can survive - to latch onto the fanbase created by the movie. There's no other fanbase that can support Trek on TV. Whatever rights needs to be negotiated to make this happen, those will be negotiated. That's what corporations do.

If they want to let their petty feud keep them from making money, then it's their loss. I certainly can find other things to watch on TV. But corporations always have personnel turnover and what motive do the new folks have to continue a pointless feud vs. making $$$ that can secure their career in an industry notorious for lack of job security?

I disagree that any new series must cater to the audience of the new movie. Will they be strongly taken into consideration? Of course.

I don't know what the difference is between "cater" and "taken strongly into consideration." The upshot must be that the TV show keeps them watching by giving them enough of the same essential things that they liked in the movie. It's already a given that they won't get everything. Spock and Kirk on TV as a regular basis is probably not going to happen if Quinto and Pine become big movie stars.

Alternative options could be, as I mentioned earlier, a show that retells Kirk's early days with another new cast separate from the movie (in a deliberate move by CBS to steal Viacom's thunder).

They could do that if they please, but they'd be idiots. That would confuse people who'd seen the movie and nobody else is going to care. They've already tried making Trek on TV for the existing audience - with ENT. That failed. Where are these new fans you're assuming exist? Why didn't they watch ENT?

Rather than do some nonsensical version of Star Trek, CBS is far more likely to just stick with police procedurals. Why try something risky that is likely to fail in lieu of something known and safe? If CBS is going to bother with Star Trek at all, they are going to do the safest thing, which is to capitalize on the international success of a big hit movie.

And keep in mind that the market will be international - being able to license the show overseas will be a huge inducement to doing the TV show. That audience is even less likely than Americans to have heard of Star Trek before they walk into the movie theater. The movie's job is in large part to create the audience for Star Trek which has largely withered away.

Why do we need a specific time period at all?

Just to keep history, technology, and the introduction of species into the story (Klingons first, then Borg, then Dominion) orderly. The time period could be solely behind the scenes and never mentioned on TV, but it should be something longtime fans can deduce. Some degree of consistency needs to be maintained, even if canon gets futzed with somewhat.

 

[USS Triumphant]

Why do we need a specific time period at all?

Admit it - yer one of them wormhole aliens from DS9, aren't you?

No, I know better. It's really all that jumping around in time just to insult everyone that has shaped your opinion, I'm sure.

 

[C.E. Evans]

But if Viacom wanted to make a TV series based off of Star Trek XI, they probably couldn't for legal reasons.

Right, so there's only one entity that could make a TV series and there's only one approach that it likely to result in a TV series that can survive - to latch onto the fanbase created by the movie. There's no other fanbase that can support Trek on TV. Whatever rights needs to be negotiated to make this happen, those will be negotiated. That's what corporations do.

If they want to let their petty feud keep them from making money, then it's their loss. I certainly can find other things to watch on TV. But corporations always have personnel turnover and what motive do the new folks have to continue a pointless feud vs. making $$$ that can secure their career in an industry notorious for lack of job security?

The only thing is that Mr. Redstone could care less about the feud between CBS and Viacom because either way, he wins in the end. It doesn't bother him in the slightest what they do.

I disagree that any new series must cater to the audience of the new movie. Will they be strongly taken into consideration? Of course.

I don't know what the difference is between "cater" and "taken strongly into consideration."

The rest of my paragraph actually explained that. Should CBS decide to go forth with a new Trek series it will be with new fans in mind, but it is unlikely to be a follow up to Star Trek XI as that's Viacom's turf.

The upshot must be that the TV show keeps them watching by giving them enough of the same essential things that they liked in the movie. It's already a given that they won't get everything. Spock and Kirk on TV as a regular basis is probably not going to happen if Quinto and Pine become big movie stars.

It wouldn't happen anyway, but it would be possible for CBS to cast another Spock and Kirk for their version of a "young Kirk" series that draws only upon material from the TV shows and not the movies. Once again, the reasons for this would be more legal than creative.

Alternative options could be, as I mentioned earlier, a show that retells Kirk's early days with another new cast separate from the movie (in a deliberate move by CBS to steal Viacom's thunder).

They could do that if they please, but they'd be idiots.

It wouldn't be the first time (nor the last time) a TV studio did something idiotic.

That would confuse people who'd seen the movie and nobody else is going to care.

Unfortunately, that would be of little concern for CBS. People would just have to "deal with it" as some would have to deal with the new movie.

They've already tried making Trek on TV for the existing audience - with ENT. That failed. Where are these new fans you're assuming exist? Why didn't they watch ENT?

Weren't you just talking about new fans yourself? The ones that are supposedly coming with the new movie?

IIRC, ENT was sold with the idea that it was for new Trek fans too, not just the existing audience. So why didn't they watch ENT?

Rather than do some nonsensical version of Star Trek, CBS is far more likely to just stick with police procedurals.

Maybe the CBS television network, perhaps, but the production studio is another matter.

Why try something risky that is likely to fail in lieu of something known and safe? If CBS is going to bother with Star Trek at all, they are going to do the safest thing, which is to capitalize on the international success of a big hit movie.

Well, if you really want to talk about the safest thing, it would be to not bother doing a new Star Trek series at all and just recycle the previous shows over and over again on cable or on DVD.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

If they must go back to TV they should stick with TOS.

If this movie is a success there's no way that CBS would produce a TV series that doesn't leverage the setting and possibly characters from the movie, rather than going back to the old version of "Star Trek."

 

[Hartzilla2007]

I have to ask why didn't anybody mention the CBS/Viacom fued in the many oh so long threads in the Trek XI forum that turned into verbal battles between the cannon obsesed fans and the other fans?

 

[Wowbagger]

...the cannon obsesed fans and the other fans?

I personally have a deep enjoyment of heavy weaponry, but I'm not sure about the rest of the fandom.

Just to keep history, technology, and the introduction of species into the story (Klingons first, then Borg, then Dominion) orderly. The time period could be solely behind the scenes and never mentioned on TV, but it should be something longtime fans can deduce. Some degree of consistency needs to be maintained, even if canon gets futzed with somewhat.

As long as it's never mentioned on-screen--and therefore non-canon, and therefore something that canonistas can't hold over the producers like a bludgeon--I'd be okay with that.

Personally, I'd also adopt a rule of visiting the Same Old Races no more than once a season, which would render the point more or less moot.

Practically speaking, Polaris is right. If there's a TV relaunch in the next five years (I think it doubtful), it will almost certainly be TOS-era. The only question is whether they run roughshod over canon or not. Though I can tolerate quite a bit of re-jiggering, I hope that the overall answer is no.

 

[hellsgate]

I'd like to see a "Titan" era story with cameos of a newly promoted Captain Chakotay, among others.

Credit: "Captain Chakotay" Image by An-Gel Sakura of S.T.P.M.A.

http://i520.photobucket.com/albums/w321/LtSakura/CptChakotay.jpg

 

[Wowbagger]

I'd like to see a "Titan" era story with cameos of a newly promoted Captain Chakotay, among others.

Does he die?

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I'd like to see a "Titan" era story with cameos of a newly promoted Captain Chakotay, among others.

Does he die?

He better! Or I'm boycotting this show!

 

[jamestyler]

I personally think a new TOS era show would be a huge mistake.

Part of the films charm will be it's novelty retro nostalgia. Even if it turns out to be an amazing script and performance, the 60's elements will still have that novelty feel to it. For a movie, thats not a bad thing. For a TV show... I don't think it'd work. the novelty would wear off and it might become laughable and dumped too far in the geek bundle to become a success like TNG was.

From what I've seen on the sets, some of the elements could be tweaked and updated to throw into a TV show - personally I love the glimpses of the huge consoles, the displays above the keypad areas specificly - and a brighter tone might be a nice contast to things like Battlestar. Throw in some new unifoms and less reliability on tech stuff and I think it'd be easier to grab an audience.

As for the show... I'd like to see something follow from the TNG era of things, but mixing up the format a little. Less technobabble, more complex/less perfect characters... but it'd take a lot of creative thought to come up with a series that seems fresh and new. Just throw in the optimism, make sure theres a personal element and characters/relationships to develop and allow that to come to the forefront.

I think story arcs over episodic (or a mix of the two) could really help to prevent things from getting stale - but any show with any concept in any era would be completely dependent on the writers and how they treat it.

I'd hope a new show was a few yeas off and that B&B weren't involved - not to bash them, but a new creative team would be a breath of fresh air. I know theres a mixes reaction to Doctor Who - but it's a good example of a new group of people reviving an idea and making it a success.

The JJ way of looking at what'll draw an audience, as well as a few nods to the fans is also a wonderful approach. Voyager and Enterprise went very TNG... problem was TNG was outdated. A new show has to take a new direction and keep the changing audience in mind.

Though... I'm not arrogant to believe my opinion (or to be more accurate my half awake ramblings) matters, even if I sound like I am at times, I'd just hate the idea of another show coming out and it being more of the same.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Part of the films charm will be it's novelty retro nostalgia. Even if it turns out to be an amazing script and performance, the 60's elements will still have that novelty feel to it. For a movie, thats not a bad thing. For a TV show... I don't think it'd work.

Why? There's nothing "futuristic" or even contemporary about most of the so-called "modern Trek" shows at this point. Post-TNG represents no improvement over TOS as far as either authenticity or "futurism" are concerned.

 

[jamestyler]

Part of the films charm will be it's novelty retro nostalgia. Even if it turns out to be an amazing script and performance, the 60's elements will still have that novelty feel to it. For a movie, thats not a bad thing. For a TV show... I don't think it'd work.

Why? There's nothing "futuristic" or even contemporary about most of the so-called "modern Trek" shows at this point. Post-TNG represents no improvement over TOS as far as either authenticity or "futurism" are concerned.

I don't wholly agree with that - but I wasn't talking about authenticity or futurism. I was talking about the 'retro' feel of reviving a 60's show and retaining 60's elements.

Uniforms in TNG, for example, aren't any more authentic but they don't have the retro feel or reputation the TOS uniforms do. In a big budget movie thats capturing, or at least trying to capture, the aura of the 60's show an audience may be far more likely to accept that than the same feel on the small screen with a smaller budget.

The nostalgic elements are still seen as silly and will remain a novelty. I personally dont think that novelty will be as accepted as it may be in May if it's on our screens for 26 wees of the year.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Uniforms in TNG, for example, aren't any more authentic but they don't have the retro feel or reputation the TOS uniforms do.

I don't agree..."Galaxy Quest" chose to mock the TNG uniforms and visual style much more than the TOS versions of these things, despite characters and story elements that were clearly meant to reference TOS. Spandex jumpsuits with little elastic straps to hold the cuffs down to their little booties? TOS uniforms looked, if anything, more like real clothing that people might wear now than the modern Trek stuff ever did.

Abrams is having everything redesigned to a sufficient extent that - however cheesy some of it may be - the movie looks more plausible than either TOS or TNG-era Trek did on television. So there's no reason not to follow that lead.

 

[hellsgate]

http://www.rabittooth.com/shatnerverse.jpg

Actually, I'd like to see things pick-up at the moment of Ambassador Spock's assasination (sp?) on Romulus & how Kirk & the remaining few (Scotty) deal with it.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Ha! I'd like to see Shatner get that skinny for the role.

Maybe he'll have the VFX guys edit the film/episode/whatever, frame-by-frame? :P