Star Trek 2017 will not be set in the JJ-Verse

[Chekov's Phaser]

I understand if people don't like how Jadzia was killed, because it seemed rushed, but her death shows the tragedy of war. Sure we saw it when some character finds out that someone they know was killed, but that is so clinical compared to having one of the mains die. Trading that drama, that is much more true to life, so that Jadzia can live happily ever after goes against what the writers were often trying to say about the nature of war.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Killing her off wasn't enough? Okay, how about in the final episode of DS9, Jadzia was not even seen in a flashback. Worf was married to her but it was not in his lug head in the memory moments. I would like to believe that it was just Worf being Worf but no, it was all Ira.

Not seeing how any of that shows anyone on the show hated Farrell. Might very well be a business based decision.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I understand if people don't like how Jadzia was killed, because it seemed rushed, but her death shows the tragedy of war. Sure we saw it when some character finds out that someone they know was killed, but that is so clinical compared to having one of the mains die. Trading that drama, that is much more true to life, so that Jadzia can live happily ever after goes against what the writers were often trying to say about the nature of war.

Her death was a slap in the face for the character. Its like expecting an elevator inside of skyscraper, the doors open, and the character falls to their deaths down a shaft. There are many examples of characters being treated with dignity compared to what happened to Jadzia. But I'm done with this conversation. This is a thread drift which is irrelevant, involving an irrelevant show.

 

[Shalashaska]

Shit.

Why did I have to read that big DS9 spoiler?

 

[Bad Thoughts]

I wish people would provide evidence for statements like this.

Real evidence to the contrary is plentiful.

• Behr attempted to get Farrell to return in a small capacity in WYLB, but could not budget what her agent demanded.
• Farrell was present at the series wrap party in 1999 (photos were taken).
• Memories of Jadzia were included in the episode "Penumbra," which Farrell's agent protested.
  
• When Farrell spoke about the negotiations at last years Toronto Comicon, she describes what was essentially a conversation with Berman in which Behr had no role. Behr learned only very late that Farrell would exit the series, forcing it to be rapidly written into the season 6 finale. Indeed, Farrell does not blame Behr for Dax being killed off in Jadzia form, but points solely at how Berman conducted the negotiations and misinformed Behr.

 

[EnderAKH]

Her death was a slap in the face for the character. Its like expecting an elevator inside of skyscraper, the doors open, and the character falls to their deaths down a shaft.

Google "LA Law Rosalind Shays." It'll bring up a Youtube video. Watch it, it's only 49 seconds.

 

[shapeshifter]

I didn't like the loss of Jadzia but it wasn't my call to make, it was hers.

But worse than her loss was the death scene itself. Worst five minutes of DS9 ever put on film. The writing, her acting, the whole thing left me cold as a stone.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I didn't like the loss of Jadzia but it wasn't my call to make, it was hers.

But worse than her loss was the death scene itself. Worst five minutes of DS9 ever put on film. The writing, her acting, the whole thing left me cold as a stone.

But it was really about the contract negotiations, and not the bad writing which created such a total ass scenario, her acting which was based on the dialogue written for Farrell, which left us cold, Keeper.

 

[Nerys Myk]

But it was really about the contract negotiations, and not the bad writing which created such a total ass scenario, her acting which was based on the dialogue written for Farrell, which left us cold, Keeper.

I don't think acting works like that. The writing is the beginning. The actor, director and others contribute to what winds up on screen as much as, if not more than the writer.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Google "LA Law Rosalind Shays." It'll bring up a Youtube video. Watch it, it's only 49 seconds.

I bet a fan of LA Law will claim the producers had no clue about their decisions about the way the writing handled their character.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I bet a fan of LA Law will claim the producers had no clue about their decisions about the way the writing handled their character.

Who is saying that? You seem to be confusing writing with the various business decisions being made and assume that one will always impact the other negatively.

 

[eyeresist]

But did they really have to kill off the characters? They could have got other assignments.

But there are also fans who complain that lead characters in Trek are too safe. They are serving in a military organisation and frequently see combat, so it is realistic that someone would die occasionally, and unrealistic that characters would be effectively immortal just because the fans wish it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

But there are also fans who complain that lead characters in Trek are too safe. They are serving in a military organisation and frequently see combat, so it is realistic that someone would die occasionally, and unrealistic that characters would be effectively immortal just because the fans wish it.

Plus legal contracts.

 

[Griffeytrek]

Getting back to the actual question of which if any already existing Trek continuity will the new show be set, and stepping away from who murdered who's favorite character, my 2c.

Ultimately it will come down to the medium and product being sold. Right now my best guess actually leans towards the new show being in the more traditional Primary Trek universe. Mainly for business reasons. But either remains a possibility.

The key thing is how this show is being presented. It's the flagship to CBS's hoped for subscription streaming service. That's a big element and one we overlook. The business model and target audience of a Hollywood Blockbuster vs a subscription streaming service are very different. They have different needs and work in differing ways.

For the movies nuTrek was key. Strip it out. Simplify it. Reboot it. Pare out the decades of accumulated history so the new fan can enjoy a good popcorn flick. And it's a great and highly successful formula for the new movies. But will that work for the new medium? I think it might not be ideal.

Remember this is a streaming service. Content is king. In that environment the decades of four previous shows is not a burden of entry. It is in fact a core part of the value offered. Remember they will be hanging up all of the old stuff alongside of the new show. Binge watching is a thing. So the core product is not simply the new show. That is really the lure. The teaser. The actual value is in the totality of the Trek product being offered.

Add to this that at least for the beginning, the most guaranteed subscriber base is... Well us. The long term dedicated fans. The nostalgia viewers. Those already invested in the totality of these worlds and want more. That's the hook. What happens next? Where it all goes? The show almost by design needs to be a fan service factory.

And then let's not overlook the other elephant in the room. Production costs. NuTrek looks and feels the way it does because somebody throws a ton of money at it. But how much of that can they deliver? Or rather how much can they deliver on a budget more in line with Game of Thrones or Walking Dead? Those fancy JJVerse iShips? Yeah $$$ go in at a rapid rate to achieve them.

So what becomes the better business model? NuTrek the Next Generation, where you have a clean slate for stories, but also a clean slate for fans as movie to streaming customer conversion is any bodies guess. You can't use the movie actors because you can't afford them, nor can it look or feel like the movies as you can't afford the effects or action set pieces.

Or you spawn off of the older continuity. Where you already have hundreds of hours of continuity, and firm data from Amazon and Netflix over how often it gets consumed. Where legacy guests and cameos are reasonably cheap. Where they not only know the TV production budgets, but are the best alive at making good use of them.

While they may roll the dice and go with a new nuTrek show, I'm not seeing where it is an easy or even intuitive call?

 

[STEPhon IT]

CBS should probably go with what today's audiences know about Star Trek and go with that.

 

[eyeresist]

Or you spawn off of the older continuity. Where you already have hundreds of hours of continuity

A show set in the Nu universe can still use anything it likes from the old continuity.

 

[Griffeytrek]

A show set in the Nu universe can still use anything it likes from the old continuity.

True. I just suspect that the "prime" continuity will likely be easier for the budget conscious tv producer to match. Particularly in terms of aesthetics. Some hybrid of the two might be likely. I mean they don't actually have to directly reference the movies or prior characters now do they? TNG almost never did. So they may not even say, and leave it open to fans.

See the problem with nuTrek is you run into the "other" Agents of SHIELD problem. Never mind the whole "writing being hamstrung by the movies" problem. The other is how jarringly different they are in appearance. I mean Captain America Winter Soldier and several episodes of Agents of SHIELD literally take place side by side. But the viewer can't help but notice, when they are side by side, that one of them looks strikingly like a 1980's episode of Knightrider in terms of production quality. NuTrek has a feel style and aesthetic that is going to be hard to match on a TV budget.

 

[STEPhon IT]

A show set in the Nu universe can still use anything it likes from the old continuity.

I believe the same thing, its a whole new canvas where the producers can pick and choose whatever they like than get stuck in continuity hell. Especially when TNG and it's spinoffs had muddied continuity so terribly. Too many retcons. Starting a blank slate would be best I think.

 

[eyeresist]

I just suspect that the "prime" continuity will likely be easier for the budget conscious tv producer to match. Particularly in terms of aesthetics. ...
See the problem with nuTrek is you run into the "other" Agents of SHIELD problem. Never mind the whole "writing being hamstrung by the movies" problem. The other is how jarringly different they are in appearance. ... NuTrek has a feel style and aesthetic that is going to be hard to match on a TV budget.

Speaking for myself, I will be very disappointed if ST2017 looks like it was made in the 1980s-90s.
I think the producers will try to make the show as modern as possible in terms of visual production. Anything else would be a major turn-off to mainstream viewers. Obviously they won't be able to match the cinematic excesses of the movies, but they will try to include some sci-fi eye candy (so much easier to do with modern CGI, though of course still not cheap).

 

[Griffeytrek]

Speaking for myself, I will be very disappointed if ST2017 looks like it was made in the 1980s-90s.
I think the producers will try to make the show as modern as possible in terms of visual production. Anything else would be a major turn-off to mainstream viewers. Obviously they won't be able to match the cinematic excesses of the movies, but they will try to include some sci-fi eye candy (so much easier to do with modern CGI, though of course still not cheap).

It will not look like the 80's, but it will not likely look much different from Enterprise in terms of production values. No matter how you slice it it is still being made for streaming. Not a full blown TV broadcast budget, let alone a $150 million movie.