Spoilers STAR TREK BEYOND

[Kai "the spy"]

How much baggage does Prime Trek have behind it? 736 adventures. That's enough to watch one a day for two years and still have some left over.

I don't get this argument, no matter how often I read or hear it. Why would there be a need to have watched all of it before enjoying new stuff? Thanks to my mother allowing me only one episode per week (that was when the shows were re-run on week-day afternoons), I'm still in the process of watching TNG. I'm currently in season 5, I've seen only a couple of episodes from the last two seasons. I still haven't watched the majority of VOY.

I was still always able to enjoy DS9, and ENT, and the movies.

Just because there's been a lot before doesn't mean there needs to be baggage the audience needs to know before-hand. Just create a nice and easy jumping-on point. And most of Star Trek has been an easy jumping-on point.

A new show with a new cast would be just as accessable to new viewers, if it was done right.

 

[Campe]

I disagree, actually. Yes, you can make an optimistic show that isn't "Gee golly gosh" about it set in the Prime universe that still has something to say.

I would examine the theme of how big powers respond when they're no longer "king of the heap". The post-Dominion War era is perfect for such a show. With the big powers all torn apart, and the rise of newer upstart powers (I'd borrow the Typhon Pact from the tie-ins), how would the Federation rebuild? How would a people who blithely swanned though a safe, almost-perfect universe deal with having the harsh reality of an imperfect universe slap them across the face? What do good people do when the world goes to hell around them?

I've heard the premise described as "winning the war, but struggling to win the peace afterwards".

That actually might be an idea I'd be interested in. I just see too many Trek series ideas: "Let's jump it forward 100 years, slap a higher letter on the Enterprise, get new tech and make it DARKER." That's not what I want to see.

Behind TOS, DS9 is my favorite of the Treks, so while it is darker, I like the optimism and the view of the political dealings and particularly the idea of actually having to deal with your actions. Something TNG often just ignored. So, the idea of a story after the Dominion War, where they have to clean up the mess and be responsible for the actions there? That'd be cool.

But, I still hold the idea of the baggage keeping new fans out and the hemorrhaging viewers as a reason it won't happen.

I think our best bet is after nuTrek finishes up, there's another reboot with Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise.

 

[Phantom]

^^I wish we had "rep points" because I'd definitely give you one Kai!

What NuFans dismiss as "baggage" is really a rich history in universe that writers can use for story hooks, or just neat details to use as "easter eggs".

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You just did (and proved my point again). You want me to "sit down and shut up" because I'm not an unabashed and total fan of NuTrek.

First of all, I'm pretty sure you're ALREADY sitting down (you probably wouldn't be viewing this webpage from a standing position). I'm also pretty sure that you are not dictating your messages with a speech-to-text interface, so you ARE, in fact, sitting down and shutting up whether I want you to or not.

Second of all, you have again failed to answer the question: Why do you feel your negativity is so important that everyone else NEEDS to hear it?

Do the Voyager fans need me to go to the Voyager forum and tell them how much Voyager sucks? Do STO players need me to go to the gaming forum and stand on my soapbox and complain about all the reasons Voyager pandering is a bad idea? Do fans of Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood need to hear about how their show only exists because the studio decided to milk them for their obsessive-compulsive fanwanky manga-loving DVD sales and therefore totally half-assed everything about that series knowing that its fans wouldn't even notice?

No, they don't need that at all. People like things that I don't like. I'm comfortable with that. Why aren't you?

 

[BillJ]

What NuFans dismiss as "baggage" is really a rich history in universe that writers can use for story hooks, or just neat details to use as "easter eggs".

I'm a 'Star Trek fan' and I see the Prime universe as baggage at this point. Rebooting is good for the franchise.

 

[Campe]

How much baggage does Prime Trek have behind it? 736 adventures. That's enough to watch one a day for two years and still have some left over.

I don't get this argument, no matter how often I read or hear it. Why would there be a need to have watched all of it before enjoying new stuff? Thanks to my mother allowing me only one episode per week (that was when the shows were re-run on week-day afternoons), I'm still in the process of watching TNG. I'm currently in season 5, I've seen only a couple of episodes from the last two seasons. I still haven't watched the majority of VOY.

I was still always able to enjoy DS9, and ENT, and the movies.

Just because there's been a lot before doesn't mean there needs to be baggage the audience needs to know before-hand. Just create a nice and easy jumping-on point. And most of Star Trek has been an easy jumping-on point.

A new show with a new cast would be just as accessable to new viewers, if it was done right.

Did any of the new shows really bring in viewers (other than TNG)? Did they retain old viewers? No. History proves that to be true. I think Dennis has a chart of the viewership decline over the 18 years of the Berman era.

I don't know. When I started watching Trek, there were 79 episodes and two or three movies. I didn't have to deal with that daunting nature. When I would suggest friends watching any of the Roddenberry/Berman era, it was obviously not for them, or they felt the need to watch the whole thing.

And it is possible as TNG did do it, yes. Is it likely? I don't know.

 

[Phantom]

You just did (and proved my point again). You want me to "sit down and shut up" because I'm not an unabashed and total fan of NuTrek.

First of all, I'm pretty sure you're ALREADY sitting down (you probably wouldn't be viewing this webpage from a standing position). I'm also pretty sure that you are not dictating your messages with a speech-to-text interface, so you ARE, in fact, sitting down and shutting up whether I want you to or not.

Second of all, you have again failed to answer the question: Why do you feel your negativity is so important that everyone else NEEDS to hear it?

Do the Voyager fans need me to go to the Voyager forum and tell them how much Voyager sucks? Do STO players need me to go to the gaming forum and stand on my soapbox and complain about all the reasons Voyager pandering is a bad idea? Do fans of Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood need to hear about how their show only exists because the studio decided to milk them for their obsessive-compulsive fanwanky manga-loving DVD sales and therefore totally half-assed everything about that series knowing that its fans wouldn't even notice?

No, they don't need that at all. People like things that I don't like. I'm comfortable with that. Why aren't you?

Why must I sit silent (Pro Tip: being a literalist and pedant is not becoming in a conversation) and listen to gushing opinions praising something I dislike without protest?

I have every bit as much right to criticize as you do to praise.

 

[BillJ]

I have every bit as much right to criticize as you do to praise.

Absolutely. But don't be surprised that when you come into a forum dedicated to a subject that you are roundly shouted down. I'd expect the same if I went into a Voyager, Enterprise or Deep Space Nine forum and started talking shit.

 

[Phantom]

What NuFans dismiss as "baggage" is really a rich history in universe that writers can use for story hooks, or just neat details to use as "easter eggs".

I'm a 'Star Trek fan' and I see the Prime universe as baggage at this point. Rebooting is good for the franchise.

And you, of course, represent all of the fanbase...

Did any of the new shows really bring in viewers (other than TNG)? Did they retain old viewers? No. History proves that to be true. I think Dennis has a chart of the viewership decline over the 18 years of the Berman era.

I don't know. When I started watching Trek, there were 79 episodes and two or three movies. I didn't have to deal with that daunting nature. When I would suggest friends watching any of the Roddenberry/Berman era, it was obviously not for them, or they felt the need to watch the whole thing.

And it is possible as TNG did do it, yes. Is it likely? I don't know.

The problem isn't the material, it's the creative vision that is presenting it.

TNG, Voyager, and the first 2-3 seasons of Enterprise were all basically Berman's "corporate" vision of Trek without the creative spark of a GR, or a Moore, or a Manny Coto to keep it fresh.

That is what haemorrhaged viewers, not the universe presented. When Berman either chose not to or wasn't able to interfere with the show, (DS9, the last season of Enterprise), the show took risks, broke new ground for Trek, and even had fun along the way. As a result, it sloughed off the tapioca straightjacket of the "Berman formula" like a snake shedding skin to reveal a bright and shiny new one underneath.

I have every bit as much right to criticize as you do to praise.

Absolutely. But don't be surprised that when you come into a forum dedicated to a subject that you are roundly shouted down. I'd expect the same if I went into a Voyager, Enterprise or Deep Space Nine forum and started talking shit.

"Talking sh**" of course, being anything other than fawning praise for whatever is under discussion.

You don't agree with me, and therefore any crits I make are "talking sh**".

This is actually pretty common in current Internetia. Very few forums are truly interested in having discourse between people who have essentially different opinions.

 

[CorporalClegg]

This whole conversation right now, reminds me of so some of the endless debates over at TheForce.net/Jedi Council Forums...
OT vs PT...

I'm a bigger fan of the prequels than most, but people actually argue they're better than the originals?

 

[Campe]

Did any of the new shows really bring in viewers (other than TNG)? Did they retain old viewers? No. History proves that to be true. I think Dennis has a chart of the viewership decline over the 18 years of the Berman era.

I don't know. When I started watching Trek, there were 79 episodes and two or three movies. I didn't have to deal with that daunting nature. When I would suggest friends watching any of the Roddenberry/Berman era, it was obviously not for them, or they felt the need to watch the whole thing.

And it is possible as TNG did do it, yes. Is it likely? I don't know.

The problem isn't the material, it's the creative vision that is presenting it.

TNG, Voyager, and the first 2-3 seasons of Enterprise were all basically Berman's "corporate" vision of Trek without the creative spark of a GR, or a Moore, or a Manny Coto to keep it fresh.

That is what haemorrhaged viewers, not the universe presented. When Berman either chose not to or wasn't able to interfere with the show, (DS9, the last season of Enterprise), the show took risks, broke new ground for Trek, and even had fun along the way. As a result, it sloughed off the tapioca straightjacket of the "Berman formula" like a snake shedding skin to reveal a bright and shiny new one underneath.

Take a look at this.

When Berman left and Coto took over, how did the ratings do?
What's the trend on DS9 when Berman ignored it?

It all continued downward. I'm sorry, but history proves your argument to be a fallacy. I loved DS9 and season 4 of Enterprise as much as the next diehard, but I can't deny what I see. And at the end of the day, Star Trek was a business. They needed viewers so they could get better ad rates so they could make a profit for Paramount. By the end, that just wasn't happening.

 

[BeatleJWOL]

TNG, Voyager, and the first 2-3 seasons of Enterprise were all basically Berman's "corporate" vision of Trek without the creative spark of a GR, or a Moore, or a Manny Coto to keep it fresh.

That is what haemorrhaged viewers, not the universe presented. When Berman either chose not to or wasn't able to interfere with the show, (DS9, the last season of Enterprise), the show took risks, broke new ground for Trek, and even had fun along the way. As a result, it sloughed off the tapioca straightjacket of the "Berman formula" like a snake shedding skin to reveal a bright and shiny new one underneath.

Problem is, those who disliked what Rick Berman did with Star Trek had to wait for an Ira Stephen Behr or a Manny Coto to step up and try something different, just like PrimeTrek fans are waiting now.

It should also be pointed out that if Rick Berman really felt strongly enough about the "Berman formula", DS9 and the last season of Enterprise never would have happened (and PrimeTrek may have ended even sooner than it did.

Now it's Bad Robot's turn. Once they've finished playing ball, it'll pass to somebody else. Maybe they'll pick up the reins, maybe they'll start fresh once again. Unless "the fans" start working their way up in the creative ranks now, or a team in Hollywood that considers themselves "the fans" is the next group to take hold, it is extremely possible that those who feel NuTrek is beneath them may never get their desired Trek again.

Or in your words, SOL.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

being a literalist and pedant is not becoming in a conversation

Neither is attributing opinions to people they did not in any way express. In this case, I am generously assuming that "sit down and shut up" is being meant in the LITERAL sense because it would have been rude of you to claim I told you that in another context.

and listen to gushing opinions praising something I dislike without protest?

That's just it: why do you need to protest someone else's opinion?

I have every bit as much right to criticize as you do to praise.

Assuming you have the same rights I do (which you do) it stands to this:
- Excessive nerd rage is worthy of criticism
- Irrational arguments based on thinly-veiled nostalgia is worthy of criticism
- Quixotic attempts to "protest" the fact that other people like something you don't like is worthy of criticism.

So what are you looking for?
Agreement? I don't.
Comparison of experiences? You haven't bothered to share yours.
Thoughtful discussion? You didn't bother with that either.
Sympathy? You no longer have it.

So my original assessment stands. You don't like NuTrek, and I don't like your negativity.

Now what?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

This whole conversation right now, reminds me of so some of the endless debates over at TheForce.net/Jedi Council Forums...
OT vs PT...

I'm a bigger fan of the prequels than most, but people actually argue they're better than the originals?

That's not so hard to understand. Better fight choreography and a slightly more epic story. They are, of course, delusional if they think that alone makes them better movies, but to each his own.

 

[mos6507]

What NuFans dismiss as "baggage" is really a rich history in universe that writers can use for story hooks, or just neat details to use as "easter eggs".

How is it that Trek Prime can't come back but Dr. Who managed to hold onto its canon? Sure, Nu Who is a reboot in the sense of its modern style, but it never jettisoned canon, going so far as to bring Sarah Jane Smith back and give her a spinoff series (before Elisabeth Sladen's untimely death). So I don't buy the idea that franchises eventually must buckle under the weight of their collective history.

 

[Campe]

Personally, my thought on that is: Sure, Trek Prime could come back and it might. I'm not holding my breath. It has to be a pretty compelling storyline to do so. History has shown that it would be an unprofitable venture. That might change! I don't know. Nobody does. But considering the number of pitches we've heard about over the years (some actually pitched, some only written) by some pretty compelling writers? Does it really seem likely at this juncture?

 

[Christopher]

Ok, then we can expect to see Paramount/CBS giving us more Prime universe Trek then? I'm not holding my breath waiting. There is no attempt at "big tent". They've put Prime Trek on the shelf and are catering to the NuFan crowd.

That's like asking if we can expect to see more Jeremy Brett Sherlock Holmes, or more Jon Pertwee Doctor Who, or more Adam West Batman. Nothing lasts forever. Even if the Prime universe does come back, it'll be in a changed and modernized form that'll feel just as different to the purists. But changing and modernizing a franchise does not devalue what came before, and it does not exclude its fandom. It merely expands the fandom.

Like I said, those of us who are willing to see fandom as an inclusive community, to focus on what we have in common with other fans, are always going to be a bigger group collectively than those of you who see the small differences as insurmountable barriers and bases for conflict. There used to be conflicts between people who liked the Adam West Batman and those who preferred the more serious, modern takes. These days, there's a lot of affection for both. There's no reason for different incarnations of a fictional franchise to be in conflict or mutually exclusive.

See above. Having been effectively "shut out" as an Old School fan numerous times and derided by the now dominant NuFans exactly as I described, I can tell you that there is little desire on their part to "come together".

You're wrong, and you only have yourself to blame. Fans of the new movies have no hostility to those who like classic Trek. Heck, I'm a fan of both. But what they don't like is when purists constantly attack and condemn them for having different tastes from their own. If you feel hostility from them, it's merely a pushback against your own hostility toward them. Try welcoming others and you'll find most of them willing to welcome you.

 

[Phantom]

^A few.

I think ROTS is at least as good as Jedi, in particular.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

What NuFans dismiss as "baggage" is really a rich history in universe that writers can use for story hooks, or just neat details to use as "easter eggs".

How is it that Trek Prime can't come back but Dr. Who managed to hold onto its canon?

Because Doctor Who canon plays fast and loose with consistency and sometimes just takes giant shit on its own consistency just for the hell of it. They manage to get away with this because the Doctor is a time traveler of exceptional capability, and also because the whoniverse is fucking weird.

As a result, Doctor Who can always reinvent itself in interesting new ways and handwave the differences out of existence altogether. Stephen Moffat doesn't have to take into account the fact that the Daleks invaded Earth and everyone on Earth knows all about them. Or he CAN, if he feels like it, if that makes the story better.

So I don't buy the idea that franchises eventually must buckle under the weight of their collective history.

Only when they allow that history to be a limiting constraint instead of a source of new material, which Star Trek unquestionably did. An attempt to do the same thing over and over again and avoid deviating too much from the starting conditions just leads to "paint by numbers" stories that are a lot more fun to produce than they are to watch.

 

[Khan 2.0]

Trek Prime could come back to crossover with JJ Trek 'Generations' style as shared universe crossovers are so 'in' now. e.g. I can totally see Patrick Stewart coming back as Picard in a prominent role in a movie (especially now hes done with XMen)

maybe something like a BTTF2/Trials&Tribulations (& Terminator Genisys) thing with Quinto Spock zipping across timelines and repairing stuff, interacting with familiar events from the Prime timeline (ENT,TOS,TNG). time travels been done 3 times already in the ST movies (or 4 if you count Generations) but not in the interdimensional BTTF2 type way