One of the biggest problems with Star Trek IMO is that it became a "franchise" in the first place; no way I want a Star Trek "megafranchise." Save the megafranchises for McDonald's and Taco Bell.
Star Trek Prime Universe Megafranchise
- Thread starter intrinsical
- Start date
You've entirely missed the point of the conversation. You might want to try backing up a bit.
You know, after seeing Winter Soldier, I've come to the realization that I find the "transmedia megafranchise" that the Marvel movies and Agents of SHIELD are becoming. I just want to see a good movie or watch a good show. And while I have no objection to the occasional crossover (which can indeed be quite fun) I don't approve of this interconnectivity where three movie series and a TV show are required to understand another movie, which is considered a grand event and is the springboard launching the superhero movies for the next few years and perhaps another TV show.
I'm getting tired of the Marvel movies because of this, and I don't want Star Trek to do this.
I'm getting tired of the Marvel movies because of this, and I don't want Star Trek to do this.
... AGREED!!!
That's the way Marvel historically operates with their comics, so it's not all that surprising that they would do this with their movies and TV shows as well once they were able to.
The only way Trek can avoid doing this is if it avoids doing any more prequel, spinoff, and sequel shows.
Prequel, sequel and spinoff shows don't have to involve massive crossovers that require having seen all the product to understand anything. The main problem they present is over-saturation of the brand. (It also is sub-optimal if there's no compelling story-telling or creative reason for them to be happening.)
That only works with things in a shared universe that don't ever reference one another.
Over-saturation only occurs when there's too much of something at the same time or in a very short time span. Rolled out over time and with periodic breaks, though, a property can have many iterations of itself.
I doubt that. Star Trek has never interconnected storylines very well. The only time we had two Treks existing concurrently was TNG's final seasons and movies with DS9 (since Voyager was in the Delta Quadrant doing its own thing, I'm not including). And all that really amounted to was seeing DS9 characters have cameos on TNG, the Defiant in First Contact and mentioning DS9 in Insurrection. On DS9, the Borg attack from First Contact and the Son'a from Insurrection were mentioned.
Doing an interconnected universe requires a lot of planning and work to stay consistent. Bad Robot can't even keep the comics and video game consistent with each other and the movies despite the fact that they've assumed direct supervision over tie-ins for the purposes of consistency.
The novels do the occasional storyline involving all their ongoing continuities, though the last time they did one covered everything was the Destiny trilogy in 2008 and while that was something of a significant event, the other novel series have since gone off and done their own thing without relying on the reader to be familiar with the other series.
Star Trek has lasted nearly 50 years avoiding an interconnected universe, I don't see how one is inevitable when/if they decide to do more spin-offs.
But that's exactly my point. That still amounts to an interconnected universe, with things from one show or film crossing over to another.
But Trek is an indeed interconnected universe and has been for more than 25 years (if not longer). These shows and films do not exist without occasionally referencing things that occur outside of them or featuring characters from one production making a guest appearance in another. It really is inevitable that form of crossover will continue with spinoffs.
But that's not as interconnected as the Marvel movies are. You can watch one Trek series without watching any of the others and understand things just fine. Sure, you might not get what the big deal is when someone from the other shows makes an appearance, but it's hardly a big deal.
Now compare to Winter Soldier, where most of the cast were in fact introduced in the Iron Man films instead of the previous Captain America movie. You pretty much need to be familiar with the Avengers to follow the movie. Agents of SHIELD is doing a storyline which requires you to have seen Winter Soldier to follow, and it's all going to be resolved in the next Avengers movie. Okay, it brings in money, so obviously Marvel and Disney are satisfied, but what if all you're interested in is seeing Iron Man movies, or Captain America or Thor? Is it really fair that you have to keep up with the other film series plus a TV show to make sense out of them?
The occasional crossovers are fine, as long as they stay occasional. Even transferring one character to another show is fine, like with Worf and O'Brien, provided the other show reintroduces the characters as though its audience wouldn't know them. I don't want to watch a storyline which spans multiple TV series and is resolved in a movie. As it is, all the Treks can exist independently. That is you can watch one with no knowledge of the others. The only time you needed familiarity with the other Treks to understand one was Enterprise in its final season. And that's when the show got cancelled, so hardly a shining example.
Still, it's interconnectivity though. It's just a case of how big of a deal you want to make of it.
No one is really forcing anyone to see all the movies, though (I didn't need to see any of the previous Marvel Cinematic Universe movies to enjoy The Avengers, for example--and I doubt I was alone in that). With any large or long-running franchise, there are things that happen between various installments but unless you're a completest, it's really not a big problem as they can easily be seen as time jumps.
My point is that a shared universe is a shared universe. But you can still enjoy individual installments without having to see everything that's produced.
We only have 'the hardest time living in it' because we act like horse's asses about how somebody might make a movie or TV series; when we die off, it might get some breathing room.
Yes.
They do, but not to the excess that we Trekfans do, I think. What we have as love for Star Trek borders on religious fanaticism, as I and somebody else has said before.
That cracks me up everytime I see it.
My mad photoshop skills at work.
Something about that pic makes me want to caption it:
Star Trek isn't really that special in this regard, it just has a lot more material and familiarity. And though Star Wars has less material, its hardcore fans are probably worse.
And no, the powers that be don't give that much of a shit about those fanatics.
True, our nuts at least get that the guys running the franchise are under no obligation to respect the tie-in stuff.
