News Starfleet Academy Coming to P+

[Mudd]

Honestly, the series the legacy/continuity subset of fans really have to fear is SNW. The tone / continuity is all off, but it appeals to normies the way the Abramsverse did.

1. Don't use "normies." It's a stupid and offensive old fannish term that was steeped in self-righteous insecurity. I haven't heard it in a long time;
2. You'd find it impossible to come up with a definition of "normie" that would include me, anyway, and almost as hard to find a definition of "trek fan" that didn't include me - and I'd choose SNW over any Trek production since 1969;
3. For the most part, non-trekkies don't watch streaming Star Trek.

 

[cooleddie74]

Normies isn't cool. Stop it.

It's just one step away from "True fans" and actually worse.

 

[The Old Mixer]

And Riker has tried to use charm to his advantage before.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Albeit, not so successfully there either.

Pssst...the guy you're talking to has a writing credit for that episode.

 

[James Cole]

• Don't use "normies." It's a stupid and offensive old fannish term that was steeped in self-righteous insecurity. I haven't heard it in a long time;

Fair enough, in this case I was using it as a euphemistic short hand tied to the marketing of the Abramsverse, where JJ Abrams specifically set out to target the non-fan general audience. So a hard core Star Trek fan that liked the Abramsverse and/or SNW wouldn't be included in said term, but be in addition to them.

And, I actually describe myself as a "normie" casual viewer in Star Wars or MCU fandom spaces.

1. For the most part, non-trekkies don't watch streaming Star Trek.

Most of NuTrek seems designed to appeal otherwise.

 

[fireproof78]

Most of NuTrek seems designed to appeal otherwise.

So fans can only be appealed to my legacy content?

These arbitrary lines and categories are getting harder and harder to sort.

 

[Mudd]

Most of NuTrek seems designed to appeal otherwise.

Nope. Just about everyone who loves nuTrek are long-time fans.

Well, it will be "set in the DISCOVERY timeline"...

Okay, so let's settle this.

We'll agree that the various Trek shows take place in different timelines.

Now, it's inarguably clear that the two streaming series, STD and SNW, are the only ones that might be set in our future.

All the older shows - TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT - take place in some weird variant timeline that split off from our universe in the mid-sixties. Among other things they're filled with events that never happened and they've accumulated a history that's, well, to use the phrase one more time, preposterous. Eugenics Wars in the 1990s, the Bell riots, a mad scientist inventing androids that the rest of civilization can't figure out for decades, drunk hillbilly geniuses building warp rocketships out of ICBMs, another mad scientist inventing a teleportation device that the whole galaxy uses without understanding it.

Yeah, that stuff.

So, SNW and SFA will now be designated the "Prime Universe."

We can call the rest of it Legacy Trek. Or maybe, I dunno, Universe B. As in "Bizarro."

 

[James Cole]

So fans can only be appealed to my legacy content?

These arbitrary lines and categories are getting harder and harder to sort.

Just based on the press release, SFA seems to have a clear mandate to target a certain demographic segment.

Now, it's inarguably clear that the two streaming series, STD and SNW, are the only ones that might be set in our future.

It's been a year since I saw it, but the first episode of SNW has a second American Civil War starting in a few years. Let's hope that's not out future, and that we split off from Universe B in the 1960's and avoid WW3...

 

[ChristopherPike]

I would've been fine with a Starfleet Academy movie back in the Harve Bennett days. Don't get me wrong, not at the expense of the eventual Star Trek VI... but if both had somehow happened. The originals having their deserved send-off and introducing a younger prequel cast without the backlash.

I'm not terribly invested in the 32nd Century, despite liking Discovery Season 4 more than 3. But I'll see what gets developed first and how it turns out. I didn't think I'd like Prodigy, but the strong Voyager connections drew me in.

32nd Century is kind of the highest vantage point in Star Trek, and probably far advanced learning methods of that future in being able to recreate legacy characters hundreds of years apart - as hologram teachers and guest speakers. There's the "in" for fans who don't find the concept appealing.

As long as they come up with new lessons. I think we should give the Kobayashi Maru test a rest... and see how long they can go, without referring to it.

 

[urbandk]

THERE ARE FOUR KLINGON TYPES.

I see five

 

[fireproof78]

Just based on the press release, SFA seems to have a clear mandate to target a certain demographic segment.

Ok...so if I'm a "fan" and I dare enjoy this SFA series because I, a "fan", have enjoyed Academy based content for 30 years, then perhaps this will appeal to other demographics too.

 

[HotRod]

And now with SFA, there'll be three series in the supposed Disco-verse.

TPTB gambled that they would gain more new fans with the changes than lose existing fans. How this ultimately plays out is still unknown. But if enough people go against it, then TOS might stay in visual continuity and DISCOVERY/SNW/SFA+ canonically shifted over it its own alt universe sandbox. At the very least, try and please all segments of the fanbase with LEGACY.

What does an aneurysm feel like?

 

[Soong-type Android]

All the older shows - TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT - take place in some weird variant timeline that split off from our universe in the mid-sixties. Among other things they're filled with events that never happened and they've accumulated a history that's, well, to use the phrase one more time, preposterous. Eugenics Wars in the 1990s, the Bell riots, a mad scientist inventing androids that the rest of civilization can't figure out for decades, drunk hillbilly geniuses building warp rocketships out of ICBMs, another mad scientist inventing a teleportation device that the whole galaxy uses without understanding it.

This sounds like an interesting universe.

 

[Mudd]

Just based on the press release, SFA seems to have a clear mandate to target a certain demographic segment.


It's been a year since I saw it, but the first episode of SNW has a second American Civil War starting in a few years

Do you have a point about plausibility here?

Let's hope that's not out future, and that we split off from Universe B in the 1960's and avoid WW3...

WW3 is in Universe B too. Along with a Eugenics War that we didn't have. And an Earth-Saturn manned mission that's overdue. And a crewed mission to Europa next year that doesn't exist and can't happen. And...

This sounds like an interesting universe.

It was, in its day.

 

[The Old Mixer]

What does an aneurysm feel like?

This is not the first time I've seen this type of comment from you, and I'm pretty sure I already gave you a friendly for one of them. Stop getting personal, or you'll be getting a warning.

 

[HotRod]

This is not the first time I've seen this type of comment from you, and I'm pretty sure I already gave you a friendly for one of them. Stop getting personal, or you'll be getting a warning.

I was referring to myself.

 

[The Old Mixer]

I was referring to myself.

Doesn't look like it. You asked the question as a response to two quotes from @cal888 .

 

[Farscape One]

If there is one thing that STAR TREK probably should stop doing, it's to try to add current events or what they think might happen in a couple years into the history of the franchise.

Because we never got the Eugenics Wars or DY-100 ships or anything of the sort, it's obvious the entire franchise takes place in a different universe. And that's fine.

Because they can still use other history that actually passed, like WWII, for potential stories.

And when you have a scenario like DS9's "PAST TENSE", keep that 'history' as something that took place decades after the series is in production. TOS did it with the Eugenics Wars with a 30 year gap, and DS9 did it with the Bell Riots with a 29 year gap.

When you start shoehorning in events that are presumed to happen in a year or two from when said series is in production, stepping on historical minefields (not sure what other term I can use that works for what I'm trying to say) is going to happen.

STAR TREK can easily make allegories without relying on current historical events. They've been doing it since 1966.

 

[HotRod]

Doesn't look like it. You asked the question as a response to two quotes from @cal888 .

Apologies if it seemed that way, but I was quoting something I heard many years ago, what that thing is, I don't remember. But I was being sarcastic. Trying to infer that hearing this same argument over and over again was causing damage to my own brain. Again, Apologies. I'll be more careful in the future.

 

[James Cole]

FWIW, I try and offer good faith alternate points of view. If anyone feels I'm trolling etc that's not my intent. I'm at least kinda used to it for being a pro-PICARD season 3 / STLD / PRO person in the NuTrek skeptic space. Unfortunately the Star Trek fanbase is heavily divided. If Legacy doesn't happen, I'll probably drift away and revert to posting once or twice a year in the book forum.

Ok...so if I'm a "fan" and I dare enjoy this SFA series because I, a "fan", have enjoyed Academy based content for 30 years, then perhaps this will appeal to other demographics too.

Sure, demographic spillover. The CW's median viewer age was far beyond their target 18-34, for example.

Do you have a point about plausibility here?

Just that if SNW is supposed to be set in "our future", they should have split it off further ahead, and not something that could be contradicted within 5 years of airing. If anything, branching the timeline to avoid all the differences in Star Trek post-1990 with the real world could have been a good way to keep Kurtzman Trek "our future" with more breathing room.

WW3 is in Universe B too. Along with a Eugenics War that we didn't have. And an Earth-Saturn manned mission that's overdue. And a crewed mission to Europa next year that doesn't exist and can't happen. And...

&

If there is one thing that STAR TREK probably should stop doing, it's to try to add current events or what they think might happen in a couple years into the history of the franchise.

Because we never got the Eugenics Wars or DY-100 ships or anything of the sort, it's obvious the entire franchise takes place in a different universe. And that's fine.

You did qualify it with Universe B splitting from our universe in the 1960s. I have no problem with Star Trek being an alt universe, and doesn't have to be "our future"... otherwise there's way too much Trek history that needs retconning. For all its faults, I admire PICARD season 2 for sticking to what was already established.

 

[fireproof78]

Just that if SNW is supposed to be set in "our future", th

Star Trek has always been our future.