Strange New Worlds' showrunners advise fans to write to Skydance and Paramount if they're interested in a "Year One" Kirk sequel series

[The Wormhole]

We've already Canonically seen the first part of Kirk's tenure as Captain of the Enterprise; that's what the first season of TOS covered.

In trying to get fans to support a "Year One" show, Goldsman is showing that he wants to override TOS with new Canon but doesn't want to be the one to propose such a thing because if the fandom at large realized that that's what he's suggesting, they'd be coming for his head.

It's only a fanon retcon that WNMHGB is Kirk's firs mission commanding the Enterprise, which Goldsman has already said he's going to ignore in SNW S5. Indeed, even the novels have always assumed Kirk had plenty of adventures as Captain of the Enterprise prior to WNMHGB.

According to official Chronological sources, TOS Season 1 starts in 2265.

Also, according to official Canon, Kirk took command of the Enterprise in 2265.

Even ignoring the official Chronology is not canon (which is even noted in the preface of both editions published in the 90s) you're twisting what they said. The Chronology places WNMHGB in 2265, but the rest of TOS S1 takes place in 2266. So even taking the Chronology into account, that means Kirk's entire first year commanding the Enterprise is basically untouched with only one episode taking place during it.

 

[Mudd]

Y'know, the more I think about it the less likely I think this series is. Which I'm sad about.

 

[Christopher]

Blake’s 7, despite having what now seems an emphatic and thematically appropriate ending, was cancelled — the final episode apparently wasn’t intended to be. While devastating at the time, in the long run, that’s fine!

Well, not exactly. The producers approached the end of Series C as a series finale, and were surprised when the renewal for a fourth season was announced right after the finale was broadcast. So if anything, it was the opposite of cancelled -- they got an extra season they hadn't expected. The Series D finale was written to work as a cliffhanger if they were lucky enough to get a fifth season, but that doesn't mean they "intended" to do a fifth, because they didn't know if they'd get picked up or not. Back then, it was almost unheard of for any show to have a long-term plan beyond "Do the current season and hope we get another."

Still hoping for a political style Star Trek show in the vein of The West Wing meeting Andor. I would call it Star Trek - Federation.

A show set just after ENT, during the birth of the Federation. It's about the first Federation president and its staff and the ambassadors from Vulcan, Andor and Tellar and about those first Federation worlds and how they respond to Earth, the Federation council and the growing pains of a galactic cooperation. A political thriller, with intrigue and political handy work. Could be something different for Star Trek.

Mike Sussman announced yesterday that he's pitched an Andor-like series about Archer's term as Federation president. https://gizmodo.com/star-trek-enter...ael-sussman-paramount-scott-bakula-2000640810

In the meantime, if you want a story about the formative years of the Federation, there's always my five-book Rise of the Federation novel series, which hasn't been contradicted by canon yet (aside from the brief material about Rigel VII in book 2).

It's only a fanon retcon that WNMHGB is Kirk's firs mission commanding the Enterprise, which Goldsman has already said he's going to ignore in SNW S5. Indeed, even the novels have always assumed Kirk had plenty of adventures as Captain of the Enterprise prior to WNMHGB.

It was common for shows back then to begin with an established status quo rather than having an origin story. Heck, "The Cage" itself was a "sequel" to the incident on Rigel VII that we never saw. I'm surprised that anyone would try to twist things to convince themselves that "Where No Man" was Kirk's first; there's not a shred of evidence of that in the episode.

For what it's worth, I've written a version of Kirk's first mission as Enterprise captain too, in The Captain's Oath, which also covers his previous four years as captain of the Sacagawea (which is very, very close to being contradicted by SNW, since it starts in 2261, the year of SNW's current season -- and it certainly looks like they're setting up the Farragut as Kirk's first command).

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Unless its stated on screen it is not canonical. We don't know it is Kirk's first year.

Voyager did state Kirk's 5 year mission ended in 2270. So 2265 is the first year.

 

[Christopher]

Voyager did state Kirk's 5 year mission ended in 2270. So 2265 is the first year.

Well, that depends on when in the year it ended. If it concluded at the end of 2270, then it would've started at the beginning of 2266. Assuming it was exactly 5 years, instead of maybe 5 years, 3 months or something. There's a fair amount of uncertainty.

I may have mentioned this already, but I think of "Where No Man" as a separate mission from the 5-year tour of duty. After all, a trip to the edge of the galaxy and back would take months in itself, and would more logically be a standalone mission than part of a general 5-year frontier patrol/survey tour. Also, the ship was clearly refitted between the pilot and the first season, and such an extensive refit would logically fall between distinct missions. Plus I've never understood why fans assume that just because one mission was canonically 5 years long, that somehow requires every starship mission to be 5 years long.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Well, that depends on when in the year it ended. If it concluded at the end of 2270, then it would've started at the beginning of 2266. Assuming it was exactly 5 years, instead of maybe 5 years, 3 months or something. There's a fair amount of uncertainty.

I may have mentioned this already, but I think of "Where No Man" as a separate mission from the 5-year tour of duty. After all, a trip to the edge of the galaxy and back would take months in itself, and would more logically be a standalone mission than part of a general 5-year frontier patrol/survey tour. Also, the ship was clearly refitted between the pilot and the first season, and such an extensive refit would logically fall between distinct missions. Plus I've never understood why fans assume that just because one mission was canonically 5 years long, that somehow requires every starship mission to be 5 years long.

I would interpret year 1 as 2265-2266 then 66-67 and so on but you are technically correct, the best kind of correct, and starfleet could have launched the mission in january and made it each calendar year. Such things are so much easy to check in the TNG stardate system.

And the Enterprise did go on a mission right after DSC season 2 that wasnt part of any mission so it wouldn't be out of the question either.

But I am willing to believe that the ship was never refit and we're just viewing it through a better camera. After all Tuvok told us in the 23rd century holographic imaging resolution was less precise.

 

[Starflight]

Goldsman wants to rewrite Canon Trek history by overriding TOS with a 'Prime Timeline' Reboot series showing parts of Kirk's tenure as Captain that we've already seen, but doesn't want the backlash that saying so outright would generate, so he's trying to convince the fandom that it's something they should want and show support for.

I doubt Goldsman honestly cares either way, I'd bet he just wants to do this because it's relatively easy (sets, costumes, props, etc already exist) and he's of the mindset that Star Trek's brand identity is best secured through endless revisiting of characters, ideas, places, and ships we already know. I don't know if he thinks that's more appealing to Paramount, or if it's just how he works as a creative lead. We just have to hope he makes a good show within those parameters.

The impression I get is that if you told him to come up with the most original Star Trek show possible, he'd probably freeze for a second and then give you something like "what if Kirk and Picard teamed up, but it was aboard Voyager, and Archer was there as a hologram?"

 

[trekfan_1]

Not that I think it has a chance of happening anyway, but my personal theory/hunch is that Goldman is angling for a classic bait and switch strategy. Says it's Year 1 , sets it just prior to TOS at first. Hopes it's well received . And if it is, does his version of TOS "for the modem era audience". Just my personal tin foiled hat conspiracy theory .

 

[Nerys Myk]

I doubt Goldsman honestly cares either way, I'd bet he just wants to do this because it's relatively easy (sets, costumes, props, etc already exist) and he's of the mindset that Star Trek's brand identity is best secured through endless revisiting of characters, ideas, places, and ships we already know. I don't know if he thinks that's more appealing to Paramount, or if it's just how he works as a creative lead. We just have to hope he makes a good show within those parameters.

He's a TOS fan. He wants to tell TOS stories

The impression I get is that if you told him to come up with the most original Star Trek show possible, he'd probably freeze for a second and then give you something like "what if Kirk and Picard teamed up, but it was aboard Voyager, and Archer was there as a hologram?"

I think you're confusing him with Terry Matalas.

Not that I think it has a chance of happening anyway, but my personal theory/hunch is that Goldman is angling for a classic bait and switch strategy. Says it's Year 1 , sets it just prior to TOS at first. Hopes it's well received . And if it is, does his version of TOS "for the modem era audience". Just my personal tin foiled hat conspiracy theory .

That's hardly just a theory.

 

[Starflight]

I think you're confusing him with Terry Matalas.

No arguments here, Picard S3 was the worst case by far, but it's undeniably a feature of SNW writing too ("what if Trelane picked on Korby, and then Q came and stopped him?", "what if Pike was in Balance of Terror, met Kirk, and the entire Romulan fleet arrived?").

 

[Firebird]

Voyager did state Kirk's 5 year mission ended in 2270. So 2265 is the first year.

Of the five-year-mission, not necessarily when he took command of the ship.

 

[Nerys Myk]

No arguments here, Picard S3 was the worst case by far, but it's undeniably a feature of SNW writing too ("what if Trelane picked on Korby, and then Q came and stopped him?", "what if Pike was in Balance of Terror, met Kirk, and the entire Romulan fleet arrived?").

True. Still, I'll take Goldsman fanwank over Matalas.

 

[The Wormhole]

Goldsman at least provides a story with his wank. A tasteful wank. Matalas just wanks himself silly and when he's done wanks some more. A tasteless wank.

 

[DigificWriter]

Memory Alpha's citations for 2265 being both the year that Kirk took command of the Enterprise:
What are Little Girls Made Of?
The Menagerie, Part 1
Turnabout Intruder
Dagger of the Mind
Q2

It does look like there's more of an arena for Goldsman to play around in than I thought, but I still think that he's more interested in being able to 'backdoor' his way into doing a Prime Timeline Reboot of TOS itself with a project like this but doesn't want to outright say that.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Memory Alpha's citations for 2265 being both the year that Kirk took command of the Enterprise:
What are Little Girls Made Of?
The Menagerie, Part 1
Turnabout Intruder
Dagger of the Mind
Q2

It does look like there's more of an arena for Goldsman to play around in than I thought, but I still think that he's more interested in being able to 'backdoor' his way into doing a Prime Timeline Reboot of TOS itself with a project like this but doesn't want to outright say that.

Why would he have to say anything? It’s clear from SNW that TOS will be “rebooted.”

 

[fireproof78]

Why would he have to say anything? It’s clear from SNW that TOS will be “rebooted.”

Does that mean TOS is being deleted!?!?!?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Does that mean TOS is being deleted!?!?!?

Yes. You will be instructed where to turn in your TOS related media and receive your memory wipe.

 

[Christopher]

Why would he have to say anything? It’s clear from SNW that TOS will be “rebooted.”

Not really. While they did rewrite the Eugenics Wars timeline, and have tweaked certain continuity details as it suits them regarding the Gorn, T'Pring, etc., it's clear that their overall pretense is that this is the same continuity as TOS in most regards. For instance, they made a point of temporarily promoting Pike to fleet captain when he first met Kirk, to maintain continuity with Kirk's line in "The Menagerie." If they're willing to bend over backward to preserve even such a trivial detail, it's obvious that they have no intention of "rebooting" the continuity altogether.

See, people who assume alternate tellings require alternate timelines are taking fiction too literally. The entire thing is an imaginary pretense anyway, so any series can rewrite its own history and claim it's still consistent, e.g. when TNG retconned in a Cardassian war that had supposedly been going on throughout its first two seasons even though those seasons showed an emphatically peacetime Starfleet, or when DS9 ignored "Emissary"'s depiction of the Prophets having no familiarity with corporeal life when they first met Sisko and retconned it so that they'd arranged Sisko's birth in the first place.

Star Trek has always been rewriting its own history and pretending it was the same consistent timeline. SNW isn't doing anything different. If it does spin off a Kirk series, that series will continue to make what small changes to the continuity its creators deem appropriate, but it will still pretend that its events take place in the same narrative reality as what came before, just as Trek has always done ever since James R. Kirk became James T., lithium crystals became dilithium, and UESPA became Starfleet.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Not really. While they did rewrite the Eugenics Wars timeline, and have tweaked certain continuity details as it suits them regarding the Gorn, T'Pring, etc., it's clear that their overall pretense is that this is the same continuity as TOS in most regards

That's what I meant by "rebooted." There will be tweaks, but not wholesale deletion.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I think it's probably best to look at Star Trek less as a fictional future history and more as a mythology or a legendarium. The myths and legends of old are rife with contradictions and alternate takes on the same tale, why should modern myths be any different? Truth be told, Star Trek as a whole is far more consistent than those ancient myths are.