In a world where studios announce franchises and trilogies before the first film has even come out, the "But how can I care if I know they get through it" argument doesn't really mean anything anymore.
The Problems with Prequels...
- Thread starter stueyross
- Start date
Titanic was a huge success yet people knew the outcome... most of them did.
Most of these are not true prequels though.
The Godfather Part 2 is a sequel with flashbacks.
Batman Begins is a reboot of the movie franchise.
Casino Royale is a reboot of the movie franchise.
The X-Men "prequel" movies erased the first trilogy from the timeline.
I didn't even know Good, Bad and The Ugly was a prequel until years after I saw it. I thought it was just Clint Eastwood playing a similar character to the ones he always plays in Westerns. I'll grant you it's good but it's the only real prequel in your list. I hope you enjoyed my meaningless rebuttal
Fuller does not want to re-open maybe the post-Nemesis era, but if the CBS-Netflix joint venture is successful (and maybe CS All access is a flop and the series will run it's course on Netflix in the USA too) we might get new series after Discovery that could take place post-Nemesis. Of course most probably it will not be overseen by Fuller but I'm almost sure that it will not continue Discovery's timeline.
Successful prequel TV series:
Bates Motel
Better Call Saul
Fear the Walking Dead
Case closed.
Bates Motel
Better Call Saul
Fear the Walking Dead
Case closed.
Hey, it wouldn't be the first time there was more than one Trek show on tv. But if DSC is a bust, I shudder to think how long it'll be before another show is attempted.
Bates Motel is amazing but it's not a prequel to the movies. It's a reboot of the Psycho franchise. That said, it's as good as it gets as far as great examples of "prequels" go.
Fear The Walking Dead is appalling in my opinion and I've never seen Saul so I won't comment on that.
I don't consider Psycho to be a franchise. There's only one that's any good and it's the one made by Hitchcock.
Nice use of "maybe". In fact, we just don't know. But Fuller has talked about doing series set in other periods.
We "might", we "could", "if" ... obviously there's no way to predict.
Where did that "of course" come from? Unless ST2017 is a catastrophe, Fuller will likely oversee Trek on TV for years to come. And the series will continue in the Discovery timeline, which is of course the Prime timeline.
Fargo Season 2.
I've only seen the movie "Fargo" and it's very good.
A prequel is indicative of where science fiction is today: nostalgic and stagnate. Science fiction isn't being moved forward, it's being looked back at. Taking Trek 100 or 200 years past the TNG era is moving it forward into imaginative ideas of design, technology, and new possibilities. And new dangers.
I have no doubt that it will be a great show, a great character study, but I don't foresee it bringing us anything new in the form of a prequel beyond it being a social commentary on how we should treat the "aliens" in our world.
I have no doubt that it will be a great show, a great character study, but I don't foresee it bringing us anything new in the form of a prequel beyond it being a social commentary on how we should treat the "aliens" in our world.
That might be true for SF TV and movies, but written SF is still innovating.
Movies and television in general are what's stagnant today. How many new projects are not sequels, prequels, sidequels, spinoffs, reboots and reimaginings of existing franchises?
Or simply dressed in different clothing doing the same shit.
I'm willing to bet most projects aren't sequels, prequels, sidequels, spinoffs reboots and reimagining of existing franchises. The ads for the new fall shows are starting. Most seems to be unrelated to existing properties. The only reason the "quels" and "rees" stand is out is because we recognize them.
My attitude towards prequels generally over the past 20 years has been mostly negative but that has nothing to do with the idea of one itself, rather its execution.
With relation to Trek; there has been 1 attempt that resulted in cancellation and 3 “films” that have resulted in a semi-reboot that to me seems more aimed at and made by a star wars fan. So at this point in time I have many concerns about the setting of this new series, but I feel more optimistic towards Discovery than I was towards that other “show”. Optimistic (cautiously) in that they have not decided to set it on a ship that did not exist previously in canon.
That was the major problem with that other show was that no amount of explaining away can possibly reconcile that the NX-01 did not exist in canon. There was an established line of ships named Enterprise referenced on numerous occasions that was simply ignored. I believe that the studio made a (simple-minded) edict to B&B that the next show must be on an “Enterprise” so if that was indeed a constraint that they had on them then that is fine, but it wasn't very hard to do even some cursory research for how to make a show on an enterprise in a previous time-frame, a quick google search would have done the job. If that constraint wasn't there, then simply making the NX-01 (despite the other criticism's I have on its design) a ship with a different name would have solved such a fundamental problem.
But I digress..
There are pro's and cons to sequels and prequels. I think the former is certainly easier than the latter, but in the context of trek there is equal potential in both. I personally favour the sequel option as there is less risk of tripping up and undermining canon either by accident or by willing ignorance (motivated by being uncreatively lazy like B&B did with that other show). There is freedom with a sequel in that the universe can be built upon rather than built within a pre-existing framework.
But so far with discovery, the fundamental premise that I know so far has not fundamentally contradicted canon so for me the first hurdle has been jumped successfully. The next test will be characters and stories and I am optimistic that the new team will not produce the kind of putrid dross that made Voyager so tediously mediocre and ultimately led to Enterprise's cancellation.
With relation to Trek; there has been 1 attempt that resulted in cancellation and 3 “films” that have resulted in a semi-reboot that to me seems more aimed at and made by a star wars fan. So at this point in time I have many concerns about the setting of this new series, but I feel more optimistic towards Discovery than I was towards that other “show”. Optimistic (cautiously) in that they have not decided to set it on a ship that did not exist previously in canon.
That was the major problem with that other show was that no amount of explaining away can possibly reconcile that the NX-01 did not exist in canon. There was an established line of ships named Enterprise referenced on numerous occasions that was simply ignored. I believe that the studio made a (simple-minded) edict to B&B that the next show must be on an “Enterprise” so if that was indeed a constraint that they had on them then that is fine, but it wasn't very hard to do even some cursory research for how to make a show on an enterprise in a previous time-frame, a quick google search would have done the job. If that constraint wasn't there, then simply making the NX-01 (despite the other criticism's I have on its design) a ship with a different name would have solved such a fundamental problem.
But I digress..
There are pro's and cons to sequels and prequels. I think the former is certainly easier than the latter, but in the context of trek there is equal potential in both. I personally favour the sequel option as there is less risk of tripping up and undermining canon either by accident or by willing ignorance (motivated by being uncreatively lazy like B&B did with that other show). There is freedom with a sequel in that the universe can be built upon rather than built within a pre-existing framework.
But so far with discovery, the fundamental premise that I know so far has not fundamentally contradicted canon so for me the first hurdle has been jumped successfully. The next test will be characters and stories and I am optimistic that the new team will not produce the kind of putrid dross that made Voyager so tediously mediocre and ultimately led to Enterprise's cancellation.
Similar threads
