The Problems with Prequels...

[Michael]

Can the Klingon Empire join the Federation? Can the Discovery get into a fight with the Borg? Can the Vulcans secede and join the Romulans? Can the Federation develop some faster method of travel that allows for exploration of outside of the galaxy?

In all honesty, I'm not really interested in any of these things. Sure, I don't see why Discovery couldn't feature all the things from your list. But personally, I want to see new stuff, new aliens, new characters, new stories. I don't care which fictional era or which fictional timeline it is set in. I just want it to be good and engaging. Every time I read “But Star Trek is about going forward!” or “I want to see the future, not the past!” I want to scream at the screen “The 23rd century is the future, goddamnit!”

 

[locutus101]

No, but in the midst of "unremitting hostility" between their respective governments, a Klingon individual or crew and a Federation one could be forced by circumstance to overcome their differences and accomplish something together.


If we never saw the Borg again, it would be too soon, as far as I'm concerned. Fighting the Borg is not something new and different and exciting that we are missing out on here. It has been done to death.


Again, some of them certainly could. There could be a faction or splinter group that wants to do just that, creating a dilemma for the Federation as to whether to let them go or try to prevent it. Or we could have the reverse of TNG's "The Defector," with a single individual attempting to divulge Federation military secrets for reasons that make it seem to him or her "the logical thing to do." (Kind of like a Vulcan Edward Snowden!)


Yes, and moreover we already know that they did exactly this in roughly the period in question! In "The Cage," Pike speaks of "the time barrier" being recently broken, which would allow the S.S. Columbia's crew to return home faster than they would believe. And in "Where No Man Has Gone Before," the Enterprise is on a mission attempting to probe out of the galaxy for the first time. (Or rather the first time known to Kirk, which immediately turns out to be not in fact the actual first.)


I can never get my head around this notion so many seem to have that if something wasn't mentioned or seen later on this means it wasn't around, or that if it wasn't that this is somehow inherently inconsistent and requiring "explanation." How many species, planets, people, events from TOS were mentioned on later shows? Only a few; many not ever again. Space is VAST. Everything we've seen in all the series and films combined comprises only a tiny slice of it. And even within the specific areas that we have traveled repeatedly, what we've seen in the course of it is in many cases only a tiny slice of what could be going on there. In a way, it often makes more sense for lots of things to be introduced and not heard of again than to have everything be closely connected. (Of course, I do enjoy the dramatic possibilities of having recurring elements and continuing arcs, and I'm sure this show will not be without them.)


I agree with you, yet would also add that even telling stories from points of view that seem to be less central to the "main action"—or in fact are very much central to it in their own small but important way, and have been marginalized by omission because they aren't those of the sort of characters who would be traditionally portrayed as the "heroes" who garner all the fame and glory—can effectively "reshape" the history and universe in the eyes of the audience to a great extent, and that's another part of why they are worth exploring. I think that may be a significant part of what Fuller aims to do in DSC, with the lead character being a 23rd century female Lt. Commander, LGBTQIA and "alien" characters receiving greater representation, etc. Reexamining an era previously depicted through the literal and figurative lens of 1960s society through that of today's has the potential to open all kinds of new windows on it, and to provide a compelling new perspective.

But the Xindi for example were much more than a species mentioned in passing, they were responsible for the murder of seven million people and very nearly wiped out humankind altogether! It's not something that you can just sweep under the rug and never talk about it ever again.

 

[Mage]

I think it's hilariously naive to think you can't get great storylines from a setting before Kirk anymore. It simply shows a narrow way of thinking.

The galaxy is HUGE! And 10 years is a shit load of time. Just look at the amount of stories that could be told in 7 seasons of TNG. Or DS9. Or VOY.
The amount of planets, people and events that are available 10 years before TOS that you can use to tell amazing new stories, without upsetting the established cannon of Trek is unlimited. The only huge thing that you cannot fit in there, is a galactic spanning war.

Here's an example. On a mission of explorating a uncharted sector of space (plenty of those left in the TNG era of the Alpha Quadrant, let alone TOS) the Discovery comes acros a system who's inhabitants have only just discovered warpdrive, and are set to become a bigger part of the galaxy. Trying to establish closer relations with these people, Discovery's mission is troubled by the arrival of the Klingons, who are as interested in the system, but not for it's people, but it's strategic location. With tensions already troubled (read; Cold War) between the Klingons and the Federation, it's up the crew of the Discovery to lead by example, upholding the traditions of the Federation and safeguard these new friends, without actually turning a cold war into a hot one....

Sure, simple setup, we've seen it before. But within the timespan of one episode or a novel. Now, we can go very deep into a new culture, thanks to 13 episodes. Lasting character development. The tensions between the Klingons and Federation is a known element for the time period. And you can do all of this, without upsetting the grand scheme of Holy Cannon, because events like this were probably a dime a dozen 10 years later during Kirk's 5YM.

So yeah, all this 'the problem with prequel' bullshit is just fans being angry. There are no actual problems with prequels, just problems with fans not happy with a certain situation.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

@locutus101 - Really? The Xindi incident would be talked about all the time? We don't talk about Pol Pot wiping out a quarter of Cambodia's population in everyday conversation. Probably even Cambodians don't. Germans might not even be aware that 33% of their population died during the 30 Years War. Most Americans if asked have probably forgotten that the British once burned down the White House. It's now obscure that the most famous building on Earth was torched. Who remembers. outside India, that 3 million Indians died in the Great Bengal Famine in WW2? A few historians, people interested in the Indian subcontinent. Who remembers that time China and Vietnam fought an inconclusive war in 1979? Or how communist Cuba intervened in wars in Africa? How often are they mentioned in regular speech, even by people who are familiar with major historical events?

Do you expect people in TNG are going to be comparing everything to the Xindi attack in everyday conversation?

How much of their lives did we witness, about a hundred 45 minute episodes? In that time are they going to bring up every single attack that ever happened, going back 200 years to the foundation of the Federation? Even the Romulan Wars, in which millions may have died, were referenced a couple of times at most - just like you would expect. I'm sure there are lecture theaters across the Federation where history students debate the effects of the Xindi conflict. I'm sure there are people reading books in the Coffee Shop on Starbase 21 about the Romulan Wars - but to think that the event is necessarily going to be mentioned in TOS or TNG is unrealistic.

 

[dinzy]

I am a ProFuturist, Anti-Prequelist but I am not against the show, I would just prefer that it be set well after TNG. I think I would have naturally been more pleased with this had ENT been allowed to end naturally and TNG been given a worthy sendoff post NEM, which I am still pissed off about.

Apart from this exact incident, and the possibility of having yet another young TOS character appear on the show for a fanwanking extravaganza, what is there about the setting that has an advantage over moving it to the future?

I think the only one really is that it forces writers to come up with new species and new issues that don't violate 90's Trek cannon. I am ok with this. I.e. there will be no Borg to use as a crutch. BUT, this show is not episodic and will be planned out for the entire 13 episode season to start so none of that would happen anyways, unless execs demanded it, which they can't. So that is a positive. I think I convinced myself that there may have been a motive other than marketing that went into deciding on TOS era. And yes 10 years before Kirk is TOS era, it's not really a prequel to TOS, its a sequel and prequel to BerTrek.

 

[locutus101]

@locutus101 - Really? The Xindi incident would be talked about all the time? We don't talk about Pol Pot wiping out a quarter of Cambodia's population in everyday conversation. Probably even Cambodians don't. Germans might not even be aware that 33% of their population died during the 30 Years War. Most Americans if asked have probably forgotten that the British once burned down the White House. It's now obscure that the most famous building on Earth was torched. Who remembers. outside India, that 3 million Indians died in the Great Bengal Famine in WW2? A few historians, people interested in the Indian subcontinent. Who remembers that time China and Vietnam fought an inconclusive war in 1979? Or how communist Cuba intervened in wars in Africa? How often are they mentioned in regular speech, even by people who are familiar with major historical events?

Do you expect people in TNG are going to be comparing everything to the Xindi attack in everyday conversation?

How much of their lives did we witness, about a hundred 45 minute episodes? In that time are they going to bring up every single attack that ever happened, going back 200 years to the foundation of the Federation? Even the Romulan Wars, in which millions may have died, were referenced a couple of times at most - just like you would expect. I'm sure there are lecture theaters across the Federation where history students debate the effects of the Xindi conflict. I'm sure there are people reading books in the Coffee Shop on Starbase 21 about the Romulan Wars - but to think that the event is necessarily going to be mentioned in TOS or TNG is unrealistic.

All these events are one among many. The Xindi incident is unique. From the time of Cochrane till the time of Nemesis there never have been that many people killed all at once on Earth, never. Not to mention humankind being nearly extinct if not for Archer's intervention on the Xindi weapon.

I mean the Americans are still talking about the 9/11 massacre and yet it was three thousand people not seven million. Why? Because, it was the biggest mass murder on American soil for a very long time. When something is unique, you remember it. The Xindi incident is unique.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

I always felt the Romulan Wars should be the defining incident of Archer's age - the Xindi attack could have easily been replaced with a Romulan nuclear attack, a kind of Pearl Harbour sneak attack - and it would have fallen neatly into references in TOS, DS9, etc.

But the broader point is this - now that the Xindi attack is part of Trek canon - it is easy to explain. You don't know how many times Earth has been attacked. During the movies alone, we had V'Ger, The Whale Probe, The Borg Queen's Cube - and if Shinzon had succeded, The Scimitar. During ENT we had the Xindi. After ENT we had The Romulan War. During the 100 years leading up to Kirk, who knows what happened. During the 100 years up to Picard who knows what happened. During TNG we had Alien Parasites, another Borg Cube, etc. During DS9, the Dominion War.

Now, across 250 years of history, Earth, and later the Federation may have been attacked or fought dozens of wars. The Xindi, Romulans, Kzinti, Klingons, Sheliak, Tzenkethi, Talarians, Cardassians, Tholians, Borg, Dominion. Who knows how many minor skirmishes, terrorist incidents, etc.

People don't talk about these things in detail in real life - why would Federation citizens? Do you know how many major events have happened in the last 250 years of US, UK, Indian, Chinese, German or Japanese history? The citizens of these countries do not mention them in everyday conversation. Someone might mention Pearl Harbour occasionally as a metaphor. This is exactly what we see in Star Trek; a few vague references to the Romulan Wars from Kirk, Picard and Sisko. Why would the Xindi incident be brought up? I am sure Janeway and so on are aware of it - but they have far more relevant and modern examples, such as Wolf 359, to draw upon in conversation. So the Xindi probe was a major event in Earth's history; but that does not automatically mean it would be mentioned in later Trek. Nothing is being swept under the rug.

 

[F. King Daniel]

This boils down to continuity. If anyone's expecting the new show to treat anything prior in anything but broad strokes, you're in for a rude awakening. They will ignore and contradict things established in TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise just like they all have because they'll think it benefits the story they're trying to tell.

Perhaps warp speeds will cross the galaxy in the blink of an eye like in TOS and the movies, or maybe it'll be a lifelong journey as depicted in DS9 and Voyager. Maybe they'll pretend phasers don't have a "wide beam" setting like DS9 did. Perhaps they'll decide to give communicators texting ability, and be able to do all the other cool things our phones effortlessly do today. They're almost certain to wear the Starfleet arrowhead emblem (it's been in all the publicity materials so far), ignoring the fanon that each ship in the 23rd century wore it's own insignia patch. I'd love the universal translator to act the way it really should, as depicted in Star Trek Beyond, where you actually hear the original alien language being translated live.

Long story short, if any of the above is going to cause you discomfort, get off this train now and save yourself a headache. Discovery isn't going to be Star Trek Continues or New Voyages, it's going to be Star Trek for the 21st century.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

But also, in each of those cases, you can justify the changes with a little imagination - just as Mike and Denise Okuda have done for decades in the Star Trek Encyclopedia, leaving little notes about what might have happened.

locutus101 is arguing for example that the Xindi incident would have been a defining moment in Earth's history - because of it's scope - literal extinction - but it is pretty easy to come up with some imaginative explanation for why it isn't mentioned in later Star Trek - it's what fans have been doing for decades. You could just as easily ask why TNG's Dyson Sphere was never mentioned again. Why V'Ger is never referred to, despite blotting out half the sky on Earth and threatening extinction.

Some examples: 1). people know about it but just don't happen to mention it in TOS or TNG, 2). the failure of the Xindi to actually destroy Earth means the end of humanity is purely an academic possibility that never came true to everyday citizens, 3). the people of Earth realized that they had entered a new age, and that planetary extinction events were not as uncommon as previously thought before warp travel, 4). Earth and the Federation may have a much wider canvas of historical events to draw upon.

 

[locutus101]

I am still wondering if Discovery will try to explain previous or later events or will simply do its thing without caring about any of it.

 

[Kemaiku]

Just from Enterprise to TOS, we had the Andorians go from a founding member of the Federation to being estranged and having mercenaries attack the 1701. Into Darkness mentions civil unrest and they're nowhere to be seen in TNG. But several of the ones we see post ENT have a greener tone. So we have them potentially intermarrying Aenar and suffering some societal shift that takes them out of the Federation.

Tholians are mentioned as having attacked Federation starships and even destroyed a starbase over the years, probably all around the TOS era, making them one of the main badguys we haven't gotten a good backstory to.

All joking with the Caitians aside, we never found out how Cait joined the Federation. Novels and comics have stated them leaving and rejoining about twice, so their society isn't as united as others. And now we know they have various lengths of fur and even hairless variants.

Vulcan's followed suit with the Andorians and retired from space after a while. I know people aren't fond of the novels but the post Romulan War idea of them using their fleet for scrap to build the Neutral Zone bases and having T'Pau create a new isolationist era devoted to relearning logic is as good an explanation as any. If Vulcans do turn up, it could give us a better look at what happened after the war leading up to TOS.

Also, when did they meet the Cardassians? several wars had been fought by TNG, but no one gives a good indication when.

If they're so insistent on using a prequel setting, we have all that at least without even touching Romulans, Klingons, Borg, Ferengi, etc nevermind Earth and it's outposts/colonies that have never been properly covered.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Just from Enterprise to TOS, we had the Andorians go from a founding member of the Federation to being estranged and having mercenaries attack the 1701.

If you're referring to "Journey To Babel," those weren't Andorians, but rather Orions, and their spy aboard the 1701 had been surgically altered to look Andorian.

 

[Kemaiku]

Right, been a while since I saw that one. They still end up disappearing and even getting fewer mentions than other species from TNG onwards.

 

[Tenacity]

Well, I don't think it was the Coalation of Planets aspect of those episodes that bothered people

Again I feel (imo) that it was one of the worse parts of season four, there was a "let's hold hands and sing kumbaya" vibe about it. It's not that I'm totally opposed to politics on Star Trek, it's just the way they went about it.

and frankly it would have been a much better premise for a prequel series

I would have rather ENT showed Earth and Humanity growing strong and capable on our own to the point where we stood as equals with the other species that eventual form the Federation.

 

[Kruezerman]

Cross Posted in TNZ, but I wanted to put this here:

So, I think I finally came around to Discovery, and what brought me around was the new Star Wars movie:

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

Ya see, Rogue One is going to be a prequel in the same vein, and I know that the Death Star will still be destroyed by Luke Skywalker (apparently a week later after the movie) and Darth Vader will still die. Nothing this movie does will change that. But that trailer made me excited for this story that will not change anything about the Star Wars universe. Now, this movie may suck. It could be a total flop, but it's not a forgone conclusion.

That is why I'm excited for Discovery, because it will still add on to the franchise that I love. I'm still peeved that it won't be in the new universe (yet, there may be more shows in the future), but I think the way it will be is that JJ's films will push the series forward, but Discovery will tell the stories that we haven't seen yet, just as Disney is doing with Star Wars.

So, if the question is whether or not we can move the series forward and have a prequel, this little girl has a great answer:

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

 

[Kemaiku]

You think Discovery will be half as good, or look nearly as good as Rogue One?

 

[Kruezerman]

You think Discovery will be half as good, or look nearly as good as Rogue One?

Maybe. We are talking about film vs television, which offers vastly differing budgets.

 

[INACTIVEUSS Einstein]

You think Discovery will be half as good, or look nearly as good as Rogue One?

Actually, it might be better.

Rogue One is unproven, and has already done some re-shoots - it's directed by the director of Godzilla, a film that met with mixed reviews. It is by no means guaranteed to be a critical success.

Star Trek: Discovery is written by an unproven team too, but one with a lot of talent. It is hard to state how well regarded Hannibal was in drama circles. It could be the Breaking Bad of Star Trek.

It will have a significant budget - probably higher than the one that produced this, a few years ago:

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

Say what you will about Battlestar Galactica: Blood and Chrome, but it is some of the most extensive CGI work I have ever seen in a TV backdoor pilot. And computers have become 5 years more advanced since then. Stargate Universe also had impressive CGI around that time, with the scene of the Destiny entering a gas giant being one of my favorites - irrelevant of what else I might think about the show, it was visually impressive on a mere sci-fi channel budget:

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

 

[Kemaiku]

Actually, it might be better.

 

[Tenacity]

You think Discovery will be half as good, or look nearly as good as Rogue One?

The potential for Discovery to be better that Rogue is high, bearing in mind that I not really invested in Star Wars, and I am in Star Trek

Rogue (as I understand) is going to have characters and situations pulled from the SW novels, cartoons, and comic books, which I'm unfamiliar with, This alone will reduce my enjoyment of the movie.

On the other hand, I'm a fairly knowledgeable of Star Trek canon, if this is (hopefully) included, this will increase my enjoyment.