The "re-imagining" of TOS

[Ryann866]

From recent news and comments that's most likely what I'm guessing Discovery will be. It will be a mashup of everything Classic Trek and then some. It will essentially be what the Kelvin Timeline tried to be but didn't achieve - a "have your cake and eat it too" approach to Trek. The producers can use all of the characters, mythology, and ideas and put their own remix, modern spin on them -- aesthetically and narratively. It frees their storytelling totally from canon but allows them to say that "this falls within the timeline" without having to adhere to it.

I'm cautiously optimistic will wait to see how it's executed... Nick Meyer is great and the idea of shifting the POV of the lead character is interesting, so who knows... but overall this sort of approach to Trek is disappointing and also really kind of maddening.

Battlestar Galactica worked as a reboot because the source material (for all it's nostalgic fun/value) was essentially weak, poorly executed, and thin -- but with a ton of great core ideas that could be exploited and deepened in a modern dramatic re-telling.

Trek is the opposite. TOS does not need a new variation on the same theme. It needs an expansion and an evolution... and not just in the set design, the makeup, or the aliens. That's why a post TNG series would have been the best way to go, it would have provided the maximum potential to modernize the franchise and break free of the problems with the last few series and incarnations.

I had hoped this show would have been an anthology series like American Horror Story -- with each season taking place within a different facet of the massive Trek tapestry.

Do we really need to have this "atl-version" of Errand of Mercy or the modern/Rashomon-style story approach to The Man Trap? I'm not speculating that they will reboot these stories per se, but you can bet, ala Admiral Cain and the Pegasus that familiar elements and story ideas from TOS will show up in Discovery. It will be their own twist but a wink wink to the fans at the same time. We're already seeing that in "Number One". So uninspired.

Personally, I am so bored and let down by this constant remixing and regurgitating -- Force Awakens, et all. These properties, Trek paramount among them have so much potential and it seems like most of today's creatives simply want to play in the safe sandbox of someone else's creation and make a mess rather than venture out somewhere else on the beach and build their own castles. It's disheartening for the culture -- and for Trek fans, who have always been attracted to one of it's inherent concepts... going forward... not backwards.

What would have happened to Trek in 1986 if Gene said, (while creating TNG) "let's just scramble up everything that was good 20 years ago and spit it out again..."

Oh wait, The Naked Now...

 

[Mudd]

What would have happened to Trek in 1986 if Gene said, (while creating TNG) "let's just scramble up everything that was good 20 years ago and spit it out again..."

We'd have gotten a show about the U.S.S. Enterprise exploring space with its warp drive and transporters and phasers, encountering Klingons and Romulans, doing a lot of diplomatic and research stuff and occasionally finding some new alien civilizations that were suspiciously like Earth at some point or another in its history; there would probably have been a lot of little morality plays based on that.

 

[Ronald Held]

I am not optimistic as TOS does not need updating. Leave the exterior of the Enterprise as it looked in The Cave, and do not show any interiors.
As an aside, how many years they expect to run this series?

 

[C.E. Evans]

Hollywood remaking earlier things that were once popular and then putting a different spin on them is nothing even remotely new. Studios like a safe bet when it comes to investing their money, and it's even why we see lots of similar shows on TV at a time, be it cop shows, reality shows, or singing contest shows. You could even say the recent success of Marvel superhero movies was a big push for DC to turn out superhero movies of their own as quickly as they could.

DIS might indeed be regarded as a safe bet by placing it so close to TOS, but if it truly takes off, I kind of doubt it will be solely because of whatever TOS elements it draws upon. It will still has to find it's own voice, because whatever borrowed trappings it has from TOS will only take it so far before it becomes "yet another Star Trek series."

 

[JD]

I really don't see them actually remaking or redoing anything specific from TOS. The impression I've gotten is that they're setting it in the TOS era so they can bring in familiar elements from the show, but other than that it is going to be it's own thing. We'll probably see familiar elements from TOS, and maybe see things from TOS referenced, like whatever the big event it's supposed to jump off from, but I don't really see them actually redo .

 

[mdtauk]

The Discovery is an older ship, so it shouldn't look like a Constitution Class ship. But to those not already fans, the TOS style sets would not be believable, so having nods to it, makes more sense for a modern audience, than a painstaking recreation.

Even if it messes with Canon and is not totally faithful. We should see it in the same way as the Andorian, Tellarite, and Gorn updates were in Enterprise. A better execution of the original vision for the designs. (What the designs would have looked like had they had the money/time/skills)

Also control panels should have touch screens, animated displays, and the occasional modern looking buttons.

 

[OpenMaw]

Actually, my friend was commenting on design a couple years ago.

Modern phones and certainly Windows 8/10 play with the idea of big simple blocks of color for displaying information. Not unlike that of the TOS displays. I think within that you could get away with taking the idea of the TOS/Cage era computer displays and reworking them with the modern sensibilities of what we now know computers to be like.

 

[BJ Wagner]

At this point, I'm willing to give anything a try. I just want Trek back on TV. As far as the Kelvin timeline is concerned, I wish they never created it as it is today. I wish they would have just reimagined TOS just like BSG. No time travel or alternate timelines. It just its own thing in its own universe, without some timey-winey explanation.

The safe approach that would have made most happy, would have been placing the new series post-Nemesis. But for some reason, that's not appealing to executives.

I'm like most here, I like continuity, but we fans aren't going to get it. So I'll take what I can, so long as it's well-made and compelling.

 

[johnjm22]

From recent news and comments that's most likely what I'm guessing Discovery will be. It will be a mashup of everything Classic Trek and then some. It will essentially be what the Kelvin Timeline tried to be but didn't achieve - a "have your cake and eat it too" approach to Trek. The producers can use all of the characters, mythology, and ideas and put their own remix, modern spin on them -- aesthetically and narratively. It frees their storytelling totally from canon but allows them to say that "this falls within the timeline" without having to adhere to it.

I'm cautiously optimistic will wait to see how it's executed... Nick Meyer is great and the idea of shifting the POV of the lead character is interesting, so who knows... but overall this sort of approach to Trek is disappointing and also really kind of maddening.

Battlestar Galactica worked as a reboot because the source material (for all it's nostalgic fun/value) was essentially weak, poorly executed, and thin -- but with a ton of great core ideas that could be exploited and deepened in a modern dramatic re-telling.

Trek is the opposite. TOS does not need a new variation on the same theme. It needs an expansion and an evolution... and not just in the set design, the makeup, or the aliens. That's why a post TNG series would have been the best way to go, it would have provided the maximum potential to modernize the franchise and break free of the problems with the last few series and incarnations.

I had hoped this show would have been an anthology series like American Horror Story -- with each season taking place within a different facet of the massive Trek tapestry.

Do we really need to have this "atl-version" of Errand of Mercy or the modern/Rashomon-style story approach to The Man Trap? I'm not speculating that they will reboot these stories per se, but you can bet, ala Admiral Cain and the Pegasus that familiar elements and story ideas from TOS will show up in Discovery. It will be their own twist but a wink wink to the fans at the same time. We're already seeing that in "Number One". So uninspired.

Personally, I am so bored and let down by this constant remixing and regurgitating -- Force Awakens, et all. These properties, Trek paramount among them have so much potential and it seems like most of today's creatives simply want to play in the safe sandbox of someone else's creation and make a mess rather than venture out somewhere else on the beach and build their own castles. It's disheartening for the culture -- and for Trek fans, who have always been attracted to one of it's inherent concepts... going forward... not backwards.

What would have happened to Trek in 1986 if Gene said, (while creating TNG) "let's just scramble up everything that was good 20 years ago and spit it out again..."

Oh wait, The Naked Now...

I agree that the franchise needs to look forward not backwards, but this new show is going to be very different from any other Star Trek show we've ever seen, so I don't think it's fair to call it a regurgitation.

I wanted a show post Voyager/Nemesis as well, but doing a show in that time has its own set of problems. The technology was getting too advanced. It was basically magic.

 

[fireproof78]

At this point, I'm willing to give anything a try. I just want Trek back on TV. As far as the Kelvin timeline is concerned, I wish they never created it as it is today. I wish they would have just reimagined TOS just like BSG. No time travel or alternate timelines. It just its own thing in its own universe, without some timey-winey explanation.

The safe approach that would have made most happy, would have been placing the new series post-Nemesis. But for some reason, that's not appealing to executives.

I'm like most here, I like continuity, but we fans aren't going to get it. So I'll take what I can, so long as it's well-made and compelling.

I don't think it's just the executives. Much of the reaction I saw to post-Nemesis was mixed. I personally don't see the appeal, but it could be made to work.

I think continuity can be used as the background details that fill it in, but there characters need to be solid in order for this to work, or it won't matter what era it is set in.

 

[Lord Garth]

Trek is the opposite. TOS does not need a new variation on the same theme. It needs an expansion and an evolution... and not just in the set design, the makeup, or the aliens. That's why a post TNG series would have been the best way to go, it would have provided the maximum potential to modernize the franchise and break free of the problems with the last few series and incarnations.

Nothing about Discovery sounds like a variation of the same thing. Planet-of-the-week is what's the same thing. Making it post-Nemesis wouldn't change that.

Do we really need to have this "atl-version" of Errand of Mercy or the modern/Rashomon-style story approach to The Man Trap?

We don't. And we're not getting it.

I'm not speculating that they will reboot these stories per se, but you can bet, ala Admiral Cain and the Pegasus that familiar elements and story ideas from TOS will show up in Discovery. It will be their own twist but a wink wink to the fans at the same time. We're already seeing that in "Number One". So uninspired.

That's not uninspired. It's a character who wasn't allowed to continue beyond the first pilot. Call it because of her gender, call it because of the actress it doesn't matter. A wrong is being righted, 50 years later.

What would have happened to Trek in 1986 if Gene said, (while creating TNG) "let's just scramble up everything that was good 20 years ago and spit it out again..."

Oh wait, The Naked Now...

That's not what's happening. What's happening is that Discovery is bringing out things that virtually nothing was done with during TOS. How is that different from DS9 fleshing out things that were barely touched on in TNG? Bajorans, Trills, Cardassians, the Mirror Universe (that one's TOS but you get the idea), the Klingon storyline, O'Brien, Worf, "The Best of Both Worlds" setting up the framework for Sisko's backstory. Star Trek doesn't exist in a vacuum.

 

[Ovation]

Star Trek doesn't exist in a vacuum.

It spends an awful lot of time in one, though.

 

[Seven of Five]

I look forward to seeing all of the changes, as it really is going to be a fresh new start.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

That's not uninspired. It's a character who wasn't allowed to continue beyond the first pilot. Call it because of her gender, call it because of the actress it doesn't matter. A wrong is being righted, 50 years later.
.

According to Gene, it was because of gender. He's quoted in the 50-year mission stating that NBC said they want another pilot and while you're at it, just a small change. A woman as first officer is completely unbelievable as women would never be in a position of authority like that. And while you're at it, get rid of the guy with the ears. Gene said he could fight for one, but not both. Enter Nurse Chapel.

 

[Kor]

According to Gene, it was because of gender. He's quoted in the 50-year mission stating that NBC said they want another pilot and while you're at it, just a small change. A woman as first officer is completely unbelievable as women would never be in a position of authority like that. And while you're at it, get rid of the guy with the ears. Gene said he could fight for one, but not both. Enter Nurse Chapel.

That's just Gene repeating his tall tales. It wasn't because Number One was a woman. It was because the actress was also Gene's girlfriend (when he was married to someone else), and was not yet a good enough actor to carry such a prominent role!

Kor

 

[uniderth]

Yeah, I've moved from cautiously optimistic, to cautiously pessimistic about Discovery. I still think they could pull it off but so far what I'm hearing makes me think it wont turn out well. But we haven't heard that much at all. There's no reason to throw it all out based on a few throwaway lines; but when all of those throwaway lines paint the final product in a bad light you have to be skeptical. It's one thing to be mysterious, build up hype, and say how cool your product is. But you can only hide behind hype for so long. And if your product is crap, eventually your customer will find out.

 

[Mudd]

Nothing so far makes it sound like crap. It does, however, sound like it'll be innovative enough to annoy a lot of folks.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

That's just Gene repeating his tall tales. It wasn't because Number One was a woman. It was because the actress was also Gene's girlfriend (when he was married to someone else), and was not yet a good enough actor to carry such a prominent role!

Kor

I don't think so. I've read that they didn't want a woman in command several times over the years. Is there a source on them not caring about her being a woman? She was fine in the role (which was one note at that time anyway) and he had her as Chapel and Uhura on the same show in scenes together when he was married to one and sleeping with the other and both knew it. Even if he was exaggerating, what stuck with me was that they were more against her than Spock.

 

[Mudd]

Well, that's according to Robert Justman and Herb Solow. In discussing the order for the second pilot, NBC Head of Programming Mort Werner told them:

"In varying degrees we're not too happy with some of the cast. We support the concept of a woman in a strong, leading role,but we have serious doubts as to Majel Barrett's abilities to 'carry' the show as its costar. We also think you can do better with the ship's doctor, the yeoman, and other members of the cast. We applaud the attempt at a racial mix; it's exactly what we want. Hopefully there'll be more experienced minority actors available for next year. Jefferey Hunter was okay, and if you want to use him again, that's fine with us.

"Leonard Nimoy isn't a problem, but the role he plays is a major problem! If you want to lose Nimoy, that's also fine with us. You've already heard the Sales Department reaction to the character. We can give you research numbers that support their reaction. Herb, we have to say this to you and Roddenberry: Though the Mister Spock character is interesting and probably has potential, its inclusion in our new pilot could possibly keep Star Trek off the air as a series.

"And one last thing, Herb. For God's sake no more scantily clad green dancing girls with the bumps and grinds, okay?"

 

[Lord Garth]

If Gene Roddenberry was serious about having a woman as First Officer, and NBC didn't have a problem with it, he would've replaced Number One with another woman. As it is, it looks like he just wanted his mistress as First Officer.

On the flip side, we're talking about a pilot that was rejected in 1965. For all we know, there never would've been a actress in the role Mort Werner would've been happy with. Maybe there always would've been something wrong. There's no way to know.

Since Jefferey Hunter seems to be the only actor they liked, Majel Barrett wasn't signaled out.