fast forward the Trek universe a couple more decades to the 29th Century
Difficulty there is if the technology is too advanced, the show is incredible boring. People need to be the one find solutions to the episodes problems and mysteries, not machines
especially since that isn't even remotely what SGU.
SGU's problem was hopelessness. As constructed, there was no hope for success, no chance to win. Right up through the last episode what the audience took from the show is the fact that everyone was eventually going to die.
In SG1, the show was old fashion good guys fighting bad guys, and eventually the good guys won. SGA was along the same lines, the "heroes" were the good guys.
In SGU, there were no heroes, and with only a couple of exceptions, no good people in general. It was dark, gritty, and depressing.
One of the reasons people like cop shows is, even when there is a small amount of darkness in the main characters, they are "the good guys." They (usually) defeat the bad guys. And we (the audience) get to win through them. We also, symbolically, are being protected. Look how long Law and Order has been on the air with NBC. The same with NCIS on CBS, the character of Gibbs had more than his share of darkness, but he is still the "good guy' hero.
Which is what I think about ever time someone brings up Star Trek needing desperately to be "dark and gritty." In season three, when Enterprise got all "dark and gritty," it lost me as a viewer. Some people will wish for a Star Trek that is "D and G," but how far can the show go down that particular path before the audience simply walks away. DS9 lost rating every single year as I understand it, as would happen with Enterprise, when DS9 became a endless war only show, I turned the VCR off.
In SG, the heroes won steadily over the course of years. With DS9, it was a event, basically a surprise.
One of my favorite shows is Burn Notice, not exactly a cop show, the three main character are technically criminals. But they are good people too, and they defeat worst people. And through them the audience wins.
Star Trek is about good people, doing good things, it can not be "too" dark and gritty.
A new Star Trek show needs to go back to the 24th century and take off where TNG, DS9 and Voyager ended. No more recycling of Kirk, Spock and the other TOS characters. TOS was a great show. Let it rest in peace and create something new instead
But aren't you suggesting a recycling of the late 24th century, is there any room there for any stories? There is a lot about the 22nd and 23rd centuries that we know nothing about, the "big events" are a mystery.
In my humble opinion an Abramsverse set series is what would work now.
In terms of the general (non-trekkie) audience, setting the show in the new alternate universe, or the original universe would make no difference. The new series
isn't going to have the movies actors aboard the giant Enterprise, and the general audience would not know which universe the new series is set unless you go out of your way to tell them.
