I think an optimistic show is something we all need. But also, if there's going to be a next generation of ST fans, they need "their" show. With any luck, Academy will be that.
Spoilers Variety about the future of Star Trek
- Thread starter Visitor1982
- Start date
What's wrong with animation? (Sorry, loved the typo)
Too many anvils.
Whilst some intriguing and entertaining tv shows also hopefully arises in this sense.
They already have a show that's continuing that particular segment and that's Star Trek Strange New Worlds, and I think they don't want to have two series set in the same era running at the same time.
I think kurtzman's comments were talking more towards something like the TNG era, where Federation values were fully ingrained in the characters and it was an era where for better or worse the Federation was seen by members of Starfleet as a Utopian Society just trying to expand itself on the rest of the universe.
There was plenty of really bad shit going on in the world between 1987 and 1994 too.
Why are you taking such issue with a show being made for teens/young adults today?
Indeed, yes. This show is a reflection of a current generational view. Regardless of the problems of the past (is anyone really saying there were no problems in the past?) or Trek's ability to comment on them, the fact is this generation needs its own stories. Not stories from post WW2, and not stories from the 40 years ago. Can those stories still work and have value? Absolutely, and I see young people willing to try out Trek, if finding it a bit dated.
But, that's a whole lot different than a show that feels like it was made for you and your generation and their struggle. It might be repeating themes of the past, but what story isn't?
I'm not.
I'm taking issue with Kurtzman's ridiculous assertion that Trek's core idealism or "fantasy" isn't so universal that it needs to be tailored for any given generation, on the grounds that any one has it worse than any other. I also don't think it gives young people enough credit.
Ultimately though, relatability isn't a product of setup or time period or any kind of pretense; it's a product of good writing. (Something which, so far, is elusive to the 32nd century.)
Not to mention, if the primary goal of the show is to first and foremost draw in new people, then it shouldn't borrow anything of significance from a preexisting show (A huge mistake Prodigy made.), meaning the time period and the burn or whatever is irrelevant background noise.
And my guess is that the show will merely mention various events of Disco in a bit of throwaway expo, only once again proving that the time period is completely arbitrary and this is a just producer-speak nonsense.
It worked for Star Trek '09 (which Kurtzman wrote).
Trek is taking cues from Pixar. If the idea is to introduce kids to the franchise, what better way to do it than to bring back Janeway? It engages kids AND their parents.
Teenagers spend 6-8 hours a day in school. The last thing they want when they tune in to P+ to watch Star Trek is to be reminded of school.
Last edited:
Stories need to appeal to new generations otherwise why make anything new?
Just go re-release the old. I'm sure that will work. Better yet, let's tell kids to suck it up and deal with it. Life is hard in school? Boo-hoo. Life is hard for everyone and no one gives a shit about you because no one gave a shit about me when I was your age.
Go watch Wizard of Oz to get hope. You won't find it in the generations before you.
Just go re-release the old. I'm sure that will work. Better yet, let's tell kids to suck it up and deal with it. Life is hard in school? Boo-hoo. Life is hard for everyone and no one gives a shit about you because no one gave a shit about me when I was your age.
Go watch Wizard of Oz to get hope. You won't find it in the generations before you.
Huh?
The entire conceit of the film is that it created a completely clean slate.
You're right.
Gunn may as well make Supes a dour dick who kills everyone....
"It's not about what you need. It's about what they need. "You're right.
Gunn may as well make Supes a dour dick who kills everyone....
What? First off, '09 was a TOS reboot through and through. A completely clean slate would be a new crew, on a new ship, with new adventures. And secondly, I'm not entirely certain how having Superman kill everyone would appeal to the younger generations. But if they could make it work, they should go for it.Huh?
The entire conceit of the film is that it created a completely clean slate.
You're right.
Gunn may as well make Supes a dour dick who kills everyone....
Leonard Nimoy's Spock being hunted through time as we meet Kirk, Spock, Scotty, the Enterprise and rest of the crew who eventually have to square off against Khan again as a lead sacrifices himself to save the ship while another yells Khan's name is the farthest thing from a clean slate one can imagine.
As said above. Clean slate would have nothing familiar. This had everything familiar. Plus Leonard Nimoy. As Spock.
Yes.
No.
Ignoring the fact you're mixing films, they could have just as easily cast someone that looked liked old Quinto instead of Nimoy and not changed anything.
This is all moot to my point, though. Nothing about Oh-Nine is dependent on having seen or having any knowledge of TOS whatsoever. It exists entirely in a vacuum of its own creation.
However, the implication here is that the academy show will be directly connected to Disco, even if only tangentially. However, if the last eight years are any indication, that connection will be significantly greater.
Forgetting that you're conveniently forgetting about Leonard Nimoy and everything surrounding his part of the story, I do agree with you that the movie is written well enough that you don't need any prior knowledge of his show or films.
Just like Academy can be written to have no prior knowledge of Disco just as easily, with the same tangential references '09 had that don't limit one's enjoyment.
These shows are written with layers to them. If you know the history, you'll get that much more out of it and understand the little references made. But they're not necessary.
Strange New Worlds reminds you that it exists.
You're really jumping to a conclusion here that it's going to be impenetrable when every indication, such as using SNW as an example spin-off from Discovery, is that it won't be.
No. You're attributing extraneous qualities to the character that are neither contingent nor necessary to the plot just because it is Nimoy. For all intents and purposes, the character is just "old Spock from another timeline." As such, Star Trek could have been written exactly as is even if TOS never existed.
Which is why I said a few posts ago that that's probably exactly what they'll do. But the whole point of this conversation is "Something something The Burn™ something something."
That is Kurtzman insisting it be set in that time period cuz reasons.
