Poll Which era of Star Trek would you rather see continue?

Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Saul, Aug 26, 2021.

?

Which era of Star Trek would you rather see continue?

  1. Star Trek 1966 to 2005

    46 vote(s)
    67.6%
  2. Star Trek 2009 to current

    22 vote(s)
    32.4%
  1. The Wormhole

    The Wormhole Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    Location:
    The Wormhole
    Fun fact: Patrick Stewart really has been bald since he was 19. There's something genetic in his family that results in all the males of the family going bald at a young age.

    His son Daniel likewise was bald at a young age. When he was on The Inner Light, the first scene he was in he was wearing a toupee, but when we see him again near the end of the episode, that was his natural hairline.
    I mean, Disco moved forward all the way to the 32nd century.
     
  2. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    That's too far in one go IMO, ~100 years gap is what I consider a good length of time in between world settings.

    There's a reason why I picked 2501/01-01 as the start date for my 26th Century Head Canon
    <NOTE: ~111 years from the end of (2155 “ST: Enterprise”) & the beginnings of (2266 “Star Trek”)>
    <NOTE: ~ 71 years from the end of (2293 “ST: Generations”) & the beginnings of (2364 “ST:TNG”)>
    <NOTE: ~122 years from the end of (2379 “Star Trek Nemesis”) & the start of the current Story Universe>
     
  3. Hades Temperature Checker

    Hades Temperature Checker Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    I agree. 32nd century is way too far. I felt similarly with Doctor Who when they traveled to "the end of the universe" or whatever. It just doesn't work as well, and feels incredibly inaccessible.
     
  4. The Wormhole

    The Wormhole Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    Location:
    The Wormhole
    'Kay. The point is it's still moving forward as opposed to "delving into the past" like you said "it's time to stop."

    So, you want the franchise to move forward, but when it does, you'll complain it's too far and not what you would have done? 'Kay.
     
    Lord Garth and Richard S. Ta like this.
  5. Ryan Thomas Riddle

    Ryan Thomas Riddle Writer and occasional starship commander Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Location:
    Where No One Has Gone Before
    I don't really care much for the era so long as the stories are good.
     
  6. Hades Temperature Checker

    Hades Temperature Checker Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    Well, the writers are doing it all wrong!!! ;)
     
  7. TIM Thomason

    TIM Thomason Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Location:
    Secret Vault
    We have five shows in production right now. One is "too far forward" (Discovery), one is in the past (SNW), and three, yes, THREE are moving forward from the Berman era: LD (2381), Prodigy (2383), and Picard (2400).

    For years, people were saying enough with the prequels, just go forward past Voyager. Now we have 60% of our upcoming programming going immediately post-Voyager, and that's still not good enough.
     
  8. Hades Temperature Checker

    Hades Temperature Checker Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    I've said this before but I feel it always bears repeating: the writers are in an untenable position. It can't just move the franchise forward but be just as dynamic as past Treks, be inspiring to the next generation of fans, while also ensuring not to change too much so not to push away old fans.
     
  9. ThreeEdgedSword

    ThreeEdgedSword Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2020
    Location:
    Sheer Fucking Hubris
    Technically, 4 of these shows are prequels to DSC now!

    Not sure how much
    of the 2400s we'll see in PIC, though I'd love to see more. What with them traipsing around in the past and different TLs.
     
    Wednesday Addams likes this.
  10. Laughing Dragon

    Laughing Dragon Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2021
    Location:
    Somewhere in space
    Star Trek 1966 to 2005

    Definitely, Abrams films were quite frankly just a retread of what was old. Put in new packaging. It wasn't even that good imo. I would have preferred if Trek picked up after Nemesis and actually went on to the next generation.
     
  11. Boris Skrbic

    Boris Skrbic Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Why is 1966 to 2005 seen as one era? Because Gene Roddenberry and enough of his original team started the Berman era? Because he and only a few people from his original team helped start the film era, which he lost control over after TMP?

    It doesn’t make much sense to combine the latest Bad Robot and Secret Hideout efforts either. Some of the same people have worked on both, but that’s about it.

    I’d go with 1966 to 1973 (the original series era, including TAS in spirit), 1979 to 1991 (the original film era), 1987 to 2005 (the Berman era, technically including all of GEN), 2009 to 2016 (the Abrams era) and 2017+ (the Kurtzman era).
     
  12. oldtrekkie

    oldtrekkie Captain Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2021
    It's more like two timelines than two eras. But at the same time it's a different kind of StarTrek (regardless of the fact that they linked them by making Nimoy's Spock move from one to the other). It's still very different (there are almost no Vulcans left. The Klingons, the Romulans, the Orions, definitely look different.
     
    Saul likes this.
  13. Boris Skrbic

    Boris Skrbic Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Still, there’s been no effort to maintain a degree of consistency, let alone asset reuse between the Bad Robot and Secret Hideout productions that would justify them being put together into the same era.
     
  14. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Location:
    Aug 10, 1999
    Three timelines actually, if you're looking at it like that. The Kelvin Films are incompatible with Early-Disco & SNW.

    • Vulcan is never destroyed in DSC. In fact, just the opposite. It's still around in the 32nd Century (after DSC does its time-jump), and Romulus is what was destroyed.

    • Pike was, is, and will be in command of the Enterprise for a quite a while in DSC/SNW. In the Kelvin Films, he was only in command for a hot minute.

    • The Enterprises couldn't more different. Plus we see the USS Enterprise, NCC-1701, under construction in 2255 in the 2009 Film and it looks like the ship we see in the rest of the film (most of which takes place in 2258). The construction doesn't look anything like what we see in DSC S2, set in 2257. And it's not because it was a different Enterprise, because the DSC/SNW version of the ship also has an NCC-1701 registry.

    • A war with the Klingons hasn't happened yet in Into Darkness (set in 2259), while in DSC, there was a war with the Klingons from 2256-2257. If they just had a war with the Klingons a few years earlier, Admiral Marcus wouldn't need Cumberbatch-Khan to figure out how fight Klingons in a hypothetical war, he'd have the experiences from a real war with them to draw from.

    So it just doesn't match.

    I subscribe to the Three Timeline Theory myself, but that's neither here nor there.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2021
    Wednesday Addams likes this.
  15. Vger23

    Vger23 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    Location:
    Enterprise bowling alley
    [​IMG]
     
  16. Lord Garth

    Lord Garth Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Location:
    Aug 10, 1999
    Interesting. If true, then it proves people exaggerate stuff in things they don't like. I also misremembered Spock screaming "KHAAANNNN!!!!!" in Into Darkness as being half-way through the film, when -- upon my first re-watch eight years later -- I realized it was really more like three-quarters of the way through.
     
  17. Richard S. Ta

    Richard S. Ta Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2021
    80% strictly speaking. S3 of DSC even features a jazzed up futuristic version of Voyager. ;-)
     
    Wednesday Addams likes this.
  18. Push The Button

    Push The Button Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    Location:
    Putnam, Connecticut USA
    Welcome to the internet, where your opinion matters as long as I agree with it.
     
  19. TIM Thomason

    TIM Thomason Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Location:
    Secret Vault
    I've been thinking about this post for a couple weeks now. It's an odd sentiment, coming from you specifically, because you have rewatched all of Voyager and Enterprise. Dropping LD just means you'll probably watch it all (for the first time) several years down the line.

    Why not watch it now? It's a half hour show, you could have it playing over breakfast. I don't get why some uberFans wouldn't watch a show they aren't satisfied with, first run, just in case the writing takes a turn (as it is soon purported to) or some gems pop out.

    No one is a slave. No one has to watch any of this. But what's the harm? 30 minutes out of one's week isn't too bad of a cost for potential greatness.

    I stopped watching Enterprise in Season 3. That was the biggest mistake in my life (in relation to Star Trek viewing habits). What happens if I get annoyed by Picard's time travel antics or a gross-out episode of LD? What if Prodigy is too outside-of-my-comfort-zone? I turn away, my criticisms are unknowingly answered, and I have to watch them all at some later time? The horror!
     
    Wednesday Addams likes this.
  20. Hades Temperature Checker

    Hades Temperature Checker Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    fireproof78
    Speaking of attitudes, why not let people watch what they want? 30 minutes doesn't seem like a lot to you, but for others (such as myself) that's time taken away from multiple other things. If I'm not engaged no amount of "greatness" will draw me back.