The franchise title should be enough to dictate an even more simple "one universe, keep it tidy like how a library keeps all its books organized and different yet part of the same theme but without tripping over each other." 90s Trek succeeded for a while but as everyone knows, too much continuity ends up doing more to entrap the franchise than to expand it. It's inevitable. So how it's broken, in terms of content and the deftness of, are as crucial as they are relevant when enlarging the franchise's universe.
As clever as the alt-timeline was when devised for 2009, it's no different than taking "Mirror Mirror" and turning it into a full-blown Trek series that's different apart from a few superficial similarities and name.
After all, when you have a Big Mac, you don't swap the meat with fillet made from (a mercury-laden minnow) and still call it the same thing. That's as dumb as it is as simple. Or you don't replace the Teletubbies with the band members of Poison and hawk it as the same thing. Because it isn't, unless there's reasonable continuity. Or for another analogy, it's reading a 15 page book but chapter 8 changes all the characters for no reason but redoes all the same plots (sorta like a fair amount of early-TNG, like "The Naked Now". It's mostly in hindsight any of us who likes any 2 seconds of the episode will try to defend it in any way, and I have, but the fact remains they were swapping prime cow patty for guppy fodder and pretending it's related. )
Back to the library theme, we all know full well each section of the non-fiction section has books that will flatly contradict one another. QED prevailing, maybe it just doesn't matter either way and the next Trek show can be a remake of Jerry Springer, Maury (that'll help with Kirk), and Baywatch. Just slap the same brand name on it and everyone will flock back, surely.
As clever as the alt-timeline was when devised for 2009, it's no different than taking "Mirror Mirror" and turning it into a full-blown Trek series that's different apart from a few superficial similarities and name.
After all, when you have a Big Mac, you don't swap the meat with fillet made from (a mercury-laden minnow) and still call it the same thing. That's as dumb as it is as simple. Or you don't replace the Teletubbies with the band members of Poison and hawk it as the same thing. Because it isn't, unless there's reasonable continuity. Or for another analogy, it's reading a 15 page book but chapter 8 changes all the characters for no reason but redoes all the same plots (sorta like a fair amount of early-TNG, like "The Naked Now". It's mostly in hindsight any of us who likes any 2 seconds of the episode will try to defend it in any way, and I have, but the fact remains they were swapping prime cow patty for guppy fodder and pretending it's related. )
Back to the library theme, we all know full well each section of the non-fiction section has books that will flatly contradict one another. QED prevailing, maybe it just doesn't matter either way and the next Trek show can be a remake of Jerry Springer, Maury (that'll help with Kirk), and Baywatch. Just slap the same brand name on it and everyone will flock back, surely.
