Will they go back to primeTrek after nuTrek finishes?.

[Smellmet]

Why would it confuse the casual viewer? The old trek is still out there and so are the spin off series the last one which ended only 10 years ago. Unless new fans are only 10 I think most know about the prime universe. I would guess that new fans in their teens or 20s so they surely know what Prime Trek is and anyone older who never watched trek know about the old show anyway.

I disagree. The new Trek films have also been an opportunity for me to see just how little my friends know about Prime Trek. I asked everyone in my group of friends who are aged from mid 20's right up to 40 whether or not they got the reverse reactor scene in STID and not one of them knew what I was talking about, they just enjoyed the film for what it was. A couple of them even said that 'old Star Trek is shit' when they probably barely watched it.

My seventy year old parents didn't remember they'd even seen TWOK when they watched STID and didn't make the connection, despite watching it with us as a family when we were younger.

People like us who have seen most or all of Prime Trek are in a minority of people in my opinion.

Having to explain to people like this that we're back in the Prime Timeline and not the new one during a film for example would probably be clunky, hurt the plot and confuse new viewers. It worked for the reboot as it was kept simple, and to a couple of lines of dialogue, but how would you explain that you're going back to another universe whilst making clear it's the universe of an older group of films and TV shows that the viewer is barely aware of?

 

[Therin of Andor]

That's another point - even if they went back to the original continuity, the nitpickers would freak at every perceived continuity violation. Remember the fuss the updated Andorian makeup caused in 2001?

Of course, Andorians also changed their look in TAS (grey skin), TMP (tendrilled antennae from the forehead), ST IV (balding, ears, eyebrows, and with antennae from the crown) and TNG (long, thin antennae from the crown - and big hair).

 

[BillJ]

Why would it confuse the casual viewer? The old trek is still out there and so are the spin off series the last one which ended only 10 years ago.

Ten years might as well be a hundred where Hollywood is concerned.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Why would it confuse the casual viewer? The old trek is still out there and so are the spin off series the last one which ended only 10 years ago. Unless new fans are only 10 I think most know about the prime universe. I would guess that new fans in their teens or 20s so they surely know what Prime Trek is and anyone older who never watched trek know about the old show anyway.

I disagree. The new Trek films have also been an opportunity for me to see just how little my friends know about Prime Trek. I asked everyone in my group of friends who are aged from mid 20's right up to 40 whether or not they got the reverse reactor scene in STID and not one of them knew what I was talking about, they just enjoyed the film for what it was. A couple of them even said that 'old Star Trek is shit' when they probably barely watched it.

My seventy year old parents didn't remember they'd even seen TWOK when they watched STID and didn't make the connection, despite watching it with us as a family when we were younger.

People like us who have seen most or all of Prime Trek are in a minority of people in my opinion.

Having to explain to people like this that we're back in the Prime Timeline and not the new one during a film for example would probably be clunky, hurt the plot and confuse new viewers. It worked for the reboot as it was kept simple, and to a couple of lines of dialogue, but how would you explain that you're going back to another universe whilst making clear it's the universe of an older group of films and TV shows that the viewer is barely aware of?

Do your friends and family understand that the new movies are a alternate universe from the prime universe? They seem to know that a alternate universe exists. If say for example a trek in the prime universe were made and was set in the year 2392 and was basically a sequel series to TNG and was action oriented more like the newer movies. Would you family and friends even care that its in the prime universe? We would know and care but I think if it was a great series others might well watch it and not care.

 

[drt]

Since Doctor Who keeps getting brought up as to what a successful revival (rather than reboot) looks like, there's still a contingent of Classic series fans who can't stop finding faults in the new series in regards to continuity with the old. The same will happen with Trek.

When Davies brought Doctor Who back, I'd say it was most definitely a reboot - which morphed into much more of a revival when Moffatt took over. Combine that with the implication that perhaps certain Classic stories may not have happened, or maybe happened differently than originally portrayed, is going to contribute to those continuity faults.

But truth be told, the way the JJmovies have handled previous references has been fairly consistent; considering that those references don't need to be made in the first place. So to me it's as if they're taking an extra step to recall the wider Trek world.

Yep, even when it's nonsensical to do so, for instance, still having Khan be from the 20th century.

 

[Greg Cox]

Why would it confuse the casual viewer? The old trek is still out there and so are the spin off series the last one which ended only 10 years ago.

Ten years might as well be a hundred where Hollywood is concerned.

Especially when it comes to capturing younger viewers, which is where the real future of the franchise lies . . .

 

[Gov Kodos]

Why would it confuse the casual viewer? The old trek is still out there and so are the spin off series the last one which ended only 10 years ago.

Ten years might as well be a hundred where Hollywood is concerned.

Especially when it comes to capturing younger viewers, which is where the real future of the franchise lies . . .

In the Year 2525

 

[Smellmet]

Do your friends and family understand that the new movies are a alternate universe from the prime universe? They seem to know that a alternate universe exists. If say for example a trek in the prime universe were made and was set in the year 2392 and was basically a sequel series to TNG and was action oriented more like the newer movies. Would you family and friends even care that its in the prime universe? We would know and care but I think if it was a great series others might well watch it and not care.

You are partially correct - they don't really know and don't care either. But what would be the point in an action orientated post-TNG series when the current timeline is providing action based story as it is. Why not just make a series that is set after when these new movies finish? Surely the whole point of this is to establish a new continuity, not just ditch it and go back to what you've gone to a lot of trouble setting up.

 

[-Brett-]

Star Trek has been rebooted numerous times. 1) Where No Man Has Gone Before rebooted the Cage. 2) The series itself rebooted the pilots. 3) TMP was a reboot, with a radical redesign of the Enterprise, and a radical redesign of the Klingons (subsequently retconned in Enterprise). 4) TWOK was a reboot of TMP. 5)TNG was a reboot. 6)DS9 was a reboot. 7)Voyager was a reboot. 8)Enterprise was a reboot, and came under fire for 'violating canon' by many fans (or did people forget that?) 9) Abrams's films were a reboot.

Season 1 episode 2 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 3 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 4 was a reboot....

No, that's ridiculous. The only actual reboot so far has been the Abrams flicks.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Star Trek has been rebooted numerous times. 1) Where No Man Has Gone Before rebooted the Cage. 2) The series itself rebooted the pilots. 3) TMP was a reboot, with a radical redesign of the Enterprise, and a radical redesign of the Klingons (subsequently retconned in Enterprise). 4) TWOK was a reboot of TMP. 5)TNG was a reboot. 6)DS9 was a reboot. 7)Voyager was a reboot. 8)Enterprise was a reboot, and came under fire for 'violating canon' by many fans (or did people forget that?) 9) Abrams's films were a reboot.

Season 1 episode 2 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 3 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 4 was a reboot....

No, that's ridiculous. The only actual reboot so far has been the Abrams flicks.

Reboots come in many forms.

 

[Trekkin]

Do your friends and family understand that the new movies are a alternate universe from the prime universe? They seem to know that a alternate universe exists. If say for example a trek in the prime universe were made and was set in the year 2392 and was basically a sequel series to TNG and was action oriented more like the newer movies. Would you family and friends even care that its in the prime universe? We would know and care but I think if it was a great series others might well watch it and not care.

You are partially correct - they don't really know and don't care either. But what would be the point in an action orientated post-TNG series when the current timeline is providing action based story as it is. Why not just make a series that is set after when these new movies finish? Surely the whole point of this is to establish a new continuity, not just ditch it and go back to what you've gone to a lot of trouble setting up.

This. I just don't see an objective purpose to go back to the Prime Continuity. The only reason I could give are personal fangirly urges to see how some things turned out (like if Odo and Sisko ever returned.) I just don't think that's a good enough reason.

I actually feel the same way about Transformers. After AOE frustrated me in ways ROTF didn't even manage to, I'm not seeing the next one unless it gets some pretty damn fantastic press. But Im not going to demand the movies change for me. They make a lot of people happy, they're pretty harmless all things considered, and they gave me Prime, the first film, some good scores, and a pretty good comic series to read instead. If the movies take a different direction in the future then I will be happy, but I'm not actively 'wanting' it to happen ifthatmakessense.

 

[JWPlatt]

Star Trek has been rebooted numerous times. 1) Where No Man Has Gone Before rebooted the Cage. 2) The series itself rebooted the pilots. 3) TMP was a reboot, with a radical redesign of the Enterprise, and a radical redesign of the Klingons (subsequently retconned in Enterprise). 4) TWOK was a reboot of TMP. 5)TNG was a reboot. 6)DS9 was a reboot. 7)Voyager was a reboot. 8)Enterprise was a reboot, and came under fire for 'violating canon' by many fans (or did people forget that?) 9) Abrams's films were a reboot.

Season 1 episode 2 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 3 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 4 was a reboot....

No, that's ridiculous. The only actual reboot so far has been the Abrams flicks.

Reboots come in many forms.

Congratulations. These posts have rendered the word meaningless. And it's aboot time.

 

[Squiggy]

Star Trek has been rebooted numerous times. 1) Where No Man Has Gone Before rebooted the Cage. 2) The series itself rebooted the pilots. 3) TMP was a reboot, with a radical redesign of the Enterprise, and a radical redesign of the Klingons (subsequently retconned in Enterprise). 4) TWOK was a reboot of TMP. 5)TNG was a reboot. 6)DS9 was a reboot. 7)Voyager was a reboot. 8)Enterprise was a reboot, and came under fire for 'violating canon' by many fans (or did people forget that?) 9) Abrams's films were a reboot.

Season 1 episode 2 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 3 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 4 was a reboot....

No, that's ridiculous. The only actual reboot so far has been the Abrams flicks.

Reboots come in many forms.

Not that many.

New Uniforms ≠ Reboot

 

[Nerys Myk]

Season 1 episode 2 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 3 was a reboot. Season 1 episode 4 was a reboot....

No, that's ridiculous. The only actual reboot so far has been the Abrams flicks.

Reboots come in many forms.

Congratulations. These posts have rendered the word meaningless. And it's aboot time.

The word was pretty much meaningless from the beginning. A word that didn't need to exist.

New Uniforms ≠ Reboot

I'm not saying they do.

Treating the previous film like it never existed on the other hand...

 

[Trekkin]

Sure the word still has meaning - it means ending and then restarting an OS, usually so changes can be applied.

If we bastardise that for Trek, I'd count at least two 'reboots.' Three, if you count 'The Cage' like Channel 9 seems to. TOS was ended, only to later be restarted with a new approach. Abrams did the same.

I suppose technically, you could argue TNG also 'ended' as a tv series, and then also rebooted as a movie franchise. A reboot doesn't have to be caused by an untimely crash.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Sure the word still has meaning - it means ending and then restarting an OS, usually so changes can be applied.

There was already a word for that. "Remake".

If we bastardise that for Trek, I'd count at least two 'reboots.' Three, if you count 'The Cage' like Channel 9 seems to. TOS was ended, only to later be restarted with a new approach. Abrams did the same.

The concept was reworked after "The Cage", with a mostly new cast and new characters, the exceptions being Nimoy and Spock. Though the Spock character was completely reworked. OTOH, "The Cage" was only seen by the network and studio.

I suppose technically, you could argue TNG also 'ended' as a tv series, and then also rebooted as a movie franchise. A reboot doesn't have to be caused by an untimely crash.

With the changes made to Picard in the films, you could say the character was "rebooted".

TNG it's self was a reworking of TOS. Supposedly closer to "Gene's Vision™" than TOS was.

 

[Trekkin]

'Restart' is probably a better simile.

I didn't really count the TNG series as a 'reboot' of the whole franchise. for that reason. The TOS films were still going when it began. Nothing had 'ended' to be rebooted, unless you count it as a reboot of the tv section of the franchise. Whereas for the TNG movies were a reboot of the TNG 'franchise.'

For some reason, our television stations show 'The Cage' as part of the usual line up. You get the Menagerie towards the beginning of the season, and The Cage at the end.

 

[Nerys Myk]

'Restart' is probably a better simile.

Remake has been part of TV/movies lingo for a long time.

I didn't really count the TNG series as a 'reboot' of the whole franchise. for that reason. The TOS films were still going when it began. Nothing had 'ended' to be rebooted, unless you count it as a reboot of the tv section of the franchise. Whereas for the TNG movies were a reboot of the TNG 'franchise.

Roddenberry was disenfranchised from the movies, TNG was him doing Star Trek his way. I'm sure if he had his choice, nothing from the films would have been used on TNG.

For some reason, our television stations show 'The Cage' as part of the usual line up. You get the Menagerie towards the beginning of the season, and The Cage at the end.[/QUOTE] Probably part of the package. The Cage wasn't part of the original syndication and wasn't broadcast until 1988.

 

[Trekkin]

In movies, a remake can be a reboot. AMS was a reboot, and also a quasi remake of Raimi's first movie. Both of them were also adaptations of Amazing Fantasy.

It's kind-of silly getting hung up on 'reboot's' definitions anyway. As I pointed out, 'reboot's' only official definition relates to computing. It's just that definitions key parts are the 'end' and 'restart' parts, which is what I'd focus on if I were translating it to movie lingo. A 'remade' computer is a new computer built from the same parts, a rebooted one is the exact same system restarted.

 

[Smellmet]

This. I just don't see an objective purpose to go back to the Prime Continuity. The only reason I could give are personal fangirly urges to see how some things turned out (like if Odo and Sisko ever returned.) I just don't think that's a good enough reason.

Exactly. DS9 has been off air for nearly sixteen years. I just don't believe there's the will to risk returning to a continuity that ten years ago was canned, coming off the back of a major box office flop. The new timeline enables the producers of any future Trek films/series to mine these characters/stories and re-cast/re-interpret them at will, they have the complete Trek back catalogue to call on if they wish, or they can do something totally new but have the odd guest star Prime character.

I'm not a betting man but I would gladly put money on never seeing Prime Trek again.