Will they go back to primeTrek after nuTrek finishes?.

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Dar70, Mar 2, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Lancaster, PA
    To be clear, I wasn't talking about conversations. Heck, we're having fun dissecting fifty-year-old episodes every day.

    I was talking about the actual movies and series having to establish "officially" what's still in the continuity, as though there's an office somewhere, complete with a notary public, that can revoke a movie's status as canon. When it comes to making the future movies, you don't need to rule that, say, THE FINAL FRONTIER isn't "canon" anymore. You just never mention Sybok again if there's no need to.

    Doesn't mean he's been stricken from the continuity. Just means that nobody is in a hurry to bring him back anytime soon--or put him on the cover of a novel! :)

    Or, to cite another example, even if the Prime Universe comes back, don't expect to ever see a sequel to "Spock's Brain" or "The Way to Eden." They may have happened, but they're not likely to inspire any future stories.
     
  2. JWPlatt

    JWPlatt Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    I have to add to my previous post because it didn't occur to me before. In my life as a male it has been a challenge to understand females, but I have made it a priority to try. One of the things I have come to understand is that it is a particularly male point of view to internalize and dismiss our displeasures in life because "dredging" up things make them worse instead of the concept of alleviating our displeasures through discussion and sharing. I have grown fond of the latter because it works better.


    It's true an artist should have faith in and be true to their vision. But that doesn't preclude listening to the fans and evaluating what they have to say.
     
  3. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Lancaster, PA
    But, again, fandom does not speak with one voice. As this board proves every day! :)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 5, 2015
  4. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    Splitter! ;)
     
  5. drt

    drt Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2013
    Of course if there is a return to the Prime universe as either an early 24th or 25th Century show, the producers are going to keep what they like and disregard what they don't (as well as create an entirely new bunch of continuity problems) that it's going to be called "Prime Universe In Name Only" no matter what anyway.
     
  6. Amaris

    Amaris Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Location:
    United States
    Exactly. This is where I like to heed the great Rick Nelson's advice, when he said "you know you can't please everyone so you gotta please yourself."
     
  7. JWPlatt

    JWPlatt Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    It is possible to consider the spectrum, much as a survey does.
     
  8. BillJ

    BillJ Former Democrat Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    No. I simply don't want movies made that way. Put someone in charge, have them put their creative vision on screen then I can decide whether I like it or not.
     
  9. Relayer1

    Relayer1 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Location:
    The Black Country, England
    TMP and Wrath of Khan are probably my favourite Trek movies. TMP because of Gene's vision, Khan because he was sidelined.

    The big 2001ish TMP couldn't have carried on - very few would have gone to see sequels in that style. Dumping Gene was vital. TNG benefitted from dropping him too. I can't take all the credit away from him, but he wasn't the best choice to guide Trek.

    JJ Trek ? Here to stay I'm afraid. I've enjoyed the two movies while in the cinema and have pretty much forgotten them by the time I got home. They don't feed in to my ongoing fascination with Star Trek.

    I'd love prime Trek back on T.V., but any new series will almost certainly be a JJverse spinoff.
     
  10. JWPlatt

    JWPlatt Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Are you deliberately misunderstanding just to be contrary? Movies don't have to be made by committee when listening the spectrum of the fan voice. "Consider" and "evaluate" means the artists can throw out anything they don't like and morph or keep any brilliance that inspires them. If it fits the artists' vision and they want to include it, that's their choice and intent. Both the artists and you CAN decide whether you like it or not.
     
  11. BillJ

    BillJ Former Democrat Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Covington, Ky. USA
    I understand perfectly well what you're saying. What I'm saying is that I don't need a pat on the head like a well behaved child from the creators of the media I consume. I don't need them to act like I'm important. YMMV.
     
  12. JWPlatt

    JWPlatt Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Marketing is just one aspect of listening. They hardly pat you on the head or believe you are important except to the bottom line. And the artist and studio often compromise based upon the data you eschew. It's not so black and white or done in isolation in clean-room conditions.
     
  13. Darren Mooney

    Darren Mooney Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    The spectrum of Star Trek fandom is far too diverse and scattered - not to mention too damned insignificant - to produce a useful and meaningful consensus for the purposes of marketing a movie.

    These forums should be proof that we can't agree on anything, and any attempt to "average" that would not only be a false compromise, it would be terrible.

    But, as I've said and Bill's said and Greg's said, Star Trek should not be pandering or catering to us. That's part of how Star Trek died in the early years of the twenty-first century, it stopped caring about people who weren't fans.

    We are welcome to enjoy any future Star Trek, but we are not entitled to have it service our "Star Trek needs."
     
  14. chardman

    chardman Vice Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2001
    Location:
    The home of GenCon
    I don't have a problem with multiple continuities, even when they directly contradict each other. I don't care that "Sherlock" doesn't jibe with "Elementary" or the "Sherlock Holmes" series of films by Guy Ritchie, and all of the other dozens of other incarnation of that fictional universes. I can accept them all, and judge them on their own merits.

    Thus, I can easily do the same with the piddling few incarnations there are of of "Star Trek", particularly as several have already embraced the concept of the Many Worlds Theory.

    I'd be thrilled to see an entire series of alternate Trek "histories", spead throughout the whole Trek multiverse, where the stories specifically and intentionally ignore established continuity.
     
  15. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Lancaster, PA
    So, have you seen the trailer for "Mr. Holmes" yet? :)

    But, yeah, exactly. I figured out when I was nine that not all Dracula movies take place in the same seamless continuity. Didn't bother me one bit.
     
  16. chardman

    chardman Vice Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2001
    Location:
    The home of GenCon
    Yup. Anxiously awaiting the film. One which likely violates some aspect of the continuity of virtually every previous incarnation of the Holmes character.
     
  17. Greg Cox

    Greg Cox Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Location:
    Lancaster, PA
    But one also has to make allowances for the fannish echo chamber effect--and remember that what a vocal clique of fans want may have little or nothing to with what audiences in general are looking for.

    Sure, if you go to the right convention or website, you can probably get 750 people to sign a petition asking for a VOYAGER movie.

    Doesn't mean there's really a market for it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2015
  18. fonzob1

    fonzob1 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 6, 2015
  19. JWPlatt

    JWPlatt Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    That doesn't understand what I wrote. No consensus is necessary, required or recommended. The artists listen, then unilaterally do as they choose. For example, ten million fans might want something in particular, but a single voice with a brilliant idea might make a difference to an artist. It could be a fan, a friend, or their spouse.


    Limiting it to fandom is the wrong thing to do. The typical mantra for movies is that they want movies accessible to everyone - not just the fans.

    I hope the above two responses provide a better understanding of where I'm coming from.
     
  20. Makarov

    Makarov Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2013
    Is that really true? I thought they were always trying to get the general audience. They always actioned up the movies compared to the TV show. And they did the Kirk meeting Picard plot that seems popular to the general audience. Then there are things they didn't do which fans might have wanted, such as Voyager having continuity and Nemesis / Enterprise not sucking. And those ideas probably aren't unappealing to the general audience either.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.