Will they go back to primeTrek after nuTrek finishes?.

[Squiggy]

It was an alternate timeline that healed itself back to its prime focus. Let's hope the Abramsverse can heal itself similarly.

So long as the Abramsverse is profitable it won't happen.

I just can't see a scenario where we go back to the Prime timeline.

All it would take is for the public and studio heads to change their minds on nuTrek and realize it's a giant unprofitable turd while simultaneously forgetting that PrimeTrek was a giant unprofitable turd towards the end AND for the CBS to need a new show because the US suddenly stopped watching crime-dramas AND Bill Gates dies, leaves CBS a billion dollars under the expressed condition they use the money to produce a new series.

That's all.

 

[Sector 7]

I think there are some missteps in the reboot universe that fans just can't get their head around. "Black hole" is one. Instead of calling the red matter effect a black hole, they should have called it a "quantum singularity." Voyager fans are familiar with the term. It must have been used at least 250 times.

These things could have easily been fixed in the scripts, and I don't know why they weren't.

That said, I can ignore them.

Actually, Kirk said it was described as a black hole. Later, it was referred to as a singularity, in the script.

 

[BillJ]

So long as the Abramsverse is profitable it won't happen.

I just can't see a scenario where we go back to the Prime timeline.

All it would take is for the public and studio heads to change their minds on nuTrek and realize it's a giant unprofitable turd while simultaneously forgetting that PrimeTrek was a giant unprofitable turd towards the end AND for the CBS to need a new show because the US suddenly stopped watching crime-dramas AND Bill Gates dies, leaves CBS a billion dollars under the expressed condition they use the money to produce a new series.

That's all.

There are two points of Prime universe history that would be good options, if they weren't going to do Kirk and Spock: April's Enterprise and Picard's years on the Stargazer. But, by the time they redesigned everything for modern audiences, it would be doing nothing more than paying lip-service to those fans who want the Prime universe. The facade would quickly fall away as the show would be a modern take on Star Trek.

And we would be back where we're at right now. People would be complaining about the pacing. They would be complaining about the lack of gooseneck viewers and chunka-chunka-chunka computer responses. Or incorrect nacelle lengths of the Stargazer (doubtful it would even resemble what we saw on TNG). Or the actor playing Picard not balding in a pattern similar to Patrick Stewart. If I'm a creator, going back to the Prime universe simply wouldn't be worth the headache.

 

[fireproof78]

This point has been made in several different threads-it is just cheaper to produce shows set in the present. This includes even shows that have speculative content. (X-files, for example. ) So how would suits view the options...what is the bottom line?

Despite the proliferation of reality TV, there's a fair number of genre stuff on TV these days. It's just most of it is either superhero, fantasy, period pieces, or fairy-tale, (or zombies), but the budgets required for those can't be that far off from a Trek show. So these bets are being made on a routine basis, many of them paying off nicely.

But it's not like we're contemplating the production techniques of 1978 BSG here. Labor costs persist, but technology has still made it cheaper to get a shot in the can than ever before, and who even shoots on film anymore?

That JJ burns through hundreds of millions doesn't mean you can't get something as good or even better on a TV budget.

JJ burned with the money, but he made it back. The returns on a TV show are not a guarantee in a way that CBS appears to be comfortable with, at least not right now.

Not saying that it couldn't be profitable, just that the proof is not out there. However, having just worked my way through "Daredevil" I am inclined to agree that there is potential, but CBS will be slowed to accept it. Too much of a risk.

Also, Christopher Nolan (among others) still uses film. I actually think Abrams is using film for Episode 7.

That JJ burns through hundreds of millions doesn't mean you can't get something as good or even better on a TV budget.

That's exactly what it means.

There's no television show short of Game of Thrones that has even close to the kind of budget required to deliver feature-quality effects.

I agree, but television is not the only vehicle. "Daredevil" certainly presented some interesting effects as far as the action, and (albeit limited) CGI.

But, the initial costs of building the sets and costuming is probably among the most prohibitive aspects of it.

I just don't see CBS investing the money right now and see it as too much of a financial risk.

 

[Ithekro]

Going back to the Prime Universe without using existing characters would be the path most likely followed if one head that way. Instead of getting caught up with someone else's characters, you make up your own, and set it in a known universe. just have it look like the time period and keep the known rules of that universe in place, and you should be good to go. Maybe hire someone to make sure you don't do something happened later or do something that negates something later (like having Mars blown up in the 2320s when it is clearly still there in the 2360s in TNG) without a justification as to why the later appearance is valid (the Vulcan seen later is "New Vulcan" but since "Old Vulcan" is no more, it was illogical to keep referencing the current place as "New" as their would be no reason for it in the present tense, and everyone would know that before 2258 they would be talking about the other planet Vulcan anyway).

 

[BillJ]

Going back to the Prime Universe without using existing characters would be the path most likely followed if one head that way. Instead of getting caught up with someone else's characters, you make up your own, and set it in a known universe. just have it look like the time period and keep the known rules of that universe in place, and you should be good to go. Maybe hire someone to make sure you don't do something happened later or do something that negates something later (like having Mars blown up in the 2320s when it is clearly still there in the 2360s in TNG) without a justification as to why the later appearance is valid (the Vulcan seen later is "New Vulcan" but since "Old Vulcan" is no more, it was illogical to keep referencing the current place as "New" as their would be no reason for it in the present tense, and everyone would know that before 2258 they would be talking about the other planet Vulcan anyway).

I just don't think general audiences much care about Trek's fictional history. If a writer can make compelling drama out of blowing up Mars in the 2320's, then that should be the route they go.

Damn, I'm a Trek fan and I just want to be entertained. The stories should never be dictated by some 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 year old piece of trivia.

 

[urbandefault]

Going back to the Prime Universe without using existing characters would be the path most likely followed if one head that way. Instead of getting caught up with someone else's characters, you make up your own, and set it in a known universe. just have it look like the time period and keep the known rules of that universe in place, and you should be good to go. Maybe hire someone to make sure you don't do something happened later or do something that negates something later (like having Mars blown up in the 2320s when it is clearly still there in the 2360s in TNG) without a justification as to why the later appearance is valid (the Vulcan seen later is "New Vulcan" but since "Old Vulcan" is no more, it was illogical to keep referencing the current place as "New" as their would be no reason for it in the present tense, and everyone would know that before 2258 they would be talking about the other planet Vulcan anyway).

I just don't think general audiences much care about Trek's fictional history. If a writer can make compelling drama out of blowing up Mars in the 2320's, then that should be the route they go.

Damn, I'm a Trek fan and I just want to be entertained. The stories should never be dictated by some 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 year old piece of trivia.

This.

Using existing characters? How would that happen? The actors who played them are "too old" to draw in a new audience, and recasting would be another reboot. I don't see how it could ever work.

Someone said that it's a small number of vocal fans who don't want more and more and more Trek. I think it's the other way around. It's the small minority who want Trek everywhere all the time, even though the franchise burned itself out by 2002. Enterprise just prolonged the agony for a few more years.

Trek needed a few years off to give the audience a break. Bringing it back to TV, at the same time trying to capture Marvel's lightning, is just begging for the franchise to die again, only I think this time it would not be a slow death. It would be quick, and final.

 

[Tim Walker]

Parallels showed multiple timelines that *didn't* heal themselves once everything was resolved, it merely restored the barriers that separated them. The only difference was that none of the ones featured were the ones that the TV show belonged in. So there's precedence for the nature the Abramsverse adopted, merely from the other side of the line.

And the most interesting part of that episode is when an alternate Riker said "the Borg are everywhere!"

Which brings up a question-could an alternate timeline be intriguing enough to be worth exploring?

 

[TRON JA307020]

Parallels showed multiple timelines that *didn't* heal themselves once everything was resolved, it merely restored the barriers that separated them. The only difference was that none of the ones featured were the ones that the TV show belonged in. So there's precedence for the nature the Abramsverse adopted, merely from the other side of the line.

And the most interesting part of that episode is when an alternate Riker said "the Borg are everywhere!"

Which brings up a question-could an alternate timeline be intriguing enough to be worth exploring?

The Mirror Mirror universe from TOS would be very interesting.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The mirror universe is best in small doses.

 

[BillJ]

The mirror universe is best in small doses.

+1

I only count about four good Mirror universe stories. The original "Mirror, Mirror", Mike Barr's Mirror Universe Saga (DC Comics), the aforementioned Dark Mirror and David Mack's Sorrows of Empire.

 

[JWPlatt]

"Yesterdays Enterprise" is another example of an alternated timeline. So, yes, there was also a precedent in a television series.

It was an alternate timeline that healed itself back to its prime focus. The alternate timeline was an aberration to be avoided. Let's hope the Abramsverse can heal itself similarly.

Parallels showed multiple timelines that *didn't* heal themselves once everything was resolved, it merely restored the barriers that separated them. The only difference was that none of the ones featured were the ones that the TV show belonged in. So there's precedence for the nature the Abramsverse adopted, merely from the other side of the line.

Right. And how much do people actually care that the alternate Riker we saw, and what was left of his crew, blew up?

 

[Sindatur]

The mirror universe is best in small doses.

+1

I only count about four good Mirror universe stories. The original "Mirror, Mirror", Mike Barr's Mirror Universe Saga (DC Comics), the aforementioned Dark Mirror and David Mack's Sorrows of Empire.

I also think the First DS9 Mirror episode is really good too, despite the over-abundant "Gay is EVIL" undertones (Overtones?) (Though the rest of the DS9 ones get steadily camper, I still enjoy them to varying degrees on rewatch)

i actually would be interested in a dark and gritty Mirror Universe Series, where our regular Heroes are villains, but, I'm under no delusion it would have a successful audience size

 

[fireproof78]

It was an alternate timeline that healed itself back to its prime focus. The alternate timeline was an aberration to be avoided. Let's hope the Abramsverse can heal itself similarly.

Parallels showed multiple timelines that *didn't* heal themselves once everything was resolved, it merely restored the barriers that separated them. The only difference was that none of the ones featured were the ones that the TV show belonged in. So there's precedence for the nature the Abramsverse adopted, merely from the other side of the line.

Right. And how much do people actually care that the alternate Riker we saw, and what was left of his crew, blew up?

Beyond that, I think the point is that alternate universes have been a part of Trek before. Actually, its been done in TOST a number of times, so the idea of the alternate reality healing itself is probably more like the barriers closing up and the other realities being unaware of the parallels.

*insert Stargate: SG-1 reference here*

*insert quirky Doctor Who quote here*

 

[TRON JA307020]

The mirror universe is best in small doses.

+1

I only count about four good Mirror universe stories. The original "Mirror, Mirror", Mike Barr's Mirror Universe Saga (DC Comics), the aforementioned Dark Mirror and David Mack's Sorrows of Empire.

Star Trek Enterprises "In a Mirror Darkly" Part 1 and 2 was pretty damn good.

 

[JWPlatt]

@fireproof78: I was referring back to my persistent use of "Parallels" as an example of why I do not find the Abramsverse relevant and so do not care so much about what happens within it. Borg-infested Riker and crew blowing up didn't have any impact on the prime universe - the one we live in. His is not the one we are invested in and so we don't care so much. That's natural - it's understandable that losing family members is more important to us than people we don't know. And I think seeing the Enterprise blow up is always entertaining to us ("Cause and Effect" was an orgy of such).

Others contend that we do not live in the prime universe either, and mostly use the Eugenics War to make their point, leaving us with nothing much to care about at all except a TV show and a few movies - nevermind the generations of people who have found inspiration through Star Trek. (Except I disagree with that point of view - I dismiss the Eugenics War from strict canon as writers finding their way through future history never expecting it to be a topic of discussion 50 years later).

 

[SPCTRE]

leaving us with nothing much to care about at all except a TV show and a few movies - nevermind the generations of people who have found inspiration through Star Trek.

 

[BillJ]

Star Trek Enterprises "In a Mirror Darkly" Part 1 and 2 was pretty damn good.

You take out the Defiant, and it is middling at best. Though I did like the needling Mirror Archer takes from his own mind.

 

[BillJ]

leaving us with nothing much to care about at all except a TV show and a few movies - nevermind the generations of people who have found inspiration through Star Trek.

Did they go somewhere? Everything is still there.

 

[Mudd]

Borg-infested Riker and crew blowing up didn't have any impact on the prime universe - the one we live in.

We don't live there. It's fictional, and no Trek continuity is more or less fictional than another.

I'm certainly much more invested in nuKirk and company than in, say, Sisko and his DS9 pals.