Will we get a new series with a major DS9 or Enterprise legacy?

[FederationHistorian]

I can see the proposed DS9 Season 8 happening as a series of animated movies, and that’s only because there has never been a Star Trek animated movie before.

ENT’s only chance I see – if they do not do a West Wing style show based around Archer - is through SNW. Whether that is a cameo of an aged T’Pol or Phlox, a time traveling episode where either someone from the NX-01 is transported to Pike’s time, Pike’s stumbles upon the NX-refit in the 23rd century, or even a visit to the mirror universe under Empress Sato remains to be seen. Even a Short Trek based on The Good That Men Do from the perspective of those in the 24th century is a possibility.

Its worth noting that plans for the next seven years of Star Trek have been mapped out, so its highly unlikely that DS9 and ENT won’t get a revisit sometime soon. There are gaps that need to be filled (2120s - 2140s, 2160s - 2240s, 2293 – 2364, 2399 – 26th century), and if efforts are made to try and fill those gaps (like with PIC), they may as well as try to do something with DS9 & ENT.

 

[Ometiklan]

Picard and Data got a series because they (and by proxy TNG) were the most popular of the Berman-era characters. It's the same reason TNG movies were made, and not DS9/VOY/ENT movies. The latter three just don't have as huge a following. I'm rather surprised they chose Janeway for Prodigy, but I guess she was the only person they could find.

Though it is often seen as the middle child - with the associated baggage of being overlooked on its time - DS9 is also now receiving plaudits for it's quality and being ahead of its time for serialization. I wouldn't count it's chances out. There are enough Miners out there to support a show.

For the thread topic's question, I would say not very likely, because in the public eye modern Trek means TNG and VOY.

Kor

I don't know. There is a lot of "air time" to fill on Paramount+, and a lot of fans of DS9 and ENT, I am sure the producers have thought about it. No sense in ignoring solid IP.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I'd like to see appearances from legacy characters but I wouldn't want the show to be exclusively about them. I'd like them to be along for someone else's ride.

 

[fireproof78]

No sense in ignoring solid IP.

No sense in pissing off parts of the fan base any more. It's pretty clear the production team is taking a much more delicate approach now, after Discovery and Picard.

 

[Ometiklan]

No sense in pissing off parts of the fan base any more. It's pretty clear the production team is taking a much more delicate approach now, after Discovery and Picard.

What do you mean by "delicate" and how does it relate to Discovery and Picard?

 

[fireproof78]

What do you mean by "delicate" and how does it relate to Discovery and Picard?

Discovery is separating itself, rather drastically, from any other canon source for the era.

Picard is less known, at least from my view, Kurtzman has been sensitive to fan pushback and taken in to account with planning, moving towards a "more traditional style" in SNW.

 

[Ometiklan]

Discovery is separating itself, rather drastically, from any other canon source for the era.

Picard is less known, at least from my view, Kurtzman has been sensitive to fan pushback and taken in to account with planning, moving towards a "more traditional style" in SNW.

Ah, ok. I think i agree with you. I would have said that TPTB are realigning Trek to be a little more what is expected and a little less the full artistic shakeup that Fuller apparently intended from the start. With some of this they are successful, but a lot they still aren't. But I am glad to see them trying to improve the show when they realize some things are "off".

 

[fireproof78]

Ah, ok. I think i agree with you. I would have said that TPTB are realigning Trek to be a little more what is expected and a little less the full artistic shakeup that Fuller apparently intended from the start. With some of this they are successful, but a lot they still aren't. But I am glad to see them trying to improve the show when they realize some things are "off".

I think that's a fair point and Fuller's efforts definitely were felt for a while in Discovery. I just think that DSC going to the future was an overcorrection to what was perceived as a problem that wasn't necessarily problem. And that's why I say it's more delicate in their approach-their more timid in approaching the sacred canon now, sadly.

 

[dinzy]

I think that's a fair point and Fuller's efforts definitely were felt for a while in Discovery. I just think that DSC going to the future was an overcorrection to what was perceived as a problem that wasn't necessarily problem. And that's why I say it's more delicate in their approach-their more timid in approaching the sacred canon now, sadly.

I doubt SNW would have been a thing had Discovery not time jumped. At the very least the likelihood would have been lower. I am glad Disco went to the future because it opens up the universe. That's kind of the opposite of this thread about revisiting a past series. The only overcorrections I saw were the explaining for no holograms on 1960s TV shows. Most of what they did seemed to flow out of the story. I think they had the time travel tech in S2 and decided they wanted to write stories in the future. I highly doubt it was a reaction to some annoying fans bickering about canon. Not to say that didn't add a big PRO to the list of reasons to do the time jump. I think canon influenced how they did it, but was not the reason for doing it.

 

[Cap'n Calhoun]

The only overcorrections I saw were the explaining for no holograms on 1960s TV shows

Spock's "Let's never speak of this again" plan at the end of season 2 was unnecessary and seemed a bit much.

 

[fireproof78]

I doubt SNW would have been a thing had Discovery not time jumped. At the very least the likelihood would have been lower. I am glad Disco went to the future because it opens up the universe. That's kind of the opposite of this thread about revisiting a past series. The only overcorrections I saw were the explaining for no holograms on 1960s TV shows. Most of what they did seemed to flow out of the story. I think they had the time travel tech in S2 and decided they wanted to write stories in the future. I highly doubt it was a reaction to some annoying fans bickering about canon. Not to say that didn't add a big PRO to the list of reasons to do the time jump. I think canon influenced how they did it, but was not the reason for doing it.

I mean, I saw the Klingons get changed with the hair, the movement towards ships that fans are familiar with, the no holograms, as well as the evisceration of S31.

If it wasn't a reaction to fans reaction then fair enough. But, it doesn't inspire any confidence for me.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Just because Kurtzman is throwing a bone to the poeple who want more traditional Star Trek doesn't mean he's going to stop doing the less traditional ones. He's covering all his bases, not shying away from the more controversial ones.

 

[fireproof78]

Just because Kurtzman is throwing a bone to the poeple who want more traditional Star Trek doesn't mean he's going to stop doing the less traditional ones. He's covering all his bases, not shying away from the more controversial ones.

That remains to be seen.

 

[Ometiklan]

I think that's a fair point and Fuller's efforts definitely were felt for a while in Discovery. I just think that DSC going to the future was an overcorrection to what was perceived as a problem that wasn't necessarily problem. And that's why I say it's more delicate in their approach-their more timid in approaching the sacred canon now, sadly.

Yeah, I think the two overcorrections are the "let's never speak of this again" and the jump 930 years in the future. I think they aren't as shackled by canon as they think, in both cases. But they feel like they are, so fine, jump to the future if it makes you feel better.

LDS shows how you can still write within the canon with no problem; you just have to care enough to do it right.

 

[fireproof78]

you just have to care enough to do it right.

So, they don't care enough to do it right then?

 

[Odo]

At the end of the day, it just depends on how it's done. If we got a show co-staring Hoshi, along with brand new characters, set in the 2180s, that has little to do with following the storyline or characters of Enterprise, that could be great. Or bad. Just depends on execution.

 

[Cap'n Calhoun]

That remains to be seen.

Seems like a pretty safe assumption as long as that Section 31 series is still in the works. And if a series starring a mirror universe empress doing Section 31's dirty work doesn't count as "controversial", I don't know what does.

 

[fireproof78]

Seems like a pretty safe assumption as long as that Section 31 series is still in the works. And if a series starring a mirror universe empress doing Section 31's dirty work doesn't count as "controversial", I don't know what does.

If it happens. Until then, the current output is playing safe with canon, and moving towards "safer" and "more traditional" with Trek.

And the S31 and Georgiou simply amuse me at the outrage because I recall the fandom calling for a Garak and Khan series. The definition of "controversial" is always so odd.

 

[Ometiklan]

...Its worth noting that plans for the next seven years of Star Trek have been mapped out, so its highly unlikely that DS9 and ENT won’t get a revisit sometime soon. There are gaps that need to be filled (2120s - 2140s, 2160s - 2240s, 2293 – 2364, 2399 – 26th century), and if efforts are made to try and fill those gaps (like with PIC), they may as well as try to do something with DS9 & ENT.

Just because the next 7 years have been planned out in general, how does that say DS9 and ENT won't get some kind of follow-up? What if they have already been "pinned" for later? The plan could be as simple as "film PIC S2, DSC S4, SNW S1, and LDS S2 in 2021; announce new post-DSC series and film X, Y, and Z in 2022...."

So, they don't care enough to do it right then?

No. What I am saying is that caring is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for writing within canon well. Just because DSC writers care about the show they are producing, doesn't mean they succeed at writing within canon. But whether it is just a better (or more aligned to canon references?) approach or better writers, LDS is succeeding and they obviously care very much about the canon and the shows they reference. What LDS shows is that you can, very well, write within the canon.

I know there are staff on DSC/PIC who really care about the Trek that they reference, but there is more than just the investment level of individual writers/producers that drive whether the shows are successful in their interweaving with canon.

 

[fireproof78]

No. What I am saying is that caring is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for writing within canon well. Just because DSC writers care about the show they are producing, doesn't mean they succeed at writing within canon. But whether it is just a better (or more aligned to canon references?) approach or better writers, LDS is succeeding and they obviously care very much about the canon and the shows they reference. What LDS shows is that you can, very well, write within the canon.

I mean, I guess. I think the references succeed in making it feel similar, while at the same time noting how its characters differ.

While Discovery doesn't do a direct through line and was more interested in setting itself up as distinct within the canon universe. Mileage will vary as to its success of interweaving with canon (I think it succeeds just fine).