StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Crazedwraith wrote:Assuming 1 season = 1 year. It's 14 years as in RL. 7 of TNG, 7 of Voyager with DS9 running concurrently.

Only 14 years? Huh.

Well, I said 5 seasons because that's a good length to plan out in advance if you're going to do a concurrent plot that incorporates events from the other shows. Obviously there would have to be some time-skipping going on (Department of Temporal Investigations shenanigans perhaps?) to get everything in there, and explaining how they're able to be involved in Voyager stuff all the way over in the Delta Quadrant would be problematic. Maybe they futz with the Caretaker Array, or Starfleet commissions them to try and find Voyager? Who knows.

To be honest while there's a lot of potential for shows in the Trek universe, keeping the actual Trek flavor is a tricky business, as is fitting the universe that's been set out in the original timeline.

More like 15. 6 of TNG, 1 of TNG/DS9 parallel, 1 of DS9, 6 of DS9/VOY parallel, 1 of VOY.

Elheru Aran wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:Assuming 1 season = 1 year. It's 14 years as in RL. 7 of TNG, 7 of Voyager with DS9 running concurrently.

Only 14 years? Huh.

Well, I said 5 seasons because that's a good length to plan out in advance if you're going to do a concurrent plot that incorporates events from the other shows. Obviously there would have to be some time-skipping going on (Department of Temporal Investigations shenanigans perhaps?) to get everything in there, and explaining how they're able to be involved in Voyager stuff all the way over in the Delta Quadrant would be problematic. Maybe they futz with the Caretaker Array, or Starfleet commissions them to try and find Voyager? Who knows.

To be honest while there's a lot of potential for shows in the Trek universe, keeping the actual Trek flavor is a tricky business, as is fitting the universe that's been set out in the original timeline.

I'm somewhat wondering if Star Trek really needs to just be allowed to rest in obscurity for a generation or so, then get a hard reboot.

Yeah. How about no. I'd really like to get some more Trek while I'm still breathing? Future generations can build their own fucking SciFi franchises, I want Trek while I'm still around to enjoy it!

The Romulan Republic wrote: I'm somewhat wondering if Star Trek really needs to just be allowed to rest in obscurity for a generation or so, then get a hard reboot.

Arguably that's pretty much what happened after Enterprise went down the tube. *checks dates* well it ended in 2005 and nu-Trek came out in 2009... so maybe not (unless your idea of what constitutes a 'generation' is pretty short).

I'd say a decade or so might be a decent break, though. I mean... ROTS to TFA was right at ten years, and that was a good long period of time.

Part of the problem with Trek is that Paramount doesn't give a shit about the extended-universe aspect in pretty much any way. It's all about the TV and movies for them, even though Trek has quite a few fairly successful novels and publishes new books pretty regularly. Then there's STO, which I don't know how big it is, but it's big enough that it's probably in say a top 15? of MMO's. The consequence of this disregard though is that a fanbase has grown up to some degree around or incorporating this unofficial 'extended universe'... which is more or less stuck in the original Trek universe timeline, because very original Trek stories -not- featuring the original Trek characters are pretty rare (the Mackenzie Calhoun stories would be one example).

As such, a 'hard reboot' would be... difficult for a LOT of fans to swallow. Star Wars was one thing because a.) they already had a second trilogy that changed the parameters in order to tell a different but similar story, and b.) it was continuing the broader plotline instead of rebooting. Trek... well they tried a reboot with JJ-Trek, and the feedback was distinctly mixed. It started a new timeline, scrapped the old one, and was handled by some... distinctly not-awesome people. A hard reboot would need to be handled better and, quite possibly, simply change the entire parameters of the show. Think the Battlestar Galactica reboot, and as you might recall, the response to that was also rather mixed...

Elheru Aran wrote:A series placed, say, 5 years after the Dominion War might be interesting; post-DS9 exploration of the Gamma Quadrant? You have the Dominion to play up your political tensions, and the Gamma Quadrant is basically a blank slate for introducing new races and characters unlike the Delta Quadrant now. It could be a rather more volatile version of TNG, especially if the Romulans and Klingons are feeling expansion-y...

Or they have the beta quadrant, which I don't recall hearing anything about.

Batman wrote:More like 15. 6 of TNG, 1 of TNG/DS9 parallel, 1 of DS9, 6 of DS9/VOY parallel, 1 of VOY.

TNG runs from 2364-2371. Voyager runs from 2371 to 2378.

14 years.

Caretaker Stardate: 48315.6

All Good things Stardate: 47988

Caretaker takes place a approx 3 months after All Good Things.


EIDT: oh you mean IRL?

Yes it was 15 years IRL since there was a year's gap between TNG and Voyager on TV. I should read more carefully.

Elheru Aran wrote:

biostem wrote:Frankly, I'd love to see a series centered around a privateer/unaffiliated merchant ship, set in the ST universe; It could consist of a diverse crew, who have run-ins with some famous events from ST canon. You could have interesting story arcs - like should the crew agree to smuggle ketracel white during the Dominion war? Should they take a lucrative contract to transport supplies for the Duras sisters during hr Klingon civil war? Heck, you could throw in a disgraced Starfleet officer, who is trying to mend his reputation, if you need that Starfleet connection...

Not a bad notion, but you might have to play jiggery-pokery with the timeline as IIRC from the beginning of TNG to the end of Voyager is... something like 20-30 years? That's a pretty wide time span to deal with. Spaced out over, say, five seasons that might not be an issue, but it could be difficult, particularly factoring events in from early TNG and late DS9/VOY. TNG is also problematic in that a *lot* of the things that happened in that series involved only the Enterprise and its crew directly, interactions with other ships and factions were less frequent. Plus bringing back stars from TNG... well, a lot of those guys don't look as good as they used to. Wil Wheaton is basically nearly unrecognizable as Wesley these days, for example, and even Kate Mulgrew has aged quite a bit.

Still, they're doing great things with computers these days...

Well, then have the interactions be less direct - they encounter an envoy or aide to the Duras sisters, and not any of them directly. The crew only deals with some random Vorta, instead of any named characters from DS9, that kind of thing. Maybe just have the series start with them selling supplies to some random Maquee member, who boards Chakotay's ship, and is never heard from again. I'd just like to see a story about a crew that is peripheral to the main factions...

Batman wrote:More like 15. 6 of TNG, 1 of TNG/DS9 parallel, 1 of DS9, 6 of DS9/VOY parallel, 1 of VOY.

Think there were only a very few episodes of DS9 that went out solo. It certainly wasn't an entire season.

Also it's two years of TNG/Ds9 parallel. The Crossover Birthright is series 6 TNG/ series 1 Ds9

eta: According to Memory Alpha:

"Most of this season was broadcast concurrent with Star Trek: Voyager Season 1, the first episode of which aired the same day as "Past Tense, Part II". Star Trek Generations was also released during its run, three days prior to the airing of the episode "Defiant". "

Elheru Aran wrote:

The Romulan Republic wrote: I'm somewhat wondering if Star Trek really needs to just be allowed to rest in obscurity for a generation or so, then get a hard reboot.

Arguably that's pretty much what happened after Enterprise went down the tube. *checks dates* well it ended in 2005 and nu-Trek came out in 2009... so maybe not (unless your idea of what constitutes a 'generation' is pretty short).

I'd say a decade or so might be a decent break, though. I mean... ROTS to TFA was right at ten years, and that was a good long period of time.

Part of the problem with Trek is that Paramount doesn't give a shit about the extended-universe aspect in pretty much any way. It's all about the TV and movies for them, even though Trek has quite a few fairly successful novels and publishes new books pretty regularly. Then there's STO, which I don't know how big it is, but it's big enough that it's probably in say a top 15? of MMO's. The consequence of this disregard though is that a fanbase has grown up to some degree around or incorporating this unofficial 'extended universe'... which is more or less stuck in the original Trek universe timeline, because very original Trek stories -not- featuring the original Trek characters are pretty rare (the Mackenzie Calhoun stories would be one example).

As such, a 'hard reboot' would be... difficult for a LOT of fans to swallow. Star Wars was one thing because a.) they already had a second trilogy that changed the parameters in order to tell a different but similar story, and b.) it was continuing the broader plotline instead of rebooting. Trek... well they tried a reboot with JJ-Trek, and the feedback was distinctly mixed. It started a new timeline, scrapped the old one, and was handled by some... distinctly not-awesome people. A hard reboot would need to be handled better and, quite possibly, simply change the entire parameters of the show. Think the Battlestar Galactica reboot, and as you might recall, the response to that was also rather mixed...

The novels have expanded to include a lot of new(ish) characters. There's the Starfleet Corps of Engineers, the Department of Temporal Investigations, Vanguard station, Seeker, the Bacco administration, the Gorkon's crew, and so on. Titan , Aventine and Enterprise each have a lot of fresh faces as well. The novels also have some epic storylines, such as the Destiny series (which ends the Borg), the Section 31 series (which ends S31), the Typhon Pact and fallout of that, and Titan's ongoing stories (Unseen Enemies, Orion's Hounds). There is a large, coherent and enjoyable Star Trek novelverse out there. Overwriting it wouldn't be like trash canning the mostly-shit Star Wars EU; the fan backlash would be much, much worse.

That said, a hard reboot cast as an alternate timeline/reality should work just fine and preserve all that fans loved about the old universe while clearing the board for an all new series.

Bob the Gunslinger wrote:That said, a hard reboot cast as an alternate timeline/reality should work just fine and preserve all that fans loved about the old universe while clearing the board for an all new series.

Apparently, Nicholas Meyer (who directed ST: The Wrath of Khan and ST: The Undiscovered Country) has hinted that he's working on a new Star Trek project. Could be relevant: TrekMovie

Apparently, Nicholas Meyer (who directed ST: The Wrath of Khan and ST: The Undiscovered Country) has hinted that he's working on a new Star Trek project. Could be relevant: TrekMovie

Separate from Discovery? I know he's working as a consultant on Disc.

E: read it. Hmm. "project" could be a remastering of ST2 through to a computer game through to audio books or a calendar.

Bob the Gunslinger wrote: There is a large, coherent and enjoyable Star Trek novelverse out there. Overwriting it wouldn't be like trash canning the mostly-shit Star Wars EU; the fan backlash would be much, much worse.

From my understanding is that Star Trek novels only tried to create a continuity relatively recently, around the 2000s, and even now some novels published don't conform to the established continuity. There is alot of contradictions between novels, especially older ones, and even with the canon.

I also don't think the expanded universe was ever that popular, certainly wasn't as mainstream or popular as the Star Wars EU. Even among Trekkies I don't think it was super popular. At the very least the fact that it was never canon means there is little chance of novels being overwritten because they would just remain non-canon same as every other novel.

Don't get me wrong, thats not me slighting the ST EU or implying the SW EU was better because it was more popular but the fact is there is different factors when dealing with them. No Trek novel, comic, or game has been canon, there has been no attempt to try to maintain continuity by the shows or movies with the books. More then a few books have been rendered completely null thanks to the tv series's like the books dealing with Klingon society. The Star Wars EU was canon, had a coherent universe interconnected with the films and was quite popular. Removing them removed an entire universe, removing the ST EU removes several already non-canon universes and bunch of standalone stuff.

Mind you, once you introduce things like multiple universes and time travel (not to mention omnipotent prankster beings), continuity naturally tends to become a bit... fluid (see Doctor Who for a case of this dialled up to eleven).

Joun_Lord wrote:

Bob the Gunslinger wrote:
I also don't think the expanded universe was ever that popular, certainly wasn't as mainstream or popular as the Star Wars EU. Even among Trekkies I don't think it was super popular.

While I agree with most (ish) of what you post, I have to note this bit. If it wasn't that popular, why did they keep publishing books? More than Star Wars EU, actually, I think?

I do have to say that lacking a better continuity hurts them in some ways, but it does give them a lot of creative freedom in that they can spin off a lot of different ideas, and they weren't locked into using the same characters all the time like most of the Star Wars stories were. Sure, you might have your novels directly based off TNG or TOS or whatever, but as Bob pointed out, there was a lot of stuff on the side. You never really got that with Star Wars apart from stuff like Republic Commando or Force Unleashed.

Elheru Aran wrote:While I agree with most (ish) of what you post, I have to note this bit. If it wasn't that popular, why did they keep publishing books? More than Star Wars EU, actually, I think?

I do have to say that lacking a better continuity hurts them in some ways, but it does give them a lot of creative freedom in that they can spin off a lot of different ideas, and they weren't locked into using the same characters all the time like most of the Star Wars stories were. Sure, you might have your novels directly based off TNG or TOS or whatever, but as Bob pointed out, there was a lot of stuff on the side. You never really got that with Star Wars apart from stuff like Republic Commando or Force Unleashed.

Just because they weren't as popular as Star Wars novels didn't mean they weren't popular enough to make some cash. Like some Warsies, some Trekkies will buy anything with their brands label on it and like with the Star Wars books there would probably be plenty of interest in stories that expand the universe. Its a guaranteed market even if its not going to be making stupid amounts of money, though I;m sure they made atleast respectable amounts considering atleast a few like the Shatner novels made the NYT best seller list.

I'd agree that how things were set up for Trek it gave authors more freedom but I think too much freedom. There is not constraints, they is no canon to adhere to. Every novel can be its own thing and tell its own story but doesn't expand the overall story. Each SW EU book told a new chapter of an ongoing saga, even if it seemed like most of the chapters involved the newest superweapon of the week, while the Trek books just told a story only tangentially related to the overarching narrative. Most don't even have a cohesive narrative in their own little universe, they are all like the old Star Wars N-canon. They just have no consequences, no impact, are barely better then fan fiction on the net.

Now I can see why thats a good for both readers and the franchise though. Having standalone stories means readers don't have to read 10 bajillion other books to know whats going on, there doesn't need to be some Holocron style group trying to slap everything together with super glue and duct tape to make shit fit like trying to make shit like Masters of Teras Kasi canon for Wars, and there is no need for the movies or tv shows to give a shit about stepping on the EU nor does the EU need to give a shit about them stepping on it. No situation like with the old SW EU being flushed to make room for new material, everything is disregarded anyway.

All of the post-Destiny Relaunch novels have fit fairly well into continuity. Star Trek's novels haven't been all loosey goosey since Nemesis. The old numbered books were almost all disposable, and quite frankly pretty terrible en masse. Since Nemesis, all of the TNG era books have been advancing the continuity, quite a bit. While some of the books are not as good as others, the overall story arcs have been good, giving the audience new material that keeps the feel and most of the particulars of the setting. As someone who read the old SW EU up to the New Jedi Order, I find the Star Trek Relaunch far superior. These days they aspire so be something more than a cynical cash grab.

Anyway, I'm willing to give Discovery a chance, but am extremely wary of the kind of mindset the producers must have to declare this series a prequel in the Prime Timeline while feeling no urge to abide by the expectations born from that statement. Sure, and the writers of Lost had a plan the whole time.

Honestly, I'm still somewhat concerned about the aesthetics. Even enterprise made TOS era stuff look TOS era, Discovery still seems to look somewhat enterprise-y-kelvin-y. Not fitting of the universe its supposed to fit into. As for story, we don't know enough yet for me to really make a judge, though I would prefer a more expansionist/cold-war tone then the more utopian tone set in TNG.

Batman wrote:Yeah. How about no. I'd really like to get some more Trek while I'm still breathing? Future generations can build their own fucking SciFi franchises, I want Trek while I'm still around to enjoy it!

Savor the library that already exists, Star Trek is immense in it's current form, far beyond most other franchises

...and that's the problem, Strar Trek has already covered all possible story formats, so much of the universe has been established that the mystery of the unknown is effectively gone....and continuity is so massive that stories are too constrained by established lore that viable presentation is dead.

Star Trek is at the stage where it has no where else to go but take a very long nap.

Memories faded pop culture loses the Trek references...say 2037, 'Star Trek' comes on the air. Complete hard reboot

a 20 year dirt nap (no films, no series) is enough time where we can get something bold again, like TOS, like TNG. This would be a completely changed universe, shaped by 2030's politics.

Discovery is catching a lot of flak, because it is billed as being concurrent with "The Cage"...but disregarding all the established TOS lore.

It's just way too soon for more Star Trek, overall the people have spoken,

'Star Trek: Discovery' is...


...It's just too soon to go that far against the grain.

Up on Facebook today that Jonathon Frakes is coming aboard as a director. Sorry I don't have a decent source for that at the moment.

First real bit of good news I've heard about this show in a while, I think.

The Romulan Republic wrote:Up on Facebook today that Jonathon Frakes is coming aboard as a director. Sorry I don't have a decent source for that at the moment.

First real bit of good news I've heard about this show in a while, I think.

While it's nice, I wouldn't count on it to save the show as IIRC he's only filming one episode. We'll see. Either he films a good episode, and executive meddling turns it into a shadow of what he intended, or he films a good episode, and the rest are merely mediocre by comparison.

Elheru Aran wrote:

The Romulan Republic wrote:Up on Facebook today that Jonathon Frakes is coming aboard as a director. Sorry I don't have a decent source for that at the moment.

First real bit of good news I've heard about this show in a while, I think.

While it's nice, I wouldn't count on it to save the show as IIRC he's only filming one episode. We'll see. Either he films a good episode, and executive meddling turns it into a shadow of what he intended, or he films a good episode, and the rest are merely mediocre by comparison.

Only assuming they don't hire decent directors for the other ones as well.

Crazedwraith wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote:

The Romulan Republic wrote:Up on Facebook today that Jonathon Frakes is coming aboard as a director. Sorry I don't have a decent source for that at the moment.

First real bit of good news I've heard about this show in a while, I think.

While it's nice, I wouldn't count on it to save the show as IIRC he's only filming one episode. We'll see. Either he films a good episode, and executive meddling turns it into a shadow of what he intended, or he films a good episode, and the rest are merely mediocre by comparison.

Only assuming they don't hire decent directors for the other ones as well.

True, but the lack of news this close to premiere is... concerning. Or maybe I'm just not tuned into the Trek fanbase buzz?

Elheru Aran wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote:
While it's nice, I wouldn't count on it to save the show as IIRC he's only filming one episode. We'll see. Either he films a good episode, and executive meddling turns it into a shadow of what he intended, or he films a good episode, and the rest are merely mediocre by comparison.

Only assuming they don't hire decent directors for the other ones as well.

True, but the lack of news this close to premiere is... concerning. Or maybe I'm just not tuned into the Trek fanbase buzz?

I've heard very little about it, aside from being aware it's happening, the trailer and promo images being released, and a general sense of low-key, very cautious hype within the parts of the fandom that I mingle with. It is concerning indeed - I guess the best we can hope for is for the show to take us all by surprise and absolutely knock it out of the park, but I don't have the best feeling based on how hesitant CBS apparently has been with promoting it.

Iroscato wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:
Only assuming they don't hire decent directors for the other ones as well.

True, but the lack of news this close to premiere is... concerning. Or maybe I'm just not tuned into the Trek fanbase buzz?

I've heard very little about it, aside from being aware it's happening, the trailer and promo images being released, and a general sense of low-key, very cautious hype within the parts of the fandom that I mingle with. It is concerning indeed - I guess the best we can hope for is for the show to take us all by surprise and absolutely knock it out of the park, but I don't have the best feeling based on how hesitant CBS apparently has been with promoting it.

Yeah, that's the main thing. You would think that if they had a good feeling about it, if they were confident in their product... that they would be marketing the heck out of it. "Look at our stars! Look at our ships! Look at the planets! See this behind-the-scenes video! Here's who's directing each episode, you won't believe #22!"

Instead? A couple trailers, some promotional images, some news blurbs. It's almost as if they're running a German insurance scam on the thing.