New Star Trek TV Series In Development

[GSHamster]

I'd be sort of surprised if the powers that be let this move forward in the old timeline. My guess is that they would look at the popularity of the recent movie, the lack of popularity with the last two TV shows, and think that it would be a better bet for a new TV series to stick with the new timeline.

It could be a rights issue. Maybe the rights to the movie timeline are held by the movie people and they don't want anyone messing around with it and potentially causing issues for future movies.

So the old timeline is "safe" for a television show to mess around with.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Farengi seem likely to be the new Big Bads in this one. So I won't be watching. Can't stand them.

 

[Croesus]

Actually, they make a lot of sense, in the context of another potential series.

Trek has become akin to modern mythology, or Shakespeare. It was only a matter of time before the iconic characters were taken on by other actors.

The fans are willing to accept a movie with a clear continuity break. That's easy to wrap a mind around. However, I don't think the fans are ready for a TV series that has a similar continuity break.

You may be right about the movie needing a break, though given how good a cast they pulled together, I would have had no problem with the lack of a retcon. And I absolutely despised the story they did come up with. That said, the movie made a lot of money and has a lot of fans, so they must have done something right.

And, IMHO, Enterprise was the greatest wasted opportunity the property has ever seen.

Agree 100%. The episodes that expanded on the already existing backstories tended to be outstanding. The episodes that changed or ignored these tended to be terrible. A gross oversimplification, but more stories with the Andorians and fewer (none) with time travel would have improved the series significantly.

 

[Starman]

It could be a rights issue. Maybe the rights to the movie timeline are held by the movie people and they don't want anyone messing around with it and potentially causing issues for future movies.

So the old timeline is "safe" for a television show to mess around with.

Interesting. It does appear that CBS owns the rights for Trek TV and Paramount owns Trek movie rights. What a mess.

 

[MarkB]

Farengi seem likely to be the new Big Bads in this one. So I won't be watching. Can't stand them.

Last we saw, the Ferengi under Rom's leadership looked set to change their ways and become homogenised with Federation culture, so they might not come out as villains.

I'd view a series that continued DS9's exploration of Alpha Quadrant politics with cautious optimism - that always felt like a more solidly-built universe than Voyager's wanderings.

 

[Wycen]

You know I saw Kate Mulgrew on the Cartoon Network on their live action police spoof and my reaction was, "why do I not like this...wait, I recognize her...crap! Captain Janeway. What's on the Travel Channel..."

But having said that I'd watch a show that followed the ST tv canon. The movie, while interesting, was not targetted at me. The trick is whether it is good and that it doesn't get cancelled by morons before we get a chance to see it shine.

 

[Relique du Madde]

If the glare in the new bridge is so intense that it renders the crew sterile like it did in the Abrahms film (in my imagination), then I'm out (not even Westley appearing with his adopted tribe of space American Indians, nor a crew of Marque Space Pirates, nor someone hotter than 7 of 9 and the Enterprise Vulcan chick could bring be to watch at that point).

 

[Dire Bare]

Actually, they make a lot of sense, in the context of another potential series.

Trek has become akin to modern mythology, or Shakespeare. It was only a matter of time before the iconic characters were taken on by other actors.

The fans are willing to accept a movie with a clear continuity break. That's easy to wrap a mind around. However, I don't think the fans are ready for a TV series that has a similar continuity break.

And, IMHO, Enterprise was the greatest wasted opportunity the property has ever seen. No, it didn't fail because of franchise fatigue. It failed because B&B didn't realize what they should do with it. Manny Coto knew, and from the point they handed over the reigns to him to deal with movies, the difference is palpable. it was merely to little, too late. I think if Coto had the reigns from the beginning, the show would have been a solid success.

I would have been happier with a light retcon or even serious reimagining without all the silly time travel stuff. Let the ships, uniforms, tech, characters, stories, Trek details, etc be different, just don't waste time with a silly story to "explain" the differences. Most of the differences were cosmetic anyway, and happened "before" the time divergence.

Can you guess I'm not a fan of Trek time travel stories? The only ones I ever liked was TOS "City on the Edge of Forever", and the fan service ones from later shows that gave us nifty possible-future Enterprises and run-ins with Captain Sulu.

If I was elected Trek King, time travel stories would be banned . . . unless a writer worked extra hard to convince me he/she had a good one . . .

But you're right, Trek fans are known for their love of continuity, and this was probably necessary to allow Abrams to tell new stories without worrying about continuity minutiae and irritating legions of Trekkies across the nation.

 

[Starman]

But you're right, Trek fans are known for their love of continuity, and this was probably necessary to allow Abrams to tell new stories without worrying about continuity minutiae and irritating legions of Trekkies across the nation.

I think a vocal minority would have been upset without the time travel shenanigans, but even with them some people were upset. I don't think it was done to please fans so much as they thought they had a clever idea for doing it and it was an excuse to get Leonard Nimoy (always a welcome addition) in the film. Most Trek fans, though, I think would have been happy with just a good movie. I, too, generally dislike time travel stories and thought it was one of the weakest points in the new film. Overall, though, I really enjoyed it because I think they nailed the characters.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I can't say I'm optimistic. What about the series is really new?

DS9 set the standard for quality in Trek, but as Ron Moore put it, the universe was taken as far as it could be taken. Now BSG has pushed the bar for scifi even higher. Can they make a Star Trek that's as relevant, innovative and today as the original was in the '60s? Can they please a splintered fanbase (an interesting question to ask on a D&D board)? Can they do so in a way the network execs will like?

Can you guess I'm not a fan of Trek time travel stories?

Isn't that kind of like not being a fan of Batman's Joker stories?

Seriously, time travel is just so ubiquitous is Star Trek, it's hard to dissociate the two ideas.

I'd rather they went with the new canon. Despite the greatness of the existing Star Trek milieu, the reason it was abandoned was because the universe had been exhausted of good drama. Radical reinvention is really the only way forward.