Paramount Moving On from Kelvin Timeline Trek

[BrandX]

4 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

New Khan was a fun twist, but the mighty scenery chewing Ricardo Montalban is a hard act to follow.

More to the point, the final act of that movie didn’t stick the landing as well as the original (metaphorically and literally, I guess…)

 

As to m’learned coll’ SW’s point; it is a fine balancing act to introduce a new cast of characters and have you care about then in 120 minutes, while still making it sci-fi. And it’s do-able, if you focus on character.

 

The advantage you’ve got as a writer in this scenario is the worldbuilding is already done, and there’s no reason you can’t namecheck or cameo existing characters.

I’m thinking about Tim Zahn’s Brainy Smurf… sorry, Thrawn trilogy, which followed on from ROTJ, picked up on the lore and ran with it. Smurfy Boi, Mara and friends were so compelling that they became part of the fabric of the galaxy. And then other people picked up and ran with them.

 

Oh, for sure the end part of the movie did not land.

 

It was the speech imo.  It just didn't work.  New Spock's "KAAAAAAHN" didn't feel as good as Will Shatner's "KHAAAAAN" either.

 

What may have been better for the end is have Kirk mention the Kobyashi Maru since they had it in the first film and it was an issue between them "So what did you think of my answer to the Kobyashi Maru this time?" in a good Kirk tone.  Then have New Spock yell Kahn until he got it sounding right 😛

 

Also, do a better fight scene.  That's supposed to be a super soldier and I just don't imagine Spock being the big hand to hand fighter Kahn should be.  😛

[Techwright]

4 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

The advantage you’ve got as a writer in this scenario is the worldbuilding is already done, and there’s no reason you can’t namecheck or cameo existing characters.

 

The challenge here is which parts of the world building do you keep and which do you toss, and what's that going to mean to, arguably, one of the two most vocally nitpicky fandoms in existence.   For example: do you keep the spore drive as canon (itself an upheaval of well-established canon), or do you cut it loose in favor of the canon from the original 5 TV shows and their movies? What do you do about the Time authority of the future that seems to pick and choose their interference in the present?  By the end of Voyager, there were any number of crazy inventions that could play havoc with keeping a tight grip on writing going forward.  The Barclay communication technique, bouncing subspace communications off of stars to extend range across multiple galactic quadrants is but one example.  You also have a mounting number of creations (beings) that are sooner or later going to need to be addressed or its going to look weird.  Are you telling me there is only one giant space amoeba in the entire galaxy?  Surely there must be other swarms of flying parasites to control whole planets with spinal cord-infecting tendrils, more scorpion-like parasites to enter victims mouths, more warp-speed vampire clouds to suck iron-blooded victims dry, etc.  

 

Sooner or later, your product becomes even less believable the more cases of antagonists' populations or off-the-charts technologies that you ignore.  

 

I can see a couple of ways to successfully address this concern:

 

1.  Reboot - clear all canon and begin again.   This is not necessarily a bad thing.  Strange New Worlds had a soft reboot, specific to the technology.  The SNW Enterprise's command deck looks vastly more advanced than 1960s Star Trek's original, and that's somewhat okay with me, as a lot of technology we have today surpasses the 1960s version.  The Kelvin timeline movies got around the dated tech look by stating that the Kelvin Enterprise was designed from retro-engineered technology created after studying the scans of the time-jumping Romulan ship.  But even in a reboot I'd stay clear of the established characters.  The original Kirk era had a dozen Constitution-class starships, of which the Enterprise was only one.  Why not focus on the crew of another?

2.  Go where no one has gone before - riffing off what I suggested in a previous post, focus on a deep exploration ship or possibly squadron (as a Trek parallel to long-range exploration in the 1400s.  Columbus took 3 ships after all, and Magellan had several). Set them previous to Barclay's galaxy-spanning communication discovery. The advantage here is that deep space explorers would not necessarily have access to all the updates and changes going on in the Federation, since there's no Barclay.  Any advancement would have to be their own discovery, either through experimentation or alien contact.  This admittedly has certain strong parallels to Voyager, the difference being Voyager's events began with an interference, while these would begin with a choice.   For icing on the cake, do the unexpected and set the adventure outside of the galaxy.  Most don't know this but we actually have dwarf galaxies near, and possibly even in collision with the Milky Way. (near being over the MW's polar region, meaning the dwarf is closer to the MW core than MW's own arms are)  One supposedly  in collision is full of red stars suggesting great age.  In Trek views, this implies ancient civilizations to explore.  

3.   Carefully moving forward: starting with events after Picard, move forward, but craft answers to those hanging threads that might eventually snag and bog down Trek.  For example, simple dialog can fix several of these:  "The latest dispatches say a starship fleet was finally deployed to trace back the path of the giant space amoeba and destroy any others it finds to remove potential threats."  No special effects, no budget, a nice cameo comment and the problem is tied up neatly.

[ShardWarrior]

1 hour ago, Techwright said:

1.  Reboot - clear all canon and begin again.   This is not necessarily a bad thing. 

 

I disagree.  It is a bad thing and please, no more reboots.  Star Trek had a very successful 18 year television run from 1987 to 2005 creating new series with new characters with their own stories to tell.  We do not need yet another rehash of TOS or TNG.  

[Wravis]

8 hours ago, ShardWarrior said:

 

I disagree.  It is a bad thing and please, no more reboots.  Star Trek had a very successful 18 year television run from 1987 to 2005 creating new series with new characters with their own stories to tell.  We do not need yet another rehash of TOS or TNG.  

If you don't like it, don't watch it.

[ShardWarrior]

1 hour ago, Wravis said:

If you don't like it, don't watch it.

 

Correct.  If it is not to my liking, I will not watch it, just as I stopped watching Discovery after its first season.  See how simple that is?  Please contain your inflated sense of entitlement in the Sonic Melee thread.  No need to play the wounded puppy.  

[Wravis]

11 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

 

Correct.  If it is not to my liking, I will not watch it, just as I stopped watching Discovery after its first season.  See how simple that is?  Please contain your inflated sense of entitlement in the Sonic Melee thread.  No need to play the wounded puppy.  

 

Except you didn't. You posted "don't make any more of this, because I don't like it". It's not made for you. They aren't obligated to stop making them simply because you don't like the show.

And now I'm telling you, no, don't voice your opinion. Just shut up and don't consume the thing being created. 

Like you suggest others do when they don't like things.

Do you see how annoying that is? That's what you sound like.

Edited 13 hours ago by Wravis

[ShardWarrior]

6 minutes ago, Wravis said:

It's not made for you. They aren't obligated to stop making them simply because you don't like the show.

 

Correct.  Quite clearly shows like Discovery and Strange New Worlds were made for an audience that did not include me, so I did not watch them.  Nor did I demand the producers listen to my feedback.  I did not cry and stomp my feet and whine on the Star Trek forums complaining to the producers that they did not listen to me.  I very much doubt anyone involved with the production of Star Trek visits these forums.  I just did not watch the programs.  It really is not more difficult than that.

 

Again, please contain your inflated sense of entitlement and your issues with the HC people in the Sonic Melee thread.  There is no need to derail this thread with it.  Thank you.

[Triumphant]

I don't want a complete reboot, but I do want to see a new captain and crew, in a new ship, going out and exploring where no one has gone before.  I'd like to get back to the tried and true formula of self-contained stories in each episode, with the ocassional 2 or three part cliff hanger at the end of the season.  Again, though- it just won't work unless you can get a decently long season to allow the actors to find their footing in the roles and the writers to find their groove in writing for the characters.

Trek has always been character driven, with the focus being (to a very strong extent) on the evolution of the character's personal and professional relationships with each other.  I love action and special effects as much as any other sci-fi nerd but, in Trek, sthat tuff has to be one component of the show and not the main event.

Also, the ship is a sort of character in itself.  Make it beautiful and interesting.  Not ugly.

But hell, why am I droning on about it?  It's not like the producers are going to read this or otherwise be swayed by this old fart's opinons.  😁

[BrandX]

23 hours ago, Techwright said:

 

The challenge here is which parts of the world building do you keep and which do you toss, and what's that going to mean to, arguably, one of the two most vocally nitpicky fandoms in existence.   For example: do you keep the spore drive as canon (itself an upheaval of well-established canon), or do you cut it loose in favor of the canon from the original 5 TV shows and their movies? What do you do about the Time authority of the future that seems to pick and choose their interference in the present?  By the end of Voyager, there were any number of crazy inventions that could play havoc with keeping a tight grip on writing going forward.  The Barclay communication technique, bouncing subspace communications off of stars to extend range across multiple galactic quadrants is but one example.  You also have a mounting number of creations (beings) that are sooner or later going to need to be addressed or its going to look weird.  Are you telling me there is only one giant space amoeba in the entire galaxy?  Surely there must be other swarms of flying parasites to control whole planets with spinal cord-infecting tendrils, more scorpion-like parasites to enter victims mouths, more warp-speed vampire clouds to suck iron-blooded victims dry, etc.  

 

Sooner or later, your product becomes even less believable the more cases of antagonists' populations or off-the-charts technologies that you ignore.  

 

I can see a couple of ways to successfully address this concern:

 

1.  Reboot - clear all canon and begin again.   This is not necessarily a bad thing.  Strange New Worlds had a soft reboot, specific to the technology.  The SNW Enterprise's command deck looks vastly more advanced than 1960s Star Trek's original, and that's somewhat okay with me, as a lot of technology we have today surpasses the 1960s version.  The Kelvin timeline movies got around the dated tech look by stating that the Kelvin Enterprise was designed from retro-engineered technology created after studying the scans of the time-jumping Romulan ship.  But even in a reboot I'd stay clear of the established characters.  The original Kirk era had a dozen Constitution-class starships, of which the Enterprise was only one.  Why not focus on the crew of another?

2.  Go where no one has gone before - riffing off what I suggested in a previous post, focus on a deep exploration ship or possibly squadron (as a Trek parallel to long-range exploration in the 1400s.  Columbus took 3 ships after all, and Magellan had several). Set them previous to Barclay's galaxy-spanning communication discovery. The advantage here is that deep space explorers would not necessarily have access to all the updates and changes going on in the Federation, since there's no Barclay.  Any advancement would have to be their own discovery, either through experimentation or alien contact.  This admittedly has certain strong parallels to Voyager, the difference being Voyager's events began with an interference, while these would begin with a choice.   For icing on the cake, do the unexpected and set the adventure outside of the galaxy.  Most don't know this but we actually have dwarf galaxies near, and possibly even in collision with the Milky Way. (near being over the MW's polar region, meaning the dwarf is closer to the MW core than MW's own arms are)  One supposedly  in collision is full of red stars suggesting great age.  In Trek views, this implies ancient civilizations to explore.  

3.   Carefully moving forward: starting with events after Picard, move forward, but craft answers to those hanging threads that might eventually snag and bog down Trek.  For example, simple dialog can fix several of these:  "The latest dispatches say a starship fleet was finally deployed to trace back the path of the giant space amoeba and destroy any others it finds to remove potential threats."  No special effects, no budget, a nice cameo comment and the problem is tied up neatly.

 

 

That's one thing that got me.  The upgraded tech.

 

Am I the only one who can just assume that Kirk's ship likely would've been updated a bit more than the 60's version and just accept that?  Modern tech has improved, so I just accept that, hey, Kirk era likely looks better now.

 

That said, I agree with SNW when they meet the Lower Decks Boimler and Mariner when it comes to the communication devices.  I like the flip 🙂