Quote from: jeff37923;1097695I really hope that they do not link it back to the Mortis trilogy because that would just make The Force seem too much like some kind of Post-Modern Catholicism for my taste.

I also really hope that they do not engage in time travel bullshit, even though it is apparently now canon. Time travel was needed to save the Star Trek franchise from its own overconvoluted canon (not to mention its fanbase) and JJ Abrams is a hero for doing so, but it would shitwreck Star Wars.

I'm curious how Trek's canon is overconvoluted.  It's the Pre-Kirk shit that's a problem, and no amount of Kirk era alternative universe time travel bullshit is fixing that.

Now, I've not read any novels written in the past 25 years, but as far as I know, only the TV series and movies count.

Jar Jar Abrahams has the anti-Midas touch, anything he touches becomes shit. He fucked Trek, he fucked Star Wars and now is poised to fuck Superman and Green Lantern. Fuck him in the ass with a sahuaro cactus.

Sideways.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;1097733I'm curious how Trek's canon is overconvoluted.  

By the time JJ Abrams saved Star Trek, DS9 had ended on a stupid shot with Sisko vs Dukat in a Jesus vs The Devil rip off final episode, Voyager had left people cold because the storyline went nowhere, and Enterprise was foundering. Over forty years of highly detailed canon that had all sorts of contradictory elements with a franchise cash cow that had been milked so much that you needed a college degree in Treknology just to understand half of what was going on had left the viewing audience cold. People were Trekked out. JJ Abrams hit the giant history erase button on that mountain of Trekkie fueled cow flop and did the one thing that all of the previous movies and TV shows had not been able to do - make Star Trek accessible to the ordinary fan again.

A franchise is not worth it if the crap it produces keeps causing its audience to shrink.

I don't think that Star Trek had become inaccessible.  I do think that we've had an explosion of Sci-Fi offerings and that different flavors of Trek aren't designed to appeal to the same people.

I didn't care much for Voyager.  The essential premise is 'we're trying to get home'.  If they succeed, they get home and the show ends.  If they have no hope of going home, the central premise is ignored.  The show has to promise that 'this is the episode we make it' but they have to fail.  It's fuckin' Gilligan's Island.  To enjoy the show you have to completely set aside the 'escape' and focus on the journey, and they didn't sell themselves that way.

For DS9, I know a lot of people liked it, but it wasn't my cup of tea, either.  I like Trek zooming around the galaxy and exploring strange new worlds.  A lot of people liked Babylon 5 because it did Space Station Politics well, and Trek had to compete against it.

I liked Enterprise, but it had Firefly/Battlestar Galactica to compete against during the run and it had to avoid disrupting the canon set up in the original series.  

It's a big world with a lot of entertainment options, so Trek can't compete on name alone - it has to be an appealing show.  As someone who enjoys Star Trek generally, I don't think the new movies have anything to offer.  Some people make the claim that they abandoned what made Star Trek it's own thing to become more like Star Wars.  I'm not sure if that's true, but I definitely think there is room for Star Trek that is more true to the brand.  

I think a show can be a quality show and get cancelled for low ratings - it's not always crap just because the audience shrinks.  That's what happened to the original Star Trek and it happened to Firefly, too.  Good shows aren't always recognized in their time.

Quote from: jeff37923;1097749By the time JJ Abrams saved Star Trek, DS9 had ended on a stupid shot with Sisko vs Dukat in a Jesus vs The Devil rip off final episode, Voyager had left people cold because the storyline went nowhere, and Enterprise was foundering. Over forty years of highly detailed canon that had all sorts of contradictory elements with a franchise cash cow that had been milked so much that you needed a college degree in Treknology just to understand half of what was going on had left the viewing audience cold.

But the time travel reboot meant that there were two timelines to keep track of, and they kept dragging back all that canon. The time travel reset just made things more complex, not less. There are now two Khans, two Kirks, sometimes Vulcan exists, sometimes it doesn't, etc, etc...

QuotePeople were Trekked out. JJ Abrams hit the giant history erase button on that mountain of Trekkie fueled cow flop and did the one thing that all of the previous movies and TV shows had not been able to do - make Star Trek accessible to the ordinary fan again.
A franchise is not worth it if the crap it produces keeps causing its audience to shrink.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_asNhzXq72w

New Trek made money because movies with overwrought drama and mindless action sell tickets. That bubble predictably burst, because there was nothing substantial underneath.

(I agree about Dukat. They took a great villian and turned him into a demon-possessed satan-ex-machina. The last season if DS9 is my least favorite due to that.)

Meanwhile, The Orville continues to do well , IMO because they do good sci-fi stories with interesting characters. Something nuTrek and Discovery, and Picard should consider.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1097790Meanwhile, The Orville continues to do well , IMO because they do good sci-fi stories with interesting characters. Something nuTrek and Discovery, and Picard should consider.

That just kinda proves my point. The Orville is doing better at Star Trek than Star Trek: Discovery and the show isn't even part of the Star Trek franchise.

Quote from: jeff37923;1097802That just kinda proves my point. The Orville is doing better at Star Trek than Star Trek: Discovery and the show isn't even part of the Star Trek franchise.

But The Orville directly takes from Star Trek, especially TNG, unapologetically. The Orville is as far from nuTrek as you can possibly get, while there are lots of comparisons between nuTrek and Discovery.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1097806But The Orville directly takes from Star Trek, especially TNG, unapologetically. The Orville is as far from nuTrek as you can possibly get, while there are lots of comparisons between nuTrek and Discovery.

I was under the impression that Discovery was part of nuTrek.

The Orville is outperforming the current Star Trek franchise because it is following the template that was laid down during TNG when Star Trek was still fresh and not a cash cow milked to death.

Quote from: jeff37923;1097816I was under the impression that Discovery was part of nuTrek.

The Orville is outperforming the current Star Trek franchise because it is following the template that was laid down during TNG when Star Trek was still fresh and not a cash cow milked to death.

I'm not sure what your point is now. The only thing stopping nuTrek from picking up those templates, is the tone deaf writers and producers. The continuity wasn't the issue, the stories being crap was the problem.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1097820I'm not sure what your point is now. The only thing stopping nuTrek from picking up those templates, is the tone deaf writers and producers. The continuity wasn't the issue, the stories being crap was the problem.

Continuity was the problem JJ Abrams solved with nuTrek. Yes, the current franchise owners could use the TNG template, but then everyone would be comparing nuTrek to oldTrek and it would still be material that was done before.

Quote from: jeff37923;1097822Continuity was the problem JJ Abrams solved with nuTrek. Yes, the current franchise owners could use the TNG template, but then everyone would be comparing nuTrek to oldTrek and it would still be material that was done before.

Ok, and I disagreed.
By making it an alternate timeline, the old continuity is still there. Because of this, they did use material they used before, and everyone still compares nuTrek to oldTrek. Only now the stories are even shittier.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1097830Ok, and I disagreed.
By making it an alternate timeline, the old continuity is still there. Because of this, they did use material they used before, and everyone still compares nuTrek to oldTrek. Only now the stories are even shittier.

Star Trek never did treat its writers well. That tradition goes all the way back to TOS and how Roddenberry treated Ellison over City on the Edge of Forever and how Gerrold was treated over the show Bible and subsequent court case.

So Rey is Darth Vader's real mom?

That would be utterly idiotic, but only half as dumb as the Last Jedi or the Farce Awakens.

I would watch it if I knew the plot involved an Emperor-worshiping Ewok death cult (~32:22)!

Quote from: nightlamp;1097900I would watch it if I knew the plot involved an Emperor-worshiping Ewok death cult (~32:22)!

I am a Proud Supporter of the Endor Holocaust.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3667[/ATTACH]