Reunification Of Star Trek Inches Closer As CBS And Viacom Merger Talks Move To New Stage

The merger talks between CBS and Viacom (parent company of Paramount Pictures) that began in January are heating up with reports now indicating the two media companies will begin a new phase of discussions this week. According to Variety, they will be discussing valuations of the two companies, which is one of the last steps in the process. Variety reports that the final deal will have CBS as the “acquiring entity” with CBS Corp. CEO Leslie Moonves leading the combined entity.

This makes determining the value of Viacom the last step in the process. While Viacom has struggled in recent years, analysts feel changes in management and strategy make the company more attractive for CBS. A Wall Street Journal analysis says Viacom is a better deal now than the last time the two companies considered remerging back in 2016, specifically noting that the true value of Viacom’s international business and Paramount Pictures studio and library are currently being undervalued in the share price.

And if you want a simple visual explanation as to why it makes sense for these companies to come together, Recode offers the following infographic, showing how both Viacom and CBS are dwarfed by other media companies.

All of Star Trek under one roof

In 2006 when Viacom and CBS split into two companies they also split Star Trek between them. CBS owns the Star Trek license in general (which includes merchandise) and the television library, while Paramount owns the film library and holds the license to make feature films.

Bringing the two companies back together could allow more synergy for Star Trek, which could help CBS add more value to the All Access streaming service, home to Star Trek: Discovery. It’s also possible it could provide Paramount with more funding or sources of co-financing, an area it has struggled with in the last few years.

Bottom line, the reunification of the owners of Star Trek could only be a benefit to the franchise.

TrekMovie will continue to keep tabs on all the business news affecting Star Trek, so stay tuned for updates.

Leave a Reply

98 Comments on "Reunification Of Star Trek Inches Closer As CBS And Viacom Merger Talks Move To New Stage"

newest oldest

Thrusters on full.

I”m thinking, ‘thrusters on bull- … ” might be more clever a rejoinder.

Nice, Les Moonves, that perennial visionary giving us the likes of NCIS: Scorpion, NCIS: Bakula, Borscht Belt sitcoms, Julie Chen’s Star Trek: Mushroom Quest, and Survivor: Omarosa … can oversee the grand unification of the Roddenberry multiverse. This is our time to shine.

Hahahahaahahaha! This comment. Slayed me.

“Slayed”?

Jack D,

slayed

verb past tense

* informal

greatly impressed or amused (someone).

So true.
Also, I laughed far harder at that sarcasm than I should have. Thank you; after a tough day, I needed that.

Omarosa be dammed.

Reminiscent of Disney acquiring 21st Century Fox to reunite their Marvel Cinematic Universe with the Fox produced X-Men universe.

Except Alex Kurtzman is no Kevin Feige.

Ouch but, yeah, spot on.

Alex Kurtzman name attached to Star Trek has always been a bad omen for me, I thought his writing along with Roberto Orci has been sub standard, especially on Into Darkness, and even in the plot of 2009 was not well thought out in places. Beyond had different writers and still going for that mainstream blockbuster feel, I do feel that Simon Pegg and his writing partner along with Justin Lin gave us a Kelvin timeline that actually evoked the feel of Star Trek. It would be great for the two companies to merge, I loved how when the TNG crew were doing the films, they were able to feel attached to DS9 and Voyager’s continuity. It might help to reconcile the movies and TV shows if they did merge back. However, at the moment I want Discovery on focusing on being a Star Trek show, at the moment I feel it is the most inconsistent show on and has no clear idea what it wants to do, it feels like a Frankenstein’s monster at times as it seems to be produced by committee, given the producers involved. To me at times it seems the producers were trying everything to remove this show from the feel of Star Trek, and I think that is wrong. If I can still stomach what these guys are doing to our beloved show, led by Kurtzman, all I can hope for is a second season of Discovery that actually remembers and is proud to… Read more »

100% agreed.

I agree

Yes – Orci/Kurtzman seem to like coincidence, and just explain it away (Scotty happens to be on the Kirk ice planet, Spock can see Vulcan explode without a device, beaming across space in Into Darkness)… all lazy writing that could have been taken care of with tiny one sentence explanations or cross fades showing time elapsing.

That wasn’t Disney’s primary motivation for acquiring 20th Century Fox. Not by a long shot. As for the reunification of CBS and Viacom that never really worked and risked losing a number of Viacom assets to other parties.

Content would be the main motivation, content and IPs. Uniting the Star Treks is also not the main reason for a CBS/Viacom merger, but it’s the one relevant to this website, hence my original comment.

I hear ya’. My only anxiety is who they ultimately decide to steer the franchise. Still, everything is back under one roof again we could finally see a post Nemesis movie.

Personally I’d rather see another KU movie. Post Nemesis would undoubtedly be a TNG film. And let’s face it… The reason the KU was Kirk/Spock and not Picard/Data was because Kirk/Spock resonates much better with general audiences.

That said, the only way I would personally be on board with a post Nemesis movie is if it is a LARGE scale think where everyone is involved. I would want to see Picard, Janeway, Kira, Bashir… Everyone. Even find a clever way to bring Sisco back. Hell, the movie could be centered around some universe ending event involving the wormhole aliens or something. But I think stand alone movies featuring just the TNG cast are done.

I think that ship has sailed.

I’d be all for a film using Patrick Stewart though.

TUP,

Have you caught Frakes?:

https://trekmovie.com/2018/03/26/jonathan-frakes-returning-to-star-trek-discovery-talks-tarantino-ds9-and-the-orville/#comment-5391900

Paramount’s COO said Abrams deals have been all renewed and Frakes:

”But, I am an eternal optimist and I texted with J.J. [Abrams] – my close, personal friend – who I am a big fan of by the way. I know some people aren’t, but I think he is a wonderful storyteller. I think he did a great job, especially with the first Star Trek movie.

I said “What’s up? What’s happening with this?” and I asked him if it is real and so far it is real because they put a writer’s room together and [J.J] said “Quentin said it is going to be wild.” ” — Jonathan Frakes

Maybe a scene showing them in a Starfleet old folks home. Seriously no one wants to see that.

HN4,

Re: Seriously no one wants to see that.

Seriously? No one? Not even people in actual old folks homes?

HN4,

Re: Seriously no one wants to see that.

The audiences for COCOON and COCOON II refute that claim.

And bringing “Star Wars” under Disney’s 100% ownership as well. I support the Disney-21CF deal and the CBS-Viacom re-merger.

Just Another Salt Vampire

The situation is somewhat different in that Viacom and CBS are controlled by the same people, the Redstones, but have been managed separately from each other since 2006. Reintegrating them is essentially going back to the pre-2006 business model.

Spot on observation. The split failed to accomplish what had been thought would be lucrative for National Amusements as a whole. The broadcast side of things thriving while the cable assets and film studio struggled was unexpected.

While that might be a nice part of the deal it certainly is not the only or even driving force behind the acquisition.

Hope it happens. It will probably be a long winded process though, but hopefully the end game is Star Trek under one roof.

Article title, I see what you did there. Nice touch.

If this happens they should get rid of all the execs from Viacom as they ruin all the cable channels they have by adding stupid reality shows that make no sense for that tv channel. Like MTV and history channel

Michael and Kirk look good together.

They do don’t they?!

David Alexander Harrison

It’d be interesting, but would have to be done in the form of a multiverse cross-over rather than a straight reintegration, as the narratives are divergent. The (well, a) Enterprise doesn’t even exist in the Kelvin timeline by the point it shows-up in the DSC S01 finale, and I’m assuming they won’t say Vulcan was destroyed some time in the third or fourth season…

There doesn’t necessarily need to be a crossover. It just means that Discovery can now reference the movies and stuff.

There wouldn’t be any logical reason to reference the movies. Discovery exists in the prime timeline. The JJ timeline exists in an alternate universe.

There are 13 movies, not 3.

A Pascale,

I believe you will find that Paramount regards it as just another facet of Paramount 2.0:

http://deadline.com/2018/03/ucla-entertainment-symposium-tackles-paramount-issues-with-coo-andrew-gumpert-1202352893/

that is, events of the past 14 months which includes “executive changes, new marketing initiatives, financial partnerships, and successfully persuading talent to stick with the studio as part of Paramount’s reinvention.”

According to their freshly minted COO Andrew Gumpert, JJ Abrams, Skydance and Hasbro had “one foot out the door”.

“Managers of ‘just Paramount’ have our helmets on, our shoulder pads loaded, and do our job every day.” Paramount COO Andrew Gumpert speaking on the merger.

Here’s so more symposium coverage:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/streamers-spending-spree-talk-ucla-entertainment-symposium-1097152

with some info on deals Paramount’s renewed.

@Disinvited — we’ve been saying this from day one haven’t we?

I think the big problem here is going to be whether Time Warner and ATT win Trump’s DOJ case. If they are not allowed to merge, folding Viacom and CBS back to gether is going to be similarly problematic. As will Disney and Fox, and Sinclair and Tribune.

Moreover, I think this merger in particular will wait until the case against the Time Warner/ATT merger is resolved, because if the merger doesn’t go through, TW is rumored to be planning a sell-off of key assets individually: Warner Bros., DC, HBO, Turner, CNN, etc. if that happens, there’s a good chance CBS would want to pick up their producing partner for the CW in the deal, and perhaps even DC. That would be far more valuable than merging with Viacom in the short term.

That said, I’m disturbed that Abrams has either reinvented or extended his deal. It effectively means he will have a finger in anything the studio does with Trek for the next few years.

Curious Cadet,

Re: we’ve been saying this from day one haven’t we?

Indeed.

Re: case against the Time Warner/ATT merger

You have a point, but I believe the new business leaning court appointments by Trump will view the merger of CBS and Viacom as a special case, i.e. that of a reunion, and give it a pass. Also, as a woman is spearheading this merger, surely neither the Trump administration nor the Republican Party believes raining on her parade could pass any sort of sniff test for either of them if they did decided to go after it?

I wouldn’t put it past Moonves to squirrel away resources during that merger so that he could swoop in for an anticipated Warner firesale. He’s going to force something at Viacom to give to those ends if the opportunity presents itself. I have to wonder if he can find enough people left there to fire to accomplish it merely at that?

The Abrams renewal seems to indicate that either the George Kirk script or the QT script or perhaps a merger of the two Trek scripts are in the offing? I’ve been pondering if Paramount feels that to go forward with QT Trek they need Uma Thurman on board? It could be interesting casting.

Remember that Uma Thurman really doesn’t like Tarantino anymore, since he almost got her killed.

Nachum,

That’s not how she describes him. She said QT was a hero who put his career on the line to help her recover the footage, and that the real villains were the two who lied and thuggishly did everything in their power to cover it up.

“Quentin Tarantino, was deeply regretful and remains remorseful about this sorry event, and gave me the footage years later so i could expose it and let it see the light of day, regardless of it most likely being an event for which justice will never be possible.
he also did so with full knowledge it could cause him personal harm, and i am proud of him for doing the right thing and for his courage.
THE COVER UP after the fact is UNFORGIVABLE.
for this i hold Lawrence Bender, E. Bennett Walsh, and the notorious Harvey Weinstein solely responsible.
they lied, destroyed evidence, and continue to lie about the permanent harm they caused and then chose to suppress.
the cover up did have malicious intent, and shame on these three for all eternity.
CAA never sent anyone to Mexico.
i hope they look after other clients more respectfully if they in fact want to do the job for which they take money with any decency.” — Uma Thurman on Instagram

I stand corrected. I think I was mixing up her reaction to Weinstein and allegations that Tarantino was too close to Weinstein. I seem to recall that she wasn’t happy with Tarantino *at the time*. But again, I stand corrected.

@Disnivited — regardless, I don’t expect any more big mergers to go through until the ATT/Time Warner suit is settled. So reunification of Trek is still a long way off.

Curious Cadet,

Re: I don’t expect any more big mergers

And the only impediment that I can see is if the man in the Oval Office regards Colbert as part of CBS News Division. Even at that, the man so loves to rub those he identifies as enemies’ noses in his capricious acts that he’s liable to push the merger through just so he can polish his halo and claim “See, the opposition to the ATT/Warner merger is solely based on its complete lack of merit.”

The circumstances are different. One family controls both entities. It’s not so much a merger but more a reunification of assets.

Dennis C,

Exactly, how I expect the Trump appointed court to see it.

@Disinvited — I wouldn’t be so sure. The landscape has changed dramatically since Viacom and CBS split. Both companies have grown substantially in their own respects. That said, I also think Trump is seeking to punish CNN with the DOJ’s current lawsuit, and a decent judge will likely take that into consideration in weighing the evidence. But any company that tries to merge, regardless if they were originally the same company (e.g. Ma Bell split up and re-emergence), will be subject to the same objections by competitors and industry watchdogs, especially if Trump wins the ATT case, which will only strengthen those arguments in other cases. Nothing is a slam dunk right now with the mercurial Trump administration impeding the free market. At a minimum, the process itself will draw out any potential merger far longer than need be, with the net result of delaying Trek reunification under one banner.

Curious Cadet,

There are more things dreamed of in your philosophy than the philosophies of the Trump appointees can accommodate, Horatio.

Besides, as Gumpert already noted, Viacom hasn’t been, and isn’t being, considered by anyone in the business as any sort of competitive threat. And I submit, it very well was regarded as much in prior unified days, as well.

You are thinking far too much harder on this than any Trump appointee or the man himself will.

@Disinvited — I guarantee no one in the Trump administration has thought about this at all, perhaps they haven’t even heard about it. But keep in mind, this is an administration that has been sitting around coming up with the most liberal, left-leaning legislation to pass through congress, only to repeal it, and thus guaranteeing that no similar legislation can ever be passed in the future. If there is some vindictive twist to thwarting the merger, as you proposed about Colbert’s association with CBS, or 60 Minutes airing the Stormy Daniels interview, you can bet they will try.

Curious Cadet,

Re: I guarantee no one in the Trump administration has thought about this at all

Indeed, that’s my point.

Re: Stormy

Even at that, CBS is still not even on the radar, the current shinnies occupying their concentration are Amazon and ROSEANNE.

But I will grant you one thing, if they don’t get this reunification approved by the time they get the new old MURPHY BROWN back on the air this Fall you may be on to something.

I posted this on the previous thread here. Perhaps the merger is already beginning.

I checked out the IMDB page for ST: Discovery, Season 2, and found the following for episode 1:

Storyline
Crew of USS Discovery, Commanded by Acting-Captain Saru, and CDR. Michael Burnham, respond to a “Priority One” distress call from the USS Enterprise NCC1701, Commanded by Captain Christopher Pike and Spock (Zachary Quinto).

In case you gloss over this, it says Zachary Quinto is playing Spock. It may be bullshit but just thought I’d share.

@IDJ — the merger has nothing to do with hiring Quinto to play Spock. That said, IMDB can be edited by anyone, so at this point, that could just as easily be somebody’s idea of a joke.

Please stop commenting that IMDb stuff all over our articles. Posting it once in the appropriate comments section is plenty. I responded to your comment in the DSC Season 2 article . I’ll post this here too.

As Curious Cadet said, IMDb is basically Wikipedia for TV/Movies. It’s full of incorrect information for unreleased productions. It’s maintained by volunteers (just like Wikipedia), and is open to anyone adding information. All of that is to be taken with a massive grain of salt.
Eventually once Season 2 is released, valid information is added/sorted through by the editors.

For example: the DSC page last year had Rainn Wilson in 9 episodes, Michelle Yeoh in 13, etc. which we knew wasn’t true.

Jeez, sorry boss. This was only the second place I posted about it and I’ve never done it before. I felt this thread was just as appropriate since it opens with pics of Kelvin Kirk & Michael Burnham. And like I said, “it may be bullshit”, but I wasn’t sure. Thank you for explaining why. Now I’ll go deal with my shame.

IMDB also listed a new Quantum Leap series wth Scott Bakula years ago. That description is unlikely from CBS or anyone associated with the show. What you have is hopeful fan speculation with a summary of the final scene of season 1.

Wasnt Quantum Leap actually in “development” at one point, with Sam’s daughter “leaping” in an effort to find him?

THIS is the biggest news from the merger? The Stock is gonna auffer,

@TM — “while Paramount owns the film library and the license to make feature films.

Paramount doesn’t own the license to make feature films. This should say: “while Paramount owns the film library and currently holds the license to make feature films.” (and I would add) ‘from CBS’.

CBS has thrown a ton of talent at Star Trek: Discovery, and I’d love to see talent of that caliber making the movies. On the other hand, if they siphon talent away from Discovery, that could be a bad thing, so I have mixed feelings about this.

Uh…not so sure about that. I like to see someone entirely new come up with the films but I do think Trek needs another overseer to bring it all together like the old days.

Yeah if its me in charge, I’d have someone else produce the movies but I’d have a Trek czar at the merged company that ultimately calls the shots.

You want the TV and films to compliment each other but not be completely the same. I DON’T think it should be two different universes though. it should support a Cinematic Universe that is shared.

They can keep it apart if they want by doing different eras. But they can also have the same era and compliment each other with the films dealing with a big, immediate issue and the TV show doing a deeper dive into the issue.

Les Moonves is an evil man. Having his claw on the movies is a terrible idea.

Why is he “evil”? Because he’s a rich TV tycoon?

@TUP – He’s evil because he brought Star Trek back to TV. Yeah he’s pure Evil.

lol of course!

There is a lot going on in the world for someone to be so melodramatic as to call Moonves evil.

@TUP – Sadly I know just the kind of person that would call Moonves evil.

TUP,

It’s a reputation he’s earned from the intra-office wars he’s led in the past to eliminate obstacles towards his goal of becoming an Entertainment Mogul with his eyes squarely set on running a major movie studio such as Paramount, or rather heading it and turning it into one.

If you’ve heard of the dirty tricks Brad Grey pulled while in television with Anthony Pellicano, illegal wiretapping, Gary Shandling, etc. Les is regarded by many in the industry to be cut from the same dirty pool cloth.

Some think his current wife has mellowed him some.

This site’s local comment hearsay from a Vulcan handle, whose full name escapes me, described meeting Moonves and having to check if he’s still had his hand and wallet after.

OMG CBS Viacom and Paramount will remerge do you know what this means? this means that they could potentially Merge the Kelvin Universe and the Prime Universe Together giving us the Best of Both Worlds.

The problem with the graphic is that even with the merger, the new company is still a small player. MI and Transformers are weary, Trek hasn’t recaptured its footing, the merger just isn’t going to make Paramount the new Marvel under any circumstance. When they can figure out how to do a Trek movie for 75-140MM, then they’ll have something. Until then, false starts.

Never noticed the similarity in uniforms before.

Star Trek is so bad right now it’s hard to imagine anything can save it.

Maybe the first joint venture Star Trek production will have a male main character with a female name.

You mean like…”James”?

Hailing frequencies open, captain…
This is captain Marion Morrison of the USS Rio Grande. You’re short on ears and long on mouth, Klingon!

How’s that?

The original division of the company was ridiculous and personality-clash-orientated anyway, completely failing to anticipate the coming web TV boom. Star Trek was the most obvious casualty of the muddle-headed strategy. In an era where cross-promotion is everything, we could have had an animated spin-off series from the 2009 Star Trek movie, a marketing strategy where the tie-in books and comics could have been streamlined to promote the new films better, a new live action series set in the Kelvin-verse (given Discovery’s oddities, I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t end up travelling to the Kelvin-verse at some point now) and countless others. Paramount’s other franchises could also benefit if they relaunch Transformers and GI Joe with proper TV series tie-ins.

The remerger is a positive step, but only insofar as it’s a remedy to a very stupid step over a decade ago that likely cost both parties a fortune. As ever, Star Trek looks like Star Wars’ poorer older brother who made all the bad choices in life.

Paramount have never ever managed to keep the movie franchise going due to the accountants insisting on counting every last cent from the last one! In the 1980s they came close after ST5 where the original plan was to have movie series saviour the late great Harve Bennett direct his own academy based story & still do another movie with the original cast. CBS will not be any different & Discovery is not even proper Trek its by far the worse Trek series ever made and that is saying a lot when you consider some of the Berman dreck! So please keep anyone remotely involved with Discovery light years away from Trek movies!

At least it’s happening quicker than the Vulcan-Romulan Reunification..

Slowly the return for a honorable conclusion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAb6-NFuXW4&t=8s

Bring Back Enterprise, Conclude the story

@BringBackEnterprise — it’s too late. There was an opportunity for a Netflix movie 10 years ago. Now they’d be hard pressed to present a credible story given the cast’s current age. Trip is dead, and we’ve already seen the conclusion of the series with a much more youthful cast. Perhaps some post Federation establishment adventure, but it won’t be the same. It won’t be the end of the series we were watching, it’ll be a one off story about the characters 13 years later. And I’m not all that interested in seeing that, especially without Trip.

Curious Cadet,

Re: it’s too late.

Actually, no it isn’t. Thanks to the BBgun’s “inspired” scripting the final episode did not send the characters off in a much more youthful state as the obstacle that you incorrectly surmise the actors’ lack of youth would present, but in a state of advanced old age. If anything, they’re still too young to pick up where they left them off, if there was any merit to this actors’ age “logic” that you concocted. So reeling it back a couple years isn’t entirely out of the question of credibility. And as for Trip, if dead Trip in flashback was passable enough to you for his being in that episode, I don’t see why a Trip flashback couldn’t be put to better use, again, to give him a presumably better send off in a better written movie?

It’s actually too late to say that you don’t want to see the characters’ sent off old because that’s exactly what the BBgun gave us. That Genii’s long been out of the bottle.

Bring back Enterprise
Did you know? …that contrary to the belief of visual Star Trek fans around the world, the episode “These are the voyages…” was not the end or the last episode for Star Trek ENTERPRISE series. This episode still causes debates on the visual/virtual world of the internet. According to the Star Trek ENTERPRISE book series, published by Simon & Schuster, “These are the voyages” was an inaccurate and imprecise computer re-creation by Commander William Riker (TNG) were some of the scenes were not true facts. They did not really happen as it was shown. The story of ENTERPRISE continued away from the eyes of the visual and virtual fans through the struggles and conspiracies at formation and then consolidation of the Federation flowing onto the Romulan Wars and the development of new technologies and alliances. Captain Archer became an Admiral and some of his officers became captains of their own ships during the war Against the Romulan Empire. Some got involved in covert action and some allies did not fulfill their promises to the Federation of planets. If the episode “These are the voyages” was true none of this could have happened. In the books “Last full measures “and “The good that men do” we find that commander Tucker did not die, but instead was genetically altered and became a Section 31 spy inside the Romulan Empire. The book series also leave a possibility that T’pol did not end as a lonely, fatherless, motherless, childless Vulcan ostracized by her own… Read more »

Bring back Enterprise,

Fascinating premise. And consistent for Riker and his Federation history, in asking us to believe the Archer history is as inaccurate as their Cochrane’s.

It really doesn’t matter now.

Even before the split it was obvious they just dont get it nor care to.
Star trek being merged under one roof doesnt mean we will get a universe like the MCU.

We will end up with at best the DCEU or worse the Universal monsters universe that died out of the gate with the Mummy.

Simple fact is: unless they get a studio head who gets Star trek like Peter david or Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens it will fail.

Yep. Star Trek needs a Kevin Feige!

Dream scenario: A meta-plot threatens the entire Reality. End result is the Q restarts the universe, and we begin again, with the legendary 5-Year Mission of James R. Kirk. Everything that has happened, still happened. Now, it’s time for something NEW.

This “reboot” allows for the re-integration of both the television shows and movies without getting rid of everything. And though events and missions have occurred, they would not hamper making new stories. Plus, the aesthetics would be updated.

Its not needed though.

The argument given by Bad Robot for “rebooting” was to not be held hostage by canon. But thats only true if they think we’ve seen everything there is to see in the Star Trek universe. And thats obviously not true.

Even with the Kirk et al characters. There was literally nothing that prevented them from telling stories within the context of the Prime Universe other then their own hubris.

They still werent going to kill main characters or effectively alter them in any meaningful way.

And in reality, they traded upon canon and fans’ knowledge to score points. The only thing original about the JJ films was the original premise and then it was all downhill.

Yep. If they really wanted a break from canon, one of the regulars should have died definitively (no Khan’s blood) in ST09, showing all bets are off. They chickened out. If Khan’s blood brings people back to life, they should have embraced that: ‘He’s dead, Jim. I’d better get him back to sickbay and find out what happened!’ Again, they chickened out. Actually, Discovery’s been far more bold and less afraid to stretch the series’ backstory. The biggest problem with the BR movies is that they’re effectively post-modern, metatextual deconstructions (destructive ones at that) of previous Star Treks, the same as the new Star Wars ‘chapter’ films have proven to be. It’s more about a pseudo-intellectual commentary on earlier productions than actual decent storytelling. Trouble is, modern critics love that pseudo garbage, playing an Emperor’s New Clothes strategy to pretend they’re cleverer than their cineliterate – and frequently better informed – readers, hence increasing disparities between critics’ opinions and those of the general audience. There was nothing to stop BR simply telling new stories set in a ‘season four’ period of the five year mission in the new Star Trek films. Anyone sane would accept the designs would be updated, when you’re effectively making a movie equivalent of a tie-in novel to a fifty year old TV show. They could even have replaced most of the the regular characters except Kirk, Spock and McCoy with new ones. It was never explicitly stated that all the second-tier characters completed the mission… Read more »

Well said.

I thought the premise of Spock ending up back in time was brilliant. Even if they said “this is prime but we’re picking up the story in ‘season 4’ of TOS”, involving Nimoy was a smart way of exciting the fan base, bringing back lapsed fans and connecting the new films to the old.

But it didnt have to be a “new universe”. We’ve seen them time travel a bunch of times. Why is this different? Because they wanted to “change” the Star Trek universe? What did they do?

Killed Kirk’s dad who we never saw or heard from anyway. No change.

Blew up Vulcan. Ended up meaning nothing and was merely a plot device to have Kirk and Spock fight for a minute and over-emotionalize Spock.

Thats about it.

Had they done the same story but maintained it was still the same universe (perhaps with Nimoy Spock’s help they prevent some change to the time line), we could have stayed behind to keep watching as opposed to “returning” to Nimoy Spock’s time. No big difference at all.

One thing they should have done to really show us this was different, was to use the classic Enterprise instead of the Kelvin for the opening of 2009. With Robert April as Captain. And blow it up. In so many ways, that leads to a far more emotionally satisfying film.

Yeah, I agree about Robert April; way more sensible. I feel like Trek and Wars have become way too navel-gazing generally though – almost films *about* Star Trek and Star Wars. I mean, the original Star Wars films were more Romantic matinee serials crossed with Joseph Campbell and Carl Jung, while The Last Jedi was more a Naturalistic post-modern, nihilistic deconstruction/destruction of the hero’s journey.

Better perhaps that the makers ditch the ‘Cahiers du Cinema’ nonsense and tell a straightforward, fun story. Star Trek was about heroes – who are advanced enough that postmodern obsessions like race and gender are old hat, echoing Martin Luther King’s remarks about the measure of a man having happened – simply exploring the universe and learning new things.

I will NEVER accept Discovery as part of the Prime Star Trek universe. Nope. Sorry. It’s a terrible, dismal, badly-written show that sucks all the joy of out Trek.

At least the Kelvin timeline *tries* to pay homage to the original series and those that followed. Discovery just takes a whiz all over it, and the fans.

Okay.

Actually we only need a carveout from Paramount Pictures into CBS to get the franchise together, without the excess bagage of the rest of the business.

And to illustrate, here are photos of what the franchise has descended to since the split. Do you want more of THIS?

Good. Now they can finally have the proper funding to finally release Deep Space 9 and Voyager to Blu ray.