Alex Kurtzman: Star Trek Picard Series Will Be “Extremely Different” From ‘Discovery’

Alex Kurtzman, who is the overseer of the expanding CBS Trek on TV franchise, spoke with Entertainment Weekly today about the still-untitled Picard series and revealed some key details.

Picard show will be different from Discovery

In the past, the producers behind the expanding Star Trek television universe have told us that each of the shows will have its “own voice” and “tonal vision.” In the new interview with EW, Alex Kurtzman gets into more detail on what that means for the Picard show in particular:

“It’s an extremely different rhythm than Discovery, Discovery is a bullet. Picard is a very contemplative show. It will find a balance between the speed of Discovery and the nature of what Next Gen was, but I believe it will have its own rhythm.”

EW also quotes Kurtzman giving a bit more detail in contrasting the new Picard show with the second season of Discovery, saying:

“‘More grounded’ is not the right way to put it, because season 2 of Discovery is also grounded. It will feel more … real world? If that’s the right way to put it.”

Writers have been busy

In August when the show was first announced, details were still being worked out and no scripts had yet been written. The writers’ room first assembled in September, but they have apparently been very busy. Kurtzman told EW:

“The writers’ room has broken about eight episodes and we’re moving quickly, and I couldn’t be more excited about it.”

There is no word yet on how many episodes will be in the first season of the ongoing series, but Kurtzman’s comment implies more than eight. Production on the first season is set to start in April of 2019. The show will be produced in California and not in Canada like Star Trek: Discovery.

Patrick Stewart and the Picard show writers’ room in September (Photo: Twitter/Patrick Stewart)

Answers questions about Picard’s last 20 Years

When the show was first announced at Star Trek Las Vegas, Sir Patrick Stewart revealed it would take place 20 years after the events of Star Trek: Nemesis, putting the show in the year 2399. He also noted that Picard “may be a very different individual” who has been “changed by his experiences” over those twenty years. In the new interview with EW, Kurtzman discussed how the new show will reveal what Picard had been up to during that period, saying:

“Without revealing too much about it, people have so many questions about Picard and what happened to him, and the idea we get to take time to answer those questions in the wake of the many, many things he’s had to deal with in Next Gen is really exciting.”

What happened to Picard after Nemesis? We’ll find out more in 2019.


Stay up to date on all the Picard show news here at TrekMovie.com.

newest oldest
Notify me of
ziplock9000

So far, so good. Engage!

scotchyscotchscotch

Isn’t this after all the Nero stuff in the Countdown comics? I wonder how directly they’ll address all the Romulus being destroyed stuff..

Corinthian7

I’m not convinced they will while the movie and TV sides are still separate. That’s not to say I think they’ll decanonize it, but they may avoid addressing the subject on screen for as long as possible.

If I recall correctly wasn’t Kurtzman involved with writing Countdown? If so I wouldn’t be surprised if they contined the Ambassador Picard angle and he represents Vulcan on the Federation Council due to Sarek’s katra.

Daniel Ireland

Yea, the destruction of Romulus was definitely canon. That and Spock disappearing. I have a feeling these things won’t come up in the Picard series in order to set it apart from the Kelvin films but they did happen.

ML31

I think Romulus destroyed and Ambasador Spock being gone will come up. Will it be a part of the shows plot? Probably not. But I can’t believe they would go more than two seasons without acknowledging it.

Corinthian7

@ML31 I agree that these are events that are too big to be ignored indefinitely, I just think there are valid reasons why they might want to hold off addressing them. I’ve posted a more detailed summary of my thoughts on this above.

DeanH

Yeah this may be a big part of what is happening in that time frame. I think there might be a lot of angry Romulans and other members of the Romulan Star Empire looking for a new home planet.

Tiger2

Maybe not Spock disappearing but I have a hard time to believe they could avoid Romulus being destroyed. It would have shifted the entire alpha quadrant because of it. I will be interesting to see how they handle it but I know I’m not alone in that. ;)

Corinthian7

Is it canon though? I don’t say this to be controversial or take a swipe at the Abrams’ movies, I’m just being realistic. Obviously they’ve gone to great lengths to create a new timeline that’s separate from the other shows and movies but still essentially part of the same fictional universe. So yeah, on the surface the Kelvin timeline is canon, however, this is where it gets complicated. The TV and movie sides of Trek are two different companies, there’s been talk of a potential merger but this is far from guaranteed and at the moment they’re both just doing there own thing and there may come a point where to the two separate canons become irreconcilable. Sure they’re both in different timelines but themy only diverged about 20 years prior to The Cage. Therefore, there are elements of the universes that you would expect to remain consistent and the longer they are being developed independently of each other the higher the probability that they will contradict and undermine each other.

The second thing to consider is that the movies are in limbo at the moment. The follow up to Beyond appears to have stalled with reports that it may have lost it’s leading man and the Tarantino project may or may not be part of the same continuity. The bottom line is that Paramount might just decide to do a hard reboot of the movies. This could result in a similar scenario to what appears to be happening between the film and TV divisions of Marvel at the moment. When they were launched the Netflix super heroes were billed as sharing the same universe as the movie characters but the links betweeen the two have been flimsy at best. Now that it’s clear that all the Marvel Netflix shows are coming to an end we have the real possibility that the likes of Daredevil and Luke Cage could be recast and relaunched again as fresh incarnations of the characters within the MCU.

I think it’s inevitable that the whole Romulus/Spock thing will need to be addressed one way or the other in the new show but I think they’ll give themselves some breathing room. Ideally I think both the movie and the TV divisions would like to be connected so I don’t think they’ll want to close any doors but I think they’ll wait and see how things develop both with the merger and the development of the movies before answering these questions on screen.

albatrosity

I think it would be cool if the writers kept it and it remained canon. But I also think it would be a big constraint on the storytelling. As for Paramount doing a hard reboot of the reboot movies, I sincerely doubt it. The remarkable thing about Trek canon is how consistent it remained [relatively speaking] up until Disco. The KT actually fits quite nicely within the canon we know. So if Trek can bother to adhere to its own continuity, I think we’ll all be happier for it. If they don’t, and the writers go their own way — I mean I’ll still watch it, but I’ll be less impressed.

Corinthian7

@albatrosity I don’t envision a hard reboot of the reboot per se. It’s likely that if they abandon the Kelvin universe movies that they will likely want to do something different, I can’t see them recasting TOS characters straight away and there’s a decent chance that it won’t be in the set in the same continuity as the Abrams films. Now it’s possible that whoever the charge with bringing a new Star Trek vision to the big screen and might choose to do something that contradicts or even completely disowns the last 3 features. That might be a slim probability but it could happen nonetheless so unless they are specifically doing a story that revolves around Romulans they could probably be a little vague around the subject. That being said maybe the Picard show will actually focus on the Romulans. The fall out of the destruction of the Romulan homeworld could lend itself to a number of scenarios that could used to comment on issues in the world today and this is certainly something that might appeal to Sir Patrick Stewart.

Michael Hall

Please, no references to the Kelvin timeline, most especially with respect to that godawful comic.

The River Temarc

^@Michael Hall, absolutely. I’d have zero problems if they declared the Kelvin Universe wholly a non-canon, “what-if,” alternative look at TOS, and completely ignored it for the Prime timeline in the Picard series.

Tiger2

But do you think the guy who created those movies and now in charge of the new show is going to treat his own movie as non canon? Why would he want to delegitimize his own work? Outside of legal reasons I have no idea why he would.

I understand not everyone is going to like every iteration of Trek. And yes I know Enterprise, the Kelvin films and Discovery has gotten extra scorn for many reasons but its ALL Star Trek and it all matters. As long as it can fit canon it should be included IMO.

Denny C

He might if it doesn’t fit the story he wants to tell. The Kelvin timeline would stand on it’s own and apart from the original TOS timeline. This movies were never intended to be an extension of what had come before it so much as a reboot of the film franchise. They tossed fans a few nuggets to keep them happy but, in the end, this was a wholesale reboot.

GarySeven

I honestly don’t understand the logic behind people saying that the disappearance of Spock, the destruction of Romulus (I wonder why nobody also mentioned the destruction of Vulcan as well?) MUST be addressed in the new Oicsrd show. The Kelvin films were intentionally designed to be a parallel but different universe, Not the prime universe. The way I see it, the Picard series not only doesn’t have to address the KU, it should NOT address it. It’s another universe! That’s like saying the Picard series must include things that took place in the evil mirror universe too. And that would be ridiculous. Voyager and TNG, and Discovery all take place after the KU started, and they didn’t address them either- because nothing on the KU has anything to do with them. It’s not on their universe.
Please stay with the Prime IUnverse. In the Multiverse we all live in, there’s room for both universes to coexist separately.

Tiger2

Gary, because the destruction of Romulus happened in the prime universe. The destruction of Vulcan happened in the Kelvin universe and yes THAT was clearly addressed in that universe, hence STID.

No one is saying the show has to address the KU at all, but Romulus destruction happened in prime. Nero and Spock came from the prime universe into Kelvin and changed another universe history. That was literally the entire point of the film.

OK, I’ll just say this, if the producers of the Picard show or whoever says the Romulus destruction never happened in the prime universe, fine, then retcon it and move on. But if it did, then it should at least be acknowledged, right?

ML31

The problem is Trek ’09 went through great lengths to “explain away” the changes they made. I’m thinking that if those explanations are ultimately trashed, then why go through the trouble to create them to begin with? KU films could have just been straight reboots and that would be that. But, they weren’t. Romulus’ destruction IS canon now. I really don’t see how that can be swept under the rug to pretend it didn’t happen. I suppose it could be ignored completely if the story allows for it. But I just can’t imagine it get ignored indefinitely.

Tiger2

Exactly ML31!

As I said we are ONLY discussing it because this is how Paramount set up their movies in the first place. They could’ve just gone with a straight reboot and none of this would be an issue. But once you go through such lengths to not only create your universe but to fundamentally change the Prime Universe in the process, I imagine everyone in both the business and creative end knew they couldn’t just ignore it now. Especially when you take such an iconic character like Prime Spock and make him the sole connection to both of your universes.

So now you made your bed, you have to lie in it. If they didn’t expect other shows to acknowledge that story, here is some advice, don’t make that story in the first place. Or just say from the beginning that wasn’t the prime universe. But we know that’s not true because Orci himself spent a lot of time here emphasizing that’s exactly what it was.

Marja

The aspect of Romulans being a wild card in the 20-years-later prime universe would present very interesting possibilities for scripting. Other than that I see no need to dwell on the disappearance of Spock; it’s two decades since. In the grand scheme of things, he was an ambassador to Romulus. I think the assumption might be that he died there.

As for canon, I imagine Kurtzman will be chary of ticking off those fans devoted solely to its preservation, but he will not predicate every dramatic decision on it, either.

Tiger2

Agreed about Spock! Its been a long time now and to be honest we don’t know if anyone in the PU actually knew what happened to Spock or Nero. For all they know, they could’ve just died in the super nova too.

Tiger2

But Romulus being destroyed is canon! How can that be ignored? People get on Discovery case because they retcon things here and there like changing the Klingons although its not a real canon issue IMO, they just suck lol. But retconning an important planet in the alpha quadrant would seem like a big deal to me.

But yes I get it, most people hate the films because it did things like destroy Romulus in the first place. But for me, I loved it because it felt so bold. That’s what Star Trek needs. It doesn’t have to destroy more planets lol but shake things up once in awhile. Thats why I love DS9 so much, it rocked the status quo and Romulus blowing up was another way of doing that so I hope it stays.

Land O'Calrissian

Why do fans give such a crap about “canon” and “non-canon?” Come on, people. Canon arguments suck all the fun out of fandom, as they entirely miss the point.

Tiger2

Well canon is important in every story. If you want to ignore canon completely FINE, then just call it a reboot and do what you want. But for some reason that seems like blemphemy to do in Star Trek. But then they have 50 years of canon issues and if you avoid those because you’re just trying to make a story however you want, people still complain. So yeah.

And I have said in the past if they ignore Romulus blowing up, its not the end of the world for me but yes it would make those films non canon. I know most people here aren’t that bothered but I do wonder about the fanbase as a whole.

Marja

Frankly if I were in charge I wouldn’t be arsed about certain of the fanbase. I would be concerned with telling good stories, hiring good writers and actors, and staying with canon in general without being married to it.

Canon arguments bore me no end. Trek broke its own canon a number of times and people can’t seem to see that. They had 1987 – 1992 to revel in an established, canon-adherent Trek universe. Before that, it wasn’t, so much.

Sam

Pretty much that. Star Trek is more a series of creative/interpretive worlds overlapping each other than it is a single cohesive canon. This became obvious even when there was just the First Four movies, and going back to discover them already created problems with TNG in its first two seasons.

And of all the Star Treks, the most boring ones are those that concerned themselves with being stylistically similar to their predecessors.

Does the new series even need to mention Romulas at all? What if it’s not important? (All right, it’s got the longevity of a TV show; Romulas is likely to come up eventually).

So let’s say you reference it. Does it need to line up perfectly? In Kelvin Trek, Spock describes the supernova as a Freak Event which threatens the entire galaxy. But Kelvin Trek already operates on different laws of physics than classic TOS. Berman Trek also operated on very different physics than TOS. So you could reference Kelvin Trek and STILL contradict it.

Maybe in CBS Trek’s version of events, the supernova was a perfectly natural (and predicted) phenomenon, conforming to plausible science, which most of the Empire survived. Save for a VERY tiny handful of screwed left-behinds who suffered the same fate as environmental refugees in our own world just due to everyday bureaucratic oversight.

Romulas could still he a HUGE (and menacing) presence in OldPicard’s time even with their homeworld gone. The Klingons lost a homeworld in The Undiscovered Country that was never mentioned again during all of Berman Trek.

You could even have the political landscape resemble what was briefly described in ‘All Good Things’ just as an Easter Egg valentine to fans (and not even for consistency’s sake, since AGT’s depiction of an imaginary future wasn’t even consistent within itself).

What’s wrong with two people in the same room overhearing the same conversation very differently? That’s what the many separate periods within Star Trek’s supposed canon already amount to.

Or you could ignore Kelvin Trek altogether, which I would argue is well within CBS’ right to do so (Star Trek is theirs, even though it’s still hard to understand exactly how). But that is less interesting. Since it would be an excuse to keep everything homeostatic.

albatrosity

Marja, Trek has been breaking canon since 1966. But when it comes to little things like whether it’s called Starfleet or UESPA or Star Service or Spacefleet Command, that’s not really that big a deal. Whether the death penalty is General Order 4 or 7 isn’t that big a deal. But when entire episodes or movies already exist about a specific event that later goes on to be contradicted and “decanonized”, then that’s like a real insult not only to the fans watching it but the creators of the work itself. Like how would you feel being told that all of Voyager never happened because some future series decided to purge all references to it and establish “alternative facts” surrounding the timeline? That would rub a lot of people the wrong way. So like, there’s minor mistakes and then there’s major sweeping canon changes, and saying Romulus still exists in the Picard series is saying the Kelvin timeline isn’t real, and that would anger a lot of fans, for what I think would be a good reason. We’ve already invested ourselves in the story told so far. I think the torchbearers of the franchise need to pay it respect and at least acknowledge that it’s “real” and canon and not just decide one day that what some other writer said isn’t real anymore.

Tiger2

Agreed Albatrosity!

You hit the nail on the head for me and I how I see it too. Of course no show or movie shouldn’t be slave to canon, they should be allowed to make changes if and when it serves the story. But you shouldn’t just be able to ignore whole cloths of it because then it just feels like bad story telling.

And I also agree there is a difference between simple mistakes or basic changes in production, especially when a show is first starting. The whole Spock smiling thing or Kirk middle name initial being an ‘R’ are just minor differences when a low budget TV show was just starting out and they were still trying to figure it out. That’s a complete difference from deciding someone is going to have Kirk middle initial be R 50 years later after its been well established. I can differentiate between a gaffe or a minor change vs wiping away a major established story point that everyone knows but chooses to avoid it.

But as I said, if wiping that away makes the story better in some way even THAT I’m up for and we know Star Trek has retcon plenty of things. Discovery is doing it right now lol. Most of it is fine but if you can just change and ignore whatever you want at any time, that just feels lazy IMO.

And I get it, its not easy trying to fit all the minutiae in what has become a very complex and convoluted back story. Why the Kelvin films did a soft reboot in the first place. And its also why I think ONE DAY they may have to do a hard reboot, just start from scratch. But they clearly fear doing that for some reason so here we are.

DeanH

Even though I don’t agree with the so-called “canonistas” I think you need some form of continuity to add legitimacy to the story. No, I could care less if the Enterprise A was really just a renamed Yorktown OR even if the makeup on the Klingons radically changed from TOS to TMP to Discovery but you can’t just say in one year Vulcans are in the Federation and they next they have joined the Romulan Star Empire without some form of an explanation. I too, get frustrated with those who often cry foul on canon for something that I find irrelevant but that is their opinion and those opinions are quite honestly no more or less important than mine. The passion of the fanbase is one of the reasons what makes the Trek Nation so cool and fun so it is all good. When SOME fans get out of control, start to actually HATE things, vociferously slam those who like something and demand actors, writers and production people lose jobs because they despise a new series, that is when it becomes unacceptable and I ignore those complaints as being illegitimate.

Sam

I agree about not doing anything as radical as enveloping Vulcan within the Romulan Empire (at least not in a retroactive sense), and I don’t think anybody would seriously propose doing so. In fact I agree with everything you’ve just said. With some exceptions that I lack the time to get into right now — such as modern world history overwriting fictional canon (it should), or the sheer number of time travel incursions and parallel universe phenomenons already witnessed across all of ST (such that “explanations” for -accidental- discrepancies between or even within individual series really just aren’t needed to begin with).

Arguments for the “visual canon” I just don’t see as applicable, so here again I fully agree with what you’ve said. Today’s 24th century is never going to look like 1995’s 24th century, and it shouldn’t even try to. There are certain visual cues that will always scream out “Star Trek” even to the most profound hater and his grandmother. A circular command center with chairs facing a giant flatscreen TV for example will always scream out ST — no matter if the latest production decides to retroactively change that TV into a panoramic window with a translucent projection layer. A production designer is not “lazy” just because he’s been hired to be creative at his job.

Marja

Yes Sam! You’ve said it!

Marja

Agreed Dean. It’s the haters/despisers I really tire of. And the people that insist on certain technical alterations to the look of starships. I objected to Disco’s “new Klingons” at first, then came to enjoy their alienness and lack of resemblance to the ’80s band KISS.

Corinthian7

@Land O’Calrissian Canon arguments pretty much define fandom!

Corinthian7

But I don’t hate the new films Tiger2, nor am I advocating that they should or should not decanonize the movies. Rather am I am simply stating that that there is a genuine possibility that the studio might make this decision and I gave several credible reasons why they might choose to do that ie potentially irreconcilable differences in canon arising due to future Star Trek internal history being developed by two completely independent creative teams and/or uncertainty regarding the the status of the Kelvin Universe movies and a very real probability that Paramount will do a hard reboot with the movies.

I’m not suggesting that Kurtzman specifically wants to delegitimize his own work but I am suggesting that he’s not the person who would make the final decision on it. He’s in charge of Star Trek for the next few years but he’s basically a hired gun and he is producing a product to a studio mandate. If the studio decide that for commercial reasons it’s better to decanonize the movies then there’s nothing in the overall prime canon that would be violated and this action wouldn’t be without precedent – TAS was canon originally, then it wasn’t, now parts of it are again. I want to stress here Tiger that I am only speaking hypothetically, I’m not saying that they should or shouldn’t do this just that at this point in time they could genuinely go either way.

Tiger2

I know you don’t hate them Corinthian7! Your reasons are valid.

BUT, this argument makes no sense. NOT you, I’m saying if Paramount decided they don’t want CBS to use their IP. Then what was the point of using Spock or at least Nimoy’s Spock? They noted he’s specifically from the Prime Universe. That’s exactly why the canon matters because they made it clear that’s ‘our’ Spock who went over to the Kelvin universe.

Now if it was never meant to be canon to the PU, fine, but why go through all the motions of using Nimoy, tying their countdown comics to TNG, blowing up Romulus, time travel etc if they just wanted to put it in another universe and call it a day? We’re only talking about this because that’s what Paramount did. No one said they had to do it that way. They did that for the very reason so people would see those movies as connected to the PU BUT still separate enough to be their own franchise. That’s having your cake and eating it too.

So I get what you’re saying but they can’t use Spock and Romulus as canonical events from the PU if they didn’t expect CBS to use those same elements. And why even use them in that fashion if they aren’t? And why would CBS allow them to that if they never meant for it to be in THEIR canon? Nimoy should’ve NEVER been used in that case but a different actor. It only confuses people.

Corinthian7

@Tiger2 That’s not really what I’m saying. The questions you post are all fair but they assume a synergy between the TV and movie sides that probably doesn’t exist. Obviously Nimoy was used because the intent was for his character be perceived as the same one fans have followed since The Cage. Obviously the brain trust involved in eastablishing the new universe wanted to retain that connection. I’m not disputing the fact that Paramount intended for their movies be linked to canon. Rather I am suggesting the possibility that we could end up with 2 competing/conflicting versions canon..

Paramount and CBS are not the same company. It potentially benefits both businesses to have their products fit together nicely hence the decision for the movies to diverge from the main continuity into their own parallel universe. Obviously the possibility still exists that both companies may once again come under the same umbrella in which case they will be able to reap the benefits of a shared continuity. However, at this point in time they both seem poles apart and the overriding goal of both organisations is to make as much money as possible from Star Trek which could potentially send them down different paths ie what might be considered a great creative choice for Paramount could be disastrous fo CBS and vice versa. You can argue that having both versions set in different universes solves this problem but that’s a very shallow interpretation. Although the timelines are dramatically changed they still share many of the same rules. Given that there is no coordination whatsoever between the movie and tv productions this could prove very hard to manage.

Even if we were to consider the probability that both companies want to try and maintain their shared continuity then the issue is further clouded by the uncertainty surrounding a continuation of the Kelvinverse. If that series really is dead in the water would there be any benefit in CBS planting it’s flag in those movies continuity? Plenty of film series have overwritten canon before so we have to accept that this is a genuine possibility. Take the Superman movies for example? We had 4 movies starring Christopher Reeve and then Bryan Singer produces a movie that was a direct sequel to Superman 2 that overwritten 3 and 4. Look at the Aliens Franchise? First they link it to Predator, then we have Ridley Scott come along and pretty much disown that and then we’ve Sharlirto Copley almost delete 3 and 4 from the series and replace them with a version in which Hicks and Newt are both still alive.

So you have to ask, with so much uncertainty surrounding the existing cinematic take on the franchise why wouldn’t CBS be careful? The issue is easily avoided, the Romulans only showed up at the end of season one of TOS after not being heard from for over a century. In TNG they didn’t show up until the end of the first season after a similar hiatus. Unless the Picard story is specifically tapping into the Romulans they barely need to acknowledge them in the short term. I wouldn’t be surprised if they take a similar approach to Netflix with Marvel in which they occasionally alluded to an incident that was widely perceived to be the Battle of New York. They did just enough to sell the notion that everything real is connected in the MCU but left plenty of wriggle room so that those shows were not indelibly written into the same shared narrative. We’ll Likely see them use that wriggle room now that the Netflix universe is clearly coming to an end.

Tiger2

What I’m saying is IF this was any real concern from the outset, CBS simply would’ve told Paramount they can’t attach their canon to the prime universe in ANY way from the beginning, right? If they consider Nimoy’s Spock as canon to the Prime universe, then I’m guessing they would’ve told Paramount they can’t use him for the films and to simply get another actor. Simple.

Think of the DC universe and you have the DCEU for the films and the Arrowverse for the TV shows. They are all under the same company can use whatever canon they want but they make it EXPLICITLY clear they are two separate universes from the onset and exactly why there are two Supermans, two Flash, etc. Because there is clear line the two have nothing to do with each other; probably legal reasons.

My only point is if CBS and Paramount really felt that way from the beginning then DON’T create a movie that literally attaches itself to the prime universe and then somehow thinks its going to just magically work itself out later on. Why make that story UNLESS the intention is for it to be viewed as canon to the overall fanbase and not just one segment of it, in this case the films.

But Orci answered this directly and stated both sides CAN use whatever they want, which only makes sense. It doesn’t mean they WILL though obviously.

But you’re right they can certainly change it and they may, but legally it doesn’t sound like they have to.

Corinthian7

@Tiger2 The thing I want to make clear is that the point I am making is about the politics and challenges of two separate businesses making a TV and movie series based off of the same canon. If the new show comes out and categorically confirms that the Hobus supernova happened in this universe then, I’m fine with that but I just don’t think they will. The Picard series is going to be a small number of episodes per season, it’s therefore unlikely that they will have to address the questions about Romulus or Spock. The show being set years after Spock travelled back in time does answer the biggest questions posed by Star Trek 2009 ie was the prime timeline overwritten by the events of that movie. We now know it wasn’t unless of course the Picard series is actually a sequel to the JJ films and not TNG but we won’t open that can of worms right now haha. Anyway, I did want to address the crux of your argument so here goes:

“What I’m saying is IF this was any real concern from the outset, CBS simply would’ve told Paramount they can’t attach their canon to the prime universe in ANY way from the beginning, right? If they consider Nimoy’s Spock as canon to the Prime universe, then I’m guessing they would’ve told Paramount they can’t use him for the films and to simply get another actor”

You basically answered this yourself here:

“But Orci answered this directly and stated both sides CAN use whatever they want, which only makes sense.”

Once you consider the fact that both companies can do whatever they want with canon regardless of the impact it has on the other version you can understand why they might both be cautious. So that means we probably won’t see Lorca popping up in the KU or Keenser join the crew of Pike’s Enterprise in DSC. Obviously the fact that both products have gone to great lengths to show that they are part of the same lore suggests that it would be mutually beneficial to try and at least keep that appearance going forward. Therefore you might ask why would it be such a big deal to explicitly link the TV shows by confirming that Romulus was destroyed and Spock and the crew of the Narrada were lost in the incident? I’ll give you an example, what if Paramount decide to call it a day with the KT movies? There’s been a continual decline in the box office returns, we can’t get Pine and Hemsworth to sign on they might say, Tarantino might not want to be restricted to that timeline and who knows what else they might be considering.

Let’s say they decide to reboot again and let’s imagine that maybe they want to distance themselves from the previous version. How would that effect CBS if Paramount were to say that they no longer consider there own movies canon? It might be that they say the Kelvinverse was its own interpretation of Star Trek in much the same way as Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man has nothing to do with Andrew Garfield’s. Or maybe they take another approach and say that the movies were part of a Star Trek multiverse but the Spock and Nero that travelled back in time were not from the prime timeline. Why might they do this? Perhaps because they bring in somebody new who wants to tell a new story in the prime timeline that contradicts the set up for the JJ movies. Until they know what the status of the films are it makes more sense to take a cautious approach. This doesn’t mean that we can’t see Romulans and maybe if we do they might allude to some sort of disaster that we could assume was the destruction of Romulus but the key thing is that it wouldn’t box them into a corner if things changed.

Tiger2

OK Corinthian7, I got you, we’ll just have to see what they do.

But for the record, I never said the explosion of Romulus HAS to be a story line in the Picard show, I’m simply saying it should at least be acknowledged, thats all. I personally would like to see a bigger story line because I just think it would make an interesting story, especially as it shifts the entire dynamic of the alpha quadrant in this era. But no they don’t have to actually focus on it. The Kelvin films destroyed Vulcan but the sequels never used it as a story line either focusing on other things instead. STID referenced it basically but that was it. Beyond less so.

As far as not making anymore films, they lose popularity or even a reboot I don’t see why that would matter? Canon is still canon. Enterprise was prematurely cancelled and probably the least popular show today (though maybe more than DIS) and yet that show’s canon is still used today, by both the Kelvin films and now DIS. Because regardless it still happened so it still matters! I love the fact they use ENT canon as much as they do now. It clearly influenced not just their stories but that shows design too.

But if they decide to avoid it, its not the end of the world. I’m just happy we are going forward again and into 25th century Trek. That’s more than enough for most fans I think.

Corinthian7

Did CBS approve it though Tiger2? I’m working on assumption that they didn’t and likewise Paramount don’t get any input on what CBS do with their shows. If I’m wrong about that then I’d be delighted as I’d love the separate Star Trek productions to be coordinated but I’ve not seen anything to suggest that your right about that. If the show is going to be telling a story that involves the Romulans, then sure, they’re going to have to address this but if it’s not, if the Romulans are going be nothing more than window dressing then it’s better to keep it vague.

Tiger2

Well I’m guessing when CBS decided to license the movies to Paramount there is probably a set of guide lines they have to follow. But clearly it’s not very strict in terms of canon because as Orci said they were allowed to basically do what they want.

Which is why I don’t understand why some think that wouldn’t apply to CBS since they actually own the franchise?? If Paramount can use any canon or character from the shows then clearly its a two way street. And while the movies are about TOS, they reference the entire franchise if you are a big enough fan to catch them. Every show TNG, DS9, VOY and certainly Enterprise has all had elements taken from their shows incorporated into the films in some way, everything from MACOS to Section 31, even their direct story lines.

But then suddenly when the discussion of using the Romulus explosion comes up, its like there is some huge legal hurdle for CBS lol. Its weird, CBS OWNS the entire franchise, not Paramount. And as shown canon seems to be shared across the board as it SHOULD be or else why call the movies ‘canon’ at all? Thats why this discussion never made sense. The novels aren’t canon because they don’t have to follow what happens on a show or film. But once you DO call something canon, then it all has to follow regardless who makes it.

And while I don’t think its ‘coordinated’ in the sense they work together per se, I do imagine its like the Marvel movies and TV shows. They each do their own thing but they still follow each other canon so neither can ‘overwrite’ what the other is doing either. That’s what I’m guessing happens here too.

Corinthian7

@Tiger2 Ah right, I’ve been assuming that Viacom owned Star Trek and that they gave TV and movie licences to CBS and Paramount respectively. Now you’ve made me aware of my mistake I can understand your position more and it does cloud things a little. I’m not sure it changes my original position though which is that I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t address the Romulus situation straight away in the Picard series. I’m speculating here and clearly the above paragraph shows that I’m far from an expert on TV & movie production or licensing deals but you mention Marvel and I think they’re a great example to illustrate my point of view. Prior to forming their own studios Marvel pretty much sold off rights to their most valuable IP’s to the highest bidder and it would seem they let each studio do whatever the want with the property. This was all of course long before the MCU, Kevin Feige was still an associate producer working under Lauren Shuler Donner and Marvel had historically fared much worse at the box office than DC so it’s reasonable to assume that Marvel were more than willing to afford a lot of creative control to their licensees. When the Abrams movies were announced Star Trek was practically dead so you have to wonder how much power might have been conceded to Paramount. If we have a licensing situation similar to what Marvel has with 20th Century Fox and Sony then there could be restrictions on what they can and can’t use. Obviously 20th Century Fox are about to be absorbed by Disney and a deal has been brokered with Sony so that both companies can use the Spider-Man character within the MCU. The Sony deal is very interesting as it shows that even if an agreement can be reached there can still be lots of limitations in terms of what each party can use. It’s clear to see that even though Marvel own the IP Sony as the licensee have a lot of power over them but neither party has total control. Case in point, Spider-Man’s villain roster. Sony clearly have ambitions to create there own Spider-Man universe and it’s obvious that they want to set them within the MCU. This is indisputable, we’ve had Amy Pascal go on record stating as much. I believe she called them ‘adjuncts’ to the MCU but then had to backtrack when Kevin Feige flat out denied that they were connected (although he left the door open for this to happen in future). Now given that Sony want their characters to exist in the MCU and Marvel would undoubtably love to be able to use the likes of Venom and Doc Ock you have to ask, why is there a problem? I imagine that most people will have taken one look at the size of my posts and given up reading them by now but if you’re still here Tiger2 then I appreciate that!, The second type of licensing that Marvel have is for TV companies to produce original content. In this scenario we’re told that these shows and movies all take place within the same universe and this has been supported by some of the movie characters crossing over into the TV world. However, this has been very much a one way street with all the leg work being done by ABC. Once we look outside of ABC to TV companies not owned by Disney the links and continuity become far more tenuous. This is to the point now that we have Netflix cancelling all of theif MCU series and rabid speculation that Marvel maybe considering hard rebooting these characters and completely separating the Netflix canon from their own. Now this is Marvel that we’re talking about here, the company that’s pretty much set new benchmarks for the idea of a shared universe and as we can see even they are very non-commital in terms of confirming clear black and white links between their different licences. I could well imagine that I’m coming across as pedantic labouring the same points. I much prefer to speculate on plots and character arcs but at the same time I think there’s a widespread assumption that the Picard series will have to deal with the consequences of Star Trek (2009) and I feel that not challenging this limits speculation. For example Romulus could quite easily be around in the prime timeline without actually breaking canon. We’ve not seen how Abrams’ series plays out yet but if they closed the saga by resetting the timeline then we could potentially have scenarios in which the destruction of Romulus never happened. Not exactly out of the question when you consider that Quintin Tarantino is potentially making the final movie in that series… Read more »

Tiger2

First off, yes, I always read everything people respond to me no matter how long, so no worries about that! And its also why I try to always respond because I want people to know I take their points seriously even if we agree or disagree. Or that I at least heard them. Unless I have you on ignore lol. Thankfully I have no one these days so these boards have been great the last few months.

OK, getting to your points and this will be pretty long as well to answer as much as possible but yes CBS controls the franchise (which I was confused for a long time too because we were all so use to Paramount owning it but the people who runs the films now were not the same arm who made the previous shows and films anyway) and so the licensing deal probably has restrictions for sure, BUT I don’t think they are that strict the way Marvel was and I’ll explain why.

First off, the biggest difference is that Marvel licensed specific characters to various companies, ie, Sony has Spider-Man, Universal had Hulk and Namor, FOX (which had the biggest line up at one point but a lot has went back to Disney) had X-Men, Fantastic Four, Daredevil and so on. So they were basically able to use those characters and whoever villains and supporting characters that came with them. BUT they are ONLY allowed to use those characters and nothing more. They can’t even HINT at the bigger Marvel universe without a bunch of super-villains (in this case lawyers lol) showing up and shutting them down over it. In other words their universe is very limited.

But with the CBS/Paramount licensing deal I don’t think thats the case at ALL! AFAIK, Paramount isn’t licensing The Original Series, they are licensing the entire franchise so they can make literally anything they want within it, they simply chose the movies to be TOS first. But if they wanted to make a TNG, VOY or Enterprise movie, or even something completely new, nothing stops them. Again, AFAIK! But that’s already a big difference between all the various Marvel licenses. And yes it ALSO explains why they can reference whatever they want in the Kelvin films because they have access to the entire universe. And why they share literally the exact same canon as the shows do.

Here is a great example. Look what happened with Quick Silver when it was ruled both Disney and Fox could share the same character in their movies. They literally had to agree to separate origins of the character for their movies (Fox Days of Future Past; Disney Age of Ultron). For Disney, they couldn’t mention his father who happens to be Magneto because Fox had him of course. But what’s crazy they couldn’t even call him a mutant, which he literally is in the comics. Disney can’t even USE the word mutant at all in the MCU. As for Fox, they couldn’t mention he was an Avenger even though he has a large history with them because in the Fox Marvel universe there are no Avengers.

You see the difference now? In the Paramount/CBS license none of these restrictions exists. They can use whatever characters they want, they can all have the exact back stories as before. They can bring in whatever relationships they share, none of it seems to be off limits. Thats the entire reason Paramount considers these movies canon as the shows, because everything that exists in the shows ALSO exists in the movies too. The difference obviously because they purposely created another universe new canon has now been created, but it doesn’t negate that the old canon that still exists either. They are simply parallel to each other.

Tiger2

You said yours was long, mine is so long I had to use separate posts lol.

But as shown there is a VERY strict division between these studios and characters. Obviously the Sony deal with Spider-Man has changed but as you pointed out it still leaves into question if OTHER Sony characters like Venom is in the MCU or not. I don’t even think they know lol but it’s obviously still tricky in terms of what is allowed and isn’t.

Now getting to your point about the MCU movies vs their TV shows, I think the CBS/Paramount deal works closer to this model actually. Most people know (at least nerds lol) that while the movies and TV shows are technically connected, they are indeed run by two different studios under Marvel. So yes you’re right, the TV shows do feel less connected than the movies do because they are run separately. BUT its still the exact same canon just the same.

Because even though the movies don’t acknowledge the shows, they can’t OVERWRITE the shows canon either. In other words, they can’t just have another Daredevil show up in the movies with a new backstory and actor different from the show, because there is already a Daredevil in the MCU (or was ;)). Fury can’t still be the Director of SHIELD in the movies because Coulson is the Director of SHIELD in AoS even though he ‘died’ in the movies and so on. So that’s what I mean, yes the movies don’t directly acknowledge the shows but they ARE acknowledged, simply not directly. But they actually do act like they are in the same universe.

And I think Star Trek is being set up like this as well. Yes, the shows don’t have to acknowledge the KU at ALL if they don’t want but I do have a feeling they can’t just pretend Spock never disappeared either. Yes maybe they can IGNORE it, but I doubt they can just have another Spock show up hanging out with Picard like nothing happened. Again complete speculation but this is how I think they are setting up how the two works with each other because how else can they BOTH be canon if they literally contradict each other whenever they want?

As far as the Paramount/CBS deal, now I will say (without ANY proof mind you) the only real restriction that *I* can tell is they can’t use the same actors for the same characters. No one has ever came out and said that but it seems pretty obvious to me. Thats why every time people kept suggesting Quinto can show up as Spock in Discovery, I always disagreed because I’m pretty certain there is a clause somewhere that states the movie actors can only be used in the movies to keep them exclusive. Discovery has replaced every character from the films, that’s really the first true division that I can see and maybe that’s not even true. Maybe they just don’t want to pay Quinto more lol, its more of a guess, just a logical one since they ARE run by different studios.

OK, sorry, I went into a loooooong rant there lol. But yes, this stuff fascinates me for some reason. It doesn’t mean I’m right and 99% of it is just what I read on line. But I always make clear whatever I don’t know, I’m simply speculating.

But yes end of the day you’re still right even if everything I said is 100% correct and they can just ignore it. And if it is a deal they can’t ‘overwrite’ the other, who knows how strict that even is? I guess we’ll going to know soon. ;D

Corinthian7

@Tiger2 Lol that was a long post! That’s kind of what I’m getting at though – implied continuity rather than direct references. I could envisage a scenario whereby they will allude to something catastrophic with the Romulans but not nailing down the specifics. If you think about it there was barely any references to TOS during the first few years of TNG.

Tiger2

Yes they can probably do that. I just don’t think they would contradict canon completely. And my guess is if the show is a hit and it goes several seasons at SOME point they are going to have to cover it if they want a story line with the Romulans again but they can certainly avoid it if they choose to.

Corinthian7

I would be surprised iif they completely disregarded canon but they could be very vague. As I said they could hint at the Romulans still recovering from some unnamed disaster or they might say ‘Romulan home world’ rather than Romulus. On the surface the former would appear to confirm the events of Star Trek 2009 and the latter contradicts it but in reality both statements could go either way. For the record, I’m like you, I love canon and also got a kick out of the Enterprise shoutouts in Beyond and DSC so if they out and out embrace the Romulan situation I’d be happy. It’s just that the pragmatist in me thinks they’ll keep it vague enough to adapt to events that haven’t yet been shown or even thought of in the movies.

Denny C

Right. it’s possible that Picard and Spock were successful in the reunification of Vulcan and Romulus and that opens up al sorts of story possibilities for a Federation that has been completely redefined by bringing one of it’s biggest adversaries into the fold.

Vulcan Soul

@Tiger2 Destroying fictional planets is not what most people think of when they lament Star Trek should be “bold” again. It is comic book level boldness.

Tiger2

I think you’re missing my point VS. I like it because its changing the status quo up and going a new direction in the story that has rarely happened for literally 50 years now when it came to the Romulans.

Now I agree with you when it was destroyed in the original film, it was done for shock value and to kick off the story since they knew they never had to worry about resolving it or dealing with the repercussions. Now to be fair they also destroyed Vulcan which they did have to deal with but destroying Vulcan is a different entity from destroying one of the most feared enemies in the alpha quadrant and probably the second biggest territory to the Federation itself. I just think there is an opportunity to do something really interesting with that now that they finally have to.

The problem with the Romulans is that they don’t DO anything! Think about it, they show up in one episode, make some kind of veil threat, have a small skirmish, then its all wrapped up and they go back to the neutral zone until next season. Someone brought that up in another site but man its so true lol. We finally saw some real action with them on DS9 in the Dominion war but until then, its mostly just cloak and dagger stuff over and over and over again. Nemesis had potential to go big…but yeah.

Now they have a chance to do something different, FINALLY, with them. Shake it up a bit!

Denny C

The storyline was a tool to reboot the franchise. Think of it as the same way WB approached Thunderball. Sure, Connery was back as Bond but Thunderball stood alone. ST 2009 has Spock but it could have been any Spock from any alternate timeline or universe. It’s easy enough to dismiss the destruction of Romulus if they decide to do so.

Corinthian7

Spot on Denny C.

Trek in a Cafe

I don’t think they can ignore the destruction of Romulus. What they can ignore is any of the hate/revenge storylines that were part of Nero going after Spock. Spock is gone, so be it. What would be nice would be to see some kind of true investigation into the problems of a culture of Romulan surivors and whether the Vulcans could truly rise to the occasion. I mean it is funny that Vulcans have only one world and Romulans have an Empire. So there must be other planets with tons of Romulans.

Tiger2

That only confuses things more though and I think the Kelvin timeline is already confusing enough lol. I just think if they wanted to make it clear it wasn’t suppose to be the same Spock, they would’ve simply not used Nimoy IF he wasn’t meant to come from the Prime universe.

If they really didn’t want anyone to attach the prime universe to the Kelvin then they wouldn’t have used this particular story from day one. It was only done this way to have the prime universe included.

But end of the day if they decide they don’t want to use it, they simply don’t have to, I agree. I just hope they do personally but none of this is etched in stone. It’s fiction so they can do what they want. And I imagine it would make people happy if they did avoid it.

Brent

For every moment in time there are infinite possibilities. The Kelvin timeline explores the possibility that Romulus is gone and Spock and Nero leapt back in time, leading to the events of the Abrams movies. If it is made canon that the split occurred AFTER the destruction of the Romulus, then the destruction could be canon in the prime timeline, but if the split occurred WITH (or before) the destruction of Romulus, prime Spock would potentially be both thrown back in time and not thrown back in time in two divergent timelines. Perhaps in one timeline Spock prevented the destruction of Romulus successfully with the red matter, and in the other he didn’t. Prime Spock would still be dead twenty years later in either timeline, and Romulus would still exist in that case, maintaining the status quo.

ML31

Except they went out of their way to tell us it WASN’T a reboot, Denny. It was an alternate.

I have no issue with a straight reboot. In fact, that is the direction I think they should have gone. But they didn’t. They linked their world with the prime.

Corinthian7

@ML31 but the prime world has yet to link back to the Kelvin Universe. I’m not saying they should excise it from canon but I am saying that they could. The reason they went to all that trouble of linking Star Trek (2009) to the established lore was because they felt they needed the built in fanbase in order to sell it to a new audience. With the movie side being in such disarray there’s no telling what direction the features will go in but the one thing we can be certain of is that one way or another, there will be future movies. Paramount may very well want to attach the news to the main canon but they may choose ignore Abrams films. At this point in time it would be easy enough to distance the TV side from the movie continuity but if they outright confirm the events it could be harder for CBS to detangle if a retcon is required. I think the most sensible course is not to commit either way until they no more about what Paramount has planned.

ML31

I don’t disagree, Corinthian7. Although I do think there is no need for the PU to even acknowledge the existence of the KU. Romulus is gone. The universe continues moving forward.

Marja

It will be about 20 years later; I should think Starfleet will have moved on somewhat from those events.

Hauke Fischer

Picard doesn’t carry Sarek’s katra, they had a mind meld. It gave Picard a lot of insight into Sarek’s life, but nothing as extreme as the McCoy/Spock and Archer/Surak situations.
But you’re correct, Kurtzman was heavily involved with Countdown, it is practically canon.

Sorry, I misspoke earlier. I meant mindmeld, not katra (although a comic involving Picard did imply that part of Sarek was left behind – fortunately they don’t count as canon)

alphantrion

Well, the easiest way to solve this problem is to involve Q and have him reset the timeline to the “original” from the “Kelvin” timeline.

JAGT

They could certainly do some stuff with that. Maybe the Federation gets its hands on the Enterprise-C’s flight recorder (or log buoys or whatever it would be in a Star Trek context) that had been rotting in some Romulan off-world intelligence archive for over forty years at that point. That way they would learn of (alternate) Picard’s indirect involvement in the Battle of Narendra III and get an answer to the riddle that the existence of Sela likely posed to them. Sela might not have been the most exciting character (IMO), but “Yesterday’s Enterprise” was certainly an exciting episode — and writers love it!
So there’s one of many possibilities.

JAGT

Or did Sela already tell Picard+crew her entire backstory? I’m not so sure about that right now. I’m fairly sure that Picard knew about her being Tasha’s daughter, but I don’t think the prime-crew knew of the exact circumstances sorrounding Tasha’s time travel.
One thing is for certain though: For being such a “secretive” society, TNG-Romulans were pretty darn “in-your-face” most of the time…

Ted C

Stuff.

HubcapDave

Makes sense. My theory is that, while the number CBS got from Disco were good, they left some money on the table. Hence, the Picard series is an effort to expand the pie by catering more towards older fans who are looking for a Trek series that is a bit more “comfort food” than seeking to broaden the audience.

Mark Calcagno

I’m worried for this, because I don’t want Star Trek Rogue One, full of references with little substance.

jalo

Also this would Have a ‘ironic’ Joke at the end of every line… of any character.

Ughhh….

Tiger2

Honestly I really doubt Discovery has expanded the audience in any real way. It sounds like its mostly the same people who has always been watching Star Trek is watching this. And I’m not saying there aren’t new people watching but there is NOTHING to indicate it has grabbed a new league of fans like the TNG shows did when it premiered. And obviously part of the problem is that its on All Access. That barely has any real subscribers as it is and my best guess is the overwhelming majority who signed up for Discovery are naturally people who were already Star Trek fans. That’s part of the problem with the site IMO. It has to appeal to more people in general to turn THOSE people who are showing up for other shows onto shows like Discovery. The name Star Trek scares off most people as it is, but you’re not going to get millions of new fans to pay for something they are skeptical of.

That said outside of America, yeah probably more being on Netflix with a much wider audience but again there has been no data given about it from Netflix. And the Picard show isn’t being made for that site.

But as far as AA, most of the other shows are barely getting any real watches and hype and its just mostly Star Trek fans who are bothering, hence the Picard show.

Byron Diffenderffer

Discovery aired on Netflix in territories that had never premeiered a Star Trek show before to huge success. Outside of the US and Canada it has absolutely expanded the audience.

Tiger2

I said Netflix is possible, we simply don’t have any data because Netflix hasn’t provided any. But yeah I’m guessing plenty of people have checked out the show who doesn’t normally watch Star Trek. And if they become a ‘fan’ over it or not we clearly don’t know either. It will just depend how many show up next season I guess.

Afterburn

DSC is absolutely expanding the audience. Even anectodally i’ve had co workers and friends online come to me, the resident Trek fan, to ask about the older shows because they saw Discovery.

Now, not all of them subrscribed to CBSAA which is the problem from a revenue standpoint, but the show itself IS expanding the audience for Trek.

Tiger2

I have to take your word for it. I live in L.A. I don’t know anyone personally who is even watching the show and I’m including long term fans who I work and know because they refuse to sub to AA. And it doesn’t seem to have any buzz outside of the usual internet Trek circles like here from what I can tell.

And I lurk on quite a few Trek sites like I imagine a lot of us do and obviously post here, but I don’t know if I ran into a single post here in the last year since Discovery been on who was introduced to Star Trek through Discovery. It seems like everyone here talking about it are the same people whose been watching Trek forever now. I’m on Reddit as well, which is obviously bigger, it doesn’t seem to be a lot of new fans by way of Discovery there either. Oddly enough most people there who are new to Star Trek usually come via watching TNG or the older shows because they saw it on Netflix, Amazon or just reruns on TV.

But I’ll say it again, yes I’m sure new people are watching, but no I don’t think its anything major just based on the complete lack of buzz off line and even on line in terms of new fans.

I guess the biggest point I’m making is AA isn’t relying on ‘new’ fans for these shows to be a success, its probably mostly old fans who they are catering to.

Amulius Victor

I went to Star Trek DST in the UK back in October, which is probably the second biggest Trek convention in the world after STLV. DSC panels were the only ones that were not only filled but packed to the rafters in the largest hall at the convention centre. Sonequa, Jason Isaacs, Doug Jones, Mary Wiseman had some of the biggest queues for photos and autographs. The general vibe amongst the fans was that DSC is their STAR TREK now.

That may be a shocking and blasphemous statement to hear for those with the perception that DSC is an imposter and more of a sideshow, but I hit up Larry Nemeck on Twitter (who was also there for the convention and) for his view on the matter and this was his reply –

“Europe seems a bit more insulated from this faux amplified noise re @startrekcbs #Discovery than we in the US. All are entitled to their valid, civil criticisms, but the automated or political toxic crap that distorts actual #startrek reaction is slowly being ID’d & called out.”

I’d say not just Europe but the rest of the world. Anecdotally, I’ve come across many new people who’ve never watched (or tried and failed) Star Trek before but have now watched DSC and really enjoyed it and found it to be verryyy accessible. And since Netflix footed the majority of the cost for the 1st season (not sure about season 2) the international audience for the first time is just as important as the US audience.

For those people who are wistfully hoping that the Picard show will mark a return to Berman era Trek better not get too excited since it’s produced by Goldsman and Kurtzman. Chabon and Beyer will write top quality scripts but there won’t be a return to the old formulaic tropes of the Berman era.

Tiger2

OK, but this doesn’t really prove anything. First off, yes, Discovery has fans, I don’t think anyone has ever suggested everyone hates the show. I have said I believe more people are fans of it than not fans of it. I have to believe that for the simple fact enough watched it to get renewed at least.

And as far as a lot of people going to a convention to support the show, yes thats great but that doesn’t prove anything in terms of overall support. A. Its a Star Trek convention and B. Discovery is a brand new show. I don’t think its going to be hard to find lots of Star Trek fans excited to meet the stars of the new show. I know what people are trying to say, but you’re always going to find hardcore fans of any franchise to show to up at these things, it doesn’t say how the overall fan base feels. An example, Trump rallies are always full and gets tons of supporters. But it doesn’t mean he’s loved by everyone or the most popular, but the ones who do love him are typically hardcore and will show support as much as possible.

Now I’m NOT comparing Trump to Discovery lol, I’m just making a point in a world of 7 billion people, you’re always going to find a contingent of fans for ANYTHING. It doesn’t prove if they are the consensus or not without actual hard data, that’s all.

I’ll make my point one more time, I’m not saying Discovery is not liked by a lot of people, I’m saying I don’t know if a lot of those people are NEW fans because zero data has been released on it. And anecdotally, like the internet, it doesn’t seem to bare that out.

Tiger2

Sorry, I missed your other point and you said you met people who watched Discovery are new fans to Star Trek. I’ll take your word for it, it’s just hard to say how many of them represent Discovery’s ratings without hard data. They could represent a high number or a low number we just don’t know. But usually if there are a lot of excited fans, its usually pretty easy to find on the internet. Again thats anecdotal too but if you want to find support for anything, internet is usually an indicator at least and I just don’t see it. I’m just being honest, it doesn’t seem to have a large base of support for something like Stranger Things or Game of Thrones, ie, a huge breakout hit. But yes Trek fandom has been entrenched for decades.

As for the Picard show, Berman didn’t create the character or TNG, Roddenberry did. And I don’t know why people think thats the only Trek people care about. We’re all Star Trek fans, we simply want a good show and characters. We know Picard and TNG was good, we’re hoping someone else can take those same ideas with their own approach. People rave about Beyer’s Voyager novels and I think her Discovery episode was generally well liked. I’m just happy there is someone who knows and understands 24th century Trek. Everyone seems to agree Chabon is a great addition and Calypso was small but seem to be an indicator he can tell interesting Trek stories so I think for most fans its a benefit. Not everyone loves Kurtzman but I think most accept him at least.

Now the show can still suck lol, but people are hopeful at least WITH the people writing it. So that’s a positive.

kmart

Well, GR didn’t really create the character or TNG, that was mostly Gerrold. GR didn’t even want Stewart because he was bald (“BALD, JERRY!”) And to be honest, I found his contributions to be pretty weak tea, which was then further watered down by everything that followed for the next couple of years.

Tiger2

Ok but it wasn’t Berman either. Picard naturally evolved over the years which Berman had a lot to do with but that was still someone else’s character.

And its been 20 years and Stewart has already said it will be a different Picard…because its been 20 years lol. Kirk in the movies wasn’t the same Kirk from the show either. Fans accept characters get older and change just like we do in real life.

Denny C

I’m not so sure. I’m the resident Trek fan as well surrounded by Trek fans and no one I know or work with is watching and, outside of these pages, there is no one to discuss this show with. Mention “Stranger Things” or “Haunting of Hill House” and there are no shortage of people to discuss those shows with at work.

Tiger2

That’s exactly my point too. When a new show is a bonafide hit, you can EASILY find that online and fans gushing everywhere about it. There are countless Youtube videos, Facebook pages, Twitter feeds, etc with endless discussions about it. I just don’t see that with Discovery at ALL. I mean yes clearly people are watching the show, we are lol. But I don’t see any evidence it has created any real buzz in the mainstream or away from the usual fandom. That doesn’t mean its not popular of course but there doesn’t seem to be any real evidence its created any hype or buzz outside of the usual Trek circles.

HubcapDave

The plural of “anecdote” is not “data”…..

Tiger2

Of course. Until there is actual data somewhere there is no proof beyond anecdotes. Thats not invalid either it just doesn’t prove anything directly.

Look, I’m not trying to put the show down, I just hate when people say such and such is really popular when there is no hard evidence outside the fact they like a show and they know people who like the same show. And no offense there is no proof this show has ‘broaden’ the audience. If it was, someone would’ve thrown up a link by now showing just that. The show can be really popular but without actual ratings, viewership numbers, scientific polls, etc we’re really in the dark, especially in terms of casual or new fans. And if there is very little internet buzz on top of that, then its even harder, right?

Star Trek fans showing up at a Star Trek convention and say they love Discovery is the equivalent of Star Wars fans showing up at a Star Wars convention and saying they love The Last Jedi. And for the record, I ALSO think more fans like that movie than don’t actually, but like Discovery it has a very vocal audience of dissenters. But it would be false to say the film is loved by the overall fanbase as well. Its just hard to say just how loved or hated something is besides proclaiming it at a fan arena.

HubcapDave

Well, there have been other metrics, but they tend to get poo-poohed because of their newness. Oddly enough, Parrot Analytics “demand expressions” is the one that measures the “everyone’s talking about it” aspect you mention. Perhaps you are looking in the wrong places….

Notwithstanding that, anecdotes are a poor substitute for data, and should not be used as such.

Star Trek fans showing up at conventions saying they love Discovery is proof that the people trying to shoot Discovery down are a vocal minority.

Tiger2

OK fair enough!

Tiger2

Well look at that, I guess I have to eat my words a little, but I just saw a post of someone saying Discovery was their FIRST Star Trek show and they really liked it!

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/a59olt/just_finished_discovery_for_the_first_time_this/

So yes, they are out there! :)

How many there are in terms of viewership, that is still a question.

Amulius Victor

@Tiger2

My reference to DST/convention was to show that within the dedicated trek fan base DSC is very popular. It very much goes against the fallacy that DSC is unpopular within the fan base. That is also the point Larry Nemeck made. If it wasn’t popular within the fan base then CBSAA wouldn’t be viable for CBS.

As for anecdotal reports, they are just that, anecdotes – the weakest form of evidence. That’s a no-brainer.

In terms of the publically available evidence as to the buzz that DSC brings, Parrot Analytics (as HubCapDave mentioned) is the only quantifiable measure. And during the first season as it aired, DSC was ranked number one for the most part. Occasionally TWD did take its top spot.

Tiger2

Amuluis,

You will find a committed and devoted fan base for every Star Trek show out there, I don’t really think this is a big debate. The debate is how much of that popularity by those fans translates into viewership and ratings? We simply don’t know but to pretend we do is what I’m calling out.

There is nothing controversial or negative in my statement, I’m simply stating a fact and that is there is zero data to prove anything in terms of if Discovery has reached a larger fanbase outside of its usual fans, thats what sparked all of this in the first place. Go back to my OP, I never even talked about if general fans liked the show, I was only saying I don’t believe it has gained any real traction outside of the mainstream fanbase and that was because of the limits of media its on and in this case its AA. But I also noted it probably does have a wider fanbase on Netflix but we still don’t how much.

I never even discussed how popular the show was overall, that wasn’t my main point. Frankly it still isn’t. There is just no real proof its expanding the audience. If and when AA or Netflix give out some data then maybe I will eat my words but given the lack of discussion about it outside of places like this I just really doubt it.

ML31

“Star Trek fans showing up at conventions saying they love Discovery is proof that the people trying to shoot Discovery down are a vocal minority.”

No. No it is not.

ML31

That’s one of my pet peeves. The fact that a STD panel can fill a hall at a convention does not mean the show is globally popular. That mistake has been made over and over. I mean, 70,000 people showed up in the MercedesBenz Dome to watch Atlanta United beat the Portland Timbers. Does that mean MLS is even nationally popular? NO! It got a 1.2 rating for it’s time slot. (For the record, I LIKE MLS but acknowledge it is NOT nationally popular)

Tiger2

I don’t doubt a lot of people like Discovery, it’s the relativity of it to ratings and viewership that we just don’t know. ALL these shows get major love and acceptance at conventions. I don’t think anyone from the Voyager and Enterprise casts have ever been shunned or booed at these things, in fact just the opposite.

I’ve seen tons of convention videos of the Enterprise cast and they are treated like rock stars. And yet we know the show was having ratings problems since season 2. The show at the time was very divisive among the actual fanbase but I doubt you would ever know that at a fan convention because the people who DID love the show naturally showed up for it in droves. And I’m guessing even if you’re not a huge fan of the show itself you can still love the actors themselves and support them. Again, this is the disconnect that we are talking about.

It’s very simple, until we actually know how the show is doing in viewership its hard to say and with complete silence about it from both AA and Netflix part about it, its telling.

ML31

Yes. Here too. This place is the only place where I can interact with more than two people who have seen the first season. And for the 2nd, will be the only place at all I can interact with anyone who has seen it. No one I know is interested. (MRS ML31 never watched Trek to begin with)

Tiger2

Yes its why I come here too lol. I don’t know anyone personally watching it and I want to talk about it. At least with the Kelvin films, especially the first one, I knew a ton of people who watched those. In fact on my second viewing of that movie, I went with a group of people including my ex who knew nothing about Trek but wanted to see the film. I was the only die hard fan among them. I was answering all their nerdy questions about the characters and whatever they were confused on.

There was definitely a lot of people who watched those films that were not fans originally because again that wasn’t hard to find on the internet. Facebook lit up when the first film came out and you just had a general audience discussing it like any film. Today maybe not so much but that’s probably a lot of other factors we’ve talked about here, but I’m certain those films did pick up a lot of non-fans.

With Discovery I just don’t see that at all frankly. Sure some, just like I made a link to. I know they are out there but I seriously doubt they make up more than a tiny fraction of the viewership overall compared to the mainstream fanbase. I could be wrong but there is nothing out there to prove it is at the moment.

Afterburn

So two people don’t know anyone who is a new fan, one person does, so obviously the two people who don’t are the ones who are right.

Yeah, that makes sense.

No, none of our anecdotes are data, but even one anecdote is evidence that new viewers are being pulled in.

Tiger2

Dude, that doesn’t prove its a WIDE expansion, thats all that is being said here. Yes of course I imagine there are new fans watching as there have been with every Star Trek show. I had a friend who who never seen a single episode of the franchise until Voyager started and became a fan of that. The QUESTION is how big is that compared to the overall fanbase? Noting anywhere seems to bare out its a big group of them, especially in Trek forums like here. Maybe they are out there and more than I’m giving credit for, but without PROOF its hard to say, right?

Look here is what I’m talking about. Before Game of Thrones became a TV show, it had a HUGE following of book readers, hence why they turned it into a show. But it was the show itself that turned it mainstream and created millions of NEW fans in America and worldwide who has never picked up any of those books or probably even knew a book series existed before. I’m one of them. And I didn’t become a fan until its fifth season. But GoT has gone FAR beyond it’s original fanbase and you can easily see that, especially online. Same with Marvel movies. Majority of the people who watch those films has probably never picked up a comic book in their life and I’m guessing there a few of them here. GOTG for example was an obscure comic series I doubt 10% of people ever heard of but today Groot and Rocket are household names from New York to Cape Town.

But with Discovery, I don’t see or feel that on any real tangible level. I’m sure it has gained a few new fans but nothing major compared to a GoT or MCU.

HubcapDave

Unfortunately, the plural of “anecdote” is not “data”.

ML31

Such a comment is anecdotal, Afterburn. Such things are very difficult to measure and I can counter your anecdotal argument with my own. I personally know NO ONE who even knew Discovery existed. I had to tell friends of mine about it, who ARE Trek fans who had no idea it was even out there. And when I did tell them no one was interested in subscribing just for new Trek. Last season I talked two of them into sharing a CBSAA account just to watch STD. After it was over, both told me they will not contribute again because the show was THAT bad.

We really have no way to know what Discovery is adding or taking away from the fan base. But from where I sit, I’m not seeing the needle moving regarding Star Trek in any way.

Afterburn

Yes, it is anecdotal. But you don’t understand the conversation so I’ll let that pass while the grownups continue the conversation.

ML31

” so I’ll let that pass while the grownups continue the conversation.”

Is what is said when a valid point is made that the insecure are unwilling to admit.

Guille

I’d like to point out “The writers room has broken 8 episodes” doesn’t mean “8 episodes already written”. It means the writers have created a more or less detailed outline made of beats or scenes for 8 episodes. Writing a (first draft) script for them would be the next step.

Commander K

Does that mean all the novels post-Nemesis are likely to be well..washed away?

Tiger2

Probably, just like all the EU stuff from the Star Wars era when the new movies showed up. And fans were really happy about that too lol.

Fortunately Trek fans aren’t as tied into those stories because they always been told its not canon, mostly for this very reason. But it doesn’t mean elements from them won’t get used.

Legate Damar

Probably. I love those novels, but I wouldn’t want the TV show to be held back by them. Mainly, I want to see the Borg return to plague Picard, but the Borg were wiped out in the novels.

Soren

A slower pace with more emphasis on the quality of what is being said would be most welcome and in line with the feel of TNG. I’m assuming Stewart would instantly nix any attempt to ship in endless hand to hand combat of dumbovision ie Discovery

PEB

Guess you hated those pesky hand-to-hand fights that a lot of people remember about TOS and almost every iteration of Trek since. Stop trying to troll, you’re doing a bad job of it.

Andrew SD

When Star Trek geeks read each other like Drag Race queens I know all is well in the world and Star Trek is alive and prospering again. :)

Soren

TOS in my mind was a naff dated joke, so nice try but no banana. All other iterations concentrated on solving problems by more enlightened means.

kmart

The hand-to-hand in TOS (and often DS9, like WotW) was done quite well much of the time, as opposed to the arthritic-staged, horribly shot and cut fights on TNG and usually elsewhere in BermanTrek. I disagree with the other poster about Stewart eschewing action, since he actively promoted that, but context and execution is important here. A well-done fight scene, like Decker/security guard or Kirk/Finnegan and Kirk/Tracy, deliver the goods (the music on the Decker fight is awesome too.)

Liz

Like that time he asked the TNG writers for “more sex and shooting”, resulting in “Starship Mine”, which was summarised as “Die Hard on a starship?”

Mark Calcagno

Exactly. Stewart liked the action stuff on TNG, and actively asked for it.

Tiger2

Yeah, he was also the one who wanted more action in the films and always found ways to make him do more of that. In First Contact for example, Picard was suppose to be on the ground assisting Cochran and it was Riker who was suppose to be on the Enterprise fighting the Borg. Stewart asked could they switch roles so he could do all the fighting. It was a good move IMO given his connection with the Borg.

Muse

Um, Stewart pestered the writers throughout TNG’s run to get Picard ‘laid’ and to have him in more action scenes and fights. Also, unless I’m mistaken, Stewart was at least partly responsible for the dune buggies in Nemesis…

Aaron Harvey

That he was! I believe mHe did all the driving for the Argo except the exit and first sharp turn.

blueRose

The Picard show sounds boring.

ML31

Well… I haven’t been wondering what happened to Picard. But it’s a Trek show and I’m mildly curious in the same sense I would be curious about what became of B’lana Torres or Miles O’Brian.

Realtor Queen

didn’t O’Brian end up on DS9? Also, it’s a trek show about a Enterprise captain… but no Enterprise?

Mark Calcagno

I was under the impression O’Brian spent his entire life behind the transporter console. At least I read a comic somewhere that made that implication…

ML31

Yes. We all saw DS9. What happened later? And I was just citing random characters as examples. It’s not that I have a hankering to see what became of the O’Brian family. Just as I don’t really have a curiosity to see what became of Picard.

Saiyan

Sorry guys my OCD commands me to point out its O’Brien not O’Brian. Y’all have a pleasant day :)

Mark Calcagno

Gah! I’m sorry!

Thorny

He left to be an instructor at Starfleet Academy at the end of DS9, I think.

Willard Crybaby

the entire series should be Picard slowly tending to the vineyards in France during his days, and late night Hologram orgies. otherwise, why bother?

Harry Ballz

Hmmm, make the wine, then have them make divine…….I LIKE IT!

Denny C

“Computer: Red head, HOT.”

Sure. They should call it “Star Wines”.

Phil

…..all while having been driven insane as a result of his assimilation by the Borg, between orgies and winemaking, cleverly undermining security at the highest levels for the final Borg assault.

JonBuck

Star Trek Online is going to have an interesting time working this into the game’s canon. Retcons ahoy! Also, new ships.

Steve

As long as they don’t ask Eaves to design them. His Federation ships are ugly as f

Danpaine

‘….a very contemplative show.’ Yes, please. And it’s not a prequel! As someone who’s not terribly excited about DIscovery, I’m very glad CBS is developing a show which moves the timeline forward, post-Nem.

Tiger2

If the Picard show is a true success this could be a start to future shows for a long time to come just like we got in the 90s. And that doesn’t mean there won’t be more prequel shows obviously, I’m fine with that too.

I think for people like us, we simply didn’t want Star Trek to KEEP looking back for the next 20 years either which has been feeling like since Enterprise. Now it looks like they will go both backwards and forwards which I think is a good thing. You can fill in some of the time gaps of past Trek history while pushing forward into new territory in the 25th century and beyond.

And even though I was never fond of prequels I would be open to a post TUC show. When I heard that’s what Discovery would be that actually excited me because it would tie in the TOS era with the TNG era. It didn’t happen obviously but there are prequel ideas I’m open to.

But our first true sequel since 2002 is a joyous feeling! I still can’t believe its happening lol.

slider

To be honest the idea of Picard sitting near a fire telling stories doesn’t interest me one bit.

Tiger2

I don’t think anyone would lol. Not sure where you got the idea it’s going to be Picard sitting by a fireplace though.

Mark Calcagno

It’s a nice place to contemplate.

I think he meant it as a joke.

slider

Actually I wouldn’t put it past them. If Picard is said not to be captain and if he’s retired he’s not really going to be doing much that’s why I wouldn’t rule out that terrible idea.

Jonboc

Discovery, the speed of a “bullet”??

You gotta be kidding me.

Picard is going to grind things to a halt it sounds like. Not good.

Tumbler

I like to think Star Trek has more than two speed settings, Bullet and Grind-to-a-Halt. It has, you know, warp factors! ;-)

Tiger2

I don’t think it means that, just probably not about any big wars or conflicts like DIS first season with the Klingons. Look at TNG and DS9 for example. TNG had plenty of political strife but we never saw them go to war or have long action arcs vs DS9 where that show became very action orientated. I liked both directions.

But no I don’t think its going to just be Picard sitting around an office or digging up bones as some seem to think, especially as Kurtzman already hinted a villain will be part of the show.

Tiger2

All sounds great to me!

It’s all pretty vague but its nice to know its going to be different from Discovery. And I don’t mean that negatively, it will just be nice that the shows can feel different in tone and style from each other the way TNG and DS9 did. And being over a 100 years apart will make everything already look very different from each other.

I’m more excited they now have broken 8 scripts. That’s pretty crazy since they started only in September so things are moving! And as TM hinted it sounds like we are getting more than that which is even more good news. I’m guessing at a minimum it may be 10 episodes but it probably will be around 13 like Discovery. If they made just 3 a year I would take it lol.

Andrew SD

I have definitely become a Star Trek: Discovery fan but my first love is TNG (then all that came before and then after). I know that whatever this knew show brings it will be something very special because whatever they proposed was so good, at least from the start, to get Sir Patrick Stewart to sign back on to Star Trek in the first place. As an old TNG kid that alone is all the fuel for my faith in the new show that I need.

Tiger2

Agreed! I was a fan of TOS before TNG ever existed but TNG was truly my generation of Star Trek and its probably where I still love it the most even if DS9 is my favorite show. But TNG is what turned me from a fan to a fanatic in the first place.

For me, I would’ve been happy with a 24/25th century show with or without Picard but now that he’s there I hope it will give them the reception they are hoping for to be a jumping off point for future shows in this era like DS9 and VOY originally did. I just want Star Trek to EXPAND again, not just rely on prequels alone. TNG was special because it DID go forward and brought us a new era of Trek that has made the franchise so big and expansive today. So I’m just happy we are finally in a place again to see this as a possibility. :)

Mel

“It will feel more … real world?”

I hope this isn’t another way to say “dark and gritty”. I don’t want “real world”. I want a much better world depicted in Star Trek. Escapism for the win!

Jonboc

Agreed. I get enough “real world” every day. And it is not a pleasant place. If ever we needed positive and imaginative escapist entertainment, like TOS, it’s now.

Vulcan Soul

Mirror Lorca’s nasty little partisan speech in Discovery’s abysmal season 1 was more “real world” than I ever truly needed in Trek!

,

slider

I thought Discovery was the dark and gritty world?

Andrew SD

I took “real world” to mean that the show will be set on a planetary starbase or star fleet command, in San Francisco maybe or Paris. Picard might have dodged promotion throughout the TNG years but 20years after he’s got to be either an admiral or a ambassador. Hell he might even president of the Federation itself. I’d vote for Picard at the drop of a hat.

ML31

Or he’s out of Starfleet entirely.

albatrosity

I think it will mean it’s more Earthbound

DeanH

Hmm, I guess I am going to have to go back and watch Nemesis again to see where we left off with Picard and the rest of the TNG crew. ST10 was the only Star Trek movie or episode I have seen only once and I’ve managed to forget most of what I saw. I’ve even watched Star Trek V a couple of times and that was a pretty bitter pill to swallow haha. No matter what, I am looking forward to seeing the continuing adventures of Jean Luc (or John Luck Pickard as Q once called him).

Tiger2

To be honest Dean I don’t think rewatching Nemesis would matter much. The new show will be 20 years after that movie so the character’s lives could literally be anywhere. And canon wise all we know is Picard stayed Captain of the Enterprise while a few people like Riker and Troi left for the Titan and of course Data died. I can’t remember if anyone else from the crew left but there was a deleted scene of Beverly now working at Starfleet Medical so maybe she left too but not sure if it was said in the actual film.

DeanH

Haha thanks for the advice. You probably saved me a couple of hours of mediocre Trek. I was hoping for a repeat of my DS9 experience. When it was being made, I rarely watched but later discovered in repeats how great a show it really was. I don’t think that was going to be the case with Nemesis.

Tiger2

As someone who still has Nemesis as their WORST film on their list, I would say I have enjoyed it more on repeat viewings. Let me stress its STILL BAD lol but not as bad when I originally watched it. In fact I rewatched it just a month ago. It’s entertaining enough and oddly it doesn’t feel very dated to me which I think proves the FX are pretty strong. But no I’m not suggesting you or anyone should rewatch it though, at least not for this show.

Sam

Suttlepodcasters Brian and Jared couldn’t make it even halfway through when they revisited it.

I finally know the movie well enough that I can follow it (in as much as it’s plot is coherent enough to be followed) and enjoy certain things about it. It’s almost like TNG tried to make The Wrath of Khan and ended up mixing in The Motion Picture by accident (though not really in a good way — and I happen to love The Motion Picture). Mostly though it is a DARK and tone-deaf viewing experience. It doesn’t fall apart like The Final Frontier or Generations, but I think a STRONG case can still be made for it being the worst Trek movie ever.

“Romulan ALE. Should be ILLEGAL.”
“It. IS.”

ML31

““Romulan ALE. Should be ILLEGAL.”
“It. IS.””

And it’s still a funnier line than “LDS”.

boborci

Looking forward to seeing what they come up with and if they stick with Romulus canon or not.

Denny C

Mr. Orci, I hand you this mic to drop.

kmart

it is weightless out there, it will just float away, not drop. And you won’t be able to hear it out there either.

Sybok's Other Brother

Lots of potential story material there.

albatrosity

I say stick with it

sean patrick phagan

The further the distance themselves from the shit show called Discovery the better

slider

I worry whether the writers can pull it off especially as they aren’t using any of the other cast members.

MysticalDigtial

Funnily enough, I agree with everything except ‘shit show’ because Discovery has been amazing. just a bunch of sad people online complaining, I have yet to know a single trekie IRL, of the 30 or so I regularly converse with, that hate’s it. And that includes a lot of OG trek fans.

That being said, I do agree that it needs to be different from Discovery. And also different from TNG. TNG just is… kinda boring to go back and watch. There’s little continuity from episode to episode and that is something I always feel was lacking in 80s/90s TV, nothing had weight to it episode to episode. Kinda what ruined Voyager.

slider

You don’t know a single person who complains about Discovery? You need to visit more websites! Ha, ha!

I think they should hire you as a consultant. You sound very knowledgeable and articulate.

Michael Kukielka

I like what I’m hearing, TNG has a very specific tone that isn’t in Discovery at all. Interestingly, Short Trek’s “Calypso” is the first time I’ve recognized a contemporary version of TNG. It’s beautiful, grounded, and poignant. The fact Michael Chabon wrote that episode makes me extremely optimistic.

Cygnus-X1

What happens to Picard in 2399? He has Irumodic Syndrome and is physically incapable of serving in Star Fleet. That is what we were shown in TNG’s very well received series finale, All Good Things.

Picard is done, gone, retired — convalescing during the setting of this proposed new series. How is it that nobody has remembered this? I don’t understand how such an enormous plot detail could have eluded everyone’s memory.

If you’re going to cash in on the future, then that cash is gone. You can’t reclaim it later because you’ve run out of ideas.

ht tp://m emory-alpha.wikia . com/wiki/Irumodic_Syndrome

JonBuck

Well, that timeline also has the E-D still around with three nacelles and a giant phaser cannon. That timeline is obviously not valid. Ergo, Picard being sick with IS is also invalid. Remember, it was all a test by Q.

DIGINON

The TNG movies have already partially overwritten the future we saw in All Good Things. So that’s not a dealbreaker for the new show.

Tiger2

That timeline was erased the second they destroyed the anomaly. Data himself made that clear at the end of the episode:

“Crusher begins to wonder why Picard shared the information about the future he encountered with them. La Forge says that it goes against the rules they’ve heard about not polluting the timeline, but Data believes that the case is different. Since the anomaly never occurred, the future they encounter will be radically different from the one Picard experienced.”

And we already seen those changes because the Enterprise was destroyed, Riker and Deanna got together again and married (Riker and Deanna never got together again in the future timeline before she died), Worf quit politics to return to Starfleet and of course Data died. So that future already looks VERY different by the time Nemesis rolled around.

But interesting enough, one thing I remembered looking at Memory Alpha to find that quote is in that timeline the Klingons actually took over the Romulan territory by this time. And now that we know Romulus bit the dust (IF they keep that canon) by the super nova who knows maybe the Klingons took advantage of the power vacum and invaded Romulan territory. It would be a cool way to stay canon to both the Kelvin moves and AGT. :)

Afterburn

That last bit is very interesting. I could see the story for this show revolving around Picard being called in to help stop a Klingon annexation due to his close ties to the Klingons and Romulans (maybe Worf is involved somehow, and they can reveal that Picard was the key negotiator in the Romulan peace treaty some decade earlier post Nemesis).

Probably won’t though.

Cygnus-X1

But, Picard already had Irumodic Syndrome before Q started meddling to conduct his test.

Bah! None of it makes sense, anyway. Like all time-travel stories.

I guess a hundred wrongs do make a right.

Cygnus-X1

Actually, the only time-travel story that does make sense, in terms of its time travel logic, is ST09. Being that it’s set in a different universe, none of the time-travel paradoxes apply. Plenty of logic problems in the story otherwise, but the time-travel logic is solid.

JonBuck

There’s an article about it on Memory Alpha. Look up “Anti-Time Future”.

Cygnus-X1

From the “Anti-Time Future” article at Memory Alpha:

When Picard’s consciousness was returned to his 2370 self, he shared his experience of how the future was going to unfold with the crew. He caused them to make different life choices, which created a new future for the prime timeline, resulting in nothing from this timeline to happen.

So, if nothing from that timeline happened, that means that Picard didn’t have any experiences in that future to share with the crew, which means that they wouldn’t have made any different life choices, which means that the original future — including Picard’s Irumodic Syndrome — would have unfolded. See how it’s nonsensical?

Tiger2

This happens in time travel stories all the time. The guy doing the time traveling usually remember all the events even if they changed them. How does Marty in Back to the Future remembered where he and Jennifer were going to live in the future after he changed it?

In other words, no one understands exactly how temporal mechanics works. ;)

Cygnus-X1

Tiger2

In other words, no one understands exactly how temporal mechanics works. ;)

Because it doesn’t work. ;-)

Like I said, almost no time-travel story makes sense. It’s more akin to a fantasy story-telling technique — like waving a magic wand, or clicking your heels together three times — than to a science-fiction thematic concept.

Tiger2

Yes but that’s just how time travel stories works in general for centuries now. You can’t get on Star Trek’s case for it, this is just a basic sci fi trope.

We’re watching Star Trek, most of this stuff is pretty out there lol. Do you think there is a parallel universe where every one is the evil version of themselves? Does that make any REAL sense? Of course not, but that’s also what makes it fun, to debate the possibilities of it! And frankly until someone actually invents time travel we really don’t know HOW it would work. It’s all just a guessing game.

Cygnus-X1

Yes but that’s just how time travel stories works in general for centuries now. You can’t get on Star Trek’s case for it, this is just a basic sci fi trope.

When I was younger, I didn’t realize that it didn’t make sense. Now I know better, so I notice the problem.

Do you think there is a parallel universe where every one is the evil version of themselves? Does that make any REAL sense?

Yes! Actually, many of the top physicists in the world believe that there is actually an in infinite multi-verse, whether by Cosmic Inflation or the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics or both. None of them, however, believe that time-travel into the past of the same universe is possible.

Tiger2

Beverly said it COULD form into the disease, it wasn’t conclusive that it would though. Yes it was a possibility, but one that could be avoided. And we sort of forget this is Star Trek, they find cures to stuff like ALL the time lol. They could’ve found a cure in the new timeline.

Obviously the writers gave themselves an out for all of this in any event 25 years later they might still be making TNG stories and here we are lol. It’s crazy.

Phil

It didn’t, and I’ve been pointing that out. I’ve found that for the sake of convienience most seem perfectly happy ignoring ‘All Good Things’….

Impending Doom

I’ve personally long since decided to divorce myself from anything that Alex Kurtzman has any part in making. I have never enjoyed anything he had any part in making, despite trying.

boborci

Oh, c’mon. He was part of relaunching the successful movie franchise and now the TV universe. Wasn’t easy with critical voices in our heads.

Tiger2

Wow, the man himself is here. And yes I AGREE with you. People get so much slack for making Star Trek I have no idea why they bother making Star Trek sometimes.

But Bob since you’re here, I hope you indulge me, but you may know this more than anyone else does here, but is there any legal issues when it comes to the TV shows using canon from your movies? Basically asking would CBS be able to use the Romulus story line exploding if they wanted to? Doesn’t mean they will but is it legally possible at least if you’re allowed to answer. In reverse was there any thing you weren’t allowed to mention or show?

boborci

Yes, they Would be able to use the universe created by the movies and comics if they wished. Technically, I suppose an ambitious legal affairs person or executive could try to get a pile of extra work by parsing out who owns what, but I think it would be suicide for the franchise.

Before I left, I tried with David Ellison to unify the TV and movie universes into the excellent business model already charted by Star Wars or Marvel. Lack of cohesion is part of the reason I walked.

Sadly, it was not meant to be. I was too busy fixing my health, Grey was too busy ignoring that it was the 50th Anniversary of Star Trek, and Les Moonves was busy… with other things.

Tiger2

THANK YOU so much! This will finally kill that argument dead (oh who am I kidding lol). But yes, I have always thought this, because it makes NO sense on its head and yes it would kill the franchise. What’s the point of making it trying to make it align with the PU (even bringing in Nimoy) just for them to say none of it was canon? You guys bent over backwards trying to make it fit and Nimoy was there for that very purpose to tie the two together.

And I had no idea that was partly why you left, but yes I can understand. Trek really needs to be under one roof again. I don’t spend my days here slagging off people but I really don’t think people running Trek at Paramount really gets it and why its frustrating to some fans. I do assume maybe some of it has to do with the split but I don’t pretend to know. But the way they ignored the 50th was just a big slap in the face and partly why Beyond ended up such a dud box office wise.

Anyway I appreciate the response and now probably a good chance the Romulus destruction will stay in, which I really hope does. I think ALL Trek should be canon no matter if people hate one aspect of it or not. And it would definitely cement both the Kelvin films and shows as shared canon for GOOD! ;)

And sorry about your health issues? Are things OK now?

boborci

On the mend, thanks! The fine wine industry is weeping.

Tiger2

No worries of course! Just hope you’re getting better!

Danpaine

The 50th Anniversary really was disgracefully handled (basically ignored). So many missed opportunities. Nice to hear from you, Bob. Sorry to see Sleepy Hollow bow out, but I’m glad you’re finding success with Hawaii Five-O.

Denny C

I can’t imagine Disney dropping the ball on Star Wars’ 50th in the same way CBS and Paramount dropped the ball on Star Trek’s.

Tom

You always had the right idea to have Shatner and Nimoy for your movie that at least would have acknowledged the 50th Anniversary. i would hope Alex recognizes the opportunity.

boborci

And to answer your last question: no, we were never given any restrictions. Just ridiculous questions from the powers that bet be, like, “do we have to call it Star Trek?” Not kidding.

Tiger2

LOL seriously??? OK I guess I shouldn’t be surprised why Paramount is running these films into the ground. I still want one more Kelvin film at least, but it’s looking iffy unfortunately.

But your second answer also confirms what I been thinking and saying for awhile now, that the ‘canon’ used between the show and film division isn’t that strict the way people think of the IP divisions between Disney and FOX when it comes to using Marvel characters and so on (or use to be ;)). It does sound like both sides can just use whatever story lines and characters they want, simply make it clear which universe it was taking place in. To me this was made clear because your films referenced so many elements from the shows so I never believed the idea the shows couldn’t do the same thing with the Kelvin movies, within reason anyway.

Thanks again! You made a little news for me.

boborci

Paramount has great people in charge. Others have left. Have some hope.

Afterburn

Tiger the truth is that fans online love to pretend they know what they’re talking and make statements with absolute certainty. Statements that are incorrect or based in no evidence, and they spread to the point where they just become a widespread accepted truth.

As someone who has worked for major media companies, and been involved with the licensing of IP to other media companies, I can say I always laugh when I read what people assume to be the truth.

Because I know how these contracts work. Every contract is different and unless you’ve read the actual deal, you have really no idea.

Denny C

You know, like “Enterprise” on UPN.

Ahem.

Mario

Well, I have to say that it would have been nice if the movie had a name. It is very hard to refer to.

ML31

” like, “do we have to call it Star Trek?” Not kidding.”

As stupid as that question sounds I can totally understand the reasoning behind it. I don’t condone it mind you. Just saying I understand.

Jonboc

Loved your and Alex’s movies Bob, they exemplified the original formula I fell in love with.. but Discovery is a train wreck…maybe not Alex’s fault considering all the behind the scenes chaos…and I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, now that Disco has been revamped. But time will tell the tale! Fingers crossed, and Merry Christmas to you and yours.

Afterburn

I enjoyed both the Kelvin films and Discovery, for different reasons. I think it’s great that we can have different incarnations of the franchise that have such different feels.

Cygnus-X1

boborci

You said that you and Alex pretty much had free hand with ST09 and STID, and the studio didn’t tell you what to write or interfere with your creative process. I don’t think you can blame the shortcomings of those movies on critical voices, because then what about all of your TV shows? It’s not as though ST09 and STID deviate significantly from the storytelling style Scorpion, Hawaii Five-O and so forth. You guys have a certain style that is fairly consistent. If there’s an inner Bob Orci with meaningful stories to tell that’s been repressed all these years, the time to let him loose is now. And if you think that you’re getting bad critical advice, then ignore it and go with your gut. The world will never be without pablum. There will always be an abundance of it, with or without you adding to the stockpile.

boborci

You are like Hannibal Lecter. Your keen insight sees right through me..

boborci

And why would I “blame” anyone for unqualified success?

Cygnus-X1

boborci

And why would I “blame” anyone for unqualified success?

Have you seen BIRDMAN?

In any case, you said “it wasn’t easy with critical voices in our heads.” If you don’t mean that those critical voices were interfering with your creative process, then what do you mean?

Boborci

Loved Birdman.

We succeeded despite critical voices is obviously what I mean.

Cygnus-X1

Boborci

Well, the meaning of success follows from one’s goals. Obviously you feel that you accomplished your goals with ST09 and STID. And as for fans like me who found those movies unsatisfying (to say the least), apparently our critiques don’t factor into your goals, notwithstanding how diligently and precisely we have articulated them — and that is obviously your right. Though, I have to admit that I can’t relate. When I hand in work that is deeply flawed, and those flaws are pointed out to me in cogent rhetorical terms by multiple people, I am not able to feel that my work is an unqualified success. But, if you’re happy, then I’m happy for you. I still would like to see you do some sort of conspiracy theory project, whether in TV or film. It’s the area that you’ve shown the most passion for, and as such your project would have a brand of authenticity. You could make the JFK (1991) for this generation, whether your project were actually about the Kennedy assassination or some other conspiracy theory. I’d be interested to see whatever you decided to take on.

Cygnus-X1

Impending Doom

I couldn’t agree more.

Anything’s possible, and Kurtzman won’t be the showrunner. But, at this point, they’ve got to win me over. If I hear amazing things about the show from people whose opinions I respect, then I might have a look. Otherwise, I doubt I’ll bother. Too many disappointments, and all too predictable. I reached my limit with STID. CBS is clearly not marketing to the likes of me, anyway. That much is painfully obvious.

Hauke Fischer

One person from Picard’s past I’d like to see return is Kamala, the metamorph played by Famke Janssen in The Perfect Mate. If Picard has some sort of crisis, where he loses his mojo and gets disillusioned with the Federation or something like that I can’t imagine a much better way to jolt him back into his former self than Kamala, still the ethical paragon he was 30 years ago when she chose to fixate on Picard rather than the drab diplomat she was to marry.
It’s probably a bit too deep in the lore to be made, and the episode has been much maligned for the objectification of Kamala (though I’d say that was the point).
But who knows Chabon I think was it who was joking about metamorphs a few months ago, and Janssen would be a big name to attach to the show :)

AJinMoscow

This show won’t have any real weight to it unless certain guest roles are included: Guinan, Riker, Crusher (B), even Q. Get it right the first time.

Afterburn

To me, this show would have more weight without them. And please god, no Q.

Jonboc

Yep.

ML31

Another thing we can agree on, Afterburn. Please for the love of God… No Q.

slider

I agree.

Binyamin

Set in 2399 … so in the second season, everyone here can argue whether 2400 is the first year of the 25th century or the last year of the 24th century.

There isn’t an argument to be had. It’s the final year of the 24th century. Because there’s no Year Zero in the A.D. calendar. So there’s only being right and being wrong; arguing doesn’t enter into it.

Chaotic Neutral

Yes it does *starting argument maniacally*

Henry Janeway

You must have been a riot on New Year’s Eve 1999!

slider

So essentially from both a science and character point of view it’ll make Star Trek believable again?

MysticalDigtial

*sigh* It’s amazing how annoying some ‘fans’ are. I freaking hate Voyager and enterprise, but I would never call out the science of a freaking sci-fi show for being unrealistic, it’s a sci-fi show, it’s fiction.

PaulB

“it’s a sci-fi show, it’s fiction.” True, but what’s the other half of the genre title? Sci-fi means SCIENCE fiction. It’s fiction that is supposed to be centered around, or grow out of, science. When science is replaced by pure fantasy (the mushroom machine–sorry, the “Spore Drive” for example), it stops being SCI-fi and becomes pure fantasy.

If you’re going to defend the “fiction” half of the label, you shouldn’t sneer at those who defend the “science” half of the label.

Hauke Fischer

Do you poopoo TOS, and TNG, and DS9 as well?
transporters, giant space amoeba, hyper-accelerated humanoids, shape shifters, mind-melds.
I have no real issue with the Spore Drive, I find the concept fascinating and it’s a great metaphor for the interconnectedness of the Universe.
My main problem is that they’ll have to find a better way to mothball it than just “we don’t want ppl to inject themselves with tardigrade DNA and jump over to alternate universes”. I somehow doubt more cut-throat organizations than Starfleet *cough* Section 31 *cough* would have a problem with that.

slider

To some extent I found Voyager and Enterprise believable. Discovery I do not. But yeah I do also find some ‘fans’ as you say annoying, ones that feel new Star Trek is above criticism.

Bird of Prey

So we either watch Picard partaking in a lot of interstellar diplomacy…

…or he’ll just tend to his vineyard in France all day. ;-)

Steve

I’m dreading the Eaves-designed Federation starships for 20 years post Nemesis. Even darker, even more angular, even more pointless cutouts and even more overdesigned detailing and jagged edges. Joy.

Bart

Spot on! Eaves is so overdesigned. Let’s get Probert back for this series!

kmart

Boy, that’d be something, wouldn’t it?

Curvy ship

Spot on indeed! Probert and his smoothness, noble simplicity.

PaUl

One of the stories could be a slightly guilty (at not saving him)Picard finds a way to rescue Shatner from the Nexus! That would fit into TV budget wise & be a fitting end to the character plus give them massive ratings!!

Tom

Foolish if they don’t look at the potential for this.

MysticalDigtial

Oh please no, keep the bag of ego as far from the Trek screen as possible.

VZX

I hope this means that Moore, Braga, or other TNG writers may get involved.

Afterburn

Didn’t the fandom completely turn on Braga a decade ago? Wasn’t he Trek poison?

Or are we now turning back and remembering fondly? Can’t keep track of where in the life cycle we are in the love/hate relationship with him. I’m sure in 15 years fans will be asking for Alex Kurtzman to be involved in some new Trek movie.

Mark Calcagno

This ^

15 years ago, Braga was excitingly writing episodes where T’Pol took her clothes off. And then he wrote that “valentine,” to us.

Keep him away.

Sam

Oh they absolutely turned on both him! Along with Rick Berman.

From the end of VOY up through Nemesis and the end of ENT, everything was “Berman and Braga” or “B&B.” It was like B&B didn’t have the fans’ permission to do anything right.

Even people who couldn’t be bothered to look up Braga’s actual episodography echoed the B&B mantra, holding him partly accountable for the stylistic sameness of everything from ‘Encounter at Farpoint’ through Insurrection and Nemesis (you DO of course see the problem with this). Those that knew of his actual contributions more rightly criticized Braga for his bizarre-concept sci-fi premises, and for his upholding of Berman’s creative restrictions as co-executive producer over ENT and latter-day VOY.

Most astonishing though was during the J.J Abrams backlash, when a minority of Berman Trek apologists took to publicly gaslighting anybody on message boards who did not share their inexplicable amnesia over the similar “Berman and Braga” backlash as having ever occurred (and even somehow appearing to do an effective job at it).

alphantrion

I doubt it, Braga is involved with The Orville and Moore has a successful show and a another one developing. Even if they wanted them involved, I doubt they could find the time to fit it in. I think we should trust in Sir Patrick’s judgments as an executive producer for now.

Denny C

Sir Patrick was very much involved in the direction of Insurrection so, yeah, I dunno.

Afterburn

All that said, alpha, it would be cool if one of the old TNG writers did an episode. Heck, Menosky is on the DSC staff, get him on the team!

alphantrion

Oh, I think it would be excellent if they could get them involved somehow, but the logistics make it hard. Also, I think it would be more appropriate to say that Menosky “was” on the Discovery team, not anymore the last I checked. Didn’t he jump ship to Orville?

Afterburn

I think he did. Bad decision, career wise. But he could still contribute a script for Picard. Naren Shankar too, who was a producer most recently on The Expanse.

Curious to see what these writers could do without the network shackles of 1991.

ML31

Menosky didn’t think so. And I would say he would know better than any of us.

Afterburn

Boy, you just love to argue. Back to the kids table.

ML31

Perhaps you never should have left it.

Tiger2

Actually Afterburn, Menosky left Discovery and is now working on the Orville. Strange, but true.

MysticalDigtial

Keep Braga as far away from Trek as possible. the guy knows how to continue success if it’s already handed to him, but lacks any creativity of his own worth merit. Same goes for Berman, both oversaw some of the most boring and tiring outings Trek in Voyager and Enterprise.

Ensign Crusher

I am all for 60 minutes of what used to be known as “Piller filler”.

Mark Calcagno

I’m going off tangent, but I’ll come back in the end.

There was a video game announced in 2014 called No Man’s Sky. It was a tantalizing demo, showing the player on a lush world full of animals and plants, but then something amazing happened. The player jumped in a spaceship, launched themselves into space, then flew to another planet (after a fight scene in space) and landed on it, no load screens at all. An endless universe was promised. It was seamless, and gamers went crazy.

With gamers’ imaginations captured, Sony changed their tune a bit. Suddenly, this indie game was a AAA title, one could gather from the price. It was no longer an afterthought, but a headliner. The lead developer went on late night television to talk about it, and PS4’s started being bundled with the game.

On the internet, people grew more and more excited, waiting for the game to be released. I read people saying they couldn’t wait to become traders, or war mongers, or politicians in the game, manipulating the three factions against each other for their own gains. One problem though, none of those systems were discussed. As internet hype grew, and with mounting pressures from Sony, the lead developer started hinting that the internet was correct in their guesses of the game, and that this was indeed everything they imagined.

Then it was released, and it wasn’t what was promised at all.

A combination of ambition, greed and audience excitement created a lie, and that developer has been barely seen since. He’s to blame, certainly, but he probably wouldn’t have had the spotlight as much if Sony didn’t push him there.

Now, Star Trek Picard, or whatever it’s called.

Learn the No Man’s Sky lesson: set realistic expectations. This show will not be TNG. It may not even feel like TNG, and Picard may not be like Picard used to be. This may not be the steak after Disco’s vegatables, it may be another show you like, but not love, or you may hate it. Don’t get too excited, or put high expectations on it.

MysticalDigtial

No Mans Sky has quickly become one of the better games out there though as the developer put a lot of time into it after release and it shows.

Discovery has found it’s footing since Season 1 and Short Treks has shown they are doing a lot better story wise and I suspect we’ll see Season 2 come more into it’s own (much like most Star Trek series have to do)

I suspect Picard will be nothing like many expect, and it’s right to set realistic expectation, but given how good Discovery has been and looks to be getting even better, I don’t think there’s any badness heading our way, just different, and that’s good.

Mark Calcagno

That’s a good point, but my point was more about how hype changed a product, and that we need to control it. NMS is a really good game now, and I’m a huge Disco fan.

Darfyn

Yes , this will be Post-TNG-Picard ! Picard managing an exclusive hotel on Risa for Starfleet ! It will be called Fantasy Risa !

Kian

Whatever it is, the solid premise of Star Trek as defined by the united federation and human life on Earth is and should be post-capitalist,
JJ Films flirted too much with capitalist realism and some cyberpunk and almost began to deviate from it
that is not Star Trek, thats literally every other sci fi show out there,
the producers and writers of Discovery and Picard show need to always build upon that premise that humanity has reached an economics of abundance through technology and new modes of social organization not based upon market economy, private property and capital accumulation.

Kian

Just for clarity purpose, by deviating from it i meant the post capitalism

Ted C

That darn capitalism. Giving prosperity and opportunity to so many people…dang it. It’s gotta go!

DS9 is King

I think the new Picard series will be much closer to DS9 then Discovery.

ML31

For the sake of Star Trek, I can only hope so.

Mikey1091

Didn’t he and Orci swear up and down that Into Darkness would be vastly different from TWOK? Or more specifically did they not promise left right and sideways it wasn’t going to be a TWOK remake? I REALLY hope this isn’t another of those promises!

Afterburn

It wasn’t a remake of TWOK. It was a VERY different story that used a couple of the same elements from TWOK, but also elements from other Trek episodes/films. What I found interesting about it is how they inverted the character themes: while TWOK was about an aging Kirk realizing, at the end of his life, what his friendship with Spock meant to him, STID was about Spock, at the beginning of their relationship, discovering what friendship really is.

ML31

That doesn’t make it clever. I found it just lazy. I think they felt a line for line reading of the Spock death but reversed would be cool but it was just tired. I get that the movie had to be about Kirk earning the chair. That was the right way to go. But the execution of it was very short sighted. Kirk’s “death” carried zero weight and what emotional resonance the scene might have had was destroyed with Spock’s KHAAAN yell. Which has become a joke over the years.

Afterburn

Nobody said it made it clever. It was still a fun, if imperfect movie. Go back to teletubbies.

kmart

Just because it was a slight improvement on the utter disaster of the 09 film still doesn’t qualify it as anything quite close to ‘fun,’ unless your amusement arises out of sadism over Pine’s ever-cringeworthy scenes with Cumberbatch.

As for your ‘teletubbies’ crack, that sounds like something you should have drawn a warning for, totally unwarranted.

ML31

Right. Because anyone who disagrees with Afterburn obviously has the aptitude of a toddler. By all means, continue to de-value your own takes on things.

Danpaine

STID was absolutely awful, imo, despite whatever it made at the box office. The disc I unwisely purchased out of loyalty to the brand is only worthy of doubling as a beer coaster. Lazy, lazy writing.

Afterburn

I’ll take it off your hands. Really enjoyable movie. Better than at least 4 of the TOS/TNG films.

Mark Calcagno

I counted 6!

1, 3, 5, 7, 9 and 10

Afterburn

Haven’t watched SFS in ages, so I didn’t want to make that claim, and while Generations is objectively an awful film, it still holds a special place for me as the first time seeing the TNG crew on the big screen.

Mark Calcagno

The music is good in Generations at least. IMO the best of the films.

Danpaine

You are welcome to it, in all of it’s London Khan, Weeping Spock and Magic Blood glory…

Afterburn

Of those, only the magic blood really bothered me at all. Not sure why the other two bother anyone at all. Picky picky…

ML31

My theory on why you are not sure about those things is because you have a history of a failure to understand the complexity of the opinion. Especially when it differs from your own.

Afterburn

Seriously, give it a rest. Is there a way to block people on this site? Jeebus.

ML31

Please please please… Take your own advice.

ML31

I would argue that for sure Nem and STFC were VASTLY superior to STID. STID is closer to Gen and Ins but I think a good case could be made for them being better as well.

Afterburn

And you’d be wrong and lose every time. Because it’s YOU who doesn’t understand opinions. It really is like talking to a wall. Astonishing.

ML31

Of course. What was I thinking? Opinions aren’t subjective at all. They are akin to facts. Facts that must carry the Afterburn seal of approval.

albatrosity

I am all for an Earthbound Picard show giving insight into what terrestrial life is like in the Trek universe in this time, more political, more ‘human’ stories you could say than monster of the week type episodes. Like ENT was supposed to be in its first season, a series about getting off the ground, so that by the end of the first season they finally have a starship. Maybe this series is about Picard rising up once more to overcome whatever’s keeping him in place for the time being. It’s a series set within the Trek universe that isn’t about hopping galaxies. I think that’s a cool idea.

dennycranium

I’m peripherally involved with the Star Trek Original Series Set Tour in Ticonderoga. We held a big event last weekend. Discovery and the new Picard series came up with fans and staff,volunteers, etc. One common theme that came up was fans wanted it to look and feel like TNG did. (Like Orville)
Fans want to see the same folks who did the design return for the Picard series. They hope Doug Drexler, Mike and Denise Okuda are behind the scenes creating this world. Daren Dochterman would be a good name to add to this list.
I hope this can happen.

ML31

It’s 20 years later. Things need to look at least a little different and a little more advanced. Things change.

AtzeH

He is the villain! Beeing sad he killed his young clone, he now leads the remulan empire ;D

Ted C

Maybe another way this show will be different from Discovery is it will be good and also respectful of the Star Trek universe.

David Alexander Harrison

Anyone else wonder if this is all a big bluff & they’re actually making a Dixon Hill TV show? 🤔

snoopytrek

.. hopefully this one will be a Star Trek series

raffie

Here’s hoping “more real world” means intelligent storytelling as opposed to the dumb SJW hysteria that is STD.