• DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    13·
    8 months ago

    I’m just gonna say it: Is anyone else not really interested in a show about Starfleet Academy? I’ll give it a shot, and it could be phenomenal, in which case I will enjoy watching it. But on the whole, that’s just not a setting that interests me in the slightest. I want Legacy.

  • USSBurritoTruck@startrek.websiteMEnglish
    9·
    8 months ago

    I kinda hope that “Legacy” does get off the ground, if for no other reason than that all the folks champing at the bit for it will be confronted by the fact that once you take out the TNG cast, what you’re left with is show created by the same dude who was showrunner for season two of PIC and who thinks owning a BttF DeLorean is a personality trait, featuring the Scrappy Doo of Star Trek.

    • askryan@startrek.websiteEnglish
      4·
      8 months ago

      But what about all the interesting ideas they’ve pitched for Legacy? Like…the ideas that were come up with. That involved things. You know the ones.

      • USSBurritoTruck@startrek.websiteMEnglish
        4·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, right now the idea seems to begin and end with more Trek by Terry Matalas, and if that’s all they’re bringing to the table…I’m good.

        Even though I do like Seven, Raffi, and Crash LaForge, the ongoing adventures of Jack Crusher does not appeal to me in the slightest.

      • USSBurritoTruck@startrek.websiteMEnglish
        5·
        8 months ago

        Who’s angry? I just don’t think he’s a particularly good showrunner, and if not for people being blinded by his over reliance on fan service and nostalgia, it wouldn’t even be a question.

  • Steven Hilton@mastodon.online
    9·
    8 months ago

    @billmason @startrek I’m skeptical. I fear they ruined trek with discovery. By showing the universe nearly a millennium in the future, now any new stories they will be “filling in the timeline” where we already know at some level how it all works out. The dramatic tension is gone.

    Or, stories set after any time we haven’t already seen will be so far into future as to be disconnected from what came before.

    Makes me sad. Abrams damaged Trek. Kurtzman may have killed it.

    • Value Subtracted@startrek.websiteMEnglish
      8·
      8 months ago

      I really don’t understand this notion that a story is ruined because you’re also familiar with stories that take place after it.

      I know how WWII turned out, but there are stories set in that period that are worth watching.

      • Steven Hilton@mastodon.online
        3·
        8 months ago

        @ValueSubtracted I mean, it’s not binary, but it is a factor. I’ve watched the same movie, or even single episodes, many, many times. But there is a reason people, like myself, want to avoid spoilers before watching something new. Knowing how it ends ahead of time just hits different.

        • Value Subtracted@startrek.websiteMEnglish
          7·
          8 months ago

          I guess so. I’ve just never watched Star Trek VI and felt like it had been affected by the fact that TNG was in its sixth season by that point.

          • Steven Hilton@mastodon.online
            4·
            8 months ago

            @ValueSubtracted but part of st vi laid out how the Federation and klingon empire became the allies we see in tng. That’s the kind of “filling in the blanks” stories I’m talking about. VI is my 2nd favorite movie after Khan, so I’m not saying those kinds of stories can’t be good as well.

    • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
      5·
      8 months ago

      Strange New Worlds is “filling in a timeline” that we absolutely know how it works out - even the characters do! It’s part of the plotline - but it’s a decent show. Sure, I have plenty of objections to the episode authors and character details, but after Abrams it’s almost refreshing. I don’t think knowing the future renders making an enjoyable series impossible, do you?

    • Bill Mason 🖖 🎶 📖 🥅@mastodon.socialOP
      11·
      8 months ago

      @ValueSubtracted @startrek Yeah, just general talk of spacing out future projects. But since it’s the only potential future project we know of (I think?) it’s a straw to grab. 😂

      Personally I wouldn’t be shocked if the idea dies because people move on to other projects and then if/when Paramount decided to do it you suddenly can’t get the band back together on the timeline they want.

    • StillPaisleyCat@startrek.websiteEnglish
      6·
      8 months ago

      Actually, TrekMovie makes the case that the references in the reply to the need to ‘time things out’ for the franchise was the answer. I would parse that as their having other Star Trek franchise products ahead in the queue.

      The person asking really let Cheeks off the hook though with their final question being, “Is Trek still a priority for the company?”.

      No matter how specific the preceding preamble was to Legacy, the question they got to was super general and let Cheeks take it wherever he wanted.