Is a new TOS era movie a prequel?

[Takara_Soong 4]

I know there are many people who hate the idea of prequels which got me thinking - is a new TOS era movie a prequel. Many of the arguments that were used against Enterprise could be used to argue against a TOS era movie. To me, after everything that's happened in TNG, DS9 and VOY, going back to Kirk's era is a prequel. What do you think?

[Stephen of Borg 2]

yes it's a prequel, the new movie sounds like it takes place before TOS which makes it even more so a prequel. Enterprise was definitely a prequel since we saw how everything started and the UFP being formed.

 

I would have liked to have seen, given a choice, a movie set between ENT and TOS. You hear about the Romulan war here and there in the different series, I would have liked to have seen it happen and the new United Federation of Planets form. It would have made for a good story and would have added more background to the Trek universe. Instead of a movie, I would rather that a TV series take place after VOY. But, I have no problems with the movie currently being made

[DrWho42 13]

If it would be set around TOS and kept the spirit as well as the style, I'd really enjoy it. I would love seeing The Original Series-era with great effects, however I have seen New Voyages and thought they did a pretty good job.

 

Though, I do not like the Starfleet Academy idea even though I've read one of those children's books...

 

Mmm, according to Memory Alpha, J.J. Abrams denies the latter.

[Mike 5]

Anything they do now with TOS is a prequel because it happened before TNG, DS9 and VOY..

 

Although I wouldn't mind seeing something done between the TOS and ENT time frame I would prefer to see a movie done after Voyager. I would rather go into the future and perhaps do something with the DS9 and VOY crews..Or a totally new crew..

[Stephen of Borg 2]

I just don't want them to do a Titan TV series or movie unless they stay close to the book. If the books are completely different from the Titan TV series, it would make the novels worthless since it would be different from canon. So I wouldn't mind an after VOY story, just don't use the Titan crew.

[Theunicornhunter 2]

In order to answer the question - you have to determine your point of "origin" - your reference poin. Since The Original Series was the well, the original series then IMO it is the reference point - so anything before - such as ENT is a prequel and anything - after such as TNG, DS9 and VOY are sequels.

 

I would like to see something between ENT & TOS

[gul_nodrog 2]

The only Starfleet Academy movie I'd want to see would feature Jean-Luc Picard as the headmaster or whatever they call it. And even that I'm lukewarm on.

 

IMO it's only a prequel if it predates Kirk on the Enterprise.

 

So I vote for a movie set AFTER Voyager but having nothing to do with Voyager. My dream movie would be a DS9 movie featuring the dramatic return of Captain Sisko (not gonna happen, I know). My second choice would be a movie set 50 to 100 years beyond the events of DS9/Voyager/TNG with an entirely new cast that was free to refer to events and people we all know and love.

[Jack_Bauer 1]

Not a prequel, most likely something between the end of TOS and Star Trek The Motion Picture (probably the most notable continuity gap in Star Trek) . There's quite a bit that can be inferred from the poster. The use of the Arrowhead emblem signals the Enterprise as it was the only ship with that insignia at the time. The yellow and blue are clearly meant to symbolize Kirk and Spock.

 

So a Kirk-Spock centric story on the Enterprise, set in the last two years of the five year mission. That's my call, based on the poster.

[Takara_Soong 4]

Not a prequel, most likely something between the end of TOS and Star Trek The Motion Picture (probably the most notable continuity gap in Star Trek) .

 

So a Kirk-Spock centric story on the Enterprise, set in the last two years of the five year mission. That's my call, based on the poster.

It is a misconception that TOS did not cover 5 years of events during its three season run. According to the stardates and calendar dates at st.com, TOS covered stardates 1312.4 through 5943.7 which translates to the calendar years 2265 through 2269 inclusive*. According to Kirk's personnel file at st.com, he was named captain of the Enterprise in 2264 and the mission ended in 2269. ST:TMP occurred on stardate 7412.6 which translates to the calendar year 2271. During the time between 2269 and 2271, Decker said Kirk had not "logged a single star hour in two and a half years".

 

For a new "Kirk on the Enterprise" movie it would either have to be set during the time covered by TOS or have to take place on the Enterprise-A after the events of ST:TUC which was set on stardate 9521.6 (calendar year 2293).

 

 

*The season 1 episode Where No Man Has Gone Before (production #002 - The Cage was #001) had a stardate of 1312.4. This is the episode with Gary Mitchell who died at the end of the episode. According to st.com, Gary Mitchell died in 2265. The season 3 episode with the highest stardate was the second last episode produced and aired, All Our Yesterdays (production #078). That is the episode where McCoy and Spock go back in the history of the planet Sarpeidon whose star is about to go supernova via a portal in a library. The stardate for that episode is 5943.7. According to st.com, Sarpeidon's star went supernova in 2269.

Edited July 31, 2006 by Takara_Soong

[gul_nodrog 2]

Do you really think that anyone at Paramount or this Abrams dude really cares that much about star dates and accurate canon? Only we fans care about that stuff and Paramount doesn't care about us.

 

I'm getting a really bad feeling about this whole thing. I don't think they should "recast" these classic Trek icons ... I don't care if every single member of the crew right down to the red shirts are Oscar winners, it's not going to be right. I don't want to see anyone but DeForest Kelley playing Bones, Shatner as Kirk, Nimoy as Spock. The others are interchangeable to me, but those three ARE those characters.

[Takara_Soong 4]

Do you really think that anyone at Paramount or this Abrams dude really cares that much about star dates and accurate canon? Only we fans care about that stuff and Paramount doesn't care about us.

 

I'm getting a really bad feeling about this whole thing. I don't think they should "recast" these classic Trek icons ... I don't care if every single member of the crew right down to the red shirts are Oscar winners, it's not going to be right. I don't want to see anyone but DeForest Kelley playing Bones, Shatner as Kirk, Nimoy as Spock. The others are interchangeable to me, but those three ARE those characters.

Actually I do believe JJ Abrams cares about canon. He is a huge Trek fan. I read recently that he has the season sets for every Trek series (although he admitted he hasn't seen all the episodes). I will trust that the fan in him will follow canon until it is shown otherwise.

 

For me, I don't have a problem with re-casting those roles because I'm not a huge TOS fan. I understand how you feel though because I would feel the same way if they tried to re-cast the TNG crew.

Edited August 1, 2006 by Takara_Soong

[gul_nodrog 2]

Actually I do believe JJ Abrams cares about canon. He is a huge Trek fan. I read recently that he has the season sets for every Trek series (although he admitted he hasn't seen all the episodes). I will trust that the fan in him will follow canon until it is shown otherwise.

 

For me, I don't have a problem with re-casting those roles because I'm not a huge TOS fan. I understand how you feel though because I would feel the same way if they tried to re-cast the TNG crew.

 

 

I hope that you are right about Abrams, HOWEVER the following quote from him gives me great pause:

 

"He said that he owned every Star Trek DVD from all the series, though he didn't watch Deep Space Nine, Voyager or Enterprise as attentively as the original series and The Next Generation, which he called "incredibly smart television."

 

Lumping DS9 & Voyager (and, even though I didn't like it, Enterprise) in an "and the rest" category like he's doing makes me incredibly nervous. If he's not watching DS9 as "attentively" as TNG then chances are we Niners will be treated as we have been by all of his predecessors .... like red-headed stepchildren. He'll just be another in a long line of people who have tried to pretend that DS9 never happened (witness Worf's unexplained demotion in Nemesis).

 

Yes, yes, I know, I'm really sort of a one-note person. Every Trek discussion gets back to DS9 for me at one point or the other. I'm just saying that it's all well and good for Abrams to make a TOS movie, but that will only last so long. Eventually, they will have to make television or movies set beyond the events of DS9 and Voyager ... I just hope that when that happens, Abrams will have had the opportunity to give both of those series the attention they deserve and not just skip right over them and carry on with TNG as if DS9/Voyager never occurred.

 

 

BTW, Takara, I never cared much about TOS either until my husband and I purchased the three-season box set for Christmas last year. After having watched that series in its entirety, I am now a big TOS fan. It was actually hard to go from TOS t.v. and TOS movies to The Next Generation. (We're watching all the series chronologically). As much as I love Picard, I was really sad to see the old characters go.

[Hooray for boobies 0]

Labelling prequels or sequels for a story (if we consider it one big story) that has been going on for more than 30 years doesn't make much of a difference.

 

My own view is that it doesn't matter to me if a new movie or series is placed in the TOS era or the TNG/DS9/VOY era or in some future timeline.

 

What I want from it are new fresh and charismatic characters, smart reflections of issues in contemporary society, good acting, strong writing, attention to characters archs i.e. no reset buttons and some colours and optimism back in the show.

 

But I am not entirely fair and open minded. I do not for any reason want a movie or show continuing och even preceding 'Enterprise' (A show I could not stand in the least).

[trekz 7]

In order to answer the question - you have to determine your point of "origin" - your reference poin. Since The Original Series was the well, the original series then IMO it is the reference point - so anything before - such as ENT is a prequel and anything - after such as TNG, DS9 and VOY are sequels.

I agree with your assessment TUH!

 

Labelling prequels or sequels for a story (if we consider it one big story) that has been going on for more than 30 years doesn't make much of a difference.

 

What I want from it are new fresh and charismatic characters, smart reflections of issues in contemporary society, good acting, strong writing, attention to characters archs i.e. no reset buttons and some colours and optimism back in the show.

I agree HFB that it doesn't make a huge difference for a story that has been going on for 40 years.

 

In addition to all the things you want in a new movie, I want effective use of special effects, but not so much that it affects the character development, acting and the story. Most of all, I want MORE TREK! But I want something that adds to the overall story, and not just another money-making effort for Paramount. I also want a strong movie ie that will win new fans, and keep the old ones happy and clamoring for more!

[VaBeachGuy 12]

A "TOS Era" movie wouldn't be a prequel in my opinion because TOS started the whole thing so it wouldn't be "pre". Themovie that is about to be released next year is pre-TOS though so that is a prequel.

 

Of course that's just my opinion, it all depends on what you consider "TOS Era" to mean. To me "TOS Era" starts with "Where no man has gone before". Anything (aside from "The Cage") that's before that episode is not part of the "TOS Era".

 

Of course another way to look at it is like this, anything after Enterprise is not a prequel. For a prequel you would have to go before Enterprise's time. I don't look at it that way, but it could be argued that way.

[rob39874 0]

The new movie is a prequel which i think is a mistake did they not learn there mistake from Enterprise.

 

I would prefer to see something after mVoyagers return either with a different ship or a different species maybe someone outside the federation.

Or maybe 100 yearsin the future

[DaboGirl 7]

The new movie is a prequel which i think is a mistake did they not learn there mistake from Enterprise.

 

I would prefer to see something after Voyagers return either with a different ship or a different species maybe someone outside the federation.

Or maybe 100 yearsin the future

The thing that they are cashing in on is name recognition with this new TOS era movie vs. Enterprise.

 

How many people are more familiar with the name Sato vs. Uhura, Capt. Archer vs. Capt. Kirk, T'Pol vs. Mr. Spock?

 

Starting again gives them a crew of Travis Mayweathers that they at least feel don't give them that built in audience.

 

I don't really agree or disagree with their idea. I guess we will all find out next summer...

[A l t e r E g o 9]

We've learned allot about the film since this thread started, (minor spoilers...)

 

 

 

 

 

 

We know it features Spock from sometime after GEN, (because Kirk's death excluded Shatner) we know it Introduces TOS characters and we've been told it will not ignore ENT, so it could be said it's both a sequel to all the Shows including TOS with some prequel to TOS added.

[poguemahone 0]

Greetings,

I don't consider this to be a prequel per se, more of a relaunch/new take on a great man's vision in the current fad of movies like the newer [batman] movies, or other Remakes of Classics. This one has a twist in that it looks steller and looks to live up to the hype. It's different from a [batman] flick in that you're casting is based on real iconic people as opposed to drawings done 60+ years ago. I was apprehensive when I first about it, like I was with Transformers, time will tell if it will live up to that retake, and will be with Voltron when that comes out. I'm psyched for this thing. The only way I think it could ever be a true preqeul is if Gene Roddenberry had ever thought to completely map out his vision rather than it being stretched in every direction by every Tom, Dick, & Harry.........................

 

It looks to continue on the same line of vision created by Enterprise, which is fantastic. I'm hoping this movie will create a line of movies in the fashion of Star Trek II-IV, which were done in quick succesion, as opposed to other stand alone movies which needs to induce Character/Plot/etc. quickly, which is hard to do in SciFi since of course it relies on character depth so much, even with a franchise like Star Trek, and more so with these characters. Which what I'm hoping we get with this movie, a few more.

 

I would have liked to have seen a Enterprise Movie just gone straight to a new series sicne i'm ready for it, but maybe this reeducation, reinvision, and reintroduction on why Star Trek is so great, with Pop Culture what it is today, is just what the Franchise needs.

 

Just my thoughts.................

 

Havn't been here in along time, glad to see it's still around.

[VaBeachGuy 12]

Havn't been here in along time, glad to see it's still around.

Welcome back to the board, it's been a while and it's great to see you back!

 

For those that are "new", (meaning that you joined within the past 4 and a half or 5 years lol) poguemahone is one of our Founding Members and one of our original Mods.

 

I look forward to some good discussions about the upcoming movie, and anything else under the sun.

[Voyager recruit 0]

As being set prior to the first st, sure-it's a prequel, as much as in its way the last three Star Wars films were prequels to the adventures of Luke and co. It has a decidedly greater focus, naturally, on the primary TOS characters, than the Skywalker-Kenobi focus of PM and its followers.

[Jack_Bauer 1]

I believe the new movie is actually best classified as a prequel/sequel/reimagining.

 

Click for Spoiler:

It's a prequel in the sense that it is set in an era prior to the time frame of the Original Series. However, it is also a sequel because the villain of the movie (Nero) is from the post Nemesis era. Finally, it is a reimagining because Nero interference in the timeline creates a divergent timeline (but because of the theory of time travel they are following, does not overwrite the original) and the ripples of the change are responsible for changes in character histories, appearances, etc).

 

Really, I think this is the best way to go. It doesn't wipe the slate clean but it provides a point of entry for new fans which is something that is absolutely needed.

[Voyager recruit 0]

Hm.Guess it is a sequel, too. At any rate, as my fellow member Jack says, I hope as well it will bring new fans into 'our tent'. And then perhaps as such, they'll also explore it in full, and in so doing..see all that they've been missing, and that there's more to all this, than ships, and aliens-not that yours truly doesn't love all that!

[Chataeya 0]

I know I voted but after reading all the posts, I feel like its being put out there to bring in new fans. I just know IMO that I love Star Trek, all of it no matter when its takes place or where. I have always watch it on TV and rented any movie that I could and watched them. I so miss ST on TV and no I dont have the privilege of cable or satellite TV, so if its free I can see it. I have watched them all from start to finish. before TOS or After Voyager , Movie or TV I dont care I just want my fill of Star Trek! lol

Basically I just wish that they all had come out in the right order, as for going back and forth it can be confusing. But then again the only thing really confusing is the props they have use from the siding cardboard doors on TOS to the submarine type doors on ENT . Yes I understand that as time went on props got much better for them but to an untrained eye it can set you off with your comprehension of what you are seeing.

I am the type that observes things differently the most normal folks sort of like the "Mentalist" on CBS on Tuesday night (yes on of my favorite shows) I dont always watch what is up front more to the point of I look for what is behind the goings on up front that most would look at.

Oh well, I am going off this topic so I will stop now

[GhostofMajorHayes 10]

Yes, its a prequel. I would like to see a film set after VOY.

[Voyager recruit 0]

Oh, yeah-and with-I assume you mean-but, from what I read recently in a Wiki article or somewhere, that possibility was considered and opted out of at some point previous. Sigh...but I,m glad someone is bringing my TOS heroes back, albeit younger...

[He Who Shall Not Be Named 2]

OK, there is just something about this new movie that I don't get.

 

The producers are saying that when Nero goes back in time that a new timeline splits off from his re-entry point. So what happens to the old, orginal timeline? Does it still exist in the sense that it has a physical form? Or is it simply a construct?

 

If Nero goes back in time to affect some change it would not affect the timeline that Nero came from, so what would be the point? Same goes for Spock's time travel.

 

Don't get me wrong. I think that, if time travel were to happen, then going back in time would indeed create a new timeline branching off from the existing one. (It wouldn't necessarily happen going forward in time so long as the time traveler never returned to the past or present.) However, it wouldn't make a very good movie plot unless there was also a way to merge all these separate timelines together.

[Jack_Bauer 1]

OK, there is just something about this new movie that I don't get.

 

The producers are saying that when Nero goes back in time that a new timeline splits off from his re-entry point. So what happens to the old, orginal timeline? Does it still exist in the sense that it has a physical form? Or is it simply a construct?

 

If Nero goes back in time to affect some change it would not affect the timeline that Nero came from, so what would be the point? Same goes for Spock's time travel.

 

Don't get me wrong. I think that, if time travel were to happen, then going back in time would indeed create a new timeline branching off from the existing one. (It wouldn't necessarily happen going forward in time so long as the time traveler never returned to the past or present.) However, it wouldn't make a very good movie plot unless there was also a way to merge all these separate timelines together.

In regards to the first point, the former timeline (i.e. the one Nero leaves) would still exist and continue after the new one branches off. It's like the TNG episode Parallels, every possible timeline exists, none less valid than the others. This movie is following the theory of time travel that states that when traveling back in time you enter an alternate timeline which is different from the original simply because you're there. It's not really your past, its a similar one that need not follow the same path. I think there is some belief that this is actually how time travel would really work because this theory eliminates paradoxes. To put it in pop culture terms, Marty McFly could never prevent his parents from meeting and thereby never be born. He could only prevent the birth of that timeline's Marty McFly.

 

Now, that doesn't make Nero's time travel pointless.

Click for Spoiler:

Nero seems to be similar to Annorax in that he is trying to alter history to generate a more favourable outcome. Namely one that undoes a terrible event for him. The theory is that, based on the Countdown comic prequel and the new novel summary, Romulus is destroyed and kills his family. He goes nuts and tries to fix it and if he did succeed he could travel forward after making his past changes and be in a future where his changes are the established history and achieve his goals.

 

As for Spock travelling back (presuming it is 'our' Spock and not the altered future Spock attempting to do pretty much the same thing Nero is) that is a little odd considering his timeline isn't in danger, presumably. What Nero is doing could threaten all timelines, Spock may just want to prevent death no matter the timeline, or he is attempting to apprehend Nero and return to a 'close enough' future because he is a dangerous mad-man.

 

I don't what it is, I'm no good at physics but I seem to be able to keep timeline stuff pretty much straight in my head. Hopefully it makes sense in this post.

[He Who Shall Not Be Named 2]

So in essence Nero is just trying to create his own personal timeline?

[Jack_Bauer 1]

So in essence Nero is just trying to create his own personal timeline?

Pretty much.