How would you fix Star Trek?

[Karha of Honor]

Here's my proposal. Don't try to cash in on TOS and TNG nostalgia. Try a reboot. Now, I know this may seem like a JJ Abrams inspired attempt to take the franchise in new directions, but I actually have a radically different take on what they did, that I think could have actually worked. Don't do a half-assed reboot, but instead a completely expansive reboot that doesn't adhere even one iota to the previous continuity. It's not time travel, it's another dimension. Call the main reality we've been following Earth-415 or something, and then create a new, entirely separate Earth to play around in. Maybe even one of the parallel universes we saw in "Parallels." Like the one where the Borg had overrun the Federation. Well, no, maybe it wouldn't work after how badly Voyager nerfed the Borg. But my point is, that could offer up a lot of new storytelling possibilities, without being shackled to a greater canon. Because my worst fear with STG is that they're going to botch the continuity, like they're doing with STD. So, just shove the continuity to the side and create a new Earth for us to play around in. Like, maybe the Federation has Klingons and Romulans are Federation members in this reality, or maybe the Dominion is the way the Federation should have been, and it's them uniting to take on the Borg or something.

What do you guys think?

On paper, I really liked the idea of Abrams Trek as it could have been the equivalent of the Ultimate Marvel universe. There is too much canon and too much history for new viewers on their first viewing to understand - there is no ''pick up and play'' as it were.

How can anyone write historical fiction...?

The problem with Abrams Trek is that it was time travel, and not an alternate dimension. It was still shackled to the previous continuity to a large extent, and that was because of nostalgia. "These are the same characters you love, only changed!" By placing it in another dimension, and not an altered timeline, then you could even explain this new version of Khan. He's Khan-2 rather than Khan-1. Similar to Earth-1 Superman and Earth-2 Superman. Yeah, he'd be the inferior Khan, but I think it would have upset a lot less people. And this way, you don't have those pesky fanboys obsessing over continuity errors. It's win-win! But alas, they did not do that.

What in the Red Klingon Hell did TOS Spock do in Into Darkness? They should had just left him out of it.

Continue Star Trek from the end of the Dominion War, maybe give it a few decades, see how the war altered perceptions, especially in the Federation.

I'd like to see the Federation taken down a few notches given that it is effectively the hegemon of the Alpha Quadrant after the Dominion War. Have a large amount of people, especially humans, be disillusioned with the Fed societies promises, the Federation leadership worn out by its position in the AQ and caught too much reacting and not acting as forces like Romulans, now bent on revenge towards them for Spock costing them their home system are actively working to align races against them motivated in a way they never were before.

I'd also would like to see things from the perspective that isn't one from the Federation, but I think having a cast centered around aliens wouldn't work. The framework I've laid out, though, would be perfect for the disillusioned faction in the Fed having formed their own secessionist nation that more realpolitik and ruthless, but one that still maintains an outlook very akin to their mother nation echoing the similarities between the US and Britain despite the bad blood over the War of Independence.

Last bit too, would be to see other things play out that could be revisited, like the Founders maintaining a strong reluctance to change their outlook with Odo becoming something of the leader of a minority reform faction that had a very uphill battle, the Ferengi being pushed to take on more of a political role in the AQ as nations grow suspicious of Federation dominance leading to the establishment of a military and them having to go outside of their element getting a taste for why other races act nasty in ways they don't understand. Also have more activity of lesser AQ races and revisiting many like Enterprise should have, such as what the Tholians are up to and how they might look on things.

Finally, break up the Borg. Have an arch be about the protagonists introducing, or helping introduce, something to the Collective that would unleash rival collective personalities that have always existed within the Collective, but have been restrained. That would fragment the Borg into effectively what are nations and lead them into infighting as the each collective battles for dominion of the whole. That would allow them to remain a threat, but allow their always looming galaxy wide threatening posture they've had since TNG to finally be resolved.

I am fine with darker Trek but this sounds to much like IRL nasty politics.

The Ferengi are retarded based on what i have seen of them. Fun, but retarded.

Well, you may have your chance with STG, but I doubt Patrick Stewart will care that much about the continuity of a show he didn't star in.

Its made by the same people that made STD and we simply do not know how much creative control Stewart has. This whole thing is a propaganda exercise to try and prop up this struggling franchise because in many ways it is worse off now than it was in the aftermath of Enterprise and Nemesis. At least we had no fan civil war then.
Did you hear that STD officially has the lowest viewing figures of any Trek series to date? If it was on TV it would have Neilsons between 1 and 2 whereas Enterprise was cancelled with a 5 and a half. Part of that is the fact that not everyone is willing to pay for a subscription true, but they CHOSE that format, it is on their heads.

The competetition for eyeballs is on another plain of existence now. It can have less views and be more valuable.

[Deledrius]

On paper, I really liked the idea of Abrams Trek as it could have been the equivalent of the Ultimate Marvel universe. There is too much canon and too much history for new viewers on their first viewing to understand - there is no ''pick up and play'' as it were.

How can anyone write historical fiction...?

That's exactly the right question, IMO.

[clearspira]

On paper, I really liked the idea of Abrams Trek as it could have been the equivalent of the Ultimate Marvel universe. There is too much canon and too much history for new viewers on their first viewing to understand - there is no ''pick up and play'' as it were.

How can anyone write historical fiction...?

That's exactly the right question, IMO.

By history I mean ''there was 40 years of lore that brand new readers needed to know about before any of this makes sense'' not whatever it is that you are referring to. Why do you think that DC keep rebooting their books every couple of decades? Its because they wait for children to become adults and then realise that "hey, the only way we are getting more children to replace those children is to ensure that they actually know what is going on".
AT LEAST today we have ready access to back issues and fan wikis to brush up on the confusing parts thanks to internet. Back in the '90s, your only true resource was comic book shops and fan clubs - if you didn't live adjacent to either of these things then good effing luck trying to work out ANY backstory until you had bought weeks and weeks worth of books and potentially losing all interest as a result.

[Yukaphile]

Yeah, and for new readers like me, you got pirate sites to download the very first comic issues that spawned the superhero genre. So there's literally no excuse for their laziness today. Just reboot it. No ties to the present. Ditch old Spock and do something absolutely 100% new if you don't want to adhere to the old canon.

[Deledrius]

On paper, I really liked the idea of Abrams Trek as it could have been the equivalent of the Ultimate Marvel universe. There is too much canon and too much history for new viewers on their first viewing to understand - there is no ''pick up and play'' as it were.

How can anyone write historical fiction...?

That's exactly the right question, IMO.

By history I mean ''there was 40 years of lore that brand new readers needed to know about before any of this makes sense'' not whatever it is that you are referring to.

The point is that this assertion is unjustified, and there exists ample evidence to the contrary. People write stories which take place inside of real-world human history, which encompasses around five thousand years of canon, and these stories don't require you to read ancient Sumerian to be caught up.

If, to be understood, a story requires the audience to be intimately familiar to the level you describe, I contend that it's extremely poorly-written. It is not a failing of having a rich and broad history, but a failure to write.

[Yukaphile]

You're calling stuff like Wrath of Khan, Best of Both Worlds, and so on poorly written?

[clearspira]

On paper, I really liked the idea of Abrams Trek as it could have been the equivalent of the Ultimate Marvel universe. There is too much canon and too much history for new viewers on their first viewing to understand - there is no ''pick up and play'' as it were.

How can anyone write historical fiction...?

That's exactly the right question, IMO.

By history I mean ''there was 40 years of lore that brand new readers needed to know about before any of this makes sense'' not whatever it is that you are referring to.

The point is that this assertion is unjustified, and there exists ample evidence to the contrary. People write stories which take place inside of real-world human history, which encompasses around five thousand years of canon, and these stories don't require you to read ancient Sumerian to be caught up.

If, to be understood, a story requires the audience to be intimately familiar to the level you describe, I contend that it's extremely poorly-written. It is not a failing of having a rich and broad history, but a failure to write.

Real world history has the advantage of being something that we learn since the first grade from teachers, parents, siblings, and every factual news source imaginable.

[Yukaphile]

It shouldn't be that hard to familiarize yourself with the lore of Star Trek in today's hyperdigital world. Browse Wikipedia or Memory Alpha summaries, and when it comes to landmark episodes and the high-water marks the fans love, watch that. If you're going to try and write for the show. Better effects is no excuse for laziness.

[Deledrius]

You're calling stuff like Wrath of Khan, Best of Both Worlds, and so on poorly written?

No, in fact I would assert that the widespread popularity of those works even among those who are not steeped in the franchise quite clearly demonstrates that an engaging and well-told story can stand alone, and still be a part of the larger work and build upon it in ways that rewards fans for caring about it.

[Yukaphile]

Then at what point is a total reboot necessary? See, Star Trek, by nature, is not like other sci-fi works such as Star Wars by its nature. It is presented, as clearspira noted, as fictional. A timeline unfolding before our eyes. That's why Enterprise drew so much ire, because it disrupted the canon. The reboot movies and STD has done the same, as will probably STG. I'm not expecting a tight continuity within the TV show itself, that stuff is gonna eventually contradict, but adherence to the larger mythos is absolutely necessary. That's why Abrams' attempt failed so hard. It still wanted to adhere to the larger Trek mythology instead of setting this in another parallel dimension. And there's a difference with Wrath of Khan, in that it built upon the strengths of TOS, paid homage to them, and didn't just discard them when it became inconvenient. That is going to be harder and harder to do with literally centuries of history being written. So again, at what point do you eject all that and just start over? Because without that, you're just gonna get people retconning those popular episodes in the past to make way for new stuff that will most likely be inferior, just to make room for it.