Dude...just don't. You don't want to get me started on that topic, trust me.
Besides, this isn't the English grammar wiki we're commenting on, so we're already going way off-topic with it.
Well, at this point it's pedantics, so...live with it.
Point is, I don't need or want a PIC movie. Just no.
Fixed.
Y'know, these sort of polls should try harder to give more love to some of the less "old favorite" species of Trek. It gets a little wearying to see the same species listed every time on these things. :-P
I'd be interested in something more exotic than your typical humanoid alien, like a Changeling, or Aurelian, or even a Horta.
I kinda would like to see a story about Picard's early days aboard the Stargazer, but I'm not sure I need a whole movie in order to get it.
I, for one, would be curious to see a Kelvin-timeline TNG-related film, as it does seem like the natural next step to take the Kelvin-timeline, but Paramount's interests currently lie elsewhere. They've signaled they want to do another TOS Kelvin film first, and as I'm kinda getting the impression they're winding down their interest in the Kelvin timeline overall, they might retire that idea after that--only time will tell. For right now, though, such a TNG-related project is not even on the table currently.
As for the Prime timeline side of things, unless it's a pre-TNG story as already mentioned, I'm not at all interested in anything more Picard or even TNG related, as I think that's story not only done, it's in danger of getting beaten to death now and overstaying its welcome. PIC was more than enough of an ending for me on that, I do not at all think we really need more. Know when it's time to put an idea to bed, not drag it out longer than it has something to give.
Lewis Zimmerman, if just because Robert Picardo's portrayals of both him and the EMH (and how much they bounced off each other despite having so much in common) was always a delight to watch.
Picardo once talked about a pitch for a show he had floated to producers a couple years back (he apparently didn't get any bites) that he jokingly called Star Trek: Picardo, in which was a show that reunited the Voyager EMH with Zimmerman in a season-long arc that had them having to work together again, and it just sounded like so much fun I'm kinda sorry it didn't go anywhere.
It's an attempt to compile a collective resource of the finer details about the universe Roddenberry created, with particular emphasis (so far) having been put on the starships themselves. They have a lot more material on the Apple Vision Pro, but not everybody has access to that, so some of it is shared through other outlets such as YouTube and the archive's home site.
And while they aren't technically officially backed, they are closely affiliated with a lot of the people who had or ARE working on or with Trek, letting them have a whole lot of input on things, so while I hesitate to call it a truly official work too, it still has an official vibe to it that marks it as definitely being more than just a mere fan work too. So I think discussing the validity of whatever canonicity it may or may not have among fans is totally valid at this point, because in its completed form, the archive might have a lot of information that will become the go-to for Trek in the future--it at least has that potential, though that's probably still a good few years off still.
The majority of the fandom, I'm thinking.
I know, I know, you aren't one for these sort of debates, and I respect that, but it's probably a valid question to be asking at this point, where the rest of the fandom stands on the canonicity of the Roddenberry Archive--it's gonna have to be done at some point for (ironically) archival reasons.
The original version, but I'll leave it as is anyway for the sake of the record and all.
^ Dutch Bros, then? :-P
I'm one to talk at any rate--I actually hate coffee.
Not currently, to my knowledge, but that's partly because the Archive is still largely in its infancy and hasn't reached a point where the question of answering whether it should be or not was deemed necessary.
Seems to me that might change soon though.
So with that said...I personally would be hesitant about considering them canon, given the quibbly nature and association with the greater franchise the archive itself currently is in...but at the same time I wouldn't be against it if the greater fandom is for it too.
Yes, without question. The Voyager EMH proved the program met all the requirements to constitute a self-aware AI, so it stands to reason all of the others would too. And by Starfleet and the Federation law, that means they have rights as well as certain protections, allowing them to be spared such treatment if they didn't want it. Technically, both would be in violation, potentially gravely, of their own rules and laws doing otherwise as they were shown.
I mean, if the Exocomps just potentially being similarly self-aware themselves raised such a hullabaloo over their own rights and protections, then the EMHs definitely should get the same luxuries too.
(But then that was always part of VOY's point with the EMH--exploring how the Trek universe was being slow to realize even holograms could constitute as artificial lifeforms in the right circumstances too, and thus negligent in giving them as many rights as they probably should, the whole message of the episode in question).
Besides, repurposing EMHs of all things for mining always seemed like a really weird idea to me. It'd make more sense to just custom program from scratch a hologram to be explicitly used for mining, not force another program never designed for that function to do it instead. But holograms don't exactly strike me as more efficient anyway, given that to make them work, you'd also have to set up a fairly extensive network of holo-projectors within the mine itself, a mine that's going to be constantly changing shape as work progresses, ensure all of those projectors are consistently powered, as well as ensure the mining causes minimal to no interference to the projectors, or else the holograms are going to be glitching out on the regular and not be terribly useful...something that the nature of mining is probably going to be difficult to guarantee enough for the needed level of reliability.
Really, some sort of autonomous worker drone with only a basic AI--or even just be fully remote controlled by trained operators stationed nearby--would make more sense to me.
Well then...I guess my answer is going to have to be "yes." :-P
I currently have doubts of it working out myself, of course, same as you. I'm just looking at it from Paramount's point of view, trying to understand what their line of thinking is that led them to select this idea over so many others they could've done instead. And I know that, logically, starting over at the beginning again is a good way to draw in new viewers because then that removes the obligation of already being familiar with past material in order to follow along or understand the deeper significance of things.
Whether or not that's the right choice for them to be making, or the right way to go about doing it...it's too soon to say. And probably too soon to pass final judgement as well. Slim though I agree it definitely is...there's always a chance Paramount might surprise us with this, we just don't yet know enough details to know for sure.
For right now, let's see if this even gets past pre-production first, since Paramount seems to be struggling with that a lot lately. Then we can worry about just how likely or unlikely it will be at succeeding.
Look, it's a semantic argument that's not worth having at this point. My real point was this whole film is meant to be an attempt to do precisely as @Michael Benucci suggested--a film meant to appeal both existing fans and draw in new ones...just not in the way I think we're all in agreement at the moment we figure would've been the smarter way to do it.
I of course can't definitely confirm it right now, but that is the impression I'm getting from the description the article gives, yes.
Also, a "prequel," by definition, means a story that follows up another preexisting story while being set chronologically before it. If I'm right about it being a reboot-reboot, then technically that doesn't apply, as it wouldn't actually be following up any preexisting story, it'd be starting over from, more or less, scratch.
If we're to be especially pedantic about it, of course. I probably will still refer to it as a prequel anyway myself as that just requires less explanation. But my point was to indicate that I don't think this film, if it is produced, will be a "prequel" in the same sense that, say, ENT was a prequel to TOS, as unlike ENT, absolutely no prerequisite viewing would be required to follow along--you could start straight with this proposed film as if nothing had ever been produced before it...or so I'm sensing is Paramount's core intention here.
Agreed with Billwinz, the Orions aren't overused precisely on the grounds that, until LD picked them up, we barely knew anything about them. Heck, even with having Tendi, an Orion herself, in the main cast, even LD didn't really start to explore the Orion as a species in depth until the past couple of seasons of its five season run. If LD's overusing the Orions, then the other Trek shows are by far more guilty of "overusing" the respective species by comparison.
In all seriousness, you are absolutely correct--humans do appear more frequently than any other species in Trek. Which, when you really think about it, doesn't make as much sense as you'd think, given that the Federation, and in turn Starfleet, is supposed to be a multi-species organization allowing for equal representation of all participating species...and yet the humans still end up by far the more dominant species, even as late as the 25th century.
One of the Klingons in Undiscovered Country referred to Starfleet and the Federation as a "humans-only club"...I sometimes wonder if there was more truth to that than Trek is willing to admit at times.
To be fair, that seems to be the intent behind this--it's less a "prequel" and more a "starting over at the beginning," by the sounds of it, so to start fresh. Thus, a way to give existing fans something new to watch while also ensuring new fans don't have to already be familiar with Trek in order to watch...or so the theory would go.
Whether or not this film would actually succeed at such goals though is the big debate we're faced with now.
I find it good, but like with all comedies, it's not for everyone. What makes one person laugh isn't guaranteed to make another laugh too, after all.
But I also like LD for being more than just a comedy, as it also tells some fun stories looking at some of the more mundane and routine minutiae of the Trek universe, things Trek had previously been in the habit of just blurring over, but exploring that minutiae is excellent for world-building too, to the point every franchise should do it at some point, so it's great Trek's doing it through LD.
LD also gives some love to the more "not-so-great" ideas Trek has accumulated over the years, and demonstrated that just because they're seen as not as great as some of the other more famous ideas, doesn't mean there aren't still worthwhile stories to tell there too, and continued to flesh out further those not-so-great ideas that they probably would not have gotten otherwise, sometimes even finding ways to redeem those "less-than-great" moments of Trek by finding ways to make them compelling again.
LD's also good at acknowledging the discrepancies of the Trek universe and attempting to either provide some kind of explanation for it, even if by just putting a comedic spin to it, or to openly acknowledge it as a discrepancy and proceed to question it...even if by just putting a comedic spin to it, but sometimes LD's also managed to touch upon things that are still of legitimate concern or problems in the culture of the Federation and provide commentary on how that maybe that should be something that should be getting better addressed than it is. It also helps to humble both the Federation and Starfleet as well as Trek itself by acknowledging that, even at its best, it's still not always perfect. But that's okay, it doesn't need to be, we just need to accept it's not always perfect and enjoy it for what it is rather than focus on how it might've fallen short.
It being an animated show, LD's also been able to do a whole lot of things that live action would struggle with due to various production and/or budget concerns that wouldn't apply to animation, and it's fun to see how much more zany or exotic the Trek universe can actually be that way. Some of the best new aliens New Trek has introduced have all come from LD, for example. Looping back to my earlier point about the world-building, it also means LD doesn't have to hold back on that world-building, as production/budget concerns don't apply as much as they would for live action, allowing them to explore a great many more things that otherwise wouldn't have been practical in live action.
Well, first I'm going to wait to see if this film even happens. Paramount has had a reputation ever since Beyond of announcing a new Trek film is in development and all these things it'll be, putter around with it for several months, but then ultimately get nowhere with it, quietly shelve it, and then pursue a totally new script where they then repeat that same process. It's happened about, I estimate, a half a dozen times now, no exaggeration. So as this sounds very much the same as all of those past attempts currently, then until I hear they've definitely taken steps to legitimately begin filming this thing, I'm not holding my breath for it actually happening.
That said, it does sound like Paramount might actually be a bit more serious about making this one happen, and with their recent merger, they might be in a better position to try now. So we'll see.
Whatever the case, my thoughts on the project currently is strong uncertainty. It entirely depends on how they do a great many things, and we just don't know currently how they plan to handle any of them, so it's near impossible to be certain. It does sound like they mean this to be a true reboot, more so than even the Kelvin-timeline films were, and I naturally have mixed feelings about that. I'm not against reboots per se (for example, I for one enjoyed all three of the Kelvin films, despite their perceived faults), but we can all list examples of attempted reboots in the past all across the industry that...were more mistake than success, so if Paramount's serious about it...it's a highly risky move. One I question if its a risk they're really in a good position to even be attempting right now. I would've thought attempting a film that builds off the preexisting material, either Prime or Kelvin timelines, would be the smarter thing to attempt right now, especially after Trek being pretty much absent from the movie side of things for nearly a decade now.
Further, it feels like they aren't applying the lessons learned from the TV side of things, because they already tried a total reinvention of Trek (let's be honest here--DIS was totally meant to be a soft reboot of the TV side of the franchise starting out), but found viewers weren't responding as well as hoped to that, fumbled around trying to figure out why and how to fix it, before eventually finding that what viewers seemed to respond to the most was the shows that didn't reinvent so much at all and more continued on and paid respect to what had already come before. And as such, they've been gradually been moving the TV side of the franchise more in that direction (while still trying to give everything a new coat of paint, whether its wanted or not, but the point is they feel more on the right path now than they did starting out), so you'd think they'd want to do the same with the films.
But then I'm sure it's a totally different team of people who are working on the films and thus ignorant on how things have been going with the TV side of things...which would be unfortunate but not totally unexpected--that's generally how it works in the industry these days.
I don't know, I don't have enough information to call it. This film simultaneously has the potential to be the best thing ever or the worst thing ever right now, and I currently have no clue which is the more likely.
On the upside though, the fact they're NOT choosing to go with legacy characters in a legacy time period isn't a totally bad thing. As already noted, fans are getting a little weary of Trek hyperfocusing on the "old favorites" as of late, so this film, if produced as currently described, would have the potential of avoiding at least THAT particular problem. The mother of all prequels wasn't exactly the way I would've thought to go about it either, but it also helps to ensure they have a clean slate across the board, with no preexisting "old favorites" liable to appear because they all just don't exist yet. That...might be a good thing...depending on how its executed, and we've already discussed how that's just a big blank at the moment.
I myself named the image file: "whatisthisidonteven"...so I'm right there with you. :-P