@ValueSubtracted I think my ramblings up there are my process of arriving where you already are.
"Make Kelvin 4" is at least a plan, and there's an audience that would like more. Would I watch it, sure. Would I care if it never gets made...not really.
But when they start throwing these other movie ideas around, I don't see a purpose. And people will say what they will about Kurtzman's tenure as TV Trek overlord, but at least everything there had a purpose (whether one agrees with it or not).
usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Having TV and film Star Trek exist in separate timelines seems like a bad approach for getting people invested in the franchise as a whole. I wonder if that’s the reasoning for the early Federation time period. People who have only watched the Kelvin films can understand it as a prequel to those, but elements from it could just as easily spin-off into a streaming show without issue.
billmason@mastodon.social 1 month ago
@usernamefactory @startrek I don't know if I agree with that premise. I've run into any number of people who became Trek fans in general by starting with Kelvin.
That said, I don't know that breaking the movies into *more* timelines is a great idea.
And I personally would be skeptical that anything from the proposed movies would ever turn into a TV series. They are really operating in separate spaces right now. And P+ is shedding series faster than they're adding them.
usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Now that I’ve thought about it some more, it’s unlikely the movies would be making any decisions based off of what’s best for the streaming shows. That would probably be seen as the tail wagging the dog.
That said, I’ve definitely encountered people who enjoyed the films but skipped the shows on account of not knowing where to start and finding the relationship too confusing. It would make sense to pair a successful “early days” movie with an “early days” spinoff series to lure some of that casual audience to streaming.