Post

Star Trek: Year One “We think it would be a great [show], it’s the next thing for Star Trek, we think, in the story that we’ve been telling. But it’s out of our hands.” “Well, our sets have not been destroyed yet. That is what I can say…”

TrekMovie.com@trekmovie.bsky.social

Exclusive Update On The ‘Star Trek: Year One’ Series Pitch And Status Of The ‘Strange New Worlds’ Sets https://bit.ly/styearoneupdate

Exactly. The people behind the show can’t come up with stories anywhere near as compelling as what we’ve already got, so why rehash every last detail? I’m honestly over the whole notion of prequels. Sometimes a bit of mystery to an origin story is just more fun.

Judging from the set auctions, most of the main sets are in storage. Only items from secondary sets were sold off (Quarters, Galley, etc), nothing from the bridge made it to the auction block.

Well, as I wrote a few months back, this is not necessarily a surprise, especially since Star Trek tends to make more money for Paramount when it's NOT in production. But, similarly, Trek has defied the odds before, so we should never say "never."

cbr.comThe Real Reason for Paramount Dismantling Star Trek's 9-Year Streaming Run Isn't What You ThinkFrom political pressure from the White House to simple disdain from Paramount's new owners, the reason Star Trek production is stalled is more simple.

When STXI came out my reaction was, "Good, now everyone'll realize people only want TOS reboots, as the undending volume of fanfiction and licensed novels have always shown." Developments proved me wrong. And I expected this news because Ellison is, like, the antiRoddenberry.

I knew the Ellisons would destroy Star Trek. Fucking idiots. But let’s be real, the entire philosophy of Star Trek is in diametric opposition to their worldview. I just wish they had the balls to sell off the rights to someone who could do the IP justice. But the point was to kill good things.