I started reading Star Trek books very heavily in high school. From about 1987-1988, just as the Next Generation-themed novels started being published; but I only read the first one of those. So most of the books I read took place during the original TV show era or the early movie era (pre-Star Trek V).
Originally Posted by JediTricks
I think I read about 26 of the books as a kid and you're right that not all of them were good. I did learn which writers to follow for the most part, though. My favorite was Diane Duane who wrote The Romulan Way and is still THE expert on Romulans as far as I'm concerned. Other good writers were Diane Carey and Vonda N. McIntyre. Books like The Romulan Way, Final Frontier (which had absolutely nothing in common with the movie), Strangers From the Sky (written by Margaret Wander Bonanno), Enterprise (which had absolutely nothing to do with the TV series), The Wounded Sky, Dreadnought!, etc. really shaped my view of not just Star Trek but sci-fi in general.
After Star Trek V: The Final Frontier was released, I kind of gave up on the novels and started to lose interest in Star Trek in general. Just because it was clear that they were rewriting everything with no concern for what had already been established in the books. Which is EXACTLY what I expect to happen with the sequel trilogy.
The great thing about those pre-TNG books was that the publisher was willing to exploit fan writers for print, so if someone had an imagination similar to your own you could eventually find their works. The bad thing, of course, is that some fans write like fans and make fannish books that fall victim to big mistakes.
I read Final Frontier in my TNG years, it was an interesting novel but a bit convoluted. Then 2009's movie came along and made it look NOT CONVOLUTED AT ALL BY COMPARISON, holy crap.
The Romulan Way, I think my mom owned it and I never read it.
Seems like after Gene died, Paramount forgot to put the "science fiction" in Trek novels, they started looking at how Lucasfilm was publishing stories and copying that type of "build a brand" vision instead of just making Trek novels that allowed readers to think for themselves.
Canon is a tough one in Trek novels, I think how I've always seen it is that the shows get to pick and choose what they wanted to use, like Data's cat Spot, despite throwing out a lot of that novel's content (I don't even remember which one it is unfortunately but I remember it being a soft counterpoint to Measure of a Man). It's too bad you can't go back again, for some readers I guess it's like the canon has closed the doors on those novels' possibilities.
There are a few Trek novels I've always wanted to read:
Best Destiny about Kirk and his father - before the Abrahms movie retconned that.
Sarek - similar with Spock and his dad.
Probe - about the space probe sent to communicate with the whales in Star Trek 4.
I think it was mostly classic Trek books, but some set after the events that saw Sisko's loss from Deep Space Nine interested me - as to how Colonel Kira would continue on.
Never got to them and I'm currently re-reading ALL the Star Wars EU in chronological order, but finding I'm not enthusiastic about learning about Darth Malgus, post Mandalorian Wars. In that pre-prequel EU, I really like Ulic Qel Droma and Zayne Carrick's generations.
I didn't really get into Revan's character that much either (not a gamer).
Disney and Lucasfilm announced today that, starting in 2015, there will be a new Star Wars movie every summer, including the new trilogy and the spin-offs. That sounds a little nuts, but it's not ridiculous - Episode VII in 2015, a spinoff each for 2016 and 2017, and Episode VIII in 2018. Wow.
Man, I hope they don't dilute the brand. Then again, the high quality of all those Tinkerbell movies gives me hope.
I wonder if they're looking to supplement the Marvel movies' domination of the summer box office, or if this is a sign that they are planning to dial those down and replace them with these.
This is a very bold step. Honestly, the quality better be there, Marvel could enjoy missteps like "Thor" (not to say it's bad, but it's not as good as the others due to how small its scope was) because they had few other movies to compare to, but Star Wars already has 6 successful movies under its belt, the fans are not going to be as forgiving.
With two of those being pretty undisputed as two of the best movies ever made.
Originally Posted by JediTricks
Hey wait, how is this going to work with 2015 as the start date? Didn't JJ Abrams claim he didn't think he'd be able to deliver a film in that short amount of time? What, they just drove another dump truck full of cash up to his house and he bought more talent and skill with it to overcome that hurdle?!? It takes as long as it takes, except when you get paid more, then you get the same quality in 2/3rds the time? No.
Maybe that report wasn't so accurate? Variety says that Alan Horn said the new trilogy will be released "every other year," and I wonder if this was misheard by other outlets as "every year."
As far as JJ thinking it might not be 2015, I think it's just that - the studio will say it's 2015, while JJ can keep hemming and hawing on how long it's going to take. He didn't confirm it wouldn't be 2015, just that he'd take the time to get it right.
From what I heard Disney's plan is going to be to alternate between trilogy sequel and spinoff every year like this.
Originally Posted by Mr. JabbaJohnL
2015 - Episode VII
2016 - Spinoff movie 1
2017 - Episode VIII
2018 - Spinoff movie 2
2019 - Episode IX