This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future.

[Herkimer Jitty]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

You all are fighting over a boxcar full of Cambodian currency.

Have at it.

Heh...for sure. I'm all for progress, but some of the ideas that get floated around here are sure-fire ratings disasters.


"I want a non-white, bisexual, alien, non-American-born, hermaphroditic, little-person Captain who vehemently denounces religion and capitalism and the end of every episode!!"

Well, yeah, of course most TV viewers are pretty particular.

But calling out the choice of an award winning actress is like the opposite of backwards.

If I were the casting director... or the writer... or a producer, my choices would rely on who the actor was, how good they are, as opposed to ethnicity/minority/gender stuff.

I mean, look at the casting sheets for TNG. Yaphet Kotto was in consideration to play Captain Picard. It's not a case of saying "gee whiz, I want a french guy", it's "gee whiz, I want a good actor."

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

I'm sure Fuller is aware of the message he would send with a black female lead character, and sending that message would be intentional. Fine by me. I certainly wouldn't disagree with him.

 

[xortex]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

I don't know if Fuller and Singer have the dynamic resolve to take on the multi-headed dragon monster that is CBS, now managed by the predators and sell outs at bad robot. It's like putting them in the arena with a couple of swords against all the beasts of Rome. Just because GR did it, doesn't mean it can be done again. It would be akin to Fuller creating his own franchise from scratch. Braga was a wuss. I hope his concept for a new Trek series is sound as it would have to stand on it's own even without the Star Trek moniker supporting it or in this case trying to destroy it and doesn't burn up in the atmosphere. I really don't think anyone is strong enough to channel their vision through Star Trek or be given enough power to do what ever he wanted with it. I picture Fuller wearing one of Berman's straightjackets that Braga wore and Singer running around thumping his head and wishing he were more creative.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

If I were the casting director... or the writer... or a producer, my choices would rely on who the actor was, how good they are, as opposed to ethnicity/minority/gender stuff."

You can put anyone on the list you like and that's fine, as long as your bosses at the studio go along.

They don't have to, and often they don't. They're very, very interested in demographics, a fact which had more to do with the composition of most of the modern Trek crews than the producers' reasonable interests in diversity. The bosses look hard at what the venue for the show is, what demo they're trying to capture to present to sponsors, etc.

Of course you can quit, but they still own Star Trek and they just find another producer.

 

[xortex]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Sounds like my last GF.

 

[M-Red]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

I don't usually get into these types of conversations here because people become very passionate very quickly, but....

If I were the casting director... or the writer... or a producer, my choices would rely on who the actor was, how good they are, as opposed to ethnicity/minority/gender stuff.

I mean, look at the casting sheets for TNG. Yaphet Kotto was in consideration to play Captain Picard. It's not a case of saying "gee whiz, I want a french guy", it's "gee whiz, I want a good actor."

I certainly agree with that sentiment, but your previous post definitely indicated otherwise.

And your post wasn't even the cringe-worthy one.

 

[M-Red]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

They don't have to, and often they don't. They're very, very interested in demographics, a fact which had more to do with the composition of most of the modern Trek crews than the producers' reasonable interests in diversity. The bosses look hard at what the venue for the show is, what demo they're trying to capture to present to sponsors, etc.

That was basically my point. The core of the Trek fanbase isn't going to carry a new series over the long haul.

We'll not only have to attract a new base of viewers, but also retain them.

What makes sense in-universe, or what sends a the most noble social message, isn't necessarily what will maximize Star Trek's success on American television.

 

[RAMA]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Nope, I predicted when it would be back on TV and it will be...roughly 5 years after the movie run is over. However, Bryan Fuller is again talking about a JJ ABrams universe based series after 2013. Look for any future ST series to be on a "niche" network or source, and also look for a possible 13+ episode commitment. You heard it here first.

RAMA

 

[ElimGarak]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Wonder if Eric the Actor will make a cameo

 

[LtChange]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Nope, I predicted when it would be back on TV and it will be...roughly 5 years after the movie run is over. However, Bryan Fuller is again talking about a JJ ABrams universe based series after 2013. Look for any future ST series to be on a "niche" network or source, and also look for a possible 13+ episode commitment. You heard it here first.

RAMA

Setting a show 5 years after the movie run is over would be a little bit pointless. While the movies are successful they should capitalize the success by premiering a show close to it, maybe a few months after it. We could safely assume that the '13 Star Trek will be successful, wouldn't it be more logical promoting a new TV series of Star Trek right before the movie itself. "This fall ... the adventure continues on star ship Excelsior on the small screen" or something. I think it would be more normal premiering a new series in 2013 fall or maybe 2016 fall when Star Trek 3 might be coming out ...

 

[Lipton]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

JJ Abrams Universe Based Series.

*pukes* j/k

Maybe... but I've always wanted them to do a series based on the time police!

"Sir, we're detecting a temporal incursion in this sector, etc."

And battle with the ethics of wanting to be able to change the timeline, but not being able to. Almost every time there's a timeline disruption on Star Trek, things end up changed in the end.

I'd like to see them fix problems caused by mad men bent on changing time... of course all the viewers would have their minds twisted into tiny knots by the end of one season.

Ohh deary me. How about a Starfleet Academy series? Then at least when technobabble would show up, the characters could say, "I don't get it!"

 

[teacake]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

I always wanted the Temporal Police series, in the Relativity era.

But I'd be too scared that under JJ it would turn into Lost in Space.

Oh dear..

 

[LtChange]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

I always wanted the Temporal Police series, in the Relativity era.

But I'd be too scared that under JJ it would turn into Lost in Space.

Oh dear..

Lost in Space? You mean LOST in Space or Lost in Space? You are tricky ... I don't understand you

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Syfy announced two space opera series in development today: RHW's Defender and Bryan Fuller's High Moon. The latter is based on the moon so maybe it's cheaper but Defender is the kind of show where you'll need spaceship sets, various planets to visit, the whole magilla.

So budget is no obstacle to a space opera series. Maybe B&C just didn't pan out creatively.

 

[RAMA]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Nope, I predicted when it would be back on TV and it will be...roughly 5 years after the movie run is over. However, Bryan Fuller is again talking about a JJ ABrams universe based series after 2013. Look for any future ST series to be on a "niche" network or source, and also look for a possible 13+ episode commitment. You heard it here first.

RAMA

Setting a show 5 years after the movie run is over would be a little bit pointless. While the movies are successful they should capitalize the success by premiering a show close to it, maybe a few months after it. We could safely assume that the '13 Star Trek will be successful, wouldn't it be more logical promoting a new TV series of Star Trek right before the movie itself. "This fall ... the adventure continues on star ship Excelsior on the small screen" or something. I think it would be more normal premiering a new series in 2013 fall or maybe 2016 fall when Star Trek 3 might be coming out ...

Again no...Paramount will likely wait till after the movie division has it's go at ST, then CBS will likely take over in some way...5 years will give the movies time to make more money in release on bluray. It is also possible that they will try it in 3-4 years after the movies, that's why I say "roughly".

 

[Enterprise is Great]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Syfy announced two space opera series in development today: RHW's Defender and Bryan Fuller's High Moon. The latter is based on the moon so maybe it's cheaper but Defender is the kind of show where you'll need spaceship sets, various planets to visit, the whole magilla.

So budget is no obstacle to a space opera series. Maybe B&C just didn't pan out creatively.

Or B&C was considered too expensive and SyFy will go cheap on the budget for these shows if they pick either of them up.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

That was basically my point. The core of the Trek fanbase isn't going to carry a new series over the long haul.

They carried it for over 40 years.

We'll not only have to attract a new base of viewers, but also retain them.

At what cost? We could make a sexed-up, dumbed-down, low rent show ostensibly set in the ST universe with focus-grouped, studio-exec screened characters and cast and it might even be vastly profitable.

The question is, would it be Trek?

What makes sense in-universe, or what sends a the most noble social message, isn't necessarily what will maximize Star Trek's success on American television.

Trek has always had to walk a fine line...be "popular" enough to stay on the air, but have the integrity to have something meaningful to say with every ep.

 

[Dukhat]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

The question is, would it be Trek?

The answer to that question is: Trek is whatever the person currently in charge of it says it is.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

Nope, I predicted when it would be back on TV and it will be...roughly 5 years after the movie run is over. However, Bryan Fuller is again talking about a JJ ABrams universe based series after 2013. Look for any future ST series to be on a "niche" network or source, and also look for a possible 13+ episode commitment. You heard it here first.

RAMA

Setting a show 5 years after the movie run is over would be a little bit pointless. While the movies are successful they should capitalize the success by premiering a show close to it, maybe a few months after it. We could safely assume that the '13 Star Trek will be successful, wouldn't it be more logical promoting a new TV series of Star Trek right before the movie itself. "This fall ... the adventure continues on star ship Excelsior on the small screen" or something. I think it would be more normal premiering a new series in 2013 fall or maybe 2016 fall when Star Trek 3 might be coming out ...

Again no...Paramount will likely wait till after the movie division has it's go at ST, then CBS will likely take over in some way...5 years will give the movies time to make more money in release on bluray. It is also possible that they will try it in 3-4 years after the movies, that's why I say "roughly".

Truthfully, CBS can do a new Trek series whenever they want--including right now if they had the inclination to do so. Paramount has no say in the matter in regards to a new TV series, much less when one would ever come about.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: This is why there will be no new TV Trek for the forseeable future

That was basically my point. The core of the Trek fanbase isn't going to carry a new series over the long haul.

They carried it for over 40 years.

No, they didn't.

When the millions of more casual fans got bored with the constant repetition, it was over.

The question is, would it be Trek?

The answer to that question is: Trek is whatever the person currently in charge of it says it is.

Exactly so.


"GRRRR!!! Why is Paramount making Star Trek at me!?!??!?!?"