Not so long as it has the paramount label on it. No corporate suit would ever green light such a project. Something like that is almost the exclusive preview of the fans, like yourself and Mr Cawley, who are willing to continue that form of trek and have the skill to do it.
aridas sofia said:
Amazingly, I find myself in total agreement with Cary, Ptrope, Dennis and last but not least, CRA. I think within the last few posts is a real wealth of astute commentary on the past and future potential of the Trek "concept". If only it could break free of the need to appeal to a bigger and bigger audience with a bigger and bigger risk involved and a smaller and smaller window of creativity available due to "expected returns"... and instead be satisfied appealing to multiple smaller audiences. There is something about the "smallness" of the original Trek, and the risk taking that its small appeal demanded of those that needed to make a splash to survive, that is essential to its original charm.
I'm afraid getting back to anything like that is never, ever going to happen. At least not with a "Trek" label on it.
That's not really true. The reason that PPC chose to go ahead with this was that Abrams (who they wanted to sign for multiple pictures) wanted one of his pictures to be a Star Trek story he'd wanted to tell since he was a youth.
The thing that sold them to go ahead and sign off on that wasn't that it was going to be a "fresh take on Star Trek" so much as that it was going to be a return to "what worked in the past." Go back and pull up the board meeting minutes from that timeframe (they're available to stockholders) and you can confirm what I'm telling you.
The entire point of greenlighting this was due to the fact that it was abandoning the more recent (less popular) stuff and getting back to the way that Trek was when it was really popular, with TOS and the first several TOS-era movies.