The Overlord wrote:
A new Star Trek show will need a stronger focus on characterization, it can't have bland one note characters like Harry Kim or Travis Mayweather who add nothing to the show. If a character is on show they should serve a real purpose and be important and compelling.
I'm afraid modern free-to-air TV isn't trending towards the inclusion of "important and compelling" characters. The ubiquitous "Law and Order", "CSI" and "NCIS" shows seem to be populated with a large cast of cyphers who can be, and are, quite interchangeable. When discussing episodes over the watercooler, I find myself saying, "that woman who has a secret past", "the grey haired boss", or the "geeky computer girl", to identify the characters. Something that never happened to me with ST TV series of the past.
The other big cleverness aspect of those shows is a move towards segments that resemble a music video. Special effects that take us unto the human body, replay a theory for a murder scene, or show the wacky science fictiony ease of enhancing CCTV footage on holographic screens to gather evidence and leads.
When such shows going into endless repeat, it becomes a bizarre experience seeing the revolving door of actors saying the lines.
Also, those (many) episodes that end in a cliffhanger! It may have worked in first-run primetime, but catching Part 2 of a show that can pop up in a new timeslot every week is becoming impossible - and must be even worse in the US where you've always had so many channels.
Even worse: the programmers Down Under are typically pairing one new episode (be it "Law and Order", "CSI" or "NCIS") with one "classic" episode of the same title in telemovie
-sized chunks. Up comes "To be continued", and after the commercial break, you're jumping back in history by several years, with many different castmembers seemingly, suddenly, stepping back in roles.
And you thought the time jumps in "Lost" were confusing? At least they were scripted jumps!