GoRe Star wrote:
The fundamental problem with a new Trek series is that sets are expensive, effects are expensive, on top of the usual writing/acting/directing costs. Then add to that an ever expanding tv market to an already niche demographic and you begin to see why Voyager was on the ropes and Enterprise got canceled. That was years ago and the gap's only gotten bigger then.
It's always been that way, even when Roddenberry first peddled TOS around. He was told no several times, largely because sci-fi was considered too expensive, too difficult to produce, and catered to a small audience. The only reason why we got TOS was because Lucille Ball thought it was worth something and put some of her money behind it, despite being given advice that it was a bad move.
Why pay for all that when you can just throw together a cheap set, bring some "cool" people in for a reality show and roll in the ratings for people being stupid all for the promise of a cash prize that wouldn't cover one good actor.
It's the reason why we have so many reality shows. But I think the one drawback to contest-driven
reality shows is that they really don't have the strongest re-watchability (once their audiences know who wins), and I don't think they do well in reruns and in home video sales. In comparison, CBS (and before them, Paramount) were able to sell Trek shows over and over again both in reruns and home video.