RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,940
Posts: 5,479,014
Members: 25,057
Currently online: 505
Newest member: JeremiahJT

TrekToday headlines

Trek Shirt And Hoodie
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

A Klingon Christmas Carol’s Last Season
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

Attack Wing Wave 10 Expansion Pack
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Trek Actors In War Of The Worlds Fundraiser
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek: The Next Generation Gag Reel Tease
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24

Shatner In Haven
By: T'Bonz on Nov 24


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Future of Trek

Future of Trek Discussion of future Trek projects.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 24 2013, 05:47 PM   #31
Cinema Geekly
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cinema Geekly's Avatar
 
View Cinema Geekly's Twitter Profile
Re: British series approach?

I assume by the British approach you mean shorter seasons, which I would be all for.

Don't get me wrong, the more Trek, the better as far as I am concerned.

That being said all of my favorite TV shows are either on HBO or AMC and they all have shortened seasons and have all been critically acclaimed and they all represent different genres.

I think Star Trek would be a perfect fit for that style of show. Plus fewer episodes mean larger effects budgets.
Cinema Geekly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 24 2013, 06:09 PM   #32
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: British series approach?

Fewer episodes doesn't mean more money. Where do people get this idea from?

i.e. If a show costs say US$4m per episode, then a 20 episode season would have a budget of US$80m, converesly a 10 episode season would have a budget of US$40m
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 24 2013, 07:11 PM   #33
AviTrek
Fleet Captain
 
Re: British series approach?

It's even worse than that. If a show has a budget of $4m/episode. That gets spent lets say $3m/episode variable costs and $1m/episode amortizing fixed costs. If the show only has 10 episodes, then its budget needs to become either $3m variable plus $2m amortizing fixed or more likely $2m variable and $2m amortizing fixed. So cutting the episode count either forces more to be spent per episode or forces fixed costs to take up a higher portion of the budget and results in even less money for variable costs(ie fx).

You can argue that cutting the episode count helps creatively, but from a budget perspective it's a disaster.
AviTrek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 24 2013, 08:06 PM   #34
Sindatur
Vice Admiral
 
Sindatur's Avatar
 
Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: British series approach?

AviTrek wrote: View Post
It's even worse than that. If a show has a budget of $4m/episode. That gets spent lets say $3m/episode variable costs and $1m/episode amortizing fixed costs. If the show only has 10 episodes, then its budget needs to become either $3m variable plus $2m amortizing fixed or more likely $2m variable and $2m amortizing fixed. So cutting the episode count either forces more to be spent per episode or forces fixed costs to take up a higher portion of the budget and results in even less money for variable costs(ie fx).

You can argue that cutting the episode count helps creatively, but from a budget perspective it's a disaster.
Yup, with more episodes, you can spread the cost of building additional sets CGI Models over more episodes (IE: with 20 episodes, if an additional set or CGI Model is going to cost you $1Million, you can spread that over all 20 episodes, only using up $50K of each episode's budget to build it. If it's spread over 10 episodes, that takes $100K out of each episode's budget)
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am

Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?
Sindatur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 25 2013, 12:17 AM   #35
Crazyewok
Commander
 
Re: British series approach?

MacLeod wrote: View Post
Fewer episodes doesn't mean more money. Where do people get this idea from?

i.e. If a show costs say US$4m per episode, then a 20 episode season would have a budget of US$80m, converesly a 10 episode season would have a budget of US$40m

But if you wanted a larger budget per episode it would be more easy to sell.

If a low number of high budgetr episodes would pull in far more rateings than loads of low budget episodes then make sense to go for the former.
Crazyewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 25 2013, 12:19 AM   #36
Crazyewok
Commander
 
Re: British series approach?

solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
As others have said, a British shorter season won't necessarily work for a US show.
Worked for game of thrones
Crazyewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 25 2013, 01:23 AM   #37
solariabsg25
Captain
 
solariabsg25's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, UK
View solariabsg25's Twitter Profile
Re: British series approach?

Crazyewok wrote: View Post
solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
As others have said, a British shorter season won't necessarily work for a US show.
Worked for game of thrones
Yes, but that's a specific cable show, like The Sopranos etc, where shorter seasons are the norm (6-13 episodes).

TPTB if producing a Trek show would want it mainstream and that means the standard 22-26 episode run, like most ABC/CBS dramas, to wring as many advertising $$$ as they can get from it, as they get nothing from people paying a subscription to watch it.

Trek would also need a lot more money in set-dressing, as whereas something like Game of Thrones can film on location, Trek would by it's nature be unable to get away with Stargate SG1's "Which planet does this Canadian forest represent this week?" attitude.
__________________
"A perfect organism, unclouded by remorse, or human illusions of morality." - Ash, Alien
solariabsg25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 12:25 AM   #38
Ain Jalut
Lieutenant
 
Re: British series approach?

Cinema Geekly wrote: View Post

I think Star Trek would be a perfect fit for that style of show. Plus fewer episodes mean larger effects budgets.
Or just put more thought and depth into some episodes and you have the same budget. trek has a lot of thinking man's episodes.
Ain Jalut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 12:40 AM   #39
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: British series approach?

solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
Crazyewok wrote: View Post
solariabsg25 wrote: View Post
As others have said, a British shorter season won't necessarily work for a US show.
Worked for game of thrones
Yes, but that's a specific cable show, like The Sopranos etc, where shorter seasons are the norm (6-13 episodes).

TPTB if producing a Trek show would want it mainstream and that means the standard 22-26 episode run, like most ABC/CBS dramas, to wring as many advertising $$$ as they can get from it, as they get nothing from people paying a subscription to watch it.

Trek would also need a lot more money in set-dressing, as whereas something like Game of Thrones can film on location, Trek would by it's nature be unable to get away with Stargate SG1's "Which planet does this Canadian forest represent this week?" attitude.
Didn't they already try that in ST though with Vasquez Rocks, it represent a lot of planets in it's various appreances TOS, TNG, VOY, ENT, ST (2009),
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 01:30 AM   #40
Mr. Adventure
Admiral
 
Mr. Adventure's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Adventure
Re: British series approach?

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post
Crazyewok wrote: View Post
The why not go the cable route?
Why not indeed ? But I think CBS would rather the show air on its network. I might be wrong about that.
CBS itself would be the last place a new Trek series would ever be. It's the #1 US TV network with shows that are cheaper, easier to produce, and have broader appeal (bigger audience) than Trek does.
Perhaps Showtime? Isn't it owned by CBS? Has a long history of science fiction shows but hasn't had any in a while, maybe the time is ripe.
Mr. Adventure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 01:24 PM   #41
Infern0
Captain
 
Infern0's Avatar
 
Re: British series approach?

A British Star Trek would be horrible, and i'm a brit. There is no way enough money would be put in to make it look and feel legit, it'd be like Doctor Who, mickey mouse special effects and all.
Infern0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 04:05 PM   #42
Caretaker
Commodore
 
Location: Silver Spring, MD, USA
View Caretaker's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Caretaker Send a message via AIM to Caretaker
Re: British series approach?

Well, a shorter summer "miniseries" season seems to be working for CBS with Under the Dome. I've heard speculation that it's success may lead to the format being used for other shows in the future. Why not Trek?
__________________
Watch the I've Got Munchies podcast.

Caretaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 4 2013, 08:44 PM   #43
Iamnotspock
Captain
 
Location: Bristol, England
Re: British series approach?

Infern0 wrote: View Post
A British Star Trek would be horrible, and i'm a brit. There is no way enough money would be put in to make it look and feel legit, it'd be like Doctor Who, mickey mouse special effects and all.
You haven't seen Who for a few years have you.
Iamnotspock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2013, 11:00 AM   #44
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Ferguson, Missouri, USA
Re: British series approach?

Mr. Adventure wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
Belz... wrote: View Post

Why not indeed ? But I think CBS would rather the show air on its network. I might be wrong about that.
CBS itself would be the last place a new Trek series would ever be. It's the #1 US TV network with shows that are cheaper, easier to produce, and have broader appeal (bigger audience) than Trek does.
Perhaps Showtime? Isn't it owned by CBS? Has a long history of science fiction shows but hasn't had any in a while, maybe the time is ripe.
I think there are pros and cons to moving Trek to premium cable, namely with it becoming a Showtime exclusive and less visible to mainstream audiences (and thus smaller as an overall franchise).
__________________
"Don't sweat the small stuff--it makes you small-minded..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2013, 05:01 AM   #45
Garppo
Cadet
 
Re: British series approach?

I thought Elementary was far superior to Sherlock. But that's besides the point, sort of. If the BBC were to make Trek then it would be in mind to sell to the Americans - so you'd have to expect lots of Jack the Ripper based episodes as well as ones set in country estates.
Garppo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.