RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,581
Posts: 5,403,299
Members: 24,866
Currently online: 516
Newest member: Griznuq

TrekToday headlines

October-November 2014 Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

Cho Selfie TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

TPTB To Shatner: Shhh!
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

Mystery Mini Vinyl Figure Display Box
By: T'Bonz on Sep 29

The Red Shirt Diaries Episode Five
By: T'Bonz on Sep 29

Shatner In Trek 3? Well Maybe
By: T'Bonz on Sep 28

Retro Review: Shadows and Symbols
By: Michelle on Sep 27

Meyer: Revitalizing Star Trek
By: T'Bonz on Sep 26

Trek Costumes To Be Auctioned
By: T'Bonz on Sep 25

Hulu Snaps up Abrams-Produced Drama
By: T'Bonz on Sep 25


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.

View Poll Results: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?
Yes 85 86.73%
No 13 13.27%
Voters: 98. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 3 2013, 08:04 PM   #91
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

anh165 wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
So all that's left for Star Trek for the rest of it's existence is Kirk and Spock reboots? I doubt that would be a financially sound idea. Also there is more than a few hundred Star Trek online subscribers, not to mention fans into books, the remaining old fans who, and the new fans who would check it out. Even the worst movies do better than a few hundred viewers, which I don't think a Star Trek movie without any familiar faces could do as badly. I would like to know how you found that statistic.
Again you are talking from a position of a seasoned trek fan who is sentlemental about the TV material you grew up watching.

What you are willing to invest your time and money to see is not the same as what millions of others are interested in.
You're still speculating. Did you talk to the millions of people?
BillJ wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
X-men and Avengers both had successful spinoffs (and prequels), which Superman and Batman are trying to compete with by doing a Justice league movie (why Ben Affleck?). Plus, I'm sure if Avengers could get their hands on Spiderman, they would. People don't just want the norms.
But you're talking about things that run concurrently with their successful parents or where the parent is still there and new elements are added.
The Batman they are using in Justice League may not tie to the Dark Knight, X-men origins: Wolverine had an old Professor X before First Class, and Spiderman and Amazing Spiderman are two different movies. You could even lump Hulk and the Incredible Hulk in that group, the remake made it into Avengers.
The simple fact of the matter is this: with each spinoff, people became less and less interested in Star Trek. So if I'm a studio/network executive, the question is this: if I greenlight a new series do I go with the elements from two movies that recently generated $450 million dollars plus each or do I continue on from the elements that general audiences were obviously tired of a decade ago, including a series that finished its run with less than two-million viewers a week (nevermind the fact that three out of four series had dwindling viewership numbers) and a movie that was a box-office bomb? I know which answer I give.
For now - my original statement.
bigboojeg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 08:16 PM   #92
Captain_Amasov
Captain
 
Captain_Amasov's Avatar
 
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

-Brett- wrote: View Post
Nine of Four wrote: View Post
"Star Trek Online" offers an interesting premise for another series; Romulus and Remus destroyed, with the Romulans forming rival factions. Starfleet has ordered that ships help in any way possible with civilian Romulans.

The Klingons, seeing an opportunity for invasion, enter Romulan space and claim several systems as there own. Conflict is inescapable, and the Klingons break the century-long treaty with the Federation and attack Starfleet.

The Borg are reading there forces, to return in the 3rd or 4th season.

The Dominion, the Tholians, and the Cardassians would play in eventually as well.....
None of which is a premise for a series. It's backstory at best. Not even particularly interesting backstory.
The premise of Star Trek Online is that the Iconians have returned and found a bunch of kids on their lawn; hilarity ensues.
Captain_Amasov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 09:09 PM   #93
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
You're still speculating. Did you talk to the millions of people?
Speculations based on well-established metrics.

The Batman they are using in Justice League may not tie to the Dark Knight, X-men origins: Wolverine had an old Professor X before First Class, and Spiderman and Amazing Spiderman are two different movies. You could even lump Hulk and the Incredible Hulk in that group, the remake made it into Avengers.
But the Batman in MoS2 is still Batman. The Wolverine spin-offs are still Wolverine. They're a kin to would-be stand-alone Kirk movies. Spiderman and Hulk movies are still Spiderman and Hulk. You're making Bill's argument for him.

In all of your examples, you're still limiting yourself to the principle (in a few cases, iconic) characters of whatever franchise. None of these films or their characters have deviated from the core.

Do you honestly believe a Scott Summers/Cyclops stand-alone (origin?) film would be as successful as Logan/Wolverine? Or do you think they would have even bothered with a First Class film had young Xavier & Magneto not been involved?

There hasn't been many examples of films based on non-core characters of a franchise, but they've all failed. Catwoman is the only one I can think of off the top of my head, but I know there has been others.

And even if you just look at the Star Trek films themselves, the only non TNG film you could really call a success is FC. And NEM was an absolute bomb, considerably worse than TFF. And if you look at the "adjusted" list, FC falls to number seven--not even in the top half. And that's despite the huge success of TNG.

So the answer is, "yes," as long as Trek remains solely on film, it will remain TOS reboots. There are too many unknowns and proven concerns to try anything else.

As far as television, as much as I'd like for them to deviate into something a bit different, it's just not realistic. If (And it's a big if at this point.) CBS tries to do some kind of series, whether it be broadcast, cable, or streaming, it will probably be a TNG reboot or, as I suggested before, a mish-mash of TNG and Phase II set in the nuverse.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 02:35 AM   #94
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

CorporalClegg wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
You're still speculating. Did you talk to the millions of people?
Speculations based on well-established metrics.
That quote was in regard to a non-Kirk/Spock movie only bringing in a few hundred viewers. Which metric covers that?
bbjeg wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
But you're talking about things that run concurrently with their successful parents or where the parent is still there and new elements are added.
The Batman they are using in Justice League may not tie to the Dark Knight, X-men origins: Wolverine had an old Professor X before First Class, and Spiderman and Amazing Spiderman are two different movies. You could even lump Hulk and the Incredible Hulk in that group, the remake made it into Avengers.
But the Batman in MoS2 is still Batman. The Wolverine spin-offs are still Wolverine. They're a kin to would-be stand-alone Kirk movies. Spiderman and Hulk movies are still Spiderman and Hulk. You're making Bill's argument for him.
I was saying those movies aren't concurrent. The first set of Spiderman movies introduced mutant slingers, which was debooted back to web slingers. The Batman of MoS2 isn't going to share the Dark Knight's backstory. Hulk went from one TV version, to the first movies remake, back to a TV similar remake, and none of them were concurrent. X-Men and it's movies contradicts itself, with Professor X having legs in Woverine and in the beginning of Last Stand yet he was paralized in First Class.
None of these films or their characters have deviated from the core.
All of these movies deviated from their comicbook core.

There hasn't been many examples of films based on non-core characters of a franchise, but they've all failed.
Technically X-Men arent core characters or at least Wolverine isn't. Avengers came out around the 40's and 20 years later marvel wanted to expand the universe and created other heroes, including the X-Men, which spinned more heroes 10 years later, including Wolverine (or was it Hulk that first introduced him). I wouldn't call X-Men or at least Wolvrine failing.

My original point of all this Marvel-babble was that movies can expand without relying on reboots and the ones that did (Hulk and Spiderman) can as easily be debooted back (Incredible Hulk and Amazing Spiderman).
bigboojeg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:32 AM   #95
LobsterAfternoon
Commander
 
LobsterAfternoon's Avatar
 
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

Actually, the X-Men are indeed core characters and were created around the same time as the Avengers. The X-Men first appeared in September of 1963, same as Avengers #1. Captain America as a solo character was created several decades prior, but he wasn't created to be an Avenger, and didn't join the team until a few issues in.
LobsterAfternoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:54 AM   #96
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

^Wolverine still isn't a core character though.
bigboojeg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 04:33 AM   #97
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Land of Enchantment
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
All of these movies deviated from their comicbook core.
Plot wise, maybe. But that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
My original point of all this Marvel-babble was that movies can expand without relying on reboots
Expansions with primary characters. I addressed that with my Kirk stand-alone film analogy.

and the ones that did (Hulk and Spiderman) can as easily be debooted back
And Star Trek can't?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
^Wolverine still isn't a core character though.
"Core" =/= does not equal "original." Logan has been ubiquitously distributed throughout X-Men stories (across all media) for decades. He's about the only X-Man who has.

If we went stickily by your definition, Bones and Chekov wouldn't be core TOS characters. Jean-Luc Picard wouldn't be a core Star Trek character.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 06:02 AM   #98
Geoff Peterson
Fleet Admiral
 
Geoff Peterson's Avatar
 
Location: 20 feet from an outlet
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
X-men and Avengers both had successful spinoffs (and prequels)
The Avengers had spin offs and sequels? Are you posting from the future? The Iron Man, Thor and Cap films aren't "prequels" to Avengers. Iron Man 3 isn't a spin off. The only spin off so far is Agents of SHIELD, which has yet to air. Was X-Men Origins: Wolverine a success?

^Wolverine still isn't a core character though.
Wolverine is a core character as far the cinematic X-Men are concerned. He also appears in pretty much every other Marvel Comics title, including a couple of Avengers' books.

Technically X-Men arent core characters or at least Wolverine isn't. Avengers came out around the 40's and 20 years later marvel wanted to expand the universe and created other heroes, including the X-Men, which spinned more heroes 10 years later, including Wolverine (or was it Hulk that first introduced him). I wouldn't call X-Men or at least Wolvrine failing
. You don't have a firm grasp of the history of Marvel Comics, do you?
__________________
Nerys Myk
Geoff Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 4 2013, 03:54 PM   #99
anh165
Commander
 
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
anh165 wrote: View Post
bbjeg wrote: View Post
So all that's left for Star Trek for the rest of it's existence is Kirk and Spock reboots? I doubt that would be a financially sound idea. Also there is more than a few hundred Star Trek online subscribers, not to mention fans into books, the remaining old fans who, and the new fans who would check it out. Even the worst movies do better than a few hundred viewers, which I don't think a Star Trek movie without any familiar faces could do as badly. I would like to know how you found that statistic.
Again you are talking from a position of a seasoned trek fan who is sentlemental about the TV material you grew up watching.

What you are willing to invest your time and money to see is not the same as what millions of others are interested in.
You're still speculating. Did you talk to the millions of people?
Call it what you want, I can say that a very bad and uncharismatic singer on X-Factor will probably be very risky to invest millions in promotion and a record deal, so it wont happen.

Your sentimental bias of 90's B&B Trek is the same as those early x-factor contestants who really believe they are the next star and that the world is too stupid to realise it.
__________________
No animals were harmed during posting ...
anh165 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 5 2013, 02:53 AM   #100
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

I'd absolutely watch it and I see no reason that many, if not most, of the new fans brought in by the Abrams movies wouldn't give a 25th century Trek tv series a chance even if it took place in the Prime timeline. As I pointed out in a different thread, 25th century Prime timeline technology wouldn't be much more advanced than the technology of the Alternate Reality timeline in the Abrams movies because of the future tech of the Narada and the effects that Nero's incursion had to speed up the technological development on that timeline. As long as a 25th century Prime timeline series used more of an Abramsverse style and a back-to-basics approach as well as learning the lessons and recognizing the mistakes from the various Prime timeline movies and series and the two Abramsverse movies, I see no reason that a large number of the new fans wouldn't be faithful viewers of that series and that the old fans would view it too.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 10 2013, 04:36 PM   #101
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

I still don't know how to go about making this poll end at 100 votes.
bigboojeg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 12 2013, 03:06 PM   #102
OpenMaw
Commander
 
OpenMaw's Avatar
 
Location: Everett, Washington
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

I do think there is potential in a series set after the events of Trek 2009, in terms of what happened in the future. You lose the Romulan homeworld, sending them into all manner of chaos. You can have any design for the ship you want, you can have any kind of characters you want, you could do just about anything just by using that lynch pin that the galaxy as it was known to Trek fans for a long time has been totally shaken up by events. Just like the 2005 Doctor Who Revival, the springboard for Trek 2009 should in theory work both ways on the timeline. You can do anything in the wake of those events. I don't think "Doing what Star Trek : Online" did is a must, but... I see a lot of potential for new mysteries, new dramatic potential, new kinds of tech, new ship designs. Just so much stuff to really get excited about in the right hands.
__________________
"Paradise protests too much." SFDebris
OpenMaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 13 2013, 01:43 PM   #103
bigboojeg
Vice Admiral
 
bigboojeg's Avatar
 
Location: bbjeg
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

bbjeg wrote: View Post
I still don't know how to go about making this poll end at 100 votes.
Too late to edit, but never mind. I want to leave it open ended now.
bigboojeg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 20 2013, 11:29 PM   #104
David.Blue
Lieutenant Commander
 
David.Blue's Avatar
 
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

Sure! At the very least I'd take a gander. How often I watched it, that is a very distinct question!

Honestly, if they're just bringing STO onto the screen, my interest probably fades. But I'd certainly give it a chance!
David.Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 27 2013, 06:12 PM   #105
grendelsbayne
Commander
 
grendelsbayne's Avatar
 
Location: Netherlands
Re: If they made a 25th century TV series, would you watch it?

I would give any Star Trek series a chance, but I don't believe a 25th century series is really a good idea. Just because jumping far into the future and showing a more advanced version of the same thing, with different people and a different ship but basically the same stories, worked for TNG does not mean it will work again.

Ultimately I'd much rather see some new types of stories and settings in the same general timeline as what we already have. (Whether that would be in the prime timeline or the abrams timeline, doesn't matter that much to me)
grendelsbayne 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 01:33 PM.

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