Great info. Out of curiosity, do you know if that restructing was further fallout from the disasterous AOL/Time-Warner merger (man, that one was really f'ed up and I know took a really long time to recover from)?
Nah, that was something between AOL and Time-Warner, the CBS and Viacom split was totally different and unrelated (different companies from the get-go).
My only hope fora returning Star Trek series is that it's good. If a new series is rushed into production (unlikely, I know) off the back of the films and ends up being horrendous then that'll solidify the death of the franchise. I'd rather wait far longer for a good trek show that'll run a number of years.
Yeah, the situation as to who owns the rights is a mess. But the we still need someone with enough creative vision to lead the franchise...and dudes, I don't see anyone able to do that. And that includes JJ.
What about the rights is a mess? CBS owns Star Trek. Paramount has the license to make Star Trek movies.
I'm sure this has already been written but here goes: The TV audience today is not the same as it was in the 70s, 80s or even 90s. The audience today needs something that is intelligent, not full of politically correct cliches etc etc. I think if DS9 had been made today(Or Babylon 5) it had been a bigger success than it was because today the audience demands story arcs and plausible plots that aren't rediculous.
Nah, they just want to be entertained. Sometimes its just a singing competition. Other times it might be what amounts to a Soap Opera with zombies. No one cares if the shows contain "politically correct cliches" or if the plots are "plausible". Sometimes the more ridiculous, the better.
DS9 was behind the times relative to most first class TV drama in terms of style and content in the early 90s; it wouldn't do better now.
I agree. Television is actually the medium where the best work is being done today. There is just too much runtime, even a 13-episode season, to get away with just using explosions and CGI - there needs to be characters and a story that is interesting. Now, I should qualify that by saying cable television - basic cable, premium cable, even Netflix, but the over-the-air networks produce almost nothing of value. Mad Men Breaking Bad Sons of Anarchy etc.
Exploration is not really a specific job people can identify with anymore. It has to resonate with the general populace and with women. 24 resonated with women because of the character's journey and arc which was in conflict with itself.
In TOS and TNG, exploration was by no means limited to just new worlds and astronomical phenomena, it also included investigating anything our heroes came upon that wasn't quite right. That enabled them to also seek out and deal with threats to Earth/Federation, something amiss on a Federation member world or colony, or a Starfleet/civilian effort gone south, etc.--anything unusual that might require our heroes to take a look and see what's going on or what's wrong. In a real sense, the various CSI and Law & Order shows are exploration shows, but they explore murders and other crimes.
I mean any Star trek show has to compete against a lot of stuff on TV although of they re will there a way.
Really? I watched two episodes of Defiance last week and the first Falling Skies episode of the the new season. I rather feel there's now enough good sci-fi on TV these days...
Unfortunately for me, no matter how good these shows are, they aren't the kind of SF I want to see on TV. I don't want to see an invaded Earth, I want to see something set in space, and these shows don't scratch that itch.
Thank you for admitting it. Too often fans complain about not enough science fiction on TV, and what they really mean is, "not enough space opera". It's undeniable that there aren't a lot of space operas on TV, but that doesn't mean that there is no science fiction on tv.
Of course I'll admit it. I don't want people pointing at shows that aren't what I want at all, and saying "see, you got your wish!" I'm not saying what we have now is bad, just that it's not what I'm looking for as a viewer.