Burton: Fans Want More 'Next Generation'

[Augustus]

patlandness wrote:

---

Um, TNG (despite the box office performance of the last 2 movies) was light years from failure. For example: it's the *only* Trek show to actually have consistently high Neilsens throughout its run. It had 3 count 'em 3 spin-offs of its own (admitedly with varying quality) and brought mainstream attention to Trek that no other Trek show, not even the Original Series, had ever been able to achieve.

haha, I agree, TNG was far from a failure and most of my friends who don't like trek, like some parts of TNG, but more movies??? I don't think so...

But kudos on your signature...I remember that announcer voice: staaaaar trek: thenextgeneration.

[rocketscientist]

patlandness wrote:

---

Um, TNG (despite the box office performance of the last 2 movies) was light years from failure. For example: it's the *only* Trek show to actually have consistently high Neilsens throughout its run. It had 3 count 'em 3 spin-offs of its own (admitedly with varying quality) and brought mainstream attention to Trek that no other Trek show, not even the Original Series, had ever been able to achieve.

Actually, the spin-offs were formally spin-offs of the original show, not TNG. That's why there's Based on ST created by Gene Roddenberry in the credits for DS9, VOY, and ENT, not ST: TNG.

Even Rick Berman, who obviously never loved, understood, or watched in its entirety the original ST, says that the original show is the core from which all subsequent productions spring. All the other ST shows, including TNG, were modeled on it, the original article (even if VOY and ENT looked to me to be just TNG v2 and v3, which I blame on Berman and Braga's lack of creativity and fear of losing their TNG fanbase).

[Pingfah]

patlandness wrote:

---

Um, TNG (despite the box office performance of the last 2 movies) was light years from failure. For example: it's the *only* Trek show to actually have consistently high Neilsens throughout its run. It had 3 count 'em 3 spin-offs of its own (admitedly with varying quality) and brought mainstream attention to Trek that no other Trek show, not even the Original Series, had ever been able to achieve.

Why do you assume I was talking about the whole of TNG? That's bizarre.

Nemesis was a failure, it is the reason they did not make another TNG movie. It is one of the reasons reason why, if this film is a success, they still won't be making another TNG movie. Don't freak out, I wasn't insulting your precious Trek.

[Natural]

[Augustus]

a random, yet humorous video...

[Temis the Vorta]

misskim86 wrote:

---

They could definitely make a profitable TNG movie if they really wanted to

Wait a few years and recast the roles, sure. But why bother? There's nothing about TNG that couldn't be handled just as well by TOS. Going boldly on a spaceship, etc. TNG worked because it was comfort food at a time when TV could still support a mass-market-ish sci fi series. Those days are gone and the survival strategy for sci fi on TV is to really cater to the niche audience and make your $$$ off multiple media venues (of which movies is one).

[T'Cal]

I've said it B4 and I'll say it again: TNG belongs on TV. It's too character intensive with a large cast to be as good as it was when it was a series. FC was a fluke; the others were good (GEN), fair (INS), and bad (NEM). TNG should return as a miniseries on the SciFi Channel. Make it four 2-hour episodes played four nights in a row and then at different times on different days to make it accessible to as many as possible. Then release it on DVD six months later when the next mini-series is aired. New mini series would be aired every six months. I would probably make it more about the late 24th century than specifically about TNG, maybe including a character or two from DS9 and VOY.

[JonathonWally]

I want to see Reading Rainbow: The Motion Picture.


We need more television like Reading Rainbow. I loved that shit when I was a kid.

[FordSVT]

JonathonWally wrote:

---

I want to see Reading Rainbow: The Motion Picture.


We need more television like Reading Rainbow. I loved that shit when I was a kid.

I loved that book about the little robot UFO who visits Earth on Hallowe'en, voiced by Michael Winslow. Also the dinosaur episode and, of course, the "TNG behind the scenes" episode. Yes, great stuff.

They just stopped making them last year, but Educate Inc. bought the rights and plans to spin it off into an entire learning division, with a possible return to TV, without the retired Burton of course. I hope when my kid is old enough there is more Reading Rainbow for him/her.

[TJinPgh]

StarMan wrote:

---

They have tried.

They failed.

Really? Last I checked, 3 of the 4 made money. Which is more than I can say for the next one. But, I digress.

TNG era material, whether TNG, Titan, Voyager, or perhaps even DS9, could easily make money if done properly.

Done properly, of course, means not spending $150m on a niche franchise that has never been mainstream and never will.

TV movies, mini-series, or direct to video could easily be profitable for Paramount.

[TJinPgh]

T'Cal wrote:

---

I've said it B4 and I'll say it again: TNG belongs on TV. It's too character intensive with a large cast to be as good as it was when it was a series. FC was a fluke; the others were good (GEN), fair (INS), and bad (NEM). TNG should return as a miniseries on the SciFi Channel. Make it four 2-hour episodes played four nights in a row and then at different times on different days to make it accessible to as many as possible. Then release it on DVD six months later when the next mini-series is aired. New mini series would be aired every six months. I would probably make it more about the late 24th century than specifically about TNG, maybe including a character or two from DS9 and VOY.

I agree with the general concept. I doubt they could get Stewart to commit to that kind of schedule, though. Especially for the amount of money we'd probably be talking about.

They'd probably be better off focusing on Titan and letting Stewart do a cameo or two.

Despite the general dislike for Voyager on these forums, I think there are a couple of stories from the series that lend themselves to a follow up.

[Sean Aaron]

All they really need to do is focus on writing a good story and not compromise by trying to second-guess the fans and what they want which is what has made the TNG films rubbish.

[TJinPgh]

CaptainSpock wrote:

---

All they really need to do is focus on writing a good story and not compromise by trying to second-guess the fans and what they want which is what has made the TNG films rubbish.

I think what made the TNG films bad is the very thing that's destined to doom the new Trek movie.

With the exception of Trek IV, which had no real villain, per se, the best Trek movies (2,6 & 8) all had one thing in common. They all had links to the past that made long time Trek fans want to see them.

1, 3, 5, 7, 9 & 10 all attempted to create something from scratch that nobody could relate to. 11 is trying to do the same thing.

Every time Trek has tried to go outside the box and create something that they hoped would appeal to the masses by virtue of being able to stand alone (with no back story) they've failed miserably.

Which, ultimately, creates a bit of a problem for any future TNG movie. I'm not sure what stories have been left unresolved to make long time fans care. Or, what they could revisit.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seing a Dark Mirror movie, that maybe pitted a mirror Picard against Titan.

There are a few other ideas they could use, I suppose. We never really did find out what happened to Thomas Riker.

[MattJC]

TJinPgh wrote:

---

I think what made the TNG films bad is the very thing that's destined to doom the new Trek movie.

With the exception of Trek IV, which had no real villain, per se, the best Trek movies (2,6 & 8) all had one thing in common. They all had links to the past that made long time Trek fans want to see them.

It sucks, but Abrams and cronies don't give a rat's ass what long time fans think.

[Colonel Green]

TJinPgh wrote:

---

I think what made the TNG films bad is the very thing that's destined to doom the new Trek movie.

With the exception of Trek IV, which had no real villain, per se, the best Trek movies (2,6 & 8) all had one thing in common. They all had links to the past that made long time Trek fans want to see them.

You left out TVH, the most successful TOS movie. There goes your argument.