I wish I'd picked up on that one 20 years earlier!Turnabout Intruder: "Never be alone with your Ex. (Especially if his/her mental stability is questionable.)"
DSC and the "No Conflict" Rule
- Thread starter Balok's Decoy
- Start date
Then maybe you need glasses because the original Star Trek was an action adventure show that occasionally made some brief commentary on things. To repost and add to what Wormhole posted from the Star Trek Writers Bible:
"Build your episode on an action-adventure frame-work. We must reach out, hold and entertain a mass audience of some 20.,000,000 people or we simply don't stay on the air."
That's why there was a fight scene in almost every episode of the original Star Trek. Even when there was really no need for one, they made sure one was shoe horned in. The new movies also understand that if people aren't coming to see the movies, then there are no movies. If no one is watching your show, there is no show. No one is interested in being preached to every week.
"Then, with that firm foundation established, inter-weave in it any statement to be made about man,society and so on. Yes, we want you to have something to say, but say it entertainingly as you do on any other show. WE DON'T NEED ESSAYS, HOWEVER BRILLIANT" (emphasis mine)"
So basically it ends saying "Eh, if you've got some social commentary, hey great. But it better be wrapped up in the ACTION /ADVENTURE format and it better entertain people".
Pretty much like the new movies. Some folks try to pretend this didn't happen. Maybe because the explosions were bigger and the fights more extravagant, or maybe just because they didn't like the idea of a reboot and were prepared to hate it no matter what. But each movie had a little something to say along with all of the explosions and fight scenes.
Just like the original Star Trek.
You really want to go there? You do realize Star Trek was basing itself off of Shakespeare nearly right out of the gate, right? Look no further than Conscience of the King.
Hell, Star Trek is largely inspired by Forbidden Planet, which is itself a Shakespeare play adapted into a sci-fi setting.
Well that and the "super science" tales of the 50's. It was not the high brow, speculative science fiction some people are desperate to make it out to be. It was Action / Adventure........in space.
I guess you're right!
I would love for people to really watch "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" and see what that allegory was really getting at, instead of insisting that it was some worthwhile moral statement about racism just because some of the characters made statements about racism.
Outlandish remark?? seriously?? have you not been reading about all the issues with this series??
I am referring to their production problems.
Here is a quote from an article about it 6 days ago, so I am hardly off base with my "outlandish" comment..
"Of course, there's a big problem with a spiraling production time and cost. CBS executives have expressed reluctance about the project in general, likely due to the large expense involved in making the show, so if Discovery doesn't find an audience immediately, there's a chance the network will kill the series."
http://www.outerplaces.com/science-fiction/item/16240-star-trek-discovery-delays-props-design
So I am not the only one who thinks that CBS is being a Jerk about this series.. there are more articles going back to January that say the same, do I need to post links to them also, or will this one source suffice??
If you haven't been keeping up on that, how about the last 50 years of CBS having issues with Star Trek all the way from the TOs era to Enterprise...
"outlandish remark" pfft!
Yeah, anyone ever heard of Outer Places before? I mean, come on, the author can't even get the name of one of the hero ships right.
The interwebs. The place where anyone with an opinion and 15 bucks a month for a website can spread fear and conspiracy theories like it's nobody's business.
Why don't we just wait and see what the series actually does before we keep with all of this armchair producing? It may be terrible but have a little faith!
The interwebs. The place where anyone with an opinion and 15 bucks a month for a website can spread fear and conspiracy theories like it's nobody's business.
Why don't we just wait and see what the series actually does before we keep with all of this armchair producing? It may be terrible but have a little faith!
CBS has only gotten its hands on Star Trek around 2006.
If you are referring to the possibility the show might not be renewed because it performs abysmally, you are correct. It is possible and not outlandish to think so. However, it IS outlandish to suggest the show will not get aired at all (which is what your initial post suggests and upon which you seem to be doubling down here).Outlandish remark?? seriously?? have you not been reading about all the issues with this series??
I am referring to their production problems.
Here is a quote from an article about it 6 days ago, so I am hardly off base with my "outlandish" comment..
"Of course, there's a big problem with a spiraling production time and cost. CBS executives have expressed reluctance about the project in general, likely due to the large expense involved in making the show, so if Discovery doesn't find an audience immediately, there's a chance the network will kill the series."
http://www.outerplaces.com/science-fiction/item/16240-star-trek-discovery-delays-props-design
So I am not the only one who thinks that CBS is being a Jerk about this series.. there are more articles going back to January that say the same, do I need to post links to them also, or will this one source suffice??
If you haven't been keeping up on that, how about the last 50 years of CBS having issues with Star Trek all the way from the TOs era to Enterprise...
"outlandish remark" pfft!
I don't think that is what I meant.. But if you took it that way, and I made my statement seem that way, then it was my mistake.
I apologize, I meant going forward.. However it has been delayed quite a bit.
With as much money and time they put into the series, yea, it has to air, one would assume..
But with the way CBS is going, I am still worried that if the audience ratings aren't there, it could be do to their issues up front with the whole "paid access" fiasco, and other issues.
But now I remember, and I probably didn't convey it properly, that is what I meant. the things they are doing up front, may kill the series from future seasons beyond the first with how they are handling it's rollout.
Of what shows is that not true? If it fails to find an audience 'there's a chance they'll kill the series'? That's just the journalistic habit of reporting the blindingly obvious as though it were a sensation. If it doesn't get an audience which the holders of the purse strings deem acceptable, it's history. That's true of every series ever made. It doesn't mean that it will fail, or that anything CBS have done will increase the chances of it failing, it's just tautological reporting. You can't be contradicted if you just posit a hypothetical and draw the natural conclusion.
That CBS is looking to get out of making the show sounds like utter nonsense.
Since Netflix footed the bill for Season 1, it stands to reason that CBS would love the show to succeed and last multiple seasons so that the arrangement with Netflix can continue, because that way CBS basically gets a free show to promote their streaming thingy in the US, and they make money on merchandising.
What possible incentive would they have to want to end it?
Since Netflix footed the bill for Season 1, it stands to reason that CBS would love the show to succeed and last multiple seasons so that the arrangement with Netflix can continue, because that way CBS basically gets a free show to promote their streaming thingy in the US, and they make money on merchandising.
What possible incentive would they have to want to end it?
I said I was worried. Not that they will do anything, sheesh! I forgot how some trekkers get on this stuff. Can't make a statement that's hyperbolic without people getting in a twist or a smartass coming behind to jump you. No wonder why I stick to the Doctor Who section. Much nicer there.
"CBS" under one name or another has owned Star Trek since 1968.
