I wouldn't say SNW is best available either. But,it's still an odd comparison.
Ok. What is the chance of a Picard spinoff?
- Thread starter ELCHawk
- Start date
I've just finished watching The Twilight Zone and it really made me realise that TOS had fantastic effects for its time.
By 1960s TV standards, TOS did have among the best special effects. It was nominated for an Emmy because of its special effects, after all.
At this point, I really don't see another TNG centered show happening, at least not with Patrick Stewart involved. The rest of the cast are still a little younger, so they might be up for more, but Patrick will be 84 next month. And given that Paramount is currently focused on the Section 31 movie, plus Lower Decks, Prodigy, and Strange New Worlds...they clearly have more than enough on their plate already. At some point soon, all of us who love the TNG characters will have to accept its over for good. When that happens, it will be very painful for people my age who literally grew up with it...but its still inevitable. As Q himself said, "All good things must come to an end." 
Of all the cast I've personally met, I think my two faves were Marina Sirtis and Brent Spiner. Marina was a completely selfless sweetheart; I adored her to death. Brent was great too, very friendly with a semi-sarcastic sense of humor. I have both their autographs, but sadly I couldn't get a photo with Brent since I didn't have a camera with me at the time.
Every single episode of Deep Space Nine and every Voyager episode up to Equinox was produced when they were putting out roughly 52 episodes of Trek a year. Plus movies. Every episode of Picard (or Strange New Worlds, or Lower Decks etc.) people have loved came out in an era averaging 34 episodes a year. I think there's room for another spin-off or two before we have to start worrying... especially as the way things are going every production team will only have 8 episodes to write and film per season.
The last few years are a very good indicator for how en-masse production affects overall quality. The last 4-5 years are a rollercoaster in terms of this.
Like you, I'd be happier to see less and it be good, rather than more only for it to be shite.
A rollercoaster that includes the entirety of Picard, Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds and Prodigy. If they'd only given us 8 episodes a year we would've had Discovery... and that's it.
Or they could've cancelled Discovery and given us 8 episodes a year of the most consistently good series according to IMDb voters... Star Trek: Prodigy. Or Star Trek: Picard if you only count the absolute peaks of quality.
The way it seems to me, television is such a tricky thing that chances are you're going to be on a rollercoaster whatever happens. More shows just means you get a whole theme park to play in.
Honestly, to me the whole 'throw as much shit as you can at the wall and see what sticks' just doesn't cut it.
I've loved LDS from pretty much start to finish.
I am lukewarm to SNW.
PIC is a hot fucking mess.
DSC I find at least to be interesting.
I havent found the time or energy to watch PRO yet.
It's all just so up and down.
Getting the whole theme park is only a good thing if all the rides are worth riding on.
Just my take, of course.
I don't see Lower Decks ever existing at all if they were only making 1 season of absolute top quality ideal Star Trek per year. Unless the two of us were in charge, in which case Lower Decks would be the only thing that got made, and everyone else would be complaining that Star Trek is just animated comedy now. And if they had cancelled the other series, would Lower Decks have been improved by all the Discovery and Picard writers coming over to have a go at a script?
Does cutting the episode count help? The shortest season of TOS is season 3. Shortest seasons of DS9 and Voyager are season 1, and TNG's is season 2. These are not the most well regarded seasons. You could argue that Enterprise season 4 would've been improved by making it one episode shorter I suppose.
The City on the Edge of Forever was episode 28. They were able to spend the time improving it (or ruining it if you're Harlan Ellison) because the season was so long. A lot of TNG's best episodes came right near the end of a 26 episode season. Conspiracy, The Mind's Eye, The Inner Light, Timescape, Preemptive Strike.
Shorter seasons do mean tighter serialised season arcs. But Agents of SHIELD went and fit three whole season arcs into one 22 episode season, giving us the best of both worlds with an average IMDb rating matching Picard's fabled season 3. Best of Both Worlds, that was episode 26 now that I think about it
Uh, in conclusion, I think we should get lots and lots of episodes made by different teams working on different shows, each of them with their own approach that is always 100% compatible with the larger Star Trek franchise. Sure it won't all be for everyone, but it's better than living in a world where all we get is Strange New Worlds...
... Or Starfleet Academy.
I do agree broadly with your post, but I do think it’s a teensy but disingenuous to present numbers like this, bereft of any context.
Each of those seasons was shorter for different reasons and each had production issues that were completely unique from one another.
If we are to say that the seasons you mentioned are ‘bad’ (or at least as you said, not the most well regarded), I don’t think that their length is the main issue. It’s much more complex than a simple numbers game.
But… yes, absolutely, we most likely would not have had Lower Decks which… well, I’m glad the approach they have taken has produced that. A brilliant show.
….
What’s this topic about again?
*checks*
Huh… Picard Spin-off.
No. I don’t know what to say about that. I thought I had something but it just melted away.
Are we off topic? I suppose someone will tell us if we are.
Picard spin-off. I want it and I don’t want it.
Don’t post when high, kids.
Obviously I'm going to say Terry Matalas was the best NuTrek showrunner. But even he inherited people on his writing staff whom he didn't pick himself.
The strongest NuTrek writing staff was arguably DISCOVERY when it launched. Not just guys with prior franchise experience like Nicholas Meyer and Joe Menosky, but people like Jesse Alexander and Aron Eli Coleite with strong genre bona fides who weren't retained by Harberts and Berg, but instead replaced by people they'd worked with on REVENGE or GOOD CHRISTIAN BITCHES. By the time you get to season 4 or 5, many of the show's writing staff had a few CW genre show credits, or started off as PAs or writing assistants with DISCOVERY being their first produced work. The only name in the credits I even recognized from other series was Anne Cofell Saunders, who had low level positions on BSG and CHUCK and was recently on THE BOYS.
Go run the cross tabs on the SNW staff, and over half were on a CW show.
Live action NuTrek's greatest weakness has always been the writing the staff. Had they cut the production budget by 25%, and invested that in hiring stronger writers, you'd likely end up with a net much better product on screen.
This argument is getting old. Everyone has to start somewhere. Working on a CW show isn't some kinda mark of shame.
But it DOES cut it.
The point isn't to throw all of this stuff out and have you, the individual, love it all (though that would be nice).
Kurtzman has literally said "The idea was never to make one show that pleased everybody. It was to make a lot of shows that please individual segments of the fandom. Because as everyone knows, there is no one-size-fits-all all with Star Trek fans."
Seems you also don't understand how theme parks work either. Nobody goes on every single ride in a park. That has and never will happen. They're not even designed that way, with the junior rides verses adults. Yet they're all in use for a reason.
That'd be a damn fine world to live in, IMO.
I'm getting equally as tired as seeing "CW show" used as a pejorative. The CW has had some good shows. I am not ashamed to admit I was a fan of iZombie.
I miss iZombie. Such a fun show.
I did say ‘to me’ it doesn’t cut it.
I understand the approach. I understand the merits of it and as I said, the approach has produced some things I really like.
I just think, personally speaking, that a more unified, focussed effort put behind one show would be better.
It can’t be that controversial to argue for quality over quantity can it?
I watch the new Trek shows. Sometimes I like them, rarely do I hate them… Trek just isn’t something that’s setting my world on fire right now and I wish it was.
Similar threads
