Bread and Circuses, Tomorrow is Yesterday, The Trouble with Tribbles...
(Magical injection that turns normal humans into Vulcans......)
Beaming someone back into their body from yesterday...
Is it time to put Star Trek to rest?
- Thread starter Dar70
- Start date
Bread and Circuses, Tomorrow is Yesterday, The Trouble with Tribbles...
Beaming someone back into their body from yesterday...
Possibly.
The best Star Trek does subtle commentary on what's going on with the world today. However, we've reached a point, where we're really divided almost down the middle. And it's going to be tough to make the case to put out a program that only appeals to half of the population with a big budget. However, Star Trek didn't always have a big budget and still did a good job telling stories. It might have to do it for less and return to its roots of story over budget.
Doctor Who has definitely a hit point, where it needs to either be rested or get young, fresh blood doing it. It's time for the old guard to pass it on to the younger generation and discard its nostalgia.
The best Star Trek does subtle commentary on what's going on with the world today. However, we've reached a point, where we're really divided almost down the middle. And it's going to be tough to make the case to put out a program that only appeals to half of the population with a big budget. However, Star Trek didn't always have a big budget and still did a good job telling stories. It might have to do it for less and return to its roots of story over budget.
Doctor Who has definitely a hit point, where it needs to either be rested or get young, fresh blood doing it. It's time for the old guard to pass it on to the younger generation and discard its nostalgia.
The simple fact of the matter is if Star Trek weren't profitable, it would be put to a rest. Studios don't spend money on things they don't expect to make money on. Likewise the fact we have Star Trek content guaranteed until at least 2027, including at least one new spinoff proves that the franchise is pulling in money for Paramount and thus doesn't need to be put to a rest.
Those thinking it does need to go to rest should do the same as those who think Simpsons should be cancelled because it stopped being good years ago. Just stop watching. As long as you still tune into new episodes, you're contributing to the show's popularity and thus are a factor in why these shows stay on the air.
Those thinking it does need to go to rest should do the same as those who think Simpsons should be cancelled because it stopped being good years ago. Just stop watching. As long as you still tune into new episodes, you're contributing to the show's popularity and thus are a factor in why these shows stay on the air.
And yet more people on average watched SNW.
Funny, I usually see The Original Series cast. It's almost like the algorithms show us what we want to see.
Truly the Zack Snyder fans of the Star Trek fandom.
Don't worry, you'll likely also hate whatever else comes down the line if it doesn't conform exactly to what you think Trek should be. Maybe you'll get lucky and Robert Meyer Burnett or the Inglorious Treksperts will be made showrunners!
Don't hold your breath.
Ahh, because some fans don't want or like exactly what you want or like, they must not really be real Trekkies, they're just fans of the board. See, I find that's the difference between fans like you, and fans like me. While I may not really want or care for the idea of a Legacy series. I'll still happily watch it. I'll like what I like, dislike what I dislike and move on. If people are enjoying it, I won't wish the series a swift end. I won't go online and wish harm upon the creatives behind the show. I'll say meh and move on. Because it's just a fucking TV show.
The Star Trek thing would be to appeal to more than half.
I think Roddenberry's self aggrandizing got worse with age. But his original conceit was to follow the model of Jonathan Swift. Which was to make the unpalatable palatable. "Sneak stuff past the censors" as it were. A lot of Star Trek (and it seems a lot of fandom) has lost it's taste for such middle of the road-ery.
I swear, two seasons (and three years!) later I am still riding on the high of the first great Pike speech from the episode Strange New Worlds. "You can all be mad at each other all you want and be convinced that you're right but you are going to kill yourselves." It was the most Star Trek thing I had seen in decades.
(Seriously, the character development of the Whole Crew has been stellar, but if they don't give me a great Pike Speech I'm going to scream.)
Half the population of Earth is still a few billion...
The best Star Trek for me has always been the best stories. Modern Trek feels like it went for special effects over stories. But SNW does seem to be bucking this trend. We do know that it has two seasons left before it's over, so it has an end date.
It's really: what is going to happen after the merger?
I remember Eureka being a great show on SciFi that didn't survive its purchase to NBC because it cost too much to make despite its ratings.
The max audience is P+ subs. Then, it's what fraction of those subs that actually watch Star Trek content. The CBS content does skew older, so it's not really a sub that would pull in younger generations. And CBS content like NCIS does skew more conservative as well.
It makes sense that Prodigy moved over to Netflix that has a more broad audience.
I'm just saying, they can afford to make a show that only appeals to half the US as long as it gets enough of its potential audience watching.
And it makes sense to appeal to a different audience than other series on their service if they want to pull in new subscribers instead of just satisfying the ones they already have.
I agree. In fact, I don't like the tag scene with Q at the end of "The Last Generation" because of that. The poker game was the perfect way to end TNG's journey. Shifting to another scene with Jack and Q takes away from that being a finale for TNG, IMHO. That episode needed to just be the TNG finale and not a sequel setup series.
It does have a niche audience in general, yes. However, we have seen evidence through the years that it is capable of breaking out beyond that niche audience in certain cases.
TNG was that, for example. People today forget just how much of a success TNG was. It had massive ratings, rivaling prime time network shows, and had a big impact on pop culture of the time.
Voyage Home was another example. It achieved huge box office numbers (for the time) and had great success outside the normal sci-fi market. To the point where it became a cliche to talk about people who say "I never watch Star Trek, but I've seen the one with the whales."
I'm not saying all Trek can do that, or should. I'm just saying that it is possible to make Trek that appeals to more than its normal niche audience.
???
Sci-Fi was purchased by NBC in 1997, nine years before Eureka even premiered.
Yes, but it needs to let go of trying to please the fans and just tell a good story.
Let me correct that. It was the Comcast-NBC merger.
'Eureka' Producers On Why The Show Was Canceled and How To End It
'Eureka' producer Amy Berg weighs in on the cancellation of the hit Syfy show and producer Bruce Miller talks about how to end the series.
screenrant.com
Star Trek really peaked in the 90s. And it had its own exhibit in Vegas too. It hasn't returned to that level of popularity. Media is way too fragmented these days. It feels weird when I find I'm watching the same thing as my coworkers. Event TV seems mostly gone outside of sports.
This is what is killing off Doctor Who.
I wouldn't call what Doctor Who did in the last two seasons 'trying to please the fans'.
Similar threads
