There can never be a new TNG era Trek on TV?

[Admiral Buzzkill]

So the movie has made this "alternate timeline", does they will never make a new TNG era trek for tv because it would be too confusing?

A large part of the reason for setting TNG in a different "era" than TOS was to reinvent Trek without having to account in detail (not for a number of years in any event) about why it was different from the original series and the movies. In many respects TNG initially ignored the existence of the movies beyond ST:TMP other than where models etc. needed to be recycled for practical reasons.

That "firewall" would make another TNG-era series pretty easy to do while ignoring the differences between nuTrek and oldTrek.

In any event, the producers of a new TNG-era series would probably want to reinvent the 24th century quite a bit anyway. In that case, the Abrams reboot actually would make that simpler to justify.

 

[James Wright]

TNG, DS9 & Voyager were all set in the same time frame/era whatever you want to call it. There could possibly be another series although I doubt it'll happen unless the movie which is upcoming does good at the box office.
Why hasn't anyone put the possibility of a movie era series on the table?

James

 

[Cheebo]

Bryan Fuller said his idea for a tv show would have been in the TOS era of Abrams Nu-Trek universe.

I'd say if there is ever a new tv show the chances are it will take place in the new timeline and during the TOS era. Paramount/CBS is not going to abandon this new timeline they put so much work into starting up.

The bigger the movie is the more likely it is a tv show will emerge in the future, yet by the same token the bigger the movie is the more likely Paramount/CBS is to keeping to the new timeline and not reverting to the old worn-out one. Which makes the chances of seeing the old timeline again about....zero.

 

[Jaespol]

Bryan Fuller said his idea for a tv show would have been in the TOS era of Abrams Nu-Trek universe.

I'd say if there is ever a new tv show the chances are it will take place in the new timeline and during the TOS era. Paramount/CBS is not going to abandon this new timeline they put so much work into starting up.

The bigger the movie is the more likely it is a tv show will emerge in the future, yet by the same token the bigger the movie is the more likely Paramount/CBS is to keeping to the new timeline and not reverting to the old worn-out one. Which makes the chances of seeing the old timeline again about....zero.

Blech

 

[jamestyler]

A show in the old time line is possible and possibly preferable. Theres a history to link DVD sales too and with the comic prequels we have a whole area ready to be explored.

What happened next in that time line? It's also really easy to link in to the movie plot and explain off the differences. I thought of ideas as soon as I read about the comic storyline, I'm sure a more talented person (or team) could do much better.

 

[Jaespol]

A new Star Trek would only need about 6 million viewers (if the viewing composition was the same as that watching Enterprise) to get a competitive 3.0 in the 18-49 demographic and stay on a primetime channel or less if it was on a non mainstream channel like the CW. I think we could get that!

 

[miraclefan]

Bryan Fuller said his idea for a tv show would have been in the TOS era of Abrams Nu-Trek universe.

I'd say if there is ever a new tv show the chances are it will take place in the new timeline and during the TOS era. Paramount/CBS is not going to abandon this new timeline they put so much work into starting up.

The bigger the movie is the more likely it is a tv show will emerge in the future, yet by the same token the bigger the movie is the more likely Paramount/CBS is to keeping to the new timeline and not reverting to the old worn-out one. Which makes the chances of seeing the old timeline again about....zero.

Bye-Bye DS9. Bye-Bye ENTERPRISE!

A new Star Trek would only need about 6 million viewers (if the viewing composition was the same as that watching Enterprise) to get a competitive 3.0 in the 18-49 demographic and stay on a primetime channel or less if it was on a non mainstream channel like the CW. I think we could get that!

Ya, ENT got at least a 3.0 and it still got canned! (I should know, During the last two seasons I always checked nielson's to see where ENT was.)

 

[Cheebo]

Paramount has done A LOT to make this the image of Star Trek now. They aren't going to go backwards to the late 90's era geek-niche of the franchise after they did so much to get this to be the face of the franchise:
http://twitpic.com/4dh51

 

[Jaespol]

Bryan Fuller said his idea for a tv show would have been in the TOS era of Abrams Nu-Trek universe.

I'd say if there is ever a new tv show the chances are it will take place in the new timeline and during the TOS era. Paramount/CBS is not going to abandon this new timeline they put so much work into starting up.

The bigger the movie is the more likely it is a tv show will emerge in the future, yet by the same token the bigger the movie is the more likely Paramount/CBS is to keeping to the new timeline and not reverting to the old worn-out one. Which makes the chances of seeing the old timeline again about....zero.

Bye-Bye DS9. Bye-Bye ENTERPRISE!

A new Star Trek would only need about 6 million viewers (if the viewing composition was the same as that watching Enterprise) to get a competitive 3.0 in the 18-49 demographic and stay on a primetime channel or less if it was on a non mainstream channel like the CW. I think we could get that!

Ya, ENT got at least a 3.0 and it still got canned! (I should know, During the last two seasons I always checked nielson's to see where ENT was.)

Enterprise didn't get a 3.0 in the 18-49 demographic in its 4th season or it would have got renewed, it was regularly getting less than 3 million viewers. Its overall ratings and performance in the demographics were all bad.

 

[Kelso]

Nobody that matters would know or care what universe or century the new series was set in.

For the show to be a success, you'd need ordinary people to watch it... the type of people who catch an episode of TOS or ENT on TV and ask "Where's Data?" Hell, during the premiere of ENT, my mother thought Lt. Reed was supposed to be Scotty. That's the type of viewer you'd need to make Trek a success.

 

[Jaespol]

Nobody that matters would know or care what universe or century the new series was set in.

For the show to be a success, you'd need ordinary people to watch it... the type of people who catch an episode of TOS or ENT on TV and ask "Where's Data?" Hell, during the premiere of ENT, my mother thought Lt. Reed was supposed to be Scotty. That's the type of viewer you'd need to make Trek a success.

I really disagree, I don't think we need to attract "ordinary" people.
As I said if the show could attract 6 million AMERICAN viewers (as that is what is always most important and bloody hell do the American viewing public seem fickle) it could get a good 3.0 in the most important demographic.
And if it was a good show then hopefully people wouldn't abandon it.

 

[SFRabid]

I thought I was "ordinary people".

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

If Abrams were to be in charge of the Trek franchise overall for the next decade or so - possible - it's dangerous to assume that were he to oversee a Trek TV project that it would be based on the previous Franchise model. That is to say, an Abrams-managed Trek TV series might not parallel the format of the Trek movies he's producing by being set on a ship like the Enterprise and mimicking the characterizations/adventure format of his movies. Look at his other TV shows - like "Lost" and "Fringe" - and think about how the story telling techniques there might be applied to a series set in the nuTrek universe.

The so-called "Trek Universe" is, after all, hypothetically the whole Universe that we inhabit - just three or four hundred years from now. Abrams may "get" that in ways that the previous Head Trek Guys never did (or never were allowed to explore).

Fuller has suggested that his own idea doesn't revolve around the Captain and command crew of a Starfleet vessel in the same way as previous Trek shows. He mentioned Rosario Dawson as someone he'd like to see in the lead role, which led on another message board to some knee-jerk anti-Janeway remarks from posters who'd evidently missed all the stuff about how she probably wouldn't be playing a starship commander.

 

[miraclefan]

I thought I was "ordinary people".

Apparently if you make any posts on this thread you are no longer ''ordinary people''

 

[C.E. Evans]

I kinda doubt that any new Trek TV series will have Abrams involved in it because I think the days of one person steering both Trek's TV and movie aspects is over since the division of Paramount between CBS and Viacom. CBS may push for another TV show creator/producer with a proven track record to helm such a series (I think Fuller is a long shot myself).

That being said, though, I think the chances of a return to the 24th-Century is slim unless Viacom decides it's time to reinvent TNG for the big screen with a new younger cast.

On the TV side, one could pretty much flip a coin as far as what a sixth live-action series could be like, but I just don't think it'll be set in the same universe/timeline as Star Trek XI myself...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The reason it seems possible to me that Abrams could end up as the overseer - an executive producer on a series - is that he's sought-after in television right now and CBS might well court him to do it.

It's not very likely that any future Star Trek will be set in any version of the Trek universe other than the one that's laid out in the new film (assuming it's successful).

 

[Tulin]

Nobody that matters would know or care what universe or century the new series was set in.

For the show to be a success, you'd need ordinary people to watch it... the type of people who catch an episode of TOS or ENT on TV and ask "Where's Data?" Hell, during the premiere of ENT, my mother thought Lt. Reed was supposed to be Scotty. That's the type of viewer you'd need to make Trek a success.

She did better than me. I was sitting there wondering who they all were. I seriously could not tell them apart. Quantum Leap, Texan boy and Brit just merged for me. It wasn't until later in the season that I could even tell you which positions TB and Brit were in! I just assumed Reed was the engineer because he was British and, since QL and TB were best of buds, I kind of assumed TB was first officer.

It was all very confusing for me, for a while there but that was fine because I gave up on it not much longer afterwards.

 

[Plum]

If Abrams were to be in charge of the Trek franchise overall for the next decade or so - possible - it's dangerous to assume that were he to oversee a Trek TV project that it would be based on the previous Franchise model. That is to say, an Abrams-managed Trek TV series might not parallel the format of the Trek movies he's producing by being set on a ship like the Enterprise and mimicking the characterizations/adventure format of his movies. Look at his other TV shows - like "Lost" and "Fringe" - and think about how the story telling techniques there might be applied to a series set in the nuTrek universe.

The so-called "Trek Universe" is, after all, hypothetically the whole Universe that we inhabit - just three or four hundred years from now. Abrams may "get" that in ways that the previous Head Trek Guys never did (or never were allowed to explore).

Is it me or did I just think of StarGate for no reason?

Fuller has suggested that his own idea doesn't revolve around the Captain and command crew of a Starfleet vessel in the same way as previous Trek shows. He mentioned Rosario Dawson as someone he'd like to see in the lead role, which led on another message board to some knee-jerk anti-Janeway remarks from posters who'd evidently missed all the stuff about how she probably wouldn't be playing a starship commander.

You mean, they would give us a completely new, sexy, relevant, fun Star Trek like the film??? Dare to dream!

 

[Jaespol]

People don't realise that tv viewing figures have gone down these days, we don't need to attract "ordinary" people to make the show a success. The number of Star Trek fans in existence is more than enough to keep a profitable show on the air. I just wish they would go ahead and take advantage!

 

[I Grok Spock]

Would CBS Television have the rights to make a series based on the designs and characters of the Viacom Star Trek movie? Would they have to pay a licensing fee, or try to make it a joint production?

I wonder if one of the reasons (albeit minor) for the wholesale redesign of the TOS era, is that using direct carbon copies of TOS ships, equipment, etc. would require a payment to CBS. Off hand, I can't think of any major character or situation in ST '09 that doesn't have an arguable precedent in the movie series. The CBS/Viacom split may have killed the notion of an ongoing cohesive Trek universe more than any storytelling sleight of hand.