Is There Even A REMOTE Chance Of A New Trek Series?

[Tim Thomason]

Quinto is the easy one to get for a TV show. At least he's a TV actor. The rest of the cast has done mostly movies. You'll have a lot harder time getting them to agree to a TV show.

Karl Urban is an excellent television actor, and I feel a regular role on a major TV show would greatly appeal to him. Pine might like the increased recognition as well. I'm not sure about Yelchin or Cho, given that their roles would be minor for such generally bigger stars.

The major problem would be the cost. These major stars' salaries would be astronomical for a TV series, and I don't think anyone would like Battlestar Galactica-level special effects either. Episodes would cost millions upon millions of dollars and even a huge promotional campaign would bring even a fraction of the wanted audience for such a show.

If a TV show happens... it won't be J.J. Abrams Enterprise-based. If it is, it'll be a massive economic failure.

I, personally, believe a subtle, well-written animated series (in any Star Trek era) could be done and ready as a tie-in for the next film, sort of like Star Wars.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The biggest obstacle to a new Trek series, right now, would be Quinto's commitments to Heroes.

Did you see the season finale? I don't think that needs to be so much of a problem next season...depends on how the writers want to arrange things.

And after that, who knows if there's a S5 for Heroes. Then again, they renewed Dollhouse so they'll renew damn near anything.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

animated Trek series

I, personally, believe a subtle, well-written animated series (in any Star Trek era) could be done and ready as a tie-in for the next film, sort of like Star Wars.

Overgeeked wrote

why I think at most they're doing a cartoon series. No sets to build store. No worries about fat actors. Hand-drawn or CGI a toon is Treks best bet on the small screen.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2942072&postcount=16

I brought up the idea of

live-action with virtual sets?

to save money.
and

Not having to shoot live action generally saves money (sets, lighting, production crew, location-based production in L.A.)

'Star Wars - Clone Wars Animated Series'

Lucas Animation ...do it for $2 million an hour.

source

I know some other TrekBBS members such as Jeyl are very adamant about 2D-hand-drawn-styled animation on not 3D-CGI style.
in a discussion here on animation style for a Trek series
Check out this TOS Enterprise that has been done in CGI!

outstanding computer generated rendering of the TOS U.S.S. Enterprise by artist Alan Rhodes. This video masterfully recreates the Bridge, Engineering, Sickbay, the Captain's quarters and all of the familiar interior designs of the starship in incredible detail.

Spectacular CGI Tour of the Original Series Enterprise - Video (7 min 34 sec)
http://startrekpropauthority.blogspot.com/2009/05/spectacular-cgi-tour-of-original-series.html

TIN_MAN first gave the link.

Anthony Sabre mentions

For some reason I just don't take animated series as seriously. The exception being Batman

and that is important. Unfortunately for us Trek fans great Trek stories can be told with great location settings in animated form. TV audiences do not take animated series seriously as a storytelling tool or they would be in primetime (not just The Simpsons and Family Guy comedies) as they sometimes cost less.
If 3D CGI style after initially building CG models of ships exteriors, characters, ships interior room sets in whatever software being used by an animated by are used over and over. Only new planet and foreign ship exteriors, interiors would need to be created for episodes. They would save money by having story arcs reusing these.

 

[Hober Mallow]

Because of rights and royalties involved I entirely believe that a TREK TV show based on any aspect of any of the Berman Era shows is absolutely out of the picture. So, no RIKER show...no DS9/TNG/VOY cross over is ever going to happen. They will go in an entirely new direction and avoid anything to do with Berman Trek.

Can I get a "Hallelujah!" folks?

 

[lonewriter]

Because of rights and royalties involved I entirely believe that a TREK TV show based on any aspect of any of the Berman Era shows is absolutely out of the picture. So, no RIKER show...no DS9/TNG/VOY cross over is ever going to happen. They will go in an entirely new direction and avoid anything to do with Berman Trek.

Can I get a "Hallelujah!" folks?

Hallelujah! If Berman/Braga were involved I wouldn't watch after that disaster called Enterprise.

I would love a show based on the Kelvin.

 

[Scifiguy120]

Alot of flack has been given to Enterprise but theirs alot who did like it

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Alot of flack has been given to Enterprise but theirs alot who did like it

I liked S4 but to the Hollywood decision makers, ENT "proved" that Berman's Trek is unpopular and now Abrams has "proved" that his new timeline is what everyone wants to see. Quibble with that conclusion all you want, but that is how it is inevitably going to be perceived among the moneymen who make the decisions.

 

[Captain Pike]

I think there is really quite a good chance of a new series, but it won't be for a few years.

 

[Jack Bauer]

We'll probably won't see a new Trek series until after the third movie. I think they'll want to let the films fly on their own for awhile.

 

[PTRACER]

Post-Dominion war storyline would be good and it doesn't have to feature any of the characters from previous series except in odd episodes as guest stars.

Enterprise's problem was that it was set long before the other Star Trek series and to make it remotely interesting, they had to make up loads of rubbish storylines that pretty much destroyed the canon of Star Trek.

 

[JayTheSheriff]

Hi, I've only just joined the forum- I've been avoiding it for a while despite wanting to join as I hate getting into arguments on forums in general, but needed to know what kind of opinions people had about the things I was thinking about - and a future series is probably the one thing always at the forfront of my mind. I have very little optimism for it generally and even less so since the release of the film.

I must admit I wasn't a fan of Enterprise whatsoever when it first aired but I have given it another go and can now appreciate it (it served to satisfy my need for Trek after all other series had been completely exhausted), and I even appreciated the fact it was a prequel (much to my own personal shock), but I still have the overwhealming need for another series..

The Titan idea would be fantastic, but as discussed on here by many of you for various reasons I can't see that happening now. I would love to see one even further into the future (perhaps making a similar time leap as from TOS - TNG). But it would need to be as far removed from the producers/writers/anything whatsoever to do with the film as physically possible.

I found the film to be the biggest let down imaginiable (and that's saying something considering how low my expectations were in the first place), yes it was very pretty and nice but it had zero substance for me, was far too simplistic and I could basically have been watching any new film set in space, not necessarily Trek (although I guess that was the Abrams vision anyway).. (Must get off talking about the film here!..) So the idea of any series as a spin off of this makes me very sad indeed.

Please can someone out there offer any substantiated claims or proof that there may be another, 'proper' series (not animated by the way- that idea turns my stomach), before I go home, cry and start rewatching Voyager... Again?????

 

[AviTrek]

Sorry, time to break out those DVDs. There is no official word on anything besides initial work on Abrams Trek II. In fact the only possible news on a series is a rumor that there is an agreement/understanding between Abrams, Paramount, and CBS that there will be no new TV show until at least the second movie comes out, if not longer.

 

[JayTheSheriff]

Thanks.. so, Caretaker then..

 

[chardman]

We'll probably won't see a new Trek series until after the third movie. I think they'll want to let the films fly on their own for awhile.

They who?

If you mean Paramount, that's probably exactly what they want. Unfortunately, they don't really have much control over the matter, 'cause they don't own the television rights to the Star Trek property. CBS does.

And if the "they" you're referring to is CBS, why in the name of all that's holy would they care to let the films fly on their own for a while? Why would they wait for the hoopla to die down before exploiting the property for their own stockholders? To wait, is to risk that Trek XII or XIII suck, and thus compromise the likelihood of attracting an audience to a new series. They'll want to strike while they can still ride the promotional coattails of Trek XI and it proven popularity, rather than bank on the uncertain future of unproduced and therefore unproven sequels.

And I've said it before (probably in this very thread) that if the suits at CBS don't take advantage of the situation they are currently presented with, you can bet that their stockholders will have something to say about it, and that it will most likely involve a lot of pink-slips.

 

[BrownShatner]

I think it's safer to assume that CBS and Paramount are on the same page with plans to exploit the new Trek franchise.

They certainly could do a new Trek show starting sooner than later. However they probably wouldn't have the same cast and the 'new' universe hasn't been fleshed out in any substantial way. It's probably far too soon to do a show about the USS Whatever with a seperate cast.

 

[caisson2delta]

The key, in my opinion, to getting a new series going again is not to rush into anything. Perhaps TPTB should let things go for a while with the new movies and see where things lead. I would love a new series but don't want to see garbage just to cash in on popularity. Regardless of what reality it is set in, I think who ever writes, directs, produces a new series should have some knowledge of the history of trek and, preferably, be a fan.

 

[chardman]

I think it's safer to assume that CBS and Paramount are on the same page with plans to exploit the new Trek franchise.

They certainly could do a new Trek show starting sooner than later. However they probably wouldn't have the same cast and the 'new' universe hasn't been fleshed out in any substantial way. It's probably far too soon to do a show about the USS Whatever with a seperate cast.

Seeing as they are separate companies, I sincerely doubt they're on the same page, the same book, or even in the same library. Neither really cares one way or the other what the other is up to, beyond capitalizing on one another's successes. And with talk of Paramount merging with another studio, (one outside the Viacom parent company), the few connections that remain between Paramount and CBS are becoming less and less significant.

I'm betting on a Trek television series that is not connected in any way with the Abramsverse, but which is yet another reboot of the now twice-proven TOS universe. With yet another new Kirk, Spock, etc.

For budgetary reasons, such a series would probably a bit closer in appearance to the original than to Trek XI.

And keep in mind that if they opted for more of an "old school" look, they could conceivably simply lease and redress the already existing, (and more than adequate), ship sets from a fan production like "Phase II: New Voyages". It would be a huge money saver, and greatly reduce development and pre-production time. Utilizing such pre-existing assets would make it possible for a new Trek series to begin production within just a few months, and to begin delivering finished eps in time to be a possible mid-season replacement for the upcoming 2009-2010 television season!

Now, do I think this is a good idea? Not really. But I'm not a CBS stockholder either, so I really don't have a say. They're the folks TPTB at CBS must answer to. Their reasons are the ones that'll determine what happens next. And I've got a feeling that, like J.J. Abrams, their more concerned with capitalizing on the mainstream audience than in serving the desires of "the fanbase".

 

[BrownShatner]

Seeing as they are separate companies, I sincerely doubt they're on the same page, the same book, or even in the same library. Neither really cares one way or the other what the other is up to, beyond capitalizing on one another's successes. And with talk of Paramount merging with another studio, (one outside the Viacom parent company), the few connections that remain between Paramount and CBS are becoming less and less significant.

I guess the scenario you lay out is certainly possible. My understanding is that the Trek franchise is actually owned by the CBS side, so without knowing the financial relationship between the two, I can't say whether CBS shareholders are happy or not. However, from an overall brand management standpoint, having a Trek that's different looking from or has different actors than the film series would certain not be ideal.

Another possibility is that Trek could return to television as a mini-series. This would allow higher film-like budgets while avoiding the risk of putting "space opera" into a prime time slot.

 

[chardman]

My understanding is that the Trek franchise is actually owned by the CBS side

Partly right. IIRC CBS owns the exclusive rights to exploit Star Trek as a television property. Paramount Pictures owns the rights to exploit Star Trek as a motion picture property. While both are currently sub-divisions of Viacom, each still has its own board of directors, and their own stockholders, which they are legally beholden to. They cannot legally interfere with one another's operation, and there are strict FTC guidelines which prevent this from happening. Technically, neither has any say in how the other decides to exploit its rights to Star Trek. At present, the Star Trek film franchise, and the Star Trek television franchise, are two entirely separate legal entities. Period.

The rumored possible merger of Paramount & Universal merely exacerbates the situation.

 

[BrownShatner]

Wikipedia, so YMMV

In 2005, Viacom, which owned Paramount Pictures, split from CBS Corporation, which retained Paramount's television properties, including ownership of the Star Trek brand. Gail Berman, then president of Paramount, convinced CBS' chief executive, Leslie Moonves, to allow them eighteen months to develop a new Star Trek film before CBS would re-earn the rights to develop a new television series (in return, CBS would keep merchandising rights).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_(film)

If this is correct, Paramount does not own unlimited rights to make Star Trek films, and CBS is in control of the overall franchise.