Why is there such certainity that there will be another show?

[Admiral Buzzkill]

TNG was the only modern Trek that was entertaining enough to a broad enough cross-section of the public to make it in a broadcast environment. It's the standard against which any future relaunch of the property on TV will be judged - DS9, "Voyager" and "Enterprise" are of negligable interest in that regard other than to hard core trekkies. They just didn't offer enough that was new and intriguing for very many people who weren't already "sold" on Trek.

Moonves didn't cancel a strong, healthy franchise. He simply had no motive to continue a failing one.

 

[Captain Pike]

I think one day there will be another series.

In a strictly million-monkeys-inventing-Shakespere sense, there has to be, although hopefully we won't have evolved into a different lifeform by then..

 

[Tara]

I still think TNG's popularity also has a great deal to do with being the very first of the spin-offs--not any actual comment on it being a superior product (clearly, when you look at which of the TNG writing staff moved to DS9, and which went ot VOY, you can see why DS9's writers and producers have gone on to bigger and better things. And Manny Coto did nearly the impossible by taking the worst of Braga's Trek legacy and not just making it decent Trek for a season and a half there, buy also damned good television by any standard). Also, TNG was the only game in town for many years. A great deal of its popularity also had to do with the boom in the syndication market in the late 1980s.

It's not just a matter of "catching lightning in a bottle" again. it's also a matter of replicating the circumstances which allowed it to become a mainstream hit.

Frankly, I don't believe there would have been further spin-offs after DS9 had Viacom not owned their own broadcast channel. And Enterprise probably would have continued for 7 years had advertising revenues tanked to the degree they did, where it was just one among many casualties of UPN's diminishing ratings.

Really, we have American's Next Top Model to blame for many things (scripted hour-long drama being much more expensive to produce than cheap reality television which draws larger, more mainstream audiences which means more advertising $$$).

However, now that UPN has merged with the WB to create the CW, and the syndication market has shrunk and there may never be another powerhouse like Hercules[/i[ and Xena to spark a new syndication boom, most likely the film franchise is their only viable arena for new Trek.

The fact is, the circumstacnes which gave rise to TNG and DS9 and the rest of the franchise no longer exist. Cable and the Internet, the gaming industry, streaming content, TiVo, all of these have combined to create a very different entertainment industry than existed in 1987 when TOS had gone from a culty cancelled television memory to a genuinely successful film franchise, and Paramount realised they could extend the brand to new characters.

Looking backward makes no sense, unless you're learning from history so you can look forward with a clear view.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

TOS and story arcs

A story arc on TOS was never something we were never treated to and this was the grandest of arcs that was never really done justice in my opinion.

I think my post from New Fan Retention Rate thread about modern day television using multiple episodes for story arcs sums it up nicely.
TOS was on in the 1960s when serials on TV were not that popular apart from soap operas. Standalone story episodes were the norm.

 

[xortex]

Re: TOS and story arcs

Another series has to have a more unique and decisive premise behind it.

 

[Tara]

Re: TOS and story arcs

Another series has to have a more unique and decisive premise behind it.

A great premise doesn't necessarily mean you'll get a great TV series. I mean, look at Voyager. A lot of the uniqueness of its premise was never really explored (tho I look at chunks of BSG as Ron Moore's version of Voyager, particularly the parallels between Equinox and Pegasus).

I think all you really need for a good Trek series is a really strong showrunner, and top notch actors, and the dedication to not reinvent the wheel, but tell a new story in an existing universe.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think there will definitely be another show--now whether any of us currently here will still have teeth when it comes is another matter entirely...

 

[Shazam!]

Well, maybe then a TV show, and for my money likely a Kirk & Spock show.

If there is a new TV show, it'll definitely be a Kirk/Spock show.

If they just do a show about some crew on some ship, then there was literally no point in 'rebooting' the franchise.

 

[Evil Ezri]

If there is a new series, I do not see it being a Kirk and Spock. With that era of the 2240’s and now were really starting to get into the modern era of the 2010’s, I just do not see much interest with a series only 230 years from now. It is the same with Enterprise with being in the year 2150’s just right after the turn of the century.

Talking about a new Kirk and gang series is in my judgment a backlash of the failure of Enterprise the series. Still, the series of Enterprise was a half and half deal to pluck the positives of Kirk of the 1960’s with a new twist with a earlier era and a different ship. Sure, the Star Trek XI or Star Trek 2009 did produce a vast amount of wealth, and still, it did not really produce a deep fan base with the movie.

What is needed is something like the new Battlestar Galactica that was so accepted and built a deep fan base.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Well, maybe then a TV show, and for my money likely a Kirk & Spock show.

If there is a new TV show, it'll definitely be a Kirk/Spock show.

I don't think they'd be able to lure Pine and Quinto to do a regular TV series after making them big-shot movie stars.

If they just do a show about some crew on some ship, then there was literally no point in 'rebooting' the franchise.

The point to rebooting the franchise was to make buttloads of money and reinvigorate the brand in the public eye. So the goal has been achieved. If they want to create a whole new cast of characters for a TV show, they've done the legwork so why not?

I just do not see much interest with a series only 230 years from now.

Why not? There's no difference between what they can envision as a future 230 years from now vs 330 years vs 3300 years. They just decide, okay, they have FTL and transporters but they can't go to another galaxy. Or they decide they can go to another galaxy, but no time travel.

Who are we to say what tech will or won't be invented and when? It's very possible that FTL, transporters and time travel are flat-out impossible and will never be invented, period. Does that stop anyone?

What is needed is something like the new Battlestar Galactica that was so accepted and built a deep fan base.

BSG ended its run with about 2M viewers. Star Trek on TV would be expected to do much better than that, or to put it another way, if that's the audience they can expect, CBS won't bother. They can shove out any old derivative police procedural and get 10M viewers easy. Why work harder and get a fifth the audience?

Keep in mind, when ENT ended its run, it was more along the lines of 4-5M viewers iirc. BSG didn't even get that when it premiered.

 

[Tara]

I doubt there would be a television series with the current cast. I just can't see Pine and Saldana and Urban signing on to do telly. Even Quinto I don't think will stay on Heroes.

(That said, I tuned into FastForward pretty much just for John Cho, and I haven't been disappointed yet.)

 

[Kegg]

Well, maybe then a TV show, and for my money likely a Kirk & Spock show.

If there is a new TV show, it'll definitely be a Kirk/Spock show.

I don't think they'd be able to lure Pine and Quinto to do a regular TV series after making them big-shot movie stars.

Not what I was saying. I think the only likely TV show would be yet another reboot, whenever this film franchise has wrapped up. I'm very doubtful of any TV shows being launched during the Pine/Quinto run.

 

[Shazam!]

Not what I was saying. I think the only likely TV show would be yet another reboot, whenever this film franchise has wrapped up. I'm very doubtful of any TV shows being launched during the Pine/Quinto run.

Yep, basically like Stargate.

 

[Shazam!]

If they want to create a whole new cast of characters for a TV show, they've done the legwork so why not?

Creating a new cast of characters is the legwork. Why create new characters when they already have characters proven to turn a tidy profit?

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

Reading these exchanges, I'm ever more minded to believe there is significant mileage in the animated/CGI approach to a new show.

Anything else would look low rent next to what Abrams produced and is likely to carry on producing/directing etc, a cartoon/CGI would not have to directly compete. Such competition, along with the fact that it won't look as good as a cinematic product, might alienate anyone other than a fan.

Would the studio want that? I suspect not.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I think the only likely TV show would be yet another reboot, whenever this film franchise has wrapped up.

Nobody would have a motive to do that. Whatever the new reboot would be, it hasn't proven itself to be a money-maker by being a big-budget summer blockbuster. So there's no motive for the bean-counters to take a risk on it, vs. the infinite number of other ideas they could take a risk on instead.

The one massive value of Abram's universe is that it's now a proven money-maker. That is the one and only factor that would motivate a TV show to be made.

If they want to create a whole new cast of characters for a TV show, they've done the legwork so why not?

Creating a new cast of characters is the legwork. Why create new characters when they already have characters proven to turn a tidy profit?

The legwork I was talking about is the harder thing: to convince the corporate honchos that there's money to be squeezed out of the Star Trek brand!

Once you've gotten their attention and their quatloos, then you can hire some writers to invent all the characters you like. So yeah, that's the easy part. There are all kinds of out of work writers in Hollywood who are perfectly capable of doing good work. The hard part is getting the money to hire them, and the directors, makeup people etc.

If the CBS brass figured a Star Trek series was worth investing in, they'd not only bankroll production but also market it sufficiently to draw in at least some of the audience that enjoyed the movie. Give them the same elements - likable characters, nice SFX (by TV standards), gripping, adventurous plotline - and you'd have a decent shot at success.

Looking at the actual characters, Spock is the only one who strikes me as pretty ingenious of a creation, an iconic character you don't see come along every day. The rest are the sorts that any reasonably good writing staff could devise. So you'd have a cast of characters that are on par with the TOS crew, minus a really great Spock type. Oh well, could be worse.

And of course - casting would make or break the show.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

I don't think there will be another show for at least 5 years.

Paramount and CBS don't want to over saturate nor cause convolution in the productions.

They are going with the reboot timeline right now. It works well as a big budget feature film, a low budget TV series wouldn't work nearly as well. And as much as I long for more prime-timeline it won't be happening with the the reboot ruling in the theaters.

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

I don't think there will be another show for at least 5 years.

Paramount and CBS don't want to over saturate nor cause convolution in the productions.

They are going with the reboot timeline right now. It works well as a big budget feature film, a low budget TV series wouldn't work nearly as well. And as much as I long for more prime-timeline it won't be happening with the the reboot ruling in the theaters.

I wonder whether this will cause a deep fracture in fandom over the medium to long term, those who hate Abrams will have more reason to hate him if what you say comes to pass.

They could argue, incorrectly in my opinion, that Abrams killed Trek.

Well, their version of Trek.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Their version of Trek died because it failed.

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

Their version of Trek died because it failed.

Agreed, using the premise we all respect is an eminently sensible way to reinvigorate the franchise.

My only concern is that having seen something as visually amazing as Abrams Trek will not 'transfer' to the small screen well.

Hence my liking for an animated/CGI series, something that doesn't compete directly with big screen budgets and visuals.

Trek has a story to tell, this is the best way to do it at this stage in it's history.