Tim Russ says people actively pitching a new Series

[Temis the Vorta]

Okay let's see if we can get this boat back on course!

Anyway, I believe that a few premisses needs to be estabilished if the show waits to have a chance:
- a good writer;
- history sequence and less holes in the scripts;
- a beautifull ship;
- to forget the Nemesis, the Xindis and the Nexus. They are examples of what don´t have to be done.

Your requirements are not stringent enough. Plenty of shows have died regardless of writing quality or aesthetics. The general TV audience won't know or care anything about Trek history and won't know what you mean by "the Nemesis, the Xindis and the Nexus."

Here are the major stumbling blocks to Trek on TV:

1. CBS doesn't care about space opera or even about sci fi.

2. The only places other than CBS where Trek might end up on TV are CW and Showtime. Neither are a good fit for a mainstream franchise that skews male (CW doesn't want male; Showtime doesn't want mainstream).

3. Space opera in general is dead on TV. Name an existing successful space opera series. I can only think of one: The Clone Wars. Being animated, and being produced by deep-pockets Lucasfilm, TCW isn't a good template for live-action Star Trek on TV (although its success might argue for a new animated series).

 

[Tom]

But some may look at the market as the best time to throw out a Trek series given the lack of any space drama out there. BSG/Caprica are gone, no garuntee B&C will get greenlit as a series. Stargate is dead for know. Lucas has halted the Star Wars live action series for now, also. CBS does not have to actually air a new Trek series on one of there networks, just produce it. There are many instances where some shows are made by CBS studios yet run on NBC or ABC. It all depends on how greedy CBS wants to be with profits and charge another network for airing rights. CBS can still own the frachise and produce the show but not risk it flopping in the rating and taking a primetime sponsor hit if the ratings are low. It's is very unlikly they would do this but the option is there, and not unpresadented.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

CBS does not have to actually air a new Trek series on one of there networks, just produce it

Nobody develops shows for other outlets anymore, for financial reasons. That's just the way the business has evolved and isn't going to change anytime soon.

There are many instances where some shows are made by CBS studios yet run on NBC or ABC.

In the past. That isn't how it's done anymore.

 

[T'Girl]

CBS does not have to actually air a new Trek series on one of there networks, just produce it.

The most resent example of this would be "The Cleaner" (dropped in '09) with the hot guy from Law and Order, made by CBS, but shown on A&E. There's also The Racheal Ray Show which is directly distributed through CBS now, but used to go out through King World.

Both ABC and FOX look like they're going to be distributing shows though Apple TV systems, Steve Jobs (Apple CEO) owns a pile of Disney stock and is on the Disney board, Disney of course owns ABC, so that's where that's coming from.

The Real Housewives series (a guilty pleasure) is own by NBC and is distributed on Bravo.

CBS, should they choose, could even launch a new TV network for a mix of original content and re-runs (like NBC with the USA network) placing a new Star Trek there.

 

[Tom]

Those shows you mentioned above are not a billion dollar fanchise like Star Trek is (or was) so CBS is unlikly to involve a 3rd party network. I just mentioned it becuse it has been done with other shows so it is AN option but a very slim to none option.

 

[AviTrek]

CBS does not have to actually air a new Trek series on one of there networks, just produce it.

The most resent example of this would be "The Cleaner" (dropped in '09) with the hot guy from Law and Order, made by CBS, but shown on A&E. There's also The Racheal Ray Show which is directly distributed through CBS now, but used to go out through King World.

Both ABC and FOX look like they're going to be distributing shows though Apple TV systems, Steve Jobs (Apple CEO) owns a pile of Disney stock and is on the Disney board, Disney of course owns ABC, so that's where that's coming from.

The Real Housewives series (a guilty pleasure) is own by NBC and is distributed on Bravo.

CBS, should they choose, could even launch a new TV network for a mix of original content and re-runs (like NBC with the USA network) placing a new Star Trek there.

Bravo is owned by NBCU. The same as NBC, USA, and SyFy. So that explains Real Housewives.

All online distributions are still experiments at this point so they don't count.

The only actual example you gave is The Cleaner.

But you're dead on with your final point. For a while I've said the best hope for Trek TV is if CBS decides to launch a basic cable channel to compete with USA, TNT, FX, and ABC Family. A Star Trek TV show could even be a heavily promoted launch show to draw people to the new network.

Now the question becomes, does CBS want to launch a basic cable channel?

 

[BillJ]

Well, Modern Family is produced by Fox for ABC.

 

[Tom]

It can also be a viacom owned channel (and there are several). Even though CBS and viacom have been 2 seperate companys for 4 years they are still joined at the hip with a lot of things (mostly do to Redstone's joint envolvement). Viacom is much more pro-trek than CBS is now, as we have seen many examples of.

I so wish Viacom would put out a action/scifi/thriller type basic cable channel that would compete with Syfy. Syfy has lost there way and now would be the best time to strike with a competed similar themed channel. Some would say that of the Viacom channels, Spike runs the closest to that theme but still is not close enough. Actually, Syfy is trying to become more like Spike with the wrestling and all.

 

[T'Girl]

Those shows you mentioned above are not a billion dollar fanchise like Star Trek

But it's a franchise that isn't producing very much money for CBS. Paramount Picture owns the movie Star Trek (if I got that right), all the money from Star Trek Eleven goes to them.

CBS doesn't pull in new money from their ownership rights unless they do something with it. That means a new production, either inline with the last movie or not, CBS doesn't legally have to key into Paramounts efforts.

 

[Tom]

Those shows you mentioned above are not a billion dollar fanchise like Star Trek

But it's a franchise that isn't producing very much money for CBS. Paramount Picture owns the movie Star Trek (if I got that right), all the money from Star Trek Eleven goes to them.

CBS doesn't pull in new money from their ownership rights unless they do something with it. That means a new production, either inline with the last movie or not, CBS doesn't legally have to key into Paramounts efforts.

CBS owns the full rights to Star Trek. They get get licensing fee's from Viacom (since the companies seperated) for the exclusive right to make films. I am not sure of the specifics but there percentages involved depending on how well the film does. So CBS did make money on Trek 2009's success at the box office. Also all licenced products based on that movies (all the movies actually) directly profit CBS via the CBS licensing department. CBS is also currently making money on non movie products such as Games, STO, Books, DVD sales, syndication and airing rights for all previous Star Trek productions. So the billion dollar francise does make money for CBS. Would they like it to make much more, of course they do, a series would help.

Thing is, CBS is very anal about branding and product repution, that is why they don't do things like TV or direct to DVD on-off movies or just thowing a series out there and being happy 3mill maximum ratings. CBS has an 'all or nothing' type of approach, they don't settle for little they want big.

Things with CBS and Viacom can get a little skewed because they were once one company not to long ago and Redstone's daddy like involvement with both. But at least, on paper, to keep the lawyers happy, that is how it is setup to work.

 

[Tarek71]

Its not a great arrangement and it will probably only last as long as they are both under Redstone. Unfortunately ST is not a good fit for CBS. Their strategy with it has been very conservative. I think being much more aggressive in developing it would be alot better. But just maybe not at CBS. The movies I understand. CBS Films makes movies now, but nothing like with the budget ST had.

Hopefully ST will be detached from CBS at some point, but thats just speculating in the ether right now. For the time being CBS is not making a ST TV show. There will eventually be one. I dont know when, but at some point it will happen. It might even be on CBS/Showtime, etc. Maybe some pitches that have been made are being weighed more seriously than we realize.

I think something within the Trek universe but that is outside of the box of what you might expect from ST would have the best chance. Something quite unlike what we have seen before.

 

[JarodRussell]

Maybe they can do a new Trek show on SyFy, mwuhaha.

 

[Tom]

The only studio that could handle Star Trek properly IMO, is Universal. It is big enough to be able to handle all the things that go with Trek. They are also very fantasy/scifi friendly as well. Other than that, Star Trek should have stayed with Viacom, in total, when the companies split, not sure why it went to CBS to be honest.

 

[chardman]

^Cause the property is, at its core, a television show, and CBS got all of Viacom's television interests, while Paramount (primarily a movie studio) got Viacom's movie properties. Pretty simple really.

 

[Jakks]

I kinda doubt we'll ever see anything from the Prime-Universe on TV again. I think that ship has sailed.

What's more likely, is that should we see three successful movies from JJ and Co...we may see a TV series based on the Alternate Universe, which I'm thinking show-runners and script writers would much more prefer as that they would be free of the nightmare that is ST Prime continuity.

 

[the skullcowboy]

So where do we believe Trek stands as a " series " right now? If the sequel to ST:XI does well, are we then looking at a return to starfleet in the TOS timeline for a series? I hope not, after spending the better part of 2 decades invested in the TNG timeline( TNG/DS9/Voyager ) I find it shocking to just abandon it now. I can see flashing forward a decade or 2 but not going back 10-12 decades. Just my 2 cents...don't expect everyone to feel the same way.

 

[Tarek71]

So where do we believe Trek stands as a " series " right now? If the sequel to ST:XI does well, are we then looking at a return to starfleet in the TOS timeline for a series? I hope not, after spending the better part of 2 decades invested in the TNG timeline( TNG/DS9/Voyager ) I find it shocking to just abandon it now. I can see flashing forward a decade or 2 but not going back 10-12 decades. Just my 2 cents...don't expect everyone to feel the same way.

Who knows. We dont know who would be involved in it. JJ I think has said he would be up for it. If he and his crowd made it, it might well be in the JJ timeline. Although thats not actually a guarantee. Even a JJ series might be a departure from the movies.

If a totally different group are hired and its clear that JJ is not their boss and has no veto over them, who knows what you could have. You could have some totally out of the box Star Trek idea that is quite unlike anything we've seen before in Trek. It will probably have to be to make it as a Showtime series. Which i think is the most likely home right now.

You could have a police procedural Trek. Or something set among people in a badlands type environment. Something more raw, physical, dark and sexual. Or...something not like that at all. I really think its wide open. But something... different. Whatever it is. I just dont see a TNG type series at all, at this point.

 

[Angel4576]

I'm not expecting a new series until Abrams' movies have finished.

I know CBS are under no obligation to NOT do a Trek series while the movies are coming out, but I'd be surprised if they went ahead with one.

 

[Tom]

If Trek XII is successful and JJ pushed a series, he would probably get one.... however don't look for the series to be about Kirk and crew because Pine and the others would not do a series with out big money that CBS would not pay. Also they would want to keep them available for possible future movies so they would not recast Kirk and the crew again just for the sake of having them in a TV series. I can never see a Kirk and crew TV series ever really happening since that dynamic is best left for the big screen now.

 

[BillJ]

If the Star Trek 2009 sequel is a success, I believe we'll see an animated series not to long after.