• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sci-fi creatives with clout?

Anyone whose been a showrunner of a successful or semi-successful show can probably get his or her foot in the door at CBS. Other than that, who cares how "creative" they are? They can hire creative people, people who know sci fi, or even both. The important part is that someone has to be able to convince CBS that they should bother. We need a deal-maker, not a "sci-fi creative."

Try not to double post if you've got nothing to say. OK, sport?

Did somebody appoint you a moderator and didn't tell me?

Maybe he's MODMAN's alter ego? Haven't seen him around lately... :(
 
Would you tie him to a chair or take my approach and become a window washer at CBS. I might have to tie somebody down just to get that job. I wonder if the elevator man pitches to him every time he gets into the elevator. It's all subjective anyway. Television is a delusion. It's just a glowing blue light that swirls around and around, sometimes better, sometimes worse but always hypnotic. What's the difference if it's good or not. What's good anway? Good is what they say it is because what they say is good. Do you think they even stop to think about what is good anymore or just what will make money?
 
If you're content with the broader sadistic appeal of whipping a mule up a hill, who am I to argue.

Considering that you've never proposed a single idea for Star Trek or any television series that makes any sense at all, nor demonstrated any understanding whatever of the entertainment industry, I'd suggest that you're right with regard to arguing.
 
And why would I post a Star Trek story or premise on these boards when they're forbiden by the mods and the writers who could easily steal them. That would be stupid. Professing to know everything is a poor way to make money.
 
Well there is an entire forum that's just brimming stories and ideas. The mods don't seem to mind them too much.

Of course Dennis was probably referring to your posts about how to make Star Trek "better".
 
There's a difference between a delusion and genius, and that is someone is willing to pay for it.
 
If Star Trek is to remain Gene Rodenberry's creation, then it should uphold his ideals, and I don't pretend to know them all. If not, then it shouldn't be called Star Trek, but they should be indistinguishable.
 
If Star Trek is to remain Gene Rodenberry's creation, then it should uphold his ideals, and I don't pretend to know them all. If not, then it shouldn't be called Star Trek, but they should be indistinguishable.
Well that tosses most of your ideas out the window.

Of course Gene had a lot of "ideals" over the decades. 1964 Gene wasn't the same guy as 1987 Gene.
 
I'm only looking to use the ideas that sell. Besides how good can an idea be if it makes no money?
 
You guys are beating each other up for no reason. There are (and I doubt that there ever was) a science fiction person with clout...because science fiction has never been taken seriously. Look how much difficulty Lucas came up against when he wanted to make "Red Tails"? You think that his previous movies (and I'm talking Star Wars, of course) would've made any studio green light anything he wanted. But they didn't.

But what if, a majority of the funding for the series was put up by someone other than CBS...with CBS making a minimal investment and still maintaining rights to the franchise?
 
If Steven Spielberg or JJ Abrams walked into CBS's offices and declared their interest in making a Star Trek series, CBS would not call security to have them escorted from the premises.

The odds are reasonable that their show would end up getting made, if only because CBS would want to lock in a relationship with them. CBS might do it even if they have no particular faith in the proposed series. It's all about relationships.

But what if, a majority of the funding for the series was put up by someone other than CBS...with CBS making a minimal investment and still maintaining rights to the franchise?
What would motivate someone to invest in a property they don't have the rights to? What if the series is a monster hit, with all sorts of possible spinoffs and merchandising sales? Now the investors look like idiots - CBS will profit from the hit they created.

Look how much difficulty Lucas came up against when he wanted to make "Red Tails"?

The problem there had nothing to do with science fiction. Hollywood has no faith in dramas starring a black cast (as opposed to just one black guy, like Will Smith) will do well in foreign markets, which is essential to economic calculations for movies nowadays - most of the money for an American movie is made outside America.
 
If GR was killed in a car crash say in 1964, would JJ Abrams be doing a space opera movie? Would Speilberg? Would Lucas have done Star Wars? Would it have been the same? What Trek needs is a back door pilot with another premise and that can only come from a prequel with another captain other than Kirk. JJ fit a round peg into a square hole. Of course it still fits better than a square peg in a round hole.
 
Last edited:
What Trek needs is a back end pilot and that can only come from a prequel from another captain other than Kirk.

We already had that. It was called Enterprise. It got cancelled.

And no amount of JJ-bashing from you will change the fact that he took Star Trek and made it successful again. His method of using Kirk and Spock again was proven to be the right choice. If one were to make a future new Trek TV series, that would obviously be the way to go. Do we need Pine and Quinto to reprise their roles? Not at all. Did Sutherland and Gould reprise their roles for the M*A*S*H series? No. We got even better actors for that.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top