Exploring a darker theme in a future star trek series

[RandyS]

But everyone can stop worrying about TNG - the TV ecosystem that supported that kind of space opera series is long since defunct. There will never be a Star Trek series like that again.

And if true, that right there is a reason to worry.

Not for me - I don't want to see TNG back again. I want to see how the franchise can be shaped to the grownup cable market.

But even for TNG fans, there's no reason to worry because there's no hope left, so why worry? Well, not until the TV business really fragments from niches to micro-niches, in which serving very specific tastes becomes economically viable.

Then you could have a dozen different approaches to Star Trek simultaneously - TOS flavor, TNG flavor, DS9 flavor, JJ Abrams flavor, gritty-adult-drama flavor, cartoon-for-kids flavor, etc. We're still a ways away from that, but who knows what the future holds?

I don't disagree with you. I just miss new TNG. For many years after 1994 I was getting that with the novels, but now, they focus exclusively on the post-Nemesis period where Data is dead, and the crew is split up. I don't want to badmouth the work those writers are doing because alot of that really IS good, but the TOS novels still do stories within the series timeframe. I wonder why TNG DS9, and VOYAGER don't?

But, to adress your belief that any new Star Trek would have to be on a cable network, why is that? In fact, why not just do direct to DVD? That's how I watch everything anymore anyway. I don't remember the last time I turned the cable box on other than to look at the news, and I use the internet for THAT too.

Plus, any new Star Trek production would, within a year of it's release, be put on DVD anyway, so why not eliminate the middleman?

And yeah, I understand the cost of advertising and all that as an argument against it, but it's not like DVD's don't come with ads, promos and whatnot.

 

[BillJ]

Not for me - I don't want to see TNG back again. I want to see how the franchise can be shaped to the grownup cable market.

How does dark equate to grownup?

Funny thing I've noticed in all these "grownup" shows. The characters all invariably act like children. I'm forty years old, I just don't see how some nudity, violence, four-letter words and characters acting like spoiled children equates to being grownup?

 

[RandyS]

Don't worry about making a "dark" or "optimistic" or "dramatic" or "gritty" ST show - just worry about making a good show and let the other adjectives fall where they may.

This is without question the smartest comment I've seen in this thread so far, and that includes my own past arguments.

 

[Green Lantern]

With the success of BSG among sci fi fans, may i suggest that the next star trek series present a more darker theme to its story telling. These are the following ideas for 1, 2 or 3 episodes story arcs.

1) A starfleet captain is bought to trial after discovering that he had ordered ,rather relutantly , the torture of captured Cardassian officers, in order to gather infomation about enemy bases and fleet movements during the Dominion war. The starfleet captain did this in order to minimalize starfleet casualties.

(a storyline that corresponds to contempory usage of waterboarding by the USA under george w bush)

2) A human scientist who performs lobotomy on aliens that he captures and kepts them as servants as he is prejudiced against non humans.

(yes, racisim still exist in the 24th century)

3) A starfleet ground combat unit that carrys out an unintended massacre of a ferengi colony near the ferengi/federation space. the ferengi are all killed down to the family memebers including women & children. Starfleet starts investigations & brings those involved to trial.

(similar to the my lai massacre incident during the vietnam war)

4) A entire race who are members of the federation starts to suffer a horrrbile genetic disease that proves incurable and causes their extinction. I nominate the denobulans as the soon to be extinct race as we see them in 22nd century (Enterprise Series) but not in the 23rd or 24th centuries which could mean that they are slowly dying off.

(In the babylon 5 series, there was this race called Markab who eventually die out due to a disease)

5) starfleet tolerating and even working with slave owning cultures along its border and federation citizens owning slaves and homes on those planets outside federation control.

(interesting moral issue, brings up the issue of states rights versus slavery which was a big issue that caused the american civil war)

6) Starfleet encounters a race where there are actually three genders but but the third gender is often killed as soon as they are born as they don't seem to have any use. That race like most races require only two genders to procreate but in their distant past, they needed 3 genders in order to procreate but they evolved from that to now only needing 2 genders. Because of that they kill the third gender because they have no use for that gender anymore.

(Gender rights issue)

7) A gay klingon, i want to see how how klingons deal with the issue of homosexuality. Who knows, may be they are more tolerant than we early 21st century humans are.

(LGBT issue)

8) zombies in space. We could have an episode where a starfleet medical ship picks up hundreds of sickly patients from a colony who slowly die and then reanimate as walking zombies. The starfleet ship becomes infested and the survivors fight back. We could have a "the walking dead" type of situation onboard the ship as the survivors await for rescue.

(zombies. I love zombies ! The TV series Andromeda had an episode about zombies infesting a ship but i always felt Star Trek could do it better.)

1) A nice idea that'll make fans choose sides.
2) A nice and realistic idea, alien racsism. The networks will proberbly like that because it'll show little kids and such that racsism is wrong.
3) Neat, I love a bit of blood and gore.
4) YES!!! It'll show the geeks like us that the continuity still matters to the network!
5) My response is simular to 1&2.
6) Interesting, It'll be like that episode of the next Generation when Riker falls in love with a member of a genderless species and heshewhatever falls in love with him and reveals she prefers gender, but the native species remove the "error" and "cure" heshewhatever from prefering gender. You know what episode I'm on about right?
7) Or maybe they are about as tolerant as a load of catholic extremests from the 13th century, that's the theory I'm going with, the klingons seem to be a people with pride and conservative values. Maybe the klingon can be in denial.
8) Oh yeah baby! I was thinking, maybe we can just have the borg become more zombie like.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Not for me - I don't want to see TNG back again. I want to see how the franchise can be shaped to the grownup cable market.

How does dark equate to grownup?

Funny thing I've noticed in all these "grownup" shows. The characters all invariably act like children. I'm forty years old, I just don't see how some nudity, violence, four-letter words and characters acting like spoiled children equates to being grownup?

Of course. Characters act like idiots because there's mature content in a show.

It's a stretch to predicate that since there is nudity, cursing, and violence, that the quality will automatically suffer. There is no direct relationship between the two.

 

[Lynx]

But everyone can stop worrying about TNG - the TV ecosystem that supported that kind of space opera series is long since defunct. There will never be a Star Trek series like that again.

And if true, that right there is a reason to worry.

Agree!

But in that case, we don't have to worry about watching any Star Trek at all, if it turns out to something like NuBSG or Stargate Universe. Better to stick to the old DVD.s.

 

[The Overlord]

But everyone can stop worrying about TNG - the TV ecosystem that supported that kind of space opera series is long since defunct. There will never be a Star Trek series like that again.

And if true, that right there is a reason to worry.

Agree!

But in that case, we don't have to worry about watching any Star Trek at all, if it turns out to something like NuBSG or Stargate Universe. Better to stick to the old DVD.s.

But there is a compromise between creating a clone of TNG or creating a clone of NuBSG.

You can meld some darker themes into a show and still have an an optimistic view point win out in the end. Its always darkest before the dawn.

The fact is TV has changed since the 80s, so a new show would have be different from TNG. A new Star Trek show would need an ongoing story and stronger continuity to make it in today's TV landscape.

 

[BillJ]

The fact is TV has changed since the 80s, so a new show would have be different from TNG. A new Star Trek show would need an ongoing story and stronger continuity to make it in today's TV landscape.

Yet CBS, the number 1 network, has very few of these types of shows. Leaning more on episodic offerings.

 

[The Overlord]

The fact is TV has changed since the 80s, so a new show would have be different from TNG. A new Star Trek show would need an ongoing story and stronger continuity to make it in today's TV landscape.

Yet CBS, the number 1 network, has very few of these types of shows. Leaning more on episodic offerings.

And most of those shows are considered to be inferior in quality compared to the stuff on cable, which does have ongoing stories.

Besides I think its likely a new star Trek show will end up on cable rather then network TV and shouldn't Star Trek try to be the same league as the good TV shows on cable rather then the mediocre stuff on network TV?

 

[FreddyE]

How about a Star Trek thats Buffy-style in terms of "darkness"? It would be lighter in the beginning, get darker as the series progresses, but always have commedy to relax the mood, and have a hopefull ending to most seasons.

 

[BillJ]

And most of those shows are considered to be inferior in quality compared to the stuff on cable, which does have ongoing stories.

I don't think anyone will disagree that Star Trek will be insanely expensive to produce weekly.

In order for a show that is expensive to survive, it has to be put out in a manner the maximum number of people can see it. To drive revenue. Plus, cable TV providers continue to bleed subscribers here in the U.S.

Now are you going to take and put your (depending on number of episodes) $60-110 million dollar investment on a business model that looks to be slowly dying or are you going to place it where the most people possible can see it, driving advertising revenue?

The problem, as I see it on the outside, is live-action Star Trek 'done right' is too expensive for Netflix or Showtime to turn a profit off of (I don't believe it would drive subscriptions as those who really want to see it will either download it or wait for home video) and wouldn't draw enough viewers to justify a spot on a network line-up, especially at CBS.

I really don't see live-action Star Trek coming back anytime soon, especially with CBS making a rather large profit off their back catalog and and taking no risks with Paramount footing the bill for the motion picture franchise.

 

[RandyS]

And if true, that right there is a reason to worry.

Agree!

But in that case, we don't have to worry about watching any Star Trek at all, if it turns out to something like NuBSG or Stargate Universe. Better to stick to the old DVD.s.

But there is a compromise between creating a clone of TNG or creating a clone of NuBSG.

You can meld some darker themes into a show and still have an an optimistic view point win out in the end. Its always darkest before the dawn.

They did THAT long before TNG existed.

It was called "Old BSG".

 

[The Overlord]

And most of those shows are considered to be inferior in quality compared to the stuff on cable, which does have ongoing stories.

I don't think anyone will disagree that Star Trek will be insanely expensive to produce weekly.

In order for a show that is expensive to survive, it has to be put out in a manner the maximum number of people can see it. To drive revenue. Plus, cable TV providers continue to bleed subscribers here in the U.S.

Now are you going to take and put your (depending on number of episodes) $60-110 million dollar investment on a business model that looks to be slowly dying or are you going to place it where the most people possible can see it, driving advertising revenue?

The problem, as I see it on the outside, is live-action Star Trek 'done right' is too expensive for Netflix or Showtime to turn a profit off of (I don't believe it would drive subscriptions as those who really want to see it will either download it or wait for home video) and wouldn't draw enough viewers to justify a spot on a network line-up, especially at CBS.

I really don't see live-action Star Trek coming back anytime soon, especially with CBS making a rather large profit off their back catalog and and taking no risks with Paramount footing the bill for the motion picture franchise.

Cable channels like HBO are still doing well.

Look at the production values on Game of Thrones, those are amazing production values and that show is on cable.

The fact is I don't think a Star Trek show would be able to bring in enough viewers stay on the air on a network channel. It would have a better of surviving on cable.

I do think you are right about it being unlikely we see a new live action Star Trek show anytime soon.

They did THAT long before TNG existed.

It was called "Old BSG".

Except you would have handle that differently now, TV has changed a lot since the late 70s.

Also I like nuBGS better then the old one.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

But there is a compromise between creating a clone of TOS or creating a clone of NuBSG.

There fixed it for you

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The next series won't be a clone of TNG or even recognizably close, especially in two fundamental ways: episodic format and sanitized approach. But a clone of nuBSG would be tone deaf to what makes Star Trek unique. If the next series ends up on premium cable, it will be more nuBSGy than if it were on TNT or SyFy. But there is simply no place on TV now for the TNG approach. Do people think CBS is going to invent a new network just for Star Trek?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The fact is TV has changed since the 80s, so a new show would have be different from TNG. A new Star Trek show would need an ongoing story and stronger continuity to make it in today's TV landscape.

Yet CBS, the number 1 network, has very few of these types of shows. Leaning more on episodic offerings.

Sure, cop shows. CBS doesn't do sci if. Sci if and the episodic approach have parted ways because episodic shows are for broadcast and the more broadcasty cable networks like USA, no sci if there either, while sci if is for cable networks like AMC and TNT which veer towards serialization. There's still some episodicish sci fi on SyFy but God help us if Star Trek falls into their clutches. And would CBS really make a series for an NBC property anyway?

 

[RandyS]

They did THAT long before TNG existed.

It was called "Old BSG".

Except you would have handle that differently now, TV has changed a lot since the late 70s.

Indeed it has. Only not for the better.

That's been the real problem all along.

 

[The Overlord]

They did THAT long before TNG existed.

It was called "Old BSG".

Except you would have handle that differently now, TV has changed a lot since the late 70s.

Indeed it has. Only not for the better.

That's been the real problem all along.

What are you talking about? many of people are saying this is the best era of television ever, at least in terms cable content.

The late 70s didn't quality programing like the Wire, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men and many other shows found on cable. Television is vastly superior now to what it was in the late 70s.

 

[RandyS]

Except you would have handle that differently now, TV has changed a lot since the late 70s.

Indeed it has. Only not for the better.

That's been the real problem all along.

What are you talking about? many of people are saying this is the best era of television ever, at least in terms cable content.

The late 70s didn't quality programing like the Wire, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men and many other shows found on cable. Television is vastly superior now to what it was in the late 70s.

I disagree. Everything is Daddy issues, and angst, angst, angst.

I'm sick of it.

 

[The Overlord]

Indeed it has. Only not for the better.

That's been the real problem all along.

What are you talking about? many of people are saying this is the best era of television ever, at least in terms cable content.

The late 70s didn't quality programing like the Wire, Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, Mad Men and many other shows found on cable. Television is vastly superior now to what it was in the late 70s.

I disagree. Everything is Daddy issues, and angst, angst, angst.

I'm sick of it.

I think most viewers and TV critics disagree with your assessment. I would say, the Wire is better then TV shows in the 70s.