Orci says ST series talk "getting real"
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
I actually caught an episode of Voyager last week ("Real Life", aka the one where the Doctor gets a family) and enjoyed it immensely. When all is said and done I have a great fondness for the Berman era and it's because of that era (TNG in particular) that I'm a Trek fan to begin with.
But yeah one can play those arguments all day. You like whatever parts of Star Trek you like and there's no objective proof that some other parts are better.
And if the original series was it's prime, it would never have been cancelled.
But yeah one can play those arguments all day. You like whatever parts of Star Trek you like and there's no objective proof that some other parts are better.
The only objective standard for any of this is, does it make enough $$$ for them to want to keep making more? By that standard Trek may seem to have had a rocky road, but nearly half century later, it's still a viable moneymaker! That's impressive in such a brutal and unforgiving industry. Star Trek, I'm proud of ya! 
It's had to evolve with the times and changes in both the TV and movie businesses, and will have to evolve even more to keep going, especially to get back on TV (or maybe skip TV altogether and just go streaming, that's where everything is headed anyway). I wouldn't bet against it.
I am confident you will get your wish. Those who don't want Abrams & co to be involved are not likely to be so fortunate.
It's had to evolve with the times and changes in both the TV and movie businesses, and will have to evolve even more to keep going, especially to get back on TV (or maybe skip TV altogether and just go streaming, that's where everything is headed anyway). I wouldn't bet against it.
I am confident you will get your wish. Those who don't want Abrams & co to be involved are not likely to be so fortunate.
Well, you picked a good one.
Not necessarily. Depending on when such a series might happen, CBS may seek out someone else that they like who is currently not very well-known.
I am confident you will get your wish. Those who don't want Abrams & co to be involved are not likely to be so fortunate.
I think if there's not a new Trek series within the next ten years, the chances of Abrams & co being involved with it start dropping. It gets higher if it's done within the next three to five years, IMO.
If it doesn't ride the coattails of Abrams success, then the odds of it happening at all drop considerably. CBS has no overwhelming motive to bother with Star Trek. The movies are our best window of opoortunity, and at least they are pretty consistent with the past. A future series unconnected to Abrams might just reboot the thing entirely and we'll end up with something awful.
Such a series won't be necessarily awful. A total reboot may really be the next step for Trek once the Abrams era ends.
^
Quite so. Given Abrams has gone back to Basics - Kirk, Spock, Enterprise - a TV series made sometime after his film trilogy that does the same thing might feel natural. A TV show made now, well, the issue would arise what relationship, if any, it has to the Abrams franchise (a Worf series obviously little, an animated series with the film characters a lot).
Quite so. Given Abrams has gone back to Basics - Kirk, Spock, Enterprise - a TV series made sometime after his film trilogy that does the same thing might feel natural. A TV show made now, well, the issue would arise what relationship, if any, it has to the Abrams franchise (a Worf series obviously little, an animated series with the film characters a lot).
I think the future of Deep Space Nine will tell us whether we get a Trek TV series in the next five years or so. If CBS decides to give the series an HD treatment like TNG, I think it'll be unlikely we see a new series while the restoration process is ongoing.
If CBS is making good money with little investment, they'll likely see no reason to dump a ton of cash into an unknown.
If CBS is making good money with little investment, they'll likely see no reason to dump a ton of cash into an unknown.
Sure, it could be great. (I should have said we might end up with somethng awful.) Imagine if Showtime reimagined Star Trek as somethng more emotionally real and adult, along the line of Game of Thrones.
But if Showtime wants to dabble in genre fare, they're more likely to go for a more marketable category - high fantasy, supernatural cop show, supernatural horror - rather than space opera.
That's the last thing CBS would do now. The Abrams reboot is too high profile and to reboot Kirk, Spock, etc all over again would turn the advantage of the movie's success into a detriment, by confusing the audience. They'd have to wait till the movies are pretty well forgotten but then, why bother with Star Trek at all?
More likely, they'd make a grownup drama for Showtime or a young female centric drama for CW, with all or mostly new characters. And either of those channels would demand a very different appoach than we've seen in the movies or on TV. Abrams didnt really reboot the franchise because it still has the same feel, but that wouldn't necessarily be the case for a new series.
That argument still makes no sense. Just because one facet of Star Trek is easy money does not preclude CBS also investing in something that's less easy. They do it all the time, when they launch a new series that has no established fanbase, such as this year's Vegas.
So if they're willing to do things that aren't easy money in general, why would the name Star Trek turn them off? A new series would be synergistic with the older series, helping promote each other.
If they're putting effort into promoting other series, then why not ride those coattails, too, with a new series? The more Star Trek's profile is raised, by re-releases, movies, etc, the better the environment is for a new series. But waiting till all the hooplah dies down is a terrible strategy because then you have to build all the PR up from zero.
Last edited:
Sure it makes sense. They won't want remastered Trek competing with new Trek for syndication, streaming and home video dollars.
CBS likely knows that the Trek glut of the late 90's contributed to the franchise downfall in the early 2000's.
I doubt that Trek will ever wind up on Showtime and become something exclusively for adults. If anything, I think the goal will be to reach for more people rather than fewer, so a new Trek will probably skew younger, while still having something for all audiences. That doesn't mean a new Trek series can't explore serious themes and storylines, but I don't believe we'll ever see a "TV-MA" Trek series.
In fact, I really believe the next Trek series will be an animated one aimed at kids myself with a toyline and other related merchandise fully behind it.
Yeah that really seems to be more wish fulfilment than anything else. I can't see Star Trek rating itself more mature than Battlestar Galactica, and would think it would skew the other way. Temis floats the idea of Star Trek on Showtime so often you'd think an edgy cable drama is the most likely way Star Trek is coming back.
It's certainly possible, and it's one of the few ideas one can organically fit into the Abrams franchise.
You're assuming the competition aspect outweights the synergistic aspect, which I'm not assuming at all. Product lines within a single brand can be used strategically to support the whole brand line, not cannibalize it, if someone puts some thought into it.
The population of potential new viewers for Star Trek is much larger than existing fans, especially when you think about it globally. But will people who are unfamiliar with Star Trek (except for Abrams movies maybe) want to see "old stuff" that has the stigma of being old? Maybe a new show would appeal to them, and then they discover the old stuff - a nice pathway to creating a whole new audience.
And even if CBS ascribes to the glut theory of Star Trek (has anyone ever officially said they believe that?), the glut has long since dissapated away. It's more of a starvation situation now.
I wish I did, I'd tell them to stop frakking up Dexter.
But I mention it just because CBS owns it, and I shudder in horror at the show going to the CW instead. But my current theory is that the next series will be on Netflix, not Showtime. I think premium cable is too snobbish for a space opera show that is associated with free TV.That's probably the most likely scenario of all, and if it's like The Clone Wars in terms of appealing to all ages, I can get behind it, but I'd much rather see a live action show on Netflix or anywhere really.
What rock are you living under? I have access to seven-hundred hours of Trek at my fingertips.
If there is a new live-action Trek, my money is that it'll be on CBS. Trek has proven time and again that a wide range of age groups watch it. Why eliminate potential viewers by turning Trek into something it's not?
Just speaking for myself, I really don't give a shit about these remastered shows, and find them rather pointless. However, if a new series came along, I would certainly watch it. And if I enjoyed it, I would buy DVDs and other merchandise.
I'm not sure if that's how the majority feels, but I'm guessing that these remastered series are pretty niche.
TNG season one apparently sold very well, even without a standard DVD release done.
What rock are you living under? I have access to seven-hundred hours of Trek at my fingertips.
If there is a new live-action Trek, my money is that it'll be on CBS. Trek has proven time and again that a wide range of age groups watch it. Why eliminate potential viewers by turning Trek into something it's not?
I'm living under the I-want-to-watch-something-NEW rock that I've always live under.
I do have TOS and DS9 queued up on Netflix streaming right now, as well as Lost and Farscape. But I can't motivate myself to watch any of them yet, because I have an extremely strong preference for new stuff and only rarely will rewarch anything I've already seen. After the first time, 90% of the fun is gone.Shows are not made for "all age groups." They are made for the groups that ads are sold for, usually the 18-49 demo. The trend in TV is to be even more targetted, and networks will always prefer to program for their own audience, since they are by far the easiest to market new shows to.
CBS doesn't make anything close to a full range of show types. Look at what the other networks are developing and compare it to CBS. CBS has the most boring-ass development of any network, nothing but cop shows and sitcoms. NBC may fall on its face all the time, but at least its willing to branch out occasionally with something like Smash. Even Revolution would be too out there for CBS.
Add to that the much higher standards CBS has for success. Any show that gets much under 10m audience is a failure on CBS, but a hit on NBC. With ENT getting 3-4m or so, even if it were 3x as popular, it would still be skating on thin ice on CBS. What is the point of reviving the franchise just to put it someplace where it probably can't survive regardless of how good it is?
The last thing we need is another failure on TV. I want a new show to be given the most favorable environment possible. CBS is poison. But 3-4m on cable could be a perfectly comfortable level of success. Netflix's expectations are hard to judge since they've just started doing original content but it's probably similar to other subscription based services.
If NBC or FOX held the rights to Star Trek, I'd leave open some hope of a return to broadcast. NBC is desperate for anything and FOX has a young male demo skew that is right for the franchise. But CBS couldn't be more wrong.
Personally, I'd like to see an Adult Swim treatment (animated, low-fi, and edgy) but then that's what I'm trying to do myself anyway.
Similar threads
