What's Trek gonna do...

[TerraNovan]

You can't keep playing up the Trek 90210 angle with a movie ever 4 years.

Since I don't see the "Trek 90210" angle, I think they'll be okay for the foreseeable future.

What else could one assume, if the writers have highly successful and intelligent people having social lives.

Seriously though, who knows there are no rules saying they cant release a movie every 6 or 4 months.

If it can been done at a low cost, and can maintain a loyal fanbase(entirely possible considering the span of trek), it might be how movies are made in the future.

Things are always in flux, I doubt anyone 20 years ago could of predicted that a season with 13 episodes would be consider long.

 

[urbandefault]

Yeah this trek-on-TV drought has gone on way too long ...

I take it you don't remember 1969-1987?

That, my friend, is a drought.

 

[TerraNovan]

Yeah this trek-on-TV drought has gone on way too long ...

I take it you don't remember 1969-1987?

That, my friend, is a drought.

You say that like it was an exceptionally long time.

When you count The animated series, it would only 74 to 87.

Which means its 13 versus 9.

I know many of you wont compare enterprise to TAS, but I think more of us would

 

[urbandefault]

Yeah this trek-on-TV drought has gone on way too long ...

I take it you don't remember 1969-1987?

That, my friend, is a drought.

You say that like it was an exceptionally long time.

When you count The animated series, it would only 74 to 87.

Which means its 13 versus 9.

I know many of you wont compare enterprise to TAS, but I think more of us would

Ok, smart guy. Talk to me about a drought when it's been 13 years instead of 17+ for new Trek TV. I bet this will be a longer drought than last time. Can you spell CBS?

 

[BillJ]

Ok, smart guy. Talk to me about a drought when it's been 13 years instead of 17+ for new Trek TV. I bet this will be a longer drought than last time. Can you spell CBS?

I tend to think there won't be a series for the foreseeable future. The conditions are just much different. In 1987, we had seventy-nine live action episodes and four movies (available either via rabbit ears or video tape). Now, we have seven hundred episodes, with half available in HD, and twelve movies (readily available anytime one wants).

Anyone who is expecting a new series is going to be disappointed due to the oversaturation of the franchise in the 1990's.

 

[BigJake]

Okay, I'm gonna say it. The thread title just makes me want to say:

"What's Trek gonna do... when Hulkamania runs wild on YOU?!!"

There. Got it out of my system, thanks everyone.

 

[Melakon]

I don't know if CBS will even want to make a new series. They turned Roddenberry down when approached with the idea first, and went for Lost in Space instead.

 

[Disco]

I take it you don't remember 1969-1987?

That, my friend, is a drought.

You say that like it was an exceptionally long time.

When you count The animated series, it would only 74 to 87.

Which means its 13 versus 9.

I know many of you wont compare enterprise to TAS, but I think more of us would

Ok, smart guy. Talk to me about a drought when it's been 13 years instead of 17+ for new Trek TV. I bet this will be a longer drought than last time. Can you spell CBS?

See-Bah-Esh?

 

[TerraNovan]

I don't know if CBS will even want to make a new series. They turned Roddenberry down when approached with the idea first, and went for Lost in Space instead.

That was several billion dollars ago.

Im quite certain their viewpoint has changed.


Its a golden age for upper tier television. Everyone and their dog wants a competitor to Game of thrones. At the very latest I think Star trek, will take over on HBO after GoT runs it course.

However Im going with the theory that Ronald d moore, and seth macfarlane will work out a picard series together.

 

[tharpdevenport]

Why does Trek have to do anything?


Let the other franchises do what they are doing. I'd gladly wait another ten years if it meant a well written, good Trek show came out. I'd rather not crank one out just to compete or keep Trek in the mind's eye.


Trek survived a long time with just TOS.

 

[TerraNovan]

Why does Trek have to do anything?


Let the other franchises do what they are doing. I'd gladly wait another ten years if it meant a well written, good Trek show came out. I'd rather not crank one out just to compete or keep Trek in the mind's eye.


Trek survived a long time with just TOS.

no one has to do anything.


All I can ask is why are you posting on these topics if you have no interest in the topic.


Aside from being a fan which is what this site is about. I think many see right now as the prime time to bring it back to television.

The business for a niche genre like trek is prime.

Game of thrones type programs, are showing what can be done. That is large cast, serialized arcs, large budget, accessible and yet not in your average setting.

Not to mention that it could actually cause star trek to loose ground.

Too many forget that for a time BSG, Star trek, and Stargate were all competing for the audience, I think a similar scenario is just around the corner.

A new era in Space based fiction is just around the corner.

 

[BillJ]

All I can ask is why are you posting on these topics if you have no interest in the topic.

Why not? Are we not allowed to post our opinions if they conflict with the general feelings on a subject?

Aside from being a fan which is what this site is about. I think many see right now as the prime time to bring it back to television.

If CBS doesn't see this as a prime time to bring Trek back, it doesn't matter how many other people think it is.

A new era in Space based fiction is just around the corner.

It won't happen until people are actually excited about space again. We find proof of other worlds with life, we send people to Mars, then that's when the public will take notice and the time will be ripe for a new space exploration series (not necessarily Star Trek).

 

[USS Triumphant]

As much as I would love it if Trek would suddenly whip out with a complete interlocking group of movies and TV series ala what Marvel/Disney have been doing, I don't see any signs of that actually happening. I feel like we'll be lucky if CBS/Paramount do ANYTHING even slightly cool for Trek's anniversary.

That said, I also want to mention that every time I see the name of this thread in the "Future of Trek" list, it makes me think of Hulk Hogan saying, "What's Trek gonna do when the New World Order runs wild on you?!" Which is kinda strange, since I didn't even watch wrestling during that era of Hogan-as-heel - I stopped watching WWF right around the time we could no longer say our prayers, eat our vegetables, and be good little Hulkamaniacs.

 

[TerraNovan]

All I can ask is why are you posting on these topics if you have no interest in the topic.

Why not? Are we not allowed to post our opinions if they conflict with the general feelings on a subject?

).

Sounds like trolling to me, honestly like text book trolling. Its not just an opinion on a topic, but the entire point of the sub board.

[

Aside from being a fan which is what this site is about. I think many see right now as the prime time to bring it back to television.

If CBS doesn't see this as a prime time to bring Trek back, it doesn't matter how many other people think it is.
).

This nefarious CBS really gets old, many of the people that shut down TOS, are quite literally dead by now. You can blame all you want. Yet rarely have they had a direct hand in any of the major problems.

[

A new era in Space based fiction is just around the corner.

It won't happen until people are actually excited about space again. We find proof of other worlds with life, we send people to Mars, then that's when the public will take notice and the time will be ripe for a new space exploration series (not necessarily Star Trek).

Meh that's the part I think is so semantical

Nobody wants to see a television series of people just floating around in space staring at stars.

Star trek is such a massive thing.

People want action, they want danger, they want real people dealing with big ideas, they want exploration of the human, they want to learn, they want to feel they have experienced a new idea. They want escape.

Its all pretty universal which is why star trek is so much more popular than many trekkies wanna believe.


What people don't want is, cheesiness, bad character writing, distracting special effects, or anything else that will taint what star trek has to offer.

 

[BillJ]

This nefarious CBS really gets old, many of the people that shut down TOS, are quite literally dead by now. You can blame all you want. Yet rarely have they had a direct hand in any of the major problems.

What the Hell are you talking about? CBS had nothing to do with the cancellation of TOS. TOS was produced by Desilu/Paramount and aired by NBC. NBC cancelled the show in 1969.

CBS is the current rights holder (due to a corporate split of Viacom) and was the entity that cancelled Star Trek: Enterprise. Les Moonves, the head of CBS when the show was cancelled and is still the head of the company, isn't much of a fan of science fiction. I simply don't expect a new show to be made while Moonves is in charge of CBS.

 

[urbandefault]

All I can ask is why are you posting on these topics if you have no interest in the topic.

Why not? Are we not allowed to post our opinions if they conflict with the general feelings on a subject?

).

Sounds like trolling to me, honestly like text book trolling. Its not just an opinion on a topic, but the entire point of the sub board.



This nefarious CBS really gets old, many of the people that shut down TOS, are quite literally dead by now. You can blame all you want. Yet rarely have they had a direct hand in any of the major problems.

[

A new era in Space based fiction is just around the corner.

It won't happen until people are actually excited about space again. We find proof of other worlds with life, we send people to Mars, then that's when the public will take notice and the time will be ripe for a new space exploration series (not necessarily Star Trek).

Meh that's the part I think is so semantical

Nobody wants to see a television series of people just floating around in space staring at stars.

Star trek is such a massive thing.

People want action, they want danger, they want real people dealing with big ideas, they want exploration of the human, they want to learn, they want to feel they have experienced a new idea. They want escape.

Its all pretty universal which is why star trek is so much more popular than many trekkies wanna believe.


What people don't want is, cheesiness, bad character writing, distracting special effects, or anything else that will taint what star trek has to offer.

Les Moonves is still alive, still running CBS, and has said at least once that he's not interested in putting Trek on TV.

If something's changed his mind, I'd like to read about it.

 

[TerraNovan]

This nefarious CBS really gets old, many of the people that shut down TOS, are quite literally dead by now. You can blame all you want. Yet rarely have they had a direct hand in any of the major problems.

What the Hell are you talking about? CBS had nothing to do with the cancellation of TOS. TOS was produced by Desilu/Paramount and aired by NBC. NBC cancelled the show in 1969.

CBS is the current rights holder (due to a corporate split of Viacom) and was the entity that cancelled Star Trek: Enterprise. Les Moonves, the head of CBS when the show was cancelled and is still the head of the company, isn't much of a fan of science fiction. I simply don't expect a new show to be made while Moonves is in charge of CBS.

Alright my mistake,

but isn't it obvious that Enterprise deserved to be cancelled.

 

[BillJ]

but isn't it obvious that Enterprise deserved to be cancelled.

But what is CBS incentive to green-light another Trek series? The last one was averaging less than two million viewers a week when it was cancelled. What has changed in ten years that tells CBS that investing in new TV Trek is a financially sound decision?

There is seven-hundred hours of Trek now. It isn't like we're still living off the original seventy-nine episode from the 1966-69 run.

 

[Squiggy]

Alright my mistake,

but isn't it obvious that Enterprise deserved to be cancelled.

Um...yes?

 

[Hober Mallow]

Paramount's attitude in the 90s seemed to be that you could throw any old crew onto any old ship and call it Star Trek and the fans will eat it up. Well, we stopped doing that. If CBS has taken that lesson to heart, has learned to be cautious, that fans won't watch anything with the name Star Trek in it, then I'm glad.