Canada is 1/10th the population of the United States. There isn't enough demand to make money from it since they didn't even make money from TNG.
Maybe this is a regional thing. In my area on the US west coast, even grocery stores have blu-ray in their movie sections. Kor
In my area there are only a handful of brick-and-mortar stores left, but they all have enormous Blu-Ray displays in the front of the store and plenty of media in both formats, and even 4K UHD, in the regular racks. 3D was a failure because it required an additional piece of hardware that needed to be charged, prevented you from doing anything else while watching and isolated you from the person or people sitting next to you. It was also damaged by the negative impression a lot of people have of theatrical 3D and the way the industry immediately started doing shitty post-conversions of movies. 3D has been tried numerous times and never been successful either theatrically or on home video. I'm kinda surprised the current theatrical trend has lasted as long as it has, to be honest. 4K is actually experiencing a growth curve very similar to HD in its first few years. Because streaming providers are providing substantial content and even cable companies are starting to get on-board growth is expected to be solid. Unlike 3D, the manufacturers are solidly behind UHD, making sets for every price level. UHD disks are never going to be more than a niche market. Unlike Blu-Ray, the majority of UHD content is available streaming (at notably lower quality) as well as on physical media, and in many cases is hitting streaming months before the physical release.
With x265 (HEVC) encoding, streaming decent 4K is absolutely currently practical on a connection as low as 20mb/sec.. A lot of people have access to that. It's reached a level of 'watchable' quality much faster than HD streaming did.
Or so they say. At 20-30 Mbps, it is garbage 4K. The X265 is like VHS at SP for 4K. It's decent for the average person, but garbage when compared to the original master. How do you know that CBS didn't make money from TNG? Their last statement was over 4 years ago. You're going by ancient knowledge. Also, as I saw in the most recent issue of Consumer Reports more and more Americans are ditching cable/satellite and are going with online streaming services such as CBS Access (and other network streams), Roku, iTunes, and Amazon and DVD for their TV. So even though traditional TV isn't airing it, doesn't mean that it's not in demand.
Because if Remastered TNG was so profitable, they would have immediately jumped on Remastering DS9. They didn't. Hence why four years later instead of Blue Rays we only get reissues on the same DVDs.
Because... There ya go. They had TNG completed in 4 years. You think they're going to spring a surprise on us? If it made money, they would said they made money and would continue to make money by doing the same thing. This is 21st century Hollywood, they beat ideas to death and then reboot. Also, as I saw in the most recent issue of Consumer Reports more and more Americans are ditching cable/satellite and are going with online streaming services such as CBS Access (and other network streams), Roku, iTunes, and Amazon and DVD for their TV. So even though traditional TV isn't airing it, doesn't mean that it's not in demand.[/QUOTE] No - it just means there's not enough demand to put it on a third their cable network that is already airing TOS, TNG, and Voyager (for some reason). Here's the ratings for Beman-Trek. If that blue line didn't make enough money to even warrant a "hey, we did good job" press release, please tell me logically why anything else would get any attention at all ESPECIALLY if it would cost more to do and take more time? All these backflips about "well, they haven't said they WON'T" have been going on for years. You might as well be holding out for a DS9 reunion movie.
CBS sure didn't jump on TNG when TOS was finished in 2008. It took them 41 months (September 2011) to issue announce TNG's Remaster from when "The Cage" wrapped in April 2008. Assuming that production on "All Good Things wrapped in October 2014 (the Blu Ray hit store in December 2014), its only been 33 months (in July 2017).
What if instead of whole series they did just select episodes and put them all together? Maybe do a top 10 list of everyone's favorite episodes and see how it sale's? Jason
I wouldn't read too much into that. It took a long time to determine if they even had all the materials (film elements) required to make the job possible.
I'm sure I've said this before, but for me the problem with this is a) everyone's favorite episodes are likely to include mid-arc episodes which wouldn't sell well with those unfamiliar with the series (and does anyone want a top 10 list of standalone episode only?), and b) if I knew they were releasing this I might be inclined to hold out for something better (the specific episodes could be a factor) unless I was led to believe that buying this was likely the only way something better stood a chance of happening.
If I had to pick 10 I think the best way to do it would be the 6 episode war arc at the start of season 6 and then 4 of your most iconic episodes which would be Duet, Pale Moonlight, and both the pilot and series final, Trials and Tribbleations and Far Beyond the Stars. I know people might like other episodes better and I know I got some I would put over these but I think this list would best cover the most famous high points of the show. Also it's 12 instead of 10 but I think it would work. Jason
Yeah. If there were to be a taster disc along the lines of TNG's, I'd pick Emissary and Way of the Warrior - the pilot and what was essentially the second pilot. But it doesn't really satisfy anyone, and it's unlikely to be affordable unless it was scaled as part of a larger project. Just remastering 1 or 10 episodes probably isn't much cheaper than doing 26 after startup costs are taken into account.
Outside of the premiere...barely. Towards the end the ratings were as high as early ENT. Every season had fewer viewers than the season before. It's dead.
What's worse? A ten point drop or a five point drop? Anyways, I've always heard it would be darn near impossible to do, and much more expensive than TNG. If it's ever done, airing numbers from 20 years ago won't be a large factor in marketability. Both shows seem to be growing in popularity, and there's a chance if Discovery is successful, someone will take up the cause.
The birth of the whole Trek franchise should teach us not to put much credence on original television ratings.