Because it could cost them money they may not recoup, seems like a sound business decision. Isn't Discovery IN the Prime Universe...? Aesthetics aside... Paramount holds the film rights, I believe. I don't think CBS had a choice in that matter. A certain fan film basically tried to start a FOR profit business, ie, a studio, using IP that didn't belong to them to raise the funds. And then dared CBS to create guidelines. Which CBS did. The developer is claiming they stole it. Studios get sued often for "stealing" ideas. Reading about the case, the claim seems tenuous. It's easy and comforting to make a big corporation the villain, but, they are in their legal right to do as they please with their IP, just as you would be free to do with yours. Copyright is there to protect the owner of said copyright.
1: Remastering DS9 would be enormously expensive and would not currently recoup the investment. Star Trek is not a charity. 2: Speak for yourself. Discovery is a good show, and I like it. Just restarted my CBSAA membership 3: CBS didn't make the mainly very good Abrams movies, Paramount did. Did you really think this through before hitting the rant button? 4: CBS shut down ONE fan production for reasons that should be clear to anyone with eyes and a nervous system. There are probably trilobites hidden in unknown seas that could comprehend that. They then issued guidelines for what they would allow from fan productions. 5: That's your opinion. There are multiple views, and I'll just let the legal process handle that. 5: Totally extra five that I typed so I left it on here and edited this to say so.
A couple of observations that rolled through my mind on this: One: Where is the market for remastering DS9? Is it worth the cost to them or is it just fan wishing that doesn't account for the cost of such things? Two: CBS knows that the broader audience associates Star Trek with Kirk and Spock, and spun it thusly. Fewer and fewer people I encounter, younger than I, know Star Trek aside from occasional jokes on Big Bang. The market is slanted towards TOS era and has been for a long time. Also, if fans didn't like it so much then it wouldn't be continuing. Companies do not throw money after failing products. Three: Those "awful" Abrams films made more money than any Trek film before it. So, it was so awful that Star Trek fans (those people who need to send a "message" to CBS) sent the message that they enjoyed that type of film. Four: A fan film production pushed the limits and infringed upon their IP and made money off of it. Not ok, and CBS is protecting their property. That's reasonable. Oh, and fan produced games do not fall under such guidelines. CBS has an active license with a game studio and would want to protect that relationship. Again, that's business. Others have addressed the spurious lawsuit that is debatable in terms of being actionable. Overall, "the fans" are not a monolithic mass who know what they want. People want different things from Star Trek, as demonstrated by the wide variety of shows, films and fan productions made over the years. By the way, the same fan films have produced far darker, war themed works akin to Discovery, yet Discovery is decried as "too dark" despite fans favorites such as Axanar (war with Klingons), Renegades (Section 31, more war), Pacific 201 (more war), among others. But, CBS should cater to a very small audience and risk losing money. That's why they are in business.
Yeah, insulting CBS for doing business savvy decisions such as not remastering DS9 is pointless, even if we fans would love that, there's just not enough market and it's a really expensive project. Steering the thread a bit closer to its original topic, here's a short interview our very own composer, Patrick Phillips, did with project lead Rob Bryan (aka Scragnog). To once again reiterate, we respect CBS's decision, even if we're hoping that they'll reconsider it in any way in the future.
I had a chance to try the last VR version of this amazing simulator on a friends HTC Vive. It was incredible. I could feel a smile the entire time. The pc version seems improved a bit visually, but it's apples and oranges to compare it to the VR experience. I don't own a VIVE but if this had come to full fruition not only would I have gladly paid CBS for it, but also would have bought a full Vive system just to experience it. It's that much fun. There is a petition on change.org It's close to the goal number of petitioners. https://www.change.org/p/cbs-save-s...creation-14f92184-6f8c-4390-b016-e1a2850460bb
This. Does. Not. Matter. Being non-profit is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. How does forcing people to come up with their own shit stifle creativity? Doesn't really take a Picasso to take something else that's insanely popular and make more of it.
If DS9 isn't remastered, it will be lost due to the whole show becoming unwatchable on future TV sets. The DVDs are already borderline unwatchable on a large screen HD set. Where is the business sense in throwing 7 seasons down the toilet for the sake of $20m? STD costs $9m per episode. Far more people watched DS9 back in the day than have watched STD or will ever watch it, but CBS continues to throw money at that. Yes, the market for Star Trek is dying. Has been for a while as the people who were teenagers and 20 somethings in the 60s begin to fall off their perch. People like me who, as teenagers, grew up with TNG and later DS9, seem, on the whole, to not much like the Abrams movies or STD. Of course they do. It's called saving face. CBS have also just sent almost the entire STD main cast to go Destination Star Trek (a CBS official Trek con) in the UK later this month, despite there having been almost no ticket sales for Jason Isaacs, Mary Chieffo, Jayne Brook, and Kenneth Marshall, all of whom were announced 9 months ago. Strikes me that CBS are desperate to drum up some level of support for the show, although at the prices being charged, that's already not happening. When you compare the actual profits made by the Abrams films which had grossly larger budgets than the TOS and TNG crew movies, I think you'll find your statement doesn't hold up. At all. Beyond also lost an absolute shit load. Well, that's for the judge to decide. People want good, well written, well acted Star Trek. That worked well enough when they were getting it ie TOS, TNG, DS9, and although I never much cared for it, the female fans mostly loved Voyager. No one complained. Most of the people who complain about STD don't have a problem with it being dark. DS9 was dark. STD is just badly written, badly acted, badly executed, lazy, boring, left wing virtue signalling, unwatchable dross with "Star Trek" put on it. The Star Trek fan base is very small, and steadily decreasing. CBS don't seem to have a problem with that. Well, I suppose they do know.
Is there numeric evidence of such claims? Where is the business in throwing money at something for it to not sell? If, as you claim below, the market for Star Trek is dying, then it makes little financial sense to throw money at the past, rather than attempting to find a new niche. Again, where's the evidence? I grew up in the era of TNG and the like but hardly cared for it. I prefer TOS and certainly prefer the Abrams films over the TNG films, or VOY or ENT for that matter. If Discovery is truly failing (a claim I doubt) then CBS will simply cancel it and shelve Star Trek. I have looked at it, and Trek 09 did very well financially, as Star Trek Into Darkness. But, obviously they are a failure because one film did poorly "No one complained" I must have been in different circles than you. People that I knew complained about Picard, complained that he wasn't Kirk, complained that DS9 was too dark, and on and on and on. I've heard it all before with vast majority of Trek shows and Discovery is not exception. The rest is your opinion on Discovery, as I am hardly bored by it, am right of center politically, and still watch it. And yes, many of the complaints I have read is that Discovery is "too dark" both literally (as in lighting) and figuratively, as in no Star Trek optimism. Yes, they do know. They are not dumb, no matter what parts of the fan base think. They are in a business and they want to grow their market share. They have contacts with video game developers which means they are obligated to protect their IP and their market share. They are going to want to expand this market and not keep feeding in to a steadily dwindling original fan base with diminishing returns. That's poor business at its worst and if Discovery is cancelled, then that doesn't automatically mean CBS is going to make the Star Trek that "the fans" (whomever that might be) want, but will simply shelve it and move on to other projects.
As someone who grew up with TNG, I couldn't disagree more. The Abrams films were lightyears more entertaining than any of the TNG films. Hell I didn't even like Into Darkness that much, but if i had to choose between it and one the next gen films, i'd choose Into Darkness. Also I love Discovery, it had the best first season of any trek series, since TOS. Yeah because Star Trek has been so right-wing up until now.
It doesn't matter if no one wants to pay the money to see it. It hasn't aired in the United States in over a decade and a half. There's no demand, and there was barely enough demand to get TNG done. If the money is there, they'll do it. If there isn't money to be made, they won't. Yay capitalism. I've got some bad news for you. You're going to want to sit down for this. That show that's been about people from different cultures getting together in a spirit of peace and harmony for the purpose of scientific advancement in a post-scarsity society where need and want have been eliminated and the accumulation of wealth is no longer the driving point of humanity is Star Trek.
How do you define "unwatchable?" Just curious. I see people using that word a lot, and always wonder what they mean. Specifically.