So what? Honestly a show wont sink on that issue. And Discovery more than makes up for the horror of having 3 white cast members. Seriously...people are making a big deal out of this BOTH ways. Who cares if no whites guys in it? Who cares if there is white guys! Either way it a small minority of people that will bitch and moan. All the majority of us want is good writing and fun episodes.
This post sounds more ironic than the actual show. How much of Discovery have you watched? Particularly of the second season? For that matter, did you watch any of the last three Short Treks? It doesn't sound like you have.
I don't like Serveaux either, but -- to be fair -- I think he's only playing Devil's Advocate. The entire purpose of this thread is for reasons why there shouldn't be a Pike Series. So these are all for the sake of argument. This isn't something to go after him for.
You're mistaken. I would encourage you to revisit Discovery. You seem to have missed the intent of the show.
I haven't missed anything. But it looks like we're in disagreement about the intent. Not the first time I've disagreed with someone and it won't be the last.
Bit late to the thread only just seen it. As some have already said a Pike/Enterprise film is one possibility, if they cant entice Pike into doing a series I bet they could entice him to do a film, whether that is straight to TV or released to the Cinemas remains to be seen. It would be a smaller workload for him to commit to and the pay would be better for it, not to mention it would enable them to write a story for a 2 hour film which does give them more leeway, especially as Pike and the other two main cast members are already established. I just doubt CBS would have the stones to try it as it is risky but if that is all they can get out of Mount they may go for it. If he enjoys it enough he could be enticed into another film or a series, the big question would be the script quality though, I got the feeling that much of the overarching plot in S2 of Discovery was a rejigged and stretched out film idea they found in the bin, the show worked best in the stand alone episodes when exploration was actually carried out or there was character development.
I guess if they really are bringing back Zachary Quinto to play Spock in Star Trek 4 version 2, wanting to keep Spock "special" and off TV until the movie hype is over with could be reason to hold off on a Pike series. Let's be honest, with how franchise movies not part of the MCU are doing right now, it's gonna need all the help it can get.
Or more accurately, franchises not owned by Disney, since Solo aside, Star Wars is still going strong, financially speaking.
I still think you can do arc-based storytelling, but that arc doesn't have to be at the forefront of every episode of the season. The Dominion War bounced back and forth from being the A story to the B story and sometimes it wasn't even mentioned at all, but, you knew it was going on in the background somewhere even if our main characters weren't participating in it at that specific moment. But on the whole, I am also very tired of series and seasonal arcs. A lot of shows are written to be binge-watched now and I truly HATE binge-watching. It feels like cramming for a test the night before having never once studied the material; you inhale all of it and remember next to nothing the next day. I made the mistake of binging The Walking Dead and Stranger Things and I wish I never did, because, I truly do not remember any of it and the stuff I do recall, I couldn't even tell you when in the series it happened.
How is that different from when TNG was on the air while two TOS movies were made? Or when ENT was on the air, Nemesis came out? Two cases of two "different" Enterprises.
They were actually different Enterprises. Abrams movies and a Pike TV show, would essentially be about the same Enterprise, even having some of the same characters, because you know the TV side couldn't resist bringing in TOS staples.
i’ve always thought the concern about audience cannibalism was overblown, but even more so now that they’ve confined the franchise to a backwater pay service in its primary market. Who’s ponying up for All Access Trek who isn’t going to pay to see a movie? They’re building a whole steaming service on our willingness to pay and pay. Considering All Access has a wafer-thin catalog outside of the Trek shows, the films could be a way to lure in new subscribers.
BTW, why does the low-hanging fruit stop at a Pike show and doesn’t go for something even safer such as a Kirk show before and after TOS? The canon Years 4 and 5 to rule them all? Year 0?
Because a Pike show has a cast that fandom has responded well to, whereas a Kirk show would have to cast new actors (assuming they aren't going for the Kelvin actors) who are more of a gamble.
If All Access remains viable long enough, we’ll probably get those too. I don’t think anything is off the table if they think it will make the ledgers look good.
The point is it makes more sense to roll the dice with the cast who is known to and liked by fandom than to gamble on someone new instead.
If Kirk were to turn up, I'd expect it to be a Short Trek about the Farragut dsaster. DSC is - or was, before the time jump - around the right time (2257). That would also have the advantage of being on a ship we know very little about, so they could cast anyone they want AS anyone they want (although of course the Captain would have to be named Garrovick ). That said, I have absolutely no idea who would, or could, play Lieutenant Kirk. He'd be in his mid-twenties, and I don't know anything about actors that young these days. Damn kids! *shakes cane and yells at the birds* Edit: Just thought of more Short Treks they could do with Kirk: * Kirk and Spock's first meeting. We have no idea when that happened, in the prime timeline. * Kirk takes over for Pike as Captain of the Enterprise. (who knows, those might actually be the same moment )