‘Star Trek: Strange New Worlds’ Renewed for Fifth and Final Season

[eschaton]

Fun fact: there's no minimum age for joining AARP and you can be eligible before you hit 50.

Okay. A better way to put it is the median age of CBS viewers is 68.

People aren't aging into becoming linear TV viewers, either. Millenials are fully in early middle age now, and still mostly stick to streaming.

 

[fireproof78]

Okay. A better way to put it is the median age of CBS viewers is 68.

People aren't aging into becoming linear TV viewers, either. Millenials are fully in early middle age now, and still mostly stick to streaming.

It's funny to observe because my parents gave up on terrestrial twenty years ago. I only streak because I don't have time for anything else.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

It's funny to observe because my parents gave up on terrestrial twenty years ago. I only streak because I don't have time for anything else.

 

[fireproof78]

That was exactly my look.

Of course, I have been told I have a face for radio too.

 

[Ssosmcin]

So 26 more episodes? Well, they can plan it out so they can have a satisfying conclusion wit this notice, which is great. And 26 episode is like an Old School single season...maybe split the filming in two, get them done so they can air more quickly rather than having years between seasons. Just a pipe dream, I know.

And if they approached this thing like an old school "Star Trek" show - in other words fewer budget busting show stopping effects sequences and more bottle shows and whatnot - they could knock the cost down a bit. But these genre shows seem to want to compete with features. Why would anyone want to see a Star Trek movie when there are theater quality effects on streaming? Fewer effects didn't hurt TOS and TNG much. The draw was always the writing and characters, not the pew pew.

 

[fireproof78]

Fewer effects definitely sold TMP...


Star Trek has been doing "pew pew" since TWOK. It's an arms race of effects vs. Star Wars then Marvel. When the production teams feel like they are not competing for audience attention they'll do less effects. But, right now, what's showing the most money?

 

[FederationHistorian]

I’m surprised not 47. Though maybe the plan is 46 episodes and a Long Trek.

In any case, those are likely going to be some long episodes to make up for the shortened episode order.

I find it interesting the precedence this six-episode order setting. There could be Trek miniseries in the future that only get six episodes. On one hand, we know some arcs go far too long (a complaint DIS dealt with), so being limited to six might tighten up mystery box stories. OTOH, after the S31 movie, it’s clear that some stories just need more runway, so to speak. A lot more than the 95 minutes S31 was given.

It opens up a lot of interesting storytelling avenues for the franchise.

If they are smart they will follow up SNW with the Kirk show, but aired on CBS, so we get a full length season.

If Star Trek ever ends up on network tv again, they’ll likely be limited to 12 episodes a season, with the episodes being burned off either midseason, or over summer.

26 episode seasons seem to be over. That's a pre-2017 thing. Even procedurals are averaging 20 episodes now.

 

[Uhura's Song]

1. Discovery - Canceled, but ran a fairly robust five seasons

2. Lower Decks - Canceled, but ran a fairly robust five seasons

3. Picard - Ended at three seasons, as was planned

4. Strange New Worlds - “Canceled”, but given a fifth season to wrap; another case of a fairly robust five seasons, and hard to really say whether it’s ending prematurely save for the fact that the final season will have its length clipped

5. Prodigy - Canceled, and definitely a failed project relative to its aims

6. Starfleet Academy - Still to come; planned for at least two seasons, but obviously, no way of knowing anything save for the extreme likelihood that we see its first, and the fair likelihood that we see its second

My point in all of this is, simply, that I don’t think Star Trek is in total trouble. There’s so much up in the air with the Skydance deal not yet having closed, and so much more that’ll be a big question mark if and when they’re in charge.

What I do think - and this is, of course, self-evident - is that there will be far less Star Trek on our screens in the years to come than there were for a few glorious years back there. There’s no reason to think things will get that good again in the remotely foreseeable future. But, crucially, nor am I quite so certain that it’s all coming to a close. A single ongoing show - that might be the norm again. And it could last for years and years to come.

Or not! Who knows. I’m in the “cautiously optimistic that it won’t go away completely” phase at this point.

Prodigy was all kinds of awesome.

I get what you are fetting at, but if the aim was to tell a good story iver 2 seasons, they succeeded wildly.

Was original Trek also a failure?

 

[Noname Given]

Was original Trek also a failure?

On its original NBC network run. yes.

Its viewership EXPLODED in the major TV markets when it went into syndication.

 

[Turtletrekker]

. Just

On its original NBC network run. yes.

Its viewership EXPLODED in the major TV markets when it went into syndication.

And I seem to recall reading that there are indications that the actual viewership of Star Trek went well beyond what was then the very narrowly cast net of Nielsen viewers.

 

[Noname Given]

. Just

And I seem to recall reading that there are indications that the actual viewership of Star Trek went well beyond what was then the very narrowly cast net of Nielsen viewers.

Well, it was canceled at the time Nielson was starting to track viewer demographics anf while overall it was low rated - for its timeslot it was a top rated show with the 18-34 age group.

Reports are mixed as to whether NBC had access to the demographics from Nielsen when they decided to cancel TOS after S3.

 

[Dar70]

It made more sense when 5 Trek shows were being made concurrently. Very little breaks between shows. Now it's completely different.

Well since I only like the live action stuff it was only Picard , Discovery and SNW. But still it was only 30 episodes total in a 12 or 18 months period. If even that. So it did not feel overkill to me. I mean guess that is ok but not enough to flesh out characters imo. Look at how some of Discos cast barely got any development. (The bridge crew) Snw does a better job.

A season is what ever the folks in charge say it is.

Yeah I know. But I'm just measuring it up to past shows. Even Disco will have more eps. Tbf I don't like that most Steaming shows do this. They rarely go beyond 5 seasons and it can take up to two years for a batch of episodes. At which point I have completely forgot some of the story arcs and have to rewatch. I'm at the point in life where I don't want to be watching 10-12 different TV mini series a year or so and than have to rewatch because I totally forgot the plot. I'm starting to watch old shows I missed now. Shows that had a ton of seasons. I'm moving away from new streaming shows. Just wish ST did not go to streaming only. Oh well...

 

[Uhura's Song]

Counting 2 parters as 2, no matter how they aired, and counting The Cage as an episode:

TOS: 80 (+6 movies)
TAS: 22
--------102 Total--------
TNG: 178 (+4 movies)
DS9: 176
VOY: 172
ENT: 98
------624 total----------
Kelvin: 3 movies
DISCO: 65 (+ 1 TV movie offshoot)
ST: 10
PIC: 30
LD: 50
PRO: 40
SNW: 46
----------241 total--------

TV: 102 + 624 + 241 = 967
Movies: 6 + 4 + 3 + 1 = 14.
------------
981. Looks like Academy S2 will put them over 1,000 entries. Someone check my math.

 

[Quinton]

Prodigy was all kinds of awesome.

I get what you are fetting at, but if the aim was to tell a good story iver 2 seasons, they succeeded wildly.

Was original Trek also a failure?

Sorry, I understand. I didn’t mean to insinuate any qualitative judgment toward it. I enjoy Prodigy, too.