10 Things a New Trek Series Must Have

[CDR6]

Yeah, you guys are most likely correct. But it's beyond me to have a great show like Star Trek (pick your favorite incarnation) and then to just sit on it... Resting on one's laurels sort of thing. Star Trek is a proven money maker, (different amounts at different times to be sure) but always producing a profit of some sort...I'm not a risk adverse type, so my career at CBS would tank...rather quickly! Thanks for the info!

Regards,
Chuck

 

[peteym5]

I think what is going to be a big factor if a new series will happen is how well "Star Trek into Darkness" does in theaters. From the previews, critic reviews, and from what has leaked online, I would not be surprised in exceeds $300 million. Home video sales are usually considered irrelevant by the studio.

Now about Greenscreen / Virtual sets vs Real Sets. They probably will build real sets for the ship because that will just be a one time investment. Paramount still has a lot of set pieces from prior Star Trek shows in storage that can be re-assembled and re-dressed to look like a brand new series. That would be cheaper and faster for the scenes that take place on the ship. Plus its more believable when you see the actors touching the controls. When an Away-Team beams down to a planet or another ship, most likely Green/Blue Screen be used or be combined with real sets / on location shooting. All depending on the story.

Its a no brainer that all the external space ship shots be CGI unless they bring in an old fashion minded executive producer that wants to use models. However, even some of the modern Science Fiction productions use combinations of CGI, models, real footage of explosions, etc. Sometimes its easier to just go somewhere with a camera and film it.

As for what the Star Trek series needs. All 5 live action shows had a strong Captain at the center of everything. It needs a good, strong, charismatic, actor/actress to make it work. The first officer also has to be at near the level of the Captain, some may argue one of the reasons why Star Trek Voyager falling behind because Chakotay did not live up to Spock, Riker, or Kira.

 

[MacLeod]

I think what is going to be a big factor if a new series will happen is how well "Star Trek into Darkness" does in theaters. From the previews, critic reviews, and from what has leaked online, I would not be surprised in exceeds $300 million. Home video sales are usually considered irrelevant by the studio.

I think Paramount will be hoping for at least US$450-500m, saying the 2009 film did US$385.7m at the box office

 

[C.E. Evans]

Home video sales are usually considered irrelevant by the studio.

Don't you believe that. Home video sales are considered extremely important by the studio. Some blockbuster films (like Star Trek XI) can make over $100 million there alone, so it's no means irrelevant.
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2009/TRK11-DVD.php

 

[MacLeod]

Those figures might be only the US sales, if they are you've got to factor into a few million more from other territories.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Yeah, those figures are domestic only, so its overall home video take is a nice chunk of change.

 

[JiNX-01]

(Full disclosure: I wrote this article and posted the link here in hopes of getting critiques on it).

My only critique is that you did a fantastic job in enumerating the problems.

 

[Portal]

I would like to see a new Star Trek series with lots more non-humanoid aliens like the Daleks of Dr. Who or the Cylons of Battlestar Galactica of old.

 

[XFozzboute]

CBS does not own the rights to make new Star Trek. It only have the rights to pre-made episodes of Star Trek. Paramount is the one who makes the decisions on any new Star Trek. If it's for movies or for TV.

 

[Harvey]

No. CBS (essentially, the corporate entity formerly known as Paramount Television) controls the rights to the franchise. The have licensed the movie rights to Paramount for the time being.

 

[CaptJack]

In addition to everything mentioned in the article (which pretty much makes sense for any quality television), I really, reeeeally hope that they either build upon the developments of the post-TNG/DS9 novels, or at least try very hard not to run roughshod over that part of Trek lore whenever they create a new television series. That, to me, has been the most well-developed and entertaining part of the mythology in the past decade, and though it is not counted as canon I would be sad to see it thrown away.

 

[Third Nacelle]

Though it might be nice, I wouldn't expect too many novels to be a major contribution to new plots. Any writers for a new series will not want to be encumbered by the canon of everything that happened in the 24th century. The only ways to avoid that is to either set it in a new universe or set it much farther in the future.

I hope it's the latter as Star Trek is supposed to be about going where no one has gone before.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The OP's list is ten things that are necessary, but not sufficient, naturally.

I'll focus on my biggest gripe:

"Of all the 24th century Star Trek shows, Deep Space 9 has aged the best as a series because of its use of serialization and continuity."​

That is a patently false statement. DS9 has not aged the best of the 24th century shows. Over half of it is completely unwatchable; I've tried, and recently. Anything good brought to the table by serialization and continuity is drowned out by the same sort of self-impressed navel gazing that caused TNG to run out of steam and that dragged down all post-TNG series.

If anything, of the 24th century shows, TNG has aged best, because it has the benefit of possessing seasons 3-5, before the tropes ultimately typical of all post-TOS Trek had calcified, plus the highlights of seasons 6 and 7.

Additionally, regardless of whether you agree with what I've said so far, because clearly you don't, you should recognize that the statement I've quoted is in fact a contentious statement. Furthermore, regardless of the reasons, whether it was franchise fatigue, self-defeating syndication practices, or whatever, general audiences watched more TNG than DS9. If there's any recent trend in rerun viewing that indicates that the present day market has changed its mind about which to watch more, I'm not aware of it.

Those two facts, the contentiousness and the ratings reality, should serve as primary indicators that you undermine your case that a new Trek series must have some form of serialization by extolling DS9, in particular above TNG. This fact:

"Now serialization is seen as a requirement by TV audiences, which means that question must be asked – what kind of serialization?"​

is really the only one that matters. It certainly matters more than going back to the well that, like it or not, ran dry.

 

[horatio83]

I don't think that a new series should be as serialized as late DS9 but I don't think that you wanna merely tell stand-alone episodes either. I think some lose story arcs like the Worf-Duras storyline in TNG or frequent two- and three-parters like in ENT's fourth season are stuff one can play around with besides season-long arcs.

 

[Third Nacelle]

I think a show set on a different kind of ship, like a hospital ship, would allow for a certain amount of serialization, but also allow great standalone episodes. It would also allow for different kinds of stories than we've had in the past.

People seem to overstate the serialization of DS9. Even with all of its long arcs, about half of its episodes are standalone - even more earlier in the series. I do agree with the OP that DS9 has aged the best of the big three, but I might be biased because I've loved (nearly) every minute of it since the beginning.

 

[MacLeod]

Whilst DSN might not have been heavily serialised, it did for the most part have a high degree of continuity. Was it 100% accurate with contunity, no of course not. Perhaps it had just the right amount of serilisation not as heavy as some shows i.e "Lost" but not as standalone as others i.e. "ST: VOY"

 

[horatio83]

I think a show set on a different kind of ship, like a hospital ship, would allow for a certain amount of serialization, but also allow great standalone episodes. It would also allow for different kinds of stories than we've had in the past.

People seem to overstate the serialization of DS9. Even with all of its long arcs, about half of its episodes are standalone - even more earlier in the series. I do agree with the OP that DS9 has aged the best of the big three, but I might be biased because I've loved (nearly) every minute of it since the beginning.

I'd say the frequent appearance of many minor characters in the early part of DS9, this loose connection of dots also counts as serialization.

I like your idea of a hospital ship. Or perhaps a cargo ship, again a space station, a colony ship / colony or a combination of several. I don't think that we need a fifth series with the standard "Starfleet ship explores the universe" pattern, Trek should experiment a bit.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The only thing wrong with a hospital ship is that by its very mission it's supposed to stay out of danger and avoid getting involved in situations where a show of force is necessary. Essentially, you'll have E.R. or Grey's Anatomy in space, which might be interesting for some folks, but probably boring for the majority of Trek fans who'd rather have something more action-oriented rather than a medical drama with some aliens tossed in.

The alternative is to have the hospital ship be frequently put in dangerous situations and saving [INSERT NAME HERE] from an interstellar disaster--but in such a case, the difference between it and a standard hero ship is academic.

Both VOY and ENT took the exploring space too literally by having their hero ships be generally alone out there by themselves, which can often lead to a lot of repetitive alien-of-the-week stories. TOS and TNG simply had exploring be an excuse for why their ships were out there, but they really told a wide variety of stories in which the actual exploration was investigating something amiss in the Federation's own backyard.

 

[Third Nacelle]

The ship wouldn't necessarily be out of danger. A series with a hospital ship could be set during say, a Cardassian-Tholian war, and the Federation could be neutral and providing medical aid to both sides. There could be a secondary setting aboard a Cardassian warship serving as escort.

I just threw that out as an idea. As much as I would like a TOS/TNG exploration type series, I think that after the hundreds of episodes already done, a new series in that format would just end up rehashing old stories - no matter what century or universe.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The ship wouldn't necessarily be out of danger. A series with a hospital ship could be set during say, a Cardassian-Tholian war, and the Federation could be neutral and providing medical aid to both sides. There could be a secondary setting aboard a Cardassian warship serving as escort.

That kind of reinforces the problem with the hospital ship idea, IMO.

I just threw that out as an idea. As much as I would like a TOS/TNG exploration type series, I think that after the hundreds of episodes already done, a new series in that format would just end up rehashing old stories - no matter what century or universe.

A sure-fire way to avoid that is with the characters. The more different, dynamic, and integral they are, the more the show is about them rather than rehashed old stories. But as I said in my earlier post, TOS and TNG didn't limit themselves to just exploring new planets and meeting new aliens every week.