Alex Kurtzman Gets New Deal With CBS, Will Expand 'Star Trek' TV

[Vger23]

Novel idea: maybe you think this is bad because you're not the target audience for these? Not every iteration of Trek has to cater to the same core audience. If the franchise is to survive, it has to diversify and bring in younger viewers. Otherwise, Star Trek dies with its existing fans.

There are a lot of selfish, unhappy people who would rather it die than remain unappealing to them personally.

There have been people posting in this forum who "gave up" on DSC back in freaking October. And they are still here, reminding us of their presence every single day. Give me a reasonable explanation for that one!

 

[lawman]

If the franchise is to survive, it has to diversify and bring in younger viewers. Otherwise, Star Trek dies with its existing fans.

And, so? What's wrong with that? Lots of entertainment properties don't outlive their fans. No one would suffer (except perhaps CBS shareholders). I am not so broad-minded as to pretend I give a damn about things I don't like made to entertain people I don't know.

(And it's not because I'm "selfish and unhappy," it's because we all only have so much emotional energy to go around. I couldn't give a tinker's damn about, say, professional soccer or NASCAR racing or reality TV shows. Should the people who actually like such things be forced to see them changed in some quixotic attempt to lure me into the audience?)

 

[Trekkin]

And, so? What's wrong with that? Lots of entertainment properties don't outlive their fans. No one would suffer (except perhaps CBS shareholders). I am not so broad-minded as to pretend I give a damn about things I don't like made to entertain people I don't know.

But actively wanting things to fail, isn’t ‘not giving a damn.’

‘Not give a damn’ is how I feel in regards to the latest Stargate series. It doesn’t appeal to me, I don’t watch it, and that’s about the end of my feelings towards it. Most of the time, I forget it exists.

I certainly don’t wish it ill, or for it to change to appeal to me. There’s no point. The world is already full of media that I do enjoy, and I don’t get any pleasure out if denying others their silly skiffy shows. There’s nothing to gain, only things to lose.

Like my self-respect. Screaming and trying to snatch at other kids toys, is for children. And it’s not exactly the sort of behaviour that’s encouraged even then.

 

[johnjm22]

Sure, why not? I thought ENT sucked but that doesn't mean I didn't wish it not to exist. I just didn't watch it again.

You didn't think that it sucked. It did suck. It's one of the reasons the franchise went into hibernation.

Shitty Trek hurts Trek.

 

[Vger23]

And, so? What's wrong with that? Lots of entertainment properties don't outlive their fans. No one would suffer (except perhaps CBS shareholders). I am not so broad-minded as to pretend I give a damn about things I don't like made to entertain people I don't know.

(And it's not because I'm "selfish and unhappy," it's because we all only have so much emotional energy to go around. I couldn't give a tinker's damn about, say, professional soccer or NASCAR racing or reality TV shows. Should the people who actually like such things be forced to see them changed in some quixotic attempt to lure me into the audience?)

Don't put words in my mouth please...

If you read what was written, the "selfish and unhappy" are those who would rather it die, not those who simply don't like something.

The best course of action when disliking something, ESPECIALLY something as inconsequential as a tv show, is to simply walk away from it and not expend anymore precious "emotional energy," as you would say. But there are plenty of selfish and miserable people (yes I use those words purposely ) who would actively hope and even campaign for it to die. And for a world with supposedly "limited emotional energy" (your words) to go around, it sure as hell feels like there are a lot of people doing this, or at least wasting their time talking about things endlessly and almost a daily in this forum dedicated to a show they claim not to like or don't care about.


There are others who do enjoy and get happiness out of it. So why can't people bury their own misery and just let that be rather than seeing it as their duty to tear it down and have animosity (some form of jealousy even?) toward those who do like it. I honestly think a lot of those people view the individuals who do like discovery as their enemies, because if there are too many people that like it, it won't die, and that gets very frustrating

Again it's nonsensical, and even more so given the context of your post above.

 

[fireproof78]

And, so? What's wrong with that? Lots of entertainment properties don't outlive their fans. No one would suffer (except perhaps CBS shareholders). I am not so broad-minded as to pretend I give a damn about things I don't like made to entertain people I don't know.

(And it's not because I'm "selfish and unhappy," it's because we all only have so much emotional energy to go around. I couldn't give a tinker's damn about, say, professional soccer or NASCAR racing or reality TV shows. Should the people who actually like such things be forced to see them changed in some quixotic attempt to lure me into the audience?)

"Forced to?" If it isn't for me, I don't invest emotional energy in to it. As you stated. But, since they property owners want to keep going, I won't begrudge them or wish them ill will because of it.

You didn't think that it sucked. It did suck. It's one of the reasons the franchise went into hibernation.

Shitty Trek hurts Trek.

Since Star Trek came back, I'm going to go with it didn't suffer that much.

 

[Lord Garth]

There are a lot of selfish, unhappy people who would rather it die than remain unappealing to them personally.

There have been people posting in this forum who "gave up" on DSC back in freaking October. And they are still here, reminding us of their presence every single day. Give me a reasonable explanation for that one!

There are two explanations and only two. Either he can't move on or he's just doing this for kicks. Either way, he'll never tell the truth. There's no third explanation. Whether it's one or the other will become more obvious over time.

 

[johnjm22]

Novel idea: maybe you think this is bad because you're not the target audience for these? Not every iteration of Trek has to cater to the same core audience. If the franchise is to survive, it has to diversify and bring in younger viewers. Otherwise, Star Trek dies with its existing fans.

Novel idea: maybe not wanting Star Trek Saved By The Bell version is a valid opinion.

 

[Firebird]

I am not so broad-minded as to pretend I give a damn about things I don't like made to entertain people I don't know.

(And it's not because I'm "selfish and unhappy," it's because we all only have so much emotional energy to go around. I couldn't give a tinker's damn about, say, professional soccer or NASCAR racing or reality TV shows. Should the people who actually like such things be forced to see them changed in some quixotic attempt to lure me into the audience?)

What's being changed in this case, though? These are new series being made for different audiences, all set within the same universe. The series we all know and love are still there, haven't been changed. Discovery won't magically become the Tiny Feds Toon Hour. Thinking Star Trek should be some exclusive club that only existing fans should be members and anyone new should be discouraged unless they only want the old formula is a load of bull. It's the gatekeeping behavior that makes up part of toxic fandom.

 

[johnjm22]

Since Star Trek came back, I'm going to go with it didn't suffer that much.

Bad Star Trek hurts the future of Trek.

We didn't get a fitting end to TNG because Nemesis was so bad it killed the possibility of another movie.

 

[fireproof78]

Bad Star Trek hurts the future of Trek.

We didn't get a fitting end to TNG because Nemesis was so bad it killed the possibility of another movie.

I still don't see how the future was hurt when it came back.

So, is the preference no Trek or bad Trek? Because, if some incarnations fail then it gets shelved. I am at least content with them experimenting and finding something that actually works, rather than lamenting everything that is proposed without any context as to what the product will actually be!

 

[Trekkin]

Bad Star Trek hurts the future of Trek.

We didn't get a fitting end to TNG because Nemesis was so bad it killed the possibility of another movie.

Sure it did. In ‘All Good Things...’, or ‘First Contact’, or ‘Generations,’ or the books, or whatever floats peoples damn boats.

The only way Star Trek can be ‘hurt,’ is if it stops making money. Which isn’t our problem. Otherwise, it has no wants or needs. Its high points will remain, and it doesn’t become ‘bad’ just because someone loses interest or it actually ends.

Also, crazy as it sounds, there are people that liked Nemesis. And people that liked TATV. And people that weren’t upset by what eventually turned out to be a hiatus. They probably wouldn’t have considered the series ‘hurt’ by them.

 

[Vger23]

Bad Star Trek hurts the future of Trek.

We didn't get a fitting end to TNG because Nemesis was so bad it killed the possibility of another movie.

I think you're more afraid of the possibility of there being a whole lot of Trek, and it being plenty successful, and just not catering to your own personal likes.

 

[Vger23]

I still don't see how the future was hurt when it came back.

So, is the preference no Trek or bad Trek? Because, if some incarnations fail then it gets shelved. I am at least content with them experimenting and finding something that actually works, rather than lamenting everything that is proposed without any context as to what the product will actually be!

I'm not too worried. I think I'm just gonna start throwing all kinds of money and interest expressions toward what irritating people think of as "bad" Trek, if anything just to spite them!

 

[fireproof78]

I'm not too worried. I think I'm just gonna start throwing all kinds of money and interest expressions toward what irritating people think of as "bad" Trek, if anything just to spite them!

If someone could define for me what "good Star Trek," preferably without citing TWOK, that would aid me a lot in knowing how strangers on the Internet want me to spend my money

 

[johnjm22]

I still don't see how the future was hurt when it came back.

We didn't get another TNG movie because of it. It's one of the reasons the franchise when dormant. If you want more Trek, than I don't see how you could be okay with bad Trek because it ultimately means less Trek.

So, is the preference no Trek or bad Trek? Because, if some incarnations fail then it gets shelved. I am at least content with them experimenting and finding something that actually works, rather than lamenting everything that is proposed without any context as to what the product will actually be!

I want them to experiment too.

Some of what's being proposed is different for Star Trek, but it sounds like shallow corporate ideas, and it's hard to get excited about much of anything with Kurtzman running the show.

The Khan stuff is a rehash.

 

[johnjm22]

I think you're more afraid of the possibility of there being a whole lot of Trek, and it being plenty successful, and just not catering to your own personal likes.

Nothing would make me happier (entertainment-wise) than good successful Star Trek.

 

[fireproof78]

We didn't get another TNG movie because of it. It's one of the reasons the franchise when dormant. If you want more Trek, than I don't see how you could be okay with bad Trek because it ultimately means less Trek.

Since Star Trek didn't go dark completely, I saw it as just a slump in business. Businesses do that. Nature of the beast.

I want them to experiment too.

Some of what's being proposed is different for Star Trek, but it sounds like shallow corporate ideas, and it's hard to get excited about much of anything with Kurtzman running the show.

The Khan stuff is a rehash.

I'll make it simple. I want them to try. I want them to try new things and experiment. Since no one can define for me "Good Star Trek" in any way that is consistent experimenting is a positive thing to my mind. I don't know if any of it will be bad if they don't try!

 

[Vger23]

Nothing would make me happier (entertainment-wise) than good successful Star Trek.

That's bullshit, and I don't believe that for a second based on your posting history.

Nothing would make you happier than to get precisely what YOU want (which is a very different thing than "good") and have that be successful. That I would have believed, but it wouldn't have had nearly as nice a ring to it, I suppose?

 

[Pure Antiproton]

I’m just happy cbs doesn’t listen to the 4 or 5 haters out there and wants to spend more resources on Star Trek. Bring it on!

I think there’s an Orville site somewhere guys (or maybe not - who knows). Best of luck.