Ok, in all seriousness, I don't care about the motivations for the hires. If these three men can produce interesting stories with dynamic characters with a touch of the optimism that Trek brought (especially in the 60s) then I'm willing to give it a shot. I won't look a gift Meyer in the mouth. My larger concern is that it will still look back without looking forward. There is so much negativity about STID using Khan but TWOK has been such the success for Trek that I can see them expecting Meyer to bring a similar game. Which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and puts Star Trek in this nice, neat, little box that can't grow. I'm hoping for something just a little different.
Having these names on board for the upcoming streaming series, especially Nick Meyer, and Rod Roddenberry is favorable to fans. Bryan Fuller is a good writer and creator so it's possible he might develop a series good enough for CBS. I'm positive with Rod's involvement he may share things to the writing staff which may be inspiring, he could even discuss stuff about his dad and he may produce treasured stories Gene had written which haven't been revealed. There's loads of possibilities.
I would agree with this. It goes a little too far in the pandering department. If this was the thought process behind Nick Meyer I think they'll be surprised that Nick will want to contribute and not just "sit in the room" as he mentioned.
I'm sure Nick will contribute but it's the studios show, and Nick will have to fall in line in what they're paying for.
They have just as much, if not more, than the prime universe shows. This is just old fogey bullshit on most people's parts, your own included.
Meyer's credited role is consulting producer. That means someone who's an advisor to the production rather than a day-to-day participant in the writer's room. Nobody's going to be "surprised," because these are professionals doing jobs whose parameters are contractually defined and whose place within the hierarchy of the business is well-understood. Of course people can aspire to different jobs than they currently hold, but I think that if Meyer had desired to be an active member of the writing staff, he would've negotiated for something like a co-executive or executive producer position. Although he has little producing experience in television, so it's unlikely that he'd be considered suitable for such a position. Consulting producer seems more appropriate. Of course he'd be free to contribute scripts from time to time, though. If anything, I'd think Meyer might serve in sort of a "supervising director" role. Some shows have experienced directors on board in producer roles to provide consistency to the directorial side of a production, even if they still have different directors coming in episode by episode. It's sort of the directorial equivalent of the way older shows like TOS would have a writer-producer or story editor in charge of working with the various freelance writers and making sure the writing style and characterizations were consistent.
No, I'm with Terok Nor on this. The Abramsverse does get more customers to each film, as the revenues prove. But as the Star Trek movies move to tent pole attractions and to the popular masses making it able to compete with the likes of Marvel movies, the fan becomes simply the viewer, and the viewer is only as loyal as the last mindless action movie of the week's success - like a Transformers movie or, ultimately, Fantastic Four. Over time it will fail like anything else - much sooner than 50 years. The Abrams movies will not have the sort of fanbase the old shows have.
I've noticed that TV writers get given "producer" credits if they stick around - seems to be a way of giving them a backdoor raise.
No, it's how the business is structured. There's a whole well-defined hierarchy of writer-producers, and people who get writing staff jobs are expected to rise through the ranks over time. You start out as an intern or staff writer, then get promoted to story editor, then climb the ladder from co-producer to producer to supervising producer to co-executive producer to executive producer to showrunner. These aren't vanity credits, they're as formalized as the job titles in any other professional hierarchy. Each tier comes with its own established level of salary and responsibility, and it's something you have to earn through experience. There's nothing "backdoor" about it. The thing to understand is that the TV industry has changed a lot since the '60s, when a show could get by with a producer, a story editor, and a bunch of freelance writers. Large in-house writing staffs have become the norm, and a writer's room is basically a training ground for future producers and showrunners. It's not a freelancer-driven medium anymore; the ideal is to join a show's staff and gain experience that will help you work your way up the producer ladder. Look how many showrunners came out of TNG's writing staff -- Ron Moore, Rene Echevarria, Brannon Braga, Naren Shankar. Practically everyone who started out as a staff writer on TNG is a showrunner today.
To me, this gets down to who is writing this show, and what the priorities for the show is for both the studio and Bryan Fuller (showrunner). He did an amazing job with Hannibal, which made me even more excited when I heard he was going to head a new series. However, I think there has been many missteps by those in power over the years. And I also don't know just how much priority CBS gives this series. Are they going to micromanage it? How interesting will the stories be? The optimistic side of me loves some of the talent being involved in this, and what they are capable of doing. The pessimistic side of me remembers the most recent t.v. Trek.
Does Fuller and his staff have to hit a homerun in the first season? Would a double work? Hiring such a great staff may rise expectations where the series can't possibly meet.
Currently Bryan Fuller is the only person connected to this show who had anything to do with previous Trek TV. Also, the head of the CBS Network has said he has nothing to do with the show. The show is being made for All Access and they have control over it, not the network.
Yeah, but the studio that owns the franchise is also named CBS. That's the problem with all these entertainment conglomerates -- they tend to be named after the studios and/or broadcasters they own, and so it's easy to get confused about which entity is being talked about. So you've got CBS Television Studios, which is the production company that makes shows for the CBS Television Network, The CW Network, and now CBS All Access. And all of the above are owned or co-owned by CBS Corporation, a multimedia conglomerate. So Jonesy is probably asking how much priority the studio and the corporation are giving the series, regardless of which network it airs on.
I'm hoping since this is going to be online, that Fuller and the writers will have at least a bit more freedom to do their own thing than if they were on one of the networks. I guess there is a chance since it's the first CBS All Access original series they might be a bit more hands on, but I hope they aren't to controlling.
The networks hire people to do a job they want seen, but allows them to do what they want or what they're paid to do? They'll get the freedom as long as it is in line to what CBS wants.
I expect it'll probably get a DVD release, if nothing else. PlayStation Network's Powers came out on DVD just a couple of months after its season ended. On the other hand, the Netflix Marvel shows don't seem to have gotten DVD sets yet, so I suppose it isn't guaranteed. But then, the rights to those are with Disney, and Disney's often been miserly about home-video releases.