Star Trek: Temporal Investigations
Bryan Fuller wants to make a new series
- Thread starter Eric Cheung
- Start date
Star Trek: Temporal Investigations
Before Fringe came out Abrams and co. kept stressing that it wasn't lost and wouldn't be heavily serialized. As I said I'm not advocating for a reset of the week. But a Lost/24 style serialized show will not even get a shot on network tv.
The way Pushing Up Daisies is going, Fuller might be freed up sooner rather than later for this endeavor. Although he might go back to Heroes too...
You know there is no reason there can't be long story arcs in an anthologyesque type series where there is no subjective point of view with a small core of regulars that we see episode to episode. Future guy didn't work because Braga didn't have it worked out when he wrote it. He hoped the writers would latch on to it and go from there like X files did.
Why wouldn't a "arc" style show (Heroes, Lost, 24, etc.) not stand a chance these days? I can see networks shying away from something as extensive and detailed as Lost, but it seems like arc-y shows are more the norm these days anyway.
The only highlights in Trek for the past 12 or so years, as far as I see it, were the last few seasons of DS9 and the last two seasons of Enterprise. Trek "monster of the week" episodes have been done to death, and arc shows have been barely attempted.
The only highlights in Trek for the past 12 or so years, as far as I see it, were the last few seasons of DS9 and the last two seasons of Enterprise. Trek "monster of the week" episodes have been done to death, and arc shows have been barely attempted.
This couldn't more accurate. If they did a Star Trek with season long arcs like Ent: S3, it would do well. Fans just need to quit being so nit-picky. If it is Star Trek, good or bad, I'll watch it. Some trek is better than no trek; and I'm sick of no trek.
I hope if he does make a new TV series, it be based on NCC-1701-F, or possibly explore the time of NCC-1701-J.
But along with that have the majority of the episodes stand-alone stories. Limit the two(or more) parters to the beginning, middle, and end of seasons.
Oh and no more season long story arcs. *cough*Xindi*cough*
Oh and get permission from CBS to premier/show it on Sci-Fi were it will most likely do better than on one of the CBS networks.
But along with that have the majority of the episodes stand-alone stories. Limit the two(or more) parters to the beginning, middle, and end of seasons.
Oh and no more season long story arcs. *cough*Xindi*cough*
Oh and get permission from CBS to premier/show it on Sci-Fi were it will most likely do better than on one of the CBS networks.
They work better on cable, where expectations for viewership #s are less, than on broadcast TV. The audience is fragmenting so much to various cable channels and now to various means of viewing shows (how many folks just dutifully watch those live broadcasts anymore, I'd estimate 50% for any cultish genre show) that all shows are having a hard time keeping the Nielsens up to survival levels. Throwing plot arcs at people just makes it harder.
Fans need to stop DVRing and downloading shows, you mean. But come to think of it, Star Trek is going to struggle on TV, plot arcs or no plot arcs. It's the subject matter and not the story format that's the problem. Any genre show is going to have a big proportion of new-media-type viewers, and those are hard for networks to make money off of. So much easier just to do another reality show or police procedural, whose audiences don't know how to program a DVR and are scared of the Internet.
If Skiffy can afford a premium show like Star Trek should be (and Paramount would be insane to put all this effort into re-launching the franchise just to have it denigrated by a cheap approach on cable TV).
I think Star Trek is in a no-win situation. To be what we want, it needs to be a big-budget production on network TV. But it won't be able to get the audience there that will make it cost effective, which throws it back to the cheapo environs of basic cable. Nonetheless, I hope they somehow figure out the finances because Star Trek really belongs on TV.
I don't think HBO or Showtime would be interested. They've established themselves as premium-content channels and wouldn't do anything as "unoriginal" as Star Trek. I know Showtime launched Stargate but that was a long time ago. They're looking for literature, and to them Star Trek is comic books.
Star Trek: Risa, where all your fantasies are fulfilled. HBO or Showtime will bite.
Star Trek: Risa, where all your fantasies are fulfilled. HBO or Showtime will bite.
Giggity-giggity.
Which character from Heroes did he destroy?
There's probably a lot of truth to this. Sci-Fi shows, in general, don't last long on TV. Production costs probably have a lot to do with it. But, Sci-Fi, in general, has always been niche programming.
Well, I think there are a few different ways to deal with this. The easiest way is to limit the number of episodes per season to around 20, then find a foreign broadcast partner to split the cost. Sci-Fi Network has done this with it's Stargate franchise as well as BSG and it has worked fairly well. I think USA did it to some extent with the 4400 and perhaps Dead Zone. This way, you're only paying for 10 episodes but getting 20.
Beyond that, I am still of the opinion that rather than doing a series or even a major movie a series of direct to DVD features and/or a mini-series format would be the best option at this point in time.
Please spare us from Fuller. The only thing he's good at is character destruction.
I will not watch a single second of a Trek series which he's in charge of or involved in.
I honestly have no idea what you're going on about here. Wanna explain?
I finally started watching some clips of "Pushing Daisies." No full episodes yet, but I've seen enough to get the flavor of the show. It seems a bit Burtonesque (not surprising since it's Barry Sonnenfeld's show who did The Addams Family and Men In Black), with elements of some slightly self-conscious quirkiness a la Gilmore Girls. The dialogue is as fast-paced and witty as Gilmore Girls but I buy it a little more because the show is that much more fantasy-based. Once I see episodes I may have more of idea what Fuller brought to the show.
Ezri II
Captain
Think it is time for a new series like a few years ago. Since UPN is gone, I hope they have it on SCI-FI channel in the United States. What happens in Europe and Australia I have no clue what is best. In my judgment, network television does not have the budget or the viewership to have a science fiction show. Nothing wrong with ABC, NBC, CBS, it is well drama base and with Jay Leno going to have a talk show at 10 pm scripted television is dead at 10 pm.
With a new Star Trek show, I hope it is as dark as Deep Space 9. Think it can get darker if it was on SCI-FI and with a darker show you do not need to have it reboot like Voyager was. What enjoyment Star Trek would be if it was as dark as BSG. They say Deep Space 9 is the darkest Star Trek series, but come on it was on network. Nope, if Star Trek was on network I think it would kill Star Trek. We do not need another Enterprise.
With BSG, it did break the benchmarks with the idea how a space war really feels like. With network Star Trek, lots of special effects that did draw viewers in the 1990’s but we also need a plot. Nope, if we go back to the 1990’s the series is dead. The series has to be on SCI-FI.
With a new Star Trek show, I hope it is as dark as Deep Space 9. Think it can get darker if it was on SCI-FI and with a darker show you do not need to have it reboot like Voyager was. What enjoyment Star Trek would be if it was as dark as BSG. They say Deep Space 9 is the darkest Star Trek series, but come on it was on network. Nope, if Star Trek was on network I think it would kill Star Trek. We do not need another Enterprise.
With BSG, it did break the benchmarks with the idea how a space war really feels like. With network Star Trek, lots of special effects that did draw viewers in the 1990’s but we also need a plot. Nope, if we go back to the 1990’s the series is dead. The series has to be on SCI-FI.
Last edited:
IMO, only, only, if the general public is hungry for such a new series.
A new series is going to need much more than the die-hard Trek fans tuning in every week to survive past its 1st season.
Those are police procedurals, a canned format that is well-known and loved by a certain reliable audience. I don't think for one moment that that audience would watch Star Trek, even if it were reformatted as a police procedural.
One look at the funny forehead aliens and they'd bail. Eleventh Hour is a good example of how the genre can be stretched into that format - that show is a police procedural with a little sci-fi window dressing. It succeeds because it does not push the tolerance levels of the audience but feeds them the comforting formula that they seek in that genre.
Star Trek needs to be its own animal, not try to ape aspects of incompatible shows, even if those shows are successful. I've seen shows try to combine incompatible formats again and again, and they almost always fail.
The most recent example is actually Fuller's - Pushing Daisies. A frothy fantasy crossed with police procedural. It was as well written, acted and produced as you could possibly hope, yet it flopped. The fact that it was a nominal police procedural did not appeal to the CSI audience. A Star Trek police procedural, even incredibly well made, would follow Pushing Daisies' example when it comes to the ratings.
Very good point. But to be precise, what's happening is that certain canned formats are surviving - police procedurals and reality TV - while the audience for more adventurous and creative formats is increasingly elusive.
One major cause of this phenomenon is that the police procedurals and reality TV formats have an older-skewing audience while the younger audience is abandoning regular viewing methods and becoming increasingly difficult to make money off of. (The other big reason is that premium and basic cable is siphoning off the broadcast audience.)
Star Trek doesn't have the option to ape the canned formats. That's just not what it is. A police procedural Trek would be as absurd as a reality TV Trek. It has no choice but to try to figure out the same problem that Heroes is facing, namely when your audience is youthful, easily distracted, and wants to watch using less-remunerative methods like downloading, how can you still make the show a viable prospect?
PS, for those who haven't heard, yes he's back to Heroes to try to salvage that show. And more power to him, it desperately needs some coherence and attention to character consistency.
Splitting revenues or just getting more licensing from foreign broadcasts is a good idea. With a big international box-office haul for the movie, that would work for Star Trek better than most TV shows. 20 episodes per season isn't much different from the usual run, so that would be ok. Much less than that, though, you are taking the risk that viewers would forget the show between seasons.
Last edited:
Similar threads
