1986, when the executives at Paramount came up with STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION.
CBS Has No Creative Control Over New Streaming Series
- Thread starter Overgeeked
- Start date
1986, when the executives at Paramount came up with STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION.
^Don't think so.
IIRC, the execs just wanted new Trek and approached Gene to do it.
He said sure, so long as the execs stay out of it!
IIRC, the execs just wanted new Trek and approached Gene to do it.
He said sure, so long as the execs stay out of it!
^Don't think so.
IIRC, the execs just wanted new Trek and approached Gene to do it.
He said sure, so long as the execs stay out of it!
Nope. That's not what happened at all.
Paramount decided to do another Trek series. They shopped it to Fox and weren't happy with what that network offered in terms of guaranteed number of episodes.
The studio decided to do it in first-run syndication. They offered the producer's job to Harve Bennett. He declined. They offered it to Leonard Nimoy (!). He declined. Roddenberry was far from their first choice, and he took the job knowing that the studio was going to make the series whether he did or not.
There was no point during the production of TNG where the studio execs "stayed out of it."
As tepid as TNG was, I'm not sure I'd be claiming the studio didn't interfere.
Of course there were executives (and you obviously know first-hand way more than I do), but from what I understand, they were just Paramount Studio executives, like Rick Berman originally, and not the network executives (NBC, UPN), that plagued the original Star Trek, Voyager, and Enterprise. I thought syndicated shows had more creative freedom due to a signifcantly lesser amount of "interference" from the higher-ups.
The original series was not "plagued" by network executives; that was part of Roddenberry's self-mythologizing. Read Inside Star Trek by Justman and Solow for a more accurate telling of the show's production.
NBC was supportive of Trek at every turn - they ponied up for a second pilot when GR's first try missed the mark; they encouraged racially diverse casting as part of their overall network policy and they renewed the show when it was on the bubble (going so far as to promote it to sponsors on the basis of the favorable audience demographics).
But that reality didn't paint GR in sufficiently heroic terms, nor does it provide the fan-flattering fodder to push poorly-researched junk like Cushman's books.
NBC was supportive of Trek at every turn - they ponied up for a second pilot when GR's first try missed the mark; they encouraged racially diverse casting as part of their overall network policy and they renewed the show when it was on the bubble (going so far as to promote it to sponsors on the basis of the favorable audience demographics).
But that reality didn't paint GR in sufficiently heroic terms, nor does it provide the fan-flattering fodder to push poorly-researched junk like Cushman's books.
Last edited:
Mine was an abridged version, cutting straight to their approaching Gene.
Okay. But I do harbor a memory of an interview with Gene pointing out he'd (paraphrased,) never go though the hell of dealing with studio execs, again.
That may have been something I heard him say between TAS and TMP. <shrugs>
Not to mention JJ Abrams was said to be beside himself behind the scenes at the divide between the divisions of Trek. He wanted to unify the brand and shoot Trek to the next level, but he found out that there were things he couldn't do.
He couldn't get something like trek to the next level if he licked his fingers and shoved them in a space probes control box.
What he wanted, at that time, was control of a franchise he thought mostly dead, only to find out the people in charge knew better.
Even before the tng movies the film and TV people worked together, hence inherited shuttles, uniforms, borrowed sets and shared production staff and even cast members secondary and primary (I think by the end only chekhov and uhura of the principle cast had not turned up on modern trek TV, and about half of the movie guest principle actors had, albeit in different roles.)
About the only difference was the producers, and the films got through a few of those before berman took over with generations, having been handed the torch by rodenberry on next gen. The okudas...sternbach....I think Dan curry and Westmore...al crossed over with the movies.
Any split is in the noggin of militant fan sects.
Um, I'm sure he could. He got this recent movie you may have heard of. 3rd biggest of all time.
It kinda was dead before he came along. Not dead dead, but new Trek wasn't coming. It took a name as big as his save it.
I question some of the things he wanted to do, but I don't question that he could've done it. New TV show along with a new movie, toys, games etc. He wasn't allowed. The Trek game was a mess.
Nobody ever said the two divisions hated each other and hoped the other would die. It's just a clear division in priorities and vision. Take the recent history. The movies have been full steam ahead. The TV side...meh, we're not interested. Like DC/Warner Bros. properties. They all cooperate, but people are calling dibs on characters that belong in other properties. No synergy like at Marvel.
It takes 7-8 to get an episode of TV together. Movies take months. It's a completely different business.
![15209230785_be400512ff_m[1].jpg](https://www.trekbbs.com/data/attachments/0/645-24c2fa0969f78b6e37d19f50368d788b.jpg "15209230785_be400512ff_m[1].jpg")
Thing is, the Trek of the late 90s is like the prototype of modern things like the Mcu.
Secondly...people are not going to see the new star wars because it's directed by Jj. Who I am sure did an excellent job on it, and I agree with his choice to go heavy on the physical effects etc. (have not seen the film, but, having predicted some of the story from the trailers, am aware of a chunk of it from friends and might get round to watching it)
But they went to see a NEW STAR WARS film. With the ORIGINAL ACTORS. That happened not because of JJ. Because of Lucas giving up on it and selling to Disney. Who also made the MCU happen (but who aren't quite so much fan oriented as we would hope, look at the gentle excision of x men from the top tier of the comic line because of a film rights issue)
It's like saying Trek in the 80s and 90s happened because of Robert Wise.
Jj...when bad robot were after the merchandising control....wanted to destroy so.ething before they created it as far as the wider merchandising was concerned. No mote shatner kirk, only new kirk. At one point, allegedly, no more other trek either, the Hobus super nova was supposed to take the whole shebang out. Apparently the STO people pointed out they had a game about to come out they had set in that universe, so perhaps bad robot/paramount could play nice with the other licenses, and I m sure the novel line didn't fancy being snuffed either.
(something which did happen with great certainty over in Star Wars)
CBS looked at the money they were making to this day on shatner kirk stuff...and said no. No total control option.
The film came out, divided fan opinion, had its good and it's bad.
But the merchandise, did not exactly fly of the shelves. The action figures are not great and ended up in discount stores. The novels were written, but cancelled (not sure why).
The comic has done well, bit arguably launched before the film (countdown was a nice thing, wish it had been filmed and televised as a sort of prolonged trailer) and the various enterprise things probably didn't do too badly.
Into Darkness did even less in these regards. (was there even a figure range?)
Now..my feelings about the man's work aside, it's quite clear CBS made the right decision, and that he personally has little to do with 'next levelling' things, that's someone else's job. And good thing. He's a decent enough director, and works well in certain areas. (though has made some choices I totally and utterly disagree with, as part of a group of people making things)
The Cumbernope. When just saying "nope" won't do
Oh, those wise, benevolent, Star Trek-loving CBS executives.
Oh, those wise, benevolent, Star Trek-loving CBS executives.
Oh I wouldn't go that far....
They did know it wasn't dead though. And they had people like the Sto management backing that up and ixnaying plans to blow up everything prime.
And they certainly love the dollars it brings in from existing licenses and the new ones that still show up more for shatnerkirk and Tng than for Jjtrek. The only part of the franchise I would guess makes less money on merchandise and licensing than Jjtrek is probably enterprise.
Though to be fair, the original movies didn't move a ton of merchandise, particularly the last few, disregarding the books. Including the books however...
Now, I don't care about numbers and who sold more toys, but the guys at the top do, and who knows if one of them is also one of us.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Jjtrek is like the excelsior, it's the grand experiment.
Last edited:
A
Amaris
Guest
The experiment worked. Setting aside the critical acclaim we have seen, consider this: We got not one, not two, but three movies out of it so far. The first film broke Star Trek box office records. The second one broke Star Trek's international box office records. The third one may do both, who knows? We also have a brand new Star Trek series on the way. I doubt any of that would have occurred had Star Trek 2009 failed as an experiment. So we should be grateful for JJ's hard work on that one.
Similar threads
