Kurtzman: 2 more live-action shows in the works

[Lord Garth]

Yeah whatever happened to those lovely rumours of him being shown the door? I was hopeful that we could get Star Trek back to normal.

Even if someone else was in charge you still wouldn't get Berman Trek. He had it for 18 years. That was long enough much too long.

You're all going to learn what I did. Most of you anyway. If you like any Star Trek from 1987 to 2005 (except TFF and TUC), then Rick Berman had a hand in it. I like a lot of Trek he had a hand in even though I'm not a fan of him personally. If you like any Star Trek from 2017 to whenever, you'll like a Star Trek that Alex Kurtzman had a hand in, even if you're not a fan of him.

 

[Armus]

Even if someone else was in charge you still wouldn't get Berman Trek. He had it for 18 years. That was long enough much too long.

18 years, 25 seasons of TV, and 4 movies to be exact.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah whatever happened to those lovely rumours of him being shown the door? I was hopeful that we could get Star Trek back to normal.

Don't believe everything you read on the Internet.

Even if Kurtzman left, Star Trek has moved past the Berman era. For good or for ill, those days are in the past. Time to look to the future. If only there was a show about the future that we could watch...

Yeah if done properly I guess it could be good, but my fear is the soapy, teen angst angle being over done. I’ll wait and see on anything. I would love me some Pike though.

Again, it's all in how it is done. I certainly didn't consider the novels the "soapy teen angst." And, there are ways to tell interesting "coming of age" stories that are not just soap opera type repetitiveness.

 

[BillJ]

Two more series? I'd really hope they'd get the writing in order on Discovery before overextending themselves.

 

[fireproof78]

Two more series? I'd really hope they'd get the writing in order on Discovery before overextending themselves.

Too late.

 

[eschaton]

Two more series? I'd really hope they'd get the writing in order on Discovery before overextending themselves.

Maybe this means the fourth season of Discovery really is going to be the last?

I mean it will take awhile for these new shows to get up and running right? But you're talking about Discovery, Picard, Lower Decks, Section 31, the Nickelodeon show - then two more? That's seven shows!

Even if you presume the Nick show doesn't count - because it's on Nick, not CBS All Access - you're talking about six shows, which means 60 episodes of trek content. Meaning more than one episode of Star Trek coming out per week. Which is probably overkill. They want to shoot for some Trek show being on the air every week - or at worst every month. Meaning shows are at least going to have to "take a year off" from time to time. Or older shows will get cycled out for new ones.

 

[fireproof78]

You're all going to learn what I did. Most of you anyway. If you like any Star Trek from 1987 to 2005 (except TFF and TUC), then Rick Berman had a hand in it. I like a lot of Trek he had a hand in even though I'm not a fan of him personally. If you like any Star Trek from 2017 to whenever, you'll like a Star Trek that Alex Kurtzman had a hand in, even if you're not a fan of him.

As with most things, I like some parts, and don't like others.

I just think Star Trek needs to lean more heavily in to looking towards the future. I mean, let's be more creative than just sidelining Trek to the Berman era box.

 

[BillJ]

Maybe this means the fourth season of Discovery really is going to be the last?

I mean it will take awhile for these new shows to get up and running right? But you're talking about Discovery, Picard, Lower Decks, Section 31, the Nickelodeon show - then two more? That's seven shows!

Even if you presume the Nick show doesn't count - because it's on Nick, not CBS All Access - you're talking about six shows, which means 60 episodes of trek content. Meaning more than one episode of Star Trek coming out per week. Which is probably overkill. They want to shoot for some Trek show being on the air every week - or at worst every month. Meaning shows are at least going to have to "take a year off" from time to time. Or older shows will get cycled out for new ones.

That plan would be bad for the franchise. You have to give your audience time to catch its collective breath. Oversaturation can kill the golden goose.

 

[Krupp]

I love Star Trek, but I am firmly in the camp that hasn’t enjoyed anything since the reboot. I wanted Discovery to be great but couldn’t follow it, probably what audiences want and what I’m used to have moved on a lot. I’m now to Star Trek what streamers are to Friends: constantly watching re-runs that, amusingly, have a lot of value but cannot seem to be recaptured in a new bottle. STP is my big hope for a return to something of form, and part of that hope is that the producers recognised there’s an audience to be coaxed back in (and hey, we’re older and can afford to spend more if we like it!) I’ll wait to be convinced by these new series, I’ll give them all a try but hopefully a few episodes in I’m not just switching off. Really want to be a fan of the new stuff again!

 

[fireproof78]

but cannot seem to be recaptured in a new bottle.

Because that is literally impossible.

 

[Krupp]

Because that is literally impossible.

What I mean is that stylistically TV shows and movies today are very different in the genre to the past. Lots of jumping around and emphasis on different things to drive characters and plots. When the formula is completely different it’s difficult to get into something. But I watch a lot less of everything now than I did in the 90s, so it’s not just Trek and I do think it’s my taste and not that all the new stuff is crap!

I think the Friends analogy is interesting. $250m is being paid to get it back onto a streaming platform such is its popularity. It’s probably equal parts magic in a bottle and pure nostalgia, which seems to be an affliction of age nowadays.

That being said, maybe somewhere in this variety of shows they’ll find something that suit the niche of the demographic that I’m in, which is probably part of the broad slate bet.

 

[Dukhat]

Two more series? I'd really hope they'd get the writing in order on Discovery before overextending themselves.

Or just cancel DSC.

 

[fireproof78]

Hopefully cancel the whole thing.

 

[Amasov]

Just pretending!

 

[Krupp]

Just pretending!

“Whistle Really Loud”

 

[Alexander Corrino]

Just pretending!

I want for this to be(come) real SO BADLY.

 

[Jayson1]

That damn Academy pitch goes back to at LEAST 1991 and I do not know why it keeps creeping back up...............

I think it even goes back further. I think it was something considered for a new show back in the 80's before we got TNG. Pitched by the guys who did "Space Above and Beyond" if I am thinking of it correct.

Jason

 

[Amasov]

I want for this to be(come) real SO BADLY.

I pissed off my entire Twitter audience because I posted this - despite saying it wasn't real - they all thought it was.

 

[Amasov]

Drew this shortly after.

 

[Qonundrum]

When I heard of the Academy idea back in 1990, I virtually puked. Many did. Why would it be any better now given a string of prequels since 2000 that, at best, are highly contentious and divisive and potentially implosive? It's just another barrel-scrapin' prequel. Watching frat party cadets seems incredibly inane, we know how they all aged since then, you know they're going to muck up something that makes the transition from young-Kirk to James T Kirk circa 1966 implausible at best, just coast on stereotype mannerisms and nostalgiawank callbacks and not do anything of depth or detail, and I just gave myself a coronary when imagining a meld of "Star Trek" with "Police Academy 5"...