Like it or not, Trek XI made an impact

[Tarek71]

I dont see any issue with a concurrent movie and TV incarnations. The reason they would do it is the reason they do anything at all, which is to make money. But both can succeed or both can flop or one can do well while the other flounders. Thats partly why I dont think the show needs to be tied to the movies in any direct way. Two to four years pass between films. All the dozens of episodes that go inbetween will have to stand on their own anyway. The movies are just too infrequent.

But owing to that infrequency, I dont see much problem with them running at the "concurrently". There is only overlap for the months the film is out, then its 2 or 3 or 4 years before another one. Why would this affect whether the show was successful? Or vice versa? I am just not seeing the problem.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

And, yes, the latest Terminator movie was just not good.

Really? I thought it was fantastic. But that may be because I went into the theatre expecting to see a Terminator movie, the premise of which has always been "evil robot chases good guy, good guy destroy robot, the end."

I went into every Star Trek movie since TFF with a baseline expectation: Enterprise visits some strange new world, gets into conflict with that world, the crew has to figure out a way to solve the conflict, the end. In TFF and Insurrection we were presented with a conflict scenario that was both generic and uninteresting; in Nemesis, it was altogether asinine and clearly just an excuse to stage a big space battle at the end of the film (to this day I think Nemesis would have been a better movie if they simply omitted most of the foreplay and spent an hour slugging it out in the Battle of the Bassen Rift).

STXI has, IMO, a tremendous conflict that strikes right at the heart and soul of all its main characters, and thus competes with TMP as my favorite Trek film. Its performance at the box office appears to reflect this as well.

The problem wasn't that there was 'too much Trek'. The problem was that there was too much bad Trek.

Exhibit A: Star Trek - Enterprise.

 

[superdeluxe]

I've noticed a few people on TBBS who came to Trek via the new movie and have stuck around.

I don't come around as much as I used too, but I did come because of the new trek movie..

 

[Amaris]

^ Just saying, I love the avatar.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Because we want them to?

Bzzzt! Wrong answer!

Right answer: because they can make more $$$ doing it than doing whatever else they were going to do.

But it's CBS. And they know how to make more cookie-cutter cop shows. So can they make more $$$ doing it than doing whatever else they were going to do? Eh....

Let's face it, if space opera could make big bucks on TV, where are all the space opera shows?

I dont see any issue with a concurrent movie and TV incarnations.

Right, there's no reason both couldn't exist. They certainly wouldn't hurt each other. Each might give a little PR boost to the other - the TV show would benefit more from movies than vice versa - but that's not really the issue. The issue is that TV and movies are such different businesses that success in movies doesn't say anything about likely success on TV.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Space opera shows are expensive, apparently.

But Stargate Universe managed some cheesy sets and CGI aliens, despite having barely more viewers than TNG reruns.

The Star Trek brand name is likely to draw more people in, I'd imagine. The primary problems being the way the franchise is split between CBS and Paramount, and the question of where, exactly, a Star Trek series would air.

 

[Merky]

That wouldn't be a problem. CBS could produce a Star Trek show and Paramount would be it's distribution. It could air on CBS, which would be the logical choice, or any other CBS owned property.

I don't see CBS finding it worth the investment.

 

[Vance]

That wouldn't be a problem. CBS could produce a Star Trek show and Paramount would be it's distribution. It could air on CBS, which would be the logical choice, or any other CBS owned property.

I don't see CBS finding it worth the investment.

NBC would actually be the more logical choice, CBS's demographic wouldn't normally get or want Star Trek. Studios cross networks all the time.

 

[Merky]

That wouldn't be a problem. CBS could produce a Star Trek show and Paramount would be it's distribution. It could air on CBS, which would be the logical choice, or any other CBS owned property.

I don't see CBS finding it worth the investment.

NBC would actually be the more logical choice, CBS's demographic wouldn't normally get or want Star Trek. Studios cross networks all the time.

Are their any non-Syndicated CBS shows on other networks in first run right now? Ah, in any case, that could also be a good choice. But NBC would be suicide - they're cancel friendly.

 

[Vance]

Are their any non-Syndicated CBS shows on other networks in first run right now? Ah, in any case, that could also be a good choice. But NBC would be suicide - they're cancel friendly.

As I said, networks and studios cross all the time. CBS Studios and CBS Broadcasting are actually two different companies under the CBS name. Yes, special favor exists to companies under the same umbrella, but it's not quite the same as CBS Broadcasting making its own shows.

NBC is under insane competition these days, so the real issue with a televised Star Trek is its buget/cost ratio compared to 'dirt cheap to make' shows like American Idol. It's not so much that Trek wouldn't do well, it's that it wouldn't do well enough compared to the dirt cheap sitcoms and reality shows.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

It could air on CBS, which would be the logical choice

Logical? Star Trek would crash and burn on CBS. The audience doesn't want space opera and the ratings level a show needs to get to survive on CBS is higher than on any other network. Why even bother to make the show if you're going to sabotage it like that?

The only other places where it might end up are CW and Showtime, neither of which are ideal but not a terrible idea, like CBS.

Studios cross networks all the time.

Not any more, they don't. Not sure why exactly but that practice is now history. If Star Trek wants to be on TV, it has to adapt itself to CBS (impossible), CW (unpalatable) or Showtime (best of the bad options).

 

[Devon]

Not any more, they don't.

I don't believe it happens all the time but it happens from time to time still. For instance, House M.D. is co-produced by NBC/Universal but airs on Fox.

 

[Merky]

It could air on CBS, which would be the logical choice

Logical? Star Trek would crash and burn on CBS. The audience doesn't want space opera and the ratings level a show needs to get to survive on CBS is higher than on any other network. Why even bother to make the show if you're going to sabotage it like that?

I don't watch CBS or any of the three major networks so I wouldn't know what their demographic would be tbh. I saw they had Hawaii Five-O so maybe I was looking at it from a nostalgia tv standpoint or whatever.

 

[thumbtack]

Obviously, one blockbuster movie has not been enough for the tv industry to forgive Star Trek. At least one more major hit will be needed before anybody in television picks up the phone to inquire about a series.

 

[donners22]

I haven't really noticed any difference since the film. It's not like there's been a dramatic increase in the availability of Star Trek books (if anything, it's a lot less), DVDs or screenings of Star Trek shows/movies.

I know a few who liked the film, but none got into the wider Star Trek universe as a whole.

So, like it or not, it made no impact on me or anyone I know.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

I haven't really noticed any difference since the film. It's not like there's been a dramatic increase in the availability of Star Trek books (if anything, it's a lot less), DVDs or screenings of Star Trek shows/movies.

Yeah that's because of star trek fans doing their shopping on the internet so thats where most of the trek stuff to buy is.

I know a few who liked the film, but none got into the wider Star Trek universe as a whole.

Where as I heard from a guy who works at Barnes and Nobels that Trek DVD sells have increased since the new movie came out leaving me to think we're getting new fans.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

It could air on CBS, which would be the logical choice

Logical? Star Trek would crash and burn on CBS. The audience doesn't want space opera and the ratings level a show needs to get to survive on CBS is higher than on any other network. Why even bother to make the show if you're going to sabotage it like that?

I don't watch CBS or any of the three major networks so I wouldn't know what their demographic would be tbh. I saw they had Hawaii Five-O so maybe I was looking at it from a nostalgia tv standpoint or whatever.

Their demographic skews the oldest of all the networks, and you can get a sense of how much they want sci fi by looking at the number of sci fi shows of any kind on CBS (even the kinds that are just sf/f spins on cop show): zero. Number of sci fi shows in development by CBS for next season: zero.

CBS is the only network that has entirely abandoned sci fi. I don't see any reason why they would suddenly dive back into sci fi, and not just that but space opera, a genre that is so unpopular on TV that even the so-called "sci fi channel" can barely keep a space opera show on the air.

Hawaii Five-O works because it's a cop show. CBS is wall to wall cop shows, so that wasn't a stretch for them.

The only hope Star Trek has on TV is Showtime. The argument against it is that premium cable sells subscriptions by offering stuff viewers can't get on free TV, and Star Trek of course is associated with free TV. The argument for it is that Showtime doesn't care about ratings so much as about having shows can will lure in new subscribers. There are few existing TV franchises that could by themselves motivate viewers to subscribe, but Star Trek is one of the few.

And I've been noticing that Dexter is running out of steam (creatively). Showtime should be looking around for a new golden goose. Star Trek would be a huge risk for them, but it's not entirely out of the question.

Obviously, one blockbuster movie has not been enough for the tv industry to forgive Star Trek. At least one more major hit will be needed before anybody in television picks up the phone to inquire about a series.

I don't think the movie success will have any bearing on whether Star Trek will be picked back up to TV. The movies could make Avatar-type money, but it would still be wrong for the viewers of CBS and CW. And the risk to Showtime of dragging down/confusing their brand image would also still exist.

 

[Nerd unRage]

I'd argue sci-fi of any kind doesn't work on network. Most successful network programming seems to fall into one of these categories: cop show, lawyer show, medical show more interested in doctors'/nurses' relationships then actual medical stuff, forumalic half-hour sitcoms, or "reality" programming. At least in America, shows that require dedication and an attention span past a minute tank no matter how well-written or creative.

It seems like a lot of sci-fi shows on network are lucky to make to 3 or 4 seasons and usually struggle in the ratings most of those years. Ocassionally a rare exception happens like "The X-Files" but I think if there is another Star Trek show on TV, it'll probably air on cable. Budgets and interest are too risky for network.

 

[Merky]

We're also succumbing to the idea that if a Star Trek reboot series was to be greenlit, it would be along the same style and writing as it's previous counterparts of the Berman/Braga Treks which were slow, drawn out, and took itself too seriously at times - imo. Which, of course, would be a risky deal in terms of greelighting a new Trek. Americans don't want to sit in front of their TV watching CSPAN in space.

But if the show were to approach the style of the reboot - more action, more tension, with character conflict, charisma and "consistency", I don't see a problem with a show being sold on any network if done right. It's a reason why shows like Fringe and Supernatural are so popular and have lasted for so long. There's a balance that keeps it accessible to the general public while tickling the fancies of the sci-fi fan.

 

[donners22]

Is it just a thing on this board where people constantly take shots at the recent incarnations of Star Trek?

I don't go to many other boards, so I don't quite recall, but I think the reason for that is this sort of attitude.