Next year’s ‘Star Trek’ reboot may have naked aliens and swearing, CBS digital chief says

[JD]

I know it's not the same as onscreen Trek, but two at least Trek novels from the last decade have included the "fuck". It's been a while, but if I remember correctly one was an Enterprise novel where one of the characters was explaining that WTF meant What The Fuck? and in one of Vanguard books a non Starfleet character says "fuck the Prime Directive" before he goes to rescue some people being attacked by Klingons. So we already have a bit of evidence that the people at CBS don't have a problem with that kind of language in Star Trek.

Actually a lot of panicky people are suggesting otherwise on social media. Conspiracy theories and the evil empire CBS sticking it to the beloved Fuller, when it doesn't seem that way to me at all.

RAMA

What available evidence exactly? CBS' announcement about Fuller (himself) stepping back (and not getting fired)? CBS' announcement about Fuller remaining as executive producer? Or perhaps Fuller's interview about him choosing American Gods over Star Trek Discovery? Because Discovery wouldn't let him comment enough on social issues? Which available evidence and public announcements support your theory about Fuller "not being up to it" exactly? Because everything available to us right now actually contradicts you.

Where's the stuff about not being able to comment in social issues on Discovery come from? I haven't heard that before, but it's pretty what I had been assuming happened. It came down to either American Gods and Discovery, and he chose the former. I was amazed he was going to try to do both at once, so I was not at all surprised when he stepped away from Discovery.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Where's the stuff about not being able to comment in social issues on Discovery come from? I haven't heard that before, but it's pretty what I had been assuming happened. It came down to either American Gods and Discovery, and he chose the former. I was amazed he was going to try to do both at once, so I was not at all surprised when he stepped away from Discovery.

"Bryan Fuller gave a little more insight into why he chose American Gods over Star Trek: Discovery and the departure wasn’t just because he was too busy to do both shows.

“Part of [why I left] was [down to] my responsibilities to American Gods, which I’m very dedicated to, and so it was unfortunate to take a step back away from that show,” he said. “And mainly because of the opportunity that I believe that Star Trek provides – for a conversation about progress, for humanity and the planet, and being able to tap into that.”

But the chance to talk about relevant issues of today via his show is important to Fuller and American Gods offered that opportunity while Star Trek: Discovery did not. Star Trekis a “religion-free show,” said Fuller. “Religion on the planet has kind of gone extinct in a way [in Star Trek] and right now religion is feeding a lot of issues in many different ways. As an artist, I want to represent the times in which we are telling a story and I feel like I have that opportunity with American Gods.”

Fuller will be able to address both faith and immigration in American Gods, which will make the show “resonant and present” in 2016."

Also, from Collider:

"After talking to Bryan Fuller tonight about Star Trek I'm so so so angry at CBS about how they treated him and what they're doing now."

 

[Blooded]

I think the distribution method raises the stakes quite significantly. TNG was not the centrepiece of a subscription service. Discovery is.

If the first season flops, how many people will fork out for a second?

Doesn't matter. All that matters is how much Netflix are willing to pay for those international distribution rights, where Discovery ISN'T the centrepiece of their subscription service, as if Netflix keep paying CBS will keep producing. As simple as that.

Netflix know what Trek is worth to them worldwide, and have made those conclusions based on information we simply will never get from them. They'll also know just how many of their other shows are watched by Trek fans, so they'll have made the purchase with that in mind too.

Discovery is safe if it performs on Netflix, regardless of how it does on CBS. Don't forget, CBS have a lot of other revenue streams from this show too, which isn't exclusive to subs.

 

[donners22]

Where's the stuff about not being able to comment in social issues on Discovery come from?

But the chance to talk about relevant issues of today via his show is important to Fuller and American Gods offered that opportunity while Star Trek: Discovery did not. Star Trek is a “religion-free show,” said Fuller. “Religion on the planet has kind of gone extinct in a way [in Star Trek] and right now religion is feeding a lot of issues in many different ways. As an artist, I want to represent the times in which we are telling a story and I feel like I have that opportunity with American Gods."

http://www.trektoday.com/content/2016/12/more-on-fullers-departure-from-discovery/

Take that with a pinch of salt, as a lot of that paragraph is interpretation rather than a direct quote, but that does seem to be the gist of Fuller's point.

 

[starshipfalcon]

It's commonly thought of as a "family show," suitable for all ages. Star Trek television wasn't preceded by warnings, and Star Trek movies don't get R ratings.

If a Star Trek movie did received a R rating, it would be cut.

This is true,

Star Trek not only had children in some of the episodes, it was a cartoon and Trek characters also appeared on cereal boxes and in happy meals. There's never going to be a Game of Thrones happy meal. People are saying that folks are being prudes however, I would disagree. A person can watch and enjoy Game of Thrones and still would like Star Trek to keep to its roots.

 

[BillJ]

Star Trek not only had children in some of the episodes...

So has The Walking Dead...

A person can watch and enjoy Game of Thrones and still would like Star Trek to keep to its roots.

What roots would those be? I really think many folks forget that TOS was quite adult for its time, and was shooting for an adult audience. In "The Man Trap" (first episode aired), we watch the Salt Vampire suck the life out of several people, we had talks about the extinction of species, McCoy kills the creature that took on the form of his former lover. Not exactly kiddie fare.

 

[starshipfalcon]

So has The Walking Dead...



What roots would those be? I really think many folks forget that TOS was quite adult for its time, and was shooting for an adult audience. In "The Man Trap" (first episode aired), we watch the Salt Vampire suck the life out of several people, we had talks about the extinction of species, McCoy kills the creature that took on the form of his former lover. Not exactly kiddie fare.

Good point about the kids in Walking Dead, good point.

When I say roots I mean that it started off as a family friendly show (there's nothing wrong with that). Game of Thrones and Walking Dead didn't. If they decided to turn the other shows mentioned into a PG or G rated show, it would also be stupid. It was stupid to turn Aliens or Predator into a PG movie. They didn't start out like that.

And yes Bones shot and killed the salt vampire, yes kids were scared of the flying monkeys from OZ and yes kids hid behind the couch scared of the Deleks however, it didn';t get gory.

 

[BillJ]

When I say roots I mean that it started off as a family friendly show (there's nothing wrong with that).

It was never intended as a family friendly show. Go take a look at Pike burning alive in his mind, in "The Cage". Or Gary Mitchell choking Lee Kelso to death in "Where No Man Has Gone Before". The mental breakdowns of Ron Tracy and Matt Decker weren't family friendly. Nor were the degradation of Kirk and Spock in "Plato's Stepchildren", the torture of McCoy in "The Empath", and the revelation of Kirk having an STD and a planet trying to use it to control their population in "The Mark of Gideon".

 

[starshipfalcon]

It was never intended as a family friendly show. Go take a look at Pike burning alive in his mind, in "The Cage". Or Gary Mitchell choking Lee Kelso to death in "Where No Man Has Gone Before". The mental breakdowns of Ron Tracy and Matt Decker weren't family friendly. Nor were the degradation of Kirk and Spock in "Plato's Stepchildren", the torture of McCoy in "The Empath", and the revelation of Kirk having an STD and a planet trying to use it to control their population in "The Mark of Gideon".

They'll all pale in comparison to a rated "R" Star Trek.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Lost In Space was a kids' show in the '60s, not Star Trek: TOS.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

It was never intended as a family friendly show. Go take a look at Pike burning alive in his mind, in "The Cage". Or Gary Mitchell choking Lee Kelso to death in "Where No Man Has Gone Before". The mental breakdowns of Ron Tracy and Matt Decker weren't family friendly. Nor were the degradation of Kirk and Spock in "Plato's Stepchildren", the torture of McCoy in "The Empath", and the revelation of Kirk having an STD and a planet trying to use it to control their population in "The Mark of Gideon".

Exactly. R rated Trek won't make it any more real. It doesn't get any more real than these quoted TOS scenes. R rated Trek will just coat it with softcore porn and torture porn like Game of Thrones and will cheapen it overall. I read the GOT novels and there was nothing close to the smut of the show. I like the show, but it probably wouldn't have gone past season 2 on content alone. Sword and Sorcery has traditionally been even more of a niche market than space-based scifi.
I really hope they don't go that route with Trek, but they probably will. It's all about mass appeal these days. And sex is selling better than ever thanks to HiDef.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Lost In Space was a kids' show in the '60s, not Star Trek: TOS.

Which was totally ironic since its pilot premise was a madman trying to murder an entire family, and even after failing he regularly threw them under the space bus. The pain of it all.

 

[BillJ]

It's all about mass appeal these days.

Always been about mass appeal. Why do you think they added Worf to Deep Space Nine and Seven of Nine to Voyager?

 

[BillJ]

They'll all pale in comparison to a rated "R" Star Trek.

Why be hung up on the rating? Judge the show on the stories it tells.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Didn't Gene float around the idea of an "more mature" Trek film for a while?

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Always been about mass appeal. Why do you think they added Worf to Deep Space Nine and Seven of Nine to Voyager?

True, but they were losing their core audience then. Losing TNG numbers. They never dreamt they could get people that would never watch Trek until Trek2009 was a big hit. And with shows like GoT getting huge numbers, they want in this broader market.

 

[BillJ]

And with shows like GoT getting huge numbers, they want in this broader market.

Everyone wants that broader market. You can't not give modern audiences what they want and expect to be successful. If audiences are gravitating towards more adult content, CBS would be foolish to continue making Star Trek the way it has always been.

I think Discovery will push the bounds based on where Star Trek has been in the past, but I seriously doubt that it will be anywhere near Game of Thrones orThe Walking Dead territory. CBS is a conservative business.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Everyone wants that broader market. You can't not give modern audiences what they want and expect to be successful. If audiences are gravitating towards more adult content, CBS would be foolish to continue making Star Trek the way it has always been.

I think Discovery will push the bounds based on where Star Trek has been in the past, but I seriously doubt that it will be anywhere near Game of Thrones orThe Walking Dead territory. CBS is a conservative business.

Sure they all want it, but the reality is prior to the shows mentioned, there wasn't a chance in hell of reaching a broad market unless the studios had mainstream hit shows, usually law enforcement or medical shows. NYPD Blue, ER, etc.
If the studio made a genre show, they knew mass appeal was virtually impossible and therefore would not throw big money at the production. They made these shows because there was SOME money to be made.

Now they have 6-9 million per episode budgets. Those budgets REQUIRE, not hope for, a big return. The studios don't pull this cash out of the seat cushions. They have investors who are closely watching their investments, and don't care about creative integrity, etc.

Also, I'm not stating it should be the same show as it was. In fact it had better have a modern slant to it or they're doomed. I'm talking about gratuitous amounts of sex and violence specifically like GoT and Walking Dead. And yes, CBS does have a conservative rep to protect, which may in part be why CBS All Access exists. They can take risks and go for the cash grab and if it fails, they leveraged their risk with a subscriber model and will have shielded their main brand.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Didn't Gene float around the idea of an "more mature" Trek film for a while?

Not that I recall. According the 50-yr mission, he spent much of the 70's trying to bring Trek back in some way. The TV movies, Phase 2, etc. Soon after TMP began production as a big budget film, he was pushed aside and backed off as producer and remained involved as a creative consultant through the early 80's. But he considered himself out of Trek forever when Paramount came calling in 86 for a new series. He always had many non-Trek irons in the fire though, so who knows. Maybe he did.

 

[BillJ]

Those budgets REQUIRE, not hope for, a big return.

So did the $1.75 million per episode that TNG cost in 1987. Which made it the most expensive show on TV at the time.