Picard film in development

[fireproof78]

Each arc in DSC Season 3-5 is a different story and that should be exactly that, a different story. People are twisting that into something else. "Ah! Oh no! DSC doesn't know what it wants to do!" Actually yes, it does. It doesn't want to do the same exact thing every year. If they did, those same people would exclaim, "Oh no! Every year is the same! Do something else!" They do something else, then it's like, "They don't know what to do!" It's like the Congress of the United States whenever the opposite party holds the White House. Congress wants to do the exact opposite of whatever the President wants. "If he's for it, we're against it." The fans are like Congress.

Never thought of it like this but this is far closer to the truth than I would expect. Trek is held up to this weird mix of standards that ultimately result in "Well, I'm against it."

I was opposed to a Section 31 series because they are, frankly, villains. A one-off thing for them is fine, but an ongoing series? I just don't think it's sustainable. As for Starfleet Academy, I'd be a lot more interested in it if it wasn't a spinoff of 31st-century Discovery.
It isn't enough to JUST be new, after all. Good writing is the bedrock that all of these shows have to draw from. And if you're starting with a flawed premise, you're just handicapping yourself in the long run.

Well, Section 31 is not set up as "sustainable" so that's a nonissue.

Of course it's not new. We got new for a bit and people rejected it. Regardless of the reasons not posited, Discovery gets shellacked still for Season 2, even though it's on Season 5! (this is broadly speaking, not just at you).

So, do something new!

Ok, we got something new.

No, not that new. Do something else.

Ok, we'll do this.

Great, but can we have more legacy characters? Where is (fill in the blank) character who should be around?

Ok, here's some legacy characters.

Awesome, make a show based on them!

Ok.

Why aren't you making something new?

That's how it comes across. And it's frustrating.

 

[Cr0sis21]

That's the problem with doing anything in the TNG era, even post-Voyager/post-Nemesis. The temptation to bring in legacy characters and concepts is too strong.

At this point, you have a 30-year space between them. Which is what we had between the productions of TOS and TNG. You can have connective tissue, maybe a cameo or two, but we've already seen a road map of how it can be dive in a way that both pleases old fans and brings in new ones.

 

[fireproof78]

At this point, you have a 30-year space between them. Which is what we had between the productions of TOS and TNG. You can have connective tissue, maybe a cameo or two, but we've already seen a road map of how it can be dive in a way that both pleases old fans and brings in new ones.

Not all TOS fans were pleased with TNG.

 

[FederationHistorian]

I for one would love to know how you know that Season 3 of Picard is as good as it's going to get?

Considering that my highest rated series of the current era is LD, and there is a massive gap between that show and the live action shows – all of the Berman era shows are ranked above the current shows – there’s going to be a lot of work to do for Legacy to be in my top five.

And somehow SNW is safe?

Well, I certainly would not consider time sliding the Eugenics Wars from the ‘90s to the 21st , or having a descendant of Khan as a member of the crew, all that risqué.

I don't know, I recently rewatched Logan and would be down for a very final end to TNG, if done well (and yes I know everyone came back/is coming back after Logan but still)

Even if everyone from TNG killed off - and I'll included Wesley, Sela, and Guinan too, so that there are zero connections to TNG come Legacy - nothing really precludes from a return in the future. Between timelines, Changelings, Q Continuum, and a visit to the past via the Guardian of Forever to a lost episode of sorts. Worf alone could be brought back as an emissary for Sisko for a DS9 sequel series.

It needs to be defined what finality means here, as it looks like they can all be brought back to life like they are comic book characters.

 

[Cr0sis21]

Not all TOS fans were pleased with TNG.

Well, no, obviously. But a lot of them came around as the series improved.

 

[JoseNoodles]

At this point, you have a 30-year space between them. Which is what we had between the productions of TOS and TNG. You can have connective tissue, maybe a cameo or two, but we've already seen a road map of how it can be dive in a way that both pleases old fans and brings in new ones.

Yeah, but I think the people doing Star Trek now internalized the criticism that Discovery didn't "feel" like Star Trek, and so now they've gone hard on references to TOS and the TNG era. I don't need so much convincing that these shows are part of the Star Trek universe. I would prefer new (and better developed) characters, new alien species and technology (like ship designs) instead. But referencing older Trek that seems to be a part of the modus operandi now, rather than just being nice little callbacks or Easter Eggs. I mean it's not just limited to Trek, a lot of other properties (comic book IPs, Star Wars), feel the need to show off their "nerd street cred".

 

[fireproof78]

Well, I certainly would not consider time sliding the Eugenics Wars from the ‘90s to the 21st , or having a descendant of Khan as a member of the crew, all that risqué.

I would submit that there are plenty of unsafe episodes.

Also, the sliding timeline is a part of TNG. So, blame them first.

Well, no, obviously. But a lot of them came around as the series improved.

Ok. But that doesn't change what messaging is being sent by viewing numbers right now. So, even if people came around (and there are several TOS fans that I know who just straight up passed on TNG and all the Treks it spawned) we're not in an era of risk. We are in an era of trying to become more safe. The presentation is the desire for more safe, more familiar, comfort food level viewing.

That might not be what you want, and that's fine. It's not all that I want but I'm a weirdo who wants to see what they do with Section 31 and Starfleet Academy. But, I also like Pike.

But referencing older Trek that seems to be a part of the modus operandi now, rather than just being nice little callbacks or Easter Eggs. I mean it's not just limited to Trek, a lot of other properties (comic book IPs, Star Wars), feel the need to show off their "nerd street cred".

See above. Comfort food viewing sells.

 

[HotRod]

all of the Berman era shows are ranked above the current shows

To each their own, I suppose. Personally I'd put SNW about pretty much everything, save for TOS. But that's me.

Well, I certainly would not consider time sliding the Eugenics Wars from the ‘90s to the 21st

You can blame TNG for that one.

Also, the sliding timeline is a part of TNG. So, blame them first.

Ah, ya beat me to it!

 

[JoseNoodles]

See above. Comfort food viewing sells.

Oh, I know.

 

[Lord Garth]

Yeah, but I think the people doing Star Trek now internalized the criticism that Discovery didn't "feel" like Star Trek, and so now they've gone hard on references to TOS and the TNG era.

Yup. Which is exactly why I've chosen to bow out when I'm choosing to. I'm pretty much just running out the clock right now until Disco Season 5.

After that, I've got a bunch of other stuff lined up to watch that isn't Star Trek. And if anything comes out of the Picard Movie or Legacy, to quote Arnold Schwarzenegger, "I'll be back." Otherwise, it's been a wild ride. But if Star Trek just wants to do comfort food, and go out of its way to please people I disagree with... well, thanks but no thanks. I liked it better when, as I used to say, "All the right people hated it."

On-Topic: The Picard Movie, I'm expecting to be more like PIC Seasons 1 and 2.

 

[Cr0sis21]

Ok. But that doesn't change what messaging is being sent by viewing numbers right now. So, even if people came around (and there are several TOS fans that I know who just straight up passed on TNG and all the Treks it spawned) we're not in an era of risk. We are in an era of trying to become more safe. The presentation is the desire for more safe, more familiar, comfort food level viewing.

That might not be what you want, and that's fine. It's not all that I want but I'm a weirdo who wants to see what they do with Section 31 and Starfleet Academy. But, I also like Pike.

I think Star Trek can and always will be safe and profitable if it combines a modest budget with good writing. It's foolish to use it as a tent pole, either for UPN or for Paramount+. It did its best work when it wasn't trying to garner big bucks and massive attention.

Keep the budget at midrange and move the new shows to regular network TV and you'll have a lot of success with it.

 

[fireproof78]

I think Star Trek can and always will be safe and profitable if it combines a modest budget with good writing. It's foolish to use it as a tent pole, either for UPN or for Paramount+. It did its best work when it wasn't trying to garner big bucks and massive attention.

Keep the budget at midrange and move the new shows to regular network TV and you'll have a lot of success with it.

Possible.

But not the way of things as of right now. Tentpoles are really the only thing holding up the tents now.

 

[Danja]

So, we, as an audience, are sending the message that familiar brings money. Not new, not interesting characters, but those with the names and styles of Trek gone before.

Picard rebuilt the Enterprise-D!

I remember the flak Seven of Nine got on Voyager ("Borg Barbie", "34 of Double-D").

Keep the budget at midrange and move the new shows to regular network TV and you'll have a lot of success with it.

This is not the 1980's.

Network TV viewership has been declining for years. There are so many more options out there now than there were back then (streaming, VOD).

 

[Cr0sis21]

Picard rebuilt the Enterprise-D!

I remember the flak Seven of Nine got on Voyager ("Borg Barbie", "34 of Double-D").



This is not the 1980's.

Network TV viewership has been declining for years. There are so many more options out there now than there were back then (streaming, VOD).

Streaming and VOD aren't the future of television, as the studios are discovering. Disney, Time Warner, Paramount et. al. are learning this at a tremendous cost

 

[HotRod]

Network TV viewership has been declining for years. There are so many more options out there now than there were back then (streaming, VOD).

Yep. They could produce the greatest Trek series ever made, and it would still not survive on Network TV.

 

[fireproof78]

This is not the 1980's.

Network TV viewership has been declining for years. There are so many more options out there now than there were back then (streaming, VOD).

Yup, and this is only a recent development in the history of the medium. A lot of assumptions are made when this is still working itself out. There are a wide variety of options, and the market will continue to shift until they are able to balance out based upon market demands.

 

[Danja]

I remember when the advertising upfronts were media events. Now, the attendees can fit in a phone booth.

 

[Tuskin38]

Streaming and VOD aren't the future of television, as the studios are discovering. Disney, Time Warner, Paramount et. al. are learning this at a tremendous cost

The problem isn't streaming, it's the amount of streaming services.

 

[Cr0sis21]

The problem isn't streaming, it's the amount of streaming services.

Potayto, potahto. The only viable streaming service so far has been Netflix. Nothing else even comes close. The only reason Amazon Prime is still alive is because the whole of Amazon is holding it up.
How that shapes things for everyone else, I don't know, but if Star Wars and Marvel couldn't prop up Disney+, who in the world thought Star Trek could support Paramount+?

 

[fireproof78]

The problem isn't streaming, it's the amount of streaming services.

The problem is multi-faceted. You had several companies go all in on streaming because that was "the next big thing" in terms of apparent money sources. It isn't working out the same way as Netflix as Netflix already got there and two, running a streaming platform is difficult than just producing and airing content.

But, companies were in a bind since they had to try to make money off of this or fear missing out. So, they tried. It didn't work. Time to try something else.