Predictions for Star Trek under Skydance?

[Detached Nacelle]

My expectation is that Star Trek will be pushed back towards the middle of the spectrum between very conservative and very progressive media. This should maximize viewership. I expect the studio to want more fun adventures devoid of most politics in the show going forward. I expect they'll want their Star Trek to be more like TNG/DS9 than DISCO/SFA.

This just sounds like they would be taking the Star Trek out of Star Trek in this hypothetical. The streaming era to me doesn't feel any different in its messaging as the broadcast era did, I think the rise of right wing populism has caused them to highlight things that were always there since the 60s because they oppose fascist ideals. The rise of social media makes it easy to contort a message that certain personality types will latch on to and accept as gospel (no pun intended) without even watching the material to verify.

Star Trek has not changed in its values but the world has allowed the values Star Trek opposes to come into power which makes it a threat and that's why it's treated as so unnecessarily controversial.

 

[Danja]

This just sounds like they would be taking the Star Trek out of Star Trek in this hypothetical. The streaming era to me doesn't feel any different in its messaging as the broadcast era did, I think the rise of right wing populism has caused them to highlight things that were always there since the 60s because they oppose fascist ideals. The rise of social media makes it easy to contort a message that certain personality types will latch on to and accept as gospel (no pun intended) without even watching the material to verify.

Star Trek has not changed in its values but the world has allowed the values Star Trek opposes to come into power which makes it a threat and that's why it's treated as so unnecessarily controversial.

DS9 was controversial in its day ("It's too dark! It's too depressing! It doesn't go anywhere! ")

 

[Mr J]

I understood your posting differently than Danja. I assumed you weren't saying Star Trek should be about flawless people and ignore the dark sides of humanity, but that you'd prefer a classic sf approach (like TNG's nods to written SF of the 40s to 70s), over the action-adventure popcorn flick approach along the lines of Marvel movies, Star Wars and the like.

If that is what you were saying, I agree. But I'm afraid the general audience hasn't been reading anymore for a while, certainly not classic SF.

Yup, this is what I meant

 

[Mudd]

DS9 was controversial in its day...

And forgotten by the general public since.

 

[fireproof78]

DS9 was controversial in its day ("It's too dark! It's too depressing! It doesn't go anywhere! ")

And now Sisko to the average viewer is a network company.

 

[Tomalak]

There's also the Manchester United footballer Benjamin Sesko.

 

[Mudd]

Really, the only aspect of Voyager that has stuck in the public mind is Jeri Ryan in a catsuit. And she's had an admirable career since, because she's both talented and intelligent. Which is the only reason anyone would entertain producing an empty concept like Legacy, right?

It's not enough.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

an empty concept like Legacy, right?

The concept for Star Trek is: a ship goes out and does any space adventure thing you can think of.

The concept for Legacy is: a ship goes out and does any space adventure thing you can think of, a few years after Picard, and Seven of Nine is the captain.

 

[Campe]

Really, the only aspect of Voyager that has stuck in the public mind is Jeri Taylor in a catsuit

I don’t know that anyone ever wanted to see Jeri Taylor in a catsuit.

 

[Tomalak]

Maybe Mr Taylor.

 

[Tomalak]

The concept for Star Trek is: a ship goes out and does any space adventure thing you can think of.

The concept for Legacy is: a ship goes out and does any space adventure thing you can think of, a few years after Picard, and Seven of Nine is the captain.

So why call it “Legacy” instead of something more future-focused?

The main reason fans were excited was the opportunity for more cameos from old characters, not the new adventures of Jack Crusher.

 

[Danja]

So why call it “Legacy” instead of something more future-focused?

Ask Terry Matalas (he coined the name).

If it does go to series, there's no guarantee it'll be called Legacy.

 

[fireproof78]

The concept for Star Trek is: a ship goes out and does any space adventure thing you can think of.

The concept for Legacy is: a ship goes out and does any space adventure thing you can think of, a few years after Picard, and Seven of Nine is the captain.

And do a reunion tour for all planets shown in earlier Trek, per Matalas.

 

[Campe]

Hard pass on that concept. I don’t mind the way SFA handled looking at looking at other cultures we’ve seen. There was a nice mix of new and old (most notably the Betazoids and Klingons). But that’s not the way (Lord) Matalas(, hallowed be his name) presented the concept for Legacy.

 

[Dukhat]

Ask Terry Matalas (he coined the name).

If it does go to series, there's no guarantee it'll be called Legacy.

I don’t think you have anything to worry about in regards to the show’s name.

 

[Mudd]

I don’t know that anyone ever wanted to see Jeri Taylor in a catsuit.

 

[Turtletrekker]

If only we had voted for Bill...

 

[Riley]

My hope is that the Skydance bigwigs use the years that Kurtz Dreck is still running to put together a new team of creative people who have a deep and extensive understanding of and love for Trek. This would be a Trek think tank, not necessarily a new production crew. Let these folks work for a few years on where Trek should go next. Include past Trek writers and producers and any actors who won't immediately expect that their characters will be revisited (Stewart and all of the TNG cast).

Once the Kurtzman era is finally dead, a new team can go forward with a new series. There's no reason unrelated Trek films can't be produced in the meantime, but the best Trek is episodic. Finally, ignore the Abrams and Kurtzman "influence" and go back to basics. Compelling and likable characters at the forefront of science fiction storytelling that entertains while also exploring the human condition.

As for the era, I have no idea. I'd like to see the very first Federation starship crewed by members of the founding worlds, working together to go boldly despite their cultural differences. I'd also like to see a true "Next Next Generation," set aboard an Enterprise-F or G not featured in a video game or in an ill-conceived but pricey fanwank.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

My hope is that the Skydance bigwigs use the years that Kurtz Dreck is still running to put together a new team of creative people who have a deep and extensive understanding of and love for Trek.

They already have this.

any actors who won't immediately expect that their characters will be revisited (Stewart and all of the TNG cast).

You mean like the Doctor and Jake Sisko and getting Sito Jaxa and T'Pol out of retirement?

Finally, ignore the Abrams and Kurtzman "influence" and go back to basics. Compelling and likable characters at the forefront of science fiction storytelling that entertains while also exploring the human condition.

So exactly what we already have?

 

[Rahul]

People here pretend that the Kurtzman era was this paragon of leftism - purely because it had LGBTQ, minority & women characters.

But Kurtzman also gave us a 9/11-truther movie with Into Darkness (though that was mostly on Bob Orci - but Kurtzman was on board with), the worst case of "the end justify the means"- morals with S31, and no previous Trek characters before left as many cold bodies on their way as Burnham, the PIC crew, or even chancellor Ake (casually blowing disabled ships out of the sky).

Again - Kurtman era was good with representation. But regarding in-story choices and morals, Trek has rarely been as regressive as in the modern era that started with ST09.