Scottie, Now would be a good time!

[xortex]

How do you make a hit? He + it.

What's he doing this week and what's going on with it?
And not about just star trekking.

She + it is something different.

Mediocre people love to steer the ship into rocks. It's glorious fun.
Money has usurped talent. What is talent anyway but another way of making money, and we all know that money makes money. Power is intoxicating. Eg., Berman.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

There are waaaay too many bad shows on TV that do well in the ratings for me to ever believe that quality = success.

Or, for comparison's sake, Thrones is an excellent television show; SGU was some of the worst TV I've ever seen. The fact that one is fantasy and and in sci-fi has nothing to do with why the former is successful and the latter is not.

Game of Thrones is on HBO and SGU was on SyFy. And that, much more than the category, premise or any other factor, is why the former is great and the latter sucks. If only HBO, Showtime, AMC or FX would do a space opera...

People also like to make the "time" argument as a sci-fi series may or may not work. It's total horse pucky. Or more to the point: Nemesis was a failure and ST09 was a success. Time had nothing to do with it. One was a well made film, the other was a giant pile of shit. Had ST09 come out and 02 and Nemesis in 09 the relative success would be the same.

I agree with that - the argument that Star Trek needs to "lay fallow" to build up demand is nonsense. Demand does not simply come out of nowhere; it is manufactured by a corporation that has a product to sell.

When Paramount had a Star Trek movie product to sell, directed by JJ Abrams, they generated demand for it. And fortunately the product was good enough that word of mouth didn't kill it off, but the lack of Star Trek in the theaters or on TV right now is not somehow magically increasing demand. Just the opposite, if anything awareness and demand is diminishing as people find other things to occupy their minds with, in the absence of any well funded demand-generating campaigns.

When Paramount has the next movie to sell, then we will see an upsurge in demand. That would be the smart time to launch a TV series as well, to ride the coattails of Paramount's efforts.

 

[T'Girl]

then we will see an upsurge

But you can anticipate the upsurge.

Wouldn't it be better to have your new Star Trek product ready for when the upsurge is happening, when it at it height, rather than waiting till the upsurge is here and then begin the process of developing a new series?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Well yeah - Paramount or CBS are in charge of both creating the product and creating demand. When they know there's a product in the pipeline, then they create demand the right amount of time before the product is released (a few months at most).

But if they're not planning to release a product, there's no reason to create demand. The fact that CBS isn't planning to release a Star Trek series on TV is the problem here, not the lack of demand. I don't think generating demand would be a problem as long as the show is in the right place, namely anywhere on cable.

 

[Jetfire]

Meh. I have come to a point where I wouldn't want to see a live action Star Trek series...an animated series would be better...like a CGI series...but it would be on one of the cable toon nets...which is ok. Just ignore me.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Somebody say something?

 

[thumbtack]

Wouldn't it be better to have your new Star Trek product ready for when the upsurge is happening?

No because then you wind up with Green Lantern: The Animated Series, with the Ryan Reynolds soundalike that is probably going to cost a few people their jobs.

First comes success, then a "go" sign.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

So what would be a sign of success?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

No because then you wind up with Green Lantern: The Animated Series, with the Ryan Reynolds soundalike that is probably going to cost a few people their jobs.

How do you figure this? Who's losing jobs over GL:TAS?