Star Trek 2017 will not be set in the JJ-Verse

[Longinus]

No, it really doesn't. "True fans" at their height could not come close to meaning enough to the studio to keep Star Trek on the air and it was rebooted to take it away from them. And wham, major money making, large audience success.

Fuck the fans honestly.

Eh, Trek didn't stay on air because last two series were crap. I'm sure they still did way better than they would have if they hadn't been set in the Star Trek universe. And sure, a lot of people went to see Abrams film, but those people don't buy merchandise. We are talking about long term commitment here. It is way easier to get existing fans to pay monthly to see the new show (with added bonus of getting the old shows as well.) Sure, they need to attract new people as well. But this is not an either-or situation, they can do both.

 

[JD]

I'm kind of torn on what universe I want the new show to set in.
While I like the Abramsverse, I think I'd rather just seem them leave that to the movies.
I can definitely see the appeal to returning to the Prime Universe after Nemesis, but I'm a huge fan of the novels, and they've built up a huge post-Nemesis universe and I'd hate to see that wiped out. At the same time setting it in a real world amount of time after NEM would give them the opportunity to bring back some of the actors who've discussed returning to their roles. Even though I doubt they would be the focus, I wouldn't be totally against at least guest appearances by Mirina Sirtis and Johnathan Frakes as the Riker/Trois, and Michael Dorn as Worf. I'm pretty sure there are probably other actors who would be open to returning.
If they did set it in a new third universe, they would have the advantage of having a complete clean slate and they wouldn't have to worry about fans having fits over "canon".

 

[Dukhat]

Eh, Trek didn't stay on air because last two series were crap. I'm sure they still did way better than they would have if they hadn't been set in the Star Trek universe. And sure, a lot of people went to see Abrams film, but those people don't buy merchandise. We are talking about long term commitment here. It is way easier to get existing fans to pay monthly to see the new show (with added bonus of getting the old shows as well.) Sure, they need to attract new people as well. But this is not an either-or situation, they can do both.

I respectfully disagree with your points.

1. VOY and ENT stayed on the air because they were the flagship shows of the lowest ranking network on television. Without those shows, UPN would have died out much earlier than it did, and totally died once they had no Trek series to produce. The quality of those shows had nothing whatsoever to do with why they lasted as long as they did.

2. If they hadn't been set in the Star Trek universe, they would never have been made at all. Space opera shows weren't popular enough at the time to have had any chance at all unless they had "Star Trek" in the title (which was why they decided to put it back in the title for Enterprise.)

3. I'm also pretty sure Prime universe merchandise wasn't selling like hotcakes either.

4. Were there existing fans of House of Cards, Breaking Bad, Orange is the New Black, Sense8, etc.?

 

[Longinus]

1. VOY and ENT stayed on the air because they were the flagship shows of the lowest ranking network on television. Without those shows, UPN would have died out much earlier than it did, and totally died once they had no Trek series to produce.

Yes.

The quality of those shows had nothing whatsoever to do with why they lasted as long as they did.

This is pretty absurd claim. Do you generally believe that popularity of a TV show has no relation to whether the show gets cancelled and that the quality of the show has no relation to its popularity?

2. If they hadn't been set in the Star Trek universe, they would never have been made at all. Space opera shows weren't popular enough at the time to have had any chance at all unless they had "Star Trek" in the title (which was why they decided to put it back in the title for Enterprise.)

Indeed. And who you think were majority of the people who were attracted by the words 'Star Trek' in the title?

3. I'm also pretty sure Prime universe merchandise wasn't selling like hotcakes either.

Apparently it sells hell of a lot better. Yes, merchandise for decades old shows and films sells better than merchandise for the hot new stuff.

4. Were there existing fans of House of Cards, Breaking Bad, Orange is the New Black, Sense8, etc.?

No. But this is Star Trek. The name will attract certain sort of viewers and repel others.

 

[Trekkin]

This is pretty absurd claim. Do you generally believe ...quality of the show has no relation to its popularity?

For a long time, Two And A Half Men was the critics punching bag. It also ran for 12 years straight on a competitive network, a year longer than Voyager and Enterprise put together. Make of that what you will.

When push comes to shove, quality is purely in the eye of the beholder.

 

[eyeresist]

I guess you answered my rhetorical question. JJ fans ARE on that much of a hair-trigger.

I'm not a "JJ fan".

 

[Dukhat]

Do you generally believe that popularity of a TV show has no relation to whether the show gets cancelled and that the quality of the show has no relation to its popularity?

In this instance, yes, because this is UPN we are talking about, not a "real" network. It's the same logic behind syndication. If TNG had been produced by a major network instead of being syndicated, I truly believe it would have been cancelled after its first season. And if VOY and ENT weren't the flagship shows of a fledgling and flailing new network, they would have been cancelled as well, if even produced at all.

And "quality?" Don't get me started on that. Remember the era, not too long ago, of "reality TV?" Or how about schlock like "The Jerry Springer Show?" That shit was the lowest quality kind of TV I can think of, and yet those shows skyrocketed in the ratings. So no, quality has nothing to do with popularity.

Indeed. And who you think were majority of the people who were attracted by the words 'Star Trek' in the title?

Star Trek fans. Who, as someone said above, were not enough of a demographic to actually keep Star Trek alive.

Apparently it sells hell of a lot better. Yes, merchandise for decades old shows and films sells better than merchandise for the hot new stuff.

I'd be interested in seeing some actual sales figures for this claim. Do you have any?

 

[fireproof78]

For a long time, Two And A Half Men was the critics punching bag. It also ran for 12 years straight on a competitive network, a year longer than Voyager and Enterprise put together. Make of that what you will.

When push comes to shove, quality is purely in the eye of the beholder.

Indeed. I think it largely comes down to if the audience is entertained and enjoying themselves. Couple that with the needs of the studio to fit their mandate and some shows can be kicked down the road for years, such as your example.

Honestly, I'll make no claim to knowing a "quality" show or film. I know what entertains me, and it usually isn't what entertains the majority of a given audience. So, I stick with what I enjoy. Less stress that way.

 

[Rahul]

No, it really doesn't. "True fans" at their height could not come close to meaning enough to the studio to keep Star Trek on the air and it was rebooted to take it away from them. And wham, major money making, large audience success.

Fuck the fans honestly.

It's not like it was "the fans" that kept a franchise alive for 50 years...

Of course the new series needs to attract new audiences. But for that people have to get excited about in the first place. People need to talk about it, word of mouth needs to spread. And who's going to do that if not the fans?


Deadpool: "true" to soure material, "pandering" to fans. Fans were excited. Told their non-geek friends about it. Those got interested too. Big opening weekend. Success.
Fant4stic Four: "fuck the fans"-approach. Fans smashed it even before release. Bad word of mouth even before release. General audience not interested, because not even their "geek" fans mocked it. Box office flop.

 

[dregj]

cant someone think of the children

 

[Nyotarules]

cant someone think of the children

They're sleeping

 

[Longinus]

And "quality?" Don't get me started on that. Remember the era, not too long ago, of "reality TV?" Or how about schlock like "The Jerry Springer Show?" That shit was the lowest quality kind of TV I can think of, and yet those shows skyrocketed in the ratings. So no, quality has nothing to do with popularity.

Fine, let's not call it 'quality' then But whatever it is the fans like in Star Trek, Voyager and Enterprise didn't have enough. They are the least liked series in the franchise (not counting TAS.)

Star Trek fans. Who, as someone said above, were not enough of a demographic to actually keep Star Trek alive.

Yes, as it turns out, having 'Star Trek' in the title is not enough to keep the fans interested in the long term.

I'd be interested in seeing some actual sales figures for this claim. Do you have any?

I'm pretty sure no one does. Sure, it could be just an internet rumour, but I don't think it is.
http://moviepilot.com/posts/3637893

BTW, I think people overestimate the success of Abrams films. Sure, they made more money in the box office than any other Trek film, but they did also cost a lot more. When you compare return of investment, the results are not so great. Every dollar put into 'ST 09' made 1.85 dollars in the box office*, for 'Into Darkness' the figure was rather unimpressive 1.2. Even the often panned 'Final Frontier' had ROI of 1.68 and 'Wrath of Khan' had pretty amazing 6.55.

(*These are only comparing domestic BO, worldwide numbers obviously make the results better.)

 

[JD]

I don't have exact numbers, but there is certainly a lot more merchandise based on the Prime Universe shows coming out on a regular basis than there is Abramsverse stuff. That seems to me like a pretty clear indication that stuff from the old shows sells a lot better than Abramsverse stuff.

4. Were there existing fans of House of Cards, Breaking Bad, Orange is the New Black, Sense8, etc.?

Orange is the New Black is based on a book, and House of Cards is based on a UK TV series and a book, so those two probably did have existing fans.

 

[dregj]

haven't seen the new house of cards yet
does he still talk to the camera all the time?

 

[Rahul]

House of Cards was specifically designed by Netflix, after research had shown them audience was interested in "a drama show starring Kevin Spacey". So yes, it was built on existing fans. Not of a specific IP, but of a specific actor.

 

[fireproof78]

I don't have exact numbers, but there is certainly a lot more merchandise based on the Prime Universe shows coming out on a regular basis than there is Abramsverse stuff. That seems to me like a pretty clear indication that stuff from the old shows sells a lot better than Abramsverse stuff.
.

With due respect, the Abrams merchandise was only given a partial chance. Regardless of the Internet rumors regarding his disagreement over merchandising, there was definitely a diminishing effect from ST09 to STID. Make of that what you will, but CBS' stance is that merchandising is still their cash cow and stick with that no matter what. Read in to that what you will.

I personally wish they would do more merchandising and who knows what Beyond will bring. But, I think that CBS knows that they have a solid base with Prime Universe and are not willing to deviate from it for fear of losing the base. I don't think Abrams merchandise had a chance, personally.

 

[Nerys Myk]

House of Cards was specifically designed by Netflix, after research had shown them audience was interested in "a drama show starring Kevin Spacey". So yes, it was built on existing fans. Not of a specific IP, but of a specific actor.

It's adapted from a British series of the same name, which was adapted from a novel. Looking at the wiki, the show was developed and pitched to various networks, Netflix was the highest bidder. Their interest was based data showing audience interest in Spacey and Fincher.

 

[STEPhon IT]

With due respect, the Abrams merchandise was only given a partial chance. Regardless of the Internet rumors regarding his disagreement over merchandising, there was definitely a diminishing effect from ST09 to STID. Make of that what you will, but CBS' stance is that merchandising is still their cash cow and stick with that no matter what. Read in to that what you will.

I personally wish they would do more merchandising and who knows what Beyond will bring. But, I think that CBS knows that they have a solid base with Prime Universe and are not willing to deviate from it for fear of losing the base. I don't think Abrams merchandise had a chance, personally.

Whatever CBS does they're gonna lose some portion of the base... for awhile. These things take time to flourish, so making in the prime whatevers doesn't guarantee success, but it would be wise to generate the next generation base, and what they like. The show can't simple ride on an older base.
JJ Trek made money and it's what the new base identifies as Star Trek. Springing up the old universe might distance new comers to the series. Do you know what was the last highly successful series which was SF, that didn't include Zombies?
I'm guessing LOST and that was by JJ Abrams and his team at Bad Robot.

 

[Rahul]

...
JJ Trek made money and it's what the new base identifies as Star Trek. Springing up the old universe might distance new comers to the series.
...

This is where I respectfully have to disagree. The JJ moves were (are?) quite successfull, but they are in no way the big game changer they were intended to be. If you ask any person on the street (or, hell, watch "Big Bang Theory") and ask people what 'Star Trek' means, the answer will be "William Shatner", "Leonard Nimoy", "Patrick Steward" and "nerdy techno talk" that you will hear.

If you would have asked those people in 2009 that might have been different. But since then there have mostly been large gaps of no exposure to JJ Trek. Prime-Trek has moved to streaming services and proved overall quite successfull. And the past few years have had such a big dump of generic blockbusters that JJTrek simply didn't leave such a big mark in people's mind as 50 years and 800+ hours of previous exposure did.

 

[JoeZhang]

This is where I respectfully have to disagree. The JJ moves were (are?) quite successfull, but they are in no way the big game changer they were intended to be. If you ask any person on the street (or, hell, watch "Big Bang Theory") and ask people what 'Star Trek' means, the answer will be "William Shatner", "Leonard Nimoy", "Patrick Steward" and "nerdy techno talk" that you will hear.

I would think the answer would be Kirk and Spock which is a slightly different thing...