STD Future Seasons Shorter?

[Kevin Wolff]

I would love Trek to be on every day too, but it takes time to make good scifi, no matter the budget. This is why there are more than a handful of less than stellar Trek episodes over the years. The 20+ episode series model was always too constraining for genre television. The visual quality bar is ever higher these days now that Star Wars is proliferating again, and new shows like "The Expanse" are starting to push the envelope in terms of complex content. Trek has some catching up to do, and since the first season is also burdened with the world-building for seasons to come, I'm glad they are being careful.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

They could do what B5 and BSG did with varying degrees of success, and make a couple one-off tv films to fill the void. Not every story needs 10-13 episodes to tell, and it would help ease our pain during hiatus.

 

[JediMindMeld]

Shorter is definitely better. I just spent two months rewatching DS9, and there are like 10 good episodes out of 104 in the first 4 seasons of the show. I can't believe the number of hours they wasted on absolute nonsense. If they had gotten to the Dominion wars in the first season I think it would have been a lot more popular. It would have been better television for sure.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

Shorter is definitely better. I just spent two months rewatching DS9, and there are like 10 good episodes out of 104 in the first 4 seasons of the show. I can't believe the number of hours they wasted on absolute nonsense. If they had gotten to the Dominion wars in the first season I think it would have been a lot more popular. It would have been better television for sure.

Agreed. At one point in those early seasons, I felt like I was attending a bajoran monestary training to be a Vedek. It was painful.

 

[RandyS]

The traditionalist in me says it should be 26 like it used to be, but I wouldn't be against a shorter run. Maybe 20.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

The downside to short seasons is it's easier for a couple lesser episodes to spoil the tone of the season, especially when serialized. And storytelling beats need to keep moving and keep resonating. They can't slow things to a crawl like The Walking Dead. By episode 13 we need to feel like we've been through the wringer with the DSC crew, and can't wait to go through it again.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Exhibit A. Mad Men
Exhibit B. Breaking Bad
Exhibit C. Better Call Saul
Exhibit D. Orange Is the New Black
Exhibit E. Halt & Catch Fire (less people have seen it but it keeps getting better)
Exhibit F. I haven't seen it (yet) but Game of Thrones (from what I've heard)

Skip G.
Exhibit H. Hell on Wheels

Happy to see Trek boldly go forward and enter the millennium. Quality over quantity.

 

[Ovation]

As I tell my son--you get what you get and you don't get upset.

 

[JayTheTrekkie]

Since season 1 of Discovery would start in 2255 (depending on what month it starts)....would 13 episodes cover most of that year?

 

[tomalak301]

10 episodes just go way too fast. My favorite series, Orphan Black, does 10 episode seasons and they almost feel over as soon as they begin. 13 is a solid number.

 

[Kor]

Heh, Luther has variable numbers of episodes per season/series. Series 1 had six episodes, series 2 and 3 had four episodes each, and series 4 only had two episodes. It's a great show, but I sure hope STD won't be like that!

I am OK with 10 to 13 episodes. That's a good amount to ensure less filler and better quality storytelling.

Kor

 

[Lord Garth]

Since season 1 of Discovery would start in 2255 (depending on what month it starts)....would 13 episodes cover most of that year?

It's possible that it wouldn't, but it could. Here's the breakdown of Mad Men:

Season 1 (2007) --> March - December 1960
Season 2 (2008) --> February - November 1962
Season 3 (2009) --> April - December 1963
Season 4 (2010) --> November 1964 - October 1965
Season 5 (2012) --> May 1966 - March 1967
Season 6 (2013) --> December 1967 - November 1968
Season 7A (2014) --> January - July 1969
Season 7B (2015) --> April - October 1970

Each season was 13 episodes, except for the seventh, which was broken in two halves with seven episodes each. They all cover a normal seasons' worth of time, if you count S7 as really being two seasons.

 

[kirk55555]

I'd prefer 26 episodes, but no less then 13.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

Star Trek has plenty of great standalone episodes that aren't filler in any sense, as they are good, solid stories. If they can manage to have 10 episodes of arc and three standalones that are GOOD episodes and not there just to pad out the budget or just for the sake of filling out a season episode order.

Hell, I'd have a ten-episode arc, and three extra episodes besides, aired every few months between seasons to keep the audience engaged. Like Doctor Who kinda-sorta did.

Mark

 

[tomalak301]

I don't like the notion that filler episodes are bad episodes. That's where the character development can happen, where you can be short on plot but the characters are allowed to grow. That's another reason I'm not a fan of the 10 episode season. It's just so short that there feels like there is no room to breath.

 

[Kevin Wolff]

I try not to think about it because the 26 episode season is gone for any show utilizing extensive VFX, and yes, gone with it are those "filler" episodes where we got to know the characters better. They're mostly what I watch these days after getting tired of the great episodes.
Also, serialization is tricky for Trek. BSG used it at first to great advantage and then eventually hanged itself with it. A typical Trek season would evolve as it goes and character focus would shift to include fan favorites (O'Brien, Rom, Martok, etc). Cliffhangers would be written with no ending planned (well maybe it's best they can't do that anymore).
In a serialized format, most of the story needs to be finalized before starting, so in-season tweaking isn't as feasible.

It's going to be a very different Star Trek. If it were anyone else but Fuller I'd be concerned that it might be too far removed from what we love, kind of like the jjverse. I do think the look is going to shock us and am excited for that.

 

[trekfan_1]

I'm ok with 13 episodes. To me the run time is more important. Based on the latest news it looks like it would around 48 minutes. Although the actual quote I'm hearing is 12 minutes of ads per hour. I'm hoping that means if Fuller and company want to extend the run time beyond 48 minutes to say close to 60 minutes without the ads, that would be ok if they tacked on a proportional amount of ads to compensate for the extra run time.

 

[trekfan_1]

I also don't agree with the line of thought that 13 episodes or even 10 episodes is not enough time for character development. Sherlock only has 3 episodes a season and they have not suffered in that department at all. But again the difference is that the episodes are 90 minutes long. As long as they take their time to tell the story properly , Discovery will be fine at 10-13 episodes.

Looking back at some older trek shows, I reminded on how many disconnected subplots they often did just for filler purposes. Trimming those out in an episode to episode basis would also go a long way to maximizing storytelling and developing characters.. .

 

[Anna Yolei]

Think of it this way--the inevitable season set release will be less expensive than a 22-26 episode season set. It'll make collecting the series more affordable.

In a sane world maybe, but Paramount has been blatant about bending this fandom over and charging stupid ridiculous pricing for the various TV shows. Even Enterprise was hovering in the 100 dollar range.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Anna Yolei]

As for the topic of this thread, while I'd personally prefer 13 episodes, I most what this:

Just make the episodes count.

Less episodes means less filler.