I have far more interest and investment in the Strange New Worlds cast than I ever had in the Kelvin cast.
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
I really liked this cutaway, unfortunately I can't find @ancient's thread where he developed this - I do remember liking that he had manage to make having curved corridors in the secondary hull work. If I remember correctly he had a length of about 1200 feet for his version of the Enterprise. Also Jim Botaitis came up with a length of 1341 feet for his version of the Enterprise when he took the ten foot high sets into account.Onscreen graphics in this week's episode say the NCC-1701 is 442 meters long. Even the TOS version has to be that size. Look at cutaways like this one. Kirk's 1701 and Pike's are the same overall size.
This is not a 289-meter-long vessel.
You mean streaming or theatrical? I don’t think he really has much influence on the latter, despite his involvement in the Kelvin films. As for streaming, I think they never truly planned on branching out with those. SECTION 31 was supposed to be a series, and only happened because Michelle Yeoh still wanted to do it, and making it a movie was a reasonable compromise given how in demand she was. My understanding is the prospect of more streaming films depended on whether that film did well, and we know how that turned out.
I know but if Trek does great then lots of the credit goes to the people who hired Kurtzman. If he hires someone new and they do great then Ellison gets credit for hiring this new person who came in and saved Star Trek. If Trek just does okay which is what it's kind of doing right now, then the brand is not being maximized to it's full potential.
It makes sense to me you would want someone who will have the same kind of impact on Trek that James Gunn is having on the DCEU. Are they going to settle for just doing okay or do they want Trek to get back to where it was in the mid-90's.
Theatrical. I get the feeling lots of studios are realizing streaming wasn't what they thought it would be and want to start making money off movies again. Yet they can't get people to go, half of the time but Star Trek is brand name I think that could get people to show up. if it was made by the right people.
While there can be coordination between the TV shows and movies, it makes the most sense for the movies to have someone in authority over them who specializes specifically in movies, otherwise you end up with a situation like the TNG movies where they are basically just extended TV episodes on the big screen because (with the exception of Nemesis) all the production people are people with a background in TV with either no movie experience, or just the previous TNG movie as the extent of their movie experience.
Star Trek is doing far better than "just okay" right now. They would not have invested nearly eight years of television content with guarantees of it going on for another two (meaning a full decade) if it were "just okay." Even the Current Era's only real failure, Section 31, has still done well streaming numbers. Star Trek does not need saving at the moment, in fact changing what it's currently doing would be the text book definition of fixing something which isn't broken.
Star Trek's never going to be that popular again. Even then, the franchise itself wasn't that popular, but rather TNG was, as the popularity went into decline almost immediately after TNG ended. Even TNG's movies never reached the highs of the TV series.
Uh Huh - On what Star Trek series enduring popularituy over 18 years was TNG greenlit in the first place?
These days when you talk STAR TREK more people think "Kirk/Spock" than "Picard/Data".
And BOTH Kelvin timeline films (based on TOS) made more at the Box Office than any TNG film...
So, yeah, soryy TNG was never the absol;ute 'height' of the Star Trek franchise's popularity - that was (at the time TNG debuted) 18 years of only 79 reruns in daily syndication and foyr very popular TOS based feature films.
Hell, TOS is STILL in daily sydication today.
Yes, TOS has had the bigger cultural impact, though TNG did do better ratings in first run. Regardless, my point was the popularity Star Trek had in the 90s more or less evaporated once TNG ended.
DS9's ratings continued to worsen even as the series got better and more engaging. Same with ENT. Both shows saw improved storylines and fan reactions but the Nielsens for both were in steady decline for much of their respective runs.
To be fair, the syndication market for DS9 had also changed throughout the 90s, which made it less prolific compared to TNG in its height. I’ve read horror stories of DS9 only airing around midnight or after.
Being in LA area, I was actually lucky that my affiliate KCOP 13 would air DS9 on prime time weeknights. They had a very successful run with TNG airing it on Wednesday nights prime time that it was able to compete with network shows, and then continued doing that with DS9. That is, until S7, when UPN finally occupied all five weeknights, which forced DS9 to find a prime time slot on Saturdays.
I’ll have to look it up, but I remember Xena initially airing weekend afternoons but towards the show’s end it would only air at a weird time like 11pm.
Whereas here in my home city DS9 always aired at 11:30pm on Saturday nights on our ABC affiliate. TNG was broadcast on the same channel at 7:00pm on Saturdays, and from January 1993 to the summer of 1994 we got both new Trek series on the same evening and same channel.
TNG was on Friday night at 8PM here in the Capital District throughout its entire run.
DS-9 was Thursday nights at 9PM for most of its time, but by its last season it was being bumped more often than not due to specials & sport events.
VOYAGER started on Friday at 9PM, but moved to Saturday in the same time slot.
ENTERPRISE on UPN was Saturdays here at 8PM, but that too become problematic after the second season due to constantly being bumped by overtime football games and the local news afterward.
All of the Berman Era Trek shows got a second showing on Sundays in the same week at an assortment of times due to syndication.
(which was why I was able to record all of them on VHS tape while working the second shift at the hospital)
DS-9 was Thursday nights at 9PM for most of its time, but by its last season it was being bumped more often than not due to specials & sport events.
VOYAGER started on Friday at 9PM, but moved to Saturday in the same time slot.
ENTERPRISE on UPN was Saturdays here at 8PM, but that too become problematic after the second season due to constantly being bumped by overtime football games and the local news afterward.
All of the Berman Era Trek shows got a second showing on Sundays in the same week at an assortment of times due to syndication.
(which was why I was able to record all of them on VHS tape while working the second shift at the hospital)
Last edited:
I thought UPN had a single program schedule for the whole country? At least in my area, Voyager and Enterprise had occupied Wednesday 9pm (until the last season of ENT, which got moved to Friday 8pm.)
Some markets without a UPN affiliate were able to air some UPN shows. In the Beckley-Bluefield-Oak Hill, West Virginia market, the local ABC affiliate, WOAY-TV, carried Enterprise and Buffy the Vampire Slayer (during its UPN seasons) in an early evening weekend time slot during, the pre-Prime Time hour given over to local affiliates to program, the hour given over to syndicated game shows and infotainment programs. Enterprise was frequently joined in progress due to live sporting events overrunning. Buffy fared better in that department.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
