Things that need be done with a new Star Trek show
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
They were catering to an audience that was soon to vanish along with the channel. That's never good for longevity. 
(And I'm not at all convinced they were "catering" to the UPN audience very well, but I wasn't much paying attention to such things back then and I'm not sure what it is that they wanted. But the successful shows on UPN at the time, if there were any, would provide a clue - if the UPN audience even had a coherent identity like cable channels do now.)
So, Star Trek needs to cater to an audience on a channel with a certain amount of stability, sure. HBO and Showtime seem like going concerns. The channels in the most risk of vanishing are broadcast channels, and those are exactly the ones that wouldn't want any space opera to begin with.
(And I'm not at all convinced they were "catering" to the UPN audience very well, but I wasn't much paying attention to such things back then and I'm not sure what it is that they wanted. But the successful shows on UPN at the time, if there were any, would provide a clue - if the UPN audience even had a coherent identity like cable channels do now.)
So, Star Trek needs to cater to an audience on a channel with a certain amount of stability, sure. HBO and Showtime seem like going concerns. The channels in the most risk of vanishing are broadcast channels, and those are exactly the ones that wouldn't want any space opera to begin with.
It's like saying Venice sunk because it catered to both the land and the sea.
It sunk because it sunk.
Last edited:
There are always reasons for things happening, even Venice sinking.
In ENT's case, the reasons were business-related just as much as creative-related. Sure, ENT was an uninspired series, but look at the worse series that get along just fine. They know their audience and give them what they want. If ENT was cancelled because it was "bad" then how do all the bad shows survive and get renewed year after year?
There are coherent identities for channels' audiences nowadays, much more so than when ENT went off the air. In the case of cable, the channel actually creates the audience to some extent. Only certain types of people will subscribe to Showtime or HBO. Certain types will watch AMC; certain types watch Spike.
Even broadcast has split up along predictible lines. CBS is for fans of cop shows and anodyne sitcoms; ABC caters to the female audience with comedy and fantasy; FOX skews more male with action and cartoons; CW is for young females; NBC doesn't know what the frak it is.
TV programming has become a game of figuring out which shows will appeal to your current audience. Hell on Wheels is getting sketchy ratings because it isn't up to the quality standards of AMC. Terra Nova is struggling because FOX is for guys who like sci fi and action, not families watching heartwarming stories about dinosaurs. But American Horror Story hit right on the mark for FX, because FX = AMC - PBS.
Star Trek can fit into a lot of places, but for it to be successful, it needs to be shaped to the audience.
In ENT's case, the reasons were business-related just as much as creative-related. Sure, ENT was an uninspired series, but look at the worse series that get along just fine. They know their audience and give them what they want. If ENT was cancelled because it was "bad" then how do all the bad shows survive and get renewed year after year?
There are coherent identities for channels' audiences nowadays, much more so than when ENT went off the air. In the case of cable, the channel actually creates the audience to some extent. Only certain types of people will subscribe to Showtime or HBO. Certain types will watch AMC; certain types watch Spike.
Even broadcast has split up along predictible lines. CBS is for fans of cop shows and anodyne sitcoms; ABC caters to the female audience with comedy and fantasy; FOX skews more male with action and cartoons; CW is for young females; NBC doesn't know what the frak it is.
TV programming has become a game of figuring out which shows will appeal to your current audience. Hell on Wheels is getting sketchy ratings because it isn't up to the quality standards of AMC. Terra Nova is struggling because FOX is for guys who like sci fi and action, not families watching heartwarming stories about dinosaurs. But American Horror Story hit right on the mark for FX, because FX = AMC - PBS.
Star Trek can fit into a lot of places, but for it to be successful, it needs to be shaped to the audience.
J
Jetfire
Guest
Good writing? Good Acting? Good SFX? WHAT!? 
The more expensive it would be, the less likely it would be successful. Lucas has gone on the record to say that Star Wars: Underworld is on hold until it can be produced at a lower cost than it presently could be. So, I would suggest that the producers of a future Star Trek TV series will be able to learn a thing or two from SW:U about keeping costs down. If I were at CBS, I'd wonder whether we should wait to see what George does before making a move on a new Star Trek series.
Apples and Oranges, Lucas would be using his own Effects house, and would naturally be able to negotiate a lower price.
I see. So the fact, that ILM is used for the Star Trek films as well, means that any cost saving measures which GL might develop for SW:U will certainly have no possible application to a Star Trek series. Got it.
Oh, sure, Cost saving measures developed could be advantageous, but, Trek isn't gonna get the pricing that Lucas would get
They were catering to an audience that was soon to vanish along with the channel. That's never good for longevity.
(And I'm not at all convinced they were "catering" to the UPN audience very well, but I wasn't much paying attention to such things back then and I'm not sure what it is that they wanted. But the successful shows on UPN at the time, if there were any, would provide a clue - if the UPN audience even had a coherent identity like cable channels do now.)
I was curious, so I checked wikipedia -- UPN picked up "Buffy" and "Roswell" from WB, so for a while it appears they were trying to cater to the sci-fi audience. However, most of their successful shows were 'urban' sitcoms (and of course wrestling).
I recall that Enterprise was followed by "America's Next Top Model", which makes no sense from an audience perspective, but perhaps at the end they didn't really care.
If they would've catered to us they would've listened to what we were saying.
Nobody gave specific instructions on storylines or character development, but everyone complained about writing, pace and design.
And they didn't listen. They just tried to defend their work over and over again and, you know what, bad production just doesn't hold water.
It wasn't until Black got in that alot of the problems we cited started to get fixed and the stories MADE SENSE. And by the time that happened it was too late.
Dude, good writing and bad writing is not dictated by the fans, it just IS.
Yeah, we all didn't want Spock to die in TWOK but nobody complained about it after we saw how it was done.
They didn't take our input as constructive criticism, they seemed to enjoy the battle...the fact that they had control over Star Trek, which, honey, is not true. We spend the money on the DVDs and the merchandise, it's ours.
Last edited:
There's a trip down memory lane! You're right - UPN used to be kind of for black people (aka "urban.") Wow, were they schizo. ENT never had a prayer - UPN's audience was too unfocused. "Sci fi" and "urban" go together like ketchup and ice cream.
Star Trek could survive much better nowadays if, for starters, it hooked up with a channel that knew what it was all about, and had a single, coherent audience to cater to. And most of them do nowadays - it's a requirement if they don't want to end up like UPN.
Star Trek could survive much better nowadays if, for starters, it hooked up with a channel that knew what it was all about, and had a single, coherent audience to cater to. And most of them do nowadays - it's a requirement if they don't want to end up like UPN.
It really depends when you are looking at UPN. When UPN debuted it had a sci fi focus with Nowhere Man, Legend, The Sentinel, etc... The problem was, by the time VOY ended and ENT debuted all the other sci fi shows had died, and UPN had developed the urban comedy niche that really had no place for Star Trek.
include humanoid robots in next live action Trek series.
or androids like Data.
see this thread from last year:
humanoid robots in next live action Trek series?
or androids like Data.
see this thread from last year:
humanoid robots in next live action Trek series?
No, you misunderstand. What I was saying was, ENTERPRISE was cancelled because UPN had to cater to the audience that that networ'ks shows were shifting to.
In that instance, it certainly was NOT us. If it was, ENTERPRISE, or some other Star trek series would still be on the air.
Been a while since I visited TBBS, but this is just the conversation I was looking for 
I would truly love to see a new series pick-up in the TNG, DS9, and Voy cannon, and though a show based around the Titan would be amazing I'm not sure how they'd pull it off given the diversity of the crew, if they follow the novels that is. Also some are right, Frakes is getting up there in age, and unless him and Sirtis got into shape they look too much like has-beens. Even in the Ent finale they were showing their age compared to how they looked in The Pegasus which is the TNG they were supposedly in with the holodeck scenes.
Honestly I think they'd need to shake it up alittle, though I'm not sure how. I think an Earth based show would be too boring for Trekkers and not make much since to casual viewers. But either way it'd be nice to pull together some of the folks who brought Trek back to life in the 80s and 90's like the Okudas , Rick Berman, David Livingston, Jeri Taylor, and others. Heck even Brannon Braga though I think he went in the wrong direction with Enterprise.
If they could get a good core team together I'm sure they could come-up with something.
I would truly love to see a new series pick-up in the TNG, DS9, and Voy cannon, and though a show based around the Titan would be amazing I'm not sure how they'd pull it off given the diversity of the crew, if they follow the novels that is. Also some are right, Frakes is getting up there in age, and unless him and Sirtis got into shape they look too much like has-beens. Even in the Ent finale they were showing their age compared to how they looked in The Pegasus which is the TNG they were supposedly in with the holodeck scenes.
Honestly I think they'd need to shake it up alittle, though I'm not sure how. I think an Earth based show would be too boring for Trekkers and not make much since to casual viewers. But either way it'd be nice to pull together some of the folks who brought Trek back to life in the 80s and 90's like the Okudas , Rick Berman, David Livingston, Jeri Taylor, and others. Heck even Brannon Braga though I think he went in the wrong direction with Enterprise.
If they could get a good core team together I'm sure they could come-up with something.
Yeah, I definitely wouldn't mind seeing the Typhon Pact become a genuine part of continuity.
Similar threads
