To be fair, we're Trek fans and fanatics. We'd find a way to whine even if TNG, DS9 and ENT all returned to television with multi-year contracts for dozens of new episodes apiece with most of the original cast members reprising their roles.
Trek Returning to TV in 2017!
- Thread starter Squiggy
- Start date
Exclusive to streaming makes me think the budget for this series will be not too much. Could be wrong.
Manny Coto and Ron Moore maybe, but I think a new team is exactly what is needed to get fresh stories underway. We need people who used to be fans of the show, not the likes of Kurtzman who claims to be a fan but really isn't.
Which is another round of war, war, war. *shrug*
I suggest you forward your ideas to CBS as they are eagerly awaiting your input.
I thought subscription series tended to benefit from higher budgets than network TV?
I usually associate a web only star trek series as something fans would do
It's weird for a big studio IMO to do this for one of it's biggest franchise.
It's weird for a big studio IMO to do this for one of it's biggest franchise.
Bringing in a writer who has produced sure-fire winners in both TV and movies is your definition of "chickening out?"
That's your own assumptions talking, not what anyone has actually said. But of course, since I have "no brains," my opinions must be meaningless to you.
Aso, what exactly is the press release trying to suggest?
That Star Trek: "Phase III" will be only available on some kind of streaming service that nobody actually uses?
I'm British, so I genuinely don't know what this CBS service is - please fill me in!
That Star Trek: "Phase III" will be only available on some kind of streaming service that nobody actually uses?
I'm British, so I genuinely don't know what this CBS service is - please fill me in!
As they sit on their giant pile of money Kurtzman has made for them.
I'm not sure I like the idea of Ronald D Moore being involved - I like what he does....
....but his only setting seems to be "dark / gritty / religious".
Not what Star Trek, or indeed the world, arguably needs right now.
....but his only setting seems to be "dark / gritty / religious".
Not what Star Trek, or indeed the world, arguably needs right now.
They actually did so for a decade.
I stuck with Voyager and Enterprise (UGH) till the end.
So I'll be watching this as well.
So I'll be watching this as well.
CBS - All Access in the States. Someone in the UK will probably pick it up to watch on the tube.
They do. Better production values too.
New Trek, back on TV where it belongs! Extremely excited by this.
My two penn'orth:
I don't particularly care what universe/timeline it's set in, though my thoughts are it'll probably be the Abramsverse, either concurrent with the movies or projected further into the future so as not to step on toes with continuity.
I don't hate the Abrams movies. They're certainly more whizz-bang and actiony (and I think it's fair to say 'dumbed-down'), but they're enjoyable for what they are and they do keep the core of the characters intact, and to an extent of Trek itself.
That said, they can't sustain a TV series on explosions and lens flare alone so that gives the stories (and characters) room to breathe. The article on startrek.com states that the series will "explore dramatic contemporary themes that have been a signature of the franchise", so signs point to getting a series more faithful to what we know Star Trek to be, but in a new environment and hopefully with a bit of innovation and a shot of adrenaline.
I'm just happy we're getting some new Trek, let's not condemn it before we've even seen it.
Still would've liked to see Captain Worf, though
My two penn'orth:
I don't particularly care what universe/timeline it's set in, though my thoughts are it'll probably be the Abramsverse, either concurrent with the movies or projected further into the future so as not to step on toes with continuity.
I don't hate the Abrams movies. They're certainly more whizz-bang and actiony (and I think it's fair to say 'dumbed-down'), but they're enjoyable for what they are and they do keep the core of the characters intact, and to an extent of Trek itself.
That said, they can't sustain a TV series on explosions and lens flare alone so that gives the stories (and characters) room to breathe. The article on startrek.com states that the series will "explore dramatic contemporary themes that have been a signature of the franchise", so signs point to getting a series more faithful to what we know Star Trek to be, but in a new environment and hopefully with a bit of innovation and a shot of adrenaline.
I'm just happy we're getting some new Trek, let's not condemn it before we've even seen it.
Still would've liked to see Captain Worf, though
I would tend to agree. Nothing wrong with those things of course...I just don't want an endless diet of it in Trek.
I'm amazed at the amount of negativity this seems to be drawing so far. I'm excited. I plan to start watching Limitless, as that is a TV show he is currently producing, before I form an kind of expectations. After all, most of what we have seen Kurtzman do is in conjunction with Orci. Might be that this is going to be a lot more true to form than some folks are expecting.
Tim Russ had better be in this. That's all I'm gonna say.
-First episode will be broadcast on U.S TV
- Future episodes will be available on CBS's online format
-Foreign countries will be able to watch the new Star Trek series on TV as well as CBS's online system
I believe the thought is consistent that not going with something proven is the more courageous path, which is why some people dislike all the reboots and say there's nothing new in Hollywood.
Conflicted on the streaming plan. I interpret it as not being confident enough to launch on the big boy TV network, but the plus side is that it probably won't be held to the monster standard and quickly cancelled if it gets lower numbers. Streaming likely more forgiving there.
Personally, streaming-only is just more of a PITA. I like having the DVR grab everything, and being able to go through it. Now there's Netflix for some shows, so two spots. Now starting to break up into all sorts of channels with their own things, so splintering my attention and where to go to watch each thing.
This CBS app better be on my TV or Blu-Ray box for apps, as it's going to kill it for me if I have to go sit at the computer to watch. I paid for a giant TV screen for a reason. (and yes, could hook up a computer to the TV, but now you're just adding more hassle to my viewing experience. I just want to turn on the tv and go...)
And I already pay an annoying amount for my cable package, plus pay Netflix. Not really looking forward to giving every other channel $5/mo to add their streaming service to the pile...
Personally, streaming-only is just more of a PITA. I like having the DVR grab everything, and being able to go through it. Now there's Netflix for some shows, so two spots. Now starting to break up into all sorts of channels with their own things, so splintering my attention and where to go to watch each thing.
This CBS app better be on my TV or Blu-Ray box for apps, as it's going to kill it for me if I have to go sit at the computer to watch. I paid for a giant TV screen for a reason. (and yes, could hook up a computer to the TV, but now you're just adding more hassle to my viewing experience. I just want to turn on the tv and go...)
And I already pay an annoying amount for my cable package, plus pay Netflix. Not really looking forward to giving every other channel $5/mo to add their streaming service to the pile...
Similar threads
