Trek Returning to TV in 2017!
- Thread starter Squiggy
- Start date
It might be the more people that watch, the more ads that can be sold.
But then you'd get fans complaining that you're betraying the 'spirit' of Star Trek by focusing on a military group like that, and that you're not being faithful to Roddenberry's 'vision'.
I hate to say this but I think as far as the studio is concerned there's going to be more of the style of the JJverse instead of the Prime. This is going to sound a little critical but I'm going to use my wife as an example. She loves the movies set in the Abramsverse and will watch them pretty frequently. If I put on one of the movies set in the Prime Universe she'll barely make it through it. For example: She liked Into Darkness and hated Wrath of Khan; she liked 09 but First Contact was 'boring'. The same thing happened with my niece (16) and nephew (18) who have said the same thing. They all three have asked me if we can go see Beyond when it comes out because they liked the trailer (I didn't care for it).
I hope that we see a return to form with the new films, but I'm afraid that the new generation is going to win out...
I hope that we see a return to form with the new films, but I'm afraid that the new generation is going to win out...
But a film is, in the same way that Smallville was very different to both Superman Returns and Man of Steel, the current Marvel TV serieses are different to the Avengers-linked movies, Gotham is different to Batman Begins, First Contact was different to TNG or DS9, and TWOK was different to TOS.
I'm sure the new series will be whizzy and flashy and bangy and based on what todays TV viewers want, but what works for a 2 hour film does not work for a 16 hour season.
Why would CBS disdain a popular movie franchise by not basing the spin-off TV series on the elements that are in it? Also, why do people continue to believe all of the bullcaca about Roddenberry having a 'vision' and all of the other nonsense about the franchise that isn't true and never was? As well, there are a lot of bangy and whizy TV shows on the CBS schedule, and they do quite well in the ratings.
I like to see some ambition and boldness and them going a third way with this stuff. Not just lift it from the movies. Take some risks here. That's my preference.
I don't like the JJ stuff at all but I would also object to them redoing the Prime-Berman style.
What "universe" it is set in is a different topic just to state.
I don't like the JJ stuff at all but I would also object to them redoing the Prime-Berman style.
What "universe" it is set in is a different topic just to state.
Last edited:
Nx1701g. Perhaps as their tastes mature their opinions will change. Of course, seeing "Wrath of Khan" would have been helped by seeing "Space Seed".
Seeing "First Contact" would have been helped by seeing the Borg eps of TNG.
Oh, absent that you can still enjoy them, but seeing the prior material does enhance ones viewing of the later.
If there's one thing you can say about JJTrek, it's that it's accessible.
Seeing "First Contact" would have been helped by seeing the Borg eps of TNG.
Oh, absent that you can still enjoy them, but seeing the prior material does enhance ones viewing of the later.
If there's one thing you can say about JJTrek, it's that it's accessible.
I'd like to see somebody take Trek in their own stylistic direction, not just try to emulate modern styles with Trek aesthetics like JJ did.
But for it to really feel like Trek I would hope that direction has a sense of adventure and prioritized peaceful solutions before violent ones. Just make the show smart like a premium network show is expected to be.
But for it to really feel like Trek I would hope that direction has a sense of adventure and prioritized peaceful solutions before violent ones. Just make the show smart like a premium network show is expected to be.
She has actually. In preparation for Into Darkness I showed her Space Seed. She fell asleep.
Same deal. She's one of the few people I've met who disliked The Best of Both Worlds. She didn't dislike I, Borg though.
Very true. Surprisingly my secretary and I got on the topic of Star Trek and Star Wars today and we talked about the Abramsverse and that there was a new series coming. She said that if it were like the movies she may watch it, but if it were like the Prime Universe she'd pass not wanting to be bogged down by all that came before.
I think that's part of it too now. I think that the universe may have a part in this because there's so much that it intimidates some people from watching it.
At any rate I'll still watch it though...
Make her watch all of of Star Trek Enterprise since it's the only previous canon remaining in the Abramsverse.
It's true, AbramsTrek is designed to appeal to a modern general audience. From a business perspective, there's no harm in that.
But I would counter that with, if the modern general audience wants something that appeals to them, they can look anywhere else on television or summer movies. They'll never connect with Star Trek the way we do even if it's changed to appeal more to them. Things oriented at a niche audience can only survive by keeping that niche audience.
It's kind of like how Japanese game companies made changes to their games to appeal more to a mainstream Western audience. Western audiences didn't buy them, and the niche audiences who loved their old stuff didn't like them either. I suspect if they just try to make Star Trek an action series the same thing will happen. Star Wars fans will keep watching Star Wars, and Mad Max, and all the other action franchises, and Star Trek fans won't connect with it either.
Would you rather have a Trek that pleases a lot of people a little, or a few people a lot? Just like, I'm not a fan of Dr Who, and Dr Who fans certainly wouldn't want to see it changed to please me more.
But I would counter that with, if the modern general audience wants something that appeals to them, they can look anywhere else on television or summer movies. They'll never connect with Star Trek the way we do even if it's changed to appeal more to them. Things oriented at a niche audience can only survive by keeping that niche audience.
It's kind of like how Japanese game companies made changes to their games to appeal more to a mainstream Western audience. Western audiences didn't buy them, and the niche audiences who loved their old stuff didn't like them either. I suspect if they just try to make Star Trek an action series the same thing will happen. Star Wars fans will keep watching Star Wars, and Mad Max, and all the other action franchises, and Star Trek fans won't connect with it either.
Would you rather have a Trek that pleases a lot of people a little, or a few people a lot? Just like, I'm not a fan of Dr Who, and Dr Who fans certainly wouldn't want to see it changed to please me more.
^ The problem with that interpretation is just as you lay out though. Trek is, in the end, a business and if it stops making a lot of money then it's going to be taken away again. The perfect example is the lull that began with Nemesis (seriously I can still remember how shocked I was that Main in Manhattan beat it) and then Enterprise ended after season 4 (Battlestar Galactica was beating Enterprise in the ratings at the time).
I hope that the new series strikes a good balance. Personally I think that it being on CBS All Access may be part of the best bet for it at the moment. With it being online the fans who want to watch will have the opportunity to do so. Maybe they'll restore it to what it once was for those reasons? I don't know.
But, like all things, it had to adapt to survive.
I hope that the new series strikes a good balance. Personally I think that it being on CBS All Access may be part of the best bet for it at the moment. With it being online the fans who want to watch will have the opportunity to do so. Maybe they'll restore it to what it once was for those reasons? I don't know.
But, like all things, it had to adapt to survive.
But Trek was never meant for a niche audience and I doubt a niche audience alone can keep it on the air.
I don't know if I would exactly classify this as wishful thinking, but it's not far off. NuTrek has been successful with that modern (by which I take it you mean younger) general audience, both domestically and abroad. You don't dispute this as being a sound business approach. But then you suggest that since that cohort has so many other offerings on different platforms, they should (voluntarily?) give up on a franchise, new to many of them, so that the focus of the films can be reformed to be in sync with what traditional Trek fans desire. Why should people be turned away from something they enjoy and is being executed in the way the filmmakers have intended it to be?
You seem to be saying that because Trek is a tradition that developed its history over so many years before the new films arrived, that it should be considered its own discreet genre which only the cognoscenti who have been long adherents can properly appreciate. Well, the whole point of the films being introduced when and in the way they were, was that there was manifest evidence, over an extended period of time, that the hallowed tradition of the Prime Universe had run its course as something that warranted investment on a broadcast or certainly, film platform. Perhaps if creative decisions on the last two TV entries had been free from network interference, a recognition that the emphasis in productions was moving away from a serial model, and a greater self-discipline from avoiding thinly described cribbing of plots from earlier iterations, amongst other things, had been different, than the fervor or at least sustained interest in Voyager and Enterprise, would have made another Prime entry, after a reasonable interval, a realistic proposition. But that was not the case, so while the studio heads saw value in resurrecting the franchise, it must have seemed a given that the treatment and approach going forward had to reflect the changing times if the new product was going to be seen as relevant.
The new approach, in reflecting the values inherent in most other genre productions, perforce would require a large budget and consequently had to be made to appeal and be marketed to the broadest general audience possible. The films were not going to be made as a concession to the traditional fanbase. That some of the longtime viewers would inevitably sample the films, out of curiosity if for no other reason, I would have to think was considered as a bonus, but not a driving force. As to the appreciation factor you argue for, I would suggest that the diverse, "new" viewing cohort likely shares a greater unanimity of satisfaction in what they've been offered, than a continuation of the known history would ever allow among the traditional audience. I think that can be attested to by the normal give and take one witnesses here every day.
I guess to sum up, as offered by BillJ above, a reintroduction to film of the franchise using either approach couldn't be considered a niche production. Trek isn't an art house kind of property and to think of it being in that realm, one that can only be understood by a limited society of longtime habitues is simply not realistic. If. by your analogy, NuTrek pleases a lot of people only minimally (which I don't think is the case anyway), it seems clear that they're satisfied enough to continue coming to see this representation, and significantly for a good number of them, probably for repeated viewings. This means that the concept is a successful one and to suggest that it be replaced by an iteration that as a given will not generate anywhere near the same income, to be done as sort of a valedictory concession of sorts, would be a business determination that would be seen as a conceptually losing proposition and consequently, wouldn't ever see the light of day. Generally, for the same reasons, I expect that the upcoming series will be an expansion of the films, albeit with the explicit spectacle quotient toned down to reflect the budget realities of the medium.
A very important point to make. No matter what we end up seeing on the screen, it's bound to piss off half the people who consider themselves to be 'die-hard' fans. The fact of the matter is unless this series also appeals to the 'not so die-hard fan' as well, it is going to fail. I believe it can be done, but it's going to be hard work.
Another thing to consider is that the 'core' older fandom that loves the prime universe is dying off, and that Paramount/CBS can't keep on making TV shows, movies, and merchandise to please them and only them; it has to cultivate a new generation of fans in order to keep this franchise alive (something that DC Comics doesn't seem to get, but that Marvel does, for example-who the hell wants to, and needs to, see a comic book based on the 1966 Batman TV show?) The 'core' older fandom need to understand that things for this franchise have to change, or it will die. That's the minimum.
I'm really looking forward to STAR TREK's return to television ... it's been too long. I like The Classic Series, but even with the George Lucas-styled CGI drop-ins and effects redos, it's not enough to bring it up to speed. I'd love to see the whole thing rebooted, again, only for TV, this time and tap into all of that untapped potential the first series had. Who knows what CBS will eventually unleash on us paying customers, but ... that continues to be my wish. In any event, they've already got my money, because it's too late to turn back, now ... whatever series eventuates, I'll support it. I may regret it, but I'll worry about that, later. STAR TREK's been around longer than I've been alive ... and I just can't imagine Life without it.
Remastered TOS is no where near as offensive and inappropriate as the Lucas special edition edits.
Similar threads
