Spoilers Variety about the future of Star Trek

[Char Kais]

Interesting statement about the age of Star Trek fans:

IMDB did show the age of users who rated episodes.

Discovery: 92% of users are over 30 (That's worse than Yellowstone).
Picard and Prodigy (the show specifically targeted at children!): 94% are over 30

So much for the "new and young" audience NuTrek is chasing.

Remember all the arguments (especially regarding Discovery) about how Star Trek needs to change and modernize to attract new viewers?
Remember all the grandiose announcements around "Prodigy" and how important it is to reach a younger audience?

ViacomCBS Reportedly Sees ‘Star Trek: Prodigy’ As Gateway To Toys And Theme Park Attractions

“Prodigy” was viewed by many as critical to the fate of the “Trek” franchise, as it’s the first bid to engage families — a path that can lead to ancillary products such as toys and theme park rides.

 

[fireproof78]

Remember all the arguments (especially regarding Discovery) about how Star Trek needs to change and modernize to attract new viewers?
Remember all the grandiose announcements around "Prodigy" and how important it is to reach a younger audience?

Yup.

Didn't work. Shut it down, and let the franchise rest.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Man, this board is so cynical.

 

[fireproof78]

Man, this board is so cynical.

If current Trek can't reach new fans what is the point?

 

[Cr0sis21]

If current Trek can't reach new fans what is the point?

I don't think it's just Trek.
I've got two children still living in the house. One is 15, the other is 10.
Trying to get them to watch anything with me is like pulling teeth. What they like is few and far between. Comic book movies, Ghostbusters, Star Trek, nature shows, sitcoms, Star Wars, and on and on, they just won't.
So what do they watch? YouTubers, TikToks, things like that. It infuriates me, but that's also pretty common amongst the younger generation. The good news? They might eventually find their way to Trek.
My oldest daughter, who's a grad student at UF, just asked me to make a list for her of how to watch Star Trek in chronological order. She wants to get through as much as she can before going on the Star Trek cruise next year with me and her mother.
Likewise, my youngest kids will often get pulled in when I just have it on in the background. My youbgest daughter loves the music from Subspace Rhapsody. My son enjoys Lower Decks when I have it on.
So, maybe, in a few years they will come around. But what Frakes is describing? That's not new. When I was in the sixth grade going to conventions in the 90s, I barely saw anyone there my own age. It was all adults. And yet, those fans must have been somewhere because there are a LOT of people watching Trek now who are in they're 40s. But if you asked Frakes that same question in 1996, you'd have gotten the same answer. So... we will see what the future holds. But certainly, anecdotal evidence isn't reason to stop productions.
And as far as reviews of Prodigy go, how many 9 year Olds are leaving reviews of anything on Rotten Tomatoes or IMDB?

 

[Quinton]

Interesting statement about the age of Star Trek fans:

IMDB did show the age of users who rated episodes.

Discovery: 92% of users are over 30 (That's worse than Yellowstone).
Picard and Prodigy (the show specifically targeted at children!): 94% are over 30

So much for the "new and young" audience NuTrek is chasing.

Remember all the arguments (especially regarding Discovery) about how Star Trek needs to change and modernize to attract new viewers?
Remember all the grandiose announcements around "Prodigy" and how important it is to reach a younger audience?

I gotta tell ya I know your shtick is to get people riled up but I just find you so funny

 

[Cr0sis21]

I gotta tell ya I know your shtick is to get people riled up but I just find you so funny

For the record, I don't actually know anyone who's ever left a review on IMDB, myself included.
That's a hell of a small sample size for ANY show.

 

[Quinton]

For the record, I don't actually know anyone who's ever left a review on IMDB, myself included.
That's a hell of a small sample size for ANY show.

Yeah...

I don't doubt that there's maybe some tidbit of glean-worthy analysis in this; if someone were to show me that there's a sizably younger audience of reviewers for, say, Steven Universe? I'd believe it. But this doesn't strike me as particularly valuable because - as you say - it's a hecking small sample size.

 

[El Maestro]

Man, this board is so cynical.

We've both been members since 2001...it's always been this way but it does seem a bit more so in the last few years....

 

[El Maestro]

It's pretty funny to me how a lot of the "wE nEeD sOmeThiNG NeW tO rEaCh nEW AudiENces" thing often means "my pet/preferred franchise project is the thing that will grow the Trek audience." Funny how that works!

 

[Cr0sis21]

It's pretty funny to me how a lot of the "wE nEeD sOmeThiNG NeW tO rEaCh nEW AudiENces" thing often means "my pet/preferred franchise project is the thing that will grow the Trek audience." Funny how that works!

One thing I've learned is that audiences will always surprise you. You can't predict who will enjoy something, and who won't. God knows I never imagined we'd see the affection for Enterprise that we're getting now.

 

[fireproof78]

Trying to get them to watch anything with me is like pulling teeth. What they like is few and far between. Comic book movies, Ghostbusters, Star Trek, nature shows, sitcoms, Star Wars, and on and on, they just won't.

Sorry to hear that. My kids are around the same age and we sit down and watch Trek, Mandalorian, Marvel (all of them...ugh), The Flash, among others.

 

[bdub76]

If current Trek can't reach new fans what is the point?

Doctor Who found new fans. I see this at conventions. I don’t see why Trek can’t reach new fans.

The biggest problem with Trek is its huge back catalogue. It’s gigantic compared to Doctor Who. And it’s on P+, which doesn’t have a huge subscription base. If new fans think they have to watch all of that catalog to get new Trek shows, they’ll likely move on. Trek needs to reboot in the sense that it tells new fans what it’s about. Doctor Who does this often with each new Doctor. Trek needs to do something like that with each new series.

Hopefully, the new series won’t depend on too much prior history for new fans to get it.

 

[Cr0sis21]

Sorry to hear that. My kids are around the same age and we sit down and watch Trek, Mandalorian, Marvel (all of them...ugh), The Flash, among others.

They do both like Avatar, though. We just finished a family rewatch of it with my youngest (it was her first time). She then moved on to Korra, got two episodes in, Ave decided she didn't like it, despite my son trying to convince her to watch it with him (oh the irony).
To be fair, my youngest does want to watch horror films, but I have to be very restrictive. She also keeps trying to read my book, which, while flattering, is NOT age appropriate.

 

[fireproof78]

Doctor Who found new fans. I see this at conventions. I don’t see why Trek can’t reach new fans.

Again, I would like to think it can. It hasn't down it though.

It's pretty funny to me how a lot of the "wE nEeD sOmeThiNG NeW tO rEaCh nEW AudiENces" thing often means "my pet/preferred franchise project is the thing that will grow the Trek audience." Funny how that works!

If Picard Season 3 is the way to reach new fans I welcome it.

But, ST 09 did more for new fans than anything of late and I see Kelvin films derided all over the placed, so clearly us current fans don't know how to reach new fans.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The problem isn't the "what" it's the how. The franchise's inability to attract a new audience ultimately boils down to three things: Lack of accessibility, poor promotion, and, most importantly, this perpetual need to weaponize nostalgia -- which is, at its very core, a conceptual gatekeep for any would-be new audience.

*That is to say, any new story idea or setting or whatever else will ultimately fail if it's needless weighed down by memberberries.

 

[Daddy Todd]

My oldest daughter, who's a grad student at UF, just asked me to make a list for her of how to watch Star Trek in chronological order. She wants to get through as much as she can before going on the Star Trek cruise next year with me and her mother.

That sounds like watching Star Trek is homework. I don't understand that attitude at all. If it's not fun, then watch something that is.

 

[Cr0sis21]

That sounds like watching Star Trek is homework. I don't understand that attitude at all. If it's not fun, then watch something that is.

Maybe I didn't explain that right.
She ASKED to go on the cruise with my wife and I next year (we've been on the last 2).
I was surprised, but she wanted to. Then she asked for the chronological list, which I did.
She's watched and enjoyed Star Trek, but always just the random episode here or there. She's never taken the time to watch it regularly before but now she wants to.
In my experience, that's how a lot of people come into Trek.

 

[El Maestro]

But, ST 09 did more for new fans than anything of late and I see Kelvin films derided all over the placed, so clearly us current fans don't know how to reach new fans.

The franchise's inability to attract a new audience ultimately boils down to three things: Lack of accessibility, poor promotion, and, most importantly, this perpetual need to weaponize nostalgia -- which is, at its very core, a conceptual gatekeep for any would-be new audience.

I think both of these things are true and speak to Paramount's longstanding inability to understand what Trek is, understand the overall entertainment and media landscape, and/or refuse to accept what is organic to Trek re: earning expectations, along with larger trends in the industry. Remember the (lack of) 50th anniversary franchise fanfare?

The Kelvin movies should never have stopped. They also should not have been expected to be billion dollar tentpoles (though this is a symptom in the movie industry at large). They should have kept on going and then branched into streaming TV.

The one thing I do disagree with is that Trek "weaponizes" nostalgia. They don't, or at least not in as cynical a way as some other franchises do (looking at you, Star Wars). Audiences respond to nostalgia, so they make it. It's simple market economics. This isn't localized to Trek. They just haven't done the other things needed to keep momentum. I think in hindsight squandering the Kelvin movies will prove to be a huge mistake.

A lot of this has to do with Paramount's ill health as a company. The view from 10,000 feet is that since ST09 and DSC Trek has had a renaissance in terms of amount and diversity of content. I know it won't continue and that's a shame because the diversity of type of shows is a positive for Trek, not a negative, but all signs point to this being unsustainable for reasons that aren't really Trek's fault.

 

[Cr0sis21]

I think both of these things are true and speak to Paramount's longstanding inability to understand what Trek is, understand the overall entertainment and media landscape, and/or refuse to accept what is organic to Trek re: earning expectations, along with larger trends in the industry. Remember the (lack of) 50th anniversary franchise fanfare?

The Kelvin movies should never have stopped. They also should not have been expected to be billion dollar tentpoles (though this is a symptom in the movie industry at large). They should have kept on going and then branched into streaming TV.

The one thing I do disagree with is that Trek "weaponizes" nostalgia. They don't, or at least not in as cynical a way as some other franchises do (looking at you, Star Wars). Audiences respond to nostalgia, so they make it. It's simple market economics. This isn't localized to Trek. They just haven't done the other things needed to keep momentum. I think in hindsight squandering the Kelvin movies will prove to be a huge mistake.

A lot of this has to do with Paramount's ill health as a company. The view from 10,000 feet is that since ST09 and DSC Trek has had a renaissance in terms of amount and diversity of content. I know it won't continue and that's a shame because the diversity of type of shows is a positive for Trek, not a negative, but all signs point to this being unsustainable for reasons that aren't really Trek's fault.

My family has a commercial landscaping company, and so I like to use that as a metaphor for Trek.
A landscaping company will make huge profits off of installation jobs. But they also require huge investments and can take time for that turnaround.
On the other hand, maintenance pays far, far less but is easy to do and has a much lower upfront cost. Maintenance will bring in steady cash flow each month while you wait for the big checks.
Star Trek is maintenance. But Paramount WANTS it to be installation.
On the flip side, Marvel and Star Wars are Installation, but Disney WANTS them to be maintenance.
An episode of Star Trek should not cost millions of dollars. You don't need to spend that to attract an audience. Pop culture traditionally views Trek as low budget with great stories. That's all you need.