News WB/Paramount merger talks

[Relayer1]

I don't actually feel that we've had that much Trek. 65 episodes of Disco, 30 of Picard and 20 of SNW - 115 episodes. I know it's a different world, I know costs and expectations have changed and it's not an exactly fair comparison, but in total that's way less than the TNG episode count alone.

I'm not at my "full" point yet. I'm grateful for what we've had, but I'd really like more Trek going forwards.

 

[johnjm22]

Less action is interesting, given the original pitch was an "action/adventure" show.

I didn’t say no action. I said less action.

 

[fireproof78]

I didn’t say no action. I said less action.

So did I. And said it was an interesting idea.

 

[Mudd]

Since SNW is the best that Trek has been in about half a century, the point is moot. No reason to want a break, just more episodes.

 

[fireproof78]

Since SNW is the best that Trek has been in about half a century, the point is moot. No reason to want a break, just more episodes.

I mean, both SNW and Prodigy are held up as some of the best Trek produced. And yet the franchise needs a break?

Curious.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Less action is interesting, given the original pitch was an "action/adventure" show.


I would tend to agree, except, as noted, the numbers are not there, and when the numbers increase is when there is the familiar, there is the touchstones, there are familiar characters. Regardless of what we might think here, what gets the most clicks, interest, and talking points around the interwebs is not the new, but the old. Picard Season 3 is the biggest example of this. It did nothing different story wise that had not been done in previous seasons, but it had the familiar. Discovery Season 2 brought in Pike, and spun off a new show.

The trend is towards the familiar. And even in the unfamiliar the question defaults to "Where is this (alien, character, planet)?"

I'm not disagreeing, but let's take Picard season 3. What brought in the audience was the reunion of the nearly complete original cast. Which I agree was exciting. I loved the idea of it: the original crew of the Enterprise D being hunted by some unknown enemy. But, as you said, the resulting episodes didn't pay off with an interesting or original story and didn't do much with the main advertised villain. It instead regurgitated the old "surprise, the captain has a son" plot with music quotes from unrelated movies on the soundtrack, characters from other shows and ships from all over the franchise. The numbers would probably have been strong with just the reunion and and story that didn't stack the deck with all of that nostalgia, but instead give us a compelling threat and not the Borg yet again. There are ways to give the continuity freaks what they want while still looking forward.

For all the praise and love they board gives to SNW, I personally would have been a LOT happier with the show if they focused on Pike era crewmembers we saw in The Cage and some originals instead of loading the cast up with TOS legacy characters and a Khan descendent. It would have been - for me - a more satisfying look back while still being much more original without inviting all of the annoying canon arguments which stem from it.

So fine, tap Trek history, but I would like it better if they didn't swim in it. But nobody twists my arm, and I can choose not to watch it. It's just not appointment TV for me. These feel like expensive fan films to me.

Now people are clamoring for Star Trek Legacy and if it happens, I won't even bother with it, TBH.

The thing though is the Berman era throughout 25 seasons established far far more lore than TOS+TAS did in 3.5 seasons. Anything set in local space not set 1000 years in the future will come up against the well what happened next? wall.

I can understand there being a potion of the fanbase not being interested in the continuity or established lore, but throwing everything out is bound to alienate others...

It's not throwing out anything. It's a BIG Galaxy (even "local" space) and a huge Starfleet with hundreds of ships and crews. Why must every one of them have ties and references to prior series characters? You can have a series that is obviously in the same fictional universe without once referring to Janeway, Riker, being related to Spock or meeting a younger version of the lead of the original series. As long as the writing and actors are strong, as long as it adheres to the Spirit of Star Trek, it will get an audience. I don't mind occasional callbacks or reminders that it's all one continuity, but the Nostalgia Button is worn down to a nub.

But, again, this is just me. Lots of fans love it. I envy them, I wish I did

 

[Lord Garth]

It's not throwing out anything. It's a BIG Galaxy (even "local" space) and a huge Starfleet with hundreds of ships and crews. Why must every one of them have ties and references to prior series characters? You can have a series that is obviously in the same fictional universe without once referring to Janeway, Riker, being related to Spock or meeting a younger version of the lead of the original series. As long as the writing and actors are strong, as long as it adheres to the Spirit of Star Trek, it will get an audience. I don't mind occasional callbacks or reminders that it's all one continuity, but the Nostalgia Button is worn down to a nub.

But, again, this is just me. Lots of fans love it. I envy them, I wish I did

There's not ever going to be a Star Trek series that exists in a vacuum.

TNG - "An all-new Enterprise with an all-new crew!" Still the Enterprise. They tried having Ferengi as the main villains and that bombed spectacularly, so they went back to the Romulans. Q is Trelane by another name, but done better. Riker and Troi are Decker and Ilia with different names. Data is a cross between Xon from Phase II and Questor from The Questor Tapes.

DS9 - The Cardassians were created for TNG, the Bajorans were created for TNG, then they used those aliens as the basis to build the framework for DS9. When TNG ended, all the Galactic Alpha Quadrant Politics with the Federation, Klingons, and Romulans shifted right over to DS9. Two of the main characters, Worf and O'Brien, came from TNG.

VOY - The Maquis were created for VOY, but their storyline was introduced in episodes of TNG and DS9. The Doctor was based off of Moriarty. Q, Barclay, and Troi all eventually became recurring characters. VOY's biggest enemy was TNG's biggest enemy: The Borg.

The TNG Movies, DS9, and VOY are all extensions of TNG; and split everything three ways. Each one got a different piece.

ENT - This series shows the aftermath of what happened 90 years after Vulcans made First Contact with Humans. So, in a way, ENT is a follow-up to FC. The ship they're on is the Enterprise, NX-01, leading to a string of Stupid Prequel Arguments. They run into the Klingons and the Ferengi, leading to even more Stupid Prequel Arguments. (Can you tell I'm not usually a fan of prequels?) The entire fourth season was devoted to showing how things will eventually lead into TOS and TNG. And you guessed it, more Stupid Prequel Arguments. "In the Mirror, Darkly" was equal amounts Mirror Universe and Big TOS Parade. Framing "These Are the Voyages" are Riker and Troi on the Enterprise-D as if it's still TNG Season 7, which actually is what some people like to pretend Picard Season 3 is.

The point is: None of these series existed in a total and complete vacuum, even during the Berman Era.

To your credit, though, at least you're being fair in your critique. SNW and PIC Season 3 are two sides of the same coin. One with TOS, the other with TNG. A lot of people have blinders on and will attack PIC S3 for "Nostalgia! Nostalgia! Nostalgia!" while giving SNW a free pass, even though it has a ton of TOS characters, TOS enemies, and will most likely ultimately end up showing how things got to TOS.

.
.
.

But if people want next-to-no callbacks and minimal fan service: Discovery Season 4. You get exactly what you want and a Roddenberrian Plot where communication saves the day, while trying to stop an all-powerful Species 10-C, which is from another galaxy and doesn't recognize humanoid life.

The hugest complaints about that season were that it was "too slow" and everyone was "talking about their feelings". Not exactly the Non-Stop Action Jackie Chan Movie that certain people want to make New Trek sound like it always is.

 

[fireproof78]

The hugest complaints about that season were that it was "too slow" and everyone was "talking about their feelings". Not exactly the Non-Stop Action Jackie Chan Movie that certain people want to make New Trek sound like it always is.

This is true

For all the praise and love they board gives to SNW, I personally would have been a LOT happier with the show if they focused on Pike era crewmembers we saw in The Cage and some originals instead of loading the cast up with TOS legacy characters and a Khan descendent. It would have been - for me - a more satisfying look back while still being much more original without inviting all of the annoying canon arguments which stem from it.

I think it would have been nice to see more Cage characters, but the canon argument would come regardless.

 

[Lord Garth]

Too many people confuse nostalgia with lore. They're not the same thing. They can overlap, but they're not the same. Nostalgia is going back to the way things were before. If things aren't the way they were, it's not nostalgia. Using examples within Picard itself:

The TNG Crew all on the Enterprise-D is nostalgia. Picard and Riker on the Titan having to deal with Shaw, and putting Seven into an awkward spot due to the change in her position isn't. That's showing time has moved forward and highlights exactly how things aren't the way they were before.

The Borg Queen being disfigured and wanting revenge while the Borg are in total shambles is continuing lore. If the Borg Queen ruled an intact Borg Collective, with the Borg exactly the way they were in TNG or VOY, that would've been nostalgia.

Vadic feeling vengeful about the experiments she was subjected to and not approving of the peace between the Federation and the Dominion is continuing lore. Had the Dominion become an actual threat again, and all the major Alpha Quadrant powers had to re-unite against them as if it was late-DS9, that would've been nostalgia.

At least that's how I distinguish between "nostalgia" and "lore".

 

[eschaton]

I just don't understand the idea that if the WB merger goes through, Trek will be retired.

As I said, WB has many faults, but Batgirl aside, they've only killed niche shows outside of major franchises. They seem very committed to figuring out how to fix DC and not abandon their other media tentpoles.

Under no circumstances does retiring Paramount's biggest IP make sense.

 

[FederationHistorian]

I just don't understand the idea that if the WB merger goes through, Trek will be retired.

As I said, WB has many faults, but Batgirl aside, they've only killed niche shows outside of major franchises. They seem very committed to figuring out how to fix DC and not abandon their other media tentpoles.

Under no circumstances does retiring Paramount's biggest IP make sense.

The logic is that Trek is expensive to produce. And seeing as WBD is focused on finding $3B in savings, and live action Trek costs $100M per season or per movie if it head to the big screen, WBD might just cancel shows or theater releases in the name of savings.

Its also worth noting that WBD cancels animation a lot. Not just obscure ones, but those involving icons like Batman. Meaning even LD is not really safe under WBD.

 

[Mudd]

I mean, both SNW and Prodigy are held up as some of the best Trek produced. And yet the franchise needs a break?

Curious.

Yep.

Picard III had no appeal beyond nostalgia.

 

[Phaser Two]

The logic is that Trek is expensive to produce. And seeing as WBD is focused on finding $3B in savings, and live action Trek costs $100M per season or per movie if it head to the big screen, WBD might just cancel shows or theater releases in the name of savings.

Its also worth noting that WBD cancels animation a lot. Not just obscure ones, but those involving icons like Batman. Meaning even LD is not really safe under WBD.

There's finding ways to save and finding ways to save that are frankly stupid and therefore unlikely. Killing off a tent pole with a devoted fan base as some seem to think will happen? Stupid. Also, if you're referring to Caped Crusader, first, that's one show, which isn't killing off Batman, and second, that got picked up by Amazon. I think people can rest assured that Star Trek isn't going anywhere.

 

[HIjol]

Catching up on this Thread, and reading some excellent and thoughtful posts.
As a Trek Fan for some 58 years - since September of ‘66! - I feel qualified to say that The Treks are only as good as the people who are “making” them, and can only be as good as they can be when they are created to make money (as has been pointed out) and get ratings.

Would that we WERE in the future where,

“The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.”

Capt. Jean-Luc Picard

Then, perhaps, we would be able to have just the kinds of episodes we wanted.
#holodeck!!!

 

[Tuskin38]

still annoyed they didn't return to the original name, pre Fox, of 20th Century Pictures. no appreciation for movie history.

I did like that Disney/LucasFilm went back and re-added the 20th Century Fox logo and fanfare to the beginning of the older Star Wars movies on D+ after acquiring the company.

It felt weird starting up one of the older Star Wars movies and not hearing it.

 

[James Cole]

I'm not disagreeing, but let's take Picard season 3. What brought in the audience was the reunion of the nearly complete original cast. Which I agree was exciting. I loved the idea of it: the original crew of the Enterprise D being hunted by some unknown enemy. But, as you said, the resulting episodes didn't pay off with an interesting or original story and didn't do much with the main advertised villain. It instead regurgitated the old "surprise, the captain has a son" plot with music quotes from unrelated movies on the soundtrack, characters from other shows and ships from all over the franchise. The numbers would probably have been strong with just the reunion and and story that didn't stack the deck with all of that nostalgia, but instead give us a compelling threat and not the Borg yet again. There are ways to give the continuity freaks what they want while still looking forward.

Look, one of the problem with the "movie spread across ten episodes" + mystery box format is you get stuck with major threats. PICARD goes with the two greatest threats of the TNG/DS9/VGR era. I know, I know, the Borg again. But at least there's a new take on them that has deeply personal stakes for Picard.

It's not throwing out anything. It's a BIG Galaxy (even "local" space) and a huge Starfleet with hundreds of ships and crews. Why must every one of them have ties and references to prior series characters? You can have a series that is obviously in the same fictional universe without once referring to Janeway, Riker, being related to Spock or meeting a younger version of the lead of the original series. As long as the writing and actors are strong, as long as it adheres to the Spirit of Star Trek, it will get an audience. I don't mind occasional callbacks or reminders that it's all one continuity, but the Nostalgia Button is worn down to a nub.

The TOS films were still happening during TNG, which took place a century apart. So it makes sense each would do its own respective thing. Janeway was the hook to get pre-existing fans into checking out PRODIGY. Picard was the hook for PICARD.

I think the one you should be complaining about is LOWER DECKS. That uses cheap memberberry nostalgia.

But, again, this is just me. Lots of fans love it. I envy them, I wish I did

PICARD season 3 was ~one season~ out of the 11 already produced / in current production.

To your credit, though, at least you're being fair in your critique. SNW and PIC Season 3 are two sides of the same coin. One with TOS, the other with TNG. A lot of people have blinders on and will attack PIC S3 for "Nostalgia! Nostalgia! Nostalgia!" while giving SNW a free pass, even though it has a ton of TOS characters, TOS enemies, and will most likely ultimately end up showing how things got to TOS.

I mean, I don't understand why SNW isn't getting at least half the level of hate early DISCOVERY received...

The logic is that Trek is expensive to produce. And seeing as WBD is focused on finding $3B in savings, and live action Trek costs $100M per season or per movie if it head to the big screen, WBD might just cancel shows or theater releases in the name of savings.

NuTrek is expensive to produce under current arrangements... cut the dozens of executive producers and have people with better writing and production track records come in and you should be able to cut a third of the budget with no one being the wiser. The California Film Commission filings show THE ORVILLE was produced for a lot less... it's third season was only $60ish million under COVID.

Heading into 2024, Paramount is facing financial pressures and exploring a sale.

Warner Bros Discovery can buy or sell starting in April when a tax penalty on transactions expires. Paramount’s controlling shareholder Shari Redstone has talked with WBD CEO David Zaslav about a potential deal, and with David Ellison, chief of fast-growing Skydance Media, that could involve a transaction at her family holding company NAI.

“There’s interest from wealthy individuals and all the usual suspects,” said one dealmaker. “People would love to own the studio but have to figure out what to do with the linear networks. A bunch of people have looked at it and can’t make the math work” – yet.

&

“We have a very hard time believing the current FTC/DOJ, which has been very aggressive in combating industry consolidation, would give this deal a pass,” Doug Creutz of TD Cowen said of a Paramount-Warner Bros Discovery deal. “It would involve merging two of the five remaining major movie studios, two major television studios, and would create a very high concentration of linear network ownership (which last we checked is still a very large and EBIDTA-positive business, even given cord cutting) including a significant consolidation of major sports rights.”

Even if they could merge, the truth is that “bigger-is-better” deals that have driven decades of media consolidation have a mixed track record with investors, company finances and the media business. “Putting these companies together doesn’t fix the problem,” said Rich Greenfield of LightShed Partners. “The problem is, they can’t compete with Netflix. They need to stop. They need to shut down these streaming services or scale them back dramatically.”

Deadline today on the current thinking. Skydance seems like the one people should be looking into more...

 

[Campe]

I'm fine with the current slate of Star Trek.
I'm fine with the concept of a Star Trek reboot.
I just want to be entertained. I'd prefer it to not be so steeped in nostalgia or lore, whatever you want to call it, that it drowns in itself.
I'd prefer that Paramount finds another partner than Warner-Discovery.
All my opinion.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Look, one of the problem with the "movie spread across ten episodes" + mystery box format is you get stuck with major threats. PICARD goes with the two greatest threats of the TNG/DS9/VGR era. I know, I know, the Borg again. But at least there's a new take on them that has deeply personal stakes for Picard.

You don't need major Universe or Federation ending threats to fill 10 lousy episodes. You say it like 10 episodes is a lot. Not where I came from. Lots of serialized cotemporary are quite successful without the crutches Trek has been leaning on. It can be a story that only impacts the characters fans have loved since 1987. That should be MORE than enough to keep people involved. Having a Big Bad, heaps of nostalgic callbacks or an End of Civilization plot is never, ever mandatory. That's a curse from the movies.

I think the one you should be complaining about is LOWER DECKS. That uses cheap memberberry nostalgia.

I would if I actually watched it. But after 5 minutes, I found myself wishing I was watching something else. So I did just that.

I mean, I don't understand why SNW isn't getting at least half the level of hate early DISCOVERY received...

I got tired of getting the one word "no" responses, links to videos and other snide comments from senior members telling me why I'm wrong. SNW love is strong, every episode is an A+, even if it is an incredibly uneven series.

PICARD season 3 was ~one season~ out of the 11 already produced / in current production.

Yep Picard season 3 was steeped in the deepest nostalgia pool yet. But Discovery needed Bernham to be related to Spock. They had to bring in Pike. Pike, once he got his own show, had to bring TOS legacy characters. As you say, Prodigy has Janeway and Lower Decks is apparently nothing but an animated ComicCon.

Yah, people love it all and I wish I did, but this is not what I look for in Star Trek. I like connectivity, but don't need that Small Universe syndrome we talk about.

Going into the Far Flung Future, Discovery probably ditched most of their crutch, which is great. I may be wrong, because I stopped watching in at the start of year 4, so someone can confirm or refute that. I hate the character choices of SNW, but I just accept it as someone else's version of the characters and try to enjoy it for what it is.

 

[fireproof78]

I think the one you should be complaining about is LOWER DECKS. That uses cheap memberberry nostalgia.

It's not taken seriously.

 

[Mudd]

SNW love is strong, every episode is an A+...

Yes.