CBS ‘Not Tied’ To Release Date For “Star Trek: Discovery”

Since CBS first announced that they were bringing Star Trek back to be an original show on their CBS All Access app, the premiere date has been a moving target. Initially it was set for January of this year. Then last September the premiere was moved to May 2017. In January the date was pushed back again and in February CBS CEO Les Moonves said Star Trek: Discovery’s first episode would arrive “late summer, early fall.” He used the same wide range prediction of “late summer, early fall” again as recently as five weeks ago. 

Now in a new interview the head of CBS Interactive Marc DeBevoise (who oversees CBS All Access) doesn’t seem to want to get any more specific, even when pressed. In fact, he wouldn’t even confirm what Moonves already stated for a target window. Here is the exchange with Vulture:

Vulture: I have to ask you about Star Trek: Discovery. It’s been delayed a bit, and you parted ways with Bryan Fuller. You still haven’t announced a premiere date, or even a launch window. Where is that right now? And how big of deal is that going to be?
DeBevoise: It’s going great, I’ve actually been up there [to the set]. It is, you know, phenomenal. It is huge. And we’re very excited about the content, the creators, the actors, all coming together. As you said, we’re not tied to any specific release date. It’ll be there when we’re ready to do it, and when we feel it’s in a great place. We’re not worried about anything here. We’re excited, and we’ll have more specifics as we get closer to what will likely be the release dates.

Vulture: Is it likely going to be the fall?
DeBevoise: We’re not stating.

DeBevoise did confirm that CBS will be sticking to their strategy of releasing episodes weekly (as they have for their first original show The Good Fight) as opposed to the Netflix model of releasing entire seasons at once. The first season of Star Trek: Discovery is set to have 13 episodes. Production started in Toronto at the end of January. As TrekMovie recently reported, production on episode 102 wrapped at the beginning of this month.

Delivering a successful new Star Trek show is obviously very important to CBS. Not only because the franchise is a valuable asset (or “family jewel” as CEO Moonves likes to say), but specifically because they are relying on Discovery to get CBS All Access to its target of 4 million subscribers. The flexibility they have already shown with regards to the premiere date indicates they are more concerned about getting it right than meeting a specific date. Hopefully we will get more info soon on the release and maybe even get a glimpse of the show via images or a trailer.

We await first trailer (and so is the Supervising Producer)

The big news today was the release of the first trailer for Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi. TrekMovie picked up on the buzz around that with a tweet about the wait for the first Discovery trailer, and interestingly this tweet was retweeted by Supervising Producer Ted Sullivan.

When specifically asked if a trailer for Discovery was coming by the end of July (in time for Comic-Con) Sullivan replied that he had “no idea,” but he would be “pumped” to see one.

The unofficial account for Star Trek: Discovery writer/producer Nicholas Meyer’s dog Stella (which presumably is run by Meyer himself) also decided to make a joke about the new The Last Jedi trailer and the wait for the first Discovery trailer, quipping “only share footage when you’re ready.”   

Possible WGA Strike looms

One thing that is definitely high on the minds of all the executives at CBS (and pretty much everyone in Hollywood) is a possible strike by the Writers Guild of America. The latest contract (which itself was only concluded after a strike) is about to expire, and talks resumed this week between the studios and the guild to craft a new one. If a deal isn’t finished by the end of the month then the WGA will go on strike. Just today the WGA released a video urging members to vote to authorize a strike. This doesn’t necessarily mean things are headed to a work stoppage, but could be a form of getting leverage for the talks.

While production on Star Trek: Discovery could continue with any scripts that were already completed before a strike is declared, eventually they will run out of material to shoot. A prolonged strike could easily push the premiere date yet again.

WGA members picketing Paramount Pictures during 2007 strike

As always, stay tuned to TrekMovie for all the latest news on Star Trek: Discovery.

Leave a Reply

168 Comments on "CBS ‘Not Tied’ To Release Date For “Star Trek: Discovery”"

Sort by:   newest | oldest

Let’s do the timewarp again!

Good. This is the benefit of streaming: they can focus on making a great show rather than on just hitting a date set for financial reasons.

im sure you dont speak for netflix’s investors

What would give you the impression I speak for them? But regardless, I guarantee you Netflix is not concerned. They want the best product, not a product that hits a date– which is why they do not announce release dates for their original shows until they are ready (it’s why we still don’t know when Defenders or Punisher will be hitting the platform).

They’ve proven that it’s QUALITY PROGRAMMING that leads to success, and ultimately profits, not just lots of content.

So i wouldn’t be surprised if Netflix investors are not bothered.

It’s not as simple as that.
Investors will sink money in to a project on the bases of XYZ return of their investment.
Now, if it’s sat in a project which is nearly 12 months behind schedule then the investors have made zero, when even putting it in to a standard bank account would give at least something.

Of course it’s not as simple as that. Thats why I said “I would not be surprised.”

But of course, we’re not investors, we’re viewers. Not sure why investors were even introduced into this discussion.

Also, we don’t even know if Netflix has paid a dime yet. It’s very possible (and in fact likely) that the contract stipulates a show must be delivered before payment is made.

Torchwood,

Re:… paid a dime yet.

You clearly have never heard of blind bidding [still used outside of the US]:

http://www.in70mm.com/news/2012/trumbull_interview/index.htm

”Well, around that time [1978], that “Star Wars” and “Close Encounters” had been made, there was a process called Blind Bidding, that was used largely in all theatres, but maybe even more so in European theatres, where the theatre chains would have to pay in advance for the right to show a certain movie before they could even see the movie – and it was called Blind Bid. So that was a way for the Studio to get money in advance, and so the Studio had received something like $ 35 million in advance payments for “Star Trek” [TMP which concluded its blind bidding before one iota of film was shot.].” — Douglas Trumbull

Way to make an assumption. All I’m saying is we don’t know– there was no indication this was the result of blind bidding. But hey, keep making idiotic assumptions.

Torchwood,

Re: Assumption

It’s not an assumption. It’s a way of doing entertainment business outside of the US which is what Netflix was negotiating for. No more an assumption or idiotic than your uninformed speculation’s parenthetical, “and in fact likely”, which it casts doubt upon.

Torchwood, Re: Assumption For your parenthetical odds estimate “and in fact likely” to be likely credible, we would have to believe that Les Moonves determines profits before receiving some Netflix payments in US dollars contributing to his declarations of profitability. https://seekingalpha.com/article/3641706-cbs-cbs-leslie-moonves-q3-2015-results-earnings-call-transcript “Regarding STAR TREK, as I said earlier, it is the family jewels. We have known from our information that all the STAR TREK series have done exceedingly well in streaming. It doesn’t come as a great surprise, but it’s the hippest, it’s the coolest, even the ones that were done 30 years, 40 years ago still resonate today, and all the series have done extremely well in terms of streaming. Added into that, as I said earlier, STAR TREK is a huge international franchise, so our international distribution guy is going crazy. He can’t wait to get out to the marketplace and sell that. So right away we’re going to be more than halfway home on the cost of the show just from international alone.” — Les Moonves, Q3-2015 ”Sure. I did say that [“CBS All Access and Showtime would contribute to operating income in 2016.”] and I can confirm that and the reason being, Omar, is the fixed cost space is now really laid. That was a 2015 investment that you saw this year [2015], and so now as we drive subs, we anticipate that incremental revenue to fall to the bottom line. So that’s the way we’re anticipating it. And when you think about things like STAR… Read more »

Likely a two-hour preview. They can always extend the order once they finish the premiere episodes and have something to show. That will likely be in another two months — so by July …

Exactly! Granted none of us are stoked that the show keeps getting delayed. That being said I am thrilled because this denotes that they are not cutting corners, they are not speeding production to produce something half-assed. They are taking their time, going over everything with a fine tooth comb and making sure it is pure perfection. The fact that they are not rushing means we are going to get a truly stellar Star Trek.

The Chadwick,

I agree. The bodies departing are of far more concern to me than delays. In fact, I’ve been fully expecting Trump’s America first before exported jobs package to introduce them on that alone.

No, ever assumption that I didn’t know what blind bidding was, which is how you opened your brain dead response.

Do you even know how to have a conversation?

Torchwood,

Re: how you opened your brain dead response.

You mean like opening with “No, ever assumption that I didn’t know…”?

And what does this have to do with delays?

Hmmm…just speculation on my part but it feels like CBS has the weekly episodes on a standard TV series production schedule and wants to be sure they have their 13 chamber magazine loaded before they pull the trigger on airing the two-part pilot which seems to be on a more motion picture like production schedule? Possibly because they want what airs OTA on CBS to be as polished and impressive visually as possible to really sell subscribing to Trek?

Either that or CBS wants the flexibility to air whatever episode, a la THE MANTRAP, tests as the most impressive first?

The show won’t be aired out of order…it’s not that kind of show. It has a pilot and a storyline. Yeah I would think they would have all 13 episodes more or less done before airing, or at least all the production done. It’d piss a lot of people off if they had to break it into two seasons; completely ruin any momentum.

You mean like every other show does these days? And I friggin’ hate it! Air all 13 episodes in 13 weeks– the only reason they split the seasons up is to get better ratings for the “mid season premiere” and “mid season finale” episodes…

Before they had the convention of running episodes in blocks, they simply stretched episodes across the same period with reruns scattered randomly throughout. “Midwinter finales” are a vast improvement. This format also encourages showrunners to produce shorter story arcs rather than stretching one story past it’s breaking point.

No, before the advent of split seasons, TV shows were 22-26 episodes, and were run in 2-3 batches, with short breaks, yes, but they didn’t make big deals of it. Usually, those breaks were not to lengthen the seasons, either, they were because of outside events: they’d typically not run new episodes Dec 12-Jan 12, when people are celebrating holidays, travelling, etc. They’d do the same around Easter, around the Super Bowl, etc. In the end you’d get 12-14 uninterrupted (or shortly) uninterrupted) weeks of new episodes, a short break, then the other 12-14 episodes.

Now, they take several months break between 6 episode arcs. It’s maddening, and I think it’s stupid. With just 13 episodes, why not just run them for 13 straight weeks starting in August/September? RATINGS, that’s why! They can inflate ad rates by having TWO finales and TWO premieres every year!

This is another reason why streaming is better (although week-to-week releases like Discovery may make that moot).

Voyager probably would have benefitted from uninterrupted runs. The show would often premiere early in the season and get big ratings, but lose its momentum with every post-November and post-February scattering of reruns and under-seen isolated eps that pulled down the seaSOn averAGE. A concerted effort to publicize mid-season finales and premieres plus full stretches of first-run episodes could have been a great strategy, but I doubt UPN would have ever had that kind of restraint.

@Ian – I agree to a degree. However, we’re used to watching 12 episode seasons and taking loooong breaks. And in many cases that is on HBO or Netflix where we PAY extra for the privilege and we dont “forget” or at least we dont wander away. Great shows keep their fans, more or less, even over long breaks.

Even if Voyager ran 20 straight episodes and then was off until the following season, it simply wasnt good enough to build anticipation for its return.

How many of us remember Best of Both Worlds cliffhanger and anguishing all summer waiting for the resolution? Voyager certainly never rose to that level of interest.

They might have given fans an excuse to stop watching. But they never gave us a reason to keep watching. That was the problem.

We didn’t have that in the UK, it would always be a single complete run, so I guess we must have had the first part of the season aired later.

You think it’s bad now? You can pretty much write off the first seasons of TNG, DS9 and VOY while the actors find their characters and chemistry, and that is on the basis of 24 odd episodes. Face it, you can go watch the first season and it’s really not the same characters you end up growing to love, or indeed hate. Now they have, what, 12 episodes to do that and begin to gel as a group? That’s a hell of a lot of money to gamble a 2nd season on with so much ironing out to do. Nothing much has really changed for the actors, its the huge volume of labor put in to set production, post, higher production values etc, the actors themselves don’t really have any much more of a workload, probably easier with less scripts to learn, there’s only so many hours in the day they can work. Sometimes quality and quantity have a tradeoff. I don’t think these short seasons achieve much more than cinematic production values, so you’re getting less story and more eye candy. That’s not really been the way Trek has pulled off in the past, and I don’t really think it’s done it any favors in the JJ movies. Would tend to lead to DSC heading in the same direction, which has many of us very worried. 12 episodes at 45 mins each is around 9 hours. Would you say we’ve had much character development in the 7 hours the… Read more »

I don’t care for the trend of shows only having 10-13 episode seasons. Then they air those shows and we don’t see the next season for 9-10 months! I’d rather they show episodes every 2-3 weeks if they are going to do something that short. Stretch those shows out over time so we don’t wait as long for the next season. But that’s the way things seem to be going so I’m getting used to it.

On a side note, I would not classify any series shorter than 13 episodes to be a full series. Those are mini-series’.

ML31,

I don’t know if the newly born OTA FOX network invented it — I’m fairly certain they didn’t — but they certainly perfected the 13 episode only season once they sprung unto the scene and they definitely changed that as everyone else scrambled to keep up with them.

Okay ML31, you should write a strongly worded letter to CBS. Point out the error of their ways. Im sure they will suddenly realise how silly they are and immediately greenlight 13 more episodes.

How’s your Netflix stream doing?

Do you have to TRY to be this way or does it just come naturally?

I was needlessly sarcastic. But it was to point out the obvious fault with your statement. Networks have trouble keeping people interested now and you want them to schedule tv shows for every 3 weeks? Come on… The trend to 13 episode seasons has really increased the quality of dramatic story telling and allowed for a higher calibre of actor in many cases as well. Go back and watch any series that had 24-26 episodes a season and you will find many clunkers among those. If they had 12-13 really good episodes, then it tells you why this trend is a good thing. In regards to my next point, I was being serious. We discussed your feeling that streaming technology didnt really exist to a high degree yet and I suggested you contact your internet provider to discuss your issues with Netflix buffering (relating my own story that I had never upgraded my internet from 2008 until I had so many more devices using my wifi that by 2016 I finally called in to report some issues and they bumped me up). Anyway, serious question, did you follow up with your internet provider? I was thinking about this while I watched Netflix in 1080P and surround sounds with not even a split second of buffering the other day. At the same time my gf was using our lap top on Wifi and I was checking the NHL scores on my iPhone. The issue isnt Netflix or streaming technology. So, fair… Read more »
There is no “motion picture like production schedule” per se, certainly not on a budget like DISC. Either way, a TV movie and one destined for theaters, generally shoot on the same schedule. A TV episode shoots in a little less than half the time, in part because they have an ongoing production to get additional footage if they need it, but mainly because they’re only getting enough material to fill 42 min. — a feature is getting 2-3 times that. The feature films that shoot over 2-3 months usually have significant travel time to new locations, major set pieces which need to be constructed, significant stunts that require more time and rehearsal, or have to go down to accommodate an actors schedule … Not because they are shooting the same stuff more slowly. Features might shoot fewer pages per day, but that doesn’t create a substantial increase in the overall schedule to account for the speculated production timeline being discussed here. Regardless of how much time they take to shoot it, a day of labor costs the same. And as much as CBS wants this to be a success, they are not going to pay for 20 days of labor to get the same thing they normally get in less than 10. So Production is the same for features and TV, all things being equal. Where they differ substantially is in prep and post. The scripts are generally scrutinized over a longer period, due to the significantly higher budgets… Read more »

Shouldn’t striking writers be carrying blank signs?

Captain Dunsel,

LOL, either that or their signs’ copy should be more striking.

Nah — no cliches, and the statement is short and to the point.

The Best part about putting Star Trek Discovery on a Streaming website is they can be more liberal with the Content and I hear Leslie Moonves does not like Star Trek but he wants to turn it into something he would like to see and he wants to turn this into Game of Thrones in Space.

This will basically be a total fail. Start trek has been ruined bit by bit in the years since voyager and ds9. Then Enterprise got canceled right when it was getting good. JJ made a big splash and now the pool is draining. The 50 year anniversary was a whimper. The fan film guidelines come along to stop anyone wanting to hold the torch for the REAL Star Trek we all loved from competing with the new trek wars with cussing and adult content. WE DON’T WANT IT. IT’S JUST NOT TREK!

I’m 53 and my first memory of watching TV is TOS. I grew up on it and it has been a touch stone for my entire life. The 50th anniversary was supposed to be for the fans. Instead it was ruined by lawyers, bad scripts and I never even saw the movie. The final movie.

I’m not excited about anything being done now, I just don’t care anymore.

So sad.

Lost me when you said “real” star trek. Like official stuff isn’t real, it may not be something you like, but less regressive fans will enjoy it just fine. It’s not the 60s or the 90s anymore, a show in those styles would tank terribly.

So… The ratings on the rewatching of all Trek on Netflix are just a fluke eh?

lol solid point

Hear hear, well said.

One of the most illogical, irrational, and millennial knuckheaded theories I’ve seen posted on Trek forums.

Please refrain from talking for anyone else but yourself…

Did he sat he was talking for anyone but himself?

They should make a prequel to show how they came up with such a stupid idea for “Star Trek”.

Spot on.

I’m a lot younger than that and I agree with you. I don’t consider JJ’s stuff real trek either, didn’t even watch Beyond. I love ST: Continues, and ST New Voyages/PhaseII. No, they don’t have the best actors/effects etc.. but the spirit is there.

The moment you use terms like “real” or “not real” is the moment you lose credibility. It’s a TV show and movie franchise, nothing more. Get a grip and stop being so melodramatic.

So Ok you love the TOS stuff.Cool, but for me, it’s like being stuck in a time warp.For Trek to be the success it once was, it’s got to move forward.Leave Kirk and Spock behind.To keep rehashing the same old thing never works in the long run.

But that just goes to show you’re stuck in a certain idea of what it should be. Ive watched New Voyages/Phase 2 and New Voyages, they’re ok, but they are continuing what we have moved on from. I am glad fans are making such things, but I don’t want to watch other actors who are nowhere near as good as Shatner, Nimoy and Kelley playing those original roles. You could say the same for the JJ movies, but its different, they are not trying to replicate TOS the way Voyages/Phase 2 and New Voyages are. Im a lot younger than 53, im 33, I was 4 when TNG first aired, watched that and TOS reruns with my father. So I would assume its safe to say Im a fan. I love all series and movies. DS9 is my fav, TOS has a special place in my heart, TNG is most rewatchable even though DS9 is my fav. Voyager has its moments and Enterprise is a solid prequel show Its a shame you didn’t see Beyond because its the best of the 3 JJ movies, although it has flaws as the other JJ Trek movies do, it has the most heart and feels like a 21st century TOS episode. Its respectful and pays tribute to TOS.

So, you’re 53 eh? And this is your level of emotional maturity? Ok…

You don’t really strike me as a fan. Why are you here?

Uh, where did you hear that? Moonves has never publicly talked about the direction he wants the show to go. All he’s talked about is the production end of it: Its distribution deal, how much it made off from Netflix, subscription quota goal, release dates, non-commercial fee options, etc. He’s never once mentioned one creative aspect of the show. Its just all business stuff to him. I really don’t think he cares one way or the other, just the promise it will get enough fans to reach their quota.

Please cite a source on this commentary. I’m not saying it’s not true, but I haven’t read that anywhere, and saying stuff like that without any sources just makes it look like you’re making it up.

He cancelled Enterprise after pushing it to Fridays on its own, but that wasn’t exactly a vindictive decision considering its performance and UPN’s demographics by then.

Yes Tiger2, I think before the last Trek movies were made everyone around here was talking about they wanted a more cerebral Star Trek like the ”old days”.I think if this tv show ever gets on the air we will get that, kind of??With all TV series because of it’s nature you do get that, where movies not.I like to point out even with TOS series movies they were not cerebral like the TV show was.Trek is better off on the small screen where they can get a little more cerebral, but remember it’s all about ratings, It’s tricky finding that balance, but if done right can work.Will see, maybe lol

Kevin first off ”what is real Star Trek”? Is the TOS real Trek and anything after, not?I’m older than you by a long shot and I found I’m tired of Kirk and Spock.It’s old and done.No doubt TOS had great stories and nothing like that was on TV at the time.TNG came along and raised the bar again.Along comes DS9 which changed TV in a way.After a few seasons, they did a whole season with one story line.That trend continues even today. Voyager and Enterprise came along UPN screwed those shows, just like CBS access will.The main reason Star Trek imop is on a downward trend is people involved are not listening to the fan base and they are doing what they think Star Trek is or should be.Before you had Paramount and Rick Berman’s team and for the most part Paramount trusted that small group.You look at what Disney and Lucasfilm’s is doing and you can see why they are on a huge roll.First, everyone involved is a huge Star Wars fan.From top to bottom they are on the same page.There is, it seems to me a passion to do things right and they listen to their fan base.Last year they took a huge risk with Rouge one and hit it out of the park.Paramount just won’t do that, they never have in their history except maybe Star Trek v which did bomb.If I’m Paramount and want to reboot Star trek now I would do what fans wanted before… Read more »

I know the quality is high but I do think there’s something about Stat Trek Continues which feels morose. It ends and I feel like I’ve been held hostage. And I know they are trying their best. I wish I didn’t feel that way.

Man,

I got so excited seeing that logo (as I always do) thinking after I got my bit of Star Wars fix with the new trailer that maybe we were going to get some real juicy news of the show like photos or something. Maybe an ANNOUNCEMENT of a trailer. Instead….more bad news. Sounds like another possible delay (but didn’t say that…yet) and maybe even the writer’s strike might delay it more (but I’m OK if that happens, these guys work their butts off they have the right to demand fair wages). Its going to come, especially since they are now shooting, but its starting to feel like Avatar a bit. I guess its good its only being delayed a few months at a time and not entire years like that movie series at least.

But its crazy if they can’t even promise a two minute trailer for a show that will have been shot for months already in late July then something is wrong. They can’t even promise that? Thats 3 months away? Oh well, hope it all works out but between this and no official word on the next film Star Trek still isn’t humming as well as hoped.

I just thought about it but if the show stayed on its original premiere date first season would be nearly over if it wasn’t already. Crazy.

Just think about that: they started filming end of january and ended shooting of 102 end of march. 1 month per episode! This is more than double the time they need for any regular network show. Even really extensive shows like game of thrones are able to shoot their ten episodes within about a half a year.
13 episodes where each of them takes a month would mean another year of shooting! No Wonder that “no one is worried” at CBS!

Actually, episode 101 (the premiere) was said to be a two parter, and 102 would then be the third episode. Maning it took them 2 months to film 3 episodes. Not a huge difference, but a notable one. Meaning instead of being able to film only 12 episodes in a calendar year they could film 12 episodes in 8 months, much closer to what you cite for Game of Thrones.

We don’t know how they are shooting this. They could very well be shooting parts of future episodes on the same set pieces built for the first episode, before they strike them for new sets needed for later episodes. So 102 might have finished shooting after being spread out to accommodate many other scenes from later episodes. This is a common tactic in producing modern TV. It allows a TV show to travel to different locations in an economical fashion, but it also forces the delay in production to air, also something that’s becoming more and more common and allowing for Netflix style binge streaming.

There is absolutely no way CBS is taking over twice as much shooting time per episode as a normal TV episode. This show has been in pre-production so long, they likely have most, if not all of its season scripted, to allow for a cross-boarding approach to production, not to mention avoid a potential writers strike delay, as well as avoid any delays to warrant extending production time. Although there’s the possibility the first episode is enhanced, with some additional stunts, etc., such that it’s amortized into the overal cost of the season, it’s not likely to be on the scale of twice the usual TV production time.

Actually GOT is an all-year production. They shoot through the calendar across the world utilizing thousands of extras. It’s like the most expansive production in TV. My guess for DSC’s long shooting time is that it was the pilot and therefore they had to break in all the sets and the actors and everything. Now that they’ve got two under their belt, the rest will be smooth sailing.

? What’s with the weekly episode thing? It’s not up to them, it’s up to Netflix, who are of course funding the entire project and will do what they like with their investment.

Nope, that is not up to Netflix. Once again, for the zillionth time, NETFLIX IS NOT FUNDING THIS.

Netflix paid to air it exclusively on their platform outside the US, and THAT PAYMENT, as stated by a Paramount exec, covered the entire cost of production.

They are NOT paying for the show, and as far as is known, have no actual say in production, just like the hundreds of other shows they air exclusively outside the US (Designated Survivor, Better Call Saul, and Riverdale, among others).

Sorry, CBS exec, not Paramount.

So, they payed for it.
Don’t split hairs, fool

Wow talk about being misinformed.

A. Its NOT Netflix show, its strictly CBS show.

B. Netflix isn’t producing it in any way, simply running it. They are the distributors only.

C. They have no say in actual production nor did they pay for the production. The money was made to run it, it just happen to be a large enough to cover the production end but thats not what the money was for.

D. Its been known for months now that when Netflix agreed to run it that the show will be run weekly on their site like a network show. It will be the first time Netflix will do something like that and that’s how bad they wanted it. Look it up. At least have the basic facts before you make completely false claims.

It’s no different than how they distribute other American shows internationally. Netflix has no say in the production of Better Call Saul– AMC simply makes the show and Netflix pays them to run it on Netflix outside of the USA.

And that’s how DSC is working too– not sure why anyone would think otherwise. Standard operating procedure for Netflix.

Actually I thought about this later on and maybe why some people think this is an actual Netflix show. I remember seeing this on another site a few weeks ago and maybe why people are confused:

http://imgur.com/zUfzKNR

So if you live outside of America that’s what people are seeing on their Netflix page. And I think the ‘Netflix Original’ line have people thinking its like their other original shows like House of Cards or Daredevil. But we know that isn’t the case at all. I honestly have no idea how Netflix gets away with this as I seen it on other shows they never actually produced themselves but I guess as long as the actual production company doesn’t mind the false advertising why should others.

So maybe I’m being too hard on the poster IF this is what he/she saw. If I saw that without knowing the deal I would assume its Netflix actual show as well.

But that’s no different than any other US show Netflix runs exclusively overseas: Better Call Saul says “A Netflix Original” too.

Torchwood,

Re: US show Netflix runs exclusively overseas

They do? Dang, and I was going to attempt to back you up by noting here in SoCal LA Mayor Garcetti and some honcho at Netflix just held an end-of-the-week news conference heralding that Netflix was moving its production facilities to LA making the city no longer a Hollywood town but a Netflix one in terms of productions. The point I would have attempted to make being if Netflix was the Trek production runner, what kind of sense would it make for Netflix to produce Trek in Canada, if they had been planning this LA move all along?

@Disinvited — what does this have to do with what we’re talking about? Netflix is not producing Star Trek: Discovery, and are simply paying to run it exclusively outside of the US just like it does for many other US shows, as i’ve cited repeatedly.

Torchwood,

Re: what does this have to do with what we’re talking about

It cast shade on those that believe Netflix is in fact producing it because if they were they’d have to be idiots to move the production to Canada at a time when they were in negotiations to move billions of dollars of productions, I believe that’s how Garcetti cast it, to their new LA production management center.

But you shaded it before I could even get it off the ground by demonstrating they maintain isolated productions exclusively overseas for whatever reasons.

Lots of “experts” who dont know a thing here lately. Netflix will pay fair market value. If ratings are low, they might want to pay less. if ratings are high, they will have to pay more. Why are people worried abut that?

Looking for excuses to be negative. “Well Netflix wont pay for it again”. Like get a grup.

Torchwood,

Re: what does this have to do with what we’re talking about

I just checked and BREAKING BAD, a show I don’t and didn’t follow, is not a Netflix production, so you lost me when you ambiguosly said Netflix runs it oversees. I was aware Gilligan said “I think Netflix kept us on the air.” at the Emmys and took your statement from a Netflix production context, which is the topic of this thread. Clear to me now that you meant something other than producing it and therefore didn’t contribute any invalidation of what would have been my initial stab at demonstrating the folly of believing NETFLIX was producing DISCOVERY.

OK but the point is maybe not everyone knows that? I’m only saying it might be confusing for some people unless they know the full deal. We obviously agree he’s very wrong either way

When this terrible idea for a star trek prequel dives, there’s no chance that Netflix will pay the same money for it again. Let’s not forget that Netflix have absolute authority over demographics, right down to the very second the viewer turns off and goes to find something else to watch. No netflix funding or indeed streaming on their platform = dubious to slim chance that there will be a 2nd season. If netflix with their huge global reach can’t get people engaging, CBS All Access hasn’t a snowflake’s chance in hell. Hindsight is a great thing, and it’s unfortunate that so many here have rose tinted glasses not only for the production itself, but also the wider fanbase opinion that this is going to nosedive. That’s your problem though, the rest of us still get a pretty decent amount of content for our Netflix multi-screen 4k subscriptions. Its just a terrible shame that this hasn’t gone in the general direction everyone had hoped it would, and instead catering to the TOS fans who can’t lap this up fast enough. 12 episodes is not going to give room for any real character development, exploration of current scientific theories, etc. Instead the money is being squandered on cinematic eye candy, massive sets, a huge VFX budget and god only knows what else completely irreverent to the bold optimistic future Gene set out to question in his marvelous morality plays wrapped in a sci-fi package. That’s not, and has never, ever been… Read more »

“there’s no chance that Netflix will pay the same money for it again.”

If viewership is high, they surely will. What is with the pea-brains commenting lately?

As for the direction of the show, I am not a TOS fan, and I think it looks great so far. And that’s the irony: i’ve seen TOS fans saying this is not aimed at them, and non-TOS fans saying it’s not aimed at them. Funny.

“if” viewership is high.

Well that’s something no one in the US will actually have any control over, you’re completely reliant upon a global audience getting wet for Discovery enough to justify NetFlix spending any more next year. It’s going to have to be at the level of “Stranger Things”, “Dare Devil” etc.

The only thing you do have control over is uptake of CBS online subscriptions. If that fails to meet CBS’s hopes do you think CBS will bother with a season 2 just so they can cover their production costs by selling it to Netflix again? I don’t think they would. At best they might move it to TV, but then would they even bother if it’s not performed well in the first instance?

“Netflix Original”
Someone at CBS had better get on to that then.

Weird by the dates but I just watched 2 1 minute teasers on cbs thing for free. Less than full trailers but way more than photos with near 360 of the new ship.

Some people think the strike will mean that by and large, small companies who are non signatories will be able to pitch their new and varied shows. The last strike did have an effect on TV, including beloved BSG. We shall see!

Yes, reality TV took off. No thank you.

But own it’s also easier to elevate a series that began as a web series – High Maintenance,
Etc.

That didn’t happen during the last strike when it was primed to do so, and it’s unlikely to now. Netflix, Hulu and amazon will profit, and primarily foreign series, which is where all our writing comes from anyway. There’s a problem of SAG, and DGA supporting their fellow unions as well, so no US actors, or directors would perform in a non-WGA production at least within the US. What will happen is more of our industry will slip beyond the borders and make celebrities out of previously unknown foreign talent, which may or may not improve the writing, or might just take jobs away from us writers …

Curious Cadet,

Re:…foreign series, which is where all our writing comes from anyway.

Could you elaborate on that? I know the networks trawl foreign TV productions for their various series “inspirations”, even license them, but I am unaware of a cadre of foreign writers that subcontract out to ghostwrite American based writers’ scripts?

I know one of the late night talk shows had a running gag where when a joke fell flat, they’d skype a Mumbai joke selling center for a “better” joke, but how could such a thing actually work for real? Who’d they get to edit such produced scripts so that cultural mismatches in lingo and mores (Which was what the gag mostly relied on for laughs.) could successfully be translated?

No, @Disinvited, you understood what I meant. The writing that created the stories we license from foreign producers, is by foreign writers. So in effect, the US writers are simply re-writing the good ideas that have already been so effectively written by foreign writers as to incite a bidding war for the property.

I’m not saying that Hollywood is hiring foreign writers, at least directly. Certainly Hollywood is subsidizing the best foreign writing by licensing the US produced versions which generate royalties for many of those involved in creating the original series, and to go off and write and create more good ideas that Hollywood can eventually license, without having to come up with any original ideas of their own.

I just finished watching a ten-ep series on Amazon that was made by the BBC in 2012. It was called “The Tunnel,” and it started with a body lying over the border of France and England in the “Chunnel.”

“The Tunnel” was based on a Swedish series called “The Bridge,” which presumably came out there in 2010 or so.

In about 2013 US TV produced a series called “The Bridge,” starting with a body halved by the border between the US and Mexico.

Nothing new under the sun. But damn, “The Tunnel” was good!

The majority of writers on Discovery are American , Curious ! Discovery is being produced at Pinewood Studios in Toronto , which is a dedicated production complex where everything is in the one place , and is secure (not to mention much more affordable) . This really is the place to make a serious quality Series .

Not sure what your point is here. All Hollywood produced series are almost all US writers, by virtue of the fact that they are signatory to the WGA contract, regardless of where they are produced.

Curious Cadet,

Thanks for elaborating. Even though I was fairly certain ghostwriting wasn’t what you meant, things change so fast I was not certain some such change had occurred. And I was aware, before Darfyn implied it, that there were those asserting that the Canadian production was entirely in-house; i.e. Canadian writers, room and all at the facility.

I love the foolish logic here.

Mine, or Tim’s?

Oh, thank you Lee!
FUTURE EVENTS
a sign of things to come
Hee!

There was some guy raving on YouTube about “all the production and personality issues” besetting “Discovery” … guess we all have our own “alarm bells”

We’ll see it when we see it.

Why do I get the feeling this isn’t actually going to get made? Or if it does it will be stopped midway through?

Not a chance. It could end up being a train-wreck (and this show is rapidly becoming one of the bumpiest launches in TV history), but CBS won’t pull the plug after spending this much money on DSC.

Yeah. *Something* will come out. It might even be a cobbled-together miniseries, in the worst-case scenario, but they’ll look to recoup on their investment somehow. But this has to be one of the most massively bungled production, or the PR for one anyway, ever. The actors seem happy, what little they’re talking about anyway (even Jason Isaacs, usually quite chatty on Twitter, has been quiet of late). It could be that everything on the production is going swimmingly, and it’s all like the 50th anniversary – also botched, and the publicity for Beyond in particular – yet they still produced a pretty-good movie at the end of it all.

The real mistake they made was announcing the release date at all. If they hadn’t, nobody would really have reason to act like this is a problem.

Torchwood, Yep! They should have waited to announce the release date until they had a bunch of eps in the can.

“Bumpiest launches in TV history” oh please it is not. Do you realize how hard it was to get TOS produced in the first place? Between Desilu taking a huge risk on it and the two pilots, it’s a virtual miracle the show even aired at all. This show is gonna be fine, relax.

The show is paid for. It will be produced, and distributed one way or the other.

Because you are stupid.

@Torchwood: LOL! Don’t mince words, Torchwood, tell us what you *really* think. :)

Lol. Sometimes you have to call it like it. Beating around the bush is a waste of time! People forget that TOS was a bungled launch, with two pilots, and teetered on cancellation due to low viewership every season. They act as if Trek has this long history of phenomenal success and CBS has somehow forgotten what makes Trek successful. The truth is, they never knew! Nobody does! Trek has always defied typical tv norms.

It’s time for them to do it again!

If it’s going to be a troubled production, a bungled launch, filled with controversial castings, liberal leaning stories that shake up the conservative right, and is produced with behind the scenes fighting among networks, producers and affiliates– it would be in the grandest tradition of Star Trek and would probably make for a better show!

As a side note, I’m laughing at the Trek trolls at Star Wars Celebration. Holding up signs like “Make Trek not Wars” and a bunch giving the Vulcan salute. NERDS!!!

I almost went to Celebration this year but watched the live stream instead. Looked like another amazing year. I’ve loved both franchises since I was a kid in the 80s but man, it’s rough seeing Trek stumble while Star Wars is rocking and rolling ahead in movies, video games, comic books, books, merch, and tv

F CBS

@Mary Swanson: Wow. What a truly genius comment! The depth of thought and the richness of language! It’s as if a poet and a flower were melded with a diamond and translated into the written word. Truly, you have stunned us with that dazzling diction and intelligent insight. Please, share more of your wit with us! The world trembles in anticipation.

comment image:large

Tweeted by Ted Sullivan – looks like a Cardassian behind the can!!!

*Speculation* – could we see the Betreka Nebula Incident? Perhaps the clue that Bryan Fuller gave about something referenced in trek but not seen…

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Betreka_Nebula_Incident

That’s from Ted’s trip to the Star Trek archives over at CBS Consumer Products, that’s not an actual behind the scenes photo of DSC. Ted has been tweeting a bunch of Trek products, and remnants that CBS kept from previous Trek shows, from the archives for a few weeks now.

He evens says so in the full context of that tweet.
https://twitter.com/karterhol/status/853271106882424832

Anything BTS of substance about DSC has been forbidden by CBS and tweets have been removed that showed even the slightest hint of real production activity.

Thanks for clearing that up! Didn’t see the context of the tweet and assumed that it was an on set pic #deflated

I might agree, but he did say the reference was from a TOS episode.

Set your expectations low.
They are meddling with a recipe that has worked for 50 years, trying to change things just for the sake of it.
I don’t think this is going to be much good, and to be honest I really dislike prequels in general, but with this also being another reboot/prequel/fanfap to TOS I don’t really expect there to be anything in there for me.

How ironic that a show about progression and the future is now going backwards yet again. The mind boggles.

It never ceases to amaze me people’s cognitive dissonance in applying phrases like “going backwards” to shows, including this one, that take place 2 centuries ahead of them.

This isn’t STAR WARS.

It’s hardly “the final frontier” when in fact it’s a chronological backstep some 200 years before the future which has already been explored and established in hundreds of hours of TV and numerous movies. I’m sorry people such as yourself don’t understand that, perhaps you are looking for something different than the rest of us. Take the JJ movies for example. You could swap out the cast with the guardians of the galaxy actors (leave Saldana there in either roll), give them a different ship, and you’ve got the same generic space action flick with zero else needing to be changed. Prequels will always be this way, because the identity and tone established in the what came before can be nothing more than an origin story at best. The hard core fans don’t like it, the casual fans can’t see the relationship, and so the end result is a production by a committee trying their best to please everyone with the silly constraints of a prequel they apparently voluntarily chose to impose upon themselves, even when trying to fool people with alternate timelines and the likes. All it does is divide fans, not unite them. That’s especially damaging when toying with something so culturally ingrained like Trek. It just ends up in pissing matches between different subgroups who, until the production was announced, had no reason to be constantly irritated by production decisions which simply wouldn’t exist had the show be set in the same correct chronological order as everything… Read more »
Erol, Re: …explored and established in hundreds of hours of TV and numerous movies. I don’t know what final frontiers you read about in your histories but the real ones take lifetimes and more than a few hundred hours to completely explore. I have been with Trek since the original first NBC airing of ARENA, and this prequelitis disease that you think that you’ve identified was there from the start BEFORE there were any prequels so your faith that these symptoms can be cured by avoiding them is ludicrous. From the beginning, Trek fans divided themselves off into various aspects of STAR TREK that they felt only spoke its true essence to them. There were the ‘”real” science-fiction is written not filmed’ faction that only followed the books. And the Trek book people divided over the comic books which aren’t “real” literature. And for the series watchers there were the only the first two seasons are “real” STAR TREK faction. And there were those disillusioned by Roddenberry’s 3rd season exit that embraced Freiberger. About the only thing I see that’s different today is that Bjo Trimble would somehow run a common thread through these diverse factions over the hope for the future that Trek held out in its various narratives to convince all these divided factions to come together and respectfully agree to disagree and celebrate all the differences. And as you might well imagine, the only ones she didn’t seem to brook well were the naysayers, and doom and… Read more »

Dis, thank you for a long-timer’s perspective. I consider myself a “true fan” and I like every single Trek for one reason and another!

Those “real fans” who “don’t like” this and that … [shrug]

So when the franchise was following Voyager, nothing else was going on in the galaxy? Turn this around, and imagine all those other starships that were around during the TOS. Now imagine one of them as Voyager — a starship off in some other part of the galaxy well away from the Enterprise, on a whole different mission. A good story can take place anywhere, and in any time. There are many compelling reasons to do a prequel — to explore a facet of Star Trek canon that was only briefly touched upon during the series, for one. But most importantly to me, is one that actually preserves canon, by setting the story in an era of trek where the technology wasn’t as advanced. The Berman era hacks wrote themselves into a corner by continually introducting an ever growing stream of technobabble that allowed them to circumvent the technology constraints, when they should have been looking for narrative solutions. The culmination of that abuse was the micro-emergency transporter device that somehow managed to transport Picard, as well as itself. By limiting the technology, they force the writing to propel the characters, not technology. Even ENT fell into the trap of pushing technology faster than it should have, because the same writers from the previous shows were crippled without it. TOS had it about right by design, but unfortunately TNG felt compelled to evolve it since it was set in the further future, which was bad enough, and then they kept… Read more »

Curious Cadet,

Re: …technobabble

You have certainly fingered my biggest problem with the BB gun writing.

It became like magical incantations used to resolve exiting whatever corner they painted their characters into.

I often swore I’d write a parody of the Disney CINDERELLA’s “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo” song using Trek’s actual Trek technobabble.

If you bother to look in to it you’ll usually find alot of the technobabble has a basis in current scientific study/theory.

Warping of space, cosmic strings, wormholes, neutrinos, heisenberg compensators, optronic computing, phase transition, high energy plasma, antimatter containment, subatomic particles, fusion power, Dyson spheres, gravitons….

Of course there are often examples of complete rubbish like “chaotic space”, but the assumption that we have already found every element and subatomic particle in existence is quite arrogant. I have no issues at all mentioning made up subatomic particles like “Vertions”, particularly when discovering the Higgs boson was only recently discovered, and a similar situation with gravitational waves.

Fast forward that 400 years and I have absolutely no doubt that we’ll have made further discoveries which would sound like technobable to us 21st century folk.

Fry,

Re: technobabble has a basis in current scientific study/theory

If you bother to look it up you’d see tachnobabble is nothing of the sort. By definition technobable is “incomprehensible” jargon, i.e. has no basis in comprehensible current scientific study/theory as you suggest.

Berman and Braga perfected the art of creating poetic words that masquerades as the type of jargon that you mistakenly think we are talking about but is in fact nonsense words created solely for the purpose of resolving a problem created by the writer with no aforethought as to the possible science involved.

And the 24th century is only 300 years ahead of us, but you have taken us to Sir Arthur C. Clarke’s conundrum for the science-fiction writer, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Which begs the question for the writers, “If your writing must be told in a setting so advanced from your readers that everything about it is scientifically incomprehensible, why are you writing science-fiction?”

Lack of imagination?!
You couldn’t be more wrong. A prequel shoehorned after Enterprise and before TOS is itself the worst example of a lack of imagination that could have possibly been chosen.

In order to be a sequel to Enterprise, and a prequel of TOS you really need to be a fan of both, which as we all know is largely not the case with the Fandom.
If you feel otherwise then you are seriously misjudging the situation here.

Your mind works in a strange way my friend.

Fry,

Re: Lack

I’m not sure what is lacking there, but your reasoning certainly is.

It compels us to believe that the movie, SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, because of its setting, had to be a commercial and artistic failure because it could obviously only appeal to fans of Shakespeare and Elizabethan history AND it’s a prequel, but its appeal was not so constrained and it was a success.

There are far too many successful writers of historical fiction in the world for a Trek production’s writers pool to ever be constrained by its canon no matter where it is set within it.

Yes you are right my friend. There are many people on here who read a bunch of comments from 10 other people and think it’s the general consensus of the fandom as a whole, but they couldn’t be more wrong.
If they took the time to take in the general reception of Discovery away from the hardcore trek websites they would realise what a flop Discovery is.

Endless threads and topics on reddit, general sci-fi sites like giant freakin robot, Youtube discussions much the same.

I don’t get why the few supporters of this compartmentalise everything and everyone else being talked about as invalid, not applicable, or irrelevant.

I dont know if its buyring heads in the sand, or just plain ignorance. The hardcore need everyone else to be on side or it won’t last, sadly it’s taking trek down with the ship.

Fry,

And there are still those in the corporate suites that think if somebody bothers to send in a handwritten letter via USPS, that that one letter represents thousands of others of a like mind who won’t go to the trouble. Go figure.

Are you kidding? Keeping the “recipe” unchanged for 50 years might work for Coca Cola, but where pop culture is concerned, offering up the same formulaic concepts year after year leads to stagnation, predictability, and audience fall-off, which is exactly what the Trek franchise experienced during the TNG decades. Hard to take you seriously, when your bias is so overt. They can’t keep making TNG the exact same way forever and expect to keep building an audience for Trek.

The more producers try to change things, the harder the fall is. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

It is broke, that’s the thing. Old Trek is broke. It’s long over 15 years now. It’s time for something new. Not JJ new. New TV new.

I have no idea how much writers in Hollywood get paid. But when I look at what comes out of Hollywood, it seems to me that there are a lot of good actors and a number of good directors; the bottleneck seems to be that there isn’t nearly enough good WRITING to fill all the airtime.

So I’m always surprised that it’s actors and producers who get the big bucks in Hollywood. Given how wildly scarce excellent writing is, I’d think Hollywood would take its writers more seriously, but instead they seem to think that any schmuck can write a movie.

Yes, which leads to the Bob Orci’s of this world!

@Harry — Yeah, the writers of Into Darkness probably should have been paid LESS. :-)

Correction, they should have paid us.

Fish Taco,

Re: Correction?

I think that’s more an addendum than a correction, i.e. the writers of Into Darkness probably should have been paid LESS, and Paramount should have used the savings to pay us.

Very true. Remember, according to Orci he is a very successful hollywood writer by virtue of his bank account. Although how many very successful Hollywood writers get fired, get drunk and troll the fans of their last writing gig?

I just watched Beyond a second time. I think it lost half a star on second viewing. Just so bad. Then STID was on TV and I watched about five minutes and gave Beyond its half star back.

You really don’t need to worry about the writers. Even the worst are paid very well. Damon Lindelof is one of the highest paid writers in Hollywood …

Writers are treated like dirt. And it’s too bad, because they are the source for every bit of universe, ethos, drama, and emotion we see on our various screens. I wish they got paid more. A LOT more. Ahem … the GOOD writers, that is.

Thank you from a fan in Ireland who appreciates you keeping everbody up to date, you do a great service to the fans

DeBevoise: “It’s going great, I’ve actually been up there [to the set]. It is, you know, phenomenal. It is huge. And we’re very excited ” – I actually read that in Donald Trump’s voice.

“It’s gonna be a great beautiful thing. Chyna.”

Zaid, Me too! Fantaaastic!

Relying on Discovery to get ‘All Access’ to 4 million? Not going to happen. There will be plenty looking for uploads and free streams of the show because of not wanting to pay for just one TV show. It took the WWE Network well over a year to reach just 1 million, and they were pushing for that to have happened in just a matter of a few months. There isn’t going to be enough on ‘All Access’ to entice 4 million in the short term, because a good chunk of that will be the “casual fan”.

The most hardcore of fans, like myself, will be the ones that will likely subscribe.

Dumb move on their part. Would be a much better proposition for mericans to use a VPN and watch on Netflix, as you’ll also get a whole load of other ad-free content.
No doubt it will be a forced 1080p stream rather than 4k, which for the money Netflix has shelled out is a pretty crappy deal for the rest of the world too.

What is with the uninformed ignorant people that bash anything related to the All Access aspect of this? From the “put it on Netflix because its ‘free'” to “streaming technology doesnt really exist yet” to “everyone will steal it anyway”, its ludicrous.

Im sure I recall reading they had passed 2 million subs already which puts it in line with HBO’s streaming service. They will be fine.

From an international perspective you guys have a terrible deal. I can’t see it being successful, only the hard core fans will shell out dollars to watch it, and even that is on the basis that Discovery being a monumental success. If it’s mediocre it probably won’t even get torrented.

The rest of the world who already have a NetFlix account will essentially be getting Discovery at zero additional cost to compliment the shows already being watched, while the only country in the world who wont get it on Netflix is the country the damned thing is being produced in.

Talk about shooting yourselves in the foot.

Fry,

Re: From an international perspective

STAR TREK: DISCOVERY is a US domestic product created solely to promote a US only domestic service. Whether or not it is a terrible deal from an international perspective is irrelevant to that goal. That it has any international market at all is merely gravy after that fact.

It may well be as you predict that it will be as well received as the BBC’s TILL DEATH US DO PART WAS in the US, but that doesn’t mean they can’t take whatever they learn from DISCOVERY and spin it off into a remade international ALL IN THE FAMILY hit.

@Fry – that’s true. The Good Wife “franchise” has certainly suffered too since no one was willing to pay to watch the spin off on CBSAA and it was quickly cancelled. Oh wait, none of that is true.

Fry,

Re: …the only country in the world who wont get it on Netflix is the country the damned thing is being produced in.

It is being filmed in Canada.

I agree

According to Minnesota Public Radio’s MARKETPLACE:

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/04/05/business/cbs-all-access

CBS is reporting that on THE GOOD FIGHT alone they are a quarter of the way there and they are shooting for 4 million subscribers by 2020 – not overnight.

Lets rename it.

Star Trek: Duke Nukem Forever

Remember all the negative blowback from all those Star Wars fans when the prequel Rouge One was released?
Me neither.

Trek fans are the worst! I’m so over it. Rogue one satisfied. Discovery will too.

Also, HBO postponed and reworked Westworld for months if not a year. With Bryan Fuller leaving, I would think that someone on the staff is figuring out authorship. I love the fact that Nicholas Meyer is still behind this and hasn’t left. And the other writers they hired understand science fiction and layered storytelling. Whether this is Classic Coke or not, who knows. But I am sure they fighting to build a concept not destroy one.

If Nick Meyer left the whole project would be doomed. He’s like the only credible shred of it left at this point. But you make a great point, Westworld was delayed a long time and it’s one of the most talked about premieres of the fall.

Trek in a Cafe,

Re: … they fighting to build a concept not destroy one

I think you are right, just like first Trek. But I think even though streaming frees them from standard network censorship standards and practices, that my sense is the show runners and writers are still working around CBS executive suite nonsense, most likely the type well-documented by Berman and Braga when Moonves took control of UPN. I don’t believe for one minute that as big a fan as Fuller is known to be, walked away from new Trek for the standard corporate NDA firing masking twaddle of “scheduling conflicts” and “more compelling artistic challenges elsewhere” and a name only credit.

To paraphrase Harve Bennett, “He would’ve found a way, if there was that much at stake – Fuller would have found a way…”

Yes, west world was a mess, scripts with interminable delays, production hiatuses to give the writers more time, cross-boarding scripts, etc. but much of the work came in post, where they re-edited the storyline to get the pacing and storytelling right.

Who are their science advisers? Or is this going to be generic space drama series with splosions and baddies?

So… have they even started anything besides posting bad gifs about who’s cast?

The article clearly states that they started shooting in late January.

I can’t help but be reminded of what Krax said to Quark when his father, G.N. Zek, was using up a LOT of holosuite time: “The Nagus will be done when he’s done!”

And so will “Star Trek: Disco” (I love whoever coined that). I’d rather wait for 13 great episodes than something hastily thrown together.

Although none of us are thrilled, that is those of us fans who care (not the humbug fans) are not thrilled its delayed. But we all know its delayed because they want to make it truly amazing, not because of issues regarding it never being made. Granted Fuller is no longer involved, but this show was started by him, do you really think a trekkie like Fuller is going to let us down? And for those of you still not on twitter you should be. I am following various Star Trek Discovery writers and producers and its amazing the happiness, excitement, dedication and passion that is going into this series. If you’re open minded and don’t care that they are going back to the Pike TOS era and the changes we will see then there is nothing to worry about. This show with the money and talent behind it, is going to be phenomenal. Lets not forget what Sonequa said: “This iteration of Star Trek is going to have a different take than the others in the Star Trek canon,” she said. “It’s going to be bigger, rawer and grittier… and the story’s going to build on itself. It’s going to be a tremendous journey.” Now I know many fans will think bigger, rawer, grittier means JJ style Star Trek and that those are negative aspects. Well, im sorry you feel that way. And lets not forget what David Mack said: “The show’s going to look great, and there’s lots of high-octane fun… Read more »

I like the graphic. History repeats itself.

Good time to break out a dusty DVD box set of the ’70s series, THE STARLOST.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

I believe they know they have a giant turd on their hands.

Everything that’s been shown of this show looks troublesome. I’m afraid they may have jumped the shark big time with this one. The Discovery itself looks like shit, and If the pics I’ve seen around the internet are legitimate, They’ve completely revamped the Klingons. Their look, their tech, everything. That’s been done before, but still. I think lots of changes are being made, and I doubt they’ll be for the better.

wpDiscuz
Advertisment ad adsense adlogger