Exclusive: Planned Star Trek TV Shows Will Differ In Style, With Breaks In Between To Avoid Burnout

Over the past week, we have been posting roundtable interviews with the New York Comic Con Star Trek: Discovery panelists  about the show’s second season. Yesterday’s post with executive producers Alex Kurtzman and Heather Kadin was our final interview about Discovery.

However, we also wanted to talk to the producer pair about their capacity as the new overseers of CBS’ plans for an expanded Star Trek universe on Television. We already teased the news from NYCC that they’re planning the Picard show as an ongoing series, but we also asked about their larger plans for Star Trek on TV, including an animated series and more.

The writers’ room for the Picard series is already up and running (Photo: Twitter/Patrick Stewart)

A different tone for each new Trek show

At the big Picard series announcement in August, Alex Kurtzman preceded his introduction of Patrick Stewart by telling the crowd “we are going to be delivering you new series,” using series in the plural form. He said the Picard series would be the next show, to follow Discovery and its spin-off Star Trek: Short Treks, which debuted earlier this month. Speaking to TrekMovie at New York Comic Con, Kurtzman would not confirm their plan for which shows are coming next, however, but did say “You’ll be hearing a lot about it very soon.”

The producers didn’t want to get into specifics, but Heather Kadin was willing to talk broadly about the plans for the expanded Star Trek television universe, saying:

I think the one thing we can say which is more general is that it’s been a real conscious effort that every project we do have its own voice and occupy its own space. I don’t mean its own space in canon, I mean its own tonal vision. Because you shouldn’t tune in to Discovery and wonder if you flipped the channel, that it was Picard. They should feel different, they should have different messages coming from different people.

Alex Kurtzman at NYCC 2018 (CBS)

Bringing in a variety of talent for a variety of Star Trek

Attracting a variety of new and varied talent for the expanded Star Trek universe is something that Kadin and Kurtzman first noted when speaking to TrekMovie at San Diego Comic-Con this summer, and Kurtzman also talked about it at Star Trek Las Vegas, so it is clearly an important part of their plans.

At New York Comic Con, Kadin expanded on their new stable of creatives, telling TrekMovie:

I think that’s what we’re most excited about because the writers and the caliber of people who keep coming out of the woodwork – Michael Chabon wrote the next short that’s coming, that’s ridiculous! – who are coming and raising their hands saying “Can I please be a part of Star Trek?” has been amazing.

We have already seen evidence of this expanding talent pool. As Kadin mentioned, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Chabon wrote for Star Trek: Short Treks and is an executive producer and writer for the Picard series. And Mike McMahan, who recently picked up an Emmy for his work as a writer and producer for the hit cult animated series Rick and Mortywrote the upcoming Harry Mudd-focused Star Trek: Short Treks episode. Variety has also reported that a Starfleet Academy series is in the works from Stephanie Savage and Josh Schwartz, veterans of shows like The O.C., Gossip Girl and CW’s reboot of Dynasty.

Following up what Kadin had to say, Alex Kurtzman told TrekMovie how this varied group of talent fits into their vision for the expanded Star Trek universe on TV, saying “as viewers, we want to make sure you’re getting a different experience every time you watch a different Trek show.”

Michael Chabon - Star Trek: Discovery

Michael Chabon on set for his Star Trek: Short Treks episode “Calypso” (Photo: Instagram/Michael Chabon)

Not ready to talk about animated Star Trek…yet

One specific project we were looking for an update on is a possible animated Star Trek show. Speaking to TrekMovie at San Diego Comic-Con, Kurtzman and Kadin confirmed there have been discussions about an animated Trek series. We suspect that Mike McMahan is not one-and-done with Star Trek: Short Treks, but is part of this expanded pool of talent working on Trek’s future. At New York Comic Con, we asked specifically if McMahan is developing an animated Star Trek series, which solicited wry smiles from both Kadin and Kurtzman, but after a pause, all Alex would say is: “We can’t really talk about it yet.”

McMahan, who has written a licensed Star Trek parody book (Warped: An Engaging Guide to the Never-Aired 8th Season.) and more recently has been developing an animated sci-fi comedy for Hulu, would be a natural fit to work with CBS to create Star Trek’s first animated series since the 1970s. We will keep asking about it, so maybe by San Diego Comic-Con 2019 Kurtzman and Kadin will be ready to talk more about Trek’s animated future.

Rick & Morty and Short Treks writer Mike McMahan tweeted this photo of his sweatshirt on the Discovery set in September

Don’t want people to burn out on Star Trek

Star Trek: Discovery is the flagship series for the CBS All Access streaming service and at SDCC Kadin confirmed with TrekMovie that all new live-action Star Trek shows will be on All Access. In August, CBS TV Studios president David Stapf told Deadline his goal for All Access was that “there should be a Star Trek something on all the time.”

TrekMovie asked the producing pair if they see a future where Star Trek is on All Access year-round with shows running one after another in succession. “It’ll never be that clean,” replied Kadin “because also I think we want people to be excited for it to come, and not burning out.”

In the 1990s the Star Trek franchise was producing over 50 episodes across two simultaneous series in most years, leading to criticism of “franchise fatigue.” We have recently seen the CEO of Disney say that the company tried to do “too much, too fast” with Star Wars movies, leading to the studio putting some of their plans on hold, so over-saturation is again top of mind in Hollywood.

At New York Comic Con, Alex Kurtzman used a food analogy when outlining how they see the scheduling of the rollout of future Star Trek shows, telling TrekMovie: “You have a good meal and then decide to take a walk before you have your dessert. That’s how to look at it.”

Executive Producers Alex Kurtzman and Heather Kadin (right) with the cast of Star Trek: Discovery at NYCC 2018 (CBS)


Keep up with all the news on the upcoming Star Trek TV shows here at TrekMovie.com.

191
Leave a Reply

37 Comment threads
154 Thread replies
2 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
66 Comment authors
newest oldest
albatrosity

Smart move, Alex. I’m already worried about burnout and we haven’t even reached Disco season 2 yet. It’s also entirely possible that, with each show having its own voice, not every series will appeal to me — I’m not necessarily in the market to watch a YA-focused Academy series, but I’ll still be grateful if it exists to bring in younger members of the fanbase. And it really is incredible Trek hasn’t had an animated series in 45 years. That, I’m actually looking forward to.

PEB

I have to agree. DS9 was heavier but the biggest complaint about Voyager was that it began to feel so much like what came before. If these shows truly have different tones to them, I think viewers will be fine.

mrbleasdale

I liked some of Voyager, but thought overall it became very cheesy

mick russom

“disco” is stupid. i greatly prefer orville and that has it issues, but “disco” (more like STD, which it is a venereal disease) is hopelessly bad.

Jimmy

They should consider bringing the Star Trek: Vanguard novels to television. They’re great stories with an interesting cast of characters.

Bill Murray

Yes! What is the time frame for Vanguard? I’m pretty sure its close to the same period as Discovery. So it could be launched as a crossover.

during the 5 year mission, I think Kirk and the Enterprise even cameo in the first book

Land O'Calrissian

No.

Matt

Why? Have you read these novels? Providing more insight as to your negative response would help generate more discussion. Personally, I think this would be a great idea since there is so much content in these novels they could draw from.

Afterburn

Nothing based on novels or comics, please.

V'Ger 23

Agree. Novels are great…but as novels…not as canon Star Trek.

DataMat

I think Voyager was fine in the general sense of success as it lasted the full seven years fairly strong throughout. It wouldn’t have gone on that long without support. Where Voyager ended was where Star Trek in its then current form should have ended. A couple of years off the air would have been good for the franchise and good in the sense that Paramount the then studio could work out bringing in new people with new ideas and maybe keeping a few veterans too of course to ease in the New blood. Enterprise was rushed into production for no good reason other than the studios short sighted greed.

Check the Circuit

How cool would it be if they just reanimated TAS with today’s CGI technology?

thebiggfrogg

Very cool.

kmart

I own TAS on DVD (very nice box, which means something coming from me, because for more than 98% of my dvds and blurays, I throw all the packaging away, owing to space issues), but you’d need more than just an upgrade to the visuals to make the same stories appealing, so I’d have zero interest in that.

Then again, I have no interest in new animated Trek period — I just kind of consider TAS to be a near-radio version of TOS that was produced in extremely trying conditions, not a situation I’d want repeated for any new incarnation of TREK.

Douglass Abramson

Most of those trying conditions were budgetary because Filmation kept all production in LA. A modern show would probably be animated by a firm or firms, in Asia, where the dollar buys more. The other major hindrance to TAS’s storytelling was NBC’s children’s programming standards and practices. Being on a streaming service, it shouldn’t be hampered by “children’s programming” issues. I really hope that they do a new animation series. I was a toddler, but I do remember the end of TAS’s Saturday morning run. While I am sure I became a Star Trek fan from watching it with my Mother’s youngest cousins on weekday afternoons; my first memories meld together. To the point where when I was asked during the Golden Anniversary what made me a fan; I had to joke that U wasn’t sure if it was the first wave of TOS syndication, the end of TAS on Saturday morning or my Colorforms set! 😁

rret

Not as cool as a series with real actors in it.

Douglass Abramson

Look at it this way, it would provide a potential platform for Shatner to make one more appearance without having to worry about the toupee staying on during an action scene or the girdle doing it’s job without injuring the man. 😉

mrbleasdale

We don’t need to see Shatner again in Star Trek

Douglass Abramson

I’m not clamoring for it, but a big chunk of fanboys are.

Jako

nah…. TAS is funny and ridicoulus and Bananas how it is ;)

AJinMoscow

I always thought “franchise fatigue” was a crummy corporate excuse to explain away poor-quality writing. How is Marvel’s film franchise doing despite all the warnings of potential super-hero fatigue? When the creative process becomes similar to putting the same gerbils in a Habitrail every day and hoping for something new, viewers move on. If VOY and ENT were superb, thought-provoking TV, then people might’ve stayed. Even “Broken Bow” posted good numbers from people hoping for something new before the show quickly became boiler-plate Trek, and viewers lost interest.

Michael Hall

You’re not wrong about the boilerplate, but that doesn’t mean that franchise fatigue isn’t a real thing.

kmart

I get the ‘idea’ of different tones for each series, but really, shouldn’t each series be able to deliver a VARIETY of tones on a fairly consistent basis? The greatest charm of TOS for me has always been that even most of the crappiest eps still have some element of character interaction that appeals. Also, a show’s ability to shock is often related to what it normally does, so if you limit the tones on a given show, you are limiting its effectiveness by putting such restrictions on storytelling calls.

I hate to agree with Berman about anything, even in part, but when he said he wouldn’t want to see a BLADE RUNNER series, I would concur — if that level of darkness was taking place on a Trek show. In its own verse, then no, Berman is as wrong as ever.

Personally, I’d like to see some very good space battle stuff in a series, but I wouldn’t want it shoehorned into an all-CG cartoon, I’d want it in a series that had some TOS/DS9 feel, and visuals effects supporting it that had more visual cred than DSC has even hinted at (outside of the tardigrade, which looked good.) The FIRST MAN and INTERSTELLAR visuals are great examples of how physical miniatures still absolutely rule when it comes to spaceship stuff, even if the popular view remains that it is better to drown in a huge quantity of variable-quality CGI than deliver a limited number of brilliant shots using the right tool for the right job.

V'Ger 23

I think it was easier to do this in series that had 26-30 episodes per season and was not serialized…much harder to do it with 10-15 episodes that are all part of an interwoven arc.

Imagine “Man In The High Castle” with a “funny” episode, for example.

Also- TOTALLY agree with you on the superiority of physical models over CGI.

mrbleasdale

I don’t think it’s fatigue… there’s plenty of shows on air, that have spin offs and produce good viewing figures and run in conjunction with each other. I think it’s more down to quality stories

Afterburn

They’re not mutually exclusive.

Franchise fatigue happens less at the consumer level and more at the production level. The 90s saw the same production teams churning out 50 hours of television each year, and a feature film every 2 or 3, with no gaps between series’. When you have that much content mandated from the studio it’s difficult to maintain a high level of quality, and even harder to keep creating something fresh each each episode (whether it be a new story, a new perspective, or a new style). So much of 90s Trek, while I enjoy it, just feels like carbon copies of itself.

I can easily see a scenario where Discovery airs a season every 16 months, a Picard Show doing the same, and a smattering of one-offs here and there (Short Treks, a tele-movie, a mini-series, etc)– and even with all of that they’d STILL be producing half as much as they did in the 90s because seasons are 13 episodes, and there’s no mandatory air dates.

V'Ger 23

To me, franchise fatigue was a very real thing. I was just BURNED out on the “Berman Trek” format, pacing, visual style, characters, etc. by the time VOY rolled around, let alone ENT. I got less and less excited with each new series announcement and each new movie premier. It just got stale and repetitive.

Now, with years of separation, I find both VOY and ENT (even more so) to be good, worthy Trek series. Now that I’m more objective and further away from the relentless assault of Star Trek shows and movies…I am in a much better position to judge them objectively.

You were burned out after the end of TNG?

Tiger2

It sounds like after DS9!

And I agree I ALSO got a bit burnt out by the end. But not until Enterprise premiered. Until then I had watched all of Star Trek loyally for 15 years. I loved watching both DS9 and VOY when they ran together. But yes even I was feeling by their last seasons maybe it was time to take a break for a few years after they ended.

With Enterprise I was never completely onboard because it was a prequel and because the premise didn’t grab me. Of course like a lot of people I still gave it a chance and watched every episode the first season. But I just didn’t care enough about it and didn’t watch the second season at all. It was mostly because of the show itself BUT if I was craving Star Trek like I am now I would’ve still watched it anyway and wait for it to improve like the others and exactly what I’m doing with DIS now. But after 15 years and a premise I didn’t care much about it was just easier to ignore it and I think a lot of people felt that way.

V'ger23

Yeah, I went from about 1998 to 2009 without caring too much. I went and saw Nemesis on opening weekend, and didn’t hate it like most did, but also didn’t really care about it.

Despite its flaws, the 2009 movie re-energized me about the franchise. I’ve been back on the upswing since then!

Tiger2

I liked the 2009 film as well. I was even at the premiere in Sydney and got to see it with the cast and crew. It wasn’t some planned thing, I just happen to be living in Sydney at the time, I heard the premiere was happening literally a mile from where I worked at the Opera House and decided to check out the premiere and ended up getting a ticket for it. It was really surreal to see Star Trek back but in that way.

And I will say it did re-energize my interest in Trek a bit but then sadly it took four years for the next one and I didn’t like it all that much (but didn’t hate it like a lot of people). Its weird because the films had a chance to really get Trek fans excited about the franchise again and they were for a little while but then it just felt so squandered they didn’t do more faster. And while I like these movies Star Trek has always felt like it belonged more on TV and probably why I’m most excited for the Picard show since anything after Enterprise left.

Certainly more than I was for the movies or Discovery but it still has to be a good show of course.

V'ger23

After DS9, or maybe more specifically, in the early stages of VOY and around the premier of INS. It took 2009 to get me re-engaged.

Sam

There was blood in the water for Berman Trek as far back as the fall of 1994, before the first TNG movie disappointed audiences. Pick up some old issues of Sci-Fi Universe magazine sometime.

Tiger2

Just as there is blood for ‘Abram’s Trek’ and getting that way for ‘Kutzman Trek’. Sadly this is what fandom does, villianize everyone, even the people who create the shows and films.

Remember the day when Star Wars fans said they would be happy when Star Wars was taken away from Lucas? Look how happy they are now.

And where can anyone pick up old issues of science fiction magazines these days?

All of Starlog has been digitized and preserved at archive.org. It’s pretty darn cool.
https://archive.org/details/starlogmagazine

Tiger2

Oh cool thanks Matt! :)

Yeah I remember reading Starlog back in the day. It was a great magazine!

ML31

That’s not entirely true. The formula for Marvel films has pretty much been the same for a decade. Little is different. In nearly every film characters could be swapped for each other and the films would still be near carbon copies of each other. They are still making money hand over fist. But the formula is getting tired and I think it only a matter of time before the box office catches up unless Kevin Feige and the Marvel guys can change things up.

albatrosity

It’s true, Marvel movies are very by-the-numbers

V'ger23

But Marvel movies are aimed at a different target audience. Star Trek is niche, Marvel is mass-appeal. Different variables and dynamics.

ML31

That is true, but every Trek feature has tried to go for mass-appeal. Some to moderate success. But that was the best it got.

Dennis C

I think they’re looking at the MCU model in that each Marvel character and film has set its own tone. Each is able to stand on its own while connected to something much larger.

That said, Star Trek is not Marvel by any stretch of that imagination. Discovery is the flagship show but it’s not what anyone would consider a monster hit. They need to grow and stabilize the core before expanding to quickly.

Jako

franchise fatigue is not an excuse.
And its not something invented by creators.
I felt it recently and I still feel it with Star Wars and Marvel.
I just feel less interested in all that stuff because it comes up every some month and is basicly the same every time.

I havent watched SOLO in Theaters. Not because of the TLJ bakclash, no, I loved TLJ very much. Just because… it was Star Wars … again.

I also havent watched Ant-man and The Wasp in Theaters… because it was:
Super Hero, Humor, Action …. again! (Just saw Infinity War… and Black Panther)

It just feels so interchangeable and it gets booring to see basicly the same stuff over and over again.

This Fatigue is damn real…

Locutus

If the shows really deliver on the diversity of tones they talk about, I am not as concerned about burn-out. If fans burned out on Star Trek in 2005, it was because the shows being produced—Voyager and Enterprise in particular—had essentially the same formula.

One of the things I did enjoy about episodic bottle stories was that one week it could be a western, another a mystery, family drama, or even comedy. The stories really dabbled in a lot of genres. Hopefully, since story arcs do not permit as much variation in storytelling, fans will get that variation through the different tones of the series. A series about colonizing a planet could be like a western. A series about Section 31 could be like a spy mystery. A series about Starfleet Academy for the teeny boppers. Animated series for the kids. It actually makes a lot of sense to me. Hopefully, they will have a show that is actually about space exploration though!!!

Michael Hall

They all could be about space exploration and still have very different tones. That said, great post.

Locutus

I know what you mean. I just think about all the Abrams movies and the first season of Star Trek: Discovery and don’t see much real space exploration going on in any of it. Hopefully, Season 2 of Discovery gives us some of that, as well as the other new series.

Afterburn

I would love to see them follow the format of the recent Doctor Who, more specifically, the 11th Doctor seasons, where each episode was largely self-contained and unique (as you say, a drama, a comedy, a western, etc)– with a through-current of a serialized story in the background that culminated at the end of each season.

PEB

This reminds me of what the team said they wanted the first season of Enterprise to be. Earth-bound and not in space with season 2 being the launch of the NX01. I know there was talk in the past about a political themed show dealing with Federation and non-Federation governments. If realistically done right, it could be cool.

ML31

It’s CBS. Starfleet JAG is just so obvious. ;)

Locutus

CSI: Andoria

nscates

If Shran is on it, I’d watch!

Utherutheruther

Early era or farflung border colony

Locutus

I’d love to see a story on the outer edges of known space. It could be 24th or 25th century, but perhaps not a Starfleet colonization project but some other independent scientific or other colony. The colony could be organized around a particular cause or drawn by the uniqueness of a particular planet (or both).

Locutus

After his work as Weyoun and Shran, I’d watch anything Star Trek with Jeffrey Combs.

Tiger2

It is amazing while people had a lot of issues with Enterprise itself Shran seems to be one of the more popular Star Trek characters now. Not only is Shran great himself, they managed to turn the Andorians from a goofy looking joke on TOS (and nonexistent in the 24th century shows altogether) to a really formidable species in the franchise now.

The Andorian/Vulcan story line is one of my favorite stories in the franchise altogether and what also disappointed me about DIS first season. The Andorians were just used as props again. We saw them but nothing more than that. I can’t even remember if I heard one spoke when we did see them.

I’m really hoping they give the Andorians a bigger role on the show next season. Of course I would love Combs back as the original Shran or even a descendant of that character but not holding my breath. But that would get a lot of Shran/Comb fans onboard with this show.

ML31

One of the things that bothered me about the spin-off 24th century shows was the lack of inclusion of TOS aliens. Sure, we got the Klingons and eventually the Romulans some. But I really wanted to see Andorians and Tellarites. It was almost as if those productions went too far the other way. Wanting to distance themselves so much from TOS that not only was it 70 years different but they actively avoided as many other elements as they could while still maintaining the Start Trek title. They could have thrown some Tellarites and Andorians in there from time to time. It wouldn’t have changed the scripts any.

Locutus

Yes. I am hoping that these new series will take some creative risks that previous shows were not allowed to take.

moauvian waoul

I’m with you there. But I think you’d lose a significant portion on the fan base who, despite their comments to the contrary, would be uncomfortable with a Trek that truly challenged them.

Tiger2

Honestly I’m excited IF they are serious and plan to shake things up! If shows do have a different tone, different premises, time periods, original characters (most of them at least ;)) then I’m on board!

People point out Voyager and Enterprise as being too similar. To me they felt different enough (I mean I actually LIKED Voyager ;)) but I get what people are saying. But also remember this was basically the mandate by UPN, not the show runners. They clearly wanted to do different things (hence why Enterprise was a prequel). I’m not defending them entirely, my only point is Star Trek CAN be different and diverse if they trust the makers. In VOY and ENT case it was really the network. I imagine if they were in syndication like TNG and DS9 were then it would be different. Doesn’t necessarily mean BETTER, but yes, different!

And that’s why this news sounds good to me. Because it sounds like CBS is mostly on board to make the shows as different from each other as possible. I do have a feeling though the mandate will be to have known characters leading these shows (if the Picard show and, ugh, Khan tells us anything) but maybe they are open enough to go in more creative avenues.

So its still a wait and see but I am SUPER excited about the Picard show and if that proves to be a hit then I will be more positive for the future.

DS9 is King

One of the Shows that I am excited about will be called Star Trek Revolution,I bet that will be a Darker Tone Show set in the Further Future of the Star Trek Universe, Uh Oh the Trekkies may not like that, lol.

Phil

Speculate much?

PaulB

@DS9 is King – You should wait until you have something worth saying before posting next time. This is just more of your “MORE VIOLENCE” fetish, which has no place in Star Trek. Bye, F’Licia!

Land O'Calrissian

Since you just made that up, I don’t think Trekkies will have an opinion about it at all.

shut up wesley

Don’t listen to them, DS9 is King. You just keep on dreamin and making stuff up!

AdAstraPerAspera

Wow. Are you all actually slamming somebody for having an imagination? Gross.

More Troubles More Dribbles

What I would like to see is that Picard’s love for Beverly blossomed into marriage, and then 2 years after Nemesis she gives birth to a son or daughter who is now 18 and on the command track.
Secondly, I would like to learn the fate of his former crew-members along with seeing an evolved B-4 or lack thereof. You can’t have us jump twenty years without resolving these things. And what about Q? Did he just disappear into the nether world? I doubt we’ve seen the last of Picard’s number one antagonist. The show doesn’t have to revolve, or even be about these things but they are all loose threads attached to Jean Luc Picard.
And lastly, while I’m hopeful for a new direction, new cast, new aliens, new worlds, etc., I wouldn’t mind stopping over to the new Deep Space Nine, and finding out what happened to the crew of Voyager. Maybe the new series can incorporate these things together into one series, or maybe we can have a different series that uses all these elements. Call it Star Trek: Century or something…

Tiger2

Well you may not get all of that lol but I’m pretty sure they will reference a lot of it if we don’t outright see it. I don’t see Brent Spiner coming back at all but you never know. I have a feeling we will see Beverly though. I would like to see them married too! ;)

For some reason while I do believe them the Picard show will feel and be different from DIS, I don’t think that means its going to be a complete departure from TNG in general for many reason. Again to make this clear (because I always have to lol) I can see a different setting from TNG with new characters, ship and Picard may not be a Captain but I still have a feeling its going to be very much based in TNG era canon JUST like DIS is becoming more based in TOS canon. I don’t see the point of using Picard for a multi-season show and yet somehow avoid 21 seasons of 24th century history? We just learned DIS is going back to Talos IV for pete sakes!! Why? Because nostalgia! I’m guessing the Picard show in whatever form will be dipping in the same water.

AA wants viewers, BADLY, they will do whatever it takes to get old fans back and that is play up the nostalgia card hard. And I won’t be shocked if they announce the Borg will be back either…and assimilate Talos IV as a tie in lol.

Afterburn

I would actually rather see Beverly appear with a son via another man, and Picard watches him from afar as he takes the path of the child he never had. That’s a far more interesting character study.

Phil

Call it Star Trek: Blender. I’ll cancel All Access if they produce a monstrosity of a reunion series.

As it’s been determined we are going to ignore All Good Things, I’m still okay with a broken Picard, destroyed by his experience with the Borg, dragging Beverly around the galaxy looting archeological treasures, and pimping her out to the Orions on occasion to turn a few bars of Gold Pressed Latinum. Lost in drink, pondering where bottom is…..

Tiger2

I’m guessing its going to be a reunion of SOME kind with certain characters but I don’t think that’s what the show will be about either.

ML31

I, too, think you will get some of that. Certainly not all of it. I can’t see Spiner coming back to play Data or B4 at all. He might have a voice cameo, though. And I really do see the rest of the TNG cast popping in for one or two episodes. But if the show is about Picard then the other TNG people cannot be featured players at all. They would be guest stars at best. Personally I hope that Q has been gone for the last 20 years. Never to be heard from again. The lone exception is if they want to do some sort of comedy episode. But it would have to be funny! Q only worked when he was being goofy. Serious Q is just dumb.
And I do think we very well could get guest shots from VOY and DS9 actors as well. At least, those who are into doing it. I’m actually curious about how they could incorporate them into whatever the show will be about.

Martin

I really wish that with all the Trek, that they would be go to ISB, RDM and the rest of the DS9 producers to get a mini series or TV movies to follow up on Bajor, Cardassia & the Dominion 25 years later. It seems that would be guaranteed to bring as much of an audience as Discovery has, and it doesn’t have to be ship based or station based. That would seem that production costs could be less than Discovery episodes.

David Ryan

If the DS9 documentary proves enough of a hit then maybe they’ll do that. Although Star Trek Online has explored some of those ideas. They even got a lot of the original DS9 cast to voice their characters again.

Tiger2

Honestly Martin, I think the door is open for anything at this point. What I mean is while I don’t see a DS9 show revival like what they are doing with Picard, I can imagine an AA TV movie happening in the future, especially if the Picard show takes off. I think what they are realizing is if you can get enough people to watch Discovery and my guess is the overwhelming majority of them watching that show probably watched all those other shows, so they will be interested in a return to all the other stuff too. It’s all revivals and reboots today. That’s why the Picard show got the excitement it did because there is soooo many people who watched TNG that probably never watched DIS. I’m convinced WAY more people still watch TNG than DIS today because its on so many other platforms and reruns like crazy. Obviously you can say the same for all of them but I imagine TOS and TNG gets the most views. Even though DS9 wasn’t as big as TNG, it still got millions of fans when it ran. So did VOY. And I’m not suggesting all these people will just triple the AA subs or anything. I’m on record not convinced the Picard show is going to bring in that many more than DIS now. It will bring in more for SURE but maybe not what CBS wants if AA still just sucks. Many will just wait it out for Blu ray or something. But the point is there is an untapped market of fans from these former shows not subscribing to AA yet. CBS finally got that and hence Picard. So yes there may be a DS9 revival of some kind in the future. I wouldn’t hold my breath on… Read more »

alphantrion

You never know Tiger, they can still do that Romulan War arc as a miniseries set in the Enterprise period with Archer’s Enterprise appearing.

Tiger2

Actually you’re right, I forgot about the Romulan war, which is still something a lot of people want to see. They don’t necessarily have to do it with the Enterprise cast though. But yes an appearance by them would be great.

And don’t get me wrong, if they did another season with Enterprise I would watch it with glee and I gave up on the show early on but it turned me around later. But I do think its still the least watch Trek show even today, not counting Discovery. And it seems to be the lowest rated as well, at least according to online polls again with the exception of Discovery. But being so low rated I just don’t see them motivated to do anything with that cast unlike the other shows which do seem to have a much higher rewatch value and just more popular. DS9 seems to be as popular as TOS in a lot of circles these days so I can see them maybe doing something with it one day. Again not holding my breath but its possible.

As for Enterprise while I don’t see a full on revival I could see a few of those characters popping up on DIS. I think thats a no-brainer for the few who could still be around like T’Pol, Shran or Phlox.

Utherutheruther

What about a show based on a colony planet in the ST:E era?

Tiger2

That would be great IMO! In fact I said I would be open to the Picard show being about him running a colony. It would just be very different and be cool to see Picard in a very different setting where he has settled down roots but still part of Starfleet at the same time. But I know no way that is going to happen lol.

But your idea sounds more interesting because that would be when creating a colony was still relatively new and they don’t have the advantage of a hundred star ships showing up in a moments notice if something goes wrong. It could be a very rugged show sort of like how DS9 was portrayed when it first started.

It would be interesting to see the first humans starting life on an unknown planet at the beginning of space exploration. Sadly I don’t see this team thinking anything that risky unless Khan or Garth is down there with them but who knows?

ML31

That would be the show I would LOVE for AA to do. And it does not need to be the Enterprise guys but I would like to see them in it. Enough time has gone by that I think they could be the right age for it. And it could give them a proper finale, too.

DIGINON

I don’t want to speculate whether CBS would ever consider bringing back DS9 from a financial standpoint. The problem I see would be Avery Brooks. It seems to me that he has withdrawn completely from the public eye. He didn’t even want to appear in the DS9 documentary even though the producers say he has been supportive of it. Bringing back DS9 loses a lot of its appeal if you can’t get the show’s lead back.

Tiger2

Great point! It wouldn’t be much of a point without the Sisko. And I imagine the point of even doing a movie or a mini-series would be to return Sisko back to the universe. That’s what people want to see. So if he’s not a board I don’t see anything happening.

ML31

I think they very much could do a DS9 revival without Sisko. They could add new characters to replace those who don’t want to do it. And it would make it feel a little more realistic as people tend to move on from things in their life.

Tiger2

They could certainly try, but I do think people will be asking what happened to Sisko. But then again since we do know what happened to him I guess that gives them the perfect excuse not to use him lol. I just think if they made another series with it a lot of people will want to see Sisko back but as you said if they come up with enough characters most will get over it. I would certainly give it a chance but I would watch that show if they only brought Quark and Morn back. ;)

Afterburn

I disagree. DS9 is the one Trek show that would work well without its captain because it was a true ensemble. Worf could be the station commander. Kira always seemed like the heart and soul of that show anyway, much in the way Spock was on TOS.

Curious Cadet

@Afterburn — I agree. It is a true ensemble show. Brooks was the weak link in my estimation. But how about this … skip DS9 and let’s set it on a Space Station at the edge of the known galaxy. And to make it more of a Trek show, have it revolve around an exploration team which resides on the base, being sent out weekly on missions, on a starship. We follow them on their missions, but we also follow those they leave behind on the station. That opens the door for far more possibilities and exploration opportunities in keeping with what Trek set out to be originally.

Afterburn

A 4 episode DS9 mini series would make me very happy. You could have Dukat reappear and take control of the derelict station to achieve his revenge on Bajor. Sisko doesn’t even need to show up, perhaps just in spirit as he thwarts Dukat in the climax in a non-corporeal appearance– with Jake becoming the new Emissary.

V'Ger 23

I love DS9 (my second-favorite series after TOS), but I have absolutely no desire to see “DS9- The Next Generation.” DS9 was great as a contained arc story. It had a beginning, middle, and end, all of which were satisfying. I really don’t want to see any revisiting of “what happened to the Bajorans and Cardassians 25 years later.”

Afterburn

A “what happened 25 years later” is not something they should do. But a “Return of the Pah Wraiths/Dukat” could be interesting.

Without Sisko, how would the prophets and bajorans defeat them? Would Dukat be the villain, or is it possible his fall has changed him and upon his return he’s actually the Prophets new Emissary? How would the Bajorans react to that? How would Kira?

I can see a lot of interesting stories to explore there from a character perspective. I wouldn’t want to see the entire cast reassembled, but Dukat (as the protagonist), Kira, Jake, and Worf— and most definitely Garak— supplemented with a new crew, could be worth exploring in a 3 or 4 episode miniseries.

Kenn

Star Trek turned 50 in 2016 with a new show and the kelvin universe is three movies in. I think burnout should be the LEAST of his concerns.

Joe Nick

Well, they fear the audience may get a star trek burn-out if there is too much on the screen…
To keep it calm and produce some diversive shows actually sounds pretty good to me.

Afterburn

Tell us, oh seer of seers, what should be its greatest concerns?

Erik

It is, he sees the Kelvin-movies are bombing, especially beyond. The casual moviegoers have seen enough, the fans don’t really care about them. Same is true for discovery. And there’s a massive rift it caused in the fandom.

Afterburn

I think it’s a bit too early to say that about Discovery. There’s been one season.

Tiger2

Yes I will agree with this. I don’t think DIS is doing as well as they hoped but it really is too early to say that its ‘bombing’. And it has time to turn around fans who don’t like it now. That’s the advantage of a TV show, they can improve.

V'ger23

DSC is splitting the fan base about as much as TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT. Since the fans are such a patient, forgiving group…I’m sure that means everyone will be as supportive and patient as we have throughout history as the series continues to get better. ;)

Afterburn

People seem to forget how much many of the TOS fans hated TNG for the first three seasons because it wasn’t Kirk and Spock. How much TNG fans were indifferent to DS9 because it was so much darker than TNG, how frankly how bored they were with VOY and ENT.

It very much reminds me of the cycle of the new Doctor.

ML31

I can’t speak for others but I was excited to hear about TNG back in ’86 when it was announced. I was thrilled to see a new crew on a new starship on new adventures. What I DIDN’T like was separating the shows by 70 years. While I wanted to see a new crew I wanted the possibilities for TOS guys to easily guest on an episode here and there. That said, I get why the decision was made to go forward so far. But as a fan at the time, I did not like it.

Afterburn

Funny how you were against “going forward” but that’s all fans want to do now. GO FORWARD! SET IT 50 YEARS AFTER NEMESIS!

I too (or rather my father, as I was new to Trek at age 5) was excited for TNG, but there was a LARGE part of the fandom that did not want to see a new crew, let alone an older bald captain, a different Enterprise, a Klingon on the bridge.

It’s easy to forget but back then Trek literally WAS Kirk and Spock, and the idea of a new crew and a new ship was heresy to many. “Why bother calling it Star Trek?” they screamed.

Tiger2

Which is why I don’t understand why people are SO bothered by the criticism?? TNG had it the worst than any Trek show out there. And today it is probably the most popular one. Certainly the most watched. I mean nearly ALL the Trek shows have gone through the exact same thing. You just cited it, especially TNG, DS9 and ENT. And now so is Discovery. None of it is new.

Thats just how fans are. They love Trek but if its not firing on all cylinders out the gate or its just too different from the others then it takes time for people to adjust. And the same time the writers find ways to just make the show better, keep what works, get rid of what didn’t, which is EXACTLY what its look they are doing with DIS next season. This is all par for the course.

I complain about the show all the time but I complained about most of them. DS9 was the actually the show I had the hardest time to accept when it aired. Now its my favorite!

So don’t take it SO personally. Yes some people don’t like DIS. Maybe some never will. But my guess is if it gets to a third or fourth season, more people will come around as long as the writers acknowledge the show faults and work to change it. I want to LOVE the show too and if it goes like the others I probably will in time.

ML31

“but that’s all fans want to do now. GO FORWARD! SET IT 50 YEARS AFTER NEMESIS!”

I’d say that is an over-generalizartion. I hear more “set it post Nemesis” more than anything. And that is what we are getting with the Picard Show.

I do recall some raised eyebrows as the decision to set the show 70+ years after TOS. But I don’t think there was any real issue with a new crew or a bald Captain. The bald captain thing was more from studio execs (and Roddenberry himself if I recall) than it was from fans.

Tiger2

Exactly ML31!

I been blamed of being a broken record on this many times over but I have always stated I just want a post-Nemesis show. I never cared how long it started after that movie, just like the idea of going forward with new material.

In fact most people have said they would be fine if a new show just took place in the same real time as when the film came out, which surprise surprise is exactly what they are doing since the new show is 20 years after the events of Nemesis. That way they can still tie it in with all the events we seen happen on the previous shows but still far enough where they can pretty much do what they want. I hardly heard anyone shouting it should be set 50-100 years later. That was mostly by people who kept putting down the idea of going forward and constantly stating this is what people wanted when that wasn’t true.

Where the show will be is all most wanted and thankfully we are FINALLY getting it!

AdAstraPerAspera

I wouldn’t say its bombed and I wouldn’t say there is a rift either. Its simply a case of a few very vocal fans gatekeeping and complaining about anyone that likes DSC. A lot of it is centered on this website. Go to Trekcore and people are much more positive.

Tiger2

I’ve lurked on that site a few times, but it doesn’t seem to be any less divided there tbh, its more like that place just has way fewer posters compared to here so not as much fighting about things. You have to go on bigger sites like Reddit to get a real sense of how people feel about it and while I say Reddit probably like it than don’t, the people who don’t like it REALLY doesn’t like it lol. I really feel the show is pretty divided in general, but so were most Trek shows at the start.

And frankly its not hard to see why since those issues are constantly brought up.

Afterburn

It is only divided among Trek fans. I attended a trade show recently focused on television and one panel included 8 speakers. At one point the presenter asked what show they were looking forward to in 2019 the most, and 7 of the 8 said the 2nd season of Discovery.

One could argue that the first person to say that influenced the others, but they had all cited Discovery, and the likes of Stranger Things, Ozark, Man in the High Castle, The Expanse, Arrested Development, Bojack Horseman, The Good Fight, and many other shows as favorites throughout the panel.

For what it’s worth, the speakers were all under 40, and a mix of male and female. Only one of them was a self-confesses sci-fi fan. The others surprised me with their pick of Discovery.

It’s just anecdotal to be sure, but it’s more proof that Discovery is not nearly as derided outside of the Trekkie audience as the Trekkies would have you believe.

Tiger2

Well I’m only talking about Trek fans. Yeah I would agree if you’re not a big fan you probably are more accepting of it, but that’s to be expected because casual fans don’t see the details like hardcore fans do. They don’t care what century it takes place in, if it looks part of the other shows, the differences in the technology, what Klingons look like etc, etc. Enterprise for example seem much more well received by people who wasn’t hardcore Star Trek fans or watched the others for mostly the same reason.

Same issue for the Kelvin films. If you never seen or care about the original Khan or watched TWOK for example then you probably thought STID was a solid film. If you do know about the back history of the original Khan, not so much.

Casual fans are more forgiving for a lot of reasons. I love the Harry Potter films for example and think they are great. My ex-girlfriend on the other hand mostly hated them because she read the books over and over again and couldn’t get over all the things they left out or changed even though she thought they were well made. I never read the books so I didn’t care lol. Just how it goes I guess.

Wallace

Thanks for giving us that bit of news. It is just so disheartening sometimes to constantly hear both STAR WARS and STAR TREK fans constantly griping and whining about this or that and not being appreciative of how lucky they are to have franchises that are actually getting TV and movies produced.

alphantrion

So does this mean we should accept any product without giving our opinion on it and blindly accepting that it is good because it is “Star Wars” or “Star Trek”. I don’t accept this way of thinking. You may like something, but you also need to criticize something if you don’t like it. I even criticize my family from time to time and they are the closest people to me. Nothing in this world is worth following blindly.

Afterburn

@alphantrion

No we should don’t have to blindly accept “just anything” (that’s how garbage episodes of VOY and ENT kept getting produced) and if you genuinely dislike DSC, by all means stop watching.

But that’s the point. DSC is here. It’s not going away. If you don’t like it, move on. That’s what I do when I see something from a beloved franchise I don’t like. Never watched Agents of Shield after the first few episodes. Was and still is garbage to me.

But what I don’t do is spend hours perusing AOS message boards telling everyone how much I hate it.

I feel like fans here will still be griping when DSC is on season 5, complaining about the same old things.

Tiger2

Afterburn, Discovery has had a whopping 15 episodes. How many are STILL complaining about TNG first two seasons literally 30 years later lol.

Again, this whole argument is just weird to me. As I had stated elsewhere but ignored but nearly EVERY STAR TREK SHOW HAD ITS DETRACTORS EARLY ON! And yes they STILL talk about those earlier days as if it happened yesterday.

Discovery is BRAND NEW, of course people will watch it and criticize what they don’t like. Didn’t they do the exact same thing with every show before it? Now if there are still that many complaining by the time it gets to season 5 then yes something is either wrong with them or the show. But it’s too early to say either way now.

I just get so sick of hearing ‘if you don’t like it, don’t watch.’ If that happened TNG would’ve been cancelled by its second season considering the fan outrage people had for that show. But they still watched because believe it or not they just wanted it to improve. Same thing with Discovery.

ML31

“I just get so sick of hearing ‘if you don’t like it, don’t watch.’”

Amen, brother. Amen. It’s such a tired and ridiculous comment that only makes sense if one does not understand the concept of being a fan of something.

ML31

Not disputing what you saw at the tradeshow, Afterburn. But the point is Discovery just doesn’t seem to be in the popular zeitgeist like Stranger Things is, for example. And the critic reviews have been mixed. Take from that what you will.

Afterburn

I never claimed it was one of the most popular shows being produced right now. That it’s not as popular as Stranger Things is not evidence that it is unpopular, disliked, or a failure.

ML31

I guess that depends on how one defines “failure”. Is it the most popular thing on CBSAA? Probably. In that context it could be deemed a success. Has it delivered on the subscribers CBS had hoped it would? All the evidence suggests it has not. In that context, it has failed.

Trekkie

Sounds sensible enough to me, it’s not *just* a Star Trek channel, so they don’t have to have Trek on every week. Two shows a year with supplemental material should keep everyone engaged enough – if they run to 2 x 22 episodes, that’s not going to much of a break, but hopefully it won’t be that often.

I’d rather have a tight 12 episode series than a rambling 22 episode one, but let’s see. And I admit some of the best Trek could easily be classified as “rambling” :-)

Kellie Shankles

So long as each Trek series is good, then believe me when I state that us Trekies won’t get burnt out. Just until recently when Discovery first dropped, we’ve been starved of everything Star Trek. So getting burnt out or fatigued of Trek won’t be an issue. Provided each Trek series is as enjoyable to watch as STTNG was. Good luck, as I just set the bar to a high, but certainly achievable level. So now please, for the love of Kahless, don’t let us down Kurtzman!

Afterburn

They’re not worried about Trekkies getting burnt out. They’re concerned the wider audience will. Contrary to popular belief, the wider audience is largely enjoying it (I listen to at least two non-trekkie podcasts that have had very positive things to say about it, which is a good sign for the health of the franchise).

To succeed, Trek needs more than just us diehards, and they need to keep Trek exciting to the wider audience. If it’s on every week, they risk it just becoming background noise.

ML31

Trek does need more than the diehards to get by. But in regards to you saying the wider, non-Trek fan audience is enjoying STD… I wouldn’t go that far. The empirical evidence suggests it’s a mix at best. I also think that CBSAA is languishing in obscurity which is keeping TONS of non-Trek fans from even knowing about it. Hell, there are Trek fans I personally know who had no idea Discovery even existed until I TOLD them.

Afterburn

While my remark is far from a blanket statement about the wider audience, it’s been generally well received by critics, and the subs and views both on CBSAA and Netflix appear to have been strong enough to justify not just a second season, but a second Trek series and spinoff minisodes.

As for CBSAA, I never did think it would flourish, but contrary to your point I think it’s Discovery that’s basically keeping it relevant. Hence the Picard series.

ML31

I did not see a trend of being well received. I saw mixed reviews from both critics and viewers. The 2nd season was likely a given no matter what happened in S1 as that is how many of these streaming shows work. Many have 2 season orders from the get go. It can happen that the two season order get cut short but most are given their 2nd chance. The 2nd series and the minisodes are not because the show was doing so well. But are there because the show is NOT doing well. CBSAA is not getting the subscribers they thought they would get but they are heavily invested in the streaming so they are doubling down. Adding the short treks to get a little blood from the stone before S2 begins and adding Stewart as Picard to the mix. I think CBS saw the writing on the wall after the first few episodes and started scrambling way back then. That is when they started brainstorming and reaching out to Stewart and such. If STD was doing as well as you claim not only would CBS be publicly stroking themselves over it but it is unlikely we would have short treks or the Picard show. At least THIS soon.

Afterburn

I’m sorry but i’m not buying a single thing you’re selling. All indications are that this is a success, critically and commercially. You claim that these indicators are proof of nothing but make claims in the opposite that are even more unsupported, and are more than a little biased speculation.

ML31

No, there are no indicators that the show is any kind of a success except when you compare it to other content on CBSAA. Granted the early extension of the STEU could be taken as the show was a success. But if it was, don’t you think CBS would be publicly crowing about it every chance they got? They publicly patted themselves on the back when it premiered. Then nothing. If that was all the evidence there was it would be enough to draw the conclusion that Trek, and CBSAA, was not doing as well as they had hoped. Combine that with everything else, and it is hard to dispute the show has not met CBS’s expectations at all. Both of us are speculating here but I can promise you… My conclusions are hardly biased. They are 100% fair. I don’t let my personal opinions get in the way of the facts. There are popular things out there that I am not a fan of. But I don’t deny their popularity. STD is not one of them.

Afterburn

You are making all of that up with no actual evidence of any kind other than your and other (minority) Trekkies dislike of DSC, and ignoring very real evidence to the contrary.

ML31

OK. Your response tells me that since you like STD that means it’s doing well. You have nothing to back it up except for you saying so. On the other hand, I have pointed out the lack of CBS crowing about how they have met or exceeded their subscriber expectations. So yes… Feel free to ignore that and just go with your own subjective opinion. That feels right, I’m sure.

Star Trek: Enterprise era, Birth of the Federation mini-series please…

Land O'Calrissian

I’d definitely be up for that.

albatrosity

Personally I want a Romulan War storyline…which we were supposed to get…hell they should just finish Enterprise thru the Federation lol

Utherutheruther

Post romulan war USS daedalus or very early ss valiant era.

erter

I’d never have burnout. I could watch new Trek 24/7

DIGINON

If you actually tried watching Trek 24/7 you would probably fail after 24/2 or 24/3 at most. People do need to sleep from time to time…
Besides, it would be impossible to have new Trek 24/7 unless you somehow invented a way to shoot and post-produce it in real-time.

Mel

I just hope they make a lighthearted and fun Star Trek series. I don’t think this super dark trend fits Star Trek. It is the same crap DC has done with Superman. Some franchises are supposed to be colourful and light. An utopian setting needs a different style than a typical dystopian setting.

albatrosity

Agreed!

ML31

I actually would like to see a straight up comedy Star Trek series. Which is partly why I like The Orville. It is essentially TNG with jokes.

Afterburn

Not interested in Trek as a straight comedy.

Utherutheruther

Agreed dont want that at all.

ML31

If there are going to be different shows with different tones, why can’t one of them be a comdey? You don’t want to see that, then don’t watch it. But I’d like to see all the tones for Trek they can set. It’s a big universe they created. Lot’s of possibilities for the more creative folks if CBS allows it.

Afterburn

No one said there can’t be, we are simply saying we don’t want to see it. You are free to want to see it all you like, I still hope they never do that. It would be stupid if you ask me.

ML31

Kinda petty to hope they not do something many very well could like, that causes no damage whatsoever to yourself or your favorite franchise only because “you don’t want to see it”. Personally, I’m not all that interested in a Starfleet Academy show. Doesn’t mean I’m hoping they don’t do it. It very well could connect to a lot of people.

Afterburn

It’s petty for me to voice my opinion on what Trek should do? Isn’t that what you and literally every other fan does here in just about every single post?

ML31

But you weren’t just “voicing your opinion.” You were wishing that something doesn’t happen that someone who is not you might enjoy. It’s one thing to say, “I’m not interested in a Star Trek comedy.” It’s another to say “I’m not interested in a Star Trek comedy to the point that I hope they never do it and deprive those who might be interested in seeing one from getting the opportunity.”

Again, I am personally not interested in a Starfleet Academy show. That is me voicing my opinion. But I know there are those who could be so I’m not sitting here hoping it never happens. That’s forcing my likes and dislikes on everyone else. And is kind of a cruddy attitude.

Afterburn

But that is exactly what you and others do every day when you wish for DSC to do more of this and less of that, or stop this storyline, or show this character, or do away with that.

I hope they never do a comedic Star Trek series. That’s not petty. Nor is it petty for you to hope they don’t use Section 31, or do more stories that align with your tastes; it’s not petty when you say you want them to do the show in the 25th century, nor is it petty when you say you hope they’ll announce this as an alternate timeline.

I may not agree with you, I may think your wants and wishes are ridiculous, but they’re not petty, because that’s not what petty means.

ML31

I think you are splitting hairs a bit here. Saying a preference for something within the show is not the same as hoping the show never happens. Although I can understand how one might feel that way.

Hoping specific styles of Trek don’t come because they don’t conform to one’s personal tastes feels a little short sighted to me. Different types of Trek could appeal to a more people and could make a STEU more popular. Which would lead to more Trek being produced. This means there will be styles that do not speak to everyone but there will be something for everyone. Which I consider a good thing.

albatrosity

I was gonna say that but was like isn’t that the Orville basically…but Trek can do comedy really well so why not?

Afterburn

A comedic episode every now and then is one thing but a straight comedy series? No thanks. I’ll watch orville or Galaxy Quest.

If they make one I’ll check it out but it would take a lot for me to be a fan. Never really liked comedic sci fi.

malcolm

please god not star fleet academy . Why not a new star trek in the 28th century .

DIGINON

A Starfleet Academy series doesn’t come with a fixed time period. You could even do it in the 28th century.
On the other hand: Why do a Trek show in the 28th century? You can’t even extrapolate reasonably from today to the 24th century, let alone the 28th century. What story “needs” to be set in the 28th century that you cannot tell just as well in the 25th, 26th or whatever?

Tiger2

I agree with you I don’t want a Starfleet academy show either but I will take that over Khan in a heartbeat. As for a Trek show in the 28th century, it may be a bit too far out but I would certainly be curious what they did with it.

But I do have a feeling we are going to see 25th century stories in the future and that’s far out enough for them to do with whatever they want, which is what I mostly care about.

Utherutheruther

How about following the first or second class of star fleet academy?

ML31

OK… But if the break is long enough some will just suspend their subscriptions until a more optimum time.

DIGINON

So what? Even if they had a new Trek all the time there would be some people who would only get a trial month and binge watch the whole stuff. There are probably also people out there who cancel their Netflix inbetween seasons of their favorite shows. That’s just the nature of streaming where you pay for a month at a time. Most people will probably be too lazy to cancel and resubscribe every few weeks. It’s a different story if there’s almost a year long break between seasons.

ML31

Eventually I’m pretty sure there will be a 3rd party provider who will bundle 10 streaming services for a lower price than all of them bought individually. Perhaps that is how Comcast or DTV will remain in service….

alphantrion

Personally I always thought “franchise fatigue or burnout” was just an excuse for bad products. I think if the quality stays consistent and if they have different people running the shows, then the series could work concurrently. It all depends on the quality of the product.

Jeff

Burn out isn’t really a thing on the consumer side unless the storytelling is boring or changes style in a way that alienates the fans you accumulated.

On the production side, to prevent burn out you need to pull in a wider variety of people involved. Take a hint from Marvel. You need someone overseeing quality control and unification for all series, but each show needs a variety of different writers, producers, and directors so they can have time to come up with interesting ideas.

If you have just a few people at the top telling the stories they’ll eventually get burned out. My guess is that is what happened with Stargate Universe. The writers wanted to try something different (like BSG style writing) and instead of slowly integrating new talent and letting the veterans move on to another show they just changed the feel of Stargate and caused the majority of fans to give up on it.

Utherutheruther

Some show ideas: enterprise B, Enterprise C, a first contact show, a post nx show the gap to bigE, a colony building show, cardassia before bajoran, kayless or post kayless and post first contact.

1. E-B follow the B.
2. E-C follow the C.
3. First Contact- follow a diplomat on mission to deal with first and aftermath.
4. USS Zander post romulan war.
5. Either an early colony, a farflung colony or a newly won.
6. Its the Cards.
7. Kayless…or not.
8. The events after FC-USS Valiant and/or Zefram Cochrane.

albatrosity

I’m kinda tired of ships called Enterprise. Yes, the early 24th century should be explored, but maybe not via those ships. I really like the early colony idea

Danpaine

It’s about oversaturation, but not Star Trek oversaturation, imo. Just off the top of my head: HBO NOW, Showtime, Starz, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Netflix, Shudder, YouTube Red, the new streaming service Disney is going to introduce soon, and so on, and so on, ALL with original programming, ALL with a monthly fee. And here’s CBSAA with Star Trek as it’s flagship (and virtually only, right now) property, waving a small hand in that vast crowd saying “we’re here now too!” Without even mentioning the programming still offered on network and cable (for even more $$), there is an absolute TON of streaming programming out there, a lot of it of excellent quality. The problem is not making too much Star Trek, the problem is getting people to pay for yet Another streaming service, which right now basically only has Star Trek to offer. For instance, I pay $11 for Netflix, and get a nearly unlimited amount of original programming and films, which includes sci-fi, drama, horror, adventure, etc., a lot of it of excellent quality. Same with Hulu, for $12. And with Amazon Prime, for $10.50. And CBSAA is $10, for just…Star Trek. The playing field is very competitive and crowded, and regular people’s entertainment dollars are limited, as is their time to watch television. And CBSAA is late to the game. Sure, we here on Trekmovie love Star Trek, but the general public has a lot more to keep them busy. Even as a huge Trek fan, CBSAA takes a back seat to nearly every channel I listed above. It just doesn’t have *nearly* enough content to make it worth it for me. Said playing field is always changing, though, so we shall see what the future brings. Point is, the showrunners are not afraid of oversaturation, they’re afraid… Read more »

Tiger2

Agreed with everything you said Danpaine!

They don’t care about oversaturation so much as they want to spread the shows out all year to keep people paying for the service. I mean sure they care about it a little bit but I don’t think they are that concerned. Every one constantly point to Star Wars but yet leave out ALL the other movie and TV franchises that are thriving and only gets bigger the more content they put out.

The reality is though no one cares all that much about AA for a reason and that is because lack of buzz and lack of shows. And I defend AA. I mean I still have it even now. But even I admit it basically sucks as a service. Nothing drives me to watch it like Netflix and Amazon which I also have. And I get Star Trek on those too. In fact I get more Star Trek films as well on both of those platforms. Oddly enough AA had TUC for awhile and its already gone. AA is simply not a very good service currently and there is not much on it. And if you’re not in love with DIS which many people aren’t then its harder to justify to keep it on all year.

Andrew SD

I love the idea of tonally different types of Star Trek shows because clearly there are various types of Star Trek fans (just check out the comments boards on this site) and that’s ok. If the shows look and feel varied enough I think fan fatigue will be less of an issue because people will have their favorites. Some people like light Star Trek, some people like serious, deep, heady Star Trek (like me). Look, after a decade of no Trek on TV I’m down for a mixed bags of high quality shows that satisfy various types of Star Trek fan groups.

Trek in a Cafe

There should be an in-Trek Trek show that’s a bunch of Federation media analysts talking about news and history from the Federation. There should also be Federation reality shows, like how to improve your home, catch a fish, and wife swap. Maybe that’s how Sarek and Amanda met!

DataMat

In respect of the Han solo movies underperformance at box office; it wasn’t actually very good. That’s why it didn’t do well!

ML31

IMHO, Solo wasn’t that good. Part of that was the subject matter, however. And that is the bigger reason for the less than stellar box office more so than anything else. But then, The Force Awakens wasn’t very good but it did great at the box office. So what do I know?

DataMat

Force Awakens was the first film in 10 years which gave it Cart Blanche. And it was still more enjoyable than Solo IMO.

ML31

I think TFA is more like a situation where if you are starving, even a crap meal is going to feel like a 5 star restaurant. Only after you have eaten and your hunger has been fed do you realize that the meal was not as good as you thought when you were eating it.

Tiger2

Exactly, people either didn’t like the film or was never interested in it, hence it bombed. Solo seem to be the least anticipated film in the franchise. Then it didn’t help with the bad PR over the behind the scenes stuff or the fact the marketing for it was abysmal. In fact the very first trailer for it wasn’t shown until four months until it came out. That was probably because they had to rehoot so much of the film. But because of that a lot of people was barely aware of it. I mean Beyond had better marketing than Solo, which had its own PR problems and we saw what happened with that film.

None of this is rocket science. It had little to nothing to do with ‘fatigue’ it was simply not a great movie that was never promoted well and tons of doubters from the onset.

ML31

I think the production problems with Solo combined with the less than stellar story led to its poor box office. They changed directors very very late. That is far worse than just massive reshoots. Rogue One had a lot of reshoots. Yet that film ended up quite good. The director change on Solo changed the entire tone of the film part way though. That’s never good.

alphantrion

And that poor kid Alden Ehrenreich never had the charisma that Harrison Ford had in the role and still has. All the time I was watching, it seemed the guy was just trying to cosplay as Han Solo and nothing else. I didn’t see that glimmer in his eye or that roguish charm that Ford brought so well into most of his role. Goes to show how some roles are just made for some actors and do not really work with others.

Afterburn

Solo wasn’t THAT good, but it also wasn’t that bad. It was an enjoyable, fun action flick, and Alden E. actually did a damned fine job of embodying the character without trying to be Harrison Ford. I’d actually love to see a sequel– I thought the chemistry between he and Chewbacca was almost stronger than in the original trilogy– but alas.

khambattafan

Somewhat troubling, if Alex was going to wear Vans Ward skater shoes to a press event, I’d prefer he wear a variant, instead of the default design.

navamske

They should use the audio from TAS and create a better-looking TAS.

Cervantes

Yes please. An updated version using that audio could be great!

kmart

Totally off topic but I just read that TOS set decorator John Dwyer died earlier this month. Worked several of the features too, and I think there are a few good stories about him and Shatner someplace.

Tiger2

I’m getting the feeling what they want to do is A. Have three shows on a year but not overlap and B. That maybe the shows can all cover a different period?

Just speculation but I think what they want to do is have DIS cover the TOS era and all the lore that exist in it (although more prequel base stuff) while the Picard show will cover all the 24th century era canon while pushing into the 25th century.

But I suspect they will announce another show probably sometime next year that may cover another era entirely different. We could get a post-TUC era show like many people want, a post Enterprise era show dealing with the Romulan war or even return to the TOS movie era and maybe why they are thinking Khan (ugh). But I remember someone suggested the Khan show may just be a red herring and it could be a ship based show.

And if they do the Starfleet Academy show that could take place literally in ANY era too. But I really suspect that’s going to be a show starring a young Sulu or something. I HOPE not but I wouldn’t put it pass them.

But I can see where DIS focuses on TOS stuff, Picard on TNG stuff and another show filling in some place entirely different none of the shows have touched yet. If so that would be PERFECT IMO because they can all just do their own thing and tell whatever stories they want.

alphantrion

If they do a young Captain Sulu show, I think they should really consider getting John Cho back for the role and have George Takei as his father.

Tiger2

I’m 99.9% sure if they actually did a show starring Sulu it will be with a new actor which they did with Spock instead of getting Quinto. I’ve said this countless times but the movie and TV division probably wants to keep their properties as separate as possible which probably means no major crossovers between the two and not using the same actors from those properties.

And probably also to avoid confusion between the KU and PU differences.

Like Disney with “Star Wars,” let’s not kid ourselves: CBS/Paramount are pushing lots of new “Trek” content in order to make more money. Disney has discovered that doing so leads to animosity from the fan community and diminishing returns when the projects don’t turn out so well. The “Trek” creative staff should take note.

The Weekend Slice

While I am fully aware of them basically being separate entities and while I would not expect an answer due to the (ongoing?) legal / merger discussions I would be curious to see what Kurtzman and team’s view is of the film part of Star Trek and where it currently is. Kurtzman was a part of Abrams’ team on the movie side so he may have an interesting view into that. I do hope at one point that they find a way to bring forward a closer connection between Trek on TV and Trek in Cinemas. He may turn out to be a great actor but I still feel that for the franchise in its entirety it would have been cool to have Zachary Quinto play Spock on Discovery rather than Ethan Peck. I don’t have anything against Peck, haven’t seen his work outside of Trek to have any sort of idea regarding his abilities/presence, but timeline wise it would have made sense for Quinto to play Spock. And I think that that the Discovery’s Spore Drive could be an easy way for the writers to merge back the movies’ alternate timeline into the prime timeline and thus undo the destruction of Romulus in Picard’s timeline. Just like the CW have those really well done (in my view) crossover events between their superhero shows we could have a crossover event between Discovery, The Picard Show and the movies where the timelines are merged back onto themselves culminating with maybe the Romulans taking steps towards peace with The Federation similar to how the events of Undiscovered Country did that for the Klingons. The series finale of Discovery could be Discovery ending up correcting all the timelines at the cost of its own destruction, thus explaining why the ship and some of… Read more »

The Weekend Slice

I am all for a new animated show. There are so many great animated movies and shows out there and I don’t consider animation to be “lesser than” incarnations with “real life” actors and sets. My favorite Batman is still Kevin Conroy and TAS is probably my fav version of a Batman show/movie. Akira is an amazing animated cyberpunk movie. Studio Ghibli have done some amazing work with animation. More recently I loved shows like Final Space. BUT it all depends on the tone they want for the show (serious/comedy/for kids/etc) and on the quality of the writing.

Jai

Not that this will make much difference if the showrunners already have concepts in mind for further shows, but I think individual shows about these would be good:

Jai

The Federation President. Basically like The West Wing. Scope for lots of epic “big picture viewpoint” stuff. Timeframe: Parallel to the Picard show, or around a decade afterwards. My first choice.

Starfleet Intelligence. Shadowy goings-on about all kinds of things. Reveals about classified stuff that change your perspective about aspects of previous shows/movies along with other “behind the scenes” activities during the timeframe of this show. Occasional references to Section 31, mainly among the higher-ups, who don’t necessarily approve of them. Would also be a great opportunity to show the spectacular lifestyle available in the Federation’s post-scarcity civilisation. So: Exciting Bourne conspiratorial drama + some Bond glamour. But keep it as intelligent as possible.

Jai

Kahless. Show him to be a truly great man, but different to the myths and Klingon stereotypes, which don’t do justice to his extraordinary personality. GoT-style medieval epic.

The Klingon destruction of the Hurq homeworld. Shows early years of Klingon interstellar expansion and the founding of their space empire. Depicts the legacy of a Klingon population traumatised and radicalised by the Hurq occupation. As soon as the Klingons achieve warp capability, they head for Hurq space and wreak revenge against them, eventually committing genocide at the end of the war — but the events corrupt Klingon culture too. The Klingon aristocracy and clergy in particular twist Kahless’s teachings to justify their own actions, which permanently changes Klingon norms (but also show dissenters who strongly disagree with what’s happening). Plenty of real-life historical precedents from all over the world.

Jai

Khan and the Eugenics Wars. The timeframe changes from the 1990s to World War 3 in the 21st century, caused by Section 31 meddling from the future. The Federation can’t exist unless global nuclear war and a “united Earth” happen first – something Section 31 also realises and deliberately incites by pulling nasty political strings on 21st century Earth. Khan figures this out and is the only augmented “tyrant” to reject Section 31’s support, but exploits the situation to try to bring Earth under his own rule while simultaneously trying to prevent global nuclear war. Would also nicely explain Khan’s hostility and wariness in Space Seed – he already knew all about Starfleet and the Federation and had very good reasons to mistrust them. Cast Hrithik Roshan as Khan, Priyanka Chopra as the ill-fated Mrs Khan, maybe Peter Weller as Colonel Green.

Matthew Weiss

Well, its been about 35 years for me personally and I have not burnt out on Star Trek – not even sure its possible for me!

boborci

Wish them all the best.

Wally

Unlike Star Wars, which is solidly set within one relatively rigid timeline, Star Trek does benefit from having a multiverse and the core philosophy of IDIC. So different tones and styles across multiple series and movies and shorts seems like a natural fit.

Tiger2

Exactly! That’s the beauty of Star Trek to me. It doesn’t have just one main villain, time period, universe, style or tone. It can adapt to a lot of things and go a lot of avenues. No one in their right mind would ever confuse TOS for DS9. Or TNG for DIS. There has already been a wide variety of tone in the franchise. You can set Star Trek in the 22nd century or the 27th. It takes place in the prime, mirror and Kelvin universes and that can start to expand in the future too.

Thats why I love Star Trek, because of how wide they can take its premise. I look forward to the day when we leave the 25th century and end up even farther in the future. Or maybe in a new galaxy altogether. I think that’s the franchise next big leap in the future.

Wally

Well put!

DIGINON

If only its fans followed what you call its core philosophy of IDIC ;-)
There seem to be quite a number of fans claiming that Discovery (or the J.J. Abrams movies) aren’t really TREK because they have a different tone and style. Some will even exclude DS9.
I do agree that, theoretically, different shows with different tones and styles should offer something for everybody but will fans be able to accept shows that don’t follow what they believe a TREK show should be?

Tiger2

Thats true DIGINON!

Sadly I see it over and over again by fans who say both the Kelvin films and Discovery shouldn’t be canon. I think because they do feel so different from what came before and/or because they think they are just not very good Trek in general.

So that push back definitely exists but I still think those people are more in the minority. I’m sure plenty of people don’t like the Kelvin films or Discovery but still accept they are canon. And I think most do accept different styles.

You brought up DS9 which some still think doesn’t hold up to Trek values but I also think its probably the most admired Star Trek show today by most fans. It certainly wasn’t as popular when it was actually on but it seems to be very embraced today and when it comes to ranking it seems to rarely fall past third place on most people’s lists. Today its many people’s favorite show including mine.

So people ARE open to different kind of Trek, but yes I would be lying if I thought it was the majority. To be honest I think most are happy if they just got more TNG again which is why I suspect we are even getting the Picard show even if its not a direct replica of the show.

nonce

Please, look how many DC and Marvel comic book movies and series there are now, very few of them are getting cancelled due to burnout.

ML31

Marvel, yes. (although the Marvel films are pretty much all the exact same formula and if they don’t start changing that up soon the box office may yet start dropping, but that’s another matter)

DC on the other hand… They have huge movie problems. They tried to go anti-marvel in tone, for lack of a better term. And it has failed them. A number of DC projects have been halted. DC is in a bit of a disarray trying to figure out what to do.

skyjedi

So sick of the franchise fatigue excuse Nemesis was a terrible movie. Enterprise only got good in the fourth season. People want quality entertainment.

mick russom

star trek is ruined. voyager and enterprise were hold the nose watchable. after that both the movies and the shows are all trash. huck spit. hollyweird snuffed another legacy. i wont be buying, subscribing or watching this crap unless i happen to catch it for free. and i wont be indoctrinating my kids into watching star trek, star wars or any of that crap either. its sad to see these franchises be wrecked. a lot of the attempts at fan based remakes are loads better.