Jeff Russo Gives Update On Noah Hawley’s Star Trek Movie

Noah Hawley and Jeff Russo at Legion premiere

Last week composer Jeff Russo was out publicizing the digital release of the complete Star Trek: Picard season one soundtrack, which included an interview here on TrekMovie where he also gave us a Discovery season 3 update.  Unfortunately, we didn’t have time to talk about his longtime collaborator Noah Hawley, who has been tapped to write and direct a Star Trek movie. But in another interview, he did give a little update on that project.

Russo talks Hawley Trek

Jeff Russo has worked with Noah Hawley on a number of projects, starting in 2009 with the television series The Unusuals. Russo revealed to Flickering Myth that he’s spoken to Hawley about the writer/director’s plans for a Star Trek movie:

Someone you’ve collaborated with a lot is Noah Hawley – on Legion, Fargo, and recently his film Lucy in the Sky. He, at the moment, is lined up to do the next Star Trek movie – is that something you’ve spoken to him about at all?

I have! We have spoken about it, and we’ve talked what he is going to want from a musical perspective, and how to approach it, and what the story is looking like it’s going to be, which is extremely exciting to me. But it was not by design. All of that was purely by coincidence, that I happened to be doing Star Trek, but also happened to be a frequent collaborator of the next Star Trek director.

He’s also a fan, and a good friend of mine, so when I started working on Star Trek, we chatted about it, talked about it, had conversations about the storytelling, and the music, and the themes, and stuff. He’s one to definitely talk about music with me, so when he called to say that his film was in the works, I was extremely excited.

It was first reported that Hawley had been tapped by Paramount to take on Star Trek in November of last year. The last we heard from him about the project was in January when he revealed he has his own take on the franchise that may or may not include existing characters or cast members.  Hawley is currently focused on the next season of Fargo, which had to halt production due to the coronavirus pandemic, causing FX to pull the April 19th season four premiere. Last week, Hawley told The Hollywood Reporter that finishing Fargo is at the top of his to-do list once the pandemic lockdown ends.

Noah Hawley on location for Fargo

ViacomCBS facing trouble during the pandemic, still making big deals

The last word from Paramount about Star Trek came during February’s investor conference call for corporate parent ViacomCBS when CEO Bob Bakish spoke about “taking the Star Trek franchise and extending it across the house,” touting multiple series in development and production at CBS All Access (and one with Nickelodeon), as well as a “highly anticipated new Star Trek feature at Paramount.”

Of course, that was before the coronavirus pandemic shut down production and theater distribution in Hollywood. In the last few weeks, ViacomCBS alerted Wall Street they were updating their financial guidance for the year, noting “the postponement of theatrical releases domestically and internationally, cancellation or rescheduling of sports events for which the company had broadcast rights, and production delays in television and filmed entertainment programming — could be material to the company’s operating results.” ViacomCBS also announced it had raised $2.5 billion in a new debt offering to help keep them going during this difficult period.

Even during these tough times, ViacomCBS is still making big deals. They are moving forward with a plan to sell off publisher Simon & Schuster (who currently hold the Star Trek books license). Late last month it was reported the company had received 25 inquiries from interested parties to pick up the veteran publishing company. And late last week ViacomCBS closed a $375 million deal to buy a 49% stake in Miramax, which includes a new deal for Paramount to distribute Miramax films and develop Miramax IP for future films. They are also making more international deals including a recent one to make new Nickelodeon content for the German market for Sky, and the acquisition of Israeli TV company Ananey was just announced today.

The ViacomCBS stock has taken a beating in the last months following the announcement of a fourth-quarter 2019 loss, losing 2/3 of its value. While other media giant stocks have also seen losses this year, they haven’t been as dramatic. Some analysts have suggested the company take more aggressive steps. Recently, influential analyst Michael Nathanson recommended the company sell off major pieces of itself, including Showtime or even Paramount Pictures, and seek to merge CBS All Access with another major streaming service such as NBC Universal’s Peacock.

ViacomCBS stock has been hit hard recently

Keep up with all the news on upcoming Star Trek films at

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

no thanks. pls bring back Tarantino

Either of ’em would be great, just not the CBS squad or Bad Robot making creative calls.

Yup. nuTrek is horrible

Agreed. No Bad Reboot either.

QT Trek is dead. You can’t resurrect what never was.

After Tarantino proved he didn’t understand how a multiverse or the Kelvin movies works I was very happy he moved on. If you can’t grasp basic science fiction concepts I don’t think you should be writing for it, especially something like Star Trek which uses literally every science fiction concept in the genre.

Absolutely agreed.
I liked concept of Tarantino’s movie in Trek universe – something like “Pulp Fiction” in space, with all this bad language and not-some-good boys and all other – but only if all this fit in Trek universe somewhere.

No way. Bad idea. Why the gore, violence and more cursing!?

Yeah, I really liked the Tarantino films I’ve seen, but I do not want to see a rated R ST film from him.

I’m bummed that the next film likely won’t feature the cast of the last 3, since I really enjoyed them and the films they were in. But I’ve seen LEGION from Hawley and loved it and I’ve heard good things about Fargo. Whatever he comes up with will likely be very interesting. I think it will be very different from both Berman-Trek and Abrams. I hope it will be set or feature Kirk, Spock, and Bones, even if they’re recast due to Hawley and Paramount wanting a reboot or change in direction. If that’s the case, it’ll be akin to the Spider-Man or Batman reboots, which doesn’t mean at all that they’ll be terrible. On the contrary, I think Noah Hawley, again, will come up with something very interesting and entertaining.

If you haven’t seen LEGION, I recommend it.

LEGION is an ignored masterpiece… we Star Trek Fans are potentially lucky to have such a creative mind at the helm. Fargo is also very very good. He fits better to Star Trek than Tarantino.

I’ll check to see if Legion is available on Netflix. I didn’t watch it when it was on FX. (was that the channel it was on?) But I do watch Fargo and think it is VERY well done.

I think it is just HULU at this point, at least for the full run to date.

I liked it, but “masterpiece”? Uh, no. To each his own, I guess.

QT Trek is a no go for me but probably not because of any bad language issues… It’s just ridiculous having the f-bomb on Trek regularly. With Tilly it was okay, but that Admiral on Picard was just obnoxiously forced.
It felt like: wow, they’ve got Cristjen Avasarala dropping those F-bombs on The Expanse in every other scene… it’s so cool… we need an elderly woman in an important position cussing like a sailor just for the f*ing sake of it…
But none of those scene did any harm to Trek. That Icheb scene on the other hand… no way I want anything like that on Trek ever again… QT Trek would be full of that stuff…

Garth Lorca,

STAR TREK survived NBC’s apoplexy over “Let’s get the hell out of here.” airing. I think it could survive any number of apoplexies over an f-bomb if it were done as equally well.

As I said. I consider the f-bombs rather irrelevant, ridiculous, embarrassing, cringeworthy, but not of vital importance.
More Icheb-style gore on the other hand is a no go for me and ould end my fandom for good…

Garth Lorca,

Except it’s not irrelevant when it’s integral as was all the colorful metaphors in THE VOYAGE HOME, which were included precisely because they WERE ridiculous and the embarassing and cringeworthy were added precisely to embellish the roar of laughter.

Overuse, is a concern, as it can be detrimental in that it tends to bore. But somehow, I never found the use of “frak” in SYFY’s BATTLESTAR GALACTICA that? And regarded as just an invented word or cussing in another language, it was clear that its each and every use was an f-bomb an not “fudge”.

Part of me wonders if the Star Trek feature might involve the Pike Crew? If I were going to reboot the feature franchise with a new and accessible storyline, a Pike story might be a good place to start.

Sensible assumption

Any Trek movie is 2-3 years out at this point. Pikes crew will be long gone by then.

Like in a Pike TV show? Then they can spin off to the movies?

I’m just brainstorming, but given the popularity of the Pike crew and the potential there, I could see a new film and tv franchise established there. But alternatively, I could imagine the planned Pike show evolving into a movie franchise exclusively now that Paramount and CBS are back together and brainstorming movie ideas. I’ve been wondering why the Pike series hasn’t been announced yet.

The Kelvin Storyline has to be a dead-end at this point, it’s been too long and the actors are not available. It would make more sense to start fresh with a smaller budget rooted in the TV series production.

No, as in moving on to other projects, once production gets back to work very late this year.

I didn’t realize that Mount, Peck, and Romijn were in such high demand that they will be unable to schedule a movie anytime in the next year or two…

I don’t understand why fans of this franchise continue to think that talent is just sitting by the phone, waiting for a call from Paramount, so they can drop whatever they may actually be doing to maybe participate in a movie that may get made before they die….

A movie is less of a commitment than a TV series. I get the impression that Anson Mount isn’t interested in a long-term TV series commitment, but a movie would be more flexible for all the actors. And it takes years to develop and film a Star Trek feature anyway.


Normally, I’d agree. But I think you just described EXACTLY what they’re doing during the nationwide pandemic stay at home?

Ive been saying since last year, they didn’t cast Rebecca Romajin just to eat a hamburger. seriously though Yeah it was pretty clear to me last year they had plans to use Mount, Peck, and Romajin in feature film. i still feel that way. but i guess only time will tell.

Most of her recent credits are just voice work and TV shows, nothing special at all. Not to take anything away from her, but she really hasn’t demonstrated anything particular star-like for the better part of this century; she’s competent, but I don’t see building a motion picture lead or major supporting role around having her cast. Mount, I just MIGHT believe for that, but he’s the only one, as I don’t see Peck’s appeal at all based on the very brief bits I’ve seen of him.

Not my first choice for a feature film but I could get behind such a thing.

I wouldn’t mind see one more reboot movie. But I also have a hunch Pike will take the lead to the big screen. It is possible.

Use the Discovery 1701 bridge and the Kelvin cast and just do a TOS adventure (ignoring the Kelvin films) and just say it’s TOS. They’ve got a great TOS cast. They’ve even got a great “Cage” cast with Pike/Number One/Spock. They’ve got the 1701 bridge and starship (from Discovery). Take the good, ignore the bad. Put them together? OR just use the 1701 bridge, and Hemsworth as Kirk’s Dad and do Diane Carey’s Final Frontier. That is just begging to be made into a movie or miniseries.

That would be utterly confusing. Either do another Kelvin movie or use a new cast if they do another TOS movie. But I really really hope they move on from TOS completely and do something original with new characters and setting if they don’t do another Kelvin movie. I don’t care what century it takes place in the 23rd or the 27th, just something new.

And they clearly can’t afford Hemsworth anymore and why the last film was cancelled.

Non hardcore fans won’t know the difference while hardcore fans will understand the difference. Might seem hard for Trek fans to understand (being a TOS fan it is EASY to understand) the majority of people have never seen a Star Trek episode (it looks too 60s and old). Then they watch TNG and think “this is lame” and get turned off (spoiler alert, that’s some boring TNG, not Star Trek). If you just do a TOS movie, it will work for both – those who don’t watch Star Trek won’t care about the canon while hardcore fans will just know “reboot” or “prime” or whatever. That you obsess about what century it is while not caring about the story, characters and if it is relatable is what condemns Star Trek to an ever decreasing audience (OMG – I love it because it’s RIKER serving pizza, most don’t care/know who that is and if they are looking for something called ‘Star Trek’ they don’t want a pizza serving).

The Kelvin movies have their own fanbase now for an entire decade and yes it would be VERY confusing to put actors in a similar role but change everything about that role when we had three other films developing both the characters and universe a totally different way. How would that NOT be confusing? That’s literally what Tarantino was suggesting. No offense but that was a stupid idea then, its stupid now. My guess is why he partly walked away from it because Paramount told him not a chance in hell that would happen.

And Cmd. Bremmon sometimes you come off like you’re trolling. You don’t speak for every Star Trek fan. It’s GATE KEEPING and it’s so annoying. Not everyone thought TNG was ‘lame’ or it wouldn’t have lasted 7 seasons (how long did TOS last again?), some of the biggest ratings in TV history that also span 4 movies and now another spin off show with Picard. And is still VERY popular today, HENCE a show about Picard 30 years later lol. Maybe it’s just a second language issue but stop speaking for everyone else. You sound like you’re 70 years old and thinks everyone either thinks like you or should if they don’t. And especially when you’re such a hypocrite about it. Clearly you never ‘turned it off’ because you watched 176 episodes (for seven straight years), four movies and now Picard and you’re still moaning about it as if anyone forced you to watch it. Dude just don’! Problem solved.

And I literally said I don’t care WHEN the movie takes place. Again, READ MY POSTS lol! I said it DOESN’T MATTER what century it takes place in, how much more clearer can I be? Did you miss that line in my post? They can have it take place in the 22nd century since there is so much they can explore in that era top, I would be fine with that, I just want something DIFFERENT along with a good story. You mean you can’t do both?

No one has done Diane Carey’s Final Frontier, I highly recommend it!
I’m glad we agree no one cares about the century too!!

I never heard about Final Frontier until you mentioned it here but opened to it. But to be honest, when everyone talks about adapting a Star Trek novel, most people sound like they want Star Trek: Destiny to be remade, at least most people here and on Reddit. And more so since its author, David Mack, is now working on some of these new Trek shows. I never read it (I never read any Star Trek novel lol) but that one does sound exciting and I guess it deals with the Borg origins (which I actually want to avoid but it sounds like it was a decent plot line).

I think some were hoping the Picard show would be about the Destiny novel. I think it would appeal to hardcore fans more. But I know you would hate it since it deals with TNG lol.

Star Trek Destiny is awesome, but it has already been totally contradicted by Picard. It probably could be adapted to fit into the new continuity, although it would have to be set at least 18 years later than the original novel was.

Yeah everyone seems to rave about this novel lol. I am even thinking of reading it now. But yeah based on what I know about it it would be pretty difficult to adapt considering so many of the characters from TNG to VOY are in it. It sounds like an Infinity type of cross over event. I think it would disappoint a lot of people if they didn’t fully adapt it and it would just be constant comparisons.

But they probably could do it with a new timeline in a few years if they really wanted to do it.

Yeah. It even has Enterprise and DS9 characters in it. In order to adapt it, I think there would be a lot they would have to cut out or change. I don’t want to give too much away, but they would have to either change the ending, or have it set after Picard. That means that Picard would probably be dealing with the Borg invasion on La Sirena instead of on Enterprise, and Riker wouldn’t be captain of the Titan like he was in the novel. It could work, but I think a lot of characters would have to be cut, and the story would have to be simplified a lot.

Meant Infinity War type of crossover.

Ahh read it!! Best Star Trek novel ever.
Funny story though when I first got it I was like 7 years old and pretty much begged for my parents to buy it for me because it had the cool Enterprise double front page. Reading it however at the time I was totally lost. “What the heck?? Why is Kirk just like talking about letters?!? Accelerator cannons and lasers??!?! Romulan carriers?!?! Captain Robert April?!? WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE??” LOL
Only when older did I revisit it and realize how the adventure of Robert April/George Kirk was awesome and how smart the author was (Diane Carey) in using City on the Edge of Forever as a framing story. To my surprise I think that one adventure was perhaps the most exciting Trek story put to paper. Also very funny in some parts, good situational humor.
As a one-off adventure it is also just dying to be made into a movie vs. say TOS which should be a series.

I have gotten SO many suggestions of what Star Trek novels to read over the years (including here), it’s probably enough to create my own book shelf with lol.

I won’t lie to you it does sound interesting but I would probably read the Destiny trilogy or some of the Kirsten Beyer Voyager novels first since they are more recent and many people talk about those over and over again, especially now that the authors are working on all these shows. But I wouldn’t hold my breath to reading any of them since I haven’t by now. ;)

Even for hardcore fans, the new bridge (from Discovery) is easily explainable since there was a brand new Enterprise at the end of the last movie, and it will be at least five years since that movie. Plenty of time for another refit of the Enterprise.

That’s true we never saw the bridge of the *new* Ent-A. Why they didn’t make the *new* ENT-A look more like the *old* Ent-A (i.e. refit) is beyond me.

they could figure out how to do a Kelvin timeline movie, that dovetails back into the prime universe.

Personally I’d like to see new TOS features evolve out of a Pike series. Have the show run for 3-4 seasons ending before Kirk takes command of the Enterprise and then have a movie tell the story of Kirk’s first mission in command of the 1701. Obviously several of the cast could transition from the TV show but there would be an opportunity to bring in somebody with mainstream appeal to play Kirk and other TOS characters not cast at that point. Subsequent sequels could then cover the final years of the original and/or the second 5 year mission.

Something else I could get behind. Doubt that will turn into a real project but it may not be a bad idea. Of course, I think we need someone other than Secret Hideout to handle it….

A whole lot of talk about nothing. Maybe if Paramount doesn’t go belly up, or is sold off, maybe they’ll make a movie in a few years. We’ll be getting our fix on CBSAA for the time being.

‘fix’ is the operative word, just a different definition for me, the verb form.

Phil you seem totally convinced we’ll never see a Star Trek movie again lol. But CLEARLY they want to make another one right? I get your point but they wouldn’t be constantly hiring people to write these scripts if they weren’t serious about it. Why bother at all? And they do still make a lot of big movies. They already agreed to make two Mission Impossible movies back to back and you know that isn’t going to be cheap lol. Even the last Terminator movie was up there in terms of cost.

I do agree a Star Trek movie is probably seen as a bigger gamble right now after Beyond bombed and why there is so much hesitation to make another one but my guess is they would throw any money at it was a guaranteed deal. It’s not that they can’t afford to make big movies, they simply can’t afford for them to bomb at a rate of other studios can afford (well these days everything is up in the air sadly).

And I can’t decide if these Kelvin movies were a good idea for the franchise or not? I mean in terms of their cost. They wanted them to be on par with Marvel and Harry Potter and obviously that didn’t happen. Now they can’t go too cheap like the old days because people will notice the difference. But those movies would probably make a profit at least (assuming they are good) but probably not at the level Paramount cares about anymore.

If they make it they’d better MARKET IT. Like they almost totally failed to do for “Beyond” [which IMO is why it ‘tanked’]. I think they only did marketing push in LA and NY. Ridiculous. And that crap trailer, OMG.

So do a better job next time Paramount. The movie was fine. Not your marketing.

I personally feel for Beyond which was a good movie. The problem was the audience was gone post Into Darkness. With Trek 2009 you had a general audience pulled into a sequel. They then took years to make said squeal only for the Enterprise to last 10 seconds in combat, Kahn be a poor guy just trying to get his family back and Starfleet firing drones at the Klingons from the neutral zone…. losing said audience. By then the market has evaporated and Paramount probably couldn’t figure out how much you then spend on a follow up (is that money a lost cause?).

I know we talked about this in the past Marja and I do agree marketing was definitely a huge issue with Beyond, but it wasn’t the only factor either. I think there were a LOT of factors at play similar to a lot of factors why Solo did so badly even though it ended up being a decent movie too.

But we all talked about it a thousand times now why Beyond failed…but it did and end of the day that’s all that really matters and why these movies are in such limbo now.

No the movie was not that good actually. Considering how much Beyond did cost it really should have been a lot better than it actually is.
They got Cumberbatch and Elba, two world class actors, and their characters were poorly realized and bland, run of the mill fair. It’s a shame.
IMO of course.

You might be right. Into Darkness was so terrible (I am a TOS fan that loves all things TOS that I really wanted to like it) that maybe it just made me so excited when I came out of Beyond without being crushed by disappointment (which I even ignored after the viewing of Into Darkness until my brother went through all the holes – poor Kahn just trying to get his family back, firing torpedoes at Qo’nos from the neutral zone, Kahn beaming from Earth to Qo’nos, the Enterprise lasts 7 seconds in combat like something out of TNG).

A studio hiring a writer is a fairly low cost investment to flesh out a story, it really doesn’t stake them to anything other then to be saying it’s ‘in development’. Paramount’s financial reality check seems to be that they are having trouble finding investors to pony up more then 125MM for a movie. The Kelvin films ran a lot of revenue through the studio, and turned a profit for them – the problem is, it was X-Men profit margins, not Marvel profit margins. So, the movies need to be made for less. I suspect that’s the hard line the studio is holding when talking to producers. JJ was never interested in doing Trek for less then 180MM, QT couldn’t do it, and I suspect Hawley can’t either. When someone signs a deal that they’ll do it for 120MM (or less), then we’ll see another movie. Until then, no.

But regardless why are you hiring writers if you have no intention to make a movie?? You think they are just doing it for PR purposes? If anything its having the OPPOSITE effect lol.

But I agree it just sounds like it’s a budget issue more than anything. I think that was another big appeal with Tarantino, he probably said he could do it cheaper. He’s done 9 films and the costliest has only been $100 million. And my guess is if they greenlight Hawley’s movie it won’t be anywhere close to what the Kelvin movies cost (and also why it’s most likely will be with a new cast as well).

My guess is that if this Hawley film is done it will be at a much lower cost than the KU films. And I am fine with that. The film will still look good and I’d rather they focus on story and plot. Not that this means it can happen again but I recall Harv Bennett reportedly telling Paramount that he could make a better Trek movie and for less money too! And he did. Granted they did save some money by re-using some TMP footage. But still….

Once this pandemic is passed I’d imagine film studios will be trying to really reign in budgets on their movies and tv shows. Some sort of long term recession or economic difficulty is on the horizon. Shutting down countries is a serious thing.

The flipside is we might see a resurgence of originality and creativity in Hollywood as money is no longer unlimited or wasted, but is used sparingly. This might yield some good results including with regard to the Star Trek movie franchise.

It’s a terrible price to pay for a resurgence in Hollywood creativity. Still, this is going to be a long, sad week for the US, so I’ll take my silver linings where I can find ‘em.

He should make a Pike movie. I would watch that. The Kelvin movies are done at this point, let it be. Pike is the most underused Trek character ever. He has so much potential on screen.

Apple should buy ViacomCBS. That way Apple will have Star Trek to use on their streaming service. Disney and other media corporations are struggling right now too. At least Disney has Star Wars and Marvel to make some quick revenue on.

Star Trek is the most valuable intellectual property CBS has at this point. They need to be careful here. CBS can’t mess up on this golden opportunity.

Honestly I think they missed the boat with Netflix. Compare their Lost in Space to Picard and ask yourself which one is more consistent with TOS “Wagon Train to the Stars” space exploration and colonization concepts (and quite frankly which one is more fun to watch and makes space “cool”). Give Star Trek to the guys who did Lost in Space and do it as a Lost in Space spin-off. (Starfleet is the frontier ‘police’ to Lost in Spaces ‘colonists’) / Star Trek reboot and you’ll have Star Trek (the real benefit to Netflix being that the name will guide them to the show saving Netflix the marketing).

Kutzman made it clear awhile ago that they didn’t want to redo the same thing we seen in the past shows with people on starships exploring the galaxy. Now THAT said I do think having ONE of those types of shows would be good and yes I think a Pike show would be the most obvious to do that with. But I think people who want a traditional TOS/TNG type of show (exploration, episodic, etc) is probably not in the cards.

But I do agree if Netflix had Star Trek it would probably be a more standard Star Trek show. I really don’t think we would’ve gotten anything like Discovery at least.

And I don’t think Lost in Space is all that popular because they already announced third season will be its last. I seen first season and liked it but I wasn’t all that enthralled with it either and why I haven’t watched second season yet (but plan to one day). Is second season better than the first one?

“Kutzman made it clear awhile ago that they didn’t want to redo the same thing we seen in the past shows with people on starships exploring the galaxy.”
Yes, I agree Kutzman doesn’t want to make exciting Star Trek. That’s why he should quit and give it to someone who does (see Netflix Lost in Space).
Lost in Space I thought would be cheesy robots that I didn’t watch it until I heard a third party talk about it (kind of like TOS!). It’s ironic because Picard was the show with the cheesy robots while Lost in Space is now the show about space exploration. Netflix Lost in Space should buy the Star Trek name and label it as such as a reboot (do a spin off with Starfleet being the frontier police for the Lost in Space colonists).

Well ‘exciting’ means different things for different people lol. I mean how ‘exciting’ did DS9 sound at first? Not really right? But then they found a way to make it work. So no I don’t think that’s all Star Trek has to be about exploring the galaxy and WHY DS9 is my favorite show. It proved you can take Trek in a different direction and make it successful. So I’m not bothered at all with Kurtzman wants to do because you CAN do it, but yes the question is how well can they do it?

Of course I’m not saying I don’t want that again either. I would happily take a ship with people on it and find new life and civilization but you can do other things with it as they have.

Unfortunately Discovery is a mixed bag for sure. It IS about people on a ship but its not about exploration per se, but that can change in its third season. And I think its problems wasn’t just the premise itself. Picard is also a mixed bag, at least its first season, but it was still waaaay better than Discovery was IMO. I think that show has amazing potential as well but yes it will mostly just depend on the story and that show is wide open to do anything with now.

As man it’s like you don’t even read these posts sometimes lol. I said I SEEN Lost in Space and I liked it, but I still wasn’t very enthralled with it and why I haven’t watched season 2 yet. It has nothing to do with Star Trek, I just found the show pretty formalic a lot of the times, but still a decent show. Maybe season 2 do a more job which is what I was wondering since I know they are literally lost in space now.

And clearly its not a huge hit because they are already cancelling it after it’s third season. Again I don’t think it has anything to do with the premise of course I just don’t think the show is strong enough to keep a big enough audience, sort of what happened with the Expanse (although Amazon saved it).

Tiger2 Apple should buy Star Trek already. Maybe Apple will do a better job than CBS at managing the franchise.

Netflix won’t buy Star Trek. They already have Stranger Things, a popular franchise in itself.

A. I don’t know suddenly where this idea about Apple buying Star Trek came from lol. Why THEM out of actual movie studios? And the rumors I seen about Apple they have their sites on something MUCH bigger like Disney themselves (but I think its just a rumor…of course I said the same thing about Disney buying 20th Century Fox at the time ;)).

B. Netflix and Amazon DID want to buy Star Trek or at least offered CBS to license it so they can make their own shows. Les Moonves confirmed it but he turned them down and decided to just try their own luck putting it on their own service instead and the rest is history.

I just don’t see CBS EVER letting go of Star Trek because the merchandise alone probably brings in billions. But yes that said I never thought Lucas would let go of Star Wars for literally the same reason and Star Wars makes a lot more money (or at least it use to). Maybe it will happen SOME day but not in the near future when they are desperately trying to get All Access off the ground.

Tiger2 Apple won’t buy Disney. Disney won’t allow that to happen.

Disney did buy 20th Century Fox last year. Maybe Disney should buy Star Trek instead of Apple lol.

CBS is not putting Star Trek in the right direction. I’m worried about the future of Star Trek. Things could get better.

OK fine, but why do you think APPLE out of all people could do better??? Its just a weird alternative to me. And I don’t have Apple TV but I do know some of their shows like Morning Show has a good and critical following but I literally know nothing about the others.

As for Star Trek, I know many are not happy with the direction its taken since the first Kelvin movies. I’m not AS bothered but yes I have not fallen in love with any of it myself. Picard is probably what I like the most by far but I know that show wasn’t amazing either. But we also have to remember its still very early. Both DIS and PIC are still babies and I want to see what Lower Decks will do.

But yes I said this that if Picard doesn’t make fans excited about future Trek then I can see others being worried. I think it did FINE overall but yes there is still some disappointment about it. Hopefully both shows will be better next season. I just don’t think any one studio is going to ‘save’ a franchise either. Remember how much fanfare Star Wars got when people learned Disney was now running it?

I’ve only watched the first two episodes of season two, the lightning storm in the first episode had more “wonder of space” than 10 episodes of Picard. Feel free to disagree.

Hmmmm … S2 gets deeper into the robot mystery. I’m trying to remember. There were a couple of very fine and touching eps in S2.

Marja Lost in Space is really good. It’s a pretty descent show on Netflix. Have you watched Altered Carbon yet? Another Netflix classic.

I don’t know anything about Altered Carbon. What is the plot of that show?

First two episodes of S2 and no robot (though some ancient civilization mysteries with some cool hard sci-fi tech).

Thanks for actually answering my question Marja. ;)

And yeah I fully plan to watch it, but there is just SO MUCH to watch lol. I just found out season 3 of Ozark is now on Netflix too and I LOVE that show. But I have no idea when I will even get to that. It’s funny you think now so many people are staying at home you will be able to watch everything only to realize how much is really out there lol. There are shows and movies over a year old I been meaning to watch but just don’t have the freaking time.

And I think it speaks to how much we love Star Trek so much, I couldn’t imagine waiting more than a day to see any new episode barring big circumstances of course.

Tiger2 almost all Netflix series are doomed to 3 seasons.

It’s apparently how Netflix does series orders, and it’s incredibly rare for them to extend. Worse, they have non-compete clauses that prevent the shows from moving to another streamer.

After Anne with an E (cancelled after 3 seasons despite being very successful), the CBC has announced that it refuses to partner with Netflix in future. Initially, the blame for the cancellation was falling on CBC, but the production company can’t make it happen. So, the issue with Netflix is getting profile.

So, I am wondering what CBS Studios has in the fine print for Discovery. It may be that since long term rights to Trek distribution are an essential part of the value of the IP, CBS did not get caught by the standard Netflix terms.

Yeah but there are exceptions. Stranger Things, The Crown, House of Cards, Narcos and Black Mirror all went or going beyond that. And it sounds like they will renew Orzak for a fourth season as well as I read they are already planning the next season if it does get renewed. I hear what you’re saying but I don’t think its any different than most TV shows and that probably after a certain amount of seasons they realize the shows are losing bigger audiences the longer they go. But if the viewership stays high enough then they stay. Problem with Netflix is they just produce a crazy amount of shows these days and its just easier to cut the less performing ones. I never heard of that show you mentioned though (which proves marketing is also still an issue when you have so many shows on that site), but I take your word for it.

But they don’t seem to announce shows being cancelled until after the season is done. I think LIS case proved the show just didn’t pull in the numbers they wanted. But if this show was pulling in numbers like Stranger Things I doubt they would be ending it so soon. Or at least wait until the third season was over and then decide.

As for Discovery, I been on record since 2016 saying the show was going to get three seasons NO MATTER WHAT! I never saw it doing any less than that regardless for a number of factors I cited prior. Even listening to all those morons on Youtube like Midnight Edge, Doomcock, whoever, citing the show was already cancelled before season one was even done were talking out of their ass. And it’s amazing they STILL have credibility now by some even after they been proven wrong so many times, but then I have to remind myself who is now President in America and he still has supporters even as much as he’s been caught lying or proven wrong.

I think this will be the season that determines if Discovery is going to prove it’s really a strong contender or not, especially because there are just SO many Trek shows coming now. So if it’s not really pulling its weight it will probably be easier to get rid of it. NOT saying they will but now they have a lot more options and we know Picard is the stronger show viewer wise so its no longer the top viewership on AA at least. But if it does make it to a fourth season it will probably stick around for awhile.

My issue with Netflix is the LOOOONNNGGG time between seasons. Such a lengthy break is absurd.

Yeah true but that is just becoming the norm of most streaming sites these days. Discovery has been off the air nearly an entire year now. The second season finale aired on April 18th last year and still not even an official date when it will return yet. Of course now its probably pushed back farther because of the coronavirus issues, but even before then it probably wasn’t going to arrive until late spring/early summer.

I do miss when a Star Trek show was off maybe four months between seasons, the good ole days lol. It’s also probably why they are planning on making so many now because of the long turn around with these shows. And AA isn’t Netflix, it’s pretty easy for most to just drop the site between seasons.

For me such a long break doesn’t help the shows. But that seems to be the way of things for streaming. It was even kinda true on cable channels. There were shows I watched that had a pretty long break between seasons. So long that I would forget they were still coming! I recall seeing the new season of Hell on Wheels on my DVR and being surprised as I forgot all about it is had been so long!

Actually I think cable started the trend first. They weren’t delayed as long as streaming shows but they still took a lot longer between seasons than network TV. Most basic cable shows seem to be made at least within a year but that is changing more and more now as well. The show I watch on AMC, Better Call Saul, was off nearly 18 months which seems nuts lol. I didn’t even realize it was off that long.

But shows on HBO and Showtime has had ridiculously long waits for awhile. GOT last season was nearly 2 years between seasons and that was just six episodes (and not a very good six episodes at that). Homeland and Westworld which I’m big fans of also been off the air since 2018 and just came back a few weeks/months ago.

These shows are treated like mini-films now and quite frankly many have the budgets that rival a lot of movies when you combine the season. And of course this is a good thing in the end because they are given the time to make these shows higher quality and a lot more FX and location shooting something a CW, FOX or NBC show doesn’t have the luxury of doing. But yes it sucks waiting lol.

But we have so many options now, its pretty easy to be distracted by something daily these days.

It did have its roots in cable. I recall BSG having some long breaks. Although they would have a first part and 2nd part of one season separated by months. And there were a couple of other cable shows I watched that seemed to take forever between seasons.

I promise you, however, that if Trek were done as a completely Netflix show it would still be a season long story arc and be only 10-13 episodes. But we may not have had the behind the scenes turmoil we got from Discovery.

Oh my freakin God, I like Lost in Space but. Family discussions at critical moments? So frustrating!

That said they did do a great job of casting and some of the character writing. It just edges on ridiculous … sometimes.

Take the Lost in Space tech/format/universe now take out the family dynamics and make it about the frontier “police/explorers” out of contact with Earth but having to explore and enforce the law (i.e. “Starfleet Command” and you’ll have Star Trek.
I’d keep some family dynamics though and colonists since they are most relatable to the general audience.

Yeah that’s what really bothered me about season one Marja, it just felt too melodramatic with the family stuff sometimes. But that’s the show, that’s what the original show was based on so its nothing WRONG with it (if they do it right at least) but it was the least appealing part for me and I’m guessing a lot of sci fi fans. I hate to say this but that’s probably why Star Trek is so popular with its fans because its never focused on family in that way before. It’s always about the ‘crew’ and while some are married or have kids, most of the characters don’t (you would think most of the TOS characters are practically virgins…minus Kirk lol). To this day Sisko was the only captain (or lead role) who was at least married and had a kid. And we’re talking seven live action shows now. That says something.

Well, Kirk was married and had a kid. He didn’t have a kid with the woman who he was married to, and his wife and son are both dead, but its something.

When was Kirk married??

The Paradise Syndrome, TOS’s “Inner Light”

And he had his kid at some point before he took command of the Enterprise. Marcus didn’t want Kirk in their kids life so he obliged.

Kirk had a baby mama, it’s not the same as actually planning to have a family or be part of one. And my guess is he has had a few kids he doesn’t know about in different parts of the galaxy. ;D

Oh OK thanks odradek, I haven’t seen that episode in ages. But that’s not quite the same thing I was talking about. ;)

Starfleet is high risk exploration / military and should have no kids (TNG being nonsensical). The grey area is colonization in which you need people having kids on the frontier with limited resources and accepting a higher risk level. This is Lost in space. Like the wagon trains to the West this is the grey area with lots of exciting stories to potentially be told, much more exciting then everyone is a super robot, everything is easy and no one dies.

People have kids and family in the military all the time man, what are you talking about? You can still have families even if they don’t travel with you, that’s ‘nonsensical’ to think otherwise and completely unrealistic.

Putting them on a warship and/or high risk exploration ship makes no sense. Putting them on a colonization ship yes – which is why Lost in Space makes sense (TNG not so much).

Oh my god! Cmd. Bremmon do you actually read the ENTIRE posts?? This was second line:

“You can still have families even if they don’t travel with you.”


So can you stop bringing this up now. And this is done in the real world ALL the time. There have been plenty of real life explorers from Christopher Columbus to Maco Polo that went years from home and yet, married. If people got married in the real frontier, I’m sure they still can marry and have families just because they are explorers in space. And Star Trek is one of the few space shows where everyone is practically single. As I said, I don’t care because its not why I watch Star Trek but it is a bit unrealistic.

And did you JUST watch Lost in Space for the first time or something recently? It’s coming up a LOT for some reason. Are we going to have to see references about that in you make now too lol.

I predict we will see his LIS references as often as we see you punctuate your sentences with lol’s. ;)

LOL, can’t argue with that Scott! :)

That was something TNG did that I felt was absurd. Families and children on the D. No one in their right mind would have their family with them on a Star Ship! It’s reckless child endangerment. Have your family but you will have to be gone for weeks or months at a time. The family silliness had Roddenberry’s input all over it.

Well I guess it makes sense now. You just upload your kids into golumns and when the Ent-D crashes and/or blows up you just find their dust and transfer them into a new golumn. Space has been totally de-risked to the detriment of story telling and the ability of the audience to relate (totally ignoring all the lessons of the Star Trek Writers Guide).
To some all the kids were already killed transporting onto the Ent-D, I kid you not, and all the parents are just like “hey, it’s ok, I have a copy”.

I’m not a huge fan of the casting. Some roles were cast well but others? Not so much. The kid playing Will is surprisingly good. And I’m not a fan of kid actors! But I have no real issue with the writing or plotting. It has gone places that are so different than expected and even though there have been some goofy moments I am caught up in the story. Seen 3 episodes of season 2 now. In fact, I like it better than any of the Secret Hideout Treks.

What is interesting here is really nothing has been officially confirmed that Hawley’s ST film is a continuation of the Kelvin-verse or not. They could indeed with the Kelvin Enterprise crew and move forward with continuing stories – but they will eventually have to address Chekov’s character (whether or not they decide to recast or not). really at this point, I do believe that the Kelvin Enterprise cast is done and over with…it is time to move on.

CBSAA is going strong with their multiple series currently or what is in production. I honestly think this Section 31 series, is really a give or take…I really don’t have to much interest at this point in time…and it doesn’t appeal to me at all.
A Pike Enterprise series (like many have called for), is really of great interest and in demand…and would more than likely be a huge benefit for CBSAA, with Discovery and Picard already in play.

I am really surprised that neither Paramount or CBSAA has thought about a ST series or film that focuses on say, Sulu’s Excelsior…that time period after TOS film series (Undiscovered Country) all the way up to TNG is really a lost potential in story telling. Not saying they should directly do a Sulu/Excelsior series specifically…but using that as an example.

I wanted a limited E-B series showing how the ship lost the ‘shame’ of being where Kirk got killed. Actually still have pages & pages about it, spent awhile in early 95 trying in vain to get hold of Nimoy, thinking he might be interested in saving 23rd century Trek.

The Star Trek movie era should have continued. My personal favorite strategy would be to use the TOS cast and do Star Trek III over again and ignore everything that followed. Add Saavik, David/Carol Marcus, Federation post Genesis term oil. Klingons, Romulans, all things cool! Go!

Seriously, the 80-+ year old TOS cast?

No no not that (though I do love the original cast). The Kelvin cast but in the movie era. Chris Pine, Zoe Saldana, etc. Update the movie era.

Seriously why????? Why would that interest ANYONE besides old fans?? Do you really want a Superman Returns or a Terminator Dark Fate situation where you try to just ‘ignore’ the other movies and continue like those don’t exist but everything looks and feels different anyway since you’re making these movies decades later? Look how well those turned out.

And in this scenario you want to use the same cast…from another universe but pretend they are other characters playing similar roles from decades ago in old movies only fans over 40 cares about? No offense but this is EXACTLY why Star Trek fans shouldn’t run the franchise. This idea would bomb so badly it would make Dark Fate look like a hit because its only appealing to a very tiny niche audience like yourself.

And it would all be beyond confusing lol.

Could always do a “Captain Sulu” series with John Cho.
I think as long as the story is good and the series is fun it will work.
I’m willing to say that due to confusion it might be better just to do a pure reboot. I’d argue that of all the Trek iterations, the movie era looked great and they should copy that (you can kind of see that how the graphics now tend to sneak in TMP symbology, red alert, fonts, etc) even in different eras (Discovery).

See, THAT’s a decent idea lol. I suggested that myself in the past, just take one of those characters and do a spin off movie or something. It doesn’t have to be as costly either. Treat it like what they did with “Bumblebee”, a smaller movie and more back to basics. It didn’t make as much as the other Transformer movies but it didn’t need to either. That’s even getting a sequel.

I would be totally on board with a Sulu movie with Cho. I don’t know how much that would bring out new fans but I would imagine all the old Kelvin fans would be into it.

Bumblebee was silly but it was still a billion ties better than those woeful Bey monstrosities. And cost a ton less, too!

Why is everyone associating the Kelvin cast for only the Kelvin timeline? Kirk,Spock etc. should look the same in any timeline. I personally liked the Kelvin movies and am not interested in yet another reboot. As a long time fan I don’t think Hawley’s ideas for the movie will meet with success. Not that many people either watch or like CBSAA Star Trek Discovery from the many articles that I have read. Hawley’s track record with a movie is not exactly stellar. I don’t think if I were Paramount I would go with Hawley’s “own take” of Star Trek along with new cast of characters. Sounds like a recipe for disaster and possibly the end of Star Trek on the big screen. I know that I will not be wasting my time or money to see “his take”. Use the Kelvin cast, let the movie take place in whatever timeline you want it to, give them a decent script to work with and see what happens. It couldn’t be any worse than Hawley’s “Lucy in the Sky” box office bomb.

A. We don’t even know what his ideas ARE yet.
B. The only reason why there wasn’t another Kelvin movie is because Chris Pine didn’t take Paramount’s offer so what can you do? (And I’m not saying he SHOULD have taken it but like it or not he is the linchpin…and he knows it.)
C. Discovery has been renewed twice now…clearly someone is watching it.
D. These movies are probably at the end of their run regardless so Paramount is going to have to think about the future, sooner or later, and my guess it’s now sooner.
E. I just checked Hawley has been involved with two movies. One he wrote back in 2006 and then Lucy and the Sky. He hasn’t done enough to even have a ‘track record’ at this point.
F. Plenty of people keep writing off Star Trek every time a movie bombs or a show gets cancelled and it always finds a way to keep going…eventually.

E, Nick Meyer’s pre-TWOK record as director was just TIME AFTER TIME (modest success) and adapting but not directing his novel THE 7 PERCENT SOLUTION, along with TV movie scripts and a ‘winner’ like INVASION OF THE BEE GIRLS. His his rep was nowhwere near as good as Hawley’s, whose future should be assured just for FARGO, let alone LEGION (crazed tho the latter might be.)

Not saying your other points don’t have merit, but I’d say Hawley (just by the ‘virtue’ of being white & male), has at least two or three more shots at the big screen before he gets ‘Frakes’d’ from being a feature director.

That’s the power of having the right analog. By knowing he was doing Horatio Hornblower in space Nick Meyer was able to write some (the?) best received movies by the public (II, IV, VI). While I used to disagree with him on Spock, I now realize he was totally right. I’d urge any Trek fan to read to DC Comics of the time (especially Peter David’s second series #1-#10) to see what could have been. The movie era totally could have made a fantastic TV show. Example – Harry Mudd. Yeah was cool to see him in Discovery, but wouldn’t it have been even more fun to see him in the movie era?!?

I hated Harry Mudd in TOS. To this day, I still have no idea why he’s a fan favorite? The one thing Discovery did right was make that character more appealing and less creepy like he came off on the original show.

This is SO odd. I wrote you a response Kmart an hour ago. It was posted but it disappeared for some reason. I know it wasn’t censored because it was a mundane post. And this isn’t the first time this happened here either.

But I’ll just summarize what I said before and that is your point is actually the same as mine. Hawley hasn’t done enough one way or the other to see how viable a film career he has yet. That was my original point. And one movie, a bomb or not, isn’t going to determine that either. Plenty of first time directors make bad movies but then go on to a lot of success later on. And most have no idea who this guy is unless they watch his shows which are pretty niche in themselves.

As for Star Trek he could be the next Nick Meyer or the the next Stuart Baird. We don’t know either way yet, but we at least know he’s an amazing and unique writer if you watch any of his shows.

Sorry about your post. Yeah, the jury would be out on this guy Hawley, but he is at least a creative force with respect to character, which is more than you could say about Baird, who does get kudos for his editing (SOME of it deserved, but I don’t like a lot of the most popular films he worked on) but based on his three big studio films (scored by Jerry Goldsmith, the best crutch a new filmmaker could have), I see him as still having delivered a trio of duds.

Hey.. I LIKED Superman Returns! :)

It wasn’t a bad movie, but did feel disappointing after all the hype and build up to it. Still I’ll take it over MoS any day which felt like two hours of beating your head in with all the mindless action.

I liked MoS too, but not as much as SR. What brought it down for me was, yes, the lengthy and noisy overblown action sequences. Which got pretty darn tiresome.

The Kelvin cast is still much to young for the movie era. Whimsical idea

At the very least could be Kirk’s second five year mission between TMP and ST:II TWOK. That would be awesome anyway since the 1701 would be in her prime as refitted flagship of the fleet (but I’d have it post uniform change).

I actually think they have hinted this won’t involve the Kelvin cast. Simon Pegg straight out said he doesn’t think the movie is about them and Hawley has said that it’s new characters, but he didn’t make it clear was it all knew characters or just added characters. But my feeling is it’s a new cast too. Once Pine walked away from the original fourth movie and Tarantino basically said he was no longer interested they probably decided it’s time to start fresh. Even if this is the Kelvin cast my feeling is this would be the final one like Nemesis was for the TNG cast because clearly it’s just too hard to even get them made.

I don’t understand how Marvel can get all these big actors and put them in multiple movies over and over again and yet they can’t figure out how to make these movies a little faster? Zoe Saldana has already played Gamora in more Marvel films than she has as Uhura and she’s only been in that role literally half the time she’s been in Star Trek.

But yes I guess the obvious is Marvel movies make money…tons of it.

Marvel has incredibly huge resources: writers, directors, CGI departments, and so on, so they can afford to keep it running year round.

It’s too bad they couldn’t do that with Kelvin Trek and turn out a movie every year or two, but JJ just HAD to faff around. Grrr!

Yeah I understand that but its still INCREDIBLE how well Marvel does it. Regardless how you may feel about those movies, the fact they make 3-4 a year, ALL connected and able to bring back those actors again and again is mind blowing.

Meanwhile it takes 3-4 years to make one standalone Trek movie with seven main actors. It’s absurd. I guess they just thought that the movies will have a big enough pull to bring the audience back over and over again no matter how long they waited and they were proven wrong. This isn’t the 80s anymore. Yes some franchise like Bond can get away with that (its crazy to this day no one has ever suggested a TV show for that) but others have to be a lot more proactive if they want to stay relevant. Now that Trek is on the small screen they can make less movies but they seriously dropped the ball when it was ONLY these movies and nothing else.

Tiger2 Marvel is owned by Disney so that’s why they can make movies every year.

Star Trek isn’t capable of doing that.

No, I didn’t mean every year, I just mean not every 3-4 years either. Most of TOS and TNG films came out 2.5 years average. But the three Kelvin films just took too long. Beyond wasn’t too bad but STID should’ve been out in 2011 or 2012 the latest.

I think the lesson from the Marvel movies is that when you reboot Trek really do it wagon train to the stars. Have the frontier police (Starfleet Command). Have the colonists. Have a first contact team. Have the traders going to alien worlds. Have the scientist with his experiment gone wrong. Have it all interconnect and you’ll end up with a value add.
Quite frankly if Josh Weadon gets his way with SWORD as the follow up with shield the Marvel universe is going to end up a better Star Trek than Star Trek (we’ve seen Earth go from first contact to aliens).

Man you been here, what, ten years? Do you realize you’re the only one who says ‘Wagon Train to the Stars’ constantly lol. I on’t think I’ve seen ONE person ever use that phrase here but you. Not an issue, just funny.

Yes I know, it’s very sad that it seems it’s just me that thinks the world needs “wagon train to the stars” – a show that shows today’s humanity can colonize and succeed in space.

You know that was just a marketing line right? Most ‘wagon trains’ didn’t have warp drive, transporters or could time travel.

What you don’t seem to get is that transporters and time travel are the weakest parts in Trek (transporters put in to save cash) with the real heart of the show the exploration and colonization of “the final frontier” ( the “wagon train” analog). The less connection to the wagon train analog, the less heart and relevance in my opinion. You are free to disagree.

They are still part of Star Trek man, from the beginning. Again you cherry pick everything to death. Star Trek is not the Expanse. That’s my only point. And yes, I soundly disagree.

I think it is a mistake by the writers to think the wonder in Star Trek was the transporter. I think you could have a better “Star Trek” without the transporter. I think the only real tech that is essential to Trek is FTL (and new civilizations).

Well Enterprise relied less on them for obvious reasons but I never had an issue with it. But as many talked about in that OTHER thread there are a lot crazy implications with it lol.

But yes when people moan and complain about ‘magical’ tech in Star Trek it doesn’t get anymore magical than a freaking transporter to me. Now they created a spore drive which is basically a ship wide transporter that doesn’t seem to have a limit in how far it can actually teleport you. I know you and others don’t like it, but as I ALWAYS say A. nothing you see in Star Trek today, NOTHING, didn’t have some seed originally planted in TOS first even if other shows took those ideas much farther later and B. Star Trek is not reality at all. Sure, ships traveling to distant stars is a possibility some day, but that’s where the comparison probably ends. ;)

Enterprise was RUINED by transporters. They only figured that out in season two when suddenly they are using shuttles when they had a transporter but it was too late.
Dare we compare what we got (TNG) to what should have been – primitive warp ships, nuclear weapons, the Captain representing all humanity since no communication with Starfleet Command, Vulcans thinking we are illogical, Andorians thinking we are pushovers, Klingons and Romulans wanting us as slaves or dead, no phasers on stun, no beaming out of any situation. ENT should have doubled down on the Horatio Hornblower in space but instead the writers were so lazy they couldn’t go one damn hour without their transporters we got them, phasers on stun and peace with the Klingons.
Star Trek isn’t transporters. It is:
SPACE THE FINAL FRONTIER – Space as a frontier not yet conquered (i.e. full of challenges)
HER FIVE YEAR MISSION – Said team having to explore said frontier
TO BOLDLY GO WHERE NO ONE HAS GONE BEFORE – Going into unconquered untamed totally risky space.
That’s what the writers are missing. They don’t get that the more untamed space is, the more “Star Trek” the show will be.
The original Star Trek pitch was correct:
“The time is ‘somewhere in the future’. 1995, 2995, doesn’t matter but CLOSE ENOUGH TO OUR OWN TIME FOR OUR CONTINUING CHARACTERS TO BE FULLY IDENTIFIABLE AS PEOPLE LIKE US.”

In Enterprise they could use the transporters, they just didn’t trust them as much and it was a time people were still mostly piloting ships inside atmospheres, so it made sense. We saw them used more as time went on but they were still used more sparingly compared to the other shows.

I was trying to have a normal conversation with you, but it ended up in the usual crazy rant lol. So I’ll just leave it here although your point is exactly why it’s probably not a good idea to do anymore prequels if Enterprise, Discovery and the Kelvin movies are any indication.

Science fiction writers want to make cool and interesting tech and more importantly what many fans like me want to see. That’s just the reality. Especially in Star Trek and its no point of hindering it or at the very least put stories in periods where they can do what they want and why Discovery is probably in the 32nd century now.

You’re never going to get TOS on that level again, because that was writing in the sixties, not today. Even if the Pike show happens, its going to still have all the crazy magical tech Discovery had and my feeling why they are not as excited about making that show as fans are.

In Enterprise they should never have had transporters. I don’t know how to make it any more simple for you.
Ok, hell, I’ll try. What did transporters bring to the table in terms of story telling for Enterprise?

No I got that part and I responded in my first paragraph. That was the first two lines of your post. The rest was just an angry rant against Enterprise itself. Again, fine, I just didn’t want to travel down that long road with you lol. It was just a one line remark and here we are. ;)

But as I SAID, they were still used much sparingly compared to the other shows, so its not like they didn’t show other means of transportation. Of course I always laughed that they had ships dock with the Enterprise to instead of beaming over which was a great concept but it was funny how all the ships, even ones they meet for the first time had the correct docking ports. what are the odds??? This was done in DS9 too but their solution was to have ships of different dimensions, designs and sizes have more options like the pylon ports and landing pads if the docking rings were too big or small (have to give it to the cardassians, very efficient species ;)). Enterprise just had the one and it seem to fit every ship.

But to show I’m not trying be a contrarian, I agree they probably didn’t NEED the transporter in Enterprise or maybe present it later. But again A. I think a lot of Trek fans would just miss that feature and why it was there because to many Star Trek are transporters, phasers and warp drive and B. you have to remember this was basic technology for most warp based species at the time. They were working with the Vulcans who probably helped them develop it, so canon wise it’s not unrealistic to see them have it so soon because they were working with an advanced race that had all of these things already.

So I never really cared but I understand why you did. And that’s fine. Nothing can be done now either way.

Once you are out of the 60s and have SFX the transporter is a story killer as opposed to a series enabler.
As you mentioned
a) No scenes of coming aboard the ship, the brilliant TMP coming onto the Enterprise requiring all transporters on Earth and Starfleet to be inoperative
But it’s more than that:
b) No fighter battles, no cool SFX shuttle going down to the planet. Ship transfers, boarding parties using shuttles, etc. Exception – gas giants, etc which thanks to CGI can now be explored but because energy is free no need to explore them.
c) All the situations pretty solved with the “Beam out”. Hostage situation. Trapped in a cave. Needing to get off the surface of the planet (one of my favorite new Lost in Space episodes now is when they have to use the Jupiter as a rocket to go get help). Half the time in Trek you don’t understand why they don’t just beam the bad guy into space (and on the same note why the bad guy doesn’t just beam the good guys in to space).
All of these concepts would have made for more exciting and visually stunning episodes than even TOS. And in ENTERPRISE it would have been perfectly logical for there to be no transporter to explain it for fans who obsess over canon (indeed it made NO sense for the transporter to be there).
No one would have missed the transporter (indeed Enterprise eventually figured out and they tried to get rid off it but it was too late).

Point of information: Roddenberry’s 1964 pitch was “_Wagon Train_ to the stars”, a comparison to a critically acclaimed TV series (NBC and ABC, 1957 to 1965, top of the Nielsen ratings). It was about the *style* of show: a semi-anthology driven by big-name guest stars (in WT, in each settlement the train passes), with high-brow stories (as opposed to juvenile action-adventure). It was never a proposal that the show focus on colonists (that happened in the Pocket “New Earth” six-book series (2000), whose first volume was titled _Wagon Train to the Stars_).

I’m going to agree it wasn’t supposed to be colonists but I am going to disagree that it was never about a “frontier” analog.

Thank you! ;)

Phillip Thorne,

Not to mention there were no colonists in either pilot. However, there WERE colonists in THE MAN TRAP which NBC picked for what amounted to a sneak peek air, which clearly demonstrates what was on the network’s mind in regards to the show.

You could Address Chekov’s Character by simply having him teach at the Academy. That way you don’t have to kill him and we can all treasure Anton Yelchin as Chekov forever.

Or just ignore it. Everything doesn’t have to have an explanation.

Well, I always thought John Cho could play Sulu for that potential Excelsior series and I still do.

Nothing to see here, a lot of talk but nothing really said. Moving on.

A story I’ve been trying to write for some time involves the federation in the 25th century. Starfleet is building a new class of mobile star bases w/ multi-platform capabilities. There are some in the federation who see them as a means to bring the federations enemies to it’s knees. But when an artifact from a distant galaxy reveals human DNA along with a message written in ancient Sumerian, everyone’s primary focus is temporarily diverted to this enigmatic discovery.
The message is a plea for help. A request to be liberated from slavery. A cry of distress.
The logistical ramifications of answering such a request- should it be deemed authentic- are astounding to say the least. The Federation Council could not conceive the notion of traveling to such a great distance, with such minimal data at hand. To some members, the idea is laughable, if not ludicrous.
But one officer in Starfleet has already begun his preparations to make the laughable, a bold new idea that will galvanize citizens of the federation from every corner.
With his eye on the largest, fastest, most technologically advanced vessel ever created by Starfleet, Captain Jake Callisto is willing to sacrifice everything to bring these ancestors of humanity, trapped in a far-off galaxy, home. Because he, along with the finest crew ever assembled, believes that ANY distress call, no matter how far, should always be answered.

{My intention is to make it into a trilogy, but since TPTB do not accept outside submissions I haven’t devoted the time to it. The concept, based loosely off of Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek, would take the franchise to another galaxy. In the interim they would find rogue planets and stars, twisted physical laws, multi-dimensional beings, aliens from other galaxies, strange illnesses, and mind-bending theories involving the creation of the universe, and the multiverse in which they would have to travel, via interstellar space. If I could sell the idea, I’d love to write it, or see it further developed in any way.}

You should pitch this story to CBS. They should turn your Star Trek story into a TV show. I love your idea here.

It’s what Star Trek is meant to be. Everything it stands for. Gene Roddenberry’s vision of a better future of humanity.

Star Trek will boldly go to a new galaxy, brilliant!

I like this idea too! I think this would be a great set up and I always said I want to see Star Trek expand not just in time but space and have them go another galaxy. This exactly why I don’t care for prequels because you can’t really do things like this (unless you ‘classify’ everything which Discovery loves to do lol). But that sounds really interesting and can open up a lot of crazy and trippy stories!

Sounds awful ☹️

I would like this way WAY more than Picard. But I do think you’ll be disappointed when it turns out the story will be just as exciting as something in the Milky Way and less so if the tech is too advanced.

Contrary to what doctor says in Picard (by a factor 33x or more), there are a hundred billion stars in this galaxy, plenty of room to tell stories. It’s like you had three-quarters of the world being water and yet seaQuest yanked the sub to another planet at the end of s2 — NBC and producers, you’re too dumb to tell stories here?

When you make it so a) no one real dies OR no one really cares if you die because you can photocopy b) You can just be a super powered robot and/or hologram that if blown up you can bring back c) Everything is free, you want it you get it d) humanity is the most caring superior race in the galaxy and everyone should just want to be as glorious as us, even the energy beings and e) each ship is 1 in a fleet of 1000 that its totally replaceable, then yes the galaxy, and quite frankly the entire observable universe, is pretty boring with respect to story telling even with starships involved (though I guess we can always watch identifiable people serve pizza). Milky Way, Andromeda, the observable universe, the observable universe next door doesn’t matter.
Thankfully this contrasts with reality thus far.


I think you mean this all coincides with the ever increasing reliance on virtually real transactions & interactions to survive a very REAL life threatening pandemic? Odd coincidence, that.

Not sure I see where you’re going with that, unless you’re just a fan of Forster’s THE MACHINE STOPS. Wouldn’t make for much of a series unless viewers really really liked THE HOLLYWOOD SQUARES, since it is just everybody living in their own separate box as I recall.


Just commenting on how our “reality” is not ever going to quite go back to what it was BEFORE this very real pandemic. I think it gives sf writers a lot more wriggle room in regards to answering charges that they are giving short shrift to how things “really” are?

I’ve been very slow to adopt the mentality of the new normal, but am beginning to see your point. It’s weird how good I usually am extrapolation, but have a deadzone/blindspot about right now, except for increasingly dire political expectations.


Wasn’t that just a retread (or possibly an homage) of where Allen’s Seaview had already gone before?

I dug VOYAGE as a little kid, but have only seen a few eps in the last 54 years. Did they really take the sub to another planet?

I was supposed to go on the set of seaQuest that first season for a Cinefex article, would have been my first set visit, but Amblin managed to tee off the editors of the mag the week before by asking them ‘who are you again?’ The snub/reply was, ‘the people who just wrote MAKING OF JURASSIC PARK for your boss’ before dropping the article.

Really wish I’d gotten to go … I liked the sets on the show, and two days after the pilot had actually written a letter to the production designer, which (according to him) wound up on a wall in the art dept. office, because I suggested a couple of fixes that were things they had already planned to do but weren’t allowed to (like putting lips on the shelves so the beakers wouldn’t fall on the deck every time the ship shook.)


I was thinking of the Henry Jones’ stopwatch episodes where his character not only manipulated time but space as well. He may not have quite exactly put the sub in “outer” space per se, but he clearly put it somewhere else at times where it seemed clear to me that they or Nelson didn’t have access to the Earth. And then there was the 4th dimensional THE DEATH CLOCK episode which I only vaguely recall as being as weird.

No thanks to both of these people! I doubt Paramount will want a movie without the current cast otherwise they have to throw away a lot of budget on a new ship & introducing a crew! Just get a decent script bring the current cast back throw in more science & a little less action. That has a far better chance of hitting the box office jackpot vs someone who directed a terrible & boring 2019 movie!!

PaUl, the ONLY reason there isn’t a Kelvin movie now is because Paramount refused to pay Chris Pine what he was owed and the film got shut down. People keep suggesting this, but if that was true then they would’ve just made the last one, especially when the actors had a clearer schedule to make it. They didn’t, so clearly they are not that bothered.

My guess is Patrick Stewart probably got a ridiculous amount of money to do Picard and probably way more than Pine was offered for the next film. But it proves if a studio or network smells a sure thing they will pay them nearly anything it takes to get them to show up.

And I don’t get your point about throwing away money on a budget when they can pay new cast members a fraction of the old ones and just make a cheaper movie altogether? Even if they manage to make a fourth Kelvin film they already destroyed the old Enterprise so all the old sets would be replaced anyway for the new ship. They are not saving much of anything at this point.

If they were talking about where he wants the film to go musically then he has at least a basic story outline in mind. But I was still wondering where this project is production wise. I haven’t heard of it even getting green lit yet. (meaning it has an approved budget)

Wouldn’t there need to be a first cut at a script, not just a concept sheet and an outline, before greenlighting?

I am intrigued actually.

At this point, I’m more than ready to let Kelvin-Trek go and see what a new take on cinematic Trek can offer.

I’m actually not sure what exactly is required before budget approval. Obviously the filmmakers would have an idea what would be expensive and what would be less so. Is the first draft of a script required before budgeting? That sort of info I am not on the inside enough to have learned about yet.

We are retconning ourselves into oblivion.

This news is a Giant MEH. I think that Paramount should do what they did the 1990s, with the TV shows and movies all connected. But they won’t. And that is not interesting to me.

I think that’s going to change in time VZX now that the companies have merged again. And while its not a HUGE connection, I am happy that Picard stuck with the Romulus explosion plotline because it does make those movies feel more connected to the franchise now and not in the isolated box they felt like to me. I know you are talking about more crossovers but again we have no idea what this movie is about yet and maybe that IS possible if it takes place in the prime universe at least.

Would be very interesting if the new movie will be Star Trek Picard. I imagine Star Trek Picard in the big screen making a big reunion, not only a reunion with the STNG crew, but also with characters from DS9 and Voyager. That’ll be very interesting for me. Big and small characters. Teaming odd combinations. Harry and Soji. Chakotay and Dax. Jurati and Barclay. Raffi and the (Voyager) Doctor. Jake and Wesley. Belana and Bashir. Garak and Laris. We are all wanting to see Berman era characters. And we all have a favorite character. That’ll be a treat for everyone.

Haven’t the CBS shareholders lost enough cash on hardcore fan Picard nostalgia? Would Nemesis have worked with Wesley, Seven of Nine and Nelix (didn’t Janeway make an appearance)?

They wanted 7 in NEM but Ryan didn’t do it. Wes actually is in NEM early on, before Janeway’s cameo.

Anyone think that would have saved NEM? If you were still watching VOY at that time, you pretty much already went to NEM, no?

Movies need a good script. All the characters will not save a bad plot. I liked Nemesis, Insurrection, and Generations. But First Contact had a great script and Frakes did an amazing job as a Director. It got everything.

I agree, I think adding characters from other series will not add more or less to the script or the success of the movie. But will be amazing for Star Trek Fans to see them all.

Nice interview!

Not surprised about those financial issues. They had it coming even before the Corona crisis. Now, it seems, lots of studios will have to merge with competitors and sell off franchises and other brands to survive. But that’s probably a good thing. There have been too many stations, too many streaming services, too many TV shows at the same time. It’s time to go back to the roots and cut back on numbers. Hopefully Trek will still be part of that downsized future…

Guess they do not want to do Tarantino’s story without Tarantino. I never thought he would direct it. I thought they would get someone in and just go with Story by Quentin Tarantino and written by Mark Smith writer of the Revenant. Guess that wasn’t enough of a draw. They wanted Tarantino to direct