Terry Matalas Working On Non-Star Trek Projects, But “They Know Where To Find Me” For ‘Legacy’

Terry Matalas interviewPhoto: Dennys Ilic)

The third and final season of Star Trek: Picard did pretty well this awards season, picking up Astra TV Awards, sweeping the Saturns, and earning showrunner Terry Matalas a WGA nomination, only the fifth in franchise history. Fans have been talking about a follow-up series, but Matalas is reiterating that his “Star Trek: Legacy” concept remains only a hope. While he is ready to work on Trek again, he’s already looking to other projects.

Ready for the call to return to Star Trek

Matalas participated in a special Zoom chat with members of the Master Replicas Collector’s Club in late February, and one of the first questions was about Star Trek: Legacy. The executive producer understood, saying:

“I am asking [about Legacy] too… I can answer, there’s nothing. Look, they have Star Trek that they’re making. They have Section 31 in production right now, which is cool. Strange New Worlds is also shooting right now. And they are prepping Starfleet Academy. That’s a lot of Star Trek, a lot of money being allocated to Star Trek. So I don’t know what you have to do. So the answer is: No… not currently. Look, anything can happen.”

Later in the discussion, he revealed that he is currently working on other projects:

“I’m working on some things I can’t talk about yet and I’m meeting on some things I can’t talk about, but they’re cool… not Star Trek: Legacy, guys, there’s no secret here. That’s not a thing… I can tell you that I am not working on anything Star Trek at the moment, but I’m enthusiastically looking forward to what they are going to do.”

While he has other projects, Matalas noted he was ready to return to the final frontier if the call comes:

“Whatever they would let me do. If they need somebody to paint the walls, I’ll be there, whatever. Again, it’s a corporation. Also Alex Kurtzman’s Secret Hideout company is running it and has been holding that together for some time. So they have very fine people figuring it all out. They know where to find me. If they ever wanted me, I would happily be a part of it.”

Michelle Hurd as Raffi Musiker, Ashlei Sharpe Chestnut as Ensign Sidney La Forge, Mica Burton as Alandra La Forge, and Jeri Ryan as Seven of Nine in “The Last Generation” (Paramount+)

Legacy would have hybrid approach to serialization

As for what kind of stories we might see if Legacy were ever to happen, Matalas was reluctant to offer details but made it clear he has put some thought into it:

“I would love to do [Legacy]. It would be a dream to go back to the 25th century to do Next Gen—to do a version that incorporates a whole lot of new characters but sees that world. Yeah, the second I bring up any ideas from it, it becomes a headline so I’m not—but there was really great stuff with the Klingons and Worf, that’s all I am going to say. But it was cool.”

While he didn’t offer specific storyline ideas, Matalas did weigh in on how Legacy could balance serialization versus a more traditional episodic format:

“There’s a larger richer story you can tell over ten hours than just one. If I were to do another series, I would do a hybrid. I think you do a version of both longer arcs and “of the week” Star Trek stories is a great way to do it—in a way that Strange New Worlds is doing it, but maybe a hair more serialized.”… As far as serialized and “of the week,” I think they live can live together. 12 Monkeys was a show that had an episodic identity in which each episode was primarily a kind of different mission, but it was still part of a whole. What’s interesting with Star Trek is new missions come in but there can be longer arcs. The one I think about the most is FX’s The Shield with Michael Chiklis. It was a procedural cop show with a new cop thing every week, but there were serialized threads—major ones—running through the series that were phenomenal. That’s the way to do it, in my estimation.”

Terry Matalas at the 2024 Saturn Awards (Albert L. Ortega)

More to come from Terry…

Check back later this week for more of Terry’s Master Replicas Collector Club chat and see what he had to say about seasons 2 and 3 of Picard, including characters and storylines that were considered.

The Master Replicas Collector Club offers discounts and early access to product releases and more including these members-only Zoom chats with celebrities. The next one with be with Battlestar Galactica star Jamie Bamber.

Keep up with news about the Star Trek Universe at TrekMovie.com.

This interview has been edited for clarity. 

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Thank you Terry Matalas for giving us the final “Next Generation” “movie” we (and the cast) deserved.
Yes, there was a lot of fan service and I am FINE with all of it.
Maybe Legacy will happen, maybe not but there are always new trek stories to be told.
If this is the end for the Next Generation crew, whether Legacy happens or not, I loved season 3 of Picard and am grateful for it. And may all the cast and crew live long and prosper and also keep getting together for poker games in between saving the galaxy.

Now be honest, did you love the Changelings working with the Borg and Federation Day where all the Starfleet ships were in a weird formation and they were all firing on a Starbase for, reasons, and Riker telling Picard “you’ve killed us all”… or did you love literally just the fan service and nostalgia?

Not directed at me, but yes.. I loved it all. I’ve been very critical of the nostalgia in these Secret Hideout produced shows, but not because I mind them harkening back to the past… it just needs to be done with purpose. There was an inherent purpose in Picard S3, in that it was the last round for the original TNG cast.. so more appropriate than normal, but still.. the nostalgia was 98% purposeful, so it worked for me in ways it never has in these other shows. It all feels earned. Terry has said Legacy would be different in that way. No TNG regulars are likely to be regular Legacy cast members. Terry just gets it.. so I’d love to have him running any show.. Legacy or not. He’s explained this many times, in several different interviews. Legacy would be different.. and it has far more promise than any of these other ones. The best hope for Legacy is for after Paramount is in new hands, and maybe after one of these other shows concludes. For now, it’s not happening in the foreseeable future.

“ There was an inherent purpose in Picard S3, in that it was the last round for the original TNG cast.. so more appropriate than normal, but still.. the nostalgia was 98% purposeful, so it worked for me in ways it never has in these other shows. It all feels earned.”

Sorry, but I genuinely don’t get this. What is the inherent narrative purpose, story-wise, in all of the nostalgia, just because this particular story happens to be the TNG crew’s last hurrah? How is that ‘earned’?

One guy says he liked it and then the replies sound like an interrogation.

“Now be honest…..”

But I didn’t — and wouldn’t — say that. My honest feeling is that people should like what they like, and no apologies. But I am genuinely puzzled as to why the most ardent fans of PIC S3 give it a pass for flaws that they would never accept in any of the other current shows. Or so it seems to me, which is why I asked.

I know that wasn’t you. That was somebody else. I just don’t want to see this guy get piled on for saying he was grateful for season 3.

I think not everybody is looking for hyper realism from a space fantasy saga that was never known for it in the first place, and it’s as simple as that. We like what we like.

What we’re calling nostalgia is also just the tendency for long lasting stories to come full circle at the end.

I think personally Trek has always been known for realism. Roddenberry consulted futurists when developing TOS. WARP for example didn’t just come from anywhere. The idea of bending space, whether feasible or not IRL is a real life scientific principal. This isn’t Star Wars where you can just jump into hyperspace and be on the other side of the galaxy in seconds or have light swords that make no sense in terms of physics.

To be fair, the series strayed away from realism long before 2009, so I’m ok with that too. I would say it has struggled to remain plausible within its own rules.. and I go back to this one little fact that is almost singlehandedly working against the current braintrust that is running Trek.. they say it follows canon. Which it doesn’t. If they would make it an actual reboot, canon wouldn’t matter.

That Matalas earned a WGA nomination speaks volumes. Those writers assess the work of other writers, the strength of the writing and the overall narrative.

I think for some they saw inconsistencies with established characters but that was ultimately the point. They weren’t the same people they were after Nemesis and for a variety of reasons.

As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I’d be a lot more impressed with the WGA nod if it had been for the fourth episode, which was truly exceptional, rather than for the paint-by-the-numbers season finale. In any case, the franchise’s sole WGA award-winner remains “The City on the Edge of Forever” in 1967, and I don’t expect that will change this year.

As you say, I would fully expect the TNG characters to be in a different place after three decades, and that they were was not among the issues I had with the season.

City on the Edge of Forever can never be topped.

I have to agree episode 4 is my favorite as well. But whatever the case is, I think it’s great Terry got it. Finales are hard to nail. I would agree that the finale isn’t anything particularly special, but it feels right in how it’s done. That’s honestly enough for me.

“ I would agree that the finale isn’t anything particularly special, but it feels right in how it’s done. That’s honestly enough for me.”

And if “isn’t anything particularly special” is good enough, then more power to you. But if that isn’t damning with faint praise then I don’t know what is.

I just mean relative to finales. I can think of a very few finales that stand out as something special. Most are trying too hard…. That doesn’t happen here, and I can’t tell you how happy that makes me. It does what it’s supposed to do. Ends on a satisfying note, and with Trek it needed to be upbeat. I’m much happier with that, than I am to see something that tries to be the Sopranos by doing something unexpected, twisty or weird. Or do what Ozark did and be too open ended as if it’s just another episode. It doesn’t do what so many do and try to kill people off (if anything was unexpected to me, it was that). It brings the right blend of emotion, and has a nod to something continuing. I thought it ended perfectly, even if it wasn’t anything particularly revelatory for a finale. Not all finales need to be. This feels like it should. That restraint is why it’s a great finale.

Well, I’m glad you enjoyed it. I thought it was strictly pro-forma and sorely lacking in any real wit or imagination, capped by a farewell scene that capitalized on our goodwill for a far superior TNG finale rather than doing anything the least bit surprising or challenging on its own. Series finales from “Better Call Saul,” “Six Feet Under,” “The Wire” and “Succession” show how you can stick the landing by encapsulating the themes that made the series unique, while taking those themes and the characters out for a final, memorable spin.

“WGA nomination speaks volumes”

No not really.

Actually, it does. Those nominations don’t come easy.

How about the LACK of WGA nominations in Trek overall, esp this century? Does that speak volumes?

A WGA WIN would speak volumes.

It would speak to people not watching all the other nominees prior to voting, or a ballot box stuffing akin to what apparently happened to get the world con set in China last year.

Because it’s integrated into story sensibly. Fleet Museum? In the story because they had to get a cloaking device. Changelings? Really couldn’t tell this story without them. Tasha Yar? They’re rehashing Data’s most cherished memories. the Borg? look how they’re woven in because of Locutus. Are there some that are there just because they could? Moriarity seems a bit overindulgent… so Sure.. But the quality of the story makes these small indulgences work. But is most of it done plausibly? Yes. Picard S3, unlike Discovery or SNW, is an intentional swan song for the TNG cast.. so it makes sense to dip into that. Contrast any of his against how they use the Gorn in SNW. They did it just because they could.. and no effort made to do it right. I’m not anti-nostalgia, it just has to be used right. Picard S3 isnt’ perfect, but if SNW could use its fan service half as good as Picard S3 did, I’d be ok with it.

The original Spacedock repurposed as the Fleet Museum and relocated to another star system to serve the purposes of the plot is just absurd, sorry. The Changelings, so unique and interesting as portrayed on DS9, are reduced to cartoonish villains, and Vadic’s abuse at the hands of the Daystrom Institute is revealed as nothing more than a stab at a backstory — as opposed to an actual theme for the season — when it’s never followed-up upon. The Borg arguably wore out their welcome decades ago, and PIC S3 adds little to the lore to justify bringing them back. I’m fully with you on SNW’s handling of the Gorn, but that doesn’t make Terry Matalas’ own story choices one whit better.

They’re supposed to have hauled spacedock to another star system? Somehow never heard or picked up on that, I guess you’d need a bunch of heavy haulers with perfectly aligned tractor beams to tow that at warp. Then again, I always think the look of spacedock is ridiculously archaic and terrestrial and much prefer the skeleton dock of TMP.

Since the E-D had to travel by warp to get from the museum to Jupiter I’d assumed that it had to be located outside of the Sol System, which makes no sense whatsoever (it would be like situating the Louvre in Ulan Bator). But just for a sanity check I looked it up on Memory Alpha:

“Athan Prime was the prime planet in its star system, orbited by at least one moon. It was the location of the Federation Fleet Museum in the early 25th century.”

(it would be like situating the Louvre in Ulan Bator)

Hardly conclusive, since there’s a branch of the Louvre in Abu Dhabi.

Would you display the Mona Lisa in that branch? No? Then why would you archive the Bounty and the Enterprise-A, two spaceships that literally saved the earth, in orbit around a planet that no one had previously heard of? Because the plot called for the Borg to assimilate Starfleet in earth orbit, and it wouldn’t do to have the structure housing the reveal of the E-D just a few kilometers away.

Would you display the Mona Lisa in that branch? No? Then why would you archive the Bounty and the Enterprise-A, two spaceships that literally saved the earth, in orbit around a planet that no one had previously heard of?

First off, the loan of well-known artwork is an extremely common practice. Van Gogh’s painting “Parsonage Garden” was stolen while on loan in 2020; it was recovered last month, so it’s top of mind right now.

Setting that aside, I got a good chuckle out of this question. Anyone who has worked on the Hill could give you a laundry list of answers to this question — one or more of the following, for instance:

– The Federation Council member representing that planet (particularly he he/she was an appropriator) got an earmark for it to be there, or it was placed there as part of some political logrolling. For example, maybe Utopia Planetia shipyards were put in the Sol system at the political cost of putting the Fleet Museum elsewhere.

In real life, the headquarters of NADBank, a development finance institution that finances border development projects, are in San Antonio. That’s not an outrageous choice, but probably San Diego or even Phoenix would have been more logical. Back in the late 1990s, the United States Industry Coalition (USIC), one of the major defense conversion cooperation projects with the Russian Federation, was headquartered in Albuquerque, New Mexico, thanks to the efforts of then Sen. Pete Domenici, chair of the Senate budget committee.

– Peripheral member worlds resented Earth (or another founding member world) getting the honor of hosting a prestigious museum, and they conditioned appropriations for it on it getting situated on a neutral site. (Indeed, this theory would be consistent with what LAST BEST HOPE, the first, expository Picard novel, said about center-periphery relations in the Federation at the time.)

– That particular world is some kind of free-trade zone, and there’s an inverted tariff structure that made it cheaper to import building materials to that member world for final assembly.

– Major airports like JFK and LHR are slot controlled. Additionally, airlines also pay landing fees and overflight fees (Russia used to make a *lot* of money charging them on flights beween Europe and Asia). In Star Trek, something similar probably exists in Earth orbit, and the project managers may have calculated it was cost-prohibitive to pay them and have the project remain financially viable.

– Some major battle, diplomatic conference, or other important event happened in that star system offscreen, maybe even involving the USS New Jersey or the 1701-A, and the museum was put there to commemorate it. (The National Nuclear Museum isn’t in DC; it’s in Albuquerque, too.) Perhaps there was previously an important Starfleet facility there; NASA has museums at Cape Canaveral, and the Russians have a space museum in Samara, where they build most of their rockets.

– Starfleet may have wanted to keep its relics away from important worlds for security reasons, rather like the seed repository on Svalbard.

– The 24th century travel and tourism industry teamed up with airlines (spacelines?) to promote that planet as a tourism destination.

– The museum is some kind of public-private partnership between Starfleet and the Federation Historical Society, and any property right in the orbit of that planet was donated by a benefactor. Or the benefactor *lives* on that planet.

– Bureaucratic inertia. About 15 years ago, I had the pleasure of visiting the Russian aviation museum at Zhukovsky, near Moscow. They have a Tu-144 (the Russian answer to Concorde) on display there, as well as the prototype of what was described as a “space interceptor,” which the museum described as a reusable, shuttle-like space fighter plane intended to take off from conventional airstrips. This was all fascinating from a military/aviation history perspective, but the actual museum was quite dilapidated. There was grass overrunning the exhibits, and a sign warned about a “zlaya sobaka” (nasty dog) roaming the premises. (In fairness, I have read articles suggesting the premises have been improved since then.)

Now, all of this undoubtedly reflected the poor state of Russian infrastructure, particularly at the time — the Udvar-Hazy Aviation Museum near Dulles is obviously in much better shape! — but it still illustrates that military and military-adjacent museums have to complete with actual military procurement for urgently-needed hardware on active duty, which again illustrates that they are sensitive to costs.

Wow, that’s quite an exhaustive list of possibilities. My compliments. All of the bureaucratic skullduggery sounds particularly fascinating, and potentially far more interesting than PIC S3’s tiresome rehash of the Borg. Forget about Terry Matalas; maybe *you* should be writing the damned thing.

I’m holding out for the writers’ room in a revival of THE WEST WING! :)

None of it is as absurd as some kind of anomaly that makes the crew burst into showtunes.. or Spock suddenly becoming emotional because some anomaly has removed his Vulcan DNA, sorry. As long as we’re talking about plausibility in Star Trek, nothing Terry has done in Picard s3 is as egregious or unsupported narratively as those things.

That’s just whataboutism, as opposed to an actual defense of a showrunner’s creative choices. And I’ll point out that, yes, the showtunes and DNA were silly, but then again *those were comedy episodes*, never meant to be taken seriously, as opposed to a ludicrous bit of worldbuilding meant to support a major, dramatic plot point of what its defenders insist is the return of “real” Star Trek.

It’s not so much a defense of his choices as just asking in what world are you grading the plausibility of this franchise? Because Trek starting dipping into the more ridiculous long before Picard S3, not all of which are even from Secret Hideout. I don’t recall hearing anything about the origin of the fleet museum. Ship designs are repeated.. why can’t space dock have had multiple counterparts throughout the federation? But if you want to talk about realism.. Spacedock itself was pretty ridiculous even back in 1984. Which is just another illustration of.. if they can build something so impractical.. why can’t it be moved? This is all stuff we just need to roll with to some degree. I see where you’re coming from, I’m just saying It’s not as rooted in sci fi as it used to be, and that wasn’t something Terry created. It’s a space/ sci-fi / fantasy franchise with a lot of made up stuff that’s not ever likely to be a version of our future.

I’m pretty sure that I remember Matalas mentioning that the Fleet Museum was the original Spacedock repurposed, though I may be incorrect on that. And no, it wasn’t at all *necessary* that it be the original, any more that it was necessary that the Titan be a “refit” (!) of Riker’s original command, another very odd creative choice. But the thing that absolutely doesn’t make sense about the Fleet Museum is not its provenance, but its location. Why, as I noted below, would you put a museum dedicated to preserving the history of ships directly involved with saving the earth anywhere but in proximity to earth? Well, for the convenience of the plot, that’s why. And that’s just bad writing.

But I am genuinely puzzled as to why the most ardent fans of PIC S3 give it a pass for flaws that they would never accept in any of the other current shows. 

I see no musical episodes (OK, “Pop Goes the Weasel” excepted) in Season 3, no animated crossovers, no Spock-T’Pring “hijinx,” no captains acting ridiculously unprofessionally and walking around with Cheshire Cat grins on their face, zany ensigns screaming “LOWER DECKS” as if they were high school cheerleaders, etc.

I didn’t like the casual disregard for violating orders in the first episode, to be sure. But by the time the crisis was over, that was probably the least of Starfleet’s worries, unlike in the SNW S2 premiere, where Spock should have been court-martialed. And at least Picard was a senior admiral who had some political currency, unlike Spock, who was a junior officer at the time.

I’m not saying it was pitch-perfect, but a rating of 9/10 or so is hardly a failure; quite the contrary.

Well, that’s all a matter of taste, isn’t it? I don’t see anything necessarily disqualifying about a musical or animated crossover episode in principle, though opinions on the results can differ — and personally thought the Spock/T’Pring body-swap was a hoot (though I wasn’t as enamored with the follow-up). I’m not a huge fan of Pike’s over-familiarity with the crew myself, though I suppose it can be argued that, unlike Starfleet captains of the past, he has certain knowledge of how his life for all intents and purposes will end, and is cultivating perhaps inappropriate relationships to compensate.

As to “Lower Decks,” the rumors have it that, well, it’s a cartoon.

Again, far be it from me to suggest that either of those shows are without their own issues, or that PIC S3 didn’t have some moments of worth. But, seriously, 9/10? I’d certainly rate the fourth episode that highly, but the season as a whole? Not so much. YMMV, of course.

Well, that’s all a matter of taste, isn’t it?

Well, sure; but so is this whole discussion, ultimately.

My problem with the musical has nothing to do with liking it or not liking it.. it’s the WTF of it all. It’s pretty far away from Trek. I think it was very well done, and I could have accepted it as a fun aside if they just broke the 4th wall and leaned into it. Make it exist outside of canon. The critical mistake is that they tried to shoehorn it in with a pretty lame and contrived explanation as an excuse to make Trek something it isn’t. It’s an indulgence of their personal desires, not an organic creation that adds anything meaningful to the franchise. It is not good Trek. The Spock DNA thing is a categorical misunderstanding of what has been firmly established about Vulcan culture. It ignores that Vulcan’s are emotional beings who choose to repress them. They tie it into their DNA, and treat Spock as if he’s never experienced emotion.. which is stupid and ridiculous. Again.. bad Star Trek.. doesn’t mean it can’t be an entertaining episode of television. But the series is a mess, and lacks depth. But there is no shame in liking these quirky episodes for what they are. Trek has often gotten things wrong, but very rarely has it been treated with disdain by its creative handlers, and never as badly as it is in SNW under Akiva Goldsman. I’m simply amazed at how these people think they are “fans” of the source material. And of course.. the Gore which I don’t need to rehash. Why call it Star Trek at all? They should go build their own franchise if they don’t want to play within what’s been established.

Well, I can see that I might have felt similarly at one time, when canon consistency was a lot more important to me than it is now. Maybe it’s just the inevitable recognition of how technologically dated even the TNG-era stuff looks now; or my own inanition with the franchise after fifty years; or even the sinking realization of how little the treatment of even a beloved SF property matters as compared to the potential crises we’re facing as a nation and as a species. Or maybe it’s just my age. But at this point, I’m less concerned with canon issues than Trek’s essential message of optimism and hope, along with likable characters and reasonably interesting stories, and that follows the lore in its broad outlines. (Sure, Spock’s DNA switch-up in the context of a comic episode doesn’t follow our previous understanding of how Vulcans control their emotions, but I’ll raise that inconsistency with a Vulcan gangster and call it with Vulcan mind-raping interrogation, both brought to you courtesy of Brother Matalas.) So far, and for all its flaws (which I pointedly *won’t* defend), SNW at least occasionally scratches that itch.

All good. I’m glad you can do that.. I just can’t. I’m not such a canonista that I can’t deal with a well supported, well executed and appropriate ret-con. I can even go along with mistakes (we’ve been doing that for years), particularly when the story is good. I just feel Terry gets it, and blends that with what modern Trek has become. That approach works for me in the one season we got of it. Canon issues aside, the bigger issue for me is the complete misunderstanding of what Trek is by Kurtzman, Goldsman and co. It’s extremely superficial and It’s just aggravating to see them continue to waste the 10 episodes they have with unnecessary genre flips when they could be exploring and giving us new and interesting sci-fi.

I think it was very well done, and I could have accepted it as a fun aside if they just broke the 4th wall and leaned into it. Make it exist outside of canon. The critical mistake is that they tried to shoehorn it in with a pretty lame and contrived explanation as an excuse to make Trek something it isn’t. It’s an indulgence of their personal desires, not an organic creation that adds anything meaningful to the franchise. 

Precisely. Thank you.

Warrior to warrior.

Don’t wait for the translation. Answer the question.

To be, or not, to be

Sorry, but I genuinely don’t get this. What is the inherent narrative purpose, story-wise, in all of the nostalgia, just because this particular story happens to be the TNG crew’s last hurrah? How is that ‘earned’?

For one thing, that all the senior bridge crew developed their own careers after leaving the Enterprise, independently of Picard.

What does that have to do with, say, the Federation President being the descendant of Pavel Chekov, being voiced by Walter Koenig, and repeating a line virtually verbatim from THE VOYAGE HOME?

Look, I didn’t love that line in the sense that it made the universe seem a bit small.

But that said…first off, stranger things have happened in real life. John McCain’s father was an admiral in the US Navy. I guess Pres. Chekhov didn’t have to contend with a primary against…the son of another *president*.

Second, while most Star Trek fans in the US may not speak Russian, I do. The character’s full name would be Anton Pavlovich Chekhov. To channel Kirk in TVH, someone on the writing staff had a fine sense of historical irony.

Third, it was one line in the entire episode. I can think of plenty of sins in recent Star Trek that eclipse that, and then some.

(I’ll add the caveat that I didn’t re-watch the final two episodes during my recent binge watch of the season on a long haul flight; someone deemed them unworthy of inclusion. My guess is that someone is at Paramount, who was hoping to hook viewers into subscribing to P+. So conceivably my view could change. But like I say, the first eight episodes held up quite well and, IMO, improved on a second viewing.)

Actually, McCain Senior’s position as an Admiral in the Navy wasn’t unrelated to his son eventually becoming a U.S. Senator at all. Seriously, what are the odds of a Chekov becoming the Fed President, out of a potential pool of trillions? No, it wasn’t the most ludicrous moment in the history of the Trek franchise, or even the silliest. But it has to rank among the most pandering.

To date I’ve given PIC S3 one rewatch, and have no problem saying that I did like it better on the second go-round. Even with all of its flaws, there’s some stuff that’s very worthwhile. But in a serialized show you’re only as good as your ending, and the ending was as flat-footed as ever.

LOL 😆So true.

This guy puts his full name out there, shares his enthusiasm and your response is to belittle him.

Yeah, that is ridiculous and uncalled for.

Was wondering when you would pop up in this thread. Surprised you weren’t first.

The Riker thing sucked. But as for all Starfleet ships being networked and attacking, that’s exactly what happened in the nuBSG

I’m not too bothered if it happened elsewhere.It was so stupid and looked even stupider in Picard. “Fire. Fire. Fire. Fire. Fire.” what a trainwreck of an episode.

Honestly although I enjoyed S3, I was not at all happy with the borg AGAIN like uugghh. To quote Kirk, “let them die”

I kind of felt that way, but I go back to how it all is woven in. It’s done quite carefully. It’s less about the Borg themselves, but about how Picard’s life was affected by his experience with them back in BoBW, and I suppose First Contact. How can you wrap up his story in Star Trek without having that represented? In that way, It just felt appropriate.. even if the Borg have been so demystified and hobbled (narratively and literally). This was about Picard, and it’s kind of a full circle moment.

I only saw it the one time. Maybe I should go back for a 2nd watch.

That’s a fair point, and makes a decent case that a TNG grand finale probably needed to bring back the Borg in some fashion. Which doesn’t mean that it couldn’t have been done much better.

It’s less about the Borg themselves, but about how Picard’s life was affected by his experience with them back in BoBW, and I suppose First Contact. How can you wrap up his story in Star Trek without having that represented?

I very much agree with this point. It’s exactly the reason that Kirk’s swan song (“Generations” notwithstanding) featured the Klingons. They were *his* adversary. It also places his mood swings in “I, Borg,” and the fact that Starfleet distrusted Picard in FIRST CONTACT, in context.

THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY was conceived as a Cold War allegory about the fall of the Berlin Wall. There’s no indication that the idea started with Kirk’s facing-off against an adversary which in fact only featured in a handful of TOS episodes.

“I’ve always distrusted Klingons, and I always will. I can never forgive them…for the death of my boy.”

Of *course* it was a Cold War allegory (duh). That doesn’t change the fact that for Kirk, the conflict with the Klingons was personal.

Starfleet ships have been “networked” since WRATH OF KHAN, if not “The Ultimate Computer.” Granted, I’m not sure what the qualitative change was after 1701-D was destroyed. But the concept is not new.

I don’t see any “networking” in those two examples of anything on the order of what happened in PIC S3, in which the ships that make up Earth’s defense fall under some kind of flocking algorithm that renders them entirely helpless for the purposes of the plot. In the face of a cybernetic enemy, that (and no “off” switch) is just criminally stupid.

Once I lowered my expectations for what was coming, yeah, watching it for fan service is fine, at least through the first five episodes. I’m not going to beat anyone one up over it, but I’d also hold that the reason Legacy isn’t going anywhere is because the suits know season three wasn’t much more then a smoke and mirrors story, and you can’t build a series off of vapors.

“Vapors” is a pretty good word for it. A certain amount of nostalgia and fan service is fine, particularly when you’re wrapping-up a decades-long legacy of a beloved show and cast. But people hold up, say, the resurrection of the E-D bridge as an example of brilliant storytelling. It isn’t. It’s just a rebuilt set.

did you love the Changelings working with the Borg and Federation Day where all the Starfleet ships were in a weird formation and they were all firing on a Starbase for, reasons, and Riker telling Picard “you’ve killed us all”… or did you love literally just the fan service and nostalgia?

I rewatched Season 3 on a recent transatlantic flight (or more precisely, episodes 1-8, as for some reason Paramount decided not to license the final two episodes for the in-flight entertainment). I thought the series not only held up well, but actually improved on a binge watch.

I very much liked RIker telling Picard “you’ve killed us all,” and more broadly, the fact that Matalas introduced some DS9-style conflict among the TNG crew, and in particular between Picard and Riker — something we saw very little of during the series outside of “The Pegasus.” (That’s one reason why “The Pegasus” was so well-received, incidentally.)

That the Changelings might attempt an alliance with the Borg is unsurprising and, I think, consistent with modern political science literature on alliance formation. (Stalin formed an alliance with Hitler, after all, and seamlessly re-formed sone with the Western allies after Hitler attacked the USSR!) Granted, I continue to wish we had seen more nuance on the part of Vadic, and the scene where she killed an underling for questioning an order was ridiculously Bondian, but merely because something might not have been pitch perfect does not mean it was awful.

As for the Federation Day space parade, military parades and pageantry are a thing. Yes, it was unrealistic to suggest the *entire* fleet was assembling for it, but I think a very mild retcon — that it was some subset of the fleet — is eminently plausible. Modern deep-water navies tend to have 300 ships; it’s reasonable to think that an interstellar, multi-planet federation would have more than that.

Finally, I agree with heyberto below that some degree of nostalgia is appropriate in the context of a swan song for a beloved series that has graced our screens for 35 years — almost half a human lifetime, moreso than it might be elsewhere. Yes, they might have laid it on a bit thick (although “The Bounty” bothered me less on the rewatch than it did originally), but by and large, they handled it deftly.

I stopped reading when you said you liked Riker’s “You’ve killed us all”. Come on. There’s a difference between crew conflict and *that*.

The line hardly came in isolation. It was clear throughout the two episodes that Riker disagreed with Picard’s tactics, and vice versa.

Whether you liked the line or not — I kind of did — you have to admit that was a pretty inappropriate thing for a captain to say in front of his crew.

OMG, OMG, OMG. We saw flawed, human characters, not heroes on a pedestal.

Agreed. A big THANK YOU, whether we get any more from him or not, is appropriate and called for. He did a fantastic job. It was a proper ending to TNG that needed to happen.

Agreed. The fact Picard season 3 even changed a few of the bigger NuTrek haters around also says a lot.

And I’m OK if we never saw the TNG cast again. They finally got the send off many of us wanted to see with Nemesis.

I really do want a Legacy show but if it never happens Matalas should be proud how he brought those characters to an end. I will always be very happy with that.

100% agree on all counts.

All good things gave TNG the perfect send off. Then Nemesis wrecked it. Now we have closure. Please don’t mess with it again!

And I don’t think they will. I think Matalas meant it 100% when he said the finale was meant to be TNGs send off. But of course that doesn’t mean we won’t see them in Legacy or other projects, just not in that reunion feel that Picard had.

I think it will be similar to the TOS cast after TUC and a few popped up here and there on the other shows and obviously Kirk in Generations. But the last time we saw them together as a crew was TUC.

Same idea and why I don’t get people think Legacy is a TNG show. No it’s not that at all.. Matalas has made that clear.

Because people have short term memories. Matalas has always said the show was about the next NEXT generation. I’m sure we would see some TNG characters but most would be new and actually part of the crew.

It’s a mix of old and new but it would be mostly new when you don’t count Seven and Raffi.

*fingers crossed*

I know Terry won’t.. but I put nothing past Kurtzman if they see an opportunity. This movie idea Patrick mentioned. I don’t mind seeing Picard or the TNG characters again, somewhere in some future production.. but not all together. Their story is finished and should remain finished.

The one and only TNG character whose story I could see continuing is Data, who effectively became a new character.

But that’s a story that could be told in a series featuring an entirely new crew, much like TNG did with Spock in “Sarek.”

Great use of Data.. there is now new stuff to explore.. I have to agree.

Agreed on all counts! Thank you, Terry! I’m ready for more Star Trek fun. Yet, I hope Terry would take Alex Kurtzman’s place (and Secret Hideout’s as well) as lead executive producer.

Liking or not liking a movie or episode is completely subjective and of course personally biased. That is what entertainment, and yes art, is all about. Remember, nothing is perfect. For example, there are so many flaws in a movie like TWOK, some of them outright laughable, but it doesn’t take away from me enjoying the movie and ranking it just behind First Contact as the best of the Star Trek film franchise.
For me I share much of your enthusiasm for Picard S3 and based on the streaming ratings, I think a lot of fans and viewers agree. IMHO it was a really great season. That said, it doesn’t take away from some of the legit criticism of the 10 episodes. Not everything is going to be perfect, and as they say – nothing is.

There really shouldn’t be any surprise in knowing that Matalas has moved on to other projects. It’s the same understanding with the Kelvin cast – they’ve moved on, they’re all in demand and no one is sitting by the phone at home waiting for a call.

There’s been a tonal shift in answers to these questions – these guys are pretty sure that it isn’t happening.

Reading between the lines, I don’t think Paramount plus is interested in continuing this branch of the franchise without Stewart. I would love a Captain Seven show, but it doesn’t have the same star power.

One season of a TNG reunion is attention getting and amazing. Keep going back to that well and it looks like they can’t create new characters. Star Fleet Academy is a better long term strategy.

Trek doensn’t need “star power”. It just needs to be good and serve its audience. Legacy can do that, with the right show runner, and they really need Terry. Can’t put it in the hands of someone else to develop. Paramount Plus might just love the idea, but can’t get the funding for another show. Just not feasible.

I think it does. A marketable name helps. You have to get the attention of the normies.

Of course it helps, but it makes the show expensive. That cast is why the budget was so small and it had to be a “bottle show”. Discovery and Strange New Worlds didnt’ have star power, and yet they have worked, from a studio perspective, to expand the universe and try to build a streaming platform from. Legacy can too, and it will be cheaper without the likes of Stewart to have to pay for.

Sonequa Martin Green was known from Walking Dead and Anson Mount had Hell on Wheels. I’m not saying they have to get Tom Cruise but a recognizable face is needed.

Star Trek Picard was built on Patrick Stewart. All the other returning actors were basically gravy.

You’re misremembering your TNG 80’s trivia. Stewart wasn’t much known in the US at the time (yes, yes, Gurney Halleck) – even entertainment shows at the time the show was launching called him a ‘relatively unknown British stage actor’. From a US perspective, LeVar Burton was far more of a familiar face.

I’m not talking about the 80s. I’m talking about the current streaming era series called Star Trek Picard, featuring the well known Patrick Stewart of the X-Men films.

Stewart was the “get” that made the 90’s trek revival possible in a market where there’s a lot more genre competition.

Huh? The person you’re responding to said nothing about TNG 80s trivia. It’s pretty obvious they’re discussing the modern-era shows.

And Wil Wheaton from Stand By Me. But point taken.

Yep, exactly. A show like this needs a ‘hook’ actor.

I’d argue that Jeri Ryan could be that hook. I mean she is known for shows other than Trek such as Law and Order SVU and Boston Legal.

Ms. Ryan is a character actor, and has never been a series lead. I suspect most wouldn’t have any idea who she is.

Only reason I knew who Senequa is was because of TWD. She was not star power in any way, shape or form. I had never heard of Anson Mount before he showed up in Disco. So I’d say familiar is one thing.. but neither of those actors were Patrick Stewart level “star” when they were hired. I don’t think they are now either.

I never claimed they were as big as Stewart and that was never my point.

Look, maybe “star power” wasn’t the right word, but you don’t have to dig in your heels and be obtuse about it. Both actors were recognizable faces and brought clout to their new series. I don’t think that’s a controversial observation.

Sometimes I think folks just like to create exhausting tangents over the smallest turn of phrase. Maybe you mean well, but really…. why???? Let it go.

I think in all fairness it’s safe to say that both actors were at least as well-known for their pre-Trek roles as Stewart: Martin-Green for her long-running role in “The Walking Dead” and Mount for “Hell on Wheels,” both successful shows with a devoted audience. In the States Stewart was primarily known for playing Gurney Halleck in the 1984 DUNE, a financial flop, and for the role of Sejanus in PBS’ adaptation of “I, Claudius” — a well-received production but not exactly an audience blockbuster. Stewart was hired mainly because Robert Justman saw him at a talk at UCLA, was very impressed by him, and convinced Gene Roddenberry to consider casting him as Picard against his better judgment. (Once again establishing Justman as the Trek franchise’s greatest unsung hero.)

“I think in all fairness it’s safe to say that both actors were at least as well-known for their pre-Trek roles as Stewart: Martin-Green for her long-running role in “The Walking Dead” and Mount for “Hell on Wheels,” both successful shows with a devoted audience.”

Yes. That’s all I’m saying. Dude needs to get lost with his “no way shape or form” nonsense. Contrarian nonsense just to argue. It’s one thing to say shows don’t need familiar names. It’s another to erase people’s success.

Sometimes these threads get sidetracked to death. I make a comment about Paramount’s current motives and everybody is like “yes,,,, but in 1066 the Normans conquered England so…”

Legacy is probably not currently in the cards because Stewart is done and they don’t see a market for more than two live action shows going forward.

Let it go? You made the argument and I responded, and you keep arguing against it. I mean.. we are in a discussion forum, so what’s teh problem. If you want to let it go, you can stop at any time. I’m not trying to argue, I’m trying to understand your point while making my own case. I’m not trying to change your mind, I just don’t see where any new actor attached to these new shows has been a draw, before launch, that would drive viewership, nor do I see where a name will move the needle. That’s why Trek continues to not do the big numbers. Just look at the movie franchise. Chris Pine was largely unknown, and his star power has surpassed any of the original casts of TOS and the Berman era shows. And even he couldn’t elevate the films. Trek can always find familiar faces. For these series, they can save money by not having to lure people like Patrick Stewart and the rest of the TNG cast who can afford to say no and stay home instead. People like Sonequa and Anson aren’t in the same pay scale as Stewart because they weren’t there to draw viewership by virtue of their name. If they could, they would not have been able to afford them in the first place. So I just don’t see how that’s going to change short of getting a true celebrity actor in a featured role, which will never happen.

“She was not star power in any way, shape or form. I had never heard of Anson Mount before he showed up in Disco.”

That’s just playing stupid. You can make your point without erasing people’s careers. That’s the point where it stopped being a discussion and became a tit for tat. I’m not going to argue just to argue, especially when the debate doesn’t have much to do with what I was saying in the first place. People have laundry to do. Can’t do this all day.

Legacy isn’t currently in the cards because Stewart has moved on. No amount of Berman era whataboutism is going to change that.

Well, quite putting a spin on what I’ve said and I won’t have to correct it. I’m not erasing anything. Those shows were not built around them as “marketable names”. That has nothing to do with their credibility in their roles. They’re both great actors. The marketability of SNW and Discovery had more to do with being called Star Trek than their involvement. That’s the point no matter how much you try to argue about their careers and/or status. They’ve had great, respectable careers. But they weren’t hired to bring in viewers. If they were, then it didn’t work because one property is being cut prematurely.

In this new day and age I agree they rely on known names (not very well known tho). But TNG, DS9, VOY all had practically brand new names. I know Avery Brooks was on that one cop show back in the day but still. IMHO Scott Bakula was the only “name” in that era for a Trek show.

I also think the financial troubles at paramount is playing a part in these decisions in a way they wouldn’t have just a few years ago. Maybe after that’s resolved we can see a tv movie or even a Legacy show. Especially if they can split the funding with another streaming service. However, even if the show is made I don’t see them receiving a large budget so creativity will have to be a top priority. Reusing costumes, sets etc.

Its really hard to compare a show to Discovery, budget wise, considering they had many creative issues in the first season that significantly impacted the show. Once they resolved that, money wise I think it helped them out a lot.

I think Legacy might have had a shot in 2019 or so, during the streaming market’s big push to establish themselves.

I think the streaming market will be chaotic for years to come, so we’ll be lucky to get a green light on anything.

I agree, and if a series underperforms they’ll pull it and place those resources somewhere else. I think SNW will be carrying the franchise on Paramount+ moving forward.

Academy is the Flagship show now. SNW is a bottle show.

With the AR wall, location shooting is down across all the shows.

Half the fanbase doesn’t even care about the Academy show lol. It has a lot to prove. A lot.

And SNW is the show starring Pike, Spock (and sadly) Kirk all being on the original Enterprise so how is that not the flagship show?

Sorry but when did you get elected as official spokesperson for all trek fans. I must have missed that day. Anyway, just always be aware that the people here and on other fan internet sites represent only a very very small minority of trek fans. You are not the majority.

You be blessed.

And who elected you to flagship show designator? It works both ways genius. 🙄

I know it burns you that more people like SNW over Discovery but trying to pretend SNW is going to take a back seat to a teen show is hysterical.

And take note I support the Academy show, but I also live in reality and few people are excited about the show.

At least admit this, which had the more positive and enthusiastic reaction at their announcements, SNW or SFA?

Half the fan base? Pretty bold statement if the fanbase is two people….

Call me bold Tiger2! 😁

In all seriousness I’m sure more want it but it’s still the minority judging by how it’s been trending since it was announced.

Could I be wrong, sure. But the interest for it still feels on the meh side.

Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t be able to back up 1/2 the fanbase per se, but comments on trekmovie and other sites are pretty telling of where the outspoken online hardcore fanbase is on this,

SFA won’t exist in most people’s minds until a trailer is produced. Your anecdotal encounters here, which trend negative because that’s the internet for you, are not a representative sample of fandom as a whole,

Don’t deny any of that. But you know how it works. We don’t have any hard data obviously lol.

For example I have zero doubt the only reason we got the SNW show over Section 31 was due to how badly S31 was trending everywhere online versus the heavy demand for SNW. So that negative trend certainly had a profound effect and I doubt it represented the entire base, just the most active ones. And Section 31 was at the development stage SFA is now.

Of course Section 31 could’ve been an amazing show, but we’ll never know, but hopefully the movie will. I’m hoping SFA will change hearts and minds when it does come. I will say it has a lot less scorn than Section 31 did lol.

“Gotham” on FOX was a bottle show. Neither SNW or Academy fall into the category of a bottle show.

SNW consistently gets top ten direct to streaming ratings. Academy is a “wait and see” So I wouldn’t call it the flagship by any means. Right now it’s vaporware at best.

Are you okay? 😯

Yes. Are you?

Not sure what your beef is.

I made too much money from bitcoin tonight. I apologize.

Sure. Have a good night.

Too much coffee, won’t be sleeping tonight.

It’s his thing.

Paramount currently has 11 (ELEVEN) Taylor Sheridan shows in development – so when I hear of their ‘money troubles,’ I take a breath. Just something to consider. More like they’re putting the bulk of their money into their hot performer, which seems to me, is not Trek. Just imo.

Yeah, maybe they should give a Trek show to Taylor Sheridan :)) and interestingly he seems to be getting quite big name actors for his shows too. Can you imagine guys like Harrison Ford or Stallone in Trek?

Truth. Trek was Moonves’s original plan to build a streaming platform around. It didn’t really work out, although it kept a certain segment of paying customers around. Paramount has lost the streaming wars, so it’s just a matter of maintaining until it can figure out its future. But also know.. those Sheridan shows are much cheaper to make.

Welp, cheaper with the exception of the A List talent they have. But regardless, the Sheridan shows pull in the numbers so it’s worth it for them. But we’ll see who Paramount gets sold too. I just hope Trek doesn’t get broken up like it did in the past.

Absolutely, but overall, they’re still much cheaper. Those shows can afford A list talent because they don’t have to build all their sets, use an AR Wall, and special effects / CGI. Trek is just much more expensive to make, when you take the actors’ salaries out.

Fair enough

I read somewhere that P+ dropped 100MM on PS3. I’d bet that that 100MM is covering the budgets of most, or maybe all of the Taylor Sheridan shows. I’d also guess that the Academy show isn’t going to an effects heavy CGI extravaganza, produced on a much tighter budget. So, even if (most of) the angry old white guys do tune out, there are likely enough younger eyes on the Academy show for a decent ROI.

Exactly. People just have to wait it out before we can say it will never happen. Yes money does seem to be a big issue but as Danpaine said they have no problem finding money for Sheridan shows and that’s probably because that is picking new subscribers. I don’t think Star Trek has done that on a serious level since Picard premiered.

Again not a surprise when there are way more future Sheridan shows in production than Star Trek shows. Sadly we are no longer at the top of the food chain.

People just need to understand Trek and quit trying to turn it into something it’s not. It’s not that it can’t grow, but its audience is smaller. They should embrace that. Make less, and figure out how to do it cheaper. It can be done.

I agree with this and I will say probably having less shows on is also a good thing and to push for more quality over quantity..

And yes the audience is smaller today so it’s OK to make smaller and cheaper shows or movies to reflect that. Star Trek isn’t MCU, it has to be treated differently.

This exactly. Trek will never be Star Wars. It will always be a niche by comparison and as you say Paramount should embrace that instead of trying to make 300 mil movies and expect MCU results which they will never get.

The next Trek movie shouldn’t be anymore than $120-130 million tops. If that’s what Beyond would’ve costed we would’ve had another movie years ago by now.

Yuppers exactly

I agree. But their actor budget is well below that of Picard S3. the Star Trek Brand was much more of what launched those shows than any actors they hired.

100%. And that’s a large reason why it’s not happening.

Discovery and Strange New Worlds didnt’ have star power

MIchelle Yeoh.

She got big after the fact, AND they were not building the franchise around her. Sure, she had some high profile stuff, but she was not getting big paychecks when they contracted her for Discovery. They are totally trying to embrace her star power now with Section 31. I think it turned into a movie and her deal renegotiated after she became more in demand. That also happened before the financial clampdown, and contractually, they probably couldn’t afford to not do it.

Disagreed. She landed a plum role as a Bond girl in TOMORROW NEVER DIES (her character, IIRC, was considered for its own spinoff), and she leveraged that in a way that, say, Daniela Bianchi never did. She starred in CROUCHING TIGER, and had a prominent role in MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA. Even before all that, she was huge in Asia. I visited some microfinance projects in Siem Reap, Cambodia, in 2009 and remember having a conversation with a Singaporean participant in the delegation who was very proud of her.

To be fair, that was prior to her Oscar. Sure she had some famous roles like movies in crouching tiger and stuff but she wasn’t nearly as big as she is now.

When TNG was cast and being promoted its only real marketable names (at least to most US audiences) were Wil Wheaton and LeVar Burton. Everyone else was working but not widely known. DS9 snagged Avery Brooks, well known for Spenser: For Hire. Otherwise that series launched on the back of Colm Meaney (a long-working actor, but not a “marketable name.”) Same for VOY. ENT managed to snag Scott Bakula, who TV audiences were more familiar with. Also, TV Trek has never been marketed to the “normies.”

I was there.

Again, I think it’s pretty obvious I’m talking about the modern era. Getting back to the point I was making, the impetus to create Picard was getting Stewart back — the guy whose character’s name was in the title. It was about his recognition first, and reviving an older era of Trek second. His name was the selling point. I don’t think I’m saying something wild here.

The goal was never to launch spin offs with lesser known 90s characters.

Getting at me to say Green and Mount are nobodies is probably a fun tangent for some but its kind of a tedious form of splitting hairs and won’t make Legacy get here any faster.

I think Starfleet Academy was more of a commitment than a strategy, with the intention to have Discovery and Starfleet Academy to carry the franchise forward. The success of SNW likely threw a wrench into those plans as well as budgetary constraints that hadn’t been a concern when Starfleet Academy was announced.

I agree with this. SA appears to be something PWTB have wanted for a long time. I don’t necessarily like it, but I see the potential draw for a studio, ie. Young Viewers.

But do you think Starfleet Academy will get young viewers? I don’t think it’s going to be much of a draw at all. Sure some but the overwhelming majority will just be old fans like all these shows today.

This is the trickiest demo to lure in for a sci fi series, essentially hoping to pull in a “Bridgerton” audience.

Yeah I have my doubts as well. Star Trek just doesn’t seem to even exist to this age group anymore.

Again I applaud them for trying and they should try obviously but I also think all said and done it will be the older fans propping it up.

Personally, I think it’s going to be a flop. I could be wrong, of course.

It’s more niche than the regular shows already are.

Agree and why I remain skeptical over it. At least put the show in the 25th century where you can bring in legacy characters but I know it’s the whole Burn thing the show is being sold on.

It was conceived and greenlit at a time when it was thought this would be the best way to go. Just can’t afford to back out of it now, is my guess.

Keep your day job. You’re terrible at this.

Okay. Guess we’ll just ignore A34 tonight.

🤑 No jealousy

A34 is the board’s resident troll. He was even banned before just to show up again a year later.

He always talks about this board and how he’s embarrassed to be a Star Trek fan and yet he’s here seven days a week anyway.

Don’t take anything he says seriously. He’s just probably very bored in his real life.

I’m here like one day a week. I’m very busy these days.

The only strategy is a flawed one. We have to do a show like this if we want to get younger viewers. So not true.

Those leather uniforms seem so jarring on that old set and the lighting.

Looks like a Y.C.M.A. cover band.

I choose to believe they are faux leather like Tesla seats have,

He said it himself, he just wants to do more Next Gen. “Worf and the Klingons”, does the man have any original ideas whatsoever?

I suspect most writers’ star trek pitches have elements of Star Trek in them.

Reusing old ideas is nothing new for Star Trek! It’s been going on for decades. I understand not everyone will like them but it’s not just a Terry Matalas thing!

Yeah, it’s a bit strange to complain a franchise is returning to touchstones its famous for.

That’s what franchises do. They work within a specific framework they’re known for. That’s what branding is.

Going to the well too often gets boring. Trek needs to move on. Watching old trek actors in their golden years isn’t going to bring in the money. 💰

I acknowledged up thread it’s time to switch gears and introduce new characters. Even still, any new incarnation of Trek will still be based on Trek’s established reputation. Warp drives, phasers, transporters and klingons and so on.

No writer is going to pitch something so off brand that there’s no point in calling it Star Trek.

I can think of over a dozen ideas for TV shows that take place in the Star Trek universe. Would you watch a police procedure show that takes place on Qo’noS? I sure would. I’m tired of spaceships.

As you said above, keep your day job. You’re terrible at this.

I have a feeling trolling Star Trek boards all day IS his day job.

That and promoting bit coin.

Welp that is what DS9 was till the Defiant and that worked (over time). I wouldn’t be adverse to seeing a show about what civilian life is like in the 25th century. Just don’t ‘90210’ it please!

I think Legacy is intended to do exactly that. Focus on the bridge crew with Seven, Raffi (who is new to Trek, actually) Jack and the rest of the guys we saw. You’d see some older characters move in and out on occasion. I think that’s fine.

True. They did that with Discovery. Look how that turned out.

That’s all well and good but counterpoint. Picard brought back the old guard and got the ratings. SNW while not legacy actors is legacy characters and ditto. Paramount is simply going with what works right now. The real test will be Academy.

The Original Series introduced ideas, themes and characters that have been reused and revisited in every series and film that followed. Discovery alone featured the Mirror Universe, time travel, The Guardian of Forever, the Enterprise, Pike, Spock and Number One.

Yet Discovery didn’t have to dig up the old TOS cast to do it. Plus Disco did a way better job with the Mirror Universe than TOS or DS9.

That’s because the old TOS cast would be way too old in the Discovery timeline. That and the fact most are dead.

And Pike was more popular than every Discovery character after he showed up in the first episode. Why did you think that was?

Pike was pretty much an unknown character before being introduced in Disco. The TOS Pike and Disco Pike might just as well be different characters.

For the first time in years I actually agree with you lol. Wow you didn’t waste my time here either. Doubly shocked.

I can’t deny that at all. Mount brought a very different energy to the role and it really payed off.

In a way that’s exactly what they did. Maybe not the actors but certainly the characters. Michael Burnham is Spock’s sister. They had the characters of Spock and Pike and the Enterprise herself on the show. if showing the enterprise in the season finale isn’t pandering to the fanbase I don’t know what is.

It’s totally pandering lol. Discovery knew they had to get more Trek-y and get the TOS crowd onboard who complained the show felt nothing like it and so we got the Enterprise, Pike and Spock.

I always said this was probably a mandate from the studio to give the show more nostalgia and fan service because before then the show runners literally said twice in interviews we would never see Spock in the show… until we did.

Yeppp. I remember when this show was conceived IIRC it was meant to be a total reboot of Trek from Bryan Singer (grrr) but they retooled it over time to be in the actual trek universe. But they were stuck in the first season with already written shows and slowly they back tracked.

There is an absolute treasure-chest, for any writer truly creative, to work with within those words.

I’m trying to figure out if you are a fan of Star Trek or not – I haven’t seen you write anything positive about any show – past or present…or future. Any and all Star Trek show WILL have elements of Star Trek in them… that is what makes them Star Trek. Do you have a favourite show that you gush over. Wit, you don’t seem like the gushing type. Do you have a favourite Trek show that you complain the least about?

Discovery I give credit for doing something new and being the only show to push the franchise forward. It’s just a shame that everything else about it sucks.

Lower Decks has a lot of heart and can be very funny. The former is its saving grace.

Strange New Worlds has a good cast and a nice look to it + some really great episodes in both seasons so far.

Picard is just terrible from beginning to end.

I don’t watch Prodigy, the visuals are awful but maybe I only think that because I’m spoiled by Lucasfilm Animation’s work.

Wow this is the most positive post I have seen Emily ever make. Someone should frame it lol.

You should still try and give Prodigy a chance though. It’s great Star Trek through and through.

The Klingons seem interesting to me if no other reason that we haven’t seen the Empire since the end of DS9. How did they recover after the Dominion War? How did Worf go from being ambassador to Q’onos to back on the Enterprise? Where is the Duras family? Are the Romulans still trying to create a civil war? I could go on and on.

No need for a Legacy series. Do a Legacy P+ movie after s31. Starring Jeri Ryan as Captain of the Ent G and guest starring some of TNG, DS9, VOY (& ENT) actors. if its a ratings hit then do regular ‘Legacy’ movies chopping and changing the Berman era guest Trek stars .

I think movies may be the way forward to keep Star Trek going and expenses down.

Ya. I agree. Paramount doesn’t have the money for more Trek shows that are already slated and I wouldn’t be surprised of the plans for the ones that are get cancelled.

God no.

This might actually be the way to go if the Section 31 movie becomes a success. Michelle Yeoh factor will certainly help, but she is also not untouchable as the cancellation of her latest Netflix show proves.

I think almost everyone can get behind this idea if a show can never happen. I think a yearly movie could be great!

I will pay close attention to anything Terry has going on, just as I have with all the Star Trek producers I’ve really enjoyed. But Terry is up there with Ron Moore, hopefully he gets a juicy contract to produce at a studio. He has an incredible ability to produce quality under enormous time and budget pressure, that has to be worth a ton in this industry! He moved mountains to make that season, and stayed engaged with the fans which is half the fun really!

I’ve been a fan of his since 12 Monkeys. The guy has a good future in showbiz if he keeps on making quality products.

Same! Matalas is a great talent and I hope he eventually comes back to Star Trek but either way I’m excited about what he does next.

Yeah, he should be running a Trek show. I just think their hands are tied right now.. not that they don’t want to do it. I think the Academy Show was too far along to back out of, whether they want to or not. I don’t think the studio would want to replace a show specifically targeted to a specific demographic with a show that isn’t, either. So there’s that. They will see Legacy as for the hard cores, not something that will gain them a new audience. I think the writing is on the wall that Trek just isn’t going to be much bigger growth proposition than it currently is, which is why they should abandon the lame Academy idea and do Legacy with Terry. They haven’t been successful and bigger since going all in on that idea in 2009. So embrace what you are, go with a smaller budget and less shows, but make it great.

I agree with all of this and I’m excited about the Academy show personally.

Please stop now. The ham-fisted cheerleading about him on this site is getting pitiful.

…as is the cheerleading for DSC. Everyone gets even coverage here, imo.

True! The site does try to be fair to every show. I appreciate that even if I am not a fan of them all. Let’s hope it continues.

Yep that’s why I love this site. If people like Anthony or Laurie isn’t going to stop pushing for it then neither should the rest of us that wants it.

But this site has been pro everything, yes even Discovery lol.

I guess it’s pro fantasy too since a Star Trek (retirement) Legacy show will never see the light of day.

You were also the same person that said a post Nemesis show would never happen lol.

Also said that about a Pike show

Dude whenever you make such proclamations my instinct is to go the opposite way and it’s been proven right so far.

Lower Decks is the only real post Nemesis show. As for SNW, as soon as they cast Pike it was a done deal that they would make a show to over write all that terrible TOS cannon. You got me confused with someone else. BTW do you own bitcoin ? You really should.

Prodigy also takes place pro Nemesis. So does Discovery and Starfleet Academy much farther in the future. So what are you talking about?

As for SNW why did you spend an entire year telling people it wasn’t going to happen then? 🙄

This is why I don’t like you. You have zero integrity and a liar. IE a troll.

I got no clue what you are talking about. Are you feeling well? Anyway about that bitcoin. You should buy.

Again why you’re just a complete waste of space. You’re at least harmless I guess, but it’s a waste of my time.

Keep this man away from Trek. Please.

Who would I want running Trek? Ira Behr. Ronald D Moore.

I dislike almost everything about the way Trek is run these days. Picard S3 was mostly pretty bad. It had some good moments. The Ro episode was really well done.

The show had the mother of all set ups too. All those old ships in the museum don’t have the connected wifi Borg signal. How amazing would it have been to have 3-4 episodes with the TNG Enterprise? And have the Defiant, Voyager, TMP Enterprise? All in action. Why? Because they are the only ships not infected with the new set up interconnected thing. That’s how you do it.

i’ll admit as a DS9 fan it was cool to see some DS9 plot threads like the Dominion War alluded to.

But the characters? Raffle or whatever her name is, I hated her. I liked the new Captain, but all these new characters just seem off.

When you watch those older Trek shows, I believe that this is a paramilitary organization. There is proper rank and subordinate relationships. These new Trek shows I feel like that isn’t a thing. Everyone feels the same. Captain Picard commanded respect. Sisko commanded respect. Now it’s all “let’s talk about our feelings and past & cry & have Shakespearean flaws”. Sure we got that sometimes in the old shows. And I’m sure some people will say “that’s how you get complicated characters”

But here’s the thing. If DS9 was made today, but this group, every week Sisko would have a breakdown about his wife dying. He would be an alcoholic or something. It would define his character. Jake would get these ridiculous monologues about how he can still smell his moms perfume and he hates Sisko for not being strong enough to save his mom and hates Sisko for being in Starfleet. Their relationship would be fraught & frayed.

I’m not saying you can’t have flawed characters but come on. It’s all so wrong. And what’s crazy is I’ve only been a Trek fan for about 4 years. I binged DS9 during the pandemic. That was my first Trek love. I had seen some TNG and some of the films. But Trek always seemed so dry to me. I knew I liked Wrath of Kahn. I had seen that. I even liked the 2009 reboot. It was fun and cool.

But it all started with me catching a random DS9 episode years ago (Trials and Tribulations). I was so impressed at how they made the show resemble the 1960s aesthetic. They nailed it. But it was in ugly standard def. I thought I’d wait for HD. And so I waited. And waited. And waited. Then the Rona hit & I did some research & realized an HD remaster wasn’t happening anytime soon. So I dug in.

Before I became a Trek fan my favourite shows were The Sopranos, Mad Men, Deadwood, The Wire, Batman The Animated Series. And now somehow Star Trek DS9 made its way in there with great characters and ambitious storylines.

So it wasn’t like I had a nostalgic love for these shows. But the Secret Hideout Trek? Nothing about seems right. It’s too much muchness.

The old shows literally had a the crew’s psychiatrist on the bridge every week. Like the modern takes or don’t, but you can’t argue characters talking about their emotions is something new to Star Trek.

90’s trek had characters stop and talk about what they were feeling all the time.

What you’re calling the old shows ain’t necessarily what everybody even considers the old shows. TOS usually kept some emotions in their quarters as a sign of professionalism, so when there was an outbreak on the bridge, it either really meant something — very important or alien influence — or it was a bad show.

Or sometimes Captain Kirk would beam down and immediately fall in love with some other guy’s robot wife. We remember things differently.

TOS was embarrassing to watch. Kirk was HR nightmare.

So embarrassing you watched every episode, right?

I’m a big MST3K fan and it prepared me to watch and laugh at those awful episodes. Season three was the worst, the show should have stayed canceled.

Ok man.

Plato’s Stepchildren
*Drops Mic*

All of Discovery.

*Drops Mic harder*

For people reading I don’t think Discovery is that bad, just messing around with the resident troll.

Kirk was a product of the 60’s. For someone with this fake too cool for school attitude, you’re quite clueless.

I loved how you put it in the last part of your final sentence “too much muchness” I think is a perfect way to describe modern Trek.

Yes. Twas a brilliant rhetorical flourish, that. Might even plagiarize it. :)

Bro you can never go wrong loving DS9! 😎🖖

A fantastic Trek show on every level. In fact I was just like you and very skeptical of the show until I finally gave it a real shot.

And I used to really pounce on NuTrek and a lot of it is still nowhere close to something like DS9 but I do enjoy it more today. But I can see what a lot of your issues are and can’t disagree that much.

Wherever Terry goes, I go. If someday, he gets to write for Star Trek again, I will return to the STU. Until then, I consider the STU to be at an end for me.

With the weak exception of SNW, which I watch but isn’t essential viewing right away for me, I’m kind of in the same ballpark you are. Prodigy is good (albeit a cartoon), and LDS is just too ADHD for me.

Yeah Prodigy is still my top show right now and I also love SNW and LDS.

But I do think there are a contingent of fans like you guys that really want the Legacy show above all else and not feeling these other shows.

Which is why it’s crazy if they never make it or something similar to it.

There’s a website out there called Redshirts Always Die which is lying to its readers by claiming Legacy is happening. Unfortunately, there are people out there who believe what sites like that one blatantly make up.

Yeah, they get a lot wrong. Another repeat offender is Midnight’s Edge on YouTube which misses on just about anything related to Star Trek and pretty much everything else.

Yeah, that’s a site to read when you’re really really bored…. but don’t believe a word of it.

Maybe they just don’t come in my queue anymore but I see very little videos from Midnight Edge these days.

Maybe they finally seen the error of their ways and stopped all the ridiculous lies but I doubt it.

They seemed to have slowed down a bit but if you look at any of their stuff over the past few months, there’s an underlying theme to virtually everything they post. It’s a grievance channel.

SciTrek on Youtube actually said 2 months ago that the Legacy deal had actually been signed. What they won’t do for clicks.

Oh yeah all they do is make up lies for pages clicks. I would never click on their links.

Yeah it’s a lot of sad people who will make click bait articles to make a few dollars. It’s really eye rolling but unfortunately when you have the devoted audience Trek has you take advantage on people’s hopes.


I still have faith we will eventually get the show. Prepared to be wrong but it’s called faith for a reason lol.

Of course Terry can’t wait by the phone for the next 1-2 years hoping for a phone call and he’s probably in demand these days.

But if they do decide to make a show he can always come back obviously. All these things are very fluid. I’m just happy he still wants to come back!

As for people who don’t want the show and hopes it never happens, there is absolutely nothing wrong to feel that way, nothing. But if a show does happen of course I hope everyone gives it a chance. It won’t be Picard season 4, it will be a new show.

It’s not happening. Maybe a TV movie, a romantic comedy starring Worf and Quark.

It’s not happening now. Agreed.

I’m hoping it will later. I have faith it will. It’s just too much of a no brainer IMO. But yes there could be a movie like they are doing with Section 31. I would love that idea too.

I agree. I think it’ll happen eventually. It might not even be with Matalas as the direct showrunner or with Jeri Ryan, Michelle Hurd, Ed Speleers, etc., in the main cast, but I think they’ll eventually come back to the post-Picard era eventually.

I think that becomes especially true depending on the fan reception to Discovery‘s final season, Starfleet Academy, and Section 31.

If there’s significant backlash or just even “meh” feelings about it all, the powers that be will want to go in the Legacy direction.

I’m 100% positive we will gat another 25th century show at some point but the question is will it be this spin off or not.

I have said this before but IF they plan to make more Star Trek after the Academy show, I have no idea how this wouldn’t be on the table?

There was so much fanfare over Picard season 3 to the point they put the finale in IMAX theaters. So they clearly knew the buzz they had with this show.

Again, it’s not going to be Picard season 4. Everyone seems to understand the show will be about Seven, Raffi and Jack and not about Picard, Riker and Worf.

But the appeal is just as strong when you have a fanbase that desperately wants more stories in this era.

It’s funny I remember being told by quite a few people no one cares about having a post Nemesis show. That era was dead and no one would even watch it.

Uh huh. Now it’s what the base is craving for above anything else. And Paramount clearly knows it

Per usual agree! I went back and read some of the comments here after the finale aired and while some certainly didn’t love it most people did. It was a huge hit. I remember when you posted the IMDB number about the finale with a 9.6. Most people thought it was over inflated (not me 😂) and was convinced it was going to take a big tumble in time. It’s slipped but it’s still at a 9.4 lol.

And most fans I knew wanted a post Voyager show the minute Voyager ended. It really shouldn’t have taken this long but now that we finally got them, I only want more not less!


Lol I remembered when I posted that in the finale thread and some people lost their damn mind.

It’s not surprising it’s still that high since people still talk very highly about it. The irony for me at the time was I thought it was too high and wanted to have a discussion where others saw it. I still it’s too high, but can’t deny the emotional connection it has with people.

Having the Enterprise D back certainly helped! ;)

Well stated. Paramount is in such in disarray these days when someone like Matalas isn’t being used that so many fans love and gave us great Star Trek. I’m happy if they do make Legacy he’s willing to come back.

He loves and honors Star Trek unlike people like JJ Abrams and Alex Kurtzman who has only ruined it.

Paramount is definitely in disarray lol..I said it many times, unless there is some long term plan they already have mapped out for future Star Trek projects post SFA I’m not sure why it wouldn’t be on the table at least; especially considering how so many fans want it and it’s constantly talked about online. That’s literally how we got SNW.

I get the feeling that what’s in production now is what had already been committed to (and the talent they had contracts with, e.g., Michelle Yeoh) before the slowdown and financial issues at Paramount+ crossed the tipping point and made the entire saturation of continuous Star Trek shows untenable.

Even if there’s a will to do Legacy among the brass at Paramount, I think the current corporate uncertainty has made greenlighting anything beyond what was already in the pipeline very difficult (and I’m gonna guess Starfleet Academy was being planned for a bit, and Section 31 has been talked about forever).

The (very flimsy) rumors I’ve seen online have claimed that if Legacy were to happen it would be some joint production (e.g., Amazon/Paramount) where Paramount would get the financial security of another streamer that would facilitate the series.

Making up a story and calling it a rumor doesn’t make it a rumor. It just makes it a lie.

Yeah I saw that too. It’s click bait of the highest level and yet you read the comments and most people believe it…sigh.

The way I am seeing it Legacy show can only happen when SNW concludes and SNW has at least two more years in it so I don’t see it happening in at least 5 years the closest. By that time the TNG cast would have aged quite a bit and I don’t see them taking very active role in it.

But I don’t see them taking a very active role on it now.

The show will be about the crew of the Enterprise G (as ugly as that ship is 🙄). The irony is not a single TNG character is part of the crew. There is only one legacy character and she came from Voyager.

I know they may give one or two a recurring role like the way Kirk randomly shows up on SNW, but the show isn’t going to rise or fall over it either.

Love Matalas and look forward to his next project no matter what it is.

But Paramount has to get their bleep together and make the Legacy show happen in the future.

I get they don’t have the money like they used to but figure it out! This is an easy lay up. It’s not another risky Kelvin movie, you know fans will show up to watch Legacy.

Fully agree as well!

The fact that Matalas and Kevin Feige are best buds now leads me to speculate that Matalas will be heading up some MCU project soon. I mean, the writing is on the wall, as it were. Terry is basically saying that Paramount has many Trek projects in production, they will not green-light a Legacy show. That ship has sailed. Not only that, I think there is some ego at play here: Kurtzman doesn’t like all the accolades that Matalas is getting and therefore will not give him another show to run.

That said, I am very much looking forward to Matalas’ MCU project. My guess it will be a show on Disney+, but it could be a movie or movie series. Maybe X-men?

As long as the present heads of the studios are in place, STAR TREK, in any form, will be treated as a second or tertiary thought. I don’t know WHAT is in the water down in SoCal, but Hollywood is bankrupt of ideas. I liked season 3 of PIC, the best of the series, and TM demonstrated that a decent post-TNG series can work. Yet, the studio heads do NOTHING with the IP. I just don’t understand it. SMH.

Give Terry the franchise instead of Kurtzman running it!



Thanks Terry – Ricky thinks you need to return to Trek, and soon! Hopefully when Warner Bros. acquires the franchise…

It sounds like that deal is already dead.

Not after WB ‘dune part 2’ opening weekend…..

What does that have to do with buying Paramount?

Terry finally gave so many of us the Star Trek we been missing since 2005. It was back to basics and not the Secret Hideout mess. And it was great to finally go forward again instead of more prequels.

I hope he returns because they need someone who really understands the franchise again.

He basically regurgitated TNG back to you. You should just stick to watching reruns.

Reading this board you seem to like Discovery, the worst Star Trek show ever made. You have zero credibility to talk.

Come back when you have some tastes please.

Oh snap! 😂

Yep Discovery is truly truly awful!

Yeah, first Trek since ST09 that I have unreservedly loved.

I’m very happy to hear you say that. I loved the season completely.

Matalas has hit a very sweet spot for many obviously and while I do like most of the modern Trek shows and movies I can’t deny how much I really enjoy his style of Trek, even if I thought the season was still flared.

I think the most important thing that Matalas proved is the fact that you can continue Trek without the need to drastically alter its design or core elements. Trek actually has always been very good in character development (TOS series to TOS movies and now TNG characters) and he managed to continue this trend. Maybe some of the story elements weren’t fully original but I partly put that to budget limitations of the season and the fact that they couldn’t do it as epic as they wanted to. (Although the Enterprise D is still pretty epic)

Very well started dear. I don’t think I could have said it any better. He understands these characters very well and managed to bring them to life just like the original show did. The story wasn’t always as strong as it could have been but it still surpassed what we been getting, even with budget constraints.

But the characters felt like real adults facing challenges again and not the unneeded melodrama and adults acting like children like so much of NuTrek offers.

I think the series with the greatest amount of character arcs is still DS9. Almost every character had a massive arc, but the greatest and best for me is Nog, IMHO.

That said, this Picard Season 3 by Matalas had amazing arcs for many of the characters on the level of DS9. This is the main reason I love that show and feel PS3 is the best Star Trek since DS9.

Yes, this. Plus, it’s a curtain call for the TNG cast..it’s ok to rehash to a point. I don’t see a lot of originality on TV these days. I’ll settle for it’s a logical progression for these characters.. from where we meet them at the start to where they end up. That’s phenomenal.

Trek doesn’t have to be perfect. It doesn’t have to be as great as it used to be..it needs to be faithful to itself. That’s why Terry is so high on most of fandom’s board to run things. He’s the best creative option we have the luxury of being exposed to. I may not understand how some of the naysayers here aren’t with us on that, but that’s ok. If they’re honest about their position, then it’s all good.

According to IMDb Terry Matalas is working on a Witch Mountain TV series as both writer and producer. I’m intrigued as I rather enjoyed the two original movies (Escape to Witch Mountain and Return from Witch Mountain). I enjoyed Race to Witch Mountain less so.

This tracks. Matalas seems to like retro stuff like Witch Mountain. I could also seem him doing a Knight Rider show.

Legacy without Jack. I’d rather have a new bridge officer/character.

12 Monkeys was a great series. And SyFy actually let them have a great and complete conclusion.