Jump to content


Photo

Big Star Trek News!!! Enterprise may return !!!


  • Please log in to reply
62 replies to this topic

#41 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 April 2013 - 08:37 AM

QUOTE (Gothneo @ Apr 7 2013, 04:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think your on to something 1701.

I don't know that I ever really considered Star Trek as first and foremost a big screen blockbuster movie type property. Since it came from TV, I always viewed the Movies as a bit of a "Bonus".

Imagine if they tried to take something like Dr. Who exclusively to the big screen, I would think they would have to transform it in a similar way... make it appeal to a broader, world wide market, flash it up etc.

Typically, big hit movies translate down to TV, not the other way. So maybe they do have a strategy. Maybe your right they want to build Star Trek into a more main stream type property that generates revenue from the big screen. If they capture enough of peoples imagination and attention, then once they are done with Movies, they can take it back to TV?


I kind of thought that was CBS/Paramount's goal all along, I'm actually surprised you didn't and I'm wondering if others felt the same as you which could explain why fans are still at odds with Abrams Star Trek?

I think they would have a strategy. Up until now that seems to have been keeping Star Trek special, not over doing it and throwing everything at an audience but allowing JJ Abrams the time to develop modern day Star Trek so that people are highly excited to see it return. Beyond Star Trek Into Darkness pretty much hangs on how this movie does but I'd be gob-smacked if it didn't do better than the 2009 movie. Assuming it does well (which it will), there will be a third movie, of which I'm certain Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindeloff will be writing. JJ Abrams and Bryan Burke will for sure be back to produce and well it's either Abrams or someone Abrams likes and trusts who'll be stepping into direct. I think CBS and Paramount will be looking at other ways to bring Star Trek to an audience and have done so already by developing the Star Trek game themselves...

Clearly a lot of talk has been on returning Star Trek to the TV and I'm sure that has been quietly talked about in meetings at Paramount and CBS. I would suspect we're a little way off before a new TV series is green-lit but clearly it won't be a new season of ENTERPRISE. It'll be something new and I'm guessing offered to JJ Abrams Bad Robot to develop, quite possibly under the guidance of a new team but overseen as an executive producer by JJ Abrams (similar to how Spielberg handles Jurassic Park and Transformers I'm guessing). Before that I really do expect an Animated Series to be announced - that's possibly the only way I can see old Star Trek actors like Scott Bakula and the cast of Enterprise back either to voice versions of their characters or different characters all together. I think essentially an Animated Series would be based on Kirk and Spock et-al, because those are the household names of Star Trek but there's nothing stopping Paramount/CBS from taking characters from Enterprise and giving them new lease of life that way but whilst Star Trek is always going to be as exciting for long-time fans, certainly Star Trek is for a new audience now, it can't just jump back into season 5 of an old show expecting the audience to understand what's happening.

What comes next will be brand new and something you can get into at first without knowing everything there is to know about Star Trek's 50 year history.


#42 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:50 PM

I'm still not sold that its the way to go for Trek, but, If thats what they are trying to do then I get it.

See... TOS and TNG gave years, even decades for fans to get to know them, so wen they did movies, they were already introduced to most people.

By re-booting on the big screen, instead of the small... we probably should expect to see 3 or 4 movies, but if a TV series comes to the works, either we will see other actors re-cast to the parts, or, we will see something entirely different.

I have to say I like some type of animated series. Though I'd prefer something in the TNG/DS9/VOY era as there is just so many actors they could draw upon.

#43 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:15 PM

QUOTE (Gothneo @ Apr 7 2013, 02:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm still not sold that its the way to go for Trek, but, If thats what they are trying to do then I get it.

See... TOS and TNG gave years, even decades for fans to get to know them, so wen they did movies, they were already introduced to most people.

By re-booting on the big screen, instead of the small... we probably should expect to see 3 or 4 movies, but if a TV series comes to the works, either we will see other actors re-cast to the parts, or, we will see something entirely different.

I have to say I like some type of animated series. Though I'd prefer something in the TNG/DS9/VOY era as there is just so many actors they could draw upon.


I kind of see the similarities with the current status of Star Trek to the status of the franchise during the 80's and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan to Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

There had not been a new Star Trek TV series for over 10 years (although reruns were being shown of TOS) and it was the movies that were keeping the franchise relevant.

Today you have the same thing all be it longer drawn out. There's not been a new Star Trek TV series for some time and the movies are currently the only filmed Star Trek out there.

We all know what happened next in 1987... So it's quite possible that we'll see liteally Star Trek: The Next Generation for a new generation being launched in the coming years.

One thing I think is 100% certain is that the Prime Timeline will not be revisited in the form of a new TV series.

As for the movies, I think we'll see one more movie to complete the JJ Abrams trilogy and then Star Trek will return to the TV either produced by Bad Robot or a new team (possibly Ronnald D Moore) beyond that it depends, will an expensive ("Broken Bow" cost $12 million) Star Trek TV series go 7 seasons?

CBS and Paramount have achieved a level of mainstream popularity to Star Trek through the JJ Abrams movies so I'm sure that we'll see more of a mainstream approach to Star Trek going beyond JJ Abrams Star Trek 3. Animated series and merchandise will all go towards gearing Star Trek up for a new, younger audience so perhaps history will repeat itself with the announcment of a new live action TV series which if successful would expand the new universe and Star Trek as TNG did back in the 80's and who knows, with the possibility of an animated series that could some how bridge the gap between Kirk and Picard and then for Picard and co being reinvented for this new universe through a new TV series, as you say you could then borrow characters from all aspects of Trek all be them reinvented for the alternate universe. We could end up seeing alternate versions of DS9 and Voyager until it comes full circle so yes I think the expansion is yet to come, so far the movie's we've been given have been great celebrations of Star Trek's enduring popularity and perfectly lay the foundation for a lengthier mission onboard an Enterprise with a new crew through a TV series just as it happened in the 80's with the success of the original motion picture trilogy (ST2 - 4)

I've got to say, if anyone hasn't yet picked up ENTERPRISE Season 1 on Blu Ray, I highly recommend it just for the Rick Berman and Branon Braga conversation.

#44 Wildcard

Wildcard

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 1,033 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 April 2013 - 03:26 AM

You know I've always wondered why no one ever explored the idea of an anthology based Star Trek series a la The Outer Limits or The Twilight Zone. Make a number of mini-series episodes involving characters, events, or speculations from the various Trek mythos.

#45 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 April 2013 - 07:02 AM

I think an anthology based on Star Trek would have worked really well with TNG and DS9 because they happened at the same time and they could have woven the two crews together culminating in the final Dominion War battle but doing that now when lets face it the TNG, DS9, VOY cast are way too old to be playing those roles in any significant way would be jarring I think to a new audience who hadn't seen Star Trek before 2009.

I think Star Trek: The Original Series, Star Trek: The Original Animated Series, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager, Star Trek: Enterprise and movie's 1 - 10 are a complete collection of stories that don't need expanding further. Thats it and that's plenty to keep anyone busy for a while.

So what's next?

Alternate Universe: Star Trek, Star Trek Into Darkness, Star Trek The Game, Star Trek 3, Star Trek Animated Series?, Star Trek: The Next Generation?

#46 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:19 PM

I think most people need a limited number of protagonist to root for, and I think the idea of the assembly cast, is the bulk of people can find the protagonist that they identify with better out of a selection of 5 or 7. If you didn't have at least a few long term protagonist, I don't know that it would work now-a-days. Outer limits and TZ were really groundbreaking for the time, but personally, I like some continuity, and if your pulling in different characters from different times... sort of "Tales of the federation" maybe it would work, but more then likely there would be precious few classic episodes, which is the case with most shows, but nothing to anchor the weaker ones.

I guess what I'm rambling on about is, that people tune in to watch Trek in syndication for the Crews, and to invest into them more than the federation and universe they live in. At least I do.

#47 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 April 2013 - 06:50 AM

Enterprise cast reunite

It's not the greatest of pictures but the cast reunited to film a reunion for the second season blu ray special features. Maybe they'll talk more about how Enterprise could be revisited at a time when so much of the focus seems to be on reinventing the Star Trek brand. How would the powers that be, bring these characters back for an established fan-base but ultimately for an audience that had not seen Enterprise at all. Would a Season 5 be a fresh start but also a continuation?

#48 Qcjoe

Qcjoe

    I can stop I just don't want to.

  • Members
  • 674 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cincinnati
  • Interests:scifi,comics,actionfigures,baseball,football

Posted 18 April 2013 - 11:43 AM

I always here that the main reason trek is not on tv is cost.  Now I know nothing on the subject of making computer graphics,but if BSG: Blood and Chrome can be maid to be just a online thing then why cant trek be maid for tv?  



#49 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 20 April 2013 - 08:05 AM

Star Trek's return to TV is inevitable and its return will be expensive and huge because CBS/Paramount will not want to diminish the success JJ Abrams movie's have had and the studio's will expect to make a return on it due to Star Trek's jump in popularity. I'd expect something like Game of Thrones when Star Trek returns to our TV screens in terms of scale. 

 

I think the bigger problem is where you put something like Star Trek. CBS isn't exactly the best place for it unless you lead into it with The Big Bang Theory.



#50 Qcjoe

Qcjoe

    I can stop I just don't want to.

  • Members
  • 674 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cincinnati
  • Interests:scifi,comics,actionfigures,baseball,football

Posted 20 April 2013 - 10:55 AM

 

Star Trek's return to TV is inevitable and its return will be expensive and huge because CBS/Paramount will not want to diminish the success JJ Abrams movie's have had and the studio's will expect to make a return on it due to Star Trek's jump in popularity. I'd expect something like Game of Thrones when Star Trek returns to our TV screens in terms of scale. 

 

I think the bigger problem is where you put something like Star Trek. CBS isn't exactly the best place for it unless you lead into it with The Big Bang Theory.

 

Lead it or after it.  Thats a good idea.  With all the Trek and nerd stuff they have in that show it would be perfect.



#51 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 21 April 2013 - 07:00 AM

Big Bang Theory is on it sixth season, and lets be honest... its winding down. I expect the show to wrap either this or next season. 

 

If a show were in production now, they might be able to capitalize on the final year of BBT, but I don't think they will have one ready before BBT is off the air.

 

I also think they wouldn't want to distract from JJ's verse until the 3rd film was done (you know they will do a trilogy!)  then I would think they would have the TV show ready to tie into it.

 

I read that Game of thrones cost about 5-6mil USD to produce. Thats some serious cash. I think Enterprise was running about 2mil USD an episode, so Game of Thrones is 2.5 to 3x, so  budget like that would be huge for a new show. 

 

If you look up the stats on something like BBT, its easily +1mil USD per episode, but thats due to its success. 

 

Bottom line is Game of thrones makes money by subscribers as well as selling its DVDs. 

 

CBS relies more on advertisers. HBO puts the money into the production to hire good actors and produce great sets and props. All but assuring a ROI with a quality product. They plan on short 2-3 seasons, so they already know the entire plot and budget. 

 

Maybe what trek needs to do is let HBO give it the same treatment. Let HBO produce and market it. Of course CBS would either need to put up the cash or let HBO take the lions share of profits for the risk. 

 

Another reason why shows like Game of Thrones or Rome are successful is because they are content for adults, which isnt for everyone. They have more  violence and have nudity in them. They are gritty. I doubt you'll get advertisers to go for all the nudity. You certainly can't show things like Game of thrones on prime time.

 

A gritty, violence filled trek with more sex and nudity? If you think people are upset by JJ's re-boot, you might have an outright rebellion... but I'd give it a chance!



#52 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:19 AM

Big Bang Theory is on it sixth season, and lets be honest... its winding down. I expect the show to wrap either this or next season. 

 

If a show were in production now, they might be able to capitalize on the final year of BBT, but I don't think they will have one ready before BBT is off the air.

 

I also think they wouldn't want to distract from JJ's verse until the 3rd film was done (you know they will do a trilogy!)  then I would think they would have the TV show ready to tie into it.

 

I read that Game of thrones cost about 5-6mil USD to produce. Thats some serious cash. I think Enterprise was running about 2mil USD an episode, so Game of Thrones is 2.5 to 3x, so  budget like that would be huge for a new show. 

 

If you look up the stats on something like BBT, its easily +1mil USD per episode, but thats due to its success. 

 

Bottom line is Game of thrones makes money by subscribers as well as selling its DVDs. 

 

CBS relies more on advertisers. HBO puts the money into the production to hire good actors and produce great sets and props. All but assuring a ROI with a quality product. They plan on short 2-3 seasons, so they already know the entire plot and budget. 

 

Maybe what trek needs to do is let HBO give it the same treatment. Let HBO produce and market it. Of course CBS would either need to put up the cash or let HBO take the lions share of profits for the risk. 

 

Another reason why shows like Game of Thrones or Rome are successful is because they are content for adults, which isnt for everyone. They have more  violence and have nudity in them. They are gritty. I doubt you'll get advertisers to go for all the nudity. You certainly can't show things like Game of thrones on prime time.

 

A gritty, violence filled trek with more sex and nudity? If you think people are upset by JJ's re-boot, you might have an outright rebellion... but I'd give it a chance!

 

Big Bang Theory if anything has grown in popularity, I'd imagine it will go beyond 10 seasons as it's already been green lit for a 7th season.  I mean even the repeats are beating shows like American Idol in the ratings so winding down BBT is not. The 6th season has been watched by around 18 million, The most watched episode "The Bakersfield Expedition" (The Star Trek TNG episode) was watched by 18 - 20 million compared to the most watched episode in season 1 which was watched by almost 10 million so no if your going to put a Star Trek TV series on CBS, put it on before or after Big Bang Theory because that show is huge.

 

As for costs, TBBT will be a lot cheaper because it's not Sci-Fi, its not a show that relies on CGI and space ships, it's a sit-com, stage bound. I think a Trek show we'd be looking at 5-6 million an episode but thats not impossible, "Broken Bow" was made for 12 million.

 

Even though I think putting Trek on with Big Bang would be great, I think CBS would be wise to either get Bad Robot or HBO to produce the show and then to sell it to a more suitable network.As for the content of the show, I think we need to think about what a Star Trek series should look like today. It can't just be an homage to what has gone before because or instance, for today's audience, having a woman of colour on the bridge, isn't as big a deal as it was in the 60's and etc... So just like the current movies are doing at the moment, the TV series needs to be relevant to today.



#53 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 April 2013 - 10:49 AM

 

Not sure if this deserves a new topic but since we're talking about Enterprise/future of Trek on TV... Could this be it?



#54 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 21 April 2013 - 04:42 PM

Sit-Coms in the U.S. especially shows on the prime networks rarely go much more than 7 seasons. But some do... so your right they could extend it. I do realize that season 7 is up, but it is on the decline, from a perspective of writing and plot... not necessarilly ratings.

 

BBT is really a cross between Friends, 3's company and Sienfield, which is why I think people like it, but just like those shows, eventually all the relationship stuff either gets resolved or people get tried of it not getting resloved. 

 

Freinds made it 10 seasons, Sienfield made it 9, and 3's company made it 8, so if they pick BBT up past season 7, it'll probably last a few more, but the best episodes are most likely behind them.  (But I hope I'm wrong!)



#55 BadBunnyMike

BadBunnyMike

    Wishes He had Spots

  • Members
  • 2,233 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockton, California

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:53 PM

Whoa that looked pretty damn good, it took me a second to realize how they did that. The things computers can do these days is freakin amazing.



#56 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 April 2013 - 10:53 AM

Sit-Coms in the U.S. especially shows on the prime networks rarely go much more than 7 seasons. But some do... so your right they could extend it. I do realize that season 7 is up, but it is on the decline, from a perspective of writing and plot... not necessarilly ratings.

 

BBT is really a cross between Friends, 3's company and Sienfield, which is why I think people like it, but just like those shows, eventually all the relationship stuff either gets resolved or people get tried of it not getting resloved. 

 

Freinds made it 10 seasons, Sienfield made it 9, and 3's company made it 8, so if they pick BBT up past season 7, it'll probably last a few more, but the best episodes are most likely behind them.  (But I hope I'm wrong!)

 

I think since the future's of TV shows in the US are based on ratings then it's not on the decline and actually in my opinion, it keeps getting better! TBBT is approaching or has overtaken the ratings Friends was getting in its final season so I think we're going to see it go on for another 3/4 years at least to 10 seasons and thats even if the ratings begin to decline which at the moment they've only risen from previous seasons.

 

In any way, I think if we're talking Enterprise/Trek TV future then its definitely going to be something new and based within the Abrams universe since that's what any new fan will be familiar with. I mean we could also see a Star Trek very much like Doctor Who in that perhaps the universes in Star Trek become forever joined (Alternate, Prime & Mirror).

 

I think we can safely say the possibilities are endless...



#57 Gothneo

Gothneo

    Knows Paul Bunyan

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of sky Blue Oxen

Posted 22 April 2013 - 07:43 PM

I can respect your opinion. Only time will tell.

 

but Lets at least compare apples to apples shall we? BBT has not quite over taken the 6th season of friends. But its a contender. lets call them equal?!

 

I think the numbers are helped by the fact that it went into syndication a couple of years ago so people are getting to see seasons 1-4 (maybe 5 too) so people are now seeing much of it for the first time. Friends was pretty much an instant success, while BBT has had to grow on people and I doubt they would have stuck with it had the rank not consistently increased. The trend in stats, though, suggests to me that its plateaued. We should see S7 do about the same numbers, and then S8 and S9 if they continue, will decline. until they either end with Season 9 or do one last Season, season 10.

 

Now its true that friends peaked in S8... so maybe we see a spike, but by S8 its better days were behind it, and I suspect so will BBT's.

 

Friends vs BBT Stats:

Season

Rank

Households/Viewers
(in millions)

1

#9[86]

14.88[86]

2

#3[87]

17.93[87]

3

#4[88]

16.30[88]

4

#4[89]

15.78[89]

5

#2[90]

15.61[90]

6

#5[91]

20.95[91]

7

#4[92]

19.70[92]

8

#1[93]

24.50[93]

9

#3[94]

21.14[94]

10

#5[95]

20.84[95]

Season

Rank

Viewers
(millions)

1

68

9.68[88]

2

44

13.11[90]

3

12

16.32[92]

4

15

14.04[94]

5

8

16.54[96]

6

3

20.00[83]



#58 BadBunnyMike

BadBunnyMike

    Wishes He had Spots

  • Members
  • 2,233 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockton, California

Posted 23 April 2013 - 02:47 AM

Okay actually since you brought up Friends... I read something saying that Fox confirmed Friends is doing a come back season. So after like 8 years or whatever it was they are making a whole new season of Friends.

 

http://elitedaily.co...omeback-season/

 

So i mean Anything could happen, but friends had a HUGE following...so it would make sense to do that, or Sienfield or Will and Grace. But Enterprise didn't have as big of a following, sure the diehard trek fans and the occasional watcher would dig it. i mean i would for sure.



#59 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:19 PM

Seriously!!!! Friends is coming back?? OMG! haha awesome, I think that could work, I'll admit it, I'm a sucker for friends. 

 

I think comparing Star Trek to friends is completely wrong though haha but anything is possible. I'd like to see them redo Enterprise with Scott Bakula and a few of the others (leaving out or replacing Jolene Blalock and Linda Park) and have it kind of be the series Rick Berman and Braga wanted in the first place and that is...

 

Humanity in the mud, building the first Starship Enterprise - at least in Season 1. That first season could be about how Captain Jonathan Archer selected his crew, building these iconic characters throughout the first season? The you could run as a sub-plot the story of how Starfleet was formed, I mean it was all kind of left for us to assume that Starfleet had been established for a while but what happened to NASA and the Planet after world war III and what would that look like for an audience today so that it was plausible? Who would be leading us into this new era and what would Starfleet look like at the beginning? These guys would be the right people to lead our PLANET into space! I mean Admiral Forrest? What were his credentials to be an admiral? Was he a Naval man before, part of NASA? A politician? And then this series could go all the way into Archer becoming Admiral, you could include the Kelvin and then George T. Kirk, Capt Robau etc and then perhaps you could have the timeline either change with the appearance of Nero or change with the Kelvin making it back to Earth and Kirk being born in Iowa? 



#60 Guest_1701_*

Guest_1701_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 April 2013 - 01:41 PM

That friends news was false :( 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users