Jump to content


Photo

"New ‘Star Trek’ Series Coming to CBS in 2017"

star trek cbs 2017 series

  • Please log in to reply
1901 replies to this topic

#41 robster

robster

    Will work for toys.

  • Members
  • 1,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crapland....some call it Norway.

Posted 03 November 2015 - 01:05 PM

LOL CKT! EXACTLY! Buy all the fun toys,cheap tat,and such,but NEVER six bucks to watch a new tv show,lol!

 

Oh Alteran,think you know me so well.......AND YOU DO!!!!!! Would TOTALLY LOVE a series with the J! Never gonna happen of course,but BOY would that be COOOOL!!!!!

 

Even if I'm on the fence for now about this new series,I'm still curious to see the new ship,and find out about the characters. More than a year away though,a lot can happen in a year.

 

John-Robin!



#42 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 03 November 2015 - 01:52 PM

While you present a good point Kor'Tar, that's exactly what CBS are wanting the fans to think. It's not people refusing to pay $6 a month, it's the principle of it considering that almost no one has heard of this service, and when a large percentage of people who do watch TV that way are using Netflix. As Star Trek fans, we have an entire RACE of people designed to show us these tactics and business practises!

 

Also, I'm amazed that more people aren't a bit more concerned that their relagating one of their biggest, longest-running and most well-known franchises to a pay-to-watch digital channel, instead of putting it front and centre on their main network channels. I'm sure they'll paint a really great image in peoples minds when it comes to the marketing of it:

 

"Star Trek has always shown us where technology is heading (proceed to show a montage of Communicators being used by Kirk and Spock, PADDs being used by Picard and Janeway, followed by Sisko, Garak and Weyoun wearing the Jem'Hadar viewscreen headsets), therefore it'll be our front-runner for pushing CBS into the future of content consumption."

 

In my opinion, this is a bad decision for them, not just because it shows a seeming lack of confidence in the series, but also because this is the kind of thing that'll lead to rampant piracy. As I said earlier, Netflix has a much bigger install base, and I'm sure people would jump at the chance to have a reason to sign up to that service (due to it offering so many tv shows and films), rather than one which will only offer alternatives such as CSI, Hawaii Five O, Big Brother and The Dome. lol

 

 

Returning to the subject of whether or not the new series will be Prime or Nu universe, seeing that they've chosen to put Alex Kurtzman in charge (at least at this preliminary stage) is a big clue in my opinion as to what they're thinking/what they want from it.

To quote Spock, "Sauce for the Goose."



#43 djc242

djc242

    I know FHC by name.

  • Members
  • 585 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 03 November 2015 - 02:56 PM

I generally agree with Jay K.

 

I tried out the CBS streaming service to watch Colbert's new show.  The quality wasn't great and the commercial breaks would loop several times.  Instead of getting 1-3 ads every so often it would turn into 9-10.  REALLY frustrating.  I wouldn't mind paying to watch a great Trek show directly but not on that service  (unless they overhaul it significantly).  If you told me my Netflix or Hulu bill would go up a few dollars for the show, then I'd be happy.  Those services are outstanding.

 

The other issue is will the service be available worldwide from the start.  I've never seen that happen but since Trek is popular internationally they would be guaranteed a good audience to start.

 

I also agree with Seth MacFarlane's tweet about the announcement:  "Let's make this new Star Trek series optimistic, eh? I think we're all dystopia'd out."



#44 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,413 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 03 November 2015 - 03:49 PM

Wait a second, their $6 a month streaming service also makes you watch ads? What the hell are you paying for then? That is exactly why I considered Hulu to be absolute garbage (I know they have commercial free now), there is no chance I'd pay for a streaming service with ads. 



#45 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 03 November 2015 - 05:34 PM

Remarks from Les Moonves from an earnings call:

http://trekcore.com/...-run-streaming/

 

This quote:
 

"We're looking to do original content on All Access and build up that platform. Netflix is our friend, [but] a competitor. They compete with Showtime [which is a CBS holding]. All Access will put out original content and knowing the loyalty of "Star Trek" fans, this will boost it."

 

...is exactly what I was referring to when I said in the first line of my last post:

 

"...that's exactly what CBS are wanting the fans to think."

 

So if you don't subscribe to Netflix etc, then there's your new service. But don't tell people who are Netflix subscribers not to be upset at CBS choosing to do this, especially when Netflix has all sorts of CBS shows available on it (and even the CBS President says they have a 'good relationship' with them). Talking purely about the business side of this new show (not the show itself), this is starting to look a bit exploitative on CBS' part...

 

Here's a video clip from the earning's call:

Spoiler



#46 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,413 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 03 November 2015 - 05:59 PM

Odds are I will be watching the pilot and 1 of 2 things will happen.

 

1. I get hooked, and subscribe to this stupid service to watch it. (Not likely since most pilots are not that good)

2. I am not hooked, and will waiting for it to release on Blu Ray/iTunes and buy it then, or watch it if they do put it on live TV after its run on CBS All Access. 



#47 Morgan

Morgan

    I can stop I just don't want to.

  • Members
  • 664 posts

Posted 03 November 2015 - 06:36 PM

At some point there is going to streaming service fatigue. CBS could be under the impression that Star Trek fans subscribe to zero streaming services already, and that they won't boycott it on principle alone. There are only so many diff services that people will sign up for, no matter the income and free time.

 

Likewise, people with zero streaming services who happen to be Trek fans will not automatically go to CBS just for Trek, because Netflix. There are other people in the household to consider.



#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 03 November 2015 - 07:46 PM

I already pay for Cable TV, Netflix, and Amazon Prime. They are wanting me to pay more for a single TV Series just because it's Star Trek, and they are using it to try and make their own streaming service bigger. 

BINGO!



#49 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 03 November 2015 - 10:11 PM

Likewise, people with zero streaming services who happen to be Trek fans will not automatically go to CBS just for Trek, because Netflix. There are other people in the household to consider.

 

Nail on the head.

 

EDIT: Just saw Drexler post this on Facebook, saying "Wow...":
http://nypost.com/20...trek-tv-reboot/

 

My personal feelings are reflected in that article to be honest, but regardless, it's going to be an interesting 14 months! lol



#50 robster

robster

    Will work for toys.

  • Members
  • 1,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crapland....some call it Norway.

Posted 04 November 2015 - 02:55 AM

Guess I'll watch it the illegal way,lol,which most people over here do anyways. I get all my tv shows and latest movies every Wednesday. Do sometimes miss US commercials though. lol

 

J-R!



#51 Alex

Alex

    Yes the Troi figures hair worries me.

  • Members
  • 921 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 November 2015 - 03:07 AM

While you present a good point Kor'Tar, that's exactly what CBS are wanting the fans to think. It's not people refusing to pay $6 a month, it's the principle of it considering that almost no one has heard of this service, and when a large percentage of people who do watch TV that way are using Netflix. As Star Trek fans, we have an entire RACE of people designed to show us these tactics and business practises!

This is exactly my problem with this distribution method; it's not that I'm unwilling to pay $6 bucks a month for Trek, (I'd pay $25 to have it on iTunes and I'll still pay the usual $100+ to get it on Blu–Ray/DVD,) it's that I'm not fond of CBS milking this for all its worth and assuming that I'll just sign up for their streaming service that's spent years languishing just because they decided to make it the only place to see the new Trek, especially when there are larger outlets that would gladly take this new Trek and give it far more exposure. (The CW has said as much when their President asked CBS to develop a new Trek series for them, which should have been easy given that they're half owned by CBS.)
 
Jay K, I should point out that it's not just Netflix. While Netflix is big, just as many people who watch TV this way are using Hulu and Amazon Prime, and may soon be using Apple/iTunes/the TV, as Apple is supposedly looking into creating original content as well. We've got two of our "big three" in Netflix and Hulu, and Amazon Prime and Apple are slugging it out to be the third of the "big three," with neither really winning at this point. (Apple has a better player than Amazon, but they don't actually stream yet, instead selling season passes for downloads, which I actually prefer even though I can understand why others don't.) As much as I absolutely hate Prime's interface, (and the fact that it behaves like a slug when I've used it,) it's a platform that people are actually using, and that could be good for Trek. The TV is another good option, because even if CBS charged a bit more for a season pass, you'd be able to keep every episode you've seen using their current distribution system, and that's appealing to me since I can download the show and not have to worry about the stream cutting out when my shoddy internet connection decides to act up. Netflix is big, but Hulu would be just as good as a place to release a new Trek series. CBS All–Access is a money–grab for a service no one seems to be begging or even really asking for, and yes, you have to have the earlobes of a Ferengi to think this is a good idea.
 

Also, I'm amazed that more people aren't a bit more concerned that their relagating one of their biggest, longest-running and most well-known franchises to a pay-to-watch digital channel, instead of putting it front and centre on their main network channels. I'm sure they'll paint a really great image in peoples minds when it comes to the marketing of it:

 I'm very concerned about this; dumping Trek on a no–name streaming service hardly screams "confidence," and sends a message more along the lines of "stop bitching about a new series already and give us $6 for our shoddy streaming service so we don't have to bother showing this on an established platform you obnoxious Trek nerds." There's no reason for Trek to be anywhere near a subscription streaming service for its first run, not when at least one broadcast Television network is willing to show it, and multiple cable channels would likely line up to bid on the rights as well if given the chance. CBS is effectively writing off viewers who aren't die–hard Trek fans by making this a subscription–only series, and that's not a smart idea for the first Trek show since 2005. It would be one thing if a new Trek show was going to be coming to an actual TV network and something like the "Captain Worf" concept was going to be on CBS All–Access, (which would make sense since it could be a riskier show to run on broadcast, but Trek fans would likely still pay for it,) but that's not what's going on here.
 

In my opinion, this is a bad decision for them, not just because it shows a seeming lack of confidence in the series, but also because this is the kind of thing that'll lead to rampant piracy. As I said earlier, Netflix has a much bigger install base, and I'm sure people would jump at the chance to have a reason to sign up to that service (due to it offering so many tv shows and films), rather than one which will only offer alternatives such as CSI, Hawaii Five O, Big Brother and The Dome. lol

I'm in 100% agreement with you. Netflix or Hulu both have huge install bases, and so do Amazon Prime and iTunes for that matter; CBS could go to any of those four companies and it would still look better than sticking this on All–Access. I haven't signed up to Netflix or Hulu yet, but one person in my family has Prime and everyone has an iTunes account. As much as I enjoy CSI, Five–O, and Under the Dome, I'm far more likely to buy a Blu–Ray/DVD release of those shows than I am to ever care about streaming them, which means I'm really just paying for Trek if I sign up for All–Access, even if there's other stuff on there.
 
I've considered Netflix as an option to rent movies that my cable company doesn't offer in HD on–demand. However, given how poorly my internet connection performs, and given that there's no agreed upon UHD standard for streaming yet, I'm reluctant to touch anything for the time being, because I know I'm always going to wind up grabbing something I really like on Blu–Ray/DVD without ever even considering streaming it.
 

I tried out the CBS streaming service to watch Colbert's new show.  The quality wasn't great and the commercial breaks would loop several times.  Instead of getting 1-3 ads every so often it would turn into 9-10.  REALLY frustrating.  I wouldn't mind paying to watch a great Trek show directly but not on that service  (unless they overhaul it significantly).  If you told me my Netflix or Hulu bill would go up a few dollars for the show, then I'd be happy.  Those services are outstanding.

This is another thing that I absolutely hate about CBS All–Access. I was actually using it to watch some of Letterman's old stuff awhile back and wound up having the same issues, and that was in the middle of the night when it wasn't my internet connection that was giving me a headache. The looping issues and other playback problems alone are frustrating enough to ruin what could otherwise be a plesant viewing experience. CBS All–Access wouldn't need an overhaul, it'd need to be nuked and rebuilt from the ground up to be worth paying attention too. I'd also be more likely to jump on one of the more popular streaming platforms if CBS put Trek on one of them, even if I'm still largely on the fence with them.
 

I also agree with Seth MacFarlane's tweet about the announcement:  "Let's make this new Star Trek series optimistic, eh? I think we're all dystopia'd out."

Now this is a sentiment that I can get behind. This is just one of the many reasons why I want this show set in the Prime Universe, and why I hope Kurtzman is sort of the opposite of Orci. I do seem to remember hearing that he was a Star Trek fan before his involvement in the films though, but need to double–check that information. If it's true, it gives me a bit more hope about him, although I'd feel better if he had some "golden era" TNG–VOY alumni on his production team.
 

Wait a second, their $6 a month streaming service also makes you watch ads? What the hell are you paying for then? That is exactly why I considered Hulu to be absolute garbage (I know they have commercial free now), there is no chance I'd pay for a streaming service with ads.

If you believe CBS, the idea is that you're paying for access to their back catalog beyond what you'd find in your cable company's on–demand offerings, and are at least hypothetically under no obligation to have a cable subscription to use All–Access the way you'd need one for on–demand, so the $6 is meant to make up what CBS is supposedly losing from cord–cutters in the form of retransmission fees on cable. There aren't as many ads as their are on an actual TV broadcast though, and apparently that's another justification for the $6 dollar fee.
 

So if you don't subscribe to Netflix etc, then there's your new service. But don't tell people who are Netflix subscribers not to be upset at CBS choosing to do this, especially when Netflix has all sorts of CBS shows available on it (and even the CBS President says they have a 'good relationship' with them). Talking purely about the business side of this new show (not the show itself), this is starting to look a bit exploitative on CBS' part...

 My problem isn't even with CBS wanting to push their streaming service with original content, my problem is with them milking Trek to do it. There are plenty of unknown ideas that can't make the cut for broadcast that CBS could try on this service, and that could propel it to compete with a Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon Prime level streaming service. Trek is not in that category though, and I'd rather it be treated as the established property that it is while an unknown be given a shot it might not otherwise get. Yahoo! grabbed Community because nobody else wanted it; if Trek wound up in that boat I wouldn't be opposed to it winding up on All–Access, but it's not there now. The last time it was in such a situation was when Enterprise was cancelled, and if streaming existed at that point, it likely could have gone there. (The real problem was that the tectonic–shift in viewer tastes hadn't occured until after Enterprise was cancelled, and by the time the show started to get good again, UPN was hemmoraging affiliates and people who wanted to watch the show couldn't.)
 

Odds are I will be watching the pilot and 1 of 2 things will happen.
 
1. I get hooked, and subscribe to this stupid service to watch it. (Not likely since most pilots are not that good)
2. I am not hooked, and will waiting for it to release on Blu Ray/iTunes and buy it then, or watch it if they do put it on live TV after its run on CBS All Access.

This is pretty much the conclusion I've reached about the series as well. I'm going to wind up buying this on Blu–Ray anyway since I have everything else Trek–related on Blu–Ray/DVD or am in the process of acquiring it (again) on Blu–Ray, so if I'm not hooked from the get–go, I'll just wait for the Blu–Ray release and enjoy the show that way. Besides, even as a PS3 owner it's further incentive for me to justify purchasing a PS4 to use with another TV.
 

At some point there is going to streaming service fatigue. CBS could be under the impression that Star Trek fans subscribe to zero streaming services already, and that they won't boycott it on principle alone. There are only so many diff services that people will sign up for, no matter the income and free time.
 
Likewise, people with zero streaming services who happen to be Trek fans will not automatically go to CBS just for Trek, because Netflix. There are other people in the household to consider.

Morgan, this is an excellent point. There's already some streaming service fatigue, and while one person in my family has Amazon Prime, he has it for the free shipping and the video is just a bonus. Everybody has iTunes accounts so we can all get "streaming/downloadable" video that way, and I have no interest in paying for a service that I'm going to have to jump through hoops to use between my internet connection acting up and the service acting up.
 

EDIT: Just saw Drexler post this on Facebook, saying "Wow...":

http://nypost.com/20...trek-tv-reboot/
 
My personal feelings are reflected in that article to be honest, but regardless, it's going to be an interesting 14 months! lol

I'm not sure if that "Wow..." is meant as Drexler being disappointed in the article or shockingly agreeing with it, but I can understand his reaction either way. While I normally avoid the New York Compost and The Daily Fail, I have to admit that I wound up agreeing with the former in that article, as I feel very similarly to the way you do about how this show is being handled. (I'd pushed Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to the lower decks of my brain though before this reminded me of that mess. There were two memorable things in that movie, Mudflap and Skid, the VW bugs that spoke in jive, and the fact that the crew managed to film on the actual Egyptian Pyramids because someone in their government was a huge Transformers fan who was able to pull some strings to make it happen. That doesn't excuse the rest of the film though, which even Kurtzman and Orci admitted was a rushed mess in the same way that Brannon Braga likes to go after the Voyager episode Threshold.) Sticking this on All–Access is completely counter–intuitive, and I wouldn't be so concerned about it if I didn't think it was going to harm the show's chances of success. A no–name streaming service isn't where you stick something like Trek in a world where Trek is such an easy sell; it's where you stick a show that can't succeed anywhere else or that nobody else would touch. House of Cards, and Transparent wound up on Netflix, but they were shopped around to other outlets that wouldn't touch them first. That doesn't mean they're bad, it just means that no other outlet would take them. Trek doesn't have that problem, and I wish I could remember who passed on HoC, because I could have sworn I read something about them "regretting it" after all of those other political dramas took off around the same time that HoC did. This is going to be an interesting 14 months indeed though; hopefully the more we learn about this series, the more apparent it'll be that it's being handled correctly outside of being shoved onto CBS All–Access.



#52 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 04 November 2015 - 03:29 AM

Alex, when I say Netflix, you can definitely assume I also mean Hulu, Prime and the rest (just easier to write!). :)

Also, regards Drexler, he's really not a fan of JJ Trek (similar to LeVar Burton in terms of opinions on it, only a lot stronger). I also hate those types of tabloids (not a big fan of the media generally to be honest), so without knowing anything about the article's author, I do agree with his opinions nontheless.



#53 Whirlygig

Whirlygig

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,425 posts

Posted 04 November 2015 - 09:09 AM

As may have been said here, and has definitely been said elsewhere, don't get too worked up over the streaming aspect of this.

 

14 months is a long time in today's media landscape.  By next January they may change their strategy altogether, or alter their pricing, or who knows what else.  Another pattern of late has been for episodes to be made available for free for a limited time after airing...maybe they will do some of that.

 

Also, few seem to be thinking of the obvious solution where we simply wait for the season (which will probably be short like modern series are trending) to be over and subscribe for a single month to binge-watch them all.

 

My advice is to settle down and wait.  Go back to thinking about Star Wars!



#54 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 04 November 2015 - 10:47 AM

Just don't give it to Sy Fy because they'll somehow manage to murder it like they do with every other show that isn't Smackdown. 

I know its cool to say you hate Sy Fy but I hate SyFy.  I gave them another chance with a few shows then they went and canceled them after a few seasons.  



#55 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 04 November 2015 - 06:11 PM

Guys, this is exactly how TNG was born, instead of streaming it was first run syndication. That was a huge success story. Can the same be repeated? Theres no reason to suggest it won't work. We are just a handful of fans and regardless of what you say now, you may just be saying something different in a years time when CBS tease you with trailers and a cast, a new ship etc... It is also only $5.99 a month and you don't just get Star Trek for that price too.

 

In any case, whatever happens between now and January 2017, CBS understand the risks and are definitely dedicated to Star Trek for the long-term. Even if this doesn't work, they will still have a Star Trek series that is there to be sold and marketed. This is their golden goose, it's been away for 12 years and fans are hungry for it to return. We have no idea how this is going to be sold to international markets either so who knows what will happen.

 

Bottom line... If this is Prime Universe Star Trek, I don't care what any of you guys say, you'll be signing up. CBS All Access has to start somewhere, they will undoubtably put more exclusive and original content onto All Access and what better show to start with than their biggest property, a property that has always done better in the first run syndication 80's and 90's equivalent to today's 21st century streaming on demand. Plus all we're talking about is $5.99 a month, that's $71.88 a year, the price of a plastic star trek ship from DST. 



#56 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 04 November 2015 - 10:59 PM

Bottom line... If this is Prime Universe Star Trek, I don't care what any of you guys say, you'll be signing up.

 

Just because I love certain aspects of something doesn't make me automatically love the rest. And as for signing up to a service that charges you a monthly fee, whilst still showing you adverts in between shows, ha! Not a chance for me, even if I could. That quote from Les Moonves once again: 
 

"...knowing the loyalty of "Star Trek" fans, this will boost it."

 

Only reaction I have to that:
 

Spoiler



#57 Alteran195

Alteran195

    Their ACTION FIGURES, not dolls!!

  • Members
  • 3,413 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 05 November 2015 - 10:56 AM

 

 

Bottom line... If this is Prime Universe Star Trek, I don't care what any of you guys say, you'll be signing up. 

I will absolutely not support a streaming service that you pay for, and has ads.

 

I rarely use Hulu because of how they started with paying for service, while still having ads. 



#58 1701D

1701D

    Dances with Toys

  • Members
  • 1,310 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 05 November 2015 - 11:11 AM

Well guys, thats a crying shame you're going to let a measly $5.99 get in the way of enjoying a new Star Trek that could be amazing. I think theres been a complete overreaction from fans and I guess no matter what CBS or Paramount do, it just won't be good enough. Like it or not, this is the future of TV in general. Its already happening in the UK with BBC 3 becoming an online channel only and with the advent of smart TV's etc... Networks like CBS, BBC et al, will all begin to produce original programming that is direct to their own streaming services.  

 

And JK, I see you reside in Liverpool in the UK? I don't think we'll have to worry about streaming this series as it will be likely sold to a TV network in the UK, possibly Sky Atlantic but it might be available on CBS Action which is a Freeview Channel. Don't quote me on this but its clear CBS are determined to sell Star Trek 2017 across multiple countries world wide and ultimately I don't really think it will matter if you want to watch it streamed or not, it'll be available eventually on all formats. 



#59 Jay K

Jay K

    It's not a disease it's a hobby.

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England
  • Interests:Music, Star Trek, and gaming.

Posted 05 November 2015 - 12:43 PM

Where's this overreaction from fans, because I've seen nothing but the opposite on sites like Reddit, etc? From the Trek sites I look at, the mood seems to be a big celebration generally. Also, in regards to your comments on CBS/Paramount not doing enough to please them/some of them, I ask you, what have they done so far to please us? For me personally as someone who immensely disliked the JJ stuff, I see they've hired a guy who was heavily involved with the making of those films, and who co-wrote both of them: A guy who has been responsible for some absolutely terrible tv in my opinion - therefore what do I have to be excited about? I won't bother mentioning it being put behind a pay-wall/non FTA again.

I'm not outright saying I won't watch it at some point because of course I will, and anyone who says otherwise is a liar, but there's nothing to get me excited so far; nothing that would fill me with confidence (like for instance seeing some production guys from the old series' come onboard).

 

Lastly, and where we differ the most I feel, is that although I consider myself a massive trekkie generally, there's some things in the franchise I don't like - things I:
find boring (most of the first two seasons of TNG, and a lot of Enterprise),
find cringeworthy (DS9's Take Me Out to the Holosuite, and most of Voyager), and
don't like at all (JJ).
Just because it says 'Star Trek' in the name doesn't mean I'll automatically love and support it, and I hate the generalised view that culture seems to propagate nowadays whereby if you're a fan of one thing in a series/franchise, you have to be a fan of every part of it. I've never subscribed to that train of thought, and I never will.

 

You know, barring the big difference in price ($6 vs $70), this reminds me of the people who would post years ago here (and elsewhere), saying that in order to get Diamond Select to make the Defiant and/or Voyager, we should buy every ship they put out. Hell, I even used to think along those lines once (never posted anything about it), but have thankfully come to my senses (albeit several constitution class Enterprises too late...).

Likewise, people saying over the last few years that if every trekkie buys TNG on blu-ray, they'll put DS9 on blu-ray, and if they all buy that, they'll put Voyager on blu-ray. No one should be forced to buy anything they don't want, in the hopes of getting something put out/made from it as a result. If that means the line/series dying as a result, then so be it. In reference to the DST ships, the rampant collecting of Eaglemoss' ships has proven to me that the market for toy starships is definitely there, as well as DST themselves reiterating via updates how their products in that line always sell really well. And as for DS9 etc getting remastered for HD, I'd say it's a certainty at some point for the simple fact of CBS not wanting parts of their 'crown jewel' franchise looking old and terrible on the latest 4k/UHD tvs.

This is all exactly the kind of stuff that Les Moonves was talking about when he said "the loyalty of Star Trek fans."

 

To be clear though, these are only my impressions and thoughts, and as always, I'd never try to enforce them on others. People can make their own minds up with stuff like this, but it would be nice to think that some consideration and thought was given before buying into stuff simply because it involves something you love.

 

EDIT: The editor made this post seem a lot smaller than how the forum presents it, so my apologies for that. To quote Sylvio from the Sopranos, "I've said my piece, Chrissy!", and I'm going to restrict myself to the toy threads for a while. Great discussion all the same. Important to realise that this is all discussion and argument, and nothing personal. :D



#60 robster

robster

    Will work for toys.

  • Members
  • 1,206 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Crapland....some call it Norway.

Posted 05 November 2015 - 01:50 PM

The comments I've read on various Trek sites and other general tv and movie sites have not been all celebratory. A LOT of negativity,hence my previous comments about Trek fans,lol! Only thing I post amongst all that negativity is this. You can piss and moan all you want,but in the end you KNOW you'll be watching it.

 

I look forward to it......while still sitting on my fence till I see ship designs and casting.

 

J-R!







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: star, trek, cbs, 2017, series

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users