MisterPL

This vastly different take on Star Trek has got me thinking though... has Star Trek succeeded where Star Wars has failed?

Where exactly has Star Wars failed compared to Star Trek?

Lucas was always reluctant to put Star Wars on TV because he didn't want it turning into Star Trek but that didn't keep him from producing Star Wars TV films or the acclaimed animated series The Clone Wars. Disney followed that up with Rebels, featuring a new cast of characters with cameos from film characters. Rogue One proved they could do the same successfully with a live-action feature film. Even Star Wars had Quark and Spaceballs long before Trek had Galaxy Quest and The Orville.

So I'm a little unclear where Star Wars has failed, especially when it was Lucas' success at the box office that convinced Paramount's execs to turn Phase II into TMP.

I saw they have the Twilight Zone too... Love TZ. 

 

I have to admit I'm a bit confused at some of their catalog... for example... they have Cheers... and I always thought that was NBC... of course thats where Star Trek was originally too... so I suppose they sell/swap content.

That confused me at first, too, but it's not about what network it's on. It's about who produced it.

For example, Cheers was produced by Paramount. So I'm guessing the lineup at CBS All Access looks a little like this:

https://en.wikipedia...ount_Television

Also what happens when all the Star Trek fans cancel their subscription when the season ends.

This is why CBS has another rumored Star Trek project waiting in the wings. As HBO learned with Game of Thrones, you gotta hook viewers with new, original content. Plenty of Trek fans watch other stuff, too, but for those solely interested in new Trek, they'll need something on the other side of the calendar to keep subscribers from bolting.

If all this new show accomplishes is to separate Trekkies from prejudiced posers, I'm all for it.

Hey, at least it doesn't look like an Apple store, am I right?

8) TVMA: whatever has pushed it into this rating has me worried - Wile Trek is cerebral and 'grown up' - it was optimistic and family friendly - to loose that would be such a shame.

That rating might be more a sign of the times. Beetlejuice drops an F-bomb but his film got a PG rating from the MPAA back in 1988. We've gotten a bit more... sensitive lately.

I'm so glad none of the naysayers here are doctors. They wouldn't even fully examine the patient to pronounce him dead. 

Seriously, Trekkies have no idea what they want. The fandom is a far cry from a hive mind, that's for sure. Some of you even contradict yourselves. I don't envy the powers that be.

Believe it or not, all these characters are human except one. (He's only half human.)

That's a really cool pizza cutter.

(There we go with the Game of Thrones analogy...  )

What exactly in that trailer made you think, Whoa! This is Game of Thrones in a Star Trek packaging? Because I've seen plenty of both properties and I'm not seeing anything in that trailer that reminded me of that HBO series.

Again, if a Trekkie can't see any recognizable elements of Star Trek in that trailer, they're blinding themselves to it. 

And if anyone really expects the entire season – or even the first episode – to be laid bare in a two-and-a-half-minute trailer, people really need to manage their expectations.

 Sadly for Star Trek though, I'm not sure I did see much in the way of Star Trek in that trailer?

Yeah, except for the flip-up communicator, the transporter, Starfleet Command, that starship, its bridge screen and voice activated "Computer," the delta badges, the Vulcan guy, Klingons, photon torpedoes, the mention of Kirk, Spock, and the Enterprise, the title of the show and the 50-year-old Alexander Courage theme, I didn't see much in the way of Star Trek in that trailer either.

Seriously, I think Trekkies have become desensitized to the most recognizable tropes of the franchise. In the past (with Enterprise Star Trek: Enterprise, for example), marketing treated the property as if it was something that needed to be flown under the radar in order to reach beyond the geeks and to a larger audience.

These days they're not being stealthy about it at all. They're not selling it as a really hip sci-fi show that happens to be Star Trek. They're selling it as a really hip Star Trek show.

Optimism!   

MINIMATES.

My biggest problem with canon is when it's misspelled "cannon."

As long as the pornography matches the aesthetic of the original series, I'm all for it. 

I am not trying to start any big debate about homosexuality,but homosexuality in Star Trek makes me think of episodes of TOS and TNG where the Enterprise crew encountered planets where the inhabitants had adopted practices that had either already destroyed themselves or had doomed themselves to being a part of a dying race. Without judging homosexuality on its moral standing,but looking at it from a biological standpoint, if everyone on Earth adopted homosexuality today, there would be no further generations and the people of Earth would disappear after the last inhabitant died off from our current population. Does this seem like a positive practice that Star Trek should embrace?

Sure.

Try to think of homosexuality as a way for nature to control overpopulation, not a "practice." That implies a choice. We're not talking about political ideologies ("Patterns of Force"). People aren't born Nazis the way they're born heterosexual or homosexual or asexual, et al.