General Star Trek thread

368100

Spon Farmer wrote: »

It would be a shame if the old crew weren't back as the main cast.

I don't want them to be a crew again - Riker has his own command now and the other should also have gone their separate ways - but it should definitely be a "TNG 2.0".

I think that ship has sailed :-)

Spon Farmer

368100 wrote: »

I think that ship has sailed :-)

Why do you say that?

368100

Spon Farmer wrote: »

Why do you say that?

As much as I would personally watch it for Nostalgia, I think they're all too old at this stage, especially given what tv networks are looking for these days.

An older Picard is one thing but all the crew back for TNG 2.0 I dont think would be appealing enough to what they'd be looking for. Might have worked after Nemesis but I think its too late now. I might be wrong, just my opinion.

Spon Farmer

368100 wrote: »

As much as I would personally watch it for Nostalgia, I think they're all too old at this stage, especially given what tv networks are looking for these days.

An older Picard is one thing but all the crew back for TNG 2.0 I dont think would be appealing enough to what they'd be looking for. Might have worked after Nemesis but I think its too late now. I might be wrong, just my opinion.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

What has their age got to do with it? And what are "TV networks looking for these days" that makes it so different to what they wanted in the past?

Evade

All the crew back in essentially their old positions is a terrible idea, it was bad enough that Riker didn't accept his own ship until almost fifteen years after the first offer, but "where are they now?" cameos is something I'd like to see.

368100

Spon Farmer wrote: »

That makes no sense whatsoever.

What has their age got to do with it? And what are "TV networks looking for these days" that makes it so different to what they wanted in the past?

Calm down, as I said its just my opinion. Makes perfect sense to me, dont know why it doesnt for you but then I dont really care enough to worry about it.

As for what are networks looking for, look at most of the series being commissioned, fit, young, goodlooking cast to appeal to younger generation.

I think its clear CBS dont really care what trekkies think or want, over attacting a more general audience.
If you cant see a big shift in types of series getting commissioned these days compared to the 80s and early 90s then I dont know what to say...you must have been caught in the nexus ribbon.

Spon Farmer

Evade wrote: »

All the crew back in essentially their old positions is a terrible idea, it was bad enough that Riker didn't accept his own ship until almost fifteen years after the first offer, but "where are they now?" cameos is something I'd like to see.

As I said above I wouldn't want them to be a crew again but there are plenty of stories to be told that can reunite them.

Spon Farmer

368100 wrote: »

Calm down, as I said its just my opinion. Makes perfect sense to me, dont know why it doesnt for you but then I dont really care enough to worry about it.

Who isn't being calm? All I said was that your comment made no sense - just because we disagree doesn't mean one of us is jumping up and down is a fit.

368100 wrote: »

As for what are networks looking for, look at most of the series being commissioned, fit, young, goodlooking cast to appeal to younger generation.

The "young, fit, etc." is what most Tv and movie executives have always looked for - it isn't a recent trend.

None of that means the suits and creatives involved can't see the potential of a reunion of these characters.

368100 wrote: »

I think its clear CBS dont really care what trekkies think or want, over attacting a more general audience.
If you cant see a big shift in types of series getting commissioned these days compared to the 80s and early 90s then I dont know what to say...you must have been caught in the nexus ribbon.

Trekkies alone cannot keep the franchise alive. It needs that general, casual audience too just like Star Wars, Bond, etc. - that is here most of the money probably is.

Of course TV shows are different today - in en years they'll probity be different again. That still has no relevance to Frakes, Spiner, etc. returning to their roles. Not everyone acting role is taken by "young wans".

368100

I think accusing me of "making no sense whatsoever" was enough to for me to make that comment. Maybe made no sense to you whatsover, so if you need it explained it line by line ill try and simplify it.

I made a simple statement that IN MY OPINION they are too old for a TNG 2.0 and there wouldnt be much interest from the networks to commission it. It only takes a browse through this thread and other forums off site to see my OPINION is shared by others though I also said I may be wrong.

If you can't accept someone else's opinion is different to yours maybe boards isn't the place to be.

Rawr

A short while back on a review channel I sometimes watch, they made up a potential idea for a Picard Trek show, and "reviewed" it. The idea they came up with sounded awesome.

They imagine a story where an elder Picard and LaForge mentor a new batch of cadets (ala Wrath of Khan) aboard an old Galaxy Class ship, which has been converted into a training vessel.

Due to various things happening, the ship is hurled into deep space, killing most of the commissioned crew, and leaving the two elder officers to lead these kids into becoming a proper crew, to get back home. The show would mostly focus on the young crew and how they cope with their new situation. Our nostaglia buttons would be pressed by having some TNG crew there, and the familar surroundings of a Galaxy Class ship.

Here's the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe1hKZjCVyM

I really do like the idea, but somehow I doubt CBS doing it (we wouldn't be that lucky). However I do get the feeling that any new Picard show might simply have Patrick Steward in a supporting roll, with the main cast being made up of younger actors. Picard might just be some kind of "wise old man" who offers advice.

Spon Farmer

368100 wrote: »

I think accusing me of "making no sense whatsoever" was enough to for me to make that comment. Maybe made no sense to you whatsover, so if you need it explained it line by line ill try and simplify it.

I made a simple statement that IN MY OPINION they are too old for a TNG 2.0 and there wouldnt be much interest from the networks to commission it. It only takes a browse through this thread and other forums off site to see my OPINION is shared by others though I also said I may be wrong.

If you can't accept someone else's opinion is different to yours maybe boards isn't the place to be.

I now it can be difficult to judge a situation based on text messages but you are making mighty leaps to conclusions think that comment w a sign of emotional distress. It is ironic because now I'm thinking you are upset.

Why are you turning on the caps locks to mention the word opinion?

Of course your comments are your opinion. What else would they be? I never said it wasn't your opinion or that you weren't entitled to your opinion. As to not "not accepting your opinion" - this is a discussion forum and people disagreeing with you is going to happen. You even said yourself that your opinion might be wrong so I don't know why you are getting so upset at someone who thinks yo are wrong.

Spon Farmer

Rawr wrote: »

I really do like the idea, but somehow I doubt CBS doing it (we wouldn't be that lucky). However I do get the feeling that any new Picard show might simply have Patrick Steward in a supporting roll, with the main cast being made up of younger actors. Picard might just be some kind of "wise old man" who offers advice.

No, they have made a big deal of it being the return of Picard and there is a photo of him at a meeting with the writer's - if Stewart is involved in developing the story/stories then this is no "passing the torch" type of situation.

368100

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I now it can be difficult to judge a situation based on text messages but you are making mighty leaps to conclusions think that comment w a sign of emotional distress. It is ironic because now I'm thinking you are upset.

Why are you turning on the caps locks to mention the word opinion?

Of course your comments are your opinion. What else would they be? I never said it wasn't your opinion or that you weren't entitled to your opinion. As to not "not accepting your opinion" - this is a discussion forum and people disagreeing with you is going to happen. You even said yourself that your opinion might be wrong so I don't know why you are getting so upset at someone who thinks yo are wrong.

I don't think theres any point continuing this discussion.

Spon Farmer

368100 wrote: »

I don't think theres any point continuing this discussion.

There actually is a point to continuing, but if you don't want to that is okay.

Justin Credible Darts

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I just read that Dorn said he doesn't want to sit through the make up process for any sort of cameo.

Wouldn't blame him.

unlikely thats the reason.
Dorn pushed for his own show for years, so putting on the make up was not an issue.
More likely he does not want a cameo out of fear it would kill any slim chance of his own show

AMKC

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

unlikely thats the reason.
Dorn pushed for his own show for years, so putting on the make up was not an issue.
More likely he does not want a cameo out of fear it would kill any slim chance of his own show

No he has said there is no point in doing it just for a cameo. Four hours in the chair for maybe 10 seconds on screen. Can't blame him.
I do think he should push for his own show now as now is the time to do it. Also it would be cool if his show could somehow link with Picard's show maybe a crossover episode or something.

Inviere

Worf is never getting his own show, I don't see it anyway.

coffee_cake

The "i am not a merry man" show

pixelburp

Without googling further, I vaguely recall a rumour around Dorn cameoing on Discovery as an ancestor of Worf, but nobody could agree on a fee, the actor supposedly asking too much for a small appearance.

Wise Old Elf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKdohNSnLtw

Inviere

bluewolf wrote: »

The "i am not a merry man" show

By some accounts Dorn isn't a very merry man at all. He'd do well to remember what made him famous.

pixelburp

Looks like the latest rumour suggests Michelle Yeoh's Georghiu is to get her own show; no details if it's our timeline or the Mirror version / section 31. I'd suspect the latter.

Kirby

Michelle Yeoh can't act. In English anyway. Her delivery is just awful and any trek tv show is going to be dialogue heavy which just highlights her deficiencies ever further.

Honestly, I don't get the appeal. Am I alone here? Does everyone else love her?

Rawr

Kirby wrote: »

Michelle Yeoh can't act. In English anyway. Her delivery is just awful and any trek tv show is going to be dialogue heavy which just highlights her deficiencies ever further.

Honestly, I don't get the appeal. Am I alone here? Does everyone else love her?

I kind of liked her as a regular Starfleet Captain. Although I tend to like the idea of any Captain that goes beyond the default North American accent. However as "Evil Queen Lady Evil-ton", she kind of chewed up the scenery...and not in a good way.

I hope this rumoured show is not a Mirror Universe show. The Mirror Universe is fun in short bursts, but over-exposure could easily ruin that (Like with Voyager did to the Borg).

A Section 31 show might have some interesting ideas with wrestling morals verses the safety of the Federation. However if they make the same mistake as STD and focus on one character (Yeoh this time) it might not be that good either.

Either way, they'll need to do a good job. Rumors are that CBS don't have the cash available for too many more expensive screw ups (like reshooting a chunk of Season 2 because it tested badly)

pixelburp

Wait, Season 2 tested badly and had reshoots? When was this, haven't read anything about that ... I had quite liked what I'd seen so far in trailers

Rawr

pixelburp wrote: »

Wait, Season 2 tested badly and had reshoots? When was this, haven't read anything about that ... I had quite liked what I'd seen so far in trailers

I forget that source (and of course much of this might not even be true), but one of the YouTube rumor mills I occasionally listen into mentioned a bit of drama revolving around the Star Trek "Short Trek" shorts and CBS's attempts to sell them to Netflix.

All from Rumor:

The "Short Treks" are being released as a bonus to anyone subscribed to CBS All Access. It turns out that CBS simply couldn't afford to release the shorts for free (as a promo for Season 2) and that income from All Access isn't as high as expected. Netflix had paid for international distribution of Season 1, which more or less paid for Season 1 entirely.

Netflix felt burned by the viewer response to STD, and are not taking that risk again, so now CBS need to pay for Season 2 themselves. So cash is now very tight at CBS. After shooting several episodes, they tested them and audiences responded badly. So badly, that they ended up reshooting a large chunk of the Second season to correct some problems, and thus increasing their costs and draining their limited budget.

Apparntly in despiration to get cash for the production, CBS approached Netflix with an offer to sell the "Short Treks" to them for $40 mill.
Netflix refused.
CBS then went down to $35 mill.
Netflix refused again.
CBS when down to $20 mill.
Netflix still refused.

In the end they sold the Short Treks to another SciFi streaming service (I forget which) for that $20 mill.

My guess is that Netflix might of expected the Short Treks for free (or included with Season2), given that they bankrolled Season 1, and just weren't going to pay more for it.

So those are the rumors I've heard. They might not be true...but if so, CBS will need to not screw up with STD or any of the addition shows (Including the Picard show).

Goodshape

Hm, can't find anything at all from Google searching "discovery season 2 reshoots" and saying that CBS have been forced to finance season two themselves – or that it's causing them to run short on cash – would contradict other reports that Netflix have a deal for "as many as five seasons" already. Regardless of whether it's a five season deal, they're certainly showing season two in January so it'd only make sense that they've paid their way for that.

And given the money they're reportedly paying for a season, I can see why they'd not jump at the chance to pay even more for a few loosely-connected shorts / promos.

I can also understand why CBS might be panicking a bit about their own 2nd rate streaming service, even if Discovery is "paid for".


And sure, Netflix are (assuming they are) bank rolling the production, but they also get to air the show as a "Netflix Original" in every single territory bar the USA and Canada. On the flipside, CBS may have their production costs covered by the deal, but they've still got an entirely new service to build, promote, and encourage people to subscribe to.

pixelburp

Yeah, I've seen nothing about reshoots for Season 2: and given the zeal with which Season 1's various chaotic developments were reported, there's no way a repeat would have been missed by outlets. There were those 'Short Treks' that are clearly recycling sets from the Discovery itself, so maybe that's where the rumour grew. Talk of Mary Wiseman being on the Discovery set was bound to cause some confusion.

AtomicHorror

Rawr wrote: »

I forget that source (and of course much of this might not even be true), but one of the YouTube rumor mills I occasionally listen into mentioned a bit of drama revolving around the Star Trek "Short Trek" shorts and CBS's attempts to sell them to Netflix.

All from Rumor:

The "Short Treks" are being released as a bonus to anyone subscribed to CBS All Access. It turns out that CBS simply couldn't afford to release the shorts for free (as a promo for Season 2) and that income from All Access isn't as high as expected. Netflix had paid for international distribution of Season 1, which more or less paid for Season 1 entirely.

Netflix felt burned by the viewer response to STD, and are not taking that risk again, so now CBS need to pay for Season 2 themselves. So cash is now very tight at CBS. After shooting several episodes, they tested them and audiences responded badly. So badly, that they ended up reshooting a large chunk of the Second season to correct some problems, and thus increasing their costs and draining their limited budget.

Apparntly in despiration to get cash for the production, CBS approached Netflix with an offer to sell the "Short Treks" to them for $40 mill.
Netflix refused.
CBS then went down to $35 mill.
Netflix refused again.
CBS when down to $20 mill.
Netflix still refused.

In the end they sold the Short Treks to another SciFi streaming service (I forget which) for that $20 mill.

My guess is that Netflix might of expected the Short Treks for free (or included with Season2), given that they bankrolled Season 1, and just weren't going to pay more for it.

So those are the rumors I've heard. They might not be true...but if so, CBS will need to not screw up with STD or any of the addition shows (Including the Picard show).

Any chance these rumours are originating from Midnight's Edge?

pixelburp

It does smell very Midnight's Edge all right - has any of their speculation ever turned out to be true, beyond as a Stopped Clock?