TheMovieman

He also has some stinkers: The 5th Wave, Winter's Tale, Lost in Space and the gem of gems, Batman & Robin.

majorjoe23

Goldsman has two settings: schmaltz and crap. Losing Fuller but adding him does not excite me.

Double_Oh_7

And movies!

Double_Oh_7

You didn't mention Batman and Robin. I wonder why

PatD

You know, it would behoove Paramount to work with Netflix and get Star Trek: Discovery released via them: more people would see it and it could be the next "Stranger Things".

But, they're probably just going to release it and expect the public at large (I'm not talking about fans in general) to just pay for a pass to see it. This whole thing is a clusterfuck.

Jay G.

Paramount isn't producing the show, CBS TV Studios is. And CBS bought it, and want to run it on their streaming service. The only reason Netflix gets it in all the other regions is that CBS doesn't have a presence anywhere but the US.

PatD

Fine. CBS. But, I stand by what I say. They are in for a rude awakening if they think Joe and Jane Average are going to plunk down big cash for a monthly service to see a spin-off to a TV franchise that went off the air over 12 years ago. This isn't the mid-1980s and 90s and Star Trek isn't the pop culture powerhouse it used to be. I hate saying it, because I'm a died-in-the-wool HARDCORE Trek fan who used to think of it as a proxy-religion, but if I can see it, CBS should have the smarts to.

Jay G.

I'm pretty sure I posted previously in this thread a quote from someone at CBS explicitly stating that they expect the hardcore Trek fans to be the ones signing up for subscriptions. I don't think they necessarily care about the "average viewer," at least in regards to using this show to leverage more subscriptions.

Netflix went after some niche audiences early on too. They revived Arrested Development, a show that was cancelled on network TV specifically because the average viewer wasn't watching it, but which had a dedicated fanbase that likely would subscribe to a streaming service just to watch more.

Eric F

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

This show will be one of the most pirated shows of all time- right up there with GoT.

PatD

The people behind Star Trek: TNG were more ambitious and tried to make the series a household phenomenon--which it was (It was the only Trek series to get consistently high Neilsen ratings)...and they didn't do it by trying to court fans only. *shakes head*

Ultimately, it's just going to be a Battlestar Galactica knock-off with pointy ears. Bright, optimistic Trek is over with. I'll pass.

Jay G.

Actually, TNG was the first dramatic series to use first-run syndication. So Paramount Television (the owner and producer of Trek TV at the time) was definitely banking on Trek fans for this risky move:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadc...cated_programs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_T..._profitability

In both instances, the series popularity within a dedicated fanbase was used to leverage a new market. The difference is that for TNG, selling the show in syndication didn't explicitly exclude viewers; they just had to be within range of a station airing it. CBS All Access, in contrast, does put a larger constraint on access, since people have to opt-in via payment to watch. However, it's no more restrictive than when, say, Outer Limits was relaunched as a Showtime series.

Well, if you don't even think it'll be good and won't be watching it, I don't even know why you're complaining about the platform it's being released on.

Josh-da-man

TNG's first-run syndication probably benefited greatly from the number of independent stations and new Fox stations (most of which were probably indie stations to begin with) that were around in 1987. Most of these probably jumped at the chance to get first-run programming with a built-in cult audience to fill space on their schedules.

hdnmickey

Exactly. If this is going to be any good, I hope that they find a way to at least get it at least on some secondary cable channel at the minute rather than this subscription only business.


So he can regurgitate the same post even though it's complete bullshit. He even rags on the Abrams movies after admitting he has never watched them.

Shannon Nutt

Is Nick Meyer still involved? I can't find any mention of him in the latest stories about Fuller's exit.

PatD

I said I hadn't seen the 3rd one. I've seen the first 2 and they're garbage. I'm appalled (but not surprised) that they're the highest grossing Trek films. And you can take my prediction of the new series to the bank--they won't risk doing anything original or flies in the face of modern mainstream entertainment--like TOS did. They're going to copy the style and ethos of the last big SF show on television: in short, It's going to be a nuBSG knock-off--guaranteed.

Jay G.

I think you skipped a word, did you mean "at the last minute"?

And my point about Outer Limits on Showtime is that Showtime is a "subscription only business." For a while, the only way to watch that show was to subscribe to Showtime.

And CBS is also adding other exclusive shows to All Access, like Big Brother: Over the Top, and a Good Wife spinoff:
http://www.adweek.com/news/televisio...netflix-173246

The main point is, while it may restrict the viewership more than if it was on a network or another streaming service, that doesn't mean it's a bad business move on CBS's part.

I mean, it's worked for HBO. Tons of people subscribe to HBO just for Game of Thrones, and often just for the two months that airs.

Not really. You're coming off as incredibly biased against the new show, with little in terms of rationale for your opinion. You don't like the new movies, which is fine, and I would say avoiding the third film if you didn't like the first two is reasonable. However, the show is being produced by a different team than the movies are, so there's reason to think they'll be different from them.

hdnmickey

Yes. Thank-you.

Personally I don't find this new CBS option at all comparable to HBO and Showtime.

Jay G.

I think it's mostly because CBS All Access is composed of, primarily, shows that air, or have aired, on CBS. People find it distasteful because it seems to be trying to monetize stuff other networks either give for free (last few aired episodes), or let other streaming services (Hulu, Netflix, Amazon) stream (older seasons of shows).

There's also the idea that it's late the game, and that people are more inclined to look favorably to a show being exclusive to a service they already subscribe to (Netflix) than a new one they currently aren't subscribed to, even though either way you have to pay to view.

So it's a combination of CBS All Access not currently being that popular, and not having much of value besides CBS shows.

It's a bit like how gamers got upset when EA started making their games exclusive to their Origin service instead of being available on the much more popular Steam anymore. Technically, they're both online stores, and competition is good, but it felt unfair to some that EA would attempt to use its properties to leverage adoption of a competing service, especially after so many had already heavily bought into the Steam ecosystem.

DJariya

http://www.startrek.com/article/disc...ssion-new-york

As of early September he said he still was.

DJariya

I gave some of the most recent examples of his credits. Batman and Robin was almost 20 years ago.

In the TV forum he was known for his work on Fringe.

Do you always have to be such an annoying Internet tough guy on this board?

Shannon Nutt

His recent work includes The 5th Wave and Insurgent...so, you know, pretty middling, at best. The bottom line here is that Trek should be run by people who know Trek.

The biggest issue, from what I hear, is that the "brass" at both Paramount and CBS these days is that there's no one around who understands Star Trek or knows what to do with it.

They really need to scrap this and start from scratch...it sounds like it's a huge mess right now and a show like Star Trek need one or two people running things with a clear vision of where to take things.

Deftones

They had that guy but he just left....

DJariya

Well, let's see. A few names off the top of my head:

Rick Berman - Hasn't worked in 11 years

Ronald Moore - Contracted with Sony and is Outlander's showrunner.

Manny Coto - 24: Legacy's showrunner

Brannon Braga - Salem's showrunner

Michael Piller - Dead

Ivan Steven Behr - Currently working with Moore on Outlander


Not a lot of options.

Nick Meyer is still on the writing staff and the 2 co-showrunners right now worked under Fuller in his previous projects. I don't know if they know squat about Star Trek, but Fuller seems to be confident in them.

I'm not trying to defend this project, because I think for such an ambitious show and a huge name to live up to, they've been pretty lackadaisical getting the ball rolling. It's the end of October and still no cast announcements yet. And this is supposed to be ready to air by May?

Shannon Nutt

Nick Meyer is one they certainly should have considered for showrunner.

Also:

Jonathan Frakes
Tracy Torme
Rene Echevarria
Phyllis Strong

There are some decent choices out there.

DWilson

Speaking of show-runners past and present, fans of "Trek" should read "The Fifty Year Mission" by Edward Gross & Mark A. Altman, a 2-volume set that provides an "oral history" of all versions of "Star Trek" over the years. I just finished Volume Two, which provides fascinating detail on all the struggles behind the scenes on all of the spin-offs of the original series. It's amazing how contentious each and every one of those series were.