Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

Star Trek News and Rumours

14567810»

Posts

  • P5ych0p4thP5ych0p4th444 GermanyPosts: 335Member
    @Freak ... while I think, Voyager would be better regarded from a story standpoint, had they leaned more into their concept, I don’t think, it would have been the relative success that it was. While I can’t be sure, I believe, it would/should have gone the Stargate Universe route. And while I like that show and it would have probably gotten a third season were it not for the financial crisis ... most “fans” had long abandoned ship by the end of the second season. To this day a lot of Stargate fans hate that show simply because it’s different. And it’s the same with Trek. While objectively DS9 ist the superior show, it’s nowhere near as beloved as Voyager which gave fans pretty much more of the same.

    So ironically ... a better Voyager show might have actually been less successful.

    So in a way I applaud CBS for not just doing “more Trek” and taking risks by disregarding past formulae. It’s just that they’re doing it really really bad.
  • markmasseymarkmassey393 StaffordshirePosts: 521Member
    I think SGU would have had a better reception if it had ran alongside Atlantis for a couple of seasons... I think a lot of fans turned on it because they thought Atlantis had been cancelled to make way for stargate/battlestar galactica, only not as good... I have to say though that for me SGU is my favorite of the 3 shows.. But its a warning to established franchises that when you drastically change the format and tone of a show... you're risking not bringing the fans with you, especially when you're hostile to them like the stargate writers were.. I'm not sure DS9 would have lasted if they'd ended TNG and launched the show form there... It was allowed to marinade under the shadow of TNG and find its own feet, only to be overshadowed by voyager haha... now I'm sure there are a lot of trek fans who still don't care for DS9 but i think it's proved its point in the long run....

    I'm not sure I'd agree that a better voyager series would have been less successful.. I mean I totally get what you're saying @P5ych0p4th.. if they made voyager a few years later I doubt that it would have been allowed to limp along for seven seasons... i don't think voyager is more beloved because its more of the same self contained "safer" episodes... it's just on a ship.. and that's what people watch star trek for? "mostly" I don't think that having poor harry kim promoted a few times throughout the seasons would have done any harm to viewer numbers, or some deeper stories involving the cast, or doing that bloody year of hell season (what were they thinking)..... but we all know how the show was ran..

    but i know from my kids who will just sit and watch a tng or voyager episodes and skip ds9.. that there is something captivating about watching people on a ship exploring space.... so i can understand why ds9 is overlooked... even though its the one that raises everything up haha...

    I think we can all agree that none of us want trek to just go back and copy and paste the tos/tng style.... that's just how shows were in the 80's and 90's.. I just want good scif on a ship (or station, or anywhere) with a cast that I enjoy watching..... Again I don't see how that's so difficult? and again here i am crying about star trek hahahaha...!!!!!!!!!! grrrrr !!!!!!

    P5ych0p4th
  • FreakFreak1073 Posts: 4,345Member
    edited December 2020 #274
    Voyager was not that successful when it came out compared to past Trek (I think it was doing a little better than DS9 in rating but then that was due to how Trek was being broadcasted in the States at the time. Both shows where in syndication and the station that aired them did not always air them in order. This made watching DS9 harder to follow with it continues story, instead of story of the week that you got from other Star Trek shows.), but Voyager was doing better than most show on at the time in rating. I'll admit that I stopped watching Voyager during Season 5, because it was not giving me anything new. (I have since watched all of it multiple times.)
    With the exception that it was getting a little tired for me, the one thing that really bugged the hell out me about the show was each week something happen. The ship was damaged or what not and then the following week we see the ship look like it just come out of Spacedock brand new.
    But it was Berman that wanted that. Paramount had not yet bought CBS so no interference form them yet.

    I know your more of a Voyager fan than DS9, but I would say like Voyager. They are equally loved, But being a DS9 fan I would say it more beloved.
    The only real way to answer which is beloved more is to do a poll.
    Since both shows have gone off the air, they have gain more fans though streaming sites. (A lot fans that did not like DS9 first time round due to the way it aired have come round to liking it. Because they can now follow the story as it was meant to be told.)
    We all know Voyager is the most popular Trek show on Netflix last year, but did you know DS9 is a close second with a difference of views being in the hundreds and not thousands.

    If Voyager had the same formula in Story as DS9. Your right it might not have been as successful. But again that down to how the show was aired back then. Just look at Ronald D Moore, BSG. Massive success so if it was shown right Voyager in this style of story telling could have been bigger than it was.
    I also think SG:U is a bad example. Yeah it very different to SG-1 and SG:A, but it was a more personal story about the crew, it was also a show ahead of it time. I though the first season was plain bad and almost stopped watching because, if you remove the Stargate it was not Stargate show. But by the second season they started to put those elements that made SG-1 and SG:A so loved back in and retain the original show premises and it got much better. Unfortunately it was too late for the show.

    As for CBS involvement it has been bad from the start. First they never pick up TOS when Roddenberry went to them. (It originally aired on NBC.)
    Then after Viacom had bought CBS and started moving it Paramount TV wing over to them, they started to interfere with Enterprise. So we never got the show it was meant to be. I think that show would have be accepted more if CBS did not interfere from the start. When they finally did stop interfering, Enterprise started to get better, but alas Berman and Moonves had a falling out and Enterprise became the causality from that.
    CBS has never been good for Trek. The deal with Bad Robot, which brought Secret Hideout to make current Trek show. Not having anyone from classic Trek involved is another huge mistake.

    Before you say, But they had Bryan Fuller and Nicholas Meyer involved with Discovery. Have you ever wonder way they where let go?
    They were let go because of the deal CBS had made with Paramount and Bad Robot. Part of that deal was that CBS could not make a Star Trek show for ten years after Star Trek 09 has come out. Something they did not care about at the time as they had no plans to make more Star Trek Shows.
    When did CBS announce Discovery?
    2016, which meant they were in breach of contact. Given that JJ had given up on Trek, he handed it over to Kurtzman and Secret Hideout. CBS was not going to drop Discovery, because they needed it for their streaming service. So instead of continuing to be in breach of contract, Kurtzman step in and the first thing he did was fire Brian Fuller and Nicholas Meyer. But instead of starting from scratch as he now had a deadline to have the show out, he bastedised what they had done. (This is why Fuller name is on the show as co-creator. He hates that fact, but happy accepted the check that come in post each month because of it.)
    It should also be noted that since Secret Hideout has taken over Star Trek, nothing has meet it deadline and everything has been over budget.

    In sort everything currently wrong with Trek is down to CBS. But thankfully Viacom has now remerged and Shari Redstone has personally hire Emma Watson to sort Trek out. Will she?
    Only time will tell.

    Post edited by Freak on
  • admiral hortonadmiral horton190 Posts: 122Member
    What i am going to say will get alot of heat, but I have to say it.
    Star trek must be taken put of the hand of CBS. They r purposely doing everything they can to drive the long time trek fans away. I say that because virtually everything thing they do is a slap in the face to trek fans, JJ, DSC, Picard. They r wanting I believe to run Star Trek so far into the ground that nothing can revive it. If they want Star Trek to be a money maker that DSC, and Picard (Picard being the not a slap but a punch to the face) must be declared alternative timeline like to crap JJ brought out and get Star Trek back to the days of TNG, DS9, VOY, and put some money into it. Paramount, and CBS want Star Trek to make money, but dont want to put any money into the shows and movies, what do u think is going to happen when u cant make a good show, or movie, without spending money to make it. Star Trek must be brought by someone or company that loves and respects the franchise and make shows and movies the fans want to see. Listen to the fan and it will be a money maker.
    FreakpsCargile
  • P5ych0p4thP5ych0p4th444 GermanyPosts: 335Member
    @admiral horton ... I don’t think, that’s a very controversial opinion here 😁
  • markmasseymarkmassey393 StaffordshirePosts: 521Member
    one thing you can't say about new trek is that it's cheap.... well the budgets any way.... lol
  • FreakFreak1073 Posts: 4,345Member
    No it not cheap, but the money is not being spent on the show. It's going to the producers.
    I have never seen a show with 23 producer until this one.
  • P5ych0p4thP5ych0p4th444 GermanyPosts: 335Member
    Freak wrote: »
    No it not cheap, but the money is not being spent on the show. It's going to the producers.
    I have never seen a show with 23 producer until this one.

    I wouldn’t even say that, @Freak ... say what you will about Discovery for example, but all that money does end up on screen. Especially the new season has some gorgeous shots. My main problem is the writing. But that’s not something you can easily fix with money.

    @markmassey ... as you say, I don’t know, if Picard IS cheap, but g sure looks like it. I was shocked, how bad it looked in parts. The cheap looking costumes, the uninspired production design, the props, that look like toys. Even the cgi lay bad in parts. I’ve seen plenty of ships on this side, that were of a way higher quality than that fleets at the end.
  • FreakFreak1073 Posts: 4,345Member
    edited December 2020 #280
    @P5ych0p4th, have to disagree. Being and producer or EP get you a lot of cheddar and that comes from the Budget. With having 23 producers that a huge chunk of change that taken from the budget.
    Now the reason it looks good is because of the first season. Netflix payed for it and they got that cinematic look. Kurtzman also changed the camera they where using to help in this for season two. So that huge pay out for the producer was not an issue at first.

    However each season the budget has been cut, and it really showing in Season 3. We been to Earth and all we got were VFX shots made for Picard with a few changes. (The Tree.) but with the cast, all we saw was them in the garden with a huge tree.
    We go to Trill, instead of using the Matt Painting we saw in DS9 we see nothing of the planet surface itself except for another garden and the cave where the symbionts lived. (Though I have to admit that the cave did look very similar to the one seen in DS9. But that would not have been expensive to produced.)
    Then we go to Vulcan or whatever it call now and instead of seeing anything new or interesting about Vulcan. Everything takes place on the Discovery, on sets we have seen before.
    They could have very easily done something on Vulcan with a bit of green screen. Below is a test shot for Axanar feature film that was never made due to the law suit. It was Directed by Robert Mayer Burnett and was done in a parking lot with green screen. FX was done by old Scfi-Meshes Member Tobias Richter. This was also done with a fraction of the budget that Discovery has.



    They could very easily give us something new and different and carry on world building the Star Trek Universe. But they don't because the producers are taking a huge cut of the budget and therefore it not being shown on screen.
    Post edited by Freak on
  • admiral hortonadmiral horton190 Posts: 122Member
    P5ych0p4th wrote: »
    @admiral horton ... I don’t think, that’s a very controversial opinion here 😁

    Well its good to see some half sane people here
    (I say half sane because we r all crazy it justs depends on what level you r at) :)
  • GuerrillaGuerrilla521 HelsinkiPosts: 2,723Administrator
    Star Trek: Lower Decks will finally be available internationally on Amazon Prime Video on January 22

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/amazon-beams-up-star-trek-lower-decks-animated-series-for-multiple-territories
    Comco: i entered it manually in the back end
    Join our fancy Discord Server!
  • FreakFreak1073 Posts: 4,345Member
    I have already seen it, so won't be seeing on Prime. It not great Trek, but it still better than any of the live action crap coming out of Secret Hideout.

    The other day I heard a Rumour that Discovery, Picard and Lower Decks are coming to Netflix in the US at some point in early 2021.
    My response to that was.
    Why would they do that? CBSAA is getting rebranded as Paramount Plus and current Trek is there flagship franchise. So why would they make a deal for it to go on Netflix on the States?
    It make no scene, if they stuck everything there, there is not incentive for people subscribe to Paramount Plus. (Not that current Trek is much incentive to sign up.) So I take this Rumour as Fake, especially given Netflix dose not want anything to do with Current Trek.
    @Guerrilla post above is a prime example of that. Remember Netflix get first choice on any new Trek shows and they passed on Picard and Lower Decks. I also won't be surprise if Amazon got it for Peanuts and nowhere near what CBS originally wanted to sell it for.
  • markmasseymarkmassey393 StaffordshirePosts: 521Member
    no no no..... i cant read... i've not watched them yet i made the mistake of starting a full re watch last week.... half way through season 2......... torturing myself haha
  • GuerrillaGuerrilla521 HelsinkiPosts: 2,723Administrator
    Freak wrote: »
    @Guerrilla post above is a prime example of that. Remember Netflix get first choice on any new Trek shows and they passed on Picard and Lower Decks. I also won't be surprise if Amazon got it for Peanuts and nowhere near what CBS originally wanted to sell it for.

    An Amazon... Prime example? :D

    ... :|

    I'm just glad we're getting Lower Decks over here. :tongue:

    Comco: i entered it manually in the back end
    Join our fancy Discord Server!
Sign In or Register to comment.