ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Which Trek Universe Will CBS Do

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 10:27 am

Which Trek Universe do you think CBS will choose if they do another Trek TV Series.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 10:32 am

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:30 am)
Prime.

They own it.

They wouldn't have to deal with Paramount to use it.

They have the whole history of Star Trek to draw on.

If they could use the elements of the 24th century spoken of in the movie that would be good as a start, but it wouldn't be a neccessity.

:logical:

They could start from scratch with Abrams Universe and wouldn't have to keep track of all the previous canon.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 10:47 am

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:43 am)
Quote (TrekFan1701E @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:32 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:30 am)
Prime.

They own it.

They wouldn't have to deal with Paramount to use it.

They have the whole history of Star Trek to draw on.

If they could use the elements of the 24th century spoken of in the movie that would be good as a start, but it wouldn't be a neccessity.

:logical:

They could start from scratch with Abrams Universe and wouldn't have to keep track of all the previous canon.

If they were to start from scratch they'd do their own new ¿universe.

CBS is not going to want to pay Paramount for anything if they don't have to. They want Paramount to keep paying them for using the Trek characters.

That's why I wonder if the 24th century parts of the movie belong to CBS by default since they occur in the prime timeline.

:logical:

That's an interesting thought SB63. CBS could start Trek from scratch also. Would that be a good move?

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 11:05 am

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 11:03 am)
Quote (TrekFan1701E @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:47 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:43 am)
Quote (TrekFan1701E @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:32 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:30 am)
Prime.

They own it.

They wouldn't have to deal with Paramount to use it.

They have the whole history of Star Trek to draw on.

If they could use the elements of the 24th century spoken of in the movie that would be good as a start, but it wouldn't be a neccessity.

:logical:

They could start from scratch with Abrams Universe and wouldn't have to keep track of all the previous canon.

If they were to start from scratch they'd do their own new ?universe.

CBS is not going to want to pay Paramount for anything if they don't have to. They want Paramount to keep paying them for using the Trek characters.

That's why I wonder if the 24th century parts of the movie belong to CBS by default since they occur in the prime timeline.

:logical:

That's an interesting thought SB63. CBS could start Trek from scratch also. Would that be a good move?

Why not? It was a good move for Paramount...

I however would rather continue to build on what has gone before.

:logical:

I wonder how CBS could start Trek TV from scratch? Begin at the begining of the 24th Century? Or right when the Federation was formed?

fooledagain

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 878

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 10:25 pm

If they do a new television show it will be based on what can make the most money. That means that it will be Abrams Trek. CBS/ Paramount are parts of a larger entity. Corporate accounting says do what makes the money.

If the market research turns up enough interest among the right demographic then a Trek series will be the next Abrams effort after the end (finally, thank god) of "Lost." The chance of original trek characters and stories outside of novels is slim at best.

fooledagain

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 878

Report this Jan. 05 2010, 10:58 pm

Quote (GHOSTREK @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:48 pm)
Alternate woud just slap a cross the face to jj abrams ¿and thay don't sacle of the ship rigths ¿if ¿alt ncc-1701 is the same size of ¿the prime ncc-1701-e ¿some one din't do there homeworked

I like beer too.

fooledagain

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 878

Report this Jan. 06 2010, 12:04 am

Quote (GHOSTREK @ Jan. 05 2010, 11:13 pm)
Quote (fooledagain @ Jan. 05 2010, 12:58 am)
Quote (GHOSTREK @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:48 pm)
Alternate woud just slap a cross the face to jj abrams ?and thay don't sacle of the ship rigths ?if ?alt ncc-1701 is the same size of ?the prime ncc-1701-e ?some one din't do there homeworked

I like beer too.

i am not drunk

Admitting you have a problem is the first step...

Admiral_BlackCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1048

Report this Jan. 06 2010, 12:37 am

Didn't vote. I think CBS will do their own reboot and start from scratch.

fooledagain

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 878

Report this Jan. 06 2010, 2:44 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 06 2010, 9:26 am)
Quote (fooledagain @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:25 pm)
If they do a new television show it will be based on what can make the most money. That means that it will be Abrams Trek. CBS/ Paramount are parts of a larger entity. Corporate accounting says do what makes the money.

If the market research turns up enough interest among the right demographic then a Trek series will be the next Abrams effort after the end (finally, thank god) of "Lost." The chance of original trek characters and stories outside of novels is slim at best.

They're part of a larger entity, yes, but at the bottom level CBS's CBS Studios and Viacom's Paramount Pictures are two separate companies out to make their own money.

:logical:

I knew you would take issue with this SB63 based on your past comments regarding this matter. I have great respect for your opinions on all things Trek, but I think time will prove you wrong about this subject. I have read your defense of the prime versus alternate time line and think that your wish to see both play out fuels your hope for a CBS series based on the prime time line.

I have some experience with large corporations and the accounting that they do between subsidiary parts and divisions. Make no mistake about it, the financial success of Abrams Trek makes him, and his version of Trek, the front runners should CBS decide to produce a series. For that matter, Paramount can, through contractual agreement with CBS, produce a series and distribute it through CBS or a cable network if they choose to do so. Ultimately this will make the canon acolytes more and more frustrated as they have to concoct ever more elaborate explanations for the inconsistencies in new versions of Trek. I'm not saying that you are a canon-ite,  or that it is a bad thing to be one.  :D

Holberg

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1047

Report this Jan. 06 2010, 5:50 pm

Give me that ol time Star Trek , give that ol time Star Trek, It's good enough for me ;)

Holberg

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1047

Report this Jan. 07 2010, 1:28 am

Quote (SeerSGB @ Jan. 06 2010, 7:43 pm)
There's another issue with using nuTrek as the series: Recasting the roles again. ?I doubt CBS could get the film cast to do a TV series, and if they could probably wouldn't be even remotely willing to pay the cost. ?Which would mean a recast of the reboot or a reboot of a reboot.

:laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

fooledagain

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 878

Report this Jan. 08 2010, 2:06 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 07 2010, 12:29 pm)
Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ Jan. 06 2010, 8:02 pm)
Quote (SeerSGB @ Jan. 06 2010, 4:43 pm)
There's another issue with using nuTrek as the series: Recasting the roles again. ?I doubt CBS could get the film cast to do a TV series, and if they could probably wouldn't be even remotely willing to pay the cost. ?Which would mean a recast of the reboot or a reboot of a reboot.

May not be an issue, since CBS/Paramount are under the same owner the could include the TV series as part of the movies contract. (If they haven't already)

But as mentioned a few posts ago, at this level, Paramount Pictures and CBS Studios Inc. are two separate companies under two separate parents (Paramount under Viacom and CBS Studios under CBS).

:logical:

Which, in turn, are owned by National Amusements.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 08 2010, 5:02 pm

One thing we forget is that at the end of the Trek TV Series it says "This Motion Picture was.." I forget the rest so Paramount still could have kept all of Trek under the movie side. I don't think Trek should be separate entities.

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 08 2010, 5:47 pm

What if CBS did something set on Enterprirse's sister ship? In the TOS they had 12 other Constitution Class ships. Maybe in the Alternate Universe they have the same amount?

TrekFan1701E

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14979

Report this Jan. 08 2010, 7:29 pm

Quote (trekbuff @ Jan. 08 2010, 6:30 pm)
Quote (TrekFan1701E @ Jan. 08 2010, 5:47 pm)
What if CBS did something set on Enterprirse's sister ship? In the TOS they had 12 other Constitution Class ships. Maybe in the Alternate Universe they have the same amount?

They would clearly need to stay away from arcs as the central story. Don't even mention the Xendi - surely there was a lot going on besides that arc. They could mention Archer and the NX-01 and even have some of the Enterprise actors do cameos.

The problem was they failed to pay attention to what they were doing with respect to what the majority of the fans wanted and were expecting.

I don't know if CBS understands exactly what caused viewers to leave Enterprise. How much of Braga's propaganda of over saturation and fan burn out did CBS believe? STXI clearly should have put those excuses to rest. However, if CBS tries to put any new Trek series on the CW, they will be starting a new Trek series of with a built in disadvantage. It should be on Wednesday evenings at 8:00 PM on CBS.

VOY had a chance, but B&B went with virtually two arcs, the Kazon and the Borg, for 6 of the 7 years of that series. The ship was not named Enterprise and I never heard one single complaint because of it. It was the lack of exploration while Voyager was on her way home, three seasons of Kazon, and alomst aimless season, another three seasons of Borg and the almost cartoonie nature of VOY which hurt that series.

A new Trek series could be Star Trek: Federation. What happened after TATV? How did the allies jocky for position? What worlds were its members? How did we meet them all? There's a lot of questions never answered by Enterprise which should have been.

As the dust settles after the Romulan War, there are a lot of stories about it and the founding of the UFP. Potential missed in Enterprise. Those stories remain untold...

:)

You forget Trek needs more than just its fans in order to survive and I think that is what they were trying to do with Enterprise but it didn't work. I think if anything CBS should put the series back into syndication. On CBS it would get cancelled after the first three episodes if the series didn't keep getting over a 10.0 rating each week. I think a series set right after the RW and the founding of the Federation would be cool. A Universe in shambles and the Federation sends out the Dadelous Class ships to put the Universe back together. However would that attract a general audience? I also wouldn't mind a series about the RW but I guess that would be too dark and Abrams didn't want the new movie to be dark.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum