^why would they consider it? their last endeavor failed miserably and they made no money (perhaps even lost, I don't care enough to look.) Trek would be dead, that's why all the set pieces and whatnot were SOLD OFF..they had NO PLANS of EVER doing more. So why would they consider it considering they don't even have anything left over to RE-USE? they'd have to WASTE money building ALL NEW SETS..JUST to try something that FAILED again. No, they'll go to something else ENTIRELY before they'd go back to Star Trek. the ONLY chance we have of seeing NEW Star Trek Series is if either CBS SELLS the rights...OR..they do a nuTrek series based off the alternate timeline. Star Trek is the probably the last thing CBS is considering for anything other then movies (and even those are probably on thin-ice..if a nuTrek movie ever bombs..it's GONE.) And we certainly won't see the "prime timeline" show or setting again.
They sold off the Trek sets from TNG, DS9, Voy, Ent so they do not have to pay storage fees. All the models were sold off because anything they will do in the future will be done by CGI which is cheaper. If a studio can spend $100+ Million on films or $20 million per season on a tv show I am sure they can pay about $100,000 to build sets for a new TV show. Rebuilding sets is not what is going to stop a new Trek series from going into production. Chances are a new Star Trek show will be popular enough to run multiple seasons unless it got a producer that made something that was not true to what Star Trek is. You cannot look at just Enterprise being canceled because of low ratings. The fans on here can list a lot of reasons why they did not like the show over the other Star Trek shows. I personally was skeptical about a prequel and birth of the federation thing from when I first heard about the new show. Many rather have the next post TNG Era show over Enterprise. If it was done soon have Voyager ended. To do a post TNG/DS9/Voyager series now may be problematic. You're going to have a new set of producers and writers coming in to create a whole new show and last thing is you want to restrict them to material of the a new show. They need the freedom to make a new show. They can recycle some prior ongoing story lines to new ones, but only after this new show has going on for awhile. I would not bring in the Borg until the show ran 3 years and I would bring them back as the menace that can wipe out most of Starfleet. Make them a real threat, not the weaken version we seen on Voyager.
DS9 wasn't popular, either. No idea whether the production was rushed, but if it was, more shows should be rushed like that. It's futile to try to link ratings and quality. And I still see no compelling reason why CBS should bother to do a Star Trek series. Low ratings would have been enough, but it was also doomed because UPN was being folded into the CW, which had a female-skewing strategy and wouldn't have been interested in any space opera show (traditionally a male-skewing genre) at that time. I doubt they're interested now either. They seem to be very happy with their witches and vampires. However, there have been some indications that they want to increase their male audience, so the CW is probably one of the more likely places we'd see a space opera series emerge. Sets can be rebuilt if they're serious about a new show. Or they can go the greenscreen route. If CBS wants a show, they'll give it the budget it needs for production. In any case, a new Star Trek series would not be able to use existing sets. They would look too dated now, especially after Trek XI. They would go for a new look, hewing more closely to Trek XI designs than anything previous.
Yep, aside from ENT and the movie sets, none of the old sets would hold up in HD. So they would never have been used for a new show anyway.
CGI sets..rebuilding old ones. doesn't matter. FACT is, after Enterprise and Nemesis failings, they are not interested in doing a new Star Trek series based off the Prime Timeline. that's the ENTIRE REASON nuTrek was even given a chance. And it succeeded. Whether those here want to hate on it or not. FACT is, if we EVER see a new series, it's going to be based off the nuTrek timeline..NOT the Prime. we'll NEVER see another Prime-Timeline series...nuTrek is the ONLY chance we have of a series. you can come up with all the reasons and excuses you want as to why it may be viable. CBS won't do it. ESPECIALLY because of nuTrek's success. Why in the world would they go back to something that failed (a la Enterprise and Nemesis) when they have a something even "normal" STrek fans seemed to really like with the nuTrek reboot? so tell yourselves what you want. It'll never happen. It's nuTrek or nothing.
set design - bridge I totally agree. I agree. After Trek XIII the sets can go right into use in the next Trek TV series if it were even set on the JJVerse Enterprise. If it were not the sets can be used occasionally for any scenes set on the Enterprise, or they could be redressed as another bridge for the series. Obviously for engineering on the new series it would have to be built from scratch due to the real-world location used for the Engineering set in Trek XI also for the practical use as a standing set in studio vs. on-location for a TV budget. Unfortunately for all Trek TV series exteriors have been limited to Southern California due to budget.
Re: set design - bridge Well, if Stargate Universe could afford to travel to get better locations, a new Star Trek could probably do so as well.
Re: set design - bridge and that's a viable example because Stargate Universe is doing so well! oh wait....it was CANCELED. doesn't that tell you something?
Re: set design - bridge It tells me that the ratings went from bad to abysmal. It tells me nothing about their use of location shooting.
Re: set design - bridge part of the cancellation is not bringing in the revenue vs cost. The last thing TPTB are going to do is have unneeded costs, like this, in a series that has failed them in the past..a la nemesis bomb and Enterprise cancellation. so no...SG:U ultimately couldn't afford it...perhaps because of the crap story...or actors..or any other slew of things. Regardless your point is invalid. CBS isn't going to take any risks with Trek. And it's only going to take one bomb to see it go bye-bye again. so again..this should tell you something
Re: set design - bridge If Stargate: Universe had done well in the ratings, the cost per episode (2.5-3 million each) wouldn't have been an issue, plain and simple. To draw a comparison, Breaking Bad costs the same per episode, but because it hasn't tanked in the ratings (in fact, it had gone up), that cost isn't an issue.
Re: set design - bridge and Trek has already failed them, like I said, monetary wise..so IF they decide to give it another go they are NOT going to have costs such as that...if the show does well..then perhaps.. which is my point. keep the examples coming..doesn't change that CBS killed Trek because it failed and they aren't really interested in another series..and if that did change they aren't going to throw around cash on it, at least at first, until/unless it actually does well. so, again, it should tell you something
Or if they license the rights. Whether to set any potential new series in the prime universe, or the alternate of the last movie, would likely be a decision made by the creative team of any new production. CBS likely wouldn't care, as long as they receive their licensing fee and a piece of the pie. Unless set aboard a ship identical to the movie Enterprise and in the same time period, new shooting sets would have to be constructed. Wrong. The series Enterprise was only the latest incarnation of a long term, highly profitable franchise. And yes it was removed after low ratings. However, CBS knows that they own a cash-cow named Star Trek, and they are hardly going to "kill it." What CBS owns, and what Paramount Pictures owns are two different properties. For any new series to be direct tied to the JJ-movie to an option, not a requirement.
It is very unlikely CBS will sell the rights to Star Trek. Too much money involved. CBS did not kill "Star Trek Enterprise", it was still owned by Paramount and running on a network that folded a year after the series got canceled. Didn't Viacom kept Paramount Television and CBS seperate so they can sell programming to anyone? Everyone should keep in mind when Enterprise was airing, there were external things involving Star Trek that probably cause a decline in the ratings. The prior show "Star Trek Voyager" was already unpopular among many fans. Certainly not the popularity TNG & DS9 had. Two bad movies in the theaters did not help. Plus one of the prior Trek shows were still airing on cable or syndicated TV at the same time Enterprise aired. Personally I thought Paramount did these four Star Trek shows in too short of a time that killed it. There seems to be a question of which "Trek Reality" should be used. Maybe use the JJ Abrams reality or re-imagine something new from scratch. However you cannot ignore the basic or popular elements that came out of Star Trek before. You going to eventually bring in the Klingons, Romulans, Gorn, Tholians, Vulcans, etc. If it was more toward TNG era, maybe Feringi and Borg. But like I say, make the Borg a real menace and threat. It was established the Cardassians were around, but we don't know much of who they were in Kirks time. We know at some future point, Cardassian military took control of their government. You have an unwritten book with them. Maybe tell the story of how this happen during the new show. Can do a coupe and/or nazi similar movement rising.
Given the situation. CBS owning 5 distinct TV series in the same brand. Kirk and Spock iteration being catered for BIG TIME on the silver screen. Something perhaps needed to refresh interest in a back catalogue of episodes available online or airing seemingly at random on stations everywhere. They need to draw in newcomers to that as well. J.J. Abrams' style somewhat different and maybe (I don't know) only pulling in people to TOS. Like an all-in-one sampler highlighting the rest of the franchise. Those maybe just too frightened of diving in because they don't get it. Something that basically puts out a message like "Next Generation. Enterprise. Deep Space Nine. Voyager. It's all Star Trek to me." I'd try to do the impossible. Create a story that can appeal to fans of the disperate shows. Bring back together what a decade and a half ended up fragmenting. Or claw back a sizable percentage of what's left, at any rate. Have it make sense, with a plot that works within the Prime Universe, canon etc but also acts like a self-contained two-hour movie. I'd do what fans have been doing for ages. Pick my own favourite 6 or 7 characters from across the franchise and devise a one-off adventure around that and a reason for them being together. That way there's a sense of familiarity for us old-timers and the other way too, when somebody new later dives in anywhere - only to spot a character they first learned about here. Beyond that mixed up crew, there would be shorter moments for one or two people I'd missed, rather than create somebody new to serve the same purpose in the story anyway. I'd do it in animation since there would be no other alternative for a non-Abramsverse project. Anything else being too expensive or requiring a reuse of the only surviving physical sets, which belong to Bad Robot/Paramount - companies now separate from CBS anyway. A galaxy of acting talent between 5 different sets of casts. Have some of them lend their voices to beloved characters again, interacting in a combination we've maybe never even seen before. Except in "Of Gods and Men" perhaps... You obviously can't throw everything including the kitchen sink into the mix. But I think what can be done, is a story: a) set on an Enterprise. b) reintroducing a couple of characters per 24th Century spin-off. c) facing a problem caused by ENT. d) another created by Spock during the 2009 film. and e) be completely self explanatory - or at least, not require any knowledge other than what you show onscreen.
Here's what I posted over in the TNG forum, as a response to a group campaigning for a Star Trek: Titan series. It's not perfect and it's only a plot. Characterisation is bare minimal beyond a few of the players. Mainly because the shortlist of TNG/DS9/VOY characters is free-flowing - changable so long as the line-up of the crew doesn't stretch credibility too much. That would obviously change depending on actors who would want to be involved. I'd like to think Picard would be in it, commanding respect from implaccable foes, over a court-room setting. Instead of the action hero in the films. That was really the heart and soul of his character many times over... as in "Encounter at Farpoint", "The Measure of a Man", "Devil's Due", "The Drumhead" and I could go on. Data/B-4 has to be largely out of the picture, because Brent Spiner's feelings are well known. If it were animation, then that's possibly a whole different thing for him. There are very different demands on a story from live-action to animation, and it's obvious what I had in mine when I wrote this. It's a fairly long synopsis, but if you're here and have time enough to read it.
As you yourself pointed out in the Re-booting TNG For TV thread... To me, simply shuffling the pack, to feature familiar faces in different combinations, would be enough to suggest change.
And the mainstream audience will say, "oh this is that show with the funny nose aliens. I didn't watch it before, so I won't bother watching it now" And the show will promptly be cancelled after 3 episodes.
I can't really see past an obvious bias in that statement. If you had said that like this... "oh this is that show with the aliens with pointy ears. I didn't watch it before, so I won't bother watching it now" You would basically be attacking what makes Star Trek, Star Trek and not Star Wars or any of the other science fiction franchises. That type of viewer wouldn't be watching anyway... even if the whole cast went topless and decided to wrestle in gelo. For me, the simple fact is... if the franchise has to become so unrecognisable, then maybe it shouldn't come back until there's a far more open-minded audience out there. Maybe a few more who have fond memories of Star Trek as it was.