New terrible Trek series coming
- Thread starter xortex
- Start date
It always amazes me how much sci-fi series costs like Trek. Here are my ways to cut costs.
1) minimilism like TOS
2) Use unknown actors for the leads.
3) CGI SFX and green screen
4) Eliminate the prosthetic appliance budget - either aliens are gonna be really alien or more preferably non Humanoid and non corporeal/ethereal or the like, or they are gonna be explained as distantly related Humans somehow.
5) Smaller ship and sets with a smaller crew (extras).
6) less use of aliens
7) No phasers, therefore no battles. No replicators or holosuites.
8) Use a Canadian forest like Stargate - There must be other locales up there.
9) styrophoam rocks and canvass tarp caves like TOS and lots of matte paintings.
10) A self contained concept and premise that focuses more on drama and conflict.
1) minimilism like TOS
2) Use unknown actors for the leads.
3) CGI SFX and green screen
4) Eliminate the prosthetic appliance budget - either aliens are gonna be really alien or more preferably non Humanoid and non corporeal/ethereal or the like, or they are gonna be explained as distantly related Humans somehow.
5) Smaller ship and sets with a smaller crew (extras).
6) less use of aliens
7) No phasers, therefore no battles. No replicators or holosuites.
8) Use a Canadian forest like Stargate - There must be other locales up there.
9) styrophoam rocks and canvass tarp caves like TOS and lots of matte paintings.
10) A self contained concept and premise that focuses more on drama and conflict.
1) minimilism like TOS
I liked the surreal set for Spectrum of the Gun, but how many time can you pull that off? There no real way around throwing money at the bridge set, however, if the ship is more "military" a somewhat stark interior could work.
2) Use unknown actors for the leads.
Stargate made do with one B level actor (Dean) and a load of no-bodys. Eureka and Warehouse 13 pretty much the same. Non sci-fi shows do this all the some, you get the best you can with the money you have.
3) CGI SFX and green screen
Sanctuary has had a fairly good time with this, although the first couple of seasons it was very obvious.
4) Eliminate the prosthetic appliance budget
Having the aliens be "almost" completely Human is a good money saver, have them be aliens through their acting. Prosthetics like the Vulcans and the Bajorians yes, Cardassians and people like Neelix no (I for one liked Neelix).
5) Smaller ship and sets with a smaller crew (extras).
Smaller set and casts yes, although if too tight it would interfere with shooting, hard to see how a "smaller" ship would save money, whether 400 feet, or a thousand, the CGI model is the same.
8) Use a Canadian forest like Stargate - There must be other locales up there.
My understanding is that location shooting is more expensive, not less. However if they can redress a modern existing set to be "future" great.
10) A self contained concept and premise that focuses more on drama and conflict.
Yes.
What, you mean like pine forests vs fir forests? Maybe they could use some spruce for a change of pace.
I would seriously have to hunt someone down and kill them if Star Trek were ever given the el cheapo Stargate treatment.
Sets are not that important. Look at Dune - a desert local or 'The Empath' - no sets whatsoever. Most of TOS was done on artificial interior planet exteriors. The surrealness actually enhanced it.
Plus 'kids' like in 'First Duty' and 'Tapestry' would be much more mature, like they were in Voyager with Red squadron, etc. I think it would be interesting if a younger crew of cadets had to save Earth.
Plus 'kids' like in 'First Duty' and 'Tapestry' would be much more mature, like they were in Voyager with Red squadron, etc. I think it would be interesting if a younger crew of cadets had to save Earth.
You'd love the 2009 movie, then.
"First Duty" and "Tapestry" were Next Generation episodes. Red Squadron (a.k.a. Red Squad) was in the DS9 episode "Valiant". You're mixing your Treks.
"SPACE: The final frontier. These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: To explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no Tribble has gone before."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_no_man_has_gone_before
Interestingly enough, the whole crew is composed of naked Tribbles. And we can recycle the Klingons as enemies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_no_man_has_gone_before
Interestingly enough, the whole crew is composed of naked Tribbles. And we can recycle the Klingons as enemies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_no_man_has_gone_before
The Holodeck (and the TOS Gangster Planet etc) was actually used to save money. It allowed them to shoot on standing sets and rent costumes from a warehouse. I don't think Hollywood has 'lots' anymore, but there's always going to be the temptation to reuse a nearby set.
The casts of modern Trek shows were way too large, they barely knew what to do with them. TOS had the right idea with 4-5 regulars and a revolving cast as needed.
The casts of modern Trek shows were way too large, they barely knew what to do with them. TOS had the right idea with 4-5 regulars and a revolving cast as needed.
DS9 had a large cast and most of them were put to good use, except for Dax and Jake, but I think the writers just didn't know what to do with those character types. They did have plenty of room for all the main cast and more, because they started shifting focus on recurring characters and making them practically defacto main characters.
With a weekly series, a big cast can be rotated through episodes in which one or two of them are the focus and several others as minor players for the episode. Having a big cast is a good thing, as long as you don't have any dead weight. And if a character or an actor proves to be dead weight, it's a good thing to shunt them to the background, or kill them off if contracts allow.
To keep main characters from being ignored, the writers simply need to get over this notion that Starfleet characters can't have juicy conflicts - that's why the writers preferred Garak, Damar, Winn, etc - they didn't have to be namby pamby Starfleet types, and it's simply easier to get good drama when you have characters like that at your disposal.
Even among the regular cast, the non-Starfleet folks like Kira, Odo and Quark were allowed to have more intense conflicts, and Sisko was also allowed the same freedom as his character was moved away from his Starfleet identity.
With a weekly series, a big cast can be rotated through episodes in which one or two of them are the focus and several others as minor players for the episode. Having a big cast is a good thing, as long as you don't have any dead weight. And if a character or an actor proves to be dead weight, it's a good thing to shunt them to the background, or kill them off if contracts allow.
To keep main characters from being ignored, the writers simply need to get over this notion that Starfleet characters can't have juicy conflicts - that's why the writers preferred Garak, Damar, Winn, etc - they didn't have to be namby pamby Starfleet types, and it's simply easier to get good drama when you have characters like that at your disposal.
Even among the regular cast, the non-Starfleet folks like Kira, Odo and Quark were allowed to have more intense conflicts, and Sisko was also allowed the same freedom as his character was moved away from his Starfleet identity.
DS9 was also a good bit more melodramatic than would be possible with a new Trek series. It was the kind of show that only could exist piggybacking on a pre-established universe such as what was done with TNG. So perhaps for the next, next Trek show.
VOY & ENT did the rotating episodes thing where they focused episodes on a minor character. IMO, it usually fell flat on it's ass because there wasn't anything interesting about the character to begin with.
VOY & ENT did the rotating episodes thing where they focused episodes on a minor character. IMO, it usually fell flat on it's ass because there wasn't anything interesting about the character to begin with.
"Star Trek: Stargate"
The crew of a Federation militia spelunking on their day-off end-up finding a concealed bunker with a stargate and a 'puddlejumper'. The stargate is a one way trip. Upon their arrival, the stargate fries out from lack of proper maintenance, where they come under attack. The puddlejumper mysteriously roars to life and flies them to a nearby settlement where they find unexpected help.
The crew of a Federation militia spelunking on their day-off end-up finding a concealed bunker with a stargate and a 'puddlejumper'. The stargate is a one way trip. Upon their arrival, the stargate fries out from lack of proper maintenance, where they come under attack. The puddlejumper mysteriously roars to life and flies them to a nearby settlement where they find unexpected help.
Similar threads
