http://www.latino-review.com/news/star-trek-exclusive-trek-is-going-to-return-to-tv

 

So, GREAT news, Trekkers, CBS is looking to bring Star Trek back to TV.

 

The last we heard of a Star Trek TV series, was around 2006 before the Abrams movie planted its flag and destroyed most of what we knew (except Spock and - presumably  the plot of Star Trek: Enterprise)  there were two competing versions: Bryce Zabel (writer, Dark Skies) and J. Michael Straczynski (Babylon 5, but I like crediting him as the good writer on The Real Ghostbusters) pitched a version called “Star Trek: Reboot the Universe” that actually made it online in PDF form.

 

The second was developed closer to the JJ reboot and was written by producer Geoffrey Thorne, novelist and writer on things like Leverage and Criminal Intent and was called Star Trek: Federation and was conceptualized with producer Robert Burnett, Bryan Singer (the X-Men director and producer of TV’s House among others) and Christopher (director of Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation). This other series wouldn’t reboot the Star Trek universe, but would vault it forward past the DS9 and Voyager series timelines into a far flung future where the Utopia Federation that we knew from other TV series had become boring and complacent.

 

Federation would have seen the titular group reduced to a mere peacekeeping force as the old ways broke apart. Vulcans withdraw from the United Federation of Planets and reunify with the Romulans, the Bajorans of Deep Space Nine would have also withdrawn and become a planet full of religious monks, like a “Tibet in space.” The Klingons wouldn’t be as warrior-obsessed anymore, but would instead be warrior mystics. The Ferengi would have a female Nagus. The Cardassians would have abandoned war and become an artist/philosopher race.

In essence, Federation would have advanced the timeline of the Star Trek Universe far enough in the future to re-define some of the characters that had been the same since the original series’ inception.

 

We don’t have too many details about the new Star Trek series CBS is going to get working on, but I spent some time filling you in on Federation, because it seems like the same people who made that pitch could be involved. Bryan Singer's name has been mentioned for the new CBS Trek as a possible Executive Producer through his Bad Hat Harry productions. While "Star Trek: Reboot the Universe" was invalidated by 2008's movie Trek, Star Trek: Federation still has a trio of enthusiastic producers, a script and a writer ready to go should CBS decide to give Singer the ahead to develop this new series. 

 

Robert Burnett is rumored to be working on a non-Trek project with Skydance Productions (Skydance worked with Paramount, McQuarrie and Bad Robot on M:I 5) and simultaneously keeping one foot in the Trek world. He's currently producing (one of the producers) a project independent of all previously mentioned parties,  Star Trek: Axanar, a 90-minute fan-made feature film about "The Four Years War," as mentioned in the TOS episode "Whom Gods Destroy." The film has scraped up and impressive cast and released “Prelude to Axanar” last year to show how this great venture can be pulled off on a fan-donated budget:

 

That’s the sort of Star Trek product Brunett can use as an example of how producing a reasonably-budgeted TV series set in the Star Trek Universe this day and age should be a piece of cake.

 

Back to our Federation three:

 

CBS is interested in Bryan Singer developing (and Singer reportedly loves Prelude to Axanar) and Federation co-conspirator Chris McQuarrie was still game for the project as of last December, if Twitter is to be believed.

 

As far as when to expect some sort of official announcement about who snagged the NEW Trek production job, that’s a bit tougher to predict.

 

Star Trek 3 seems to be the Trek Paramount would like us to focus on (Elba for Mogh of the House of Martok, right Simon Pegg?), Singer is only tweeting about making the new X-Men movie and McQuarrie is wrapping up the edit on Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation for later this year. The Star Trek: Federation story document still exists, though, and I’m told Geoffrey Thorne might have taken that treatment all the way to a pilot script before the project cooled, which would allow this show to get off the ground much faster.

 

For the sharp-eye’d Trek fan, all eyes are on Star Trek: Axanar (official site here) to show off what Trek on a budget can look like. If that can work and CBS can see it work, then we might get a riff on Star Trek: Federation. Either way, CBS is convinced it's a good idea to probe the idea of a Star Trek TV show, so TV Trek’s likely on the way.

 

I’ve been saying it since summer of 2005…

 

...no, I’ve been saying it since summer of 1990: There should ALWAYS be Star Trek on TV

 

Edited November 23, 20196 yr by The Unknown Poster

6 hours ago, Logan007 said:

I never liked the Waltons.

Goodnight Olivia, (Goodnight) Goodnight John, (Goodnight) Goodnight Ma, (Goodnight) Goodnight Pa, (Goodnight) Goodnight Mary Ellen, (Goodnight) Goodnight Jason, (Goodnight) Goodnight Mary Beth, (Goodnight) Goodnight Elizabeth, (Goodnight) Goodnight Ben, (Goodnight) Goodnight John Boy... John Boy?? John Boy??? JOHN BOY??? We know about your Playboy collection hidden between the mattresses! (Damn!)

23 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Goodnight Olivia, (Goodnight) Goodnight John, (Goodnight) Goodnight Ma, (Goodnight) Goodnight Pa, (Goodnight) Goodnight Mary Ellen, (Goodnight) Goodnight Jason, (Goodnight) Goodnight Mary Beth, (Goodnight) Goodnight Elizabeth, (Goodnight) Goodnight Ben, (Goodnight) Goodnight John Boy... John Boy?? John Boy??? JOHN BOY??? We know about your Playboy collection hidden between the mattresses! (Damn!)

30s man there was no playboy...national geo maybe.

 

I didn't find the name "Michael" jarring or out of the ordinary (but then again I know two different women named Michael)

6 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

30s man there was no playboy...national geo maybe.

 

Way to spoil a joke. You must be hilarious at parties. 

12 hours ago, voodoochylde said:

I didn't find the name "Michael" jarring or out of the ordinary (but then again I know two different women named Michael)

Yeah but you and your friends are weirdos.

After ep 4 maybe they should have set it 30 after TNG.

Spinning saucer now? WTF?!

9 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

After ep 4 maybe they should have set it 30 after TNG.

Spinning saucer now? WTF?!

I'm okay with it. The bigger issue for me are the Klingons. I don't like them. There is absolutely no redeeming quality about them. If we have to put up with a bunch of bald headed creatures who keep standing around barely able to speak because of plastic prosthetics in their mouths while  talking about T'Kuvmah  & doing little else it'll become painful. There is no talk of the glory of war, for dying with honour for a noble  cause. Just religious crap that is boring. 

Edited October 9, 20178 yr by SpeedFlex27

The producers & writers of the show would have been wise to stick to what worked after TOS in the look & philosophy of Klingons. Not what they have done to them for the new series. They just look like freaks now. 

Edited October 9, 20178 yr by SpeedFlex27

52 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

After ep 4 maybe they should have set it 30 after TNG.

Spinning saucer now? WTF?!

What spinning saucers did they have in TNG?   Why would we think they can’t spin a saucer?  

They clearly said this ship was built to strict specifications for the spore drive. 

Visuals are updated. 

It’s fine. 

Thanks to Worf on both the TNG & Deep Space Nine we got to know the Klingons & understand their values. Now, that's all been thrown out the proverbial space dock starting over.  I just can't see these Klingons ever developing any likeable characteristics. Celebrating & telling stories of victories in battle with blood wine & singing songs about Kayless. Damn, I miss those Klingons. The Klingons in Discovery? Just blow them up & kill them all. I can't wait to see what they've done to the Romulans. 

15 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Thanks to Worf on both the TNG & Deep Space Nine we got to know the Klingons & understand their values. Now, that's all been thrown out the proverbial space dock starting over.  I just can't see these Klingons ever developing any likeable characteristics. Celebrating & telling stories of victories in battle with blood wine & singing songs about Kayless. Damn, I miss those Klingons. The Klingons in Discovery? Just blow them up & kill them all. I can't wait to see what they've done to the Romulans. 

these are the Klingons, before they have settled their differences with the federation.  of course they won't have any redeeming qualities. they are the federations mortal enemies for this series.

16 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Thanks to Worf on both the TNG & Deep Space Nine we got to know the Klingons & understand their values. Now, that's all been thrown out the proverbial space dock starting over.  I just can't see these Klingons ever developing any likeable characteristics. Celebrating & telling stories of victories in battle with blood wine & singing songs about Kayless. Damn, I miss those Klingons. The Klingons in Discovery? Just blow them up & kill them all. I can't wait to see what they've done to the Romulans. 

The Klingons in TNG were very different from the Klingons in TOS and even the TOS films.

We are seeing a snapshot of certain Klingons.  Since Enterprise is canon and we know there is a Klingon homeworld, we can assume there is some limited government.  They dont have 100 houses.  They have 24 so there is respect for that structure.  There is a relationship between the houses. 

We can assume that the houses will come together more formally (or stay together since they have said they are united during war) and remain that way, give or take.  Even in TNG time, there was a lot of conflict and intrigue among the Kilingon government.  In fact, same with TOS films (they conspired to kill their own Chancellor to maintain a war footing with the Federation).

I dont think Discovery Klingons are acting out of character from what we've seen or what we know.

The "honor" thing in TNG was a bit over-stated since we saw Klingons act dishonorably many times.   Worf was raised by humans and came from a disgraced Klingon house.  So he idealized Klingon culture and essentially represented the best of what Klingons claimed to be.

9 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

The Klingons in TNG were very different from the Klingons in TOS and even the TOS films.

We are seeing a snapshot of certain Klingons.  Since Enterprise is canon and we know there is a Klingon homeworld, we can assume there is some limited government.  They dont have 100 houses.  They have 24 so there is respect for that structure.  There is a relationship between the houses. 

We can assume that the houses will come together more formally (or stay together since they have said they are united during war) and remain that way, give or take.  Even in TNG time, there was a lot of conflict and intrigue among the Kilingon government.  In fact, same with TOS films (they conspired to kill their own Chancellor to maintain a war footing with the Federation).

I dont think Discovery Klingons are acting out of character from what we've seen or what we know.

The "honor" thing in TNG was a bit over-stated since we saw Klingons act dishonorably many times.   Worf was raised by humans and came from a disgraced Klingon house.  So he idealized Klingon culture and essentially represented the best of what Klingons claimed to be.

True but the Klingons we saw on TNG sure  knew how to have a good time. They were engaging & sociable with an edge. I would argue that the Klingons we knew on TNG were only different because TNG is approximately 80 years in the future from TOS. In Kirk's time, there was no peace treaty between the Federation & The Klingon Empire. In Kirk's time, having a Klingon serving on the Enterprise would have been unheard of. Humans really didn't know what the Klingons were about & the Klingons saw humans & the Federation as being weak. However, they found out how resilient humans were & begrudgingly began to respect them. So, we saw a different kind of Klingon in the TOS series &  movies than we saw on TNG series & movies. But the Klingons we see on Discovery maybe some fans like them. I sure don't. Other than the Klingons I'm pleasantly surprised. This series may have a chance. 

Edited October 12, 20178 yr by SpeedFlex27

CBS hasnt released definitive numbers for All Access but some numbers out there seem to indicate 500,000 subscriptions were added around Discovery, taking All Access from about 1.5 million subs to 2 million subs.  CBS wants 4 million by 2020.  They have said more seasons of Discovery are "likely".  I tend to think they know 100% that they are renewing it but waiting for a particular time to announce.

Discovery just wrapped production for the entirety of season 1.

Forget the new show, bleh.   I'm re-watching the originals on Netflix.

13 minutes ago, basslicker said:

Forget the new show, bleh.   I'm re-watching the originals on Netflix.

They really need to give DS9 the HD treatment.  I recently re-watched the TNG pilot and the DS9 pilot and DS9 was lightyears ahead of TNG in terms of quality - acting, writing, depth of characters, everything.

31 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

They really need to give DS9 the HD treatment.  I recently re-watched the TNG pilot and the DS9 pilot and DS9 was lightyears ahead of TNG in terms of quality - acting, writing, depth of characters, everything.

Not sure if that will happen. Was not the HD sales of TNG disappointing?

14 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Not sure if that will happen. Was not the HD sales of TNG disappointing?

Yes.  TOS HD treatment was successful and prompted them to do TNG.  TNG was a lot of work.  They used the original negatives, scanned them into an HD workflow and then used timestamps and episode notes to stitch them back together.  SFX done on video, like phasers, planets etc were re-created.  Fortunately, most of the ships were done with models and had tremendous detailing.

CBS did great work on it., a really really great job.  But some feel the blu rays were priced too high and came at a time when streaming began taking off so CBS sort of bet on Blu Ray sales that didn't materialize.

To do DS9 and Voyager is supposedly going to cost $40 million because they used more CGI than TNG.  But that CGI was rendered to the standards of the day thus needs to be recreated.  And I guess assembling from scratch from tons of negatives is a painstaking process. 

My feeling is, they eventually HAVE to do it because Star Trek makes lots of money for CBS because they are heavily syndicated and streamed.  But who's going to watch DS9 in SD on a big tv?  So CBS will get less and less fees for those unless they upgrade them.  Maybe they can budget them into the over-all budget for All Access.  Once they launch All Access in 4K (presumably they will), its sort of muting the celebration when two of your series are in SD. 

Or perhaps they can make a deal with Netflix to share the costs in return for a sweetheart deal on streaming them.  It has to be done.

They always said Star Trek always makes money.  Sometimes it takes longer than hoped for...but in the end, every series and film makes profit because they are watched forever.

EDIT: The people who made DS9, like Ira Behr, are making a documentary about DS9.  They crowdfunded it and it was so successful they have enough money to do some limited clips in HD to show off what it can do.  Hopefully the success of the documentary will revive interest in a full conversion.

Here's a test video of DS9 in HD (taking into account Youtube compresses it, it still looks awesome):

 

Edited October 12, 20178 yr by The Unknown Poster

I thought the FX in DS9/VOY is fine for the most part.

Just now, FrostyWinnipeg said:

I thought the FX in DS9/VOY is fine for the most part.

They're rendered in SD.  So they can be "blown up" to HD quality but would look fuzzy.  They have to be completely re-done.  And unlike TNG, they used CGI more often, even for ships, rather than models.  DS9 especially, had many ship battle scenes that would all have to be re-done.  Knowing CBS, they wont do it unless they can do it at a really high level of quality.  So they'd re-create from scratch.

 

Let's vote: Best Star Trek series? I'll start: DS9. 

 

Worst Star Trek series? Voyager

Edited October 13, 20178 yr by SpeedFlex27

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Let's vote: Best Star Trek series? I'll start: DS9. 

Worst Star Trek series? Voyager

Tough one . It's pretty close tie for DS9/VOY. Although DS9 had great ending and VOY bad. I just can't watch TNG anymore.

Or ENT first 2

ENT last 2

Not all of season 2, it got pretty good at the end.

Edited October 13, 20178 yr by FrostyWinnipeg

I always enjoyed Enterprise.  Archer was a Captain writing the book as it went in real time. Janeway was a Captain who constantly made mistakes putting her crew thru a lot of grim & hard times. She seemed like a Me First officer. It's a wonder they didn't mutiny & leave her on some deserted Class M planet.

TNG/DS9 for me.

I'll just say it.  I still love Commander Ryker.