Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Star Trek TV Series Coming In 2017 (hollywoodreporter.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the make-it-so dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Star Trek is returning to television. In January, 2017, a new series will begin. The first episode will air on CBS, and subsequent episodes will appear on CBS's online platform, "All Access." "The new Star Trek will introduce new characters seeking imaginative new worlds and new civilizations, while exploring the dramatic contemporary themes that have been a signature of the franchise since its inception in 1966." The show will be produced by Alex Kurtzman, who produced the two recent Star Trek films in 2009 and 2013. No details have been released regarding what the show will be about, or who will star in it. CBS is currently looking for a writer to helm the show.

49 of 438 comments (clear)

  1. 10 years was a decent rest by peter303 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Running the 2nd thru 5th season in a row and overlapping probably exhausted the genre. Its had enough rest now for new ideas.

    1. Re:10 years was a decent rest by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

      I dunno, I think it may be lost in space after the passing of the creator. It feels like yet another franchise now, willing to compromise its vision for whatever sells. Unlike the other "Star ..." franchise, in this case I think it's probably a bad thing.

    2. Re:10 years was a decent rest by Tx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It can't get any worse than Enterprise.

      Then again, I thought it couldn't get any worse than Voyager, so I could be wrong.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    3. Re:10 years was a decent rest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Enterprise was vastly superior to Voyager.

    4. Re:10 years was a decent rest by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually its creator wasn't that great. TNG seasons 1 and 2 were kinda bad, and those were the only two seasons that he had a heavy influence. After that, the writers started breaking some of the rules that Roddenberry had established for the series.

    5. Re:10 years was a decent rest by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh please. Enterprise was actually a pretty good show. I'm only sorry I listened to people like you and didn't watch it until about a year ago on Netflix.

      There's two main problems with Enterprise: 1) the opening theme song sucks donkey balls (except for the two mirror-universe episodes in season 4, that opening sequence is fantastic). 2) the whole Xindi arc in season 3.

      Voyager was pretty bad, especially because of the annoying captain. It was far worse than Enterprise.

    6. Re:10 years was a decent rest by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It can't get any worse than Enterprise.

      Then again, I thought it couldn't get any worse than Voyager, so I could be wrong.

      Rule #1 of sequels: It can always get worse.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    7. Re:10 years was a decent rest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Voyager was crap, but Enterprise wasn't that bad at all, especially the last three seasons.

    8. Re:10 years was a decent rest by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Enterprise was awesome as all the technology from the original Star Trek series wasn't fully developed yet. The transporters were still experimental for human transport. Tactical alert — RED ALERT! — took several seasons to fall into place. The captain chair needed tweaking to get just right.

    9. Re:10 years was a decent rest by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The episode was nominated for the 2003 Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation (short form) and received the highest Nielsen ratings for any episode of Enterprise during season two at that point.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Night_in_Sickbay

      A highly rated low point for the series.

    10. Re:10 years was a decent rest by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I thought that was a rather interesting episode. You have two species of intelligent life that evolved and coexisted on the same planet, which is probably not a common occurrence in the cosmos. The species that looked down on the other species was dying out from a genetic defect. Providing a cure would only prolong the inevitable outcome by a few hundred years. This was the first episode that formed the basis for the Prime Directive to not interfere with emerging cultures.

    11. Re:10 years was a decent rest by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, they both sucked equally.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    12. Re:10 years was a decent rest by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Funny

      Meesah loving Wesley Crusher!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    13. Re:10 years was a decent rest by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

      So like the U.S. navy or military got its ass kicked in our formative years? You mean like reality?

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    14. Re:10 years was a decent rest by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Enterprise was a return to what made Star Trek good - the ideas. Voyager had some, but always copped out by resolving every moral or philosophical question by firing an inverse tachyon beam at it.

      My worry is that this new TV series will suck like the new movies did. They were okay as action movies I guess, if you like being blinded by lens flare, but as Star Trek they were the worst of what Voyager wanted to be - an action driven show. DS9 had action but you actually cared about it, not so much in Voyager or the two new movies.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:10 years was a decent rest by metlin · · Score: 2

      Voyager was pretty bad, especially because of the annoying captain. It was far worse than Enterprise.

      But Neelix was awesome, right?

    16. Re:10 years was a decent rest by grimmjeeper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Barbie of Borg was there only to rescue the failing ratings. The character added nothing of significant value beyond looking good in a tight jumpsuit.

    17. Re:10 years was a decent rest by newcastlejon · · Score: 2

      I thought that was a rather interesting episode. You have two species of intelligent life that evolved and coexisted on the same planet, which is probably not a common occurrence in the cosmos. The species that looked down on the other species was dying out from a genetic defect. Providing a cure would only prolong the inevitable outcome by a few hundred years. This was the first episode that formed the basis for the Prime Directive to not interfere with emerging cultures.

      Is that the one that came immediately before the one where Phlox calls the Organians "appalling" because they won't cure his patients for him?

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    18. Re:10 years was a decent rest by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      It took me 5 minutes to get over the cringe factor of reading your post: They made a third starship troopers? How much pain can one person take?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    19. Re:10 years was a decent rest by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 3, Informative

      DS9 beat B5 to air by a couple of weeks but B5 was in concept phase at least a couple of years before DS9.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    20. Re:10 years was a decent rest by lgw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In Enterprise, the "exploration of contemporary themes" often devolved into "dictating correct moral values through episode-end voice overs".

      The beauty and genius of the original series was the way they sidestepped just that. Kirk would be forced to make some important decision of great moral consequence, and as a military leader, he'd make whatever decision made sense to him at the time and the crew would go with that. Only rarely were there even arguments over the right course of action.

      What made that work so well was that they explicitly weren't presented as moral paragons. At the end of many episodes there'd be some quick conversation between Kirk and another officer or two along the lines of "Are you sure we really did the right thing there? No, but it was the best idea we had, and maybe it will work out for the best" Much less arrogant writing.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    21. Re:10 years was a decent rest by epyT-R · · Score: 2

      Oh goody I can't wait. Glee Trek: The Heterophobic Generation

    22. Re:10 years was a decent rest by sycodon · · Score: 2

      Kinda like the opposite of Waterboarding.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    23. Re:10 years was a decent rest by tbannist · · Score: 2

      I have to give Voyager the edge here, it had three decent seasons. Enterprise had roughly three-quarters of a decent season.

      More over I could bear to watch Voyager even when it was stupid and underachieving. I stopped watching Enterprise, the mind-numbing stupidity of every character on the show was just too horrible to watch. The best example of what was hideously wrong with the the terrible, terrible scripts for most of the show is this: A crew member is trapped on a planet, he refuses to be beamed up because his companion would be killed by the rapid temperature change. What do you do?

      If you answered make him wait 8 hours on the side of a mountain while you retrofit a shuttle with a refrigeration unit, you chose wrong. What can't they cool or heat the transporter room? It's a spaceship, one would assume it they have some kind of temperature control on the rooms. Failing that, they have more than one shuttle, why didn't they send someone down with water and a tent? They were literally dying on the mountain side.

      It's not just that one episode but that episode was emblematic of the problems with Enterprise that came up over and over and over again. The Enterprise personnel were hyper competent in narrow fields while as a team they failed do everything correctly. It only became watchable in the final season when they got a new head writer and he started trying to clean up all the crap from the previous seasons. Like, actually trying explain why all of the Vulcans on the show acted more like short-tempered hormonal teenagers than the cool detached logicians they are supposed to be.

      So in summary, Voyager is marginally less worse than Enterprise. In both cases, you probably want to watch a different series.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    24. Re:10 years was a decent rest by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      It is almost as preposterous as having a black norse god Heimdall in Thor. Just why?

      Why not?

      Seriously, you're watching a show about norse gods and you care about their fucking skin colour? How about the fact that they're talking in American English? Or that they exist at all?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  2. "TV series" by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it loses the ability to call itself a "TV series" when it refuses to air over a conventional method for getting television into your home... Just sayin'. I love Trek, but I hope this flops so CBS will know their service is lame. (But if it flops, CBS will likely blame Trek and keep pushing ahead with the service anyways).

    --
    All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
    1. Re:"TV series" by Jason+Levine · · Score: 4, Informative

      We actually tried CBS's All Access service after getting a month free promotion. I've found the selection limited and there are a lot of ads. Every commercial break is about 1.5 minutes of ads. Contrast this with Hulu which has 20-30 seconds of ads in each break. It's amazing how quickly you lose your tolerance for long commercial breaks when you cut cable.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:"TV series" by rtkluttz · · Score: 2

      Yes, this. As much as I love Star Trek, I'll be forced to either pirate or unintentionally boycott. I don't live in an area with fast enough internet to stream and I also use linux, not Windows or Mac. So all the "controlled and approved" streaming sites like Netflix, Hulu etc that don't give you a "download in advance and watch in the app of your choice" option will never be able to get my business. Nevermind, I'll just download the torrent.

      --
      Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
  3. Which continuity? by timholman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the article:

    The new television series is not related to the upcoming feature film Star Trek Beyond which is scheduled to be distributed by Paramount Pictures in summer 2016.

    So will this show be set in the original TOS / TNG / DS9 continuity, or in the Abrams continuity?

    Lots of plusses and minuses either way.

    1. Re:Which continuity? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      I think you're looking back at early TNG and DS9 with rose-colored glasses. Neither were good in their second seasons.

      He never said that TNG (or DS9) was good in its second season. He just offhandedly said that at this rate, this new show, in *its* second season, might be as good as TNG. (Although you bring up a good point: maybe after two seasons at this improvement rate it'll only be as good as the Pulaski episodes, which of course is far short of the classic 3-5 seasons of TNG.)

      It really wan't until the 3rd season that it got good.

      You can thank Rick Berman for that miracle. Rick Berman took over TNG, Maurice Hurley (Roddenberry's drinking buddy and lead writer) left the show, and since Maurice had forced Gates McFadden out (because he was a dick), now with him gone and Roddenberry taking a back seat, Berman asked McFadden to return, reprising her role as the doctor, which of course likely saved the show since no one liked Pulaski.

      I never really got into DS9, but was Roddenberry heavily involved there too? Honestly, it seems like the more control Roddenberry has over something, the worse it is. He's just like George Lucas: he has some good high-level ideas, but he needs other people to turn them into something really great, and when he gets too involved it turns to shit. Even the first season of TOS was pretty bad a lot of the time, especially the early episodes. After that, Roddenberry wasn't so involved and it was great. It sounds like DS9 was the same.

  4. Please, no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Please, no. Just let the poor thing rest in peace.

  5. Beating A Dead Horse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Come on, the universe has already got enough of the shows. We do not need another bunch of poorly written Trek. Didn't they get that memo when "Enterprise" was suddeny cancelled by UPN a few years back?

  6. Ob by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    Do the TV series follow the odd/even rule, or is that just the movies?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  7. Social Justice Warrioring by Tokolosh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why do I have this nagging feeling that will be less of going boldly?

    --
    Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    1. Re:Social Justice Warrioring by quantaman · · Score: 2

      Why do I have this nagging feeling that will be less of going boldly?

      Fine I'll take the bait.

      Star Trek has always been highly progressive. In the 60's they had black women and Russians at the height of the Cold War. They had the first on-screen inter-race kiss.

      In the late 80's and early 90's they continued with their cashless society, they were an explicitly diplomatic vessel that was actively trying to find peaceful solutions to violent confrontations.

      DS9 was based around something that looked very similar to the Israel/Palestine conflict.

      Star Trek has always embraced tough social questions. If a new series has any claim to the Star Trek tradition is should absolutely be exploring questions such as gender equality, non-traditional relationships, and debates over what kind of language is proper.

      Of course if they're up to the standard of previous Star Treks they'll do it with a lot skill so people won't be ranting against them as SJW. Then again if they're up to the standards of the JJ Abrams movies they won't be able to recognize a social controversy if it hit them with a photon torpedo.

      --
      I stole this Sig
  8. It'll be aired in todays conventional methods by future+assassin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll be on a torrent site 10 min after airing so you can watch it are you leisure. Now if I was them I'd put it up on a torrent site right after it aired with the commercial intact. That way you beat the pirates to the punch and people probably wouldn't care about the tv ads.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re: It'll be aired in todays conventional methods by SQLGuru · · Score: 2

      But they haven't figured out how to track the viewers and charge the advertisers for that.......it's sort of the same problem that a lot of internet content has. Pay per impression is the model that they understand and when you can't easily track impressions, it's hard to turn that into a business model.

  9. Trek is ABOUT Social Justice Warrioring by Etherwalk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Star Trek still exists because the original series was all about social justice. The original series was a commentary on society as much as it was science fiction.

    Let This Be Your Last Battlefield.

    TOS wasn't pro-hippie in that it recognized the importance of duty and responsibility and the complexities of life, but it was pro-equality, pro-egalitarian, anti-discriminatory.

    1. Re:Trek is ABOUT Social Justice Warrioring by Tokolosh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      SJW = equality of outcome
      Boldly = equality of opportunity

      --
      Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    2. Re:Trek is ABOUT Social Justice Warrioring by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 4, Interesting

      e. It was basically Roddenberry's idealistic version of the USA in space. I mean, come on, the starship was named after one of the most staunchly pro-capitalist concepts ever.

      Well, it's set in a post-scarcity communist utopia .The bridge crew was expressly made up of Americans, Russians and Japanese people in an era when fighting the "Japs" was a recent memory and the Russians were the new enemy, in a direct appeal to get over our differences. It featured the first inter-racial kiss as though black people and white people could get along (in spite of the still existent legal segregation). The one guy who was racist was shown as anachronistic.

      But yeah, if you ignore everything and focus on the starship name, totally a paean to America!

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:Trek is ABOUT Social Justice Warrioring by mjwx · · Score: 2

      e. It was basically Roddenberry's idealistic version of the USA in space. I mean, come on, the starship was named after one of the most staunchly pro-capitalist concepts ever.

      Well, it's set in a post-scarcity communist utopia .The bridge crew was expressly made up of Americans, Russians and Japanese people in an era when fighting the "Japs" was a recent memory and the Russians were the new enemy, in a direct appeal to get over our differences. It featured the first inter-racial kiss as though black people and white people could get along (in spite of the still existent legal segregation). The one guy who was racist was shown as anachronistic.

      But yeah, if you ignore everything and focus on the starship name, totally a paean to America!

      It appears you know nothing about Communism, or Star trek. The post scarcity thing was not introduced until TNG, there was still an idea of scarcity in TOS.

      In TOS, the Federation represented the US with it's democracy and respect of freedom, the Klingons represented the Russians, barbaric and imperialistic. This is why The Undiscovered Country was produced during glasnost and the fall of communism. It was, at the time, quite subtle propaganda (well obvious propaganda to non-Americans like myself).

      Also the society in TNG was far from communist. Post scarcity made working for a living no longer necessary, when you no longer need to work it is not communism. Communism would be where all Federation Citizens receive 5 metres of Andorian cotton each year and have to make all their clothes out of that.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  10. Better idea ... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why not skip YASTS (Yet another star treck series) and bring back Firefly?

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:Better idea ... by willworkforbeer · · Score: 2

      Why not skip YASTS (Yet another star trek series) and bring back Firefly?

      Is it a little surprising none of the recent young-enough-to-love-it billionaires hasn't funded it as a vanity project? It may cost $1.5M per episode, but it would make back a chunk of that in its initial release, plus international distribution, and streaming revenues for decades.

      Plus, make your enemies rage by becoming a nerd folk hero.

      --
      Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
  11. Re:First salvo! by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good luck with that. This series is being headed by the producers involved with JJTrek.

    It'd be interesting to see more episodes in the mirror universe though, even if it is a little depressing because that's actually our universe. The "prime" universe you speak of, where most Star Trek occurs, is actually a parallel universe for us. Humans in our universe are nothing like that; we're really a bunch of evil, power-hungry murderers just like depicted in the mirror universe episodes.

  12. I don't give a crap...until it hits DVD by anyaristow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I will not check out CBS's "online platform".

    I will not jump through hoops to see programming. I will not sign up for multiple entertainment services and take on yet more monthly bills. I will not tolerate piss-poor streaming quality. I most especially will not tolerate incessant advertising, even if the service is free. *Especially* if it is free.

    We have reached the point where the number of entertainment choices, the un-originality of them, the hoops and interruptions and surveillance they come with, has reduced their value to next to nothing. What we need is fewer sources, not more. We need aggregators, like cable TV services with on-demand access, at fair prices, with actual competition and no sports channel taxes.

    Netflix is the best we have, but they are moving in the wrong direction, increasing prices so they can offer their own programming. They don't have an ESPN tax, but they do have a Orange-is-the-new-black tax. And their selection isn't awesome and isn't timely or even stable.

    I won't see the new Trek until it has been out on DVD long enough to drop in price, a lot, because I hate even the ads they sometimes put on DVD, so I won't pay more than $17 for a season of television programming.

    Or maybe Netflix will pick it up and I'll get to see it before they drop it...and re-add it...and drop it... and...

    Screw it. All this wonderful technology the 21st century has brought us has pretty much been squandered by shitty business models and fucking shareholder value.

  13. Not "on television" but "online" by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2

    ...subsequent episodes will appear on CBS's online platform, "All Access."...

    Looks like I won't be able to see the show, because all I have here is an old TV antenna clinging to the side of the chimney....

  14. Canadians Bracing by Strixy · · Score: 2

    Canadians (and anyone who isn't a'Murican) are already bracing for the inevitable, "Not available in your country" error message.

  15. Great, let's sink the franchise even lower by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The first episode will air on CBS

    Red flag #1. CBS sucks ass and they have 0 balls. If this show is anything like all the other bland shit that's on network TV these days, it will make even Voyager look good by comparison.

    subsequent episodes will appear on CBS's online platform, "All Access."

    subsequent episodes will appear on CBS's online platform, "All Access."

    Red flag #2. Network doesn't even believe in it enough to put it on their regular broadcast channel. They're just using it to promote their shitty also-ran streaming channel. Hello, lots of low budget episodes.

    The show will be produced by Alex Kurtzman

    Red Flag #3. Let's get the fucktard behind those shitty action-movies-with-a-Star-Trek-skin to produce! He understands that REAL Star Trek ain't about all that thinkin' shit, it's about 'PLOSIONS!!!!

    CBS is currently looking for a writer to helm the show.

    Red Flag #4. CBS says "We don't even have a clue yet what it's going to be about, where we're going to go with it, or who's going to write it. But dammit, let's greenlight this thing! Just slap a Star Trek label on it and people will watch, right?"

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  16. Re:PC TREK by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Can you imagine how bad the original Star Trek would have been if SJWs had been involved?

    http://heydeadguy.typepad.com/...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.