Star Trek: Discovery (Paramount+)

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
Star Trek: New Series (CBS)(2017)

New ‘Star Trek’ TV Series To Premiere January 2017 On CBS

http://deadline.com/2015/11/star-trek-tv-series-alex-kurtzman-1201603597/

Ever since Alex Kurtzman and Bob Orci, key players on the Star Trek feature franchise, moved to CBS TV Studios, there had been talk about them resurrecting the studio’s marquee title. Now the long-gestating new Star Trek TV series is becoming a reality. It will be shepherded by Kurtzman, who will serve as executive producer. He had quietly been meeting with potential writers for the past few months. CBS Television Studios is the studio.

The first original series developed specifically for CBS All Access, is set to premiere in January 2017. It 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, according to the network. It will launch with a special preview broadcast on the CBS network. The premiere episode and all subsequent first-run episodes will then be available exclusively in the U.S. on CBS All Access. The franchise will also be distributed concurrently for television and multiple platforms around the world by CBS Studios International.

Kurtzman and Orci have gone their separate ways in features. On the TV side, their company, CBS TV Studios-based Kurtzman/Orci Paper Products, is still intact though Kurtzman is expected to work solo on the Star Trek series as one of the projects under a separate deal with the studio.

CBS Corp. had been high on rebooting Star Trek with a new series installment, which had been a goal for the company.
 
OP
OP
Brian in Mesa

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
New Star Trek Series Premieres January 2017

http://www.startrek.com/article/new-star-trek-series-premieres-january-2017

CBS Television Studios announced today it will launch a totally new Star Trek television series in January 2017. The new series will blast off with a special preview broadcast on the CBS Television Network. The premiere episode and all subsequent first-run episodes will then be available exclusively in the United States on CBS All Access, the Network’s digital subscription video on demand and live streaming service.

The new program will be the first original series developed specifically for U.S. audiences for CBS All Access, a cross-platform streaming service that brings viewers thousands of episodes from CBS’s current and past seasons on demand, plus the ability to stream their local CBS Television station live for $5.99 per month. CBS All Access already offers every episode of all previous Star Trek television series.

CBS All Access offers its customers more than 7,500 episodes from the current television season, previous seasons and classic shows on demand nationwide, as well as the ability to stream local CBS stations live in more than 110 markets. Subscribers can use the service online and across devices via CBS.com, the CBS App for iOS, Android and Windows 10, as well as on connected devices such as Apple TV, Android TV, Chromecast, Roku players and Roku TV, with more connected devices to come.
 

puckhead

Waxing Gibbous
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Posts
15,980
Reaction score
14,198
Location
Moment, AZ
If this is sub only, they can boldly GTFOOH. :mad:
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
If this is sub only, they can boldly GTFOOH. :mad:

Yep, it sounds like the premiere will be on broadcast, but all the other episodes won't.

This will do one of 2 things--get tons of Trekkies to sign up for their service, or turn people against CBS with a vengeance. I'm betting on the latter.
 

CardsFan88

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 28, 2002
Posts
7,195
Reaction score
3,723
If it's not available for free, it will fail. I love Star Trek and watched every series, including DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise with Scott Bakula, but Star Trek series are kind of hit and miss with the general public. They can love 'em one minute and forget about them later. It also didn't help they ended The Next Generation when it was at it's peak.

But there is no way I'm paying $5.99 a month to watch one TV series. The people of America are losing their incomes in this ongoing and deepening depression, yet everyone and their mother wants you to subscribe to some 5.99-11.99 a month service. There's simply too many of them, and looks like more and more are on the way. Oh and I'm sure we'll all see 2-3 more cable bill increases between now and then. There's too much free content around, and with the web, and other mediums like video games, all this subscription stuff is going to fail pretty hard.

Not even Netflix makes money. They are burning through their money like crazy. I fully expect Netflix to hit 19.99 soon and only go up from there. I don't think they can make money even at 19.99, not with all their providers demanding more money.

If they delay the 'free' broadcast a week or a month, then I'm ok with it, just as long as there IS a free broadcast at some point.

But they are setting it up to fail if they keep it behind a paywall. Pay near HBO prices for the quality of a TV program that sucks up your bandwidth and monthly gb's. Ugh. I think if you get all the premium networks you end up averaging about 9 a month for each one.

In the end, each content provider wants you to pay some month fee, it's getting pretty insane out there.
 
Last edited:

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
If it's not available for free, it will fail. I love Star Trek and watched every series, including DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise with Scott Bakula, but Star Trek series are kind of hit and miss with the general public. They can love 'em one minute and forget about them later. It also didn't help they ended The Next Generation when it was at it's peak.

But there is no way I'm paying $5.99 a month to watch one TV series. The people of America are losing their incomes in this ongoing and deepening depression, yet everyone and their mother wants you to subscribe to some 5.99-11.99 a month service. There's simply too many of them, and looks like more and more are on the way. Oh and I'm sure we'll all see 2-3 more cable bill increases between now and then.

If they delay the 'free' broadcast a week or a month, then I'm ok with it, just as long as there IS a free broadcast at some point.

But they are setting it up to fail if they keep it behind a paywall. Pay near HBO prices for the quality of a TV program. Ugh.

I know a lot of people that are already up in arms about CBS having their own streaming service for new content--but to now have a major property be EXCLUSIVE to that service? That's a recipe for disaster.
 

puckhead

Waxing Gibbous
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Posts
15,980
Reaction score
14,198
Location
Moment, AZ
I'm a huge fan of ST and would never buy a service for just one exclusive.This will not go well for them if they continue down this road. I'm thinking they'll wise up pretty quick after this makes the rounds.
 

HeavyB3

Unregistered User
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
8,499
Reaction score
62
Location
Hicktown, AKA Buckeye, AZ
That sucks. I don't want to have to pay. This series is marked for death with that kind of deal. They'll kill it as soon as they realize they don't have the necessary number of subscribers.
 
OP
OP
Brian in Mesa

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
‘Star Trek’: Bryan Fuller Named Showrunner of New Series

http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/star-trek-bryan-fuller-showrunner-cbs-hannibal-1201700606/

“Hannibal” creator Bryan Fuller has found his next mission: showrunner and co-creator of CBS’ new “Star Trek” series.

A longtime fan of science fiction, Fuller began his career writing for “Star Trek: Voyager” (1997-2001) and “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” (1997).

“My very first experience of ‘Star Trek’ is my oldest brother turning off all the lights in the house and flying his model of a D7 Class Klingon Battle Cruiser through the darkened halls. Before seeing a frame of the television series, the ‘Star Trek’ universe lit my imagination on fire,” said Fuller. “It is without exaggeration a dream come true to be crafting a brand new iteration of ‘Star Trek’ with fellow franchise alum Alex Kurtzman and boldly going where no ‘Star Trek’ series has gone before.”

The new series is set to bow on CBS in January 2017, then move to CBS’ All Access digital subscription service. It will be the first original series to launch on a broadcast network but air primarily on an SVOD service.
 
OP
OP
Brian in Mesa

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
My guess is most people will just download the episodes. You'd think they'd want a wider audience watching the show when it first airs.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
33,988
Reaction score
11,801
Location
Arizona
This is problematic of the switch from network packages to a la carte TV. Honestly, it's a good thing that CBS is getting it's own streaming service. What is bad is that all of these networks doing so are charging outrageous pricing. People don't want to pay for TV packages where they watch 10% of the channels yet they don't want to be gouged on per network basis either.

It's an unfortunate side effect to the transition but I think more and more of the networks that start streaming their networks or going to do the same. I am cutting the cord this year and yeah...I will probably have HBO with Hulu, Netflix etc. Eventually, I think prices will come down but it's going to be painful for some time I think.

I agree though..bad distribution model to "force" people to subscribe to digital service. It's bad form. Plus it screws all of us going to OTA viewing of network TV.
 
Last edited:

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
This is problematic of the switch from network packages to a la carte TV. Honestly, it's a good thing that CBS is getting it's own streaming service. What is bad is that all of these networks doing so are charging outrageous pricing. People don't want to pay for TV packages where they watch 10% of the channels yet they don't want to be gouged on per network basis either.

It's an unfortunate side effect to the transition but I think more and more of the networks that start streaming their networks or going to do the same. I am cutting the chord this year and yeah...I will probably have HBO and CBS digital only service. Eventually, I think prices will come down but it's going to be painful for some time I think.

I work in television and I think you are off base. Having each network have their own streaming service is ludicrous.

CBS isn't good enough to pay a separate fee every month. Heck, if all the broadcast networks did that and you wanted all 5 of them, that's 25 bucks alone.

That is a recipe for disaster.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
33,988
Reaction score
11,801
Location
Arizona
I work in television and I think you are off base. Having each network have their own streaming service is ludicrous.

CBS isn't good enough to pay a separate fee every month. Heck, if all the broadcast networks did that and you wanted all 5 of them, that's 25 bucks alone.

That is a recipe for disaster.

Agree to disagree. For cord cutters, OTA service is not a reality for some. So, if you want to cut the cord and see first run TV, it's a valid option. Personally, I won't subscribe to CBS (fixed above) for just Trek. That part is ludicrous when I can get all the rest of the programming via OTA. That is an option for me. However, making shows exclusive to get you to subscribe when you have access to all the other programing? That is wrong.
 
Last edited:

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
Agree to disagree. For chord cutters, OTA service is not a reality for some. So, if you want to cut the chord and see first run TV, it's a valid option. Personally, I won't subscribe to CBS (fixed above) for just Trek. That part is ludicrous when I can get all the rest of the programming via OTA. That is an option for me. However, making shows exclusive to get you to subscribe when you have access to all the other programing? That is wrong.

Right now, there is CBS and then Hulu to get network shows. Hulu may or may not go away in the next year (since cable companies are pressuring networks to sever their deals with them), but if it does, it will be a disaster. The problem with this CBS model is that they think they are Netflix.

If you want to see House of Cards, you HAVE to get Netflix. If you want to see Star Trek, you HAVE to get CBS. Big difference here is the amount of content that is already on Netflix.

The future (and probably a long way off) is that linear broadcast will disappear, and everything will be over the internet and streaming. There are HUNDREDS of channels and an economic model where viewers have to pay per channel is crazy.

Look at this small list of shows:

Walking Dead
Star Trek
House of Cards
Game of Thrones
Orphan Black
The X-Files
Sherlock
Colony

Those are pretty big shows and all on different networks. If you don't like television, then that's one thing. That's a lot of money tied up, possibly even more than paying for a cable or satellite subscription.

HBO and CBS will cost you at least $20 and that's extremely limiting on what you can see.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
33,988
Reaction score
11,801
Location
Arizona
Right now, there is CBS and then Hulu to get network shows. Hulu may or may not go away in the next year (since cable companies are pressuring networks to sever their deals with them), but if it does, it will be a disaster. The problem with this CBS model is that they think they are Netflix.

If you want to see House of Cards, you HAVE to get Netflix. If you want to see Star Trek, you HAVE to get CBS. Big difference here is the amount of content that is already on Netflix.

The future (and probably a long way off) is that linear broadcast will disappear, and everything will be over the internet and streaming. There are HUNDREDS of channels and an economic model where viewers have to pay per channel is crazy.

Look at this small list of shows:

Walking Dead
Star Trek
House of Cards
Game of Thrones
Orphan Black
The X-Files
Sherlock
Colony

Those are pretty big shows and all on different networks. If you don't like television, then that's one thing. That's a lot of money tied up, possibly even more than paying for a cable or satellite subscription.

HBO and CBS will cost you at least $20 and that's extremely limiting on what you can see.

There a bunch if kinks to work out regarding the models but I still see it as a necessary evil to get away from big package TV. Hulu will not be able to maintain it's current business model. No way the Networks allow it to get newer programming as TV in general transitions. Hulu will have to rely on being a year behind and it's own original programming.

Eventually every major network will have their own streaming service. You can't blame them for trying to drive people to a subscription model by offering "exclusives". Sooner or later as people transition away from package TV, there will be a breaking point for that model.

Nobody is going to pay $19.99 per channel. Once you have 10 channels your back up to the prices that are driving people away from package tv to begin with. However, the more offerings you have out there the more competition IMO. I don't think free TV will completely go away anytime soon. However, I will get what I can via OTA and be very picky about which streaming services I subscribe to. Bottom line, I am not paying $100 or more to watch TV anymore. It's not worth it. That's why I agree that Trek experiment will probably fail.
 
Last edited:

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
There a bunch if kinks to work out regarding the models but I still see it as a necessary evil to get away from big package TV. Hulu will not be able to maintain it's current business model. No way the Networks allow it to get newer programming as TV in general transitions. Hulu will have to rely on being a year behind and it's own original programming.

Eventually every major network will have their own streaming service. You can't blame them for trying to drive people to a subscription model by offering "exclusives". Sooner or later as people transition away from package TV, there will be a breaking point for that model.

Nobody is going to pay $19.99 per channel. Once you have 10 channels your back up to the prices that are driving people away from package tv to begin with. However, the more offerings you have out there the more competition IMO. I don't think free TV will completely go away anytime soon. However, I will get what I can via OTA and be very picky about which streaming services I subscribe to. Bottom line, I am not paying $100 or more to watch TV anymore. It's not worth it. That's why I agree that Trek experiment will probably fail.

With your speculation, $100 or more to watch TV is EXACTLY what will happen. Instead of having 250 channels for $100, you'll have 10-20 instead.
 

Covert Rain

Father smelt of elderberries!
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Posts
33,988
Reaction score
11,801
Location
Arizona
With your speculation, $100 or more to watch TV is EXACTLY what will happen. Instead of having 250 channels for $100, you'll have 10-20 instead.

Potentially, yes. However, the same people that wanted to get away from expensive TV will probably be more picky about their subscriptions. That's the breaking point I was talking about. The networks will find out that people won't subscribe to all the channels if that means paying $100 or more.

The only thing the networks can do, is either vastly improve programming to entice people to switch programming or start competing with the other networks to lower their per subscription pricing.

For example, today I don't subscribe to all the premium channels after my TV package. I only subscribe to HBO. Sure I could spend more but the only show I care about right now is Game of Thrones. When that is done, whoever has the show I want to watch the most will get my premium subscription. I would imagine the same will happen to digital streaming services verses people really going out and subscribing to all of them.
 
Last edited:

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
Potentially, yes. However, the same people that wanted to get away from expensive TV will probably be more picky about their subscriptions. That's the breaking point I was talking about. The networks will find out that people won't subscribe to all the channels if that means paying $100 or more.

The only thing the networks can do, is either vastly improve programming to entice people to switch programming or start competing with the other networks to lower their per subscription pricing.

For example, today I don't subscribe to all the premium channels after my TV package. I only subscribe to HBO. Sure I could spend more but the only show I care about right now is Game of Thrones. When that is done, whoever has the show I want to watch the most will get my premium subscription. I would imagine the same will happen to digital streaming services verses people really going out and subscribing to all of them.

The problem with this is that it will signal a death knell to this current golden age of television. There won't nearly be as much money, so quality AND quantity will diminish.

Sounds like you don't really watch a lot of television, so you're plan doesn't sound so bad. But from the perspective of a network, it's a non-starter.
 
Top