A New Star Trek Series Is Coming in 2017

Star Trek is boldly going where no television series has gone before—directly to CBS's new digital platform, All Access. 

A new Star Trek TV series will premiere on CBS in January 2017, the network announced Monday. The first episode will air on the CBS TV network, but all subsequent episodes will be exclusively available through All Access, CBS's digital subscription service, which costs $5.99 per month.

The series will introduce new characters, but will explore similar themes as the original show, which debuted in 1966 and starred William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy. Alex Kurtzman, who co-wrote and produced the recent movies Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness, will executive produce the show, along with Heather Kadin. It will not be connected to the upcoming film Star Trek Beyond, which hits theaters in summer 2016.

All previous episodes of the original Star Trek series (as well as other current and archived CBS shows) are already available on All Access.

Will you subscribe to All Access in order to watch the new Star Trek?


This article originally appears on TV Guide.com.

Comments (235)
Submit
Sort: Latest | Popular
Feb 21, 2016
Pay twice I don't think so.
And what happens to the "die-hard fans" if they pay and it turns out like crap (which most if not all TV shows are anyways). $5.99 per month may not seem much put add it up and measure it against what you get as for me not me.
Reply
Flag
Feb 16, 2016
Write to CBS: http://www.cbs.com/feedback/
Choose "CBS All Access" as the category and let them know how you feel. I just left a lengthy but respectful discourse on not estranging the community that forms the roots of this franchise.
Reply
Flag
Jan 05, 2016
No, I will not. We already pay too much for t.v..
What a rip off. Every year it goes up, and we get less and less programming we actually watch, and more we don't watch. I will not pay to watch t.v. on my tablet. T.V. use to be "free" through the airaves. Household antennas.
I remember when water was free -now we pay.
T.V. was free -now we pay, what's next? Paying for the air we breath? If you need oxygen, you sure do.
If they can find a way to charge you for what God gave us on this planet, they will.
I HAVE LOVED STARTREK, all my life, but will not pay to watch
t.v. on the internet, I pay for "that" already.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 20, 2015

Reply
Flag
Nov 04, 2015
Since I do not live in the USA the Q is moot!

Anyway here is a nice article:
http://www.empireonline.com/movies/features/star-trek-tv-worked-next/
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 05, 2015
Q is never moot!


1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I'm always amazed how network executives don't seem to show much of a foresight. Having a digital subscription service is trendy nowadays and everyone wants to establish one for themselves, sure, but what do you think is going to happen eventually? Your average user won't be throwing away several bucks every month just so they could get access to a few decent shows (if that). Even if they wanted to, it's not likely to be affordable for many. Especially with the likes of Netflix out there, and the kind of pricing that currently exists.

As for the new Star Trek, I suppose I'm in the neutral camp. I'm not very familiar with the old Treks, and I've mostly been exposed only to the recent movies (which were enjoyable in their own right - but if you are to believe some diehard fans, they don't do the series justice).
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
No. I don't want 10+ individual streaming services and I don't want to encourage them to keep doing that. I can see future now: I can watch this one show on CBS for $6.00/month and these other two shows I like on HBO for $9.99/month, etc., etc. No. No. No Thank you.

I'd only pay if the all the networks got together and made everything available, commercial free, for one monthly price. I also don't want them removing things (like Netflix). Just one streaming service with one monthly fee. Build that please! (Yes, I'll keep dreaming!)

They could have different packages though. Something like:

1. Unlimited streaming: one price for currently airing shows and an additional fee to access the archive.

2. A limited number of shows for a monthly fee. They set the quantity. We pick the shows. Keep it simple. No restrictions on the content. Do not want packages like cable channels (where they pick the shows). They will cleverly include shows I don't want to ever watch so that I'm forced to pick the next level of package. No. No. No.

-------
I doubt it will ever happen because this would require all these people to actually work together like adults. But, I think this idea would make a great mini (or continuing) series. It would be like watching a bunch of greedy, egotistical, arrogant 2 year old children. Very fun! Someone needs to write this.
More+
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
So ... produced and written by the people who brought you the modern Star Trek, AKA the Hollywood Trek which missed the entire point of Roddenberry's vision, and told everyone that it didn't negate the original timeline? Yeah, no. No no no no.

If, as the news implies, this is set in the fake new timeline, then it DOES mean the death of the original timeline, because we'll never again see a show set in that timeline. Which is absolute bollocks. JJ might as well just produce a new Starship Troopers TV show, because that's what this will turn out like. And only the people who didn't understand the whole point of the original timeline (DS9, Next Gen, original series and Voyager all included) will like it.

Pass. And also, shove it up your anus JJ.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 05, 2015
These kinds of companies will always go for the maximizing off profits. They could not be less interested in the ST-vision if they tried.

In the world of Roddenberry poverty and disease was eradicated. Humanity focused on science, personal growth and social progress and that's not exactly the capitalist model the want us all to obey!

No, what they have in their sights is a univers where the Vulkans are bullies, sexism runs rampant and death and destruction is the norm!

This really is
the new Star Trek series we have been waiting for (sarcasm notification).

Perhaps the authors of that sickening violendt orgy 'the Kingsman "could write a few episodes .. That would be a real enrichment of Roddenberry heritage (second sarcasm notification)!
More +
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Awesome we are getting a new show but paying for it sucks (arrrrrrrr not me :) and the people responsible for those two latest abortions/movies are involved sucks more. It will be interesting to see if it will be set in the alternate universe of the latest movies or the proper timeline.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Isn't this like the 100th Star Trek show? and i bet people are happy about this tripe
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
It's been 10 years. That's long enough to wait lol.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
2 films since then though - the ST fans don't need ANOTHER show
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
The films don't count, as they were made for morons, and weren't even slightly Trek-like.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 04, 2015
Still i'd like to see more original shows than more Star Trek

And the reception for those ST movies were highly positive - i am not a fan of them myself (i just hate the whole ST franchise) - but that is a lot of morons
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
They're obviously doing this to get people to subscribe. But it could wind up being only 6 episodes long. And it's likely to eventually show up on TV at some point, if there's any production value in it. Once they have the subscribers they don't need to keep feeding them.

There's a few fan-made Star Trek shows out there, and one or two aren't that badly done. Will the show have that level of production or something better? You can get away with a lower budget on the Internet than for a broadcast show.

Star Trek Academy has been an idea floating about for years. But are we really interested in seeing a bunch of people in Star Trek outfits standing around talking? One can see that at a SF convention.

Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Netflix and Hulu (ugh) already get $8 a month, why would I pay $6 for one show?
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I was excited for the news at first. I didn't grow up watching Star Trek but I watch (the original series) on Netflix whenever I have a gap in my binging and I love it. I like the people involved and was all ready to spend the next two years anticipating the show until I read it was exclusively All Access. No thank you.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
it has been said so sooo many times before in this same thread.. but it bares repeating.

- it is bullshit like this, that makes me support piracy.

we live in the times of Nerdvana... everything scifi & superhero is banging out the $$$....but that does not mean you try to extort a captive fanbase either.

its like some CBS clown realises its 50years of trek ..lets hostage the baby!

id fund a kickstarter to hack the shit out of this CBS digiplatform before i subscribe for this bullshit.

& having Kurtzman EP this show fills me with soo much dread.

9
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
''50years of trek ..lets hostage the baby!''

...'Lets Hostage the baby'. Hahahahahah......OMG... I Love this so hard.

I'm going to find a reason to say this to somebody.

Made me laugh very hard.

Reply
Flag
Nov 05, 2015
Klingons do not take hostages
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
They've been effectively doing the same thing for years with the movies. If you want to see Star Trek you have to go to the theater and pay. OR you can buy the DVD later. But it eventually gets to TV. It's likely this show will show up on TV within a year.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
seeing pretty much universally negative response - i'm hoping, even thinking it probable, that CBS is going to have to re-think this. it makes sense when Netflix adds a show - it might get you to join up - cause they have SO much more to offer, and such a larger variety than just CBS programs. CBS needs to either go all in and do a new over-the-air network star trek, or just don't do one. just a bad idea - that does indeed feel like fan extortion.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
well if its stream only (if i read that correct), does that also mean its US only?

1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Since the service is US only then it would be only available in the US. But it could show up on Netflix in Canada or even Space eventually.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Most likely, the rest of the world will face "geographical restrictions."
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I'll watch the first episode. But that will be it. I refuse to pay to pay for yet ANOTHER streaming service.

I'm a long time sci-fi fan. I've watched every ST series that has been aired. But CBS making a streaming only series? That's ridiculous. It is not the same syndication model that previous ST series followed.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
It's likely the episodes will be repeated. If you wait until after the day after the first episode aired you may be able to watch a repeat of the first episode and catch the second, so you can watch two episodes. Or if they keep all the older episodes about wait until they've all aired and marathon them in a week.
Reply
Flag
Nov 04, 2015
It doesn't matter if they are going to repeat it the day after, the week after, or at any other time. The point is, I don't feel the cost for yet ANOTHER streaming service is justified.
Reply
Flag
Nov 04, 2015
My point was that if you time it right you could watch the whole season for free.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Yeah that is some class A Bullshit right there. No way am are they going to force me to sign up just to watch the new Star Trek series. I mean I'm still gonna watch it - but I'll download it off the internet. IDGAF!
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Will you subscribe to All Access in order to watch the new Star Trek?
Answer: NO
4
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I will watch it, I will not pay.
6
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Same.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Who the hell is going to subscribe to a dozen streaming services the way things are going? Besides, JJ Abrams made a mess of all the established Trek tech and canon and a series would probably be the same.
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I just hope it's canon for after the GOD AWFUL ST: NEMESIS! Please don't let the storyline end with that stinker Paramount. Maybe revisit DS9? Just an idea, that show was left on a cliffhanger.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
The new CBS Star Trek TV series will have nothing to do with the Star Trek paramount feature film series and will not be produced by Paramount.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Ironically the Star Trek movie actually served as a sequel to Nemesis with Spock Prime dealing with the Romulans. If they're not ignoring the movies we might need an interquel!
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Nope, will now wait, TORRENTS!
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
A strictly streaming service smacks of under budgeting and/or gauging scifi fans in an era of the nerd!
Not so sure about Heather Kadin's influence, as I'm not enamored with the shows she's done so far.
However, it's Star Trek, I'm in.
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Okay so of course there are all kinds of ways this could suck: the streaming, the JJ effect, the risk-averse studio. But there's nothing like a Star Trek TV show and I could really use another one. I am super excited for this. Maybe it'll epitomise all the worst parts of the movies, but I dunno, with a TV show it would be hard for it to be too superficial, with so many hours to fill eventually they'll have to give us something substantial, plus the golden/peak age of TV will hopefully influence the show.

I would love to see what was going on in the Federation after the TNG era shows (of course that was before the movies wiped the timeline but in scifi there are always take backs). Parts of Bryan Singer's proposed Star Trek Federation show sounded very promising (but then again it was Singer). And who knows, they might even come up with a ship name other than Enterprise!
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I doubt they are going to give this the budget it needs to flourish.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
We'll see if this gets screwed up as bad as the movies.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Do not expect a STOS retread.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I hope not. TOS sucked. lol Maybe something in the middle?
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
$5.99 for a single network is a great reason to pirate the hell out of CBS shows, IMO.

and here's hoping there's a seven of nine character.
5
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
If it's a good series I'd consider buying it when it comes to DVD. So I wouldn't feel bad 'previewing' it. ;)
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
...whose boobs don't get smaller episodes in like T'Pol's.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
No. The way they mess up the old shows/movies these days I just don't care and it would take a lot for me to watch it. I know PC is no longer PC but I fear this one will be like so many less sic-fi and more PC.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
There's always room for more Star Trek...
7
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Not JJ's Trek. That's not even Trek.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 05, 2015
so true
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Something we can agree on!
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Well said.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Is it my birthday? This is everything I've been wanting since the last series of Star Trek ended. =D
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I'm glad you like your Star Trek present. ;)
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Happy Birthday!
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
The service will have commercials, according to some other articles I'm seeing. Even if I were a Start Trek fan, that would put it in the same category as Hulu for me--I don't effing think so.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
hulu offers commercial free now for a few dollars more.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
It was my understanding that the higher tier was more 'minimal commercials', not really commercial-free. But it doesn't matter, I pay for Amazon and Netflix and quite like both, and any new services would need to be really attractive for me to consider adding another.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
so far the only show I've run into that has commericals at all is once upon a time and it has a single 15 sec. or so commercial before the episode and then not another until after the end credits. and that would be the case for any of the others that still have forced commercials.

I tried prime and didn't feel like it differed enough from netflix's offerings to justify it. as far as I'm aware hulu+ is the only option for current - rather than post-season - content? as someone without cable that's the biggest deal for me.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Good to hear from someone who uses it. Amazon has a lot of PBS/BBC content that Netflix doesn't. It seems like one or the other generally has what I'm looking for, though occasionally I have to pay for a show or get a DVD instead of free streaming. I also watch some of the original programming for both. I have Prime anyway because I really hate to shop and Amazon saves me a lot of time, though apparently at the expense of my soul. The video is just a really nice bonus.
1
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Very cool. Looks like Trek fans will make the first real inroads to "who needs traditional content delivery", and CBS will be positioning itself as the leader in adjusting the networks to fit the new paradigm. Very very cool. Now if Kurtzman can just keep from ripping off old Trek storylines, ala Into Darkness, we may really have something. And hell, if its a disconnect to the new "canon" promulgated in the latest movies, why not just recast the iconic original characters? Yeah, I know: might as wish for the Brocolli's to allow a TV series based upon a period 60's James Bond reliving Fleming's actual writings. But hey, good news is good news indeed! What fun.
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I got excited at the headline then got all pessimistic when I found out it was exclusive to CBS All Access. That implies lower budget, which I don't think will work for Star Trek. Still hoping its good though. I just started Voyager again and was pining for a new show.
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
low budget? you mean like how when they get fired on in space, and get hit their seats rumble and thats about it.. like youre riding that old Star tours attraction at Disney land?

Or how about how I have never seen an actual space battle/dogfight in star trek instead of just super slow paced.... lets stand here and get hit and hope our shields outlast theirs battles? Yeah Star Trek is already low budget
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Let me clarify for you then, my sensitive friend; low budget by Star Trek standards.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 04, 2015
that would just be a black screen with audio..... whod watch that?
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Hallelujah! Best TV news EVER. Too bad I'm not in the states but I'm sure it will come around here as well somewhere. And if it means I need to pay for another VoD subscription then so be it - it's STAR TREK.

The sentence about it not being connected to Star Trek Beyond has me puzzled though. At first glance it sounds like it is not part of the new JJ-verse, which would make sense as CBS only owns the rights to TV Star Trek, not to the movies, therefor could not make a show based on the movies. But why are they referncing the next movie only, not Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness?
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
As long as they don't turn it into a soap opera I'm in.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
You know they will.
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
New Star Trek? Yay! Exclusive to CBS All Access? Boo!

I am looking forward to watching this, and seeing if/how they keep things fresh, while being faithful to the older series, but I'll wait until it comes out on DVD or something, since I have no interest in subscribing to CBS All Access.
4
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I'll wait for trailers

Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I already pay way too much for DirecTV, I don't think I can justify paying for All Access. I really love Star Trek :(
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
The internets are your friend - they will guide you too it regardless - and for free.
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Pay? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
7
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I've watched Star Trek the Original Series (TOS), including the movies of the 80s and the movies by JJ Abrams. Spock is one of my most favorite TV characters ever.
I think Star Trek is one franchise that is best through TV shows.
First there were 3 seasons of TOS and 6 motion pictures during the 80s. Those movies were clearly linked ; as a TV show would be.
Then, even if there was no pilot for the TV show (does someone here want to discuss the introduction with Pike ?), and the stories were never serialized per say, the characters evolved greatly. The evolution continued in the 80s movies, and what a great one !
Finally, Star Trek is first and foremost a story about characters. Of course, those characters meet ET and everything but characters are Star Trek foundation. Best trio of television ? Kirk, Spock and McCoy !

So, yeah I'm glad there is going to be a Star Trek TV show. I've been waiting for it a long time.
I really really hope it will respect the franchise. I must admit though that I'm not optimistic. Maybe because is on CBS on demand, the show will respect the story and the audience it's made for ?
More+
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Hope it's based on Star Trek after Next Gen and before the two shitty movies that destroyed the franchise...
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I love Star Trek, calling me a Trekkie wouldn't be inaccurate, but it would be a waste to get a subscription to watch just one show. I guess it will be a pirating situation, or waiting until it is eventually available some other way, on DVD or for download. I mean, obviously I'll watch it eventually, if it's any good. Maybe if all episodes are up at once, and it's possible to get a single-month subscription, that could be a possibility.

I'm more interested in the actual show then how I'll watch it. I wonder if it will be good. And what canon it will follow, movie or tv canon. And when it will be set. Post Enterprise? Post movies? Post TOS? Post DS9? (DS9 ended at a later Star Date than Voyager, right?) Will it have a small budget, considering its direct-to-streaming situation?
4
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Well thats my first 2017 dead pool pick locked in!
(eventhough i would love it to be good, with this model it's made to fail)
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
They will have tons of foreign sales too so it will get at least one season.
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I only have one subscription service: Netflix. Star Trek the next generation is available in HD. I have the original series (only 3 seasons) on DVD.

CBS all access will probably not be available outside the US because local networks who will eventually license the content will want to disallow streaming in Europe because they see it as a threat to their existence. So...


And the prime directive dictates i don't get involved with lesser technological advanced humans, like for instance copyright holders and law enforcement. They just never learn. Internet = anarchy. People with enough technological know how use a VPN, paranoid users use two or more VPNs, If you are a conspiracy theorist you combine this with TOR. (the onion router)
256 bit encryption is mandatory if you want to be safe.

The miracle is this - the more we share, the more we have.”
― Leonard Nimoy






3
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
CBS plans on *eventually* pushing All Access out overseas, just as Netflix has done.
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
And probably gauging them the same as Netflix also.
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I don't know. While Hulu is growing with 4 networks working together (plus a bunch of smaller affiliates), CBS wants $6 a month for a single network? You're not that special CBS. Maybe team up with some other content providers to enhance your offering.

Even though I'd love a new Star Trek tv series, I don't believe a show designed for your fledgling internet service is going to be up to standards, honestly.

And honestly I don't believe they'll go through with this plan. It'll get a weak response, then they'll either switch to a traditional broadcast or scrap the idea completely.
5
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
It's already a done deal, and it will probably succeed at boosting All Access subscriptions.
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Yeah....this is going to reach Game of Thrones level piracy numbers and not be the success for subscribers CBS hopes for. Hulu, Amazon, and Netflix are still better options than a monthly subscription for one network's properties.
5
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
If they get Ira Steven Behr and Rene Echevaria to write it, I will definitely watch. Though honestly, if I can make it through Enterprise I can make it through any Star Trek series.
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I apologize ahead of time for my language, but fuck that. They're trying to get people to subscribe to their digital service by putting out an already popular brand name. It's just a cash grab. There's no way I'd subscribe just for one show, which may just be Star Trek in name only.
8
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
This is just a first entry into what will be CBS's only-online line of business that is pretty much guaranteed to eventually become a full-fledged profit center.
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
It's dead Jim, leave the god damn thing alone already
6
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I would like a new Star Trek series because i generally like Star Trek, but these days i am mostly worried that they destroy it. The new movies are not in the spirit of Star Trek. They are more of action movies, missing all the things that makes Star Trek unique. I did not like them.

We also have a huge PC problem with tv and movies today, and Star Trek was even sometimes a bit PC long before it was "mainstream" and "cool" to be PC so will it now be insanely PC then to stay ahead or what will happen?

I am not interested in having a TOO obviously carefully planned "racially and sexually diverse crew" or something like that that so many tv-shows has today. The older Star Trek shows always already HAD that, but they did not cram it down our throats and scream it in our ears like the PC-ness of today. It was just there and nobody talked about it, our pointed it out. It was just there, implicitly.
7
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I kind of disagree. The Star Trek philosophy is the ultimate PC. It's about creating projections of the future to shine a light on the bullshit conservative bigotry that's holding contemporary society back. So yes they should have a multicultural crew and a crew with multiple gender orientations. And they should create stories that are thinly veiled aggressive satires on current events, somewhat masked as adventure stories.

I get that a lot of the more progressive modern shows tend to be pretty melodramatic (see Glee, Grey's Anatomy, etc) and Star Trek should not be like that. There does need to be a level of subtlety there. But you really can't have Star Trek without PC.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Trek has rarely pinpointed a PC issue and touched on it directly, other than the occasional allegorical plot. Trek tackled bigotry by just giving us a future without bigotry. It didn't need to comment on it or preach, because it was showing us a universe which found a better alternative. That to me feels like far better storytelling.
4
Reply
Flag
Nov 05, 2015
so true
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Good point.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
If we put it this way, i prefer Star Treks brand/method of PC and their vision of it. Often with PC today it is not primarily the message that is the most annoying part, but the method. HOW they are PC. I watched a TV show a week ago that was relatively entertaining, then all of a sudden without warning two main male characters is cuddling and kissing, an interracial male gay relationsship.

They just had to cram it down my throat, for no good reason at all. The relationship does not have anything to do with the overall story or fills any function. It was just this one scene. Not needed at all. Nothing else in the show is about sex, love or relationships. We never get to see any other character kiss and cuddle, so why them? Another character was a crossdresser all of a sudden, also for no reason at all except that part filled a function in the story. But it was still crammed in.

Also the modern version/vision of PC is just conflict and chaos, identity politics and groups against groups. Star Trek had a much more organized and fair view of the future in their vision. Star Trek is utopian, where everybody strives to be the best they can be to create a world in harmony and peace, that is not unfair or excludes anyone.

Todays PC-vision is dystopian, where everybody is encouraged to be the worst garbage they can be, behave badly and be in constant intergroup conflict and everything is one groups fault and everybody else should get advantages at that groups disadvantage.

just look at the number of white heterosexual males in the crews in the older Star Trek shows. Their PC-vision INCLUDES them as well. The modern PC-vision is about removing all white heterosexual males from the crew and replacing them. THAT would be very annoying if that happens.
More +
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I can agree that modern shows are often lacking in the how. But I can't help thinking that you have an issue with interracial male gay relationships and such. When TOS came out people complained about having an African American woman, a zealous Russian and a Chinese American on the bridge - they were taking positions away from white heterosexual males. They objected even more to the interracial kiss between Spock and Uhura. People who liked the show weren't bothered by these things and celebrated them.

And as to modern PC being anti-white heterosexual males, I can accept that sometimes it seems like people are arguing for more diversity in casting just for the sake of it, a sort of affirmative action. Bur come one, look at the television and movie landscape, white male heterosexual characters continue to dominate. So why get so defensive? Surely the under-represented demographics are the ones who have a legitimate right to be upset. Why should we turn on them just because sometimes they might get a little over-zealous. Despite how progressive it is I can gurantee the new show will have many white male heterosexuals, Hollywood is too conservative to allow anything else.
Reply
Flag
Nov 04, 2015
Actually, that helps a lot. I think Star Trek will always need to be inclusive and challenge society, that's part of its DNA. But it should definitely do so in a way that is true to the characters, the story and the setting. That's something we all deserve.
1
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
I DO have an issue with it and i do not think it is something to strive for at all, politically i am against it. However i can tolerate it if it is done in a good way. Appropriate, logical, fitting the rest of the story and not forced or explicitly provocative. Not just there "for the sake of it."

I understand that many people have an issue with me or others having an issue with that particular topic, because it is considered so "wrong" or "controversial" or whatever but i feel the same way with many other things i have an issue with in tv and movies, that is generally accepted to have an issue with. If you get it?

To me "diversity" in tv and movies are just one topic among many i have an issue with if not done in a good way. Cursing, drugs, sex, violence, badly drawn cartoons and style over substance is a few examples of other things i can tolerate if they are done right, but bothers me very much if they are done wrong. Whenever any of those things are shoved into a tv show or movie, "just for the sake of it" or just done wrong i usually have an issue with it.

It might even be more a question of artistic taste and overall quality for me, than a political thing. Even if it is political as well. But i can deal with ANY (political) message or artistic style, if it is done by somebody with talent and done with a sense of style and finesse.

Maybe this makes no sense at all to you. :)
More +
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I so agree with what your saying. The new movies are making mr Roddenberry spin around in his galactic grave, but i'm avraid that this new series is going to make him go supernova. But never mind me because who cares about the opinion of a old NextGen fan..
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
I know one guy that does not care about old NextGen fans, Jar Jar Abrams who directed the movies, he even said so himself. I read some days ago somebody had the brilliant idea that JJ stands for Jar Jar, i think that was so funny so we decide that it does. :)
2
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
The point was that it was set in the future and by then discrimination mattered little, if at all - at least among Earthlings.

I believe Patrick Stewart stated on some late show or interview something about his being bald and did they not have a cure for that in the future, but he said something to the effect that no one cared anymore about baldness.
4
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
He auditioned in a wig but it looked stupid so they had him come back and do it again el natural and he got the part anyway. So its not some deep meaningful thing about the future of mankind why he is bald, the tv execs did not like the bad fitting toupee he had on :)
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 03, 2015
Did not know that, but I think that and his remark were two different things. It was some casual off-hand reply he made when it was brought up, which at that time I believe was his personal interpretation to the idea of why anyone who was bald would not take a cure, as there should probably have been one by then.
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
Exactly, that was the impression i got too. Those things do not matter in the future. So, if they make a new one now and really press on these issues as they do in many other shows, it will just become annoying and malplaced.

Also if they try to make it "grittier", "darker" or more explicit with graphic sex, violence and cursing. All of which are common "modern" things in many shows today but things which would hurt the genuine Star Trek feeling very much.
3
Reply
Flag
Nov 05, 2015
so true
1
Reply
Flag
Nov 02, 2015
There's no way I'm paying CBS $5.99 a month to watch one original series (probably with commercials intact) and 20 years of old CBS shite. Thanks to Netflix and Amazon, haven't crossed the copyright infringement line to watch something in years. But given this bonehead decision by CBS, I'm betting that the new Star Trek will unseat GoT as the most pirated television episodes!!
6
Reply
Flag
Load More Comments