Skip to main content

Is there any reason for no new Star Trek TV series for past nearly ten years?




Next year we will "celebrate" tenth anniversary of airing last episodes of last Star Trek TV series.


Since I'm a Star Trek newbie, and I'm totally out of "surrounding rumors", can someone explain me, what is the real cause for this (if any)? Ten years is a vast amount of time.


Polish (my native) version of Star Trek: Enterprise Wikipedia article have even, somewhat "funny" (though completely outdated now) remark, that with cancellation of StarTrek: Enterprise, season 2005/2006 has become first for past eighteen years, that no new Star Trek TV episode was aried. Now we have eight more seasons like that. I think there should be some reason for that.


Note, that I read this closed question and most of its comments and I don't think mine falls into the same rule. Even, if there will be any new TV series produced and aired soon, thinkt, that my question will remain valid. It is interesting and should be interesting in future (at least to Star Trek newbies, like me): What caused nearly ten years of no Star Trek TV series after eighteen years of uninterrupted trial of series after series?


In other words, this question askes for reasons for current nearly ten years long situation, not if there will be any change to it (which would make the question off-topic and closed as cited one).



Answer



I've yet to hear any official source or information regarding that.


But I think one of the biggest problems for Star Trek is the franchise itself: "We've had that story before."


It's also apparent in the existing series (even TOS). Many stories always follow the same or a similar pattern with some slight variation. Also keep in mind that the three series from the 90's (and 80's) - TNG, DS9, and VOY - all co-existed in some way in the same timespan covering different aspects. In essence, they tried to tell different stories from different parts of space with different promises and settings. That worked rather well.


But at some point there isn't anything new to explore. Should they create a second TNG or DS9? I don't think that will work overall - it might feel too repetitive. And in-universe time goes on too. They can't tell new stories during timespans that got covered already (limits possibilities regarding global things happening). They already tried a prequel (with ENT) and they'd most likely run out of ideas and bad guys in case they create another sequel.



I see the biggest chance in new stories when taking the rebooted movies into consideration. But in the end this won't solve the whole "we've had that before". It just opens the possibility to retell known stories to add some variation (e.g. The Wrath of Khan and the latest movie).


Oh, and what could be interesting for me in some way: Creating a spin-off based on the whole temporal directive/timeship stuff introduced in VOY. It could get hard to find many huge and important problems supporting alterating the time line though. Plus I don't think they'd want to continue two different timelines (pun intended, more or less :)).


Edit: I think it's actually pretty safe to assume that this related question and answer could almost be seen as some kind of duplicate. The only difference, back before Star Trek: Voyager they had that one idea they haven't done before.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

What is Tolkien trying to say in this letter?

In a draft of a letter, later recorded as #246, Tolkien makes a strange statement. I am interested in the first few sentences of the letter, but I will include the remainder for the sake of context. In the 'Mirror of Galadriel', 1381, it appears that Galadriel conceived of herself as capable of wielding the Ring and supplanting the Dark Lord. If so, so also were the other guardians of the Three, especially Elrond . But this is another matter. It was part of the essential deceit of the Ring to fill minds with imaginations of supreme power . But this the Great had well considered and had rejected, as is seen in Elrond's words at the Council. Galadriel's rejection of the temptation was founded upon previous thought and resolve. In any case Elrond or Galadriel would have proceeded in the policy now adopted by Sauron: they would have built up an empire with great and absolutely subservient generals and armies and engines of war, until they could challenge Sauron and destroy ...

harry potter - What is the difference between Diffindo and Sectumsempra?

In the Harry Potter books, Diffindo is called the 'Severing Charm' and it’s most commonly used to cut ropes and the like. However, in the last book Hermione uses it on Ron but misses, creating a 'slash in his jeans' and his knee gets cut, causing him to 'roar in pain'. We've only seen Sectumsempra used once on screen when Harry directly uses it on Malfoy in the sixth book, but there it's mentioned that he is 'waving his wand wildly'. Wouldn't Diffindo, if used in such a fashion also cause a similar effect? Similarly, if it was able to cut Ron, it would also be able to, say, chop off an ear (George's)? In that case, how are these two spells different, except for Sectumsempra seemingly used exclusively to hurt humans? Answer While Diffindo and Sectumsempra both can be countered by other spells, Diffindo is far more easily countered. Reparo, a relatively common spell, can completely reverse its effect when used once. “He pulled the old cop...

harry potter - How could Expelliarmus beat Avada Kedavra?

I want to be very careful about how I ask this question – I am not asking How did Voldemort die? [CLOSED] Below the text is the relevant passages from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows if anyone wants to review them (I'm sorry for the amount of text). How did Expelliarmus beat Avada Kedavra and kill Voldemort? I feel the reason Harry's Expelliarmus overpowered Voldemort's Avada Kedavra curse has to do with who was master of the Elder Wand and how the Elder Wand works. I've always had trouble understanding fully how the Elder Wand works, though. How much did the fact that Voldemort never truly won or mastered the Elder Wand factor into how Expelliarmus reacted to Avada Kedavra and caused Avada Kedavra to rebound and kill Voldemort? An answer based in book canon would be especially welcome, but any canon source really is fine. Harry heard the high voice shriek as he, too, yelled his best hope to the heavens, pointing Draco’s wand: ‘ Avada Kedavra !’ ‘ Expelliarmus !...