New Star Trek TV Series In Development

[dravot]

You are all wrong.

They should set the new series in the post-DS9 era alternative universe (you know, the one with all the goatees & psychopaths).

That way, they can get an overturning the Empire vibe and recycle/repackage the best of Star Wars/Firefly/Blake's 7. And make it aaaaaall better.

I would so watch that show.

 

[Orius]

It's doubtful they'd set an entire series in the Mirror Universe given that that's kind of anti-Trek, but there's no problem with any new series occasionally dipping into it for fun. The original episode was great, and both DS9 and ENT pulled out some pretty good episodes set in it.

 

[Thunderfoot]

Danny, I think you hit upon something in passing, Blake's 7. Wasn't that a ST spin-off (sort of?). That never really got off the ground, maybe they should do a re-launch on that.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Wasn't that a ST spin-off (sort of?). That never really got off the ground, maybe they should do a re-launch on that.

Nah- Blake's 7 was a classic bit of late-70's British Sci-fi, in many ways presageing Firefly in its main storyline of a group of societal misfits fighting an oppressive government.

 

[Thunderfoot]

I remember now it was Gary Seven of the Assignment Earth episode.
The series never emerged as the CBS execs killed it before the pilot aired - I would love to get my hands on that.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I remember now it was Gary Seven of the Assignment Earth episode.
The series never emerged as the CBS execs killed it before the pilot aired - I would love to get my hands on that.

I remember reading about that!

I always though that episode felt like a setup for a spinoff, and then to see it confirmed in print...well it changed the way I looked at TV forever.

 

[jmucchiello]

Lucasfilm seems to have done well with The Clone Wars, though.

That's because Lucas owns Star Wars and he owns the animation studio: Lucasfilm Animation. So the licensing cost is $0.

Never compare what Lucas can do with Star Wars to anything anyone else can do with some other property because Star Wars is unique in that it is owned by its creator. That is unheard of in Hollywood.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That's because Lucas owns Star Wars and he owns the animation studio: Lucasfilm Animation. So the licensing cost is $0.

You might think that, but that is not how Hollywood works. I guarantee you that Lucasfilms is charged a standard licensing fee.

Hollywood companies tend to be vertically integrated. As in, the studio owns (in part or entire) the production company, the post-production company, the SFX company, the processing company, the ad company, the distribution company and possibly even the theater.

And at every step, fees get charged. That is because the people who own the above get paid based on what their companies do. So if you are an owner of a studio- and everything else in the company- you're getting a check at each step.

 

[Thunderfoot]

And don't forget, because Lucasfilms is an American company each and every employee must belong to a guild or union or else the Hollywood folks get very, very upset.

IATSI, SAG, VAG, BoEGaR, AES, etc all make sure entertainment employees have the right credentials so they can get their share of the dues. Why do you think a lot of the image work on most cartons is done in Asia? In other words, it ain't cheap.

 

[Cor Azer]

You might think that, but that is not how Hollywood works. I guarantee you that Lucasfilms is charged a standard licensing fee.

Hollywood companies tend to be vertically integrated. As in, the studio owns (in part or entire) the production company, the post-production company, the SFX company, the processing company, the ad company, the distribution company and possibly even the theater.

And at every step, fees get charged. That is because the people who own the above get paid based on what their companies do. So if you are an owner of a studio- and everything else in the company- you're getting a check at each step.

If taken to silly/criminal extremes, it's also how money is shuffled around such that record-breaking blockbusters make no *ahem* profit.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Which is called "Hollywood Accounting" for a reason.

Word of advice: if you ever have the good fortune to have your intellectual property get attention from Hollywood, either get a big lump sum payment OR base your royalties on the GROSS profits...because there will be not be any net profit.

 

[Thunderfoot]

This is why if you are getting into the entertainment business you need to get a REALLY good entertainment lawyer. Even if they aren't, everyone is out to screw you over, keep that in mind and you just might not get screwed.

 

[Cor Azer]

This is why if you are getting into the entertainment business you need to get a REALLY good entertainment lawyer. Even if they aren't, everyone is out to screw you over, keep that in mind and you just might not get screwed.

Off topic to Trek, but my favorite response to Hollywood Accounting was from the author of Forrest Gump - when the studios came looking for the rights to the sequel, he more-or-less said that he couldn't in good conscience sell it because the first movie was apparently such a bomb/flop.

 

[Janx]

You might think that, but that is not how Hollywood works. I guarantee you that Lucasfilms is charged a standard licensing fee.

Hollywood companies tend to be vertically integrated. As in, the studio owns (in part or entire) the production company, the post-production company, the SFX company, the processing company, the ad company, the distribution company and possibly even the theater.

And at every step, fees get charged. That is because the people who own the above get paid based on what their companies do. So if you are an owner of a studio- and everything else in the company- you're getting a check at each step.

thats really no different than internal chargebacks large companies do on interdepartmental resource usage. IT shops have been known to charge per computer in a department.

In this case though, with actual independent (but commonly owned) companies, each company needs to get paid for the work so they can pay their own employees, as well as prioritize the (work highest paying first).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

thats really no different than internal chargebacks large companies do on interdepartmental resource usage. IT shops have been known to charge per computer in a department.

Technically, you're right.

However, in Hollywood Accounting, every possible charge is added in, even if it wasn't necessary. For instance, if The Studio's post-production company is literally across the hall from it's editing studio, there WILL be a charge for shipping...and the security measures required to ship it...and a charge for the guy who had to take it to be shipped...and the new shipping containers...

All would be legit charges...if they had actually happened.

It doesn't sound like much, but everything counts in large amounts: that's how Coming to America, which grossed nearly $500M worldwide and was made for only $20M didn't show a profit.

 

[Thunderfoot]

The beginning of "The Three Amigos" shows stars of the silent era living on the studio lot and wearing prop clothes but getting almost no pay. When they demanded a raise, the studio owner claimed they were tying to rob him had them stripped and fired. Of course he was sitting behind a gold inlaid desk on a velvet upholstered chair puffing on what was likely a Cuban cigar.

Studios suffer horrible economic loss every day, some studio execs even have to drive their own Rolls Royces to work or *shudder* drive a Mercedes-Benz.

 

[Janx]

Technically, you're right.

However, in Hollywood Accounting, every possible charge is added in, even if it wasn't necessary. For instance, if The Studio's post-production company is literally across the hall from it's editing studio, there WILL be a charge for shipping...and the security measures required to ship it...and a charge for the guy who had to take it to be shipped...and the new shipping containers...

All would be legit charges...if they had actually happened.

It doesn't sound like much, but everything counts in large amounts: that's how Coming to America, which grossed nearly $500M worldwide and was made for only $20M didn't show a profit.

that's terrible, and sounds like a violation of GAAP.

But I supposes Hollywierd is one of those industries the FTC/SEC doesn't really get their paws into regulating

 

[Thunderfoot]

that's terrible, and sounds like a violation of GAAP.

But I supposes Hollywierd is one of those industries the FTC/SEC doesn't really get their paws into regulating

Yeah, the FTC/SEC don't get involved mostly because it doesn't affect investors or outside parties, most of the "shanking" is done in-house and therefore, though, unethical, and bordering on the illegal, isn't. Besides, you saw what the right army of lawyers can do in certain highly publicized trials, money talks and Hollywierd has it barrels full, even though they are all publicly broke.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Yeah, the FTC/SEC don't get involved mostly because it doesn't affect investors or outside parties,

The few cases when outsiders get involved, they've had mixed results. Art Buchwald won when he sued over Coming To America. Israel lost when they sued over Raid on Entebbe.

I think the gov't just doesn't want to go swimming in the shark-infested waters of of one aspect of one industry while they haven't been able to clean up the corruption in the economy as a whole.

 

[Thunderfoot]

The few cases when outsiders get involved, they've had mixed results. Art Buchwald won when he sued over Coming To America. Israel lost when they sued over Raid on Entebbe.

I think the gov't just doesn't want to go swimming in the shark-infested waters of of one aspect of one industry while they haven't been able to clean up the corruption in the economy as a whole.

Good point... Look what happened to the RIAA. Won the battle, lost the war.

Anyway, I still think they should do an animated version of the new show.