# Would it be possible to make a TV show set in space that is not Star Wars or Star Trek that would be a hit with the mainstream?



## CmdrShepN7 (Mar 7, 2021)

When I heard Syfy was making "The Expanse" after a couple years of ghost hunting crap, wrestling, reality TV, and shark tornadoes I thought millions of TV show watchers would be hungering for a new space adventure after BSG left a void for several years after it ended in 2009 and flock to it but "The Expanse" ended up getting a little more than 1 million viewers.

Star Trek Discovery ended up getting almost 10 million viewers when it premiered on CBS but some fans complained about the new direction Star Trek was going in.

I found Nat Geo's Mars to be boring.

Would it be possible to make something that is set in space that is not Star Wars or Star Trek that would be a hit with the mainstream?

Do we need something that would make people excited for the future again? Do we need something that makes space cool and exciting again?


----------



## Droflet (Mar 7, 2021)

Hang on. You're talking about originality. The way tv shows are slapped together these days, hmm, I wouldn't hold your breath. 

However, I can only hope that something, adult, involving, exciting and new, slips through the corporate cracks.


----------



## Pyan (Mar 7, 2021)

Bring back and expand *Firefly*, I say.


----------



## Astro Pen (Mar 7, 2021)

That is no longer possible for the same reason comedy is no longer possible.


----------



## Ed Lake (Mar 7, 2021)

CmdrShepN7 said:


> Would it be possible to make something that is set in space that is not Star Wars or Star Trek that would be a hit with the mainstream?
> 
> Do we need something that would make people excited for the future again? Do we need something that makes space cool and exciting again?



It's certainly possible, but we're talking about an art form, and there is no set formula for creating a hit TV series, especially sci-fi.

Traveling in space is now a routine sci-fi feature.  So, to create something "new" would probably require an idea that is not about "traveling" but about *living* in space, like on a rotating space station -- or on some strange planet.


----------



## Montero (Mar 7, 2021)

Babylon 5 did living in space - and very well indeed.
Star Trek Deep Space Nine was another space station one.


----------



## AlexH (Mar 7, 2021)

Astro Pen said:


> That is no longer possible for the same reason comedy is no longer possible.


You're right - I can't even think of an amusing reply!  

On a serious note, we still have Red Dwarf, Doctor Who, and is Futurama still going? Black Mirror episodes have been set in space.


----------



## Dave (Mar 7, 2021)

AlexH said:


> On a serious note, we still have Red Dwarf, Doctor Who, and is Futurama still going? Black Mirror episodes have been set in space.


Which have do forums here, or threads, at least.
Also we have forums for: The Orville
And for: Raised by Wolves

Raised by Wolves started out really quite promising, though I thought it went a little downhill, and certainly went a little weird. It is getting a second series though so "the mainstream" that you mention must have liked it.


CmdrShepN7 said:


> Do we need something that would make people excited for the future again?


Well, I think that in Raised by Wolves life on the Earth has ended in a war, so it didn't make me too excited for the future it showed.


----------



## tinkerdan (Mar 7, 2021)

I do not know what the OP is talking about.




__





						List of science fiction television programs - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Robert Zwilling (Mar 8, 2021)

There are plenty of science fiction programs but none have the name recognition of Star Trek or Star Wars. Imdb has a list of the most popular sci fi programs. The first 50 are mostly programs from the past 5 years. It has The Expanse was rated 10, Star Trek series at 21, 26, 35, 45, 50. This is probably driven by what can actually be seen on the TV screen. The remake remake remake of Superman and Lois (2021) is number 1 on the list. I don't even think of Superman as science fiction. It has its own space in my head. Picard is 53, Futurama 54, Firefly 55, Battlestar Galactica 56, and The Orville is 57. Babylon 5 is 86.

What stays at the top of the list may be a problem of branding, where the corporate interests brand information into massive numbers of consumers skulls, skewing reality. There are rock n roll bands that don't have any original members, only playing fan favorites, that are making more money than the original bands ever did. That's the power of marketing, the hand holding the brand is what counts, not what is being branded. There are plenty of programs to watch, you just have to search for them. Not all of them are new, but sometimes, a new program like The Expanse does pop into view on the crowded horizon, but that's the beauty of the internet, it doesn't take talent or effort to find something good watch. 

Maybe people like a prograsm that shows solutions to problems we see everyday. Sometimes I think all the drama being pumped into programs and movies is so popular because that part of the program seems to have a relevant message no matter what the actual program is about. For me, that only dilutes the program I am trying to watch when it's not part of the actual program's story.


----------



## KGeo777 (Mar 9, 2021)

I think something like Gulliver's Travels in Space --a lone character traveling through space might be a worthy change--the space crew storyline is kind of blandish.
Unless it's something unusual --I think Star Trek could do a show about transporter repair crews--that would be like Reno 911 of sci-fi.
A crew going around to repair transporters--the excitement, the tragedy, how many Heisenberg compensators does one need to have on hand?


----------



## Astro Pen (Mar 9, 2021)

_*"Love in Space" *_
Featuring a handsome Welsh starship captain in his late sixties, ( or at least it will if I get to write the scripts. )


----------



## Parson (Mar 10, 2021)

Astro Pen said:


> That is no longer possible for the same reason comedy is no longer possible.



This confuses me. It seems to me that trying something is more possible now (with the scores of streaming services) than ever before. What is far less possible is that it becomes iconic. That's because the television viewing audience is now extremely fragmented, and few people will organize their weeks around their weekly TV shows as was done between the 60's up until about 90.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 12, 2021)

Parson said:


> This confuses me. It seems to me that trying something is more possible now (with the scores of streaming services) than ever before. What is far less possible is that it becomes iconic. That's because the television viewing audience is now extremely fragmented, and few people will organize their weeks around their weekly TV shows as was done between the 60's up until about 90.




I totally agree with this. Science fiction has never been more mainstream than it is now, and so it follows that there have never been as many sci-fi shows being made as there have now.

But quantity quite often dilutes quality, and nowadays shows (because of just how much stuff there is out there) don't _have_ to be overly successful, they just have to _do enough; _and unfortunately _just enough_ adequately describes many tv series in general. So we don't really seem to get anything as innovating or exciting as early(ish) Trek, BSG , Doctor Who, X Files etc.

Perhaps when the sci-fi genre was more niche we got less quantity but better quality? Or maybe that was because there were less programmes being made? Or maybe because I'm wearing rose tinted specs? I don't know, but I _do _know that currently there are no current sci-fi programmes that I regularly watch, when in the past I was glued to the shows mentioned above every week.


----------



## Parson (Mar 12, 2021)

paranoid marvin said:


> Perhaps when the sci-fi genre was more niche we got less quantity but better quality? Or maybe that was because there were less programmes being made? Or maybe because I'm wearing rose tinted specs? I don't know, but I _do _know that currently there are no current sci-fi programmes that I regularly watch, when in the past I was glued to the shows mentioned above every week.



Speaking for myself (and perhaps my feeling could be generalized), I am more demanding of my TV/Movies than I was in my teens and twenties. Then I wasn't looking with nearly as critical an eye as I now have. For example: I loved the original Star Trek when it was first broadcast (I was 16ish). It was absolutely must see TV. When I watch the odd one now the plots seem wooden, the acting, meh, situations were predictable (Kirk was likely to outwit a genius level machine, anyone in red on an away mission was likely going to die, Scottie would likely find something to complain about etc. and the special effects were horrible. (To be fair it was state of the art back then.) ---- Now anything that predictable, if watched, is watched with a resigned attitude: "It's better than every other terrible choice."


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 12, 2021)

Parson said:


> Speaking for myself (and perhaps my feeling could be generalized), I am more demanding of my TV/Movies than I was in my teens and twenties. Then I wasn't looking with nearly as critical an eye as I now have. For example: I loved the original Star Trek when it was first broadcast (I was 16ish). It was absolutely must see TV. When I watch the odd one now the plots seem wooden, the acting, meh, situations were predictable (Kirk was likely to outwit a genius level machine, anyone in red on an away mission was likely going to die, Scottie would likely find something to complain about etc. and the special effects were horrible. (To be fair it was state of the art back then.) ---- Now anything that predictable, if watched, is watched with a resigned attitude: "It's better than every other terrible choice."




I know what you mean , but I would give Star Trek a little latitude, as it was (afaik) the first sci-fi series on tv; it had to be familiar and to some extent predictable, as if it had been _too _alien then it likely would have put audiences off watching it. Same goes for the acting (to some extent); they were pretty much doing it for the first time, there wasn't really anything for them to compare themselves again. And with other shows being able to learn from 60 years of sci-fi on tv, they _should _be much better. The fact that many aren't is tribute to shows like Star Trek. Having said that, compare it to Blakes 7 which came along only a decade later, and you do see a marked increase in acting and much less predictable storylines.

I totally agree with you about expectations today though. Any tv show with poor acting and/or poor storylines gets dumped after a few episodes. Only problem is that most shows are of a similarly low calibre.


----------



## KGeo777 (Mar 12, 2021)

Scotty had to complain about something! I like that tv-level acting of the time--people spoke clearly-they never mumbled their lines.
They wanted to recast Khan for Star Trek 2 because they felt Montalban was too "tv" an actor but come on--would Robert DeNiro have been a better choice?
Just because they did a lot of tv doesn't mean they didn't have traditional acting skills.



I think a crew going through space on exploration is just too boring. You would need a cast that is really appealing.
It's not impossible--SPACE 1999 did something different. Wasn't my favorite but it was different.

I wasn't into Doctor Who but it seems to me that all you need is a really interesting actor for the role and you can breath new life into it.
It seems less restricted than a Star Trek show because they have to be on this ship flying through space.


Imagine if every OS Star Trek episode had the budget of a 2001 Space Odyssey!
How much more fancy the ships and the environments would have been.


----------



## Vince W (Mar 12, 2021)

While it should be possible to come up with something I think pay to view streaming services are part of the problem. I noticed it with Netflix first. They have a pretty good idea, the script is okay and splashing out on big names means a draw in viewers. However, because there are no limits on duration I've found most of these pieces meander in pointless directions and are often 30-50 minutes too long for the material. I've said many times that pieces could have been very good for want of a good script and film editor.

This and taking real risks with stories are needed. Risks without adding elements to appeal to a wider audience. Make science fiction television that science fiction fans want to watch, not generic programs with science fiction chrome bolted on.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 13, 2021)

Vince W said:


> While it should be possible to come up with something I think pay to view streaming services are part of the problem. I noticed it with Netflix first. They have a pretty good idea, the script is okay and splashing out on big names means a draw in viewers. However, because there are no limits on duration I've found most of these pieces meander in pointless directions and are often 30-50 minutes too long for the material. I've said many times that pieces could have been very good for want of a good script and film editor.
> 
> This and taking real risks with stories are needed. Risks without adding elements to appeal to a wider audience. Make science fiction television that science fiction fans want to watch, not generic programs with science fiction chrome bolted on.




This is kind of what I was saying earlier. As sci-fi becomes more popular/mainstream, the danger is that companies will jump on the bandwagon by  adding a sci-fi element to their programme in order to buy in those extra viewers - but it isn't really scifi.

I suppose to some extent it's like the Star Wars fans who have seen the genre expand in so many ways, and deviate from the original canon that it doesn't feel like Star Wars any more. And perhaps the same could be said for fans of Marvel with all of the movies. 

When a genre is more niche, it can feel more 'special'. And those delivering product to that niche audience know what is expected. As the genre becomes more popular/mainstream and a much wider audience has to be catered for, those elements that made it what it was can be lost in the rush to sell to a larger audience.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 13, 2021)

Warhammer 40 K could work as a television  series.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 13, 2021)

BAYLOR said:


> Warhammer 40 K could work as a television  series.




Good call. You've got the fantasy/Warcraft element and the sci-fi space marine/Aliens elements. some awesome designs and the possibilities for storylines are almost limitless.


----------



## Rodders (Mar 13, 2021)

Warhammer 40k would be great, but probably wouldn’t attract a wider audience.

Police procedure shows seem to dominate the telly at the moment. I wonder if it would work in a Sci fi setting?


----------



## Vince W (Mar 13, 2021)

You couldn't sell W40K to a network without watering down to pointlessness. I would love to see it if it was true to the source.

Murder of the week in space? No thanks.


----------



## Dave (Mar 13, 2021)

Larry Niven wrote a piece about how hard it is to write detective science fiction stories. I can't remember which book it is the preface to. Anyway, his point was that it's too easy to find an undetectable way to commit a crime when anything is possible, and equally easy to find a new way to detect it too. All the stories become Deus ex Machina. In many, more earthbound, detective stories, the fun is often guessing the villain before the fictional detective does, but that is impossible if the solution depends upon something totally unexpected and unlikely. So, the stories are generally unsatisfying.

There have been such TV shows though. I remember something called _Star Cops _from 1987.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 13, 2021)

Dave said:


> Larry Niven wrote a piece about how hard it is to write detective science fiction stories. I can't remember which book it is the preface to. Anyway, his point was that it's too easy to find an undetectable way to commit a crime when anything is possible, and equally easy to find a new way to detect it too. All the stories become Deus ex Machina. In many, more earthbound, detective stories, the fun is often guessing the villain before the fictional detective does, but that is impossible if the solution depends upon something totally unexpected and unlikely. So, the stories are generally unsatisfying.
> 
> There have been such TV shows though. I remember something called _Star Cops _from the 1987.



I guess it depends on whether you _use _a deus ex machina or not. Any fictional tale set in the future or in a fantasy setting has the possibility of unknown (to the reader) methods of detection or prevention of a crime. A good author won't spring one on the reader without at least some foreshadowing or clues. 

Bladerunner, Bright and Outland are  good examples of  good cop/detective movies in scifi/fantasy settings. As for tv there's The Watch and Alien Nation (neither of which I've seen).


----------



## Saiyali (Mar 13, 2021)

Farscape was reasonably big, in its time. And the fifth season was turned into a pair of Hallmark movies (ew) so there's  always scope for a new series of that .. the child of John Crichton and Aeryn Sun, still living aboard Moya with some new gang of misfits...


----------



## Dave (Mar 13, 2021)

paranoid marvin said:


> The Watch and Alien Nation


Yes, _Alien Nation_ was great, I have the box set. I forgot about that. But that had certain rules that it played by, as you say nothing unexpected, mainly the salt water thing. Otherwise, the aliens were just an allegory for any immigrant population.


----------



## Toby Frost (Mar 13, 2021)

I really don't think 40k would be easy to make. For one thing, it's extremely violent, and would be 18-rated if you kept to the background. It's also very complicated and would need to be carefully structured so as not to be too hard to follow. Also, all of the most notable characters are at least 8 feet tall (and the space marines are seriously flat characters unless written very well). It would literally be hard to put them on screen with anyone else. Maybe some of the inquisitor stories might work, but it would be hard. To be true to itself and not end up as bog-standard military SF, it would have to include a lot of strange, wacky stuff.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 14, 2021)

Toby Frost said:


> I really don't think 40k would be easy to make. For one thing, it's extremely violent, and would be 18-rated if you kept to the background. It's also very complicated and would need to be carefully structured so as not to be too hard to follow. Also, all of the most notable characters are at least 8 feet tall (and the space marines are seriously flat characters unless written very well). It would literally be hard to put them on screen with anyone else. Maybe some of the inquisitor stories might work, but it would be hard. To be true to itself and not end up as bog-standard military SF, it would have to include a lot of strange, wacky stuff.




No doubt if they did convert it, the alterations made would probably annoy 40k fans more than it would please them.


----------



## Parson (Mar 14, 2021)

Dave said:


> Larry Niven wrote a piece about how hard it is to write detective science fiction stories. I can't remember which book it is the preface to. Anyway, his point was that it's too easy to find an undetectable way to commit a crime when anything is possible, and equally easy to find a new way to detect it too. All the stories become Deus ex Machina. In many, more earthbound, detective stories, the fun is often guessing the villain before the fictional detective does, but that is impossible if the solution depends upon something totally unexpected and unlikely. So, the stories are generally unsatisfying.



Our own @ralphkern has written a fine SF Detective novel. It's the second of *The Sleeping God's *series, *Erebus*. In my opinion this could be turned into a very fine movie. It is not that closely related to *Endeavour *which is not a detective novel, more of a mystery.


----------



## hitmouse (Mar 15, 2021)

KGeo777 said:


> Unless it's something unusual --I think Star Trek could do a show about transporter repair crews--that would be like Reno 911 of sci-fi.
> A crew going around to repair transporters--the excitement, the tragedy, how many Heisenberg compensators does one need to have on hand?




You have pretty much described Below Decks. Very funny. On Amazon.


----------



## AstroZon (Mar 15, 2021)

I like to see something along the lines of Europa Report - realistic and adventurous.   Nothing was cloned from Star Trek or Star Wars.  Instead it was meant to appear like a NASA documentary.


----------



## Laura R Hepworth (Mar 15, 2021)

Rodders said:


> Police procedure shows seem to dominate the telly at the moment. I wonder if it would work in a Sci fi setting?



If you want to see what that could look like, watch Space Precinct that's basically the whole premise of the show. The series is from 1994 and only had one season, but it's actually pretty good! I've been enjoying it on TubiTV.


----------



## G.T. (Mar 15, 2021)

The staple of the Warhammer universe is obviously the Space Marines, but there is currently a TV series based on Eisenhorn in development, a series of novels by Dan Abnett (one of the major WH40k authors). This follows a human Inquisitor as he roots out Heresy, etc. He has some psychic ability, which is always useful if one needs to inquisit someone.

I have a feeling this will work much better than a straight-up Space Marine TV show. From what I recall of the novels, there is very little interaction with the Space Marines.


----------



## Rodders (Mar 21, 2021)

As well as Warhammer, I think 2000AD has enough characters and stories to make a fabulous set of Sci-Fi TV shows.


----------



## Vladd67 (Mar 21, 2021)

G.T. said:


> The staple of the Warhammer universe is obviously the Space Marines, but there is currently a TV series based on Eisenhorn in development, a series of novels by Dan Abnett (one of the major WH40k authors). This follows a human Inquisitor as he roots out Heresy, etc. He has some psychic ability, which is always useful if one needs to inquisit someone.
> 
> I have a feeling this will work much better than a straight-up Space Marine TV show. From what I recall of the novels, there is very little interaction with the Space Marines.


Based on this is it?




__





						Eisenhorn eBook : Abnett, Dan: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store
					

Eisenhorn eBook : Abnett, Dan: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store



					www.amazon.co.uk


----------



## Vladd67 (Mar 21, 2021)

Rodders said:


> As well as Warhammer, I think 2000AD has enough characters and stories to make a fabulous set of Sci-Fi TV shows.


I would love to see a TV series of Flesh.




__





						Flesh: The Dino Files: Amazon.co.uk: Pat Mills, Geofrey Miller, Kevin O'Neill, Ramon Sola, Jamie McKay: 9781907992261: Books
					

Buy Flesh: The Dino Files by Pat Mills, Geofrey Miller, Kevin O'Neill, Ramon Sola, Jamie McKay (ISBN: 9781907992261) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.



					www.amazon.co.uk


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 21, 2021)

2000 ad has a wealth of talent in design artists and writers of both storylines and dialogue. For that brilliance not to make it onto the small (or big) screen would be a criminal shame.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 21, 2021)

Rodders said:


> Warhammer 40k would be great, but probably wouldn’t attract a wider audience.
> 
> Police procedure shows seem to dominate the telly at the moment. I wonder if it would work in a Sci fi setting?



Make the series revolve around the Inquisitors and take it the procedural route.


----------



## Vince W (Mar 21, 2021)

paranoid marvin said:


> 2000 ad has a wealth of talent in design artists and writers of both storylines and dialogue. For that brilliance not to make it onto the small (or big) screen would be a criminal shame.


When (fingers crossed) Mega-City One finally goes into production I hope it does well enough to open up the rest of 2000AD to development. That or the Strontium Dog film.


----------



## Danny McG (Mar 21, 2021)

pyan said:


> Bring back and expand *Firefly*, I say.


That's what we really want!


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 22, 2021)

Danny McG said:


> That's what we really want!





If *Firefly *had been on the CW Network, instead of *FOX *, it would run for a few seasons.


----------



## Dave (Mar 22, 2021)

_Firefly_ would either need to be recast, re-imagined and remade, or as a sequel or "next generation" to continue from the film _Serenity, _or a prequel about the civil war and more immediate aftermath. The _Firefly_ Universe still holds unanswered questions, and there is a set of graphic novels with stand alone stories that could be adapted, but I'm doubtful you could ever catch the same spark again now (unfortunately).


----------



## Rodders (Mar 22, 2021)

I agree with Dave. It’s too late for Firefly to pick up where it was left off.

I’d like to see them go and finish the Dark Matter story. Good show, that.


----------



## Vladd67 (Mar 22, 2021)

Rodders said:


> I agree with Dave. It’s too late for Firefly to pick up where it was left off.
> 
> I’d like to see them go and finish the Dark Matter story. Good show, that.


or a continuation of Threshold, Prey, Dark Skies, and American Gothic. But that is wandering off topic.


----------



## alexvss (Mar 22, 2021)

Maybe an adaptation of Valerian and Laureline?


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 22, 2021)

alexvss said:


> Maybe an adaptation of Valerian and Laureline?



With good actors.


----------



## robertheerlein (May 9, 2021)

KGeo777 said:


> Scotty had to complain about something! I like that tv-level acting of the time--people spoke clearly-they never mumbled their lines.
> They wanted to recast Khan for Star Trek 2 because they felt Montalban was too "tv" an actor but come on--would Robert DeNiro have been a better choice?
> Just because they did a lot of tv doesn't mean they didn't have traditional acting skills.
> 
> ...


Thank god they didn't recast Ricardo Mantelban as Khan for the second movie. I thought he was amazing back then and still think he did a great job even now.


----------



## robertheerlein (May 9, 2021)

I may be alone in this and if so, I apologize for bashing a favorite show. I Think the Star trek Universe spends way too much effort going back than it does going forward. The last show they had that continued the future was Voyager. After that "Enterprise" went back to pre kirk times, Then Discovery went back to pre kirk times. The various Movies with Chris Pine, all focused on Kirk era technology. While some of these shows were good, if not very good, I would like to see a new show that went FORWARD not back. The same could be said for the Star Wars universe. Again, just one man's opinion.


----------



## KGeo777 (May 9, 2021)

robertheerlein said:


> Thank god they didn't recast Ricardo Mantelban as Khan for the second movie. I thought he was amazing back then and still think he did a great job even now.


 They must have thought they could get a box office boost with someone more famous but fortunately they didn't do that. He was versatile-he could do good guys as well but Khan was such a memorable character.

Which reminds me-how about a space series about a futuristic restaurant? 

Funny that Kevin Nealon's Spock sounds more like Data-and this was a year before TNG premiered.


----------



## Dave (May 10, 2021)

I've never seen this before. Before the internet no one saw SNL in the UK. It's excellent.


----------



## KGeo777 (May 10, 2021)

I had never seen that particular skit until recently, only photos of it.  I think it was funnier than the most notorious Star Trek skit from that episode, which is the "Get A Life" one where he is at a convention and they ask him so many minute trivia questions, he bitterly harangues them for obsessing about the show. These days, conventions have become huge social events.  

 There's a commercial he did which I really like:


----------



## AstroZon (May 10, 2021)

robertheerlein said:


> I may be alone in this and if so, I apologize for bashing a favorite show. I Think the Star trek Universe spends way too much effort going back than it does going forward. The last show they had that continued the future was Voyager. After that "Enterprise" went back to pre kirk times, Then Discovery went back to pre kirk times. The various Movies with Chris Pine, all focused on Kirk era technology. While some of these shows were good, if not very good, I would like to see a new show that went FORWARD not back. The same could be said for the Star Wars universe. Again, just one man's opinion.


You're not alone.  I think both franchises need to drop the past and move forward.  Don't get me wrong - I am a big fan of both, but they need to just go somewhere else completely.


----------



## KGeo777 (May 10, 2021)

Yeah, doing the past is safer since they don't have to spend money on design or new ideas.

I think a new show on something totally unrelated to Star Trek or Star Wars would be more exciting-in theory. It is getting soap opera banal.
I can't believe anyone working on these things have any enthusiasm for them.
I liked the idea of a bounty hunter show but they didn't do what one expects which is something harder-edged.  Not a bounty hunter carrying around a child for the season.
Ditto, I expect the Kenobi show to be far less than the potential it has.
Ewan McGregor was wasted in the movies--he showed more spirit in the Jack the Giant Slayer. That's how a young Kenobi could have been.
You just know Disneeze is not going to mine them for their full potential.

A show about a space restaurant has more potential to excite at this point.

They have to bring out the CGI tricks with actor doubles to get some boost from it. They did it with the Mandalorian final and I am sure Star Trek may well do the same.
The DS9 episode where they go to the station and encounter the tribbles was clever but you can't do that often.
One problem TNG had was the original cast was so boring. The only actors who had a lot of charisma were Brent Spiner, Levar Burton (covered in unflattering eyeglasses) and Michael Dorn, until Colm Meaney, Dwight Schultz, and Michelle Forbes came on the show--it picked up when they were present.
I think the later shows were better with the casts--DS9 had a few good ones and Voyager too, but TNG, they sure had some boring leads.

I like Patrick Stewart but he was never leading man material. And I much preferred Diane Muldaur as the doctor-she did remind one of McCoy but she was more interesting to watch than Crusher and her unfortunate son.


----------



## Wayne Mack (May 10, 2021)

KGeo777 said:


> They must have thought they could get a box office boost with someone more famous but fortunately they didn't do that. He was versatile-he could do good guys as well but Khan was such a memorable character.
> 
> Which reminds me-how about a space series about a futuristic restaurant?
> 
> Funny that Kevin Nealon's Spock sounds more like Data-and this was a year before TNG premiered.


I think it is telling that even after 50+ years, the original Star Trek characters are so memorable. I can barely remember any of the plot lines nor very much of the settings, but the characters out shone any who followed. It is also interesting that Star Trek is far easier to recall than any of the other, more popular TV shows of the time.

This may be a hint to the original question. Create a series with an interesting cast and set it in space and it is likely to succeed. Putting an uninteresting cast into space or any other setting will just lead to cancellation.


----------



## KGeo777 (May 10, 2021)

The thing about the original cast was that everyone was charming-even the supporting people were interesting in their own way. They could have done a Captain Sulu show instead of Enterprise.
If the cast is interesting--it could be a western and still be watchable.
Babylon 5 worked well I thought-it had better characters than the average Star Trek spin-off show.
There was one writer for TOS-John Meredith Lucas I think- he was asked to write for TNG and he said the characters were too boring to do conflict-driven drama.


----------



## robertheerlein (May 10, 2021)

Avenue 5 on HBO was about as close as you could come these days to a restaurant in space. It was a cruise ship I believe. It was watchable but I thought it could have been way funnier since it was supposed to be a comedy.

Some of the Sci-Fi shows on Netflix have tried to make a new idea but just seemed to fall flat. Away comes to mind. I just couldn't get into it.
Lost in space had some luster at first but that seems to have faded. I'll continue to wait for the new Orville season, Seth McFarlane never lets me down


----------

