skydance – Trekking with Dennis

A New Star Trek Film Has Been Announced (Again!)

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the following Star Trek productions: The Wrath of Khan, The Next Generation, First Contact, Into Darkness, Beyond, Discovery, Picard, Lower Decks, Prodigy, and Section 31.

Just the other day, we covered a rumour/leak from Skydance that the next Star Trek film would “move on” from the Kelvin timeline, and I shared my thoughts on that. Following on from that news is the announcement from Skydance/Paramount that the film they hinted at is officially going ahead. I thought we could get into the details today, as well as talk about what this announcement might mean for the Star Trek franchise overall.

If you want to check out my piece on the apparent end of the Kelvin timeline, you can find it by clicking or tapping here.

So first of all, this is not the first time in recent years that Star Trek’s corporate overlords have announced a new film. It’s not the first time that a writer/director has been attached to a new film, either. There was a film supposedly on the schedule for 2023 penned by Short Treks and Discovery writer Kalinda Vazquez. There was Noah Hawley’s film. There was an absolute mess surrounding the Beyond sequel, which had to be rapidly un-announced after it became clear that Paramount didn’t have everything in place. There was an “origin story” which may have been connected to the Kelvin timeline. There have been other rumours and pitches, too, including from famed director Quentin Tarantino. Sir Patrick Stewart even teased that a Picard movie could be in the offing after that show wrapped up.

Still frame from Star Trek: The Motion Picture showing Kirk addressing the crew of the Enterprise. — Look, it’s everyone who’s officially announced a Star Trek movie over the last few years.

I mention all of these for one simple reason: for almost a decade now, Viacom, Paramount, and the re-forged Paramount Global tried and *repeatedly* failed to get a new Star Trek film out of development hell for all manner of reasons. And just because new owners Skydance have announced this project and attached the filmmaking duo of Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley to it… that doesn’t mean we’ll ever even hear about it again, let alone see the finished product in cinemas in the years ahead. Maybe you’ll say it’s unfair now that the Star Trek brand is under new management, but Skydance/Paramount have a lot to do to convince me that they have even the most basic filmmaking competence, at this point!

If you know me, you’ll know Marvel and comic book films aren’t really my thing, so I’m not familiar with Daley and Goldstein’s work on Spider-Man: Homecoming. I also haven’t seen their Dungeons and Dragons film, though I think it’s worth noting that both pictures got solid reviews, even if Honor Among Thieves was considered a bit of a disappointment in terms of the money it made at the box office. As far as I can tell, neither Daley nor Goldstein has worked with the Star Trek franchise before – which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it’s worth being aware of.

Posters for Spider-Man Homecoming (left) and Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (right). — Daley and Goldstein previously worked on *Spider-Man: Homecoming* and *Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves*.

As we discussed when the Skydance merger had gone through, this announcement seems to embody Skydance CEO David Ellison’s preference for film over TV. With a swath of cancellation announcements for every Star Trek series save Starfleet Academy, and now this new film getting an official announcement, I think we’re catching the first glimpse at what a new era for Star Trek is going to look like. Star Trek is being reimagined as a cinematic franchise first, and while I haven’t given up on the prospect of Star Trek remaining on the small screen… that looks less likely in the medium term, once the current crop of shows come to the end of their runs.

And I have to be honest: I’m pretty disappointed about that.

Look, I’ll be the first to concede that not every modern Star Trek project has gone well. Picard’s awful second season, Discovery’s increasingly repetitive storytelling, Prodigy struggling to find an audience… there have been many mistakes made by the former Paramount corporation and the folks in charge of creating new Star Trek stories. But for me, Star Trek’s home is and always will be on television, not at the cinema. That’s where Star Trek has the freedom to dip its toes into different genres and storytelling ideas, and it’s really the only way it can “seek out new life and new civilisations.” Being constrained to the cinema in the years ahead restricts the kinds of stories Star Trek will be able to tell.

The new film will be the first original Star Trek project for the new Skydance/Paramount corporate entity.

Additionally, it means we’re going to be seeing a lot less Star Trek! Now, I’ve taken Paramount to task in recent years for oversaturating the brand and for allowing the dreaded franchise fatigue to set in. But there’s a balance somewhere between broadcasting more than fifty new episodes in a single calendar year and releasing one film every few years. Even if we just had one Star Trek series at a time, running for truncated ten-episode seasons, that would be preferable – in my opinion – to Star Trek doing what it did in the Kelvin timeline era.

It makes sense to me, as I wrote last time, for Star Trek to move on from the Kelvin timeline, though, and I think that’s a net positive as we look at this announcement. The Kelvin films were fun for what they were, and the 2009 reboot in particular was arguably just what the franchise needed at that moment to avoid slipping away altogether. But almost a decade on from Beyond, and with so much else having been on our screens in that time, I think a new approach is warranted – and I’m happy to see Skydance going in a different direction.

Still frame from the final moments of Star Trek: Beyond showing the new Enterprise-A. — The Enterprise-A at the end of *Beyond*.

It also makes a lot of sense from the new corporation’s perspective. Why go back to something that someone else made when you could tell your own story? The Star Trek universe is vast, and there are so many different time periods, alien factions, and planets to explore… being restricted to the same handful of re-cast characters over and over again begins to feel small and repetitive after a while. As we look ahead and try to be optimistic about Star Trek’s future prospects, building a new foundation instead of trying to revive one from almost twenty years ago is the smart move.

I just hope it pays off… because after what has been a clearly underwhelming performance (in financial terms) on streaming over the past few years, and with an ageing fan community that hasn’t significantly expanded in a long time, Star Trek doesn’t feel like it’s in a great place, to be honest with you. Not when considering the future, at any rate. If this film doesn’t impress Skydance’s leadership and investors… I could absolutely see Star Trek as a whole going on hiatus, if not being permanently brought to an end.

So no pressure, eh?

Behind-the-scenes photo from the set of Star Trek: The Motion Picture showing William Shatner (Kirk) and Leonary Nimoy (Spock) having a chat on set. — William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy during the production of *The Motion Picture*.

Next, I’d like to briefly talk about what I think this new film might look like… as well as what I’d *like* it to look like if I were in charge!

Firstly, if you’re hoping for some kind of in-depth TOS-style “morality play,” or something a bit more esoteric and weird, you’re going to be bang out of luck. We’re almost certainly going to get a picture which lands a lot closer to the “action” side of “action/sci-fi.” But that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. Ask most Trekkies – and a general audience – which Star Trek films are the best, and you’re almost certain to hear The Wrath of Khan and First Contact ahead of the likes of The Motion Picture or Insurrection. But just based on the writers/directors attached to the project, and their previous works, I’m almost certain this new Star Trek film will be going down that route.

Secondly, it sounds as if we’re going to get an all-new cast of characters this time, which could also mean we’re going to get a new setting and even a new time period. Unless the new film does something silly like trying to re-cast Picard and the TNG characters, it really sounds like it’ll be going in a totally new and fresh direction, which I think is a hugely positive thing. Think about it: basically everything we’ve gotten in this era of streaming Trek is either a direct prequel or sequel, and many characters have either been re-cast or simply brought back to the franchise. Getting something genuinely *new* is going to feel like a treat after so much recycling!

Still frame from Star Trek: The Next Generation Season 1 showing the Enterprise-D at warp. — The Enterprise-D.

Finally, I expect this project will be somewhat comparable in terms of tone and audience appeal to Star Trek ’09. After a decade on streaming, this is Skydance brushing all of that aside and saying: “here’s a reboot.” Perhaps it won’t be as blatant as Star Trek ’09’s “alternate reality,” but make no mistake about it: this is another attempt to streamline and simplify Star Trek, and to reach out to a much wider audience. As a Trekkie, that might feel somewhat alarming; after all, don’t we all want Star Trek to be “made for the fans?” But I’m kind of taking the same approach as I did in the late 2000s, seeing this film – and any potential sequels – as a stepping-stone to something bigger and better. As I said in the run-up to Section 31′s launch at the start of the year: it doesn’t matter if the film isn’t for me if it succeeds in its objectives of expanding the fan community and shoring up the brand.

To me, that’s what this new film should be attempting to do. It needs to reach out to folks who may have watched First Contact and Into Darkness, but who haven’t subscribed to Paramount+, don’t know who Captain Pike is, and prefer to watch things like Spider-Man. And it needs to convince them that this weird, convoluted, nerdy franchise is something worth getting invested in. Section 31 was meant to do that, too, by the way, but I think the verdict there is that it failed.

Promo image for Star Trek: Section 31 showing Empress Georgiou holding a sword. — This new film needs to succeed where *Section 31* failed.

If I were in charge, I think I’d want a film set sometime after the Picard era – in a new, fresh, unexplored time period, but still within the prime timeline. There’d be scope, perhaps, for one familiar character to have a cameo, something akin to Leonard Nimoy’s role in Into Darkness, perhaps, just to tie things together but without overwhelming the story. And then? I’d set the new characters a challenge that might be connected to previous iterations of Star Trek, but which doesn’t depend on any pre-existing knowledge.

The Borg arguably fit the bill!

We want the new film to have a distinctly “Star Trek” identity, meaning it can be a gateway for new fans that isn’t totally disconnected from everything else that the franchise has done. But it mustn’t be *too* closely tied up with what came before, because that risks putting off the very casual audience that we’re trying to attract. It needs to be explosive and exciting while still being true to Star Trek. And I really can’t think of a better fit than the Borg, to be honest with you.

Still frame from Star Trek: First Contact showing a Borg drone in their alcove. — Should this new film feature the Borg as a major antagonist?

I know the Borg have been back a little too often in modern Star Trek, appearing in all three seasons of Picard as well as in Prodigy and Lower Decks. But the last time the Borg were seen *at the cinema* was in 1996 – and that came in what is still, to this day, one of the best-remembered and highest-rated Star Trek films. So… why not bring back the Borg for another round? Have a new cast of characters facing off against a familiar foe, but one that’s easy for non-fans to understand? You don’t need a lot of background about the Borg to realise they’re a horrible danger!

Furthermore, despite what I said about this new film not being a “morality play” type of story, we’re right in the middle of a potential A.I.-led transformation of at least some parts of society. What could be more timely than a film about the Borg: cybernetic beings, all hooked up to one hive mind? The Borg, since their inception, have been a warning of a reliance on technology gone awry, and I think there’s even more potential in that idea in 2025 than there was thirty-five years ago when the Borg debuted.

Promo photo for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine showing Sisko with Picard. — Picard and Sisko.

So that’s what I’d argue for if I were in the room!

But in any case, a new Star Trek film has been announced and seems to be going ahead. Skydance is now in full control, and it’s my hope that the new leadership team will be more competent than the previous crop of executive idiots who’ve mismanaged Star Trek over the past few years. Though I’m still disappointed to lose Strange New Worlds – and to see Star Trek potentially disappearing from the small screen in the years ahead – it does at least give me some room for optimism that Skydance has faith in the franchise. A new film wouldn’t have been my choice; I’d have commissioned a new TV show if I had the opportunity. But it’s better than nothing, and I will do my very best to support it as it develops.

If and when we get more news on this film, like story details, casting announcements, or a trailer, I hope you’ll join me as I daresay I’ll have plenty to add! And when it’s finally ready for release – perhaps in 2028, 2029, or 2030 – I’ll definitely check it out and write a review! Until then, though, there are still two more seasons of Strange New Worlds to come, as well as Starfleet Academy, and more. I’ll be talking about all of that in the weeks and months ahead, but until then… Live Long and Prosper!

The Star Trek franchise – including all films, TV programmes, and other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Skydance/Paramount. Most of the Star Trek franchise is available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available, and is also available on DVD, Blu-ray, and video-on-demand platforms. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

The End of the Kelvin Timeline?

Mon 10.11.25Dennis

Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for the Kelvine timeline films and Strange New Worlds.

In a little over six months from now, it’ll be ten years – an entire decade – since Star Trek Beyond hit cinemas. Beyond is the most recent film in the Kelvin timeline – the Star Trek spin-off films set in an alternate reality. There have been multiple attempts in the nine-plus years since its release to get a sequel off the ground, including a couple of years ago when Paramount announced – and then had to rapidly un-announce – a film that wasn’t ready. That was a clusterfuck, eh?

Every so often, if you follow some of the big Star Trek fansites and social media pages, an interview will pop up with a member of the Kelvin cast, and they always make the right noises, sounding positive and hopeful about one day returning and making another film. But if recent reports are to be believed, the newly-merged Skydance/Paramount corporation is ready to “move on” from the Kelvin timeline. While a new Star Trek film is supposedly being planned, it won’t involve the Kelvin timeline or the cast of the rebooted series. I thought we could discuss that today.

Still frame from Star Trek 2009 showing the main viewscreen on the bridge. — The bridge in *Star Trek ’09*.

I know the Kelvin films weren’t every Trekkie’s favourite part of the franchise – to put it mildly! Heck, I *still* know people who refuse to even watch them because of how upset they were at both the recasting of classic characters and the more action-heavy storytelling. But we should all be able to acknowledge what the films – and the 2009 reboot in particular – did for Star Trek at a time when the franchise had been cancelled after more than fifteen years on the small screen.

We wouldn’t have seen Discovery, Picard, Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds or really any of the Star Trek productions we’ve enjoyed over the last decade were it not for the success of the Kelvin timeline films. Star Trek ’09 demonstrated to investors that, despite declining viewership on TV in the 2000s, there was still life in the Star Trek franchise, and still new stories to be told. These films carried the torch for Star Trek during what could’ve been its darkest hour, and they set the stage for the franchise’s revival.

Behind-the-scenes photo from the set of Star Trek Into Darkness showing director JJ Abrams. — Director J.J. Abrams on the set of *Star Trek Into Darkness*.

With all that being said, regular readers will undoubtedly remember me saying that I don’t believe there’s a place for a new Kelvin timeline film. I wrote about this in 2020 and 2021, and while my original reasons for saying that have now shifted in light of the spate of cancellations this year… I stand by the original point. I know Beyond seemed to tease a sequel in its closing moments, and there will always be a part of me that wants to see reboot Kirk’s adventures aboard the Enterprise-A. But given the changes not just to Star Trek over the past ten years, but the entertainment landscape as a whole… I’m not sure a 2009-style film is the right fit any more. After almost a decade, audiences have moved on and expectations have changed.

Then there’s Strange New Worlds. What was the original idea behind Star Trek ’09? It was to show “young Kirk” and “young Spock” at Starfleet Academy, then undertaking their first missions together. Well… we’ve seen that. And thanks to Strange New Worlds, we’ve also seen the prime timeline version of that, too. Strange New Worlds has introduced several other legacy characters, and thanks to being able to develop those characters a lot more because of the extended runtime a television show permits, I’d argue it’s done a lot more with some of those characters than the entire Kelvin trilogy did.

Two still frames from Star Trek 2009 stitched together, with Cadet Kirk on the left and Commander Spock on the right. — Kirk and Spock at the Academy in *Star Trek ’09*.

At this point, if we returned to the Kelvin timeline a decade after Beyond, we wouldn’t be seeing “young Kirk” and “young Spock” on one of their first missions. We’d be seeing Kirk and Spock on their five-year mission – or perhaps even *after* that, in the latter part of the 23rd Century. There are things that the Kelvin timeline could do with that idea, sure… but we’ve already seen plenty of Kirk and Spock at this point, haven’t we? Between TOS, the Kelvin films, Strange New Worlds, and the rest of Star Trek, we’ve spent a lot of time with these characters already. So… what could a new Kelvin film do that we haven’t already seen?

This leads me to my most fundamental point: Star Trek needs to move on. Not just from the Kelvin timeline, but from the 23rd and 24th Centuries in general. Since the turn of the millennium, we’ve had Enterprise, Discovery, Strange New Worlds, and the Kelvin timeline – all of which were prequels. Then we had Prodigy and Picard, which were direct sequels to Voyager and The Next Generation. The closest Star Trek came to originality was Lower Decks, ironically enough! And that show called back to The Next Generation era over and over again, and brought in numerous guest-stars.

Still frame from Star Trek: Picard Season 3 showing the Titan/Enterprise-G in orbit of a star. — What *new* adventures might lie ahead for the Star Trek franchise?

A new film at this point should have the freedom to go in a totally different direction, and shouldn’t be too tied up with what came before. That doesn’t mean it can go breaking all of the rules of canon, of course, but after so many sequels, prequels, and spin-offs, it’ll be nice to get something truly original for once. Won’t it?

If Star Trek continues to look backwards at its own history, and keeps trying to bring back characters from the past, that limits the franchise’s potential to grow and expand. I became a Trekkie in the early 1990s not because of Kirk, Spock, and Dr McCoy, but because of Picard, Riker, and Data. If Star Trek, in the ’80s, had doubled-down on The Original Series and those classic characters, we’d have missed out on so much – not only The Next Generation, but Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and more. After such a long time, and with so much having happened since Beyond was in cinemas… a new film taking a new approach just feels like the best option.

Behind-the-scenes photo from Star Trek Beyond showing Simon Pegg, Justin Lin, and others. — Simon Pegg (Scotty) and director Justin Lin on the set of *Star Trek Beyond*.

There are risks, of course. Into Darkness remains the cinematic Star Trek franchise’s high-water mark in terms of financial success, and all three of the Kelvin films turned a profit. Creating something brand-new, with a new director and a new cast of characters, might not achieve the same level of success as a Beyond sequel. Figuring out how to attract audiences who turned out for Into Darkness – but who may have skipped *everything* Star Trek has done since – will be the biggest challenge Skydance faces when it comes to pitching the new film.

And there’s kind of limited room for manoeuvre here. In 2009, a lot of people who hadn’t watched the likes of DS9 and Enterprise showed up specifically because Star Trek was billed as a reboot. The universe was going to be reset, you didn’t have to have followed any of the increasingly convoluted storylines from the previous fifteen-plus years… this film was its own thing. But can you re-reboot a franchise and achieve the same level of success a couple of decades later? Does the name “Star Trek” carry the same weight it did in 2009, after not really managing to reach out to a big new audience on streaming? I think those are valid questions as this new film may be getting underway.

Cropped promo image for Star Trek 2009 showing the USS Enterprise in sillhouette. — A silhouette of the Enterprise was one of the first teaser images released for *Star Trek ’09*.

I don’t lament the demise of the Kelvin timeline. It laid the groundwork for Star Trek’s return to its small screen home in 2017, which I truly appreciate, but then it kind of lost its place – at least for me as a Trekkie. By the time Pike and Spock joined Discovery a couple of years later, and we were getting news of new projects featuring Picard, Section 31, and a new animated series, it really seemed like Star Trek was back. Strange New Worlds, with its focus on many of the same characters as those in the Kelvin films, occupies a very similar space, and I’m just struggling to see what a new Kelvin film could really have to say after five seasons of Strange New Worlds and everything else Star Trek has done over the past nine-plus years.

At the same time, there’s a sense that Star Trek’s executives never took *full* advantage of the alternate reality that the Kelvin films presented. We could’ve seen, just as one example, Captain Kirk taking on the Borg – something that would be impossible to do in the prime timeline. Or we could’ve done more with the idea of a crossover from the prime timeline, bringing in William Shatner and George Takei alongside Leonard Nimoy. That can’t happen now.

Cropped promo poster for Star Trek Into Darkness showing the USS Enterprise crashing into the atmosphere of a planet. — The Enterprise.

But the Kelvin films – or perhaps we should start saying “the Kelvin trilogy” – have a place in the history of Star Trek. They carried a torch for the franchise at a time when total cancellation and annihilation seemed not only likely, but were actively happening, and they set the stage for several great streaming shows that expanded the franchise in new ways. That isn’t a bad legacy by any means.

And as we look to the future? Star Trek seems set to enter a fallow period as the 2020s come to a close. After Strange New Worlds finishes its run, all we know for sure is that Starfleet Academy is getting a second season – and then there’s this potential new film. Star Trek XV – or whatever we’re going to end up calling it – has a lot to live up to in some ways, as it may have to pick up the mantle from the Kelvin timeline and keep Star Trek alive at a time when there might not be anything else going on. But this new film, thanks to being its own thing, has almost limitless storytelling possibilities, and won’t be constrained by what came before. That worked well in 2009, and it set the stage for bigger and better things. I’m going to keep my fingers crossed that this new film, in whatever form it ultimately takes, will be much more like Star Trek ’09 and less like the unfortunate Section 31.

So I hope this has been interesting. Part of me wonders if, in another ten or fifteen years, we may yet get a belated Kelvin timeline revival. Who knows! But nostalgia can be a big deal in entertainment, and if there are enough Kelvin fans clamouring for it… never say never, right? I will keep my ear to the ground and if there’s any news about a new Star Trek film in the weeks and months ahead, I daresay I’ll have more to add, so be sure to check back from time to time. And if you want to see what else I’ve had to say about the Kelvin timeline over the years, you can check out my dedicated Kelvin timeline page by clicking or tapping here. Until next time, friends!

Star Trek ’09, Star Trek Into Darkness, and Star Trek Beyond are available to stream now on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available. All three films are also available on DVD and Blu-ray. The Star Trek franchise – including all films and other properties discussed above – is the copyright of Skydance/Paramount. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Happy Star Trek Day!

Mon 08.09.25Dennis

Spoiler Warning: Beware of minor spoilers for Strange New Worlds Seasons 2-3.

Happy Star Trek Day, friends!

The 8th of September – i.e. today – was the date in 1966 when the very first episode of Star Trek premiered in the United States, and in recent years, it’s been celebrated within the fan community as “Star Trek Day.” Next year’s going to be the milestone 60th anniversary, but I thought we could take stock of where Star Trek finds itself, reflect on the importance of the franchise, and just geek out a little bit today, since it’s a special occasion.

Though it was the first episode to be broadcast, The Man Trap wasn’t the first episode to be produced. After The Cage didn’t make the cut, Gene Roddenberry and co. were given a rare second chance to make a pilot, and they settled on Where No Man Has Gone Before. However, although the network liked this episode more than The Cage, it wasn’t considered as straightforward a story when it came to deciding on the broadcast schedule. Basically, by process of elimination, The Man Trap won out against the few other completed episodes in September 1966. And just the other day, I got to meet Budd Albright – one of the actors who was in The Man Trap. Being able to say I’ve met one of the performers who was in the first ever Star Trek episode is, without a doubt, one of the coolest things I can add to my resume as a Trekkie!

Still frame from Star Trek: The Original Series S01, E01, "The Man Trap," showing Barnhart and the M-113 Creature. — Budd Albright (left) in *The Man Trap*, which aired 59 years ago today.

When you look back with 59 years of hindsight, having seen how Star Trek attracted a fandom and expanded into a massive franchise, it’s easy to fall into the trap of saying its success was always a sure thing. But if you read up on the early production history of Star Trek, what amazes me is how it could’ve either been completely different… or might never have made it off the ground at all. Even today, if a television pilot gets rejected, being offered a second chance by a broadcaster is something that very rarely happens. In the mid-1960s, with sci-fi still a relatively new and untested genre on television – and an expensive one, thanks to sets, costumes, props, prosthetics, and special effects – it’s genuinely stunning to think that the higher-ups at the network were willing to give Gene Roddenberry that all-important second chance.

There were several key decisions taken early in the production of The Original Series that I genuinely believe took a great concept and turned it into something that became a phenomenon. The first was the avoidance of product placement; Gene Roddenberry was keen to avoid Kirk and Spock turning to the camera, cigarette in hand, and plugging brands like Lucky Strike. The second, and probably most important, was that The Original Series was filmed and broadcast in colour, at a time when colour TV was only just getting started. Doctor Who, one of Star Trek’s contemporaries in the ’60s, didn’t broadcast in colour until 1970, and American shows around the same time – like The Addams Family, The Twilight Zone, and The Fugitive – were all still airing in black-and-white.

Kirk, Spock, and Dr McCoy from Star Trek on a promo poster for the series' Betamax release c. 1986 (cropped). — Kirk, Spock, and Dr McCoy.

Star Trek was cancelled in 1969 due to low ratings – but those ratings massively improved when the series was rebroadcast in the early 1970s – and I firmly believe that if it had been in black-and-white, not colour, it would’ve been more difficult for Star Trek to have garnered the level of support that led to the creation of The Animated Series and, eventually, The Motion Picture. I don’t know if colour was always the plan, and for a while, I remember reading that the only full cut of The Cage that existed was in black-and-white, though I’m not sure if that was just a pre-internet rumour! In any case, being filmed and broadcast in full colour definitely gave Star Trek a much-needed boost as colour TV was just about to take off.

At the core of Star Trek, though, were great characters and fun stories – often, but not always, with morals and messages that reflected the world in which they were written in different ways. I said a few years ago that The Man Trap is more than just an “alien monster” story; what makes the episode so poignant and powerful are the reflections Kirk, Spock, McCoy and others have when they consider the implications that the Salt Vampire may have been the last of its kind… and they killed it in self-defence. Star Trek has always trusted its audience to think, and encouraged viewers to consider the implications and possibilities of its stories. Star Trek episodes are designed to be dwelt upon after the credits have rolled – which, I think, explains why there’s such a vocal and passionate fan community!

Still frame from Star Trek: The Original Series S01, E01, "The Man Trap," showing the M-113 Creature/Salt Vampire. — The M-113 Creature.

After The Cage was rejected, Gene Roddenberry and the team re-worked most of its characters. “Number One” was originally intended to be the stoic and logical one, but that role was reassigned to the new incarnation of Spock. Captain Pike was out, replaced with Captain Kirk. Dr Boyce became Dr McCoy, but retained a similar role as an older confidant of the captain. Characters like Sulu and Uhura were created, and the stage was set for the show we’re all familiar with.

If you’d told the cast and crew then, in 1966, that new episodes featuring Spock, Scotty, Uhura, and Nurse Chapel would still be airing 59 years later… well, I doubt anyone would have believed you!

But I think it says a lot about those characters, and the way The Original Series was written, that Strange New Worlds came to exist at all – let alone that it’s the best thing Star Trek has done in a long time. Those characters, their personalities, and the way they’d conduct themselves in their roles… it’s a huge part of what made Star Trek into the franchise it would become. We’re still watching episodes starring these same characters, alebit in an updated format, all these years later.

Still frame from Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 3x06 showing Spock, Scotty, Chapel, and Uhura on the bridge of the USS Farragut. — Spock, Scotty, Chapel, and Uhura in a recent *Strange New Worlds* episode.

I didn’t come to Star Trek via The Original Series. It was The Next Generation that first made me a Trekkie in the early 1990s. I’ve said this before, but Season 2’s The Royale is the first episode I can remember watching all the way through (though I think I’d seen at least parts of episodes before that, as well as having seen some action figures and props that my uncle had at the time.) In any case, I date my entry into the Trekkie community to 1991, when The Royale aired for the first time here in the UK. I went back to watch The Original Series here and there, when it was on TV and when I could afford to rent video tapes!

But as I progressed my journey into the Trekkie community through the 1990s, including attending my first-ever fan meetup and going to visit the Star Trek Exhibition around the time of the 30th anniversary, I came to watch The Original Series episodes and films. I’m afraid I couldn’t tell you what the first TOS episode I watched was; that memory is lost in the recesses of an addled brain! But I soon fell in love with Kirk, Spock, Dr McCoy, and the rest of the crew – just as the first generation of Trekkies had done a quarter of a century earlier. I don’t think I knew that The Man Trap had been the first episode to air until I got online around the turn of the millennium and started talking to other Star Trek fans; there was a debate, for a time, about which episode “technically counts” as the first one – should we go in broadcast order or production order? Broadcast seems to have won that argument, by the way!

Behind-the-scenes photo/still frame from Star Trek: TOS showing the original USS Enterprise model against a blue screen. — The original USS Enterprise filming model.

Some people have gone so far as to suggest that, without Star Trek, there’d be no sci-fi on our screens today. I don’t agree with that assessment, I’m afraid. By 1966, when The Man Trap aired, Kuberick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey was in production. Other sci-fi and sci-fi-adjacent shows, like The Outer Limits, My Favorite Martian, and The Twilight Zone were already airing, and with the space race in full swing, there was a growing amount of attention on the genre. But without Star Trek, the sci-fi landscape would’ve been very different. Even back then, there was a lot of “doomerism” floating around. Star Trek is one of the very few entertainment properties – then or now – to present an optimistic vision of the future, where technology cures problems rather than causes them, where humanity has overcome its violent impulses rather than surrendered to them, and where the future is bright, not dark.

That’s what appealed to a lot of people about Star Trek: the core fundamentals of its setting. Technology could cure diseases. There was still an economy and private property, but humanity had moved to become a “post-scarcity society,” where an abundance of energy and resources meant we could dedicate our time to science, exploration, and other pursuits instead of being tied to a desk or working in a factory. Those elements of escapism appeal just as much today as they did 59 years ago – and they probably always will.

Still frame from Star Trek: The Original Series S01, E01, "The Man Trap," showing Dr McCoy holding his medical tricorder. — Dr McCoy with his medical tricorder in *The Man Trap*.

As someone who’s had health issues going back decades, I can say with certainty that one of the most appealing things about Star Trek’s vision of the future is the potential to cure diseases, and how it depicts an inclusive, friendly society that’s largely free from discrimination and hate. Technologies like the hypospray and medical tricorder are seen diagnosing and treating all manner of ailments and conditions. Some episodes suggested that limbs could be regenerated, scar tissue covered up, and even the ageing process itself could be reversed (in some stories, at least!) Dr McCoy (and later the likes of Dr Crusher, Dr Pulaski, and Dr Bashir) would be seen treating patients in state-of-the-art medical facilities, with bio-beds, computer monitoring, and research labs to develop brand-new cures.

Star Trek “predicted” technology that we take for granted today. What is the Enterprise’s viewscreen if not an early take on video-calling and FaceTime? Communicators seem an awful lot like mobile phones. Combadges? Bluetooth microphones and speakers. There are laser weapons in use by militaries around the world, and proposals for things like nuclear fusion reactors, ion thrusters, and even a “warp drive” concept of sorts – many of which are at least partly inspired by Star Trek. And there are countless individuals who have cited Star Trek as a reason for their interest in medical, scientific, or engineering fields.

Still frame from Star Trek: The Original Series S01, E01, "The Man Trap," showing the main viewscreen. — The planet M-113 (remastered version) on the Enterprise’s main viewscreen.

So if that’s Star Trek’s legacy and early history… what’s next? What may lie in store for Star Trek as we pass its 59th birthday?

This is where, I’m afraid, things start to look a little less rosy. In my view, Skydance – Star Trek’s new corporate overlords – are not as interested in making new television shows as the previous incarnations of Paramount and CBS had been. I don’t believe it’s a coincidence that Discovery, Lower Decks, Prodigy, and Strange New Worlds were all cancelled after Paramount took the decision to go ahead with the Skydance merger. David Ellison, the CEO of Skydance and, by extension, the man with the final say over new Star Trek productions, does seem interested in some kind of feature film adaptation – and as luck would have it, there are supposedly at least two such projects currently being worked on. But with Paramount+ struggling, and not every recent Star Trek project being particularly well-received… I will not be at all surprised if the final episodes of Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy will bring an end to this era of Star Trek on TV.

With that being said, as depressing as it may sound, it isn’t always a bad thing for a franchise to take a break, get shaken up, and come back after some time has passed! It worked for Doctor Who in the mid-2000s, it arguably worked for Star Trek after Enterprise’s cancellation, and it’s at least possible to think that future Star Trek productions may benefit from learning the lessons of this era of streaming TV… as well as from having a bit of a hiatus.

Concept art of the USS Enterprise produced for Phase II/The Motion Picture. — Concept art of the USS Enterprise produced for *Phase II*/*The Motion Picture*.

I don’t have any “insider information,” by the way. But based on what’s been said publicly about potentially merging Paramount+ with Peacock (or some other streaming platform), David Ellison’s apparent preference for films over streaming TV, and the cancellation announcement for Strange New Worlds coming before Season 3 had even aired… that’s my gut feeling. No new Star Trek has been greenlit for a while, and one of the shows that had been announced – Tawny Newsome’s “workplace comedy” series – now seems to not be going ahead. So I think we have to contend with the possibility, as we pass the 59th anniversary, that Star Trek may once again be heading for a fallow period.

But there will be time to talk about that in more detail on another occasion!

Today, I want to raise a glass and toast to Star Trek’s success. Not many other entertainment properties from the mid-1960s are still around, still being worked on, and still so beloved as Star Trek. Very few franchises get anywhere near the 1,000-story mark – yet Star Trek, at time of writing, is just about 40 episodes shy of that incredible milestone. If Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy proceed as planned, as well as the films which are supposedly being worked on… hitting that 1,000-story mark seems within reach in the next few years.

Still frame from Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 3x09 showing transporting. — Beaming down to a moon in the most recent Star Trek episode.

On a personal note, though I’ve dealt with burnout and felt the franchise had been over-saturated in the early 2020s, I’m still a huge Trekkie. I’ve been keeping up with Strange New Worlds this season, and I regularly go back to watch my favourites from The Next Generation era in particular. Being a Trekkie has been part of my identity, in a way, since I was a pre-teen, and now I’m in my forties! Nothing else in the entertainment world compares to Star Trek, for me, and even when I’m not actively watching the latest film or episode, Star Trek is still on my mind, its philosophy and vision of the future are still things I take into account, and my love for this franchise remains. The way I express that may fluctuate, sure, but I am still a Trekkie – and I daresay I always will be.

So happy Star Trek Day! Wherever you are in the world, whatever you’re doing, and regardless of whether you plan to watch The Man Trap (or any other episode) to mark the occasion, thank you for checking in, and I hope you have a wonderful Star Trek Day. This incredible franchise brought us together, today, 59 years on from that first episode – and I think that’s something pretty darn special.

Live Long and Prosper.

The Star Trek franchise – including all episodes and properties discussed above – is the copyright of Skydance/Paramount. Most Star Trek shows and films can be streamed on Paramount+ in countries and territories where the platform is available, or purchased on DVD and Blu-ray. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

So, About That Star Trek Comedy Series…

Mon 11.08.25Mon 11.08.25Dennis

We’ve had Comic-Con, where Star Trek made a splash with news about Starfleet Academy, Khan, and a pitch for a Strange New Worlds successor series. And now it’s Star Trek Las Vegas – a huge Star Trek convention with many of the franchise’s biggest stars in attendance. In between, there was a tiny little tidbit of news you may have missed – Paramount Global and Skydance Media finally completed their expensive and much-delayed corporate merger.

Last year, Tawny Newsome, Alex Kurtzman, and Paramount surprised a lot of us by announcing a brand-new Star Trek series – a “workplace comedy” which Newsome and Justin Simien were working on together. I noted at the time that the announcement seemed pretty threadbare, as if it had been thrown together at the last minute, and we didn’t really get a lot of details about it beyond who was writing it and that it might be set outside of Starfleet.

Justin Simien (left) and Tawny Newsome were working on this series.

Star Trek and comedy go well together, and they have done since the franchise’s inception. I made this argument when Lower Decks was in the offing and some fans were upset about it, because comedy has always been a part of Star Trek and will always have a place in Star Trek. Given the other options for new Star Trek shows and films, I don’t think I’d have necessarily chosen Newsome’s comedy pitch myself, but that’s beside the point. I’d have happily tuned in and I’d have wanted the new series to do well.

Note the past tense.

In the aftermath of Paramount’s merger, Newsome appeared at a panel at Star Trek Las Vegas. And she said something telling about her comedy series: “we’re waiting to hear” – i.e. from Skydance and Star Trek’s new corporate leadership about the show’s future – which she followed up with: “not to sound bleak, but nothing’s guaranteed.”

So… the comedy series ain’t happening, then. I mean, it’s not happening, is it? I would be astonished at this stage if it goes ahead; of all the proposals on the table for expanding the Star Trek franchise, it’s gotta be way down the list for the new team coming in. And I don’t think this is a huge shock – obviously Skydance plans to continue with Strange New Worlds’ final two seasons, and the two seasons of Starfleet Academy, one of which is complete and the other of which is already in production. But beyond that, there’s no new Star Trek being commissioned, and Skydance doesn’t seem to be obliged to fulfil Paramount’s past announcements – including Newsome’s comedy series.

Skydance CEO David Ellison seems much more interested in films than television shows. If Star Trek has a future in this new era, I would suggest at this early stage that it’ll be in feature films rather than made-for-streaming TV, based on what we can see from Skydance and Ellison at this early stage.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Discovery, Lower Decks, and Strange New Worlds all had their cancellations announced after Skydance and Paramount began working on their merger, with Strange New Worlds’ cancellation being announced years ahead of time while the merger was still being completed. It seems to me that Skydance wanted to come in with a clean slate, not having commitments to make any new Star Trek series whatsoever. And the comedy series? It may have been announced already, and at least some work has taken place on writing scripts, creating characters, and so on… but it was too late to the party.

If the comedy series had already entered full production, it would be safe for at least a season. But it hasn’t – and now the new team is taking over, they evidently have no obligation to pick it up. As far as we know, no casting decisions were taken, no contracts were signed, no sets have been constructed… the only thing we can be sure of is that a pitch and some scripts exist. And it’s very easy to put those in the old circular filing cabinet.

The announcement from last year’s Comic-Con.

What we heard from Tawny Newsome in Las Vegas feels more like Michael Dorn’s “Captain Worf” idea from a few years ago, or when Robert Duncan McNeill pitched a “Captain Proton” series to ViacomCBS. These are ideas that some fans might’ve liked, others might not have been into… but they never got off the ground despite clearly having a lot of thought and work put into them. I don’t believe that Goldsman and Meyers will succeed with their “Year One” pitch, and based on what we’ve just heard, I doubt that Newsome and Simien’s comedy series will go ahead, either.

And that’s a shame. As a Star Trek fan, I’d rather see the franchise in production than not – even if the kinds of shows being made wouldn’t have been my first choice. Obviously I’d be really keen on an idea like Legacy, or any kind of Strange New Worlds-inspired episodic series set somewhere after Picard. But if that’s not an option, I’d happily accept Year One or the comedy series. There’s potential in both, and I’m sure Skydance would make money on them.

Whether it’s a *Strange New Worlds* sequel, a comedy series, or something else… I just want more Star Trek!

But the direction of travel has changed. We’ve seen that with the cancellations. This current era of streaming Star Trek is, in my view, coming to an end in the next few years – possibly as early as 2028 or 2029 when the final episodes of Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy will air. Skydance’s new team might be interested in commissioning a feature film – and as luck would have it, there are several scripts being worked on – but I don’t think they’re interested in taking Star Trek forward on streaming at the moment. That might change, depending on all kinds of factors, and the more noise we can make as fans, and the more attention we can draw to Star Trek the better the franchise’s prospects will be! But for Ellison and Skydance, I just don’t believe they see much value in the Star Trek brand right now.

And that’s probably what’s done it for the comedy series. It’s a shame, because even though this wouldn’t have been my first choice for a new Star Trek production, there was still potential. And anything set after the Picard era is going to be of interest, even if it wasn’t the kind of exploration-focused episodic series that I’d have preferred. Maybe Skydance can be convinced to make a show like that… but I’m not holding my breath.

Tawny Newsome (c) with Paul Tompkins (l) and Wil Wheaton in 2022.

As we talked about when Strange New Worlds was cancelled… the blunt fact of the matter is that I don’t expect to see much more Star Trek beyond about 2028. When the shows that are currently in production make it to air and then conclude their runs, I really get the sense that that’ll be it – at least on the small screen. A fourth Kelvin film, or possibly some other cinematic adaptation, could still be possible in the years ahead, but for me, Star Trek has always been better-suited to television than the cinema.

I think in the weeks or months ahead we’ll have to lay out what’s gone wrong for Star Trek in this era of streaming television – and how Paramount’s outgoing executives took what could’ve been a golden opportunity and ended up pissing all over it. Star Trek could have been well-positioned as a big-budget, flagship franchise – but so many things went wrong, from the rollout of Paramount+ to Paramount’s inability to bring younger fans on board in significant numbers. But that’ll have to be the subject of a longer piece.

For now, it seems to me as if Newsome’s comedy show is dead – albeit unofficially at this stage. And while you may not be terribly disappointed about that on an individual level (as I’m not, to be honest with you), I think it says a lot about the Skydance merger and Star Trek’s future under this new corporation. And that does genuinely have me worried, because it feels like we’ve only just got Star Trek back after more than a decade in the wilderness. To think it could be shutting down again so soon – and with so much potential left behind – is a bitter pill to swallow.

But hey, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Skydance will announce their commitment to this project – and to many more Star Trek shows, films, and video games! We can cross our fingers and hope, right?

The Star Trek franchise – including all films and series discussed above – is the copyright of the new Paramount-Skydance Corporation. Credit to TrekMovie.com for the initial reporting on Tawny Newsome’s comments. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Introducing MountCock+

Wed 10.04.24Dennis

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, roll up and be the first to subscribe to the greatest streaming service of all time: the brand-new MountCock+!

If only it was real…

If you haven’t heard, Paramount Global – the company behind Paramount+, the Star Trek franchise, and others – is in a pretty bad place financially. That isn’t “breaking news;” it’s been the case for quite some time. As Paramount has continued to lose money, its executives have put a lot of faith in streaming to swoop in as some kind of saviour – but they’ve learned, belatedly, that streaming is a difficult market to crack at the best of times. And these are not the best of times!

Here’s what I think happened a few years ago. An elderly executive or investor – who knows nothing about the internet, data, streaming, or any of the complex technologies required to make it work – saw the success of Netflix, looked at CBS/Paramount’s own back catalogue and library of content and said to some poor, overworked employee “make me my own Netflix.” In the mid-2010s, Netflix was the hottest up-and-coming property in the entertainment world, and Paramount wanted a piece of that action. But rather than work with Netflix, Paramount wanted to be a competitor – despite having none of the outside investment, financial support, development knowledge, or technological know-how.

Logo of Paramount Global.

I really wish that I’d been faster at getting to work on this story, because “MountCock+” would’ve been a great April Fools’ gag if I’d made it a week ago! Oh well, lesson learned.

The title of this piece – which, in case it really needs saying, is facetious and won’t really be the name of a potential newly-merged streaming service – comes from news that new Paramount investor and potential new owner, SkyDance Media, is considering rolling Paramount+ and the Peacock streaming service together into one single entity. This would give subscribers to either platform access to a lot more films and TV shows, and the hope is that rolling two unprofitable streamers together will help the restructured Paramount/Paradance/Dancemount (or whatever the new company might be called) edge its way closer to profitable territory.

Paramount Global and Skydance Media may be in talks about a merger or sale.

Let’s get one thing straight right off the bat: small, specialised streaming platforms that only offer relatively few shows and films within a single niche have always been a bad idea. It was a bad idea when DC Comics tried it, it was a bad idea when CNN tried it, and the fact that DC Universe and CNN+ no longer exist as independent platforms is all the proof you’ll ever need. Netflix succeeded in the 2010s because it was a comparatively cheap and convenient way to access a huge library of content. Yes, there were whole genres on Netflix that you’d never even touch because they were of no interest to you. But there was so much other stuff that was appealing that it made a Netflix subscription worthwhile.

That was what convinced me to cut the cord – or rather, the wire to my satellite dish! In the late 2000s I got Sky – a satellite TV provider here in the UK. Getting Sky in the first place had been one of my ambitions for a long time; ever since it launched in the ’90s, the idea of hundreds of channels had been massively appealing! But by the late 2010s, the media landscape was changing. When Star Trek: Discovery was only going to be available on Netflix, I signed up so I could watch it. And I found streaming to be so convenient and at such a good price point that I very quickly dropped Sky altogether.

Stock photo of a satellite TV dish. — You can still see a satellite dish on many houses here in the UK.

The reasons for Netflix’s success were its convenience, low price point, and huge library of content. Take away one of those factors and it wouldn’t have become the phenomenon that it did – and as the so-called “streaming wars” rage in the 2020s, it’s a combination of those same factors in reverse that account for the failure or underperformance of other, newer streaming platforms. Less content for a higher price turns people away – even big fans of some franchises. I’m a Trekkie, but in 2024 I’ve only paid for a single month of Paramount+ so far; the streaming platform just doesn’t feel worth it most of the time.

Roll Paramount+ content in with another streaming service, though, and suddenly it becomes a more enticing proposition. As long as the price stays low as the library of content grows, there would be much more of an incentive to sign up for MountCock+ than there is for either Paramount+ or Peacock individually. Continuing as competitors will, in all likelihood, lead to the failure of both platforms, but if they join forces they might stand a chance. Even though Skydance doesn’t own Peacock and thus profits will have to be split, it still feels like a good idea.

Stock photo of streaming apps on a TV screen. — There are currently too many streaming services. Some will *never* be profitable for their parent companies.

Almost every time Star Trek’s parent company has been shaken up, there have been changes for the franchise. And not all of these changes have been positive. We have to keep in mind that it’s possible that a Skydance/hedge fund-owned corporation would have less of an interest in Star Trek, especially if the franchise seems to be underperforming, not bringing in or retaining subscribers, or even running too hot. While I don’t expect to see imminent cancellations, it’s something to be aware of as it’s happened before. It’s also possible that new corporate leadership might be keener on feature films with cinematic releases than on making more made-for-streaming series.

On the other hand, Paramount has been slow and even reluctant to listen to Trekkies sometimes. There’s been a significant fan campaign to create a sequel/successor show to Star Trek: Picard – but after more than a year, it hasn’t garnered a response from those at the top of the corporation. So perhaps new faces in the boardroom would be better at reading the room and understanding where the fan community is and what kind of projects we’d like to see. This is an area where Paramount has needed to improve for a long time, so again there’s the potential to see some positive changes.

Still frame from Star Trek: Picard Season 3. — Trekkies have been clamouring for another *Picard-*era series.

Business and finance is not my strong suit nor my area of expertise – and I don’t blame you if the details are boring or difficult to grasp. I’m pretty sure I’m oversimplifying it because I don’t fully understand it either; when you’re looking at corporations that routinely deal in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars… it can be hard to really comprehend the kinds of decisions that they take. But as fans, and as consumers of media in a competitive marketplace, we need to know a little about what’s happening behind-the-scenes. The future of Paramount Global will have an impact on future Star Trek productions, on the corporation’s other streaming projects, and even on its cinematic output and television channels.

For my two cents, I can see why amalgamating Paramount+ and Peacock – or Paramount+ with some other streaming platform, if the Peacock deal falls through – would make sense. After several years of streaming becoming an increasingly balkanised and fractured marketplace, bringing different platforms together just makes sense. There’s a general unwillingness on the part of audiences to pay for more than two or three different streaming services, and smaller, second-tier platforms will struggle in such a challenging environment. I’m a Trekkie – albeit one who’s been feeling a bit burned out of late – but even I have never paid for a full year’s worth of Paramount+; it’s a service I pick up for a month or two at a time to watch a couple of shows. On a related note: have you checked out my review of Halo Season 2 yet?

Promo poster for Halo Season 2. — It’s the Master Chief!

So could the hypothetical MountCock+ turn things around? I think it has to have a better chance of turning a profit than either Paramount+ or Peacock do individually – though it will perhaps need a better name than I’ve given it! But in theory, a bigger streaming platform with more original and legacy content, backed up by a corporate merger that brings more film franchises and television shows under its umbrella is a good thing. We don’t want any one corporation to have a monopoly in this marketplace, of course, but creating platforms that are more consumer-friendly and don’t see small bundles of content paywalled off at every turn is a good thing and a positive development.

“Watch this space” is probably the soundest advice right now! Paramount has been in talks for a while about possible mergers, sales, or splitting off different parts of its business, so nothing is set in stone and this latest Skydance/Peacock proposal is unofficial at best. It could happen – or Paramount could end up going in a very different direction. Still, corporate changes are afoot – and I feel increasingly confident of major news breaking before the year is over.

All properties discussed above remain the copyright of their respective broadcaster, distributor, studio, etc. This article is not financial or investment advice. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.