Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
GustavoLeao

STAR TREK RENEGADES 2

77 posts in this topic

Does anyone here think that the announcement of a new series by CBS is taking the wind out of Renegades sails when it comes to fundraising? Wouldn't there be less incentive for the fan to fund new content when new content has already been promised by the studio?

I think that could possibly happen. If this new show actually turns out to be decent?  Fan shows like Renegades are going to have a rough go of it.  There will definitely be supporters, but I imagine the clamoring for new content will simmer a bit when it is available by the studio finally. 

Then again if they make a crummy show, some may come back to the fan operations. 

Edited by kenman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone here think that the announcement of a new series by CBS is taking the wind out of Renegades sails when it comes to fundraising? Wouldn't there be less incentive for the fan to fund new content when new content has already been promised by the studio?

I think that could possibly happen. If this new show actually turns out to be decent?  Fan shows like Renegades are going to have a rough go of it.  There will definitely be supporters, but I imagine the clamoring for new content will simmer a bit when it is available by the studio finally. 

Then again if they make a crummy show, some may come back to the fan operations. 

As long as they keep their dogs off of each other's lawns?  I don't think there should be an issue; especially if, as you say, the new series' stinks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think RENEGADES will cease production after the third episode because of Kurtzman's upcoming Trek series.

But I can be wrong.

Gus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone here think that the announcement of a new series by CBS is taking the wind out of Renegades sails when it comes to fundraising? Wouldn't there be less incentive for the fan to fund new content when new content has already been promised by the studio?

I think that could possibly happen. If this new show actually turns out to be decent?  Fan shows like Renegades are going to have a rough go of it.  There will definitely be supporters, but I imagine the clamoring for new content will simmer a bit when it is available by the studio finally. 

Then again if they make a crummy show, some may come back to the fan operations. 

As long as they keep their dogs off of each other's lawns?  I don't think there should be an issue; especially if, as you say, the new series' stinks...

Oh Renegades could keep going as long as they wanted and had the funding, I'm merely saying that it is possible that funding could be harder to encourage from some fans already getting new content produced by the studio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the existence of a new CBS series is irrelevant to funding Renegades or any fan made series.  Paramount has butchered Star Trek on TV since DS9 went off the air, and the movies haven't been that great, which is one of the main reasons these fan shows were created in the first place.

I have no intention of adding an online streaming service just to see a Star Trek series that there is a 99.9999 percent chance not cover the adventures of Kirk and crew.  No Kirk?  No money.  That simple.  So if I want to see the original characters, done by people that get what the show was all about, I watch the fan made stuff.  It may not have quite the acting levels as the official stuff, and certainly not the budget, but the shows serve their purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the existence of a new CBS series is irrelevant to funding Renegades or any fan made series.  Paramount has butchered Star Trek on TV since DS9 went off the air, and the movies haven't been that great, which is one of the main reasons these fan shows were created in the first place.

I have no intention of adding an online streaming service just to see a Star Trek series that there is a 99.9999 percent chance not cover the adventures of Kirk and crew.  No Kirk?  No money.  That simple.  So if I want to see the original characters, done by people that get what the show was all about, I watch the fan made stuff.  It may not have quite the acting levels as the official stuff, and certainly not the budget, but the shows serve their purpose.

You seriously only want a show with Kirk and co?  That is the least imaginative and boring idea for a new Trek show in my mind. 

I think Renegades will only lose people throwing money towards it if the new show proves satisfying to the bulk of fans. I could see something Star Trek Continues continuing to keep fans, but it satisfies an itch for that classic Trek look and feel.  If you want that, this show is nailing it. Renegades is an attempt at making a new modern Star Trek which follows new characters...if you can get modern Trek with new characters via CBS with a real budget, better actors, and it actually turns out to be solid?  Renegades will become even more of a niche product. 

I am hesitant to get CBS All Access, because of personal experience with the service (or at least it's free counterpart).  If the new show had Kirk?  Then I'd be really against spending money on it.  I feel the exact opposite of you on this front. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the existence of a new CBS series is irrelevant to funding Renegades or any fan made series.  Paramount has butchered Star Trek on TV since DS9 went off the air, and the movies haven't been that great, which is one of the main reasons these fan shows were created in the first place.

I have no intention of adding an online streaming service just to see a Star Trek series that there is a 99.9999 percent chance not cover the adventures of Kirk and crew.  No Kirk?  No money.  That simple.  So if I want to see the original characters, done by people that get what the show was all about, I watch the fan made stuff.  It may not have quite the acting levels as the official stuff, and certainly not the budget, but the shows serve their purpose.

You seriously only want a show with Kirk and co?  That is the least imaginative and boring idea for a new Trek show in my mind. 

No Kirk, no peace... :giggle:

I agree (with Kenman); that is the worst idea ever.  

James T. Kirk is not what Star Trek is all about.... Spock is (:P).  But seriously; TNG, DS9, VGR and ENT have all proven (with varying degrees of success) that ST is more than any one character; it's a format.  A way of telling a particular type of story.  That's like saying all undersea adventures have to be about Captain Nemo and the Nautilus.  

Kirk has TOS, TAS, 6 TOS movies/1 TNG movie, and 2 reboot movies (!).  His story has been done.

I would hate to think that in 50 years of Star Trek (including 12 movies and 7 TV series) that the only thing all of those creative minds could come up with is a retelling of TOS.   And with the BR movies already having done that anyway, it'd be a reboot of a reboot (!?!).   Not to mention we already have fan films doing the same exact thing.   That takes all the the imagination of a photocopier...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the existence of a new CBS series is irrelevant to funding Renegades or any fan made series.  Paramount has butchered Star Trek on TV since DS9 went off the air, and the movies haven't been that great, which is one of the main reasons these fan shows were created in the first place.

I have no intention of adding an online streaming service just to see a Star Trek series that there is a 99.9999 percent chance not cover the adventures of Kirk and crew.  No Kirk?  No money.  That simple.  So if I want to see the original characters, done by people that get what the show was all about, I watch the fan made stuff.  It may not have quite the acting levels as the official stuff, and certainly not the budget, but the shows serve their purpose.

You seriously only want a show with Kirk and co?  That is the least imaginative and boring idea for a new Trek show in my mind. 

I think Renegades will only lose people throwing money towards it if the new show proves satisfying to the bulk of fans. I could see something Star Trek Continues continuing to keep fans, but it satisfies an itch for that classic Trek look and feel.  If you want that, this show is nailing it. Renegades is an attempt at making a new modern Star Trek which follows new characters...if you can get modern Trek with new characters via CBS with a real budget, better actors, and it actually turns out to be solid?  Renegades will become even more of a niche product. 

I am hesitant to get CBS All Access, because of personal experience with the service (or at least it's free counterpart).  If the new show had Kirk?  Then I'd be really against spending money on it.  I feel the exact opposite of you on this front. 

Agreed. If the new show will be about Kirk, that would be the quickest and surest way to kill Star Trek once and for all. It would be the ultimate proof Star Trek has absolutely nothing to offer for anybody below the age of 50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kirk and crew are Star Trek.  For me, another show is just making copies of copies of copies.  THAT is unoriginal.  Same idea, with different characters is the same idea with lesser characters.  So no, I don't really care about Captain Joe Schmoe and his Spock clone.

I think it's pretty safe to say that nothing could be further from the truth about a show about Kirk killing Star Trek.  Given that the second they returned to Kirk and crew, the first movie almost domestically did what all four TNG movies did combined, the decision to return to Kirk and crew was quite sound.

You don't have to be above 50 to see good characters are timeless. 

That's like saying that Batman would ruin a Batman show.  Some characters are timeless because they were original.  That's Kirk and crew. 

It's like James Bond.  As long as the stories work, the characters work.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seriously only want a show with Kirk and co?  That is the least imaginative and boring idea for a new Trek show in my mind. 

This.

 

  For me, another show is just making copies of copies of copies.  THAT is unoriginal.  Same idea, with different characters is the same idea with lesser characters. 

Deep Space Nine was so none of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am bored to death. Kirk again ? I rather watch STAR TREK CONTINUES. sigh

Gus

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kirk and crew are Star Trek.  For me, another show is just making copies of copies of copies.  THAT is unoriginal.  Same idea, with different characters is the same idea with lesser characters.  So no, I don't really care about Captain Joe Schmoe and his Spock clone.

I think it's pretty safe to say that nothing could be further from the truth about a show about Kirk killing Star Trek.  Given that the second they returned to Kirk and crew, the first movie almost domestically did what all four TNG movies did combined, the decision to return to Kirk and crew was quite sound.

You don't have to be above 50 to see good characters are timeless. 

That's like saying that Batman would ruin a Batman show.  Some characters are timeless because they were original.  That's Kirk and crew. 

It's like James Bond.  As long as the stories work, the characters work.

 

Hogwash.  Kirk is not the end-all be-all of Trek. Never was.  In fact if you go back to the original genesis of Trek...Kirk ain't there. 

Kirk was an important element to the original's success, but TNG proved that Trek could carry on without him.  DS9 was a creative step away from format and character archetypes that stretched the boundaries of Trek's storytelling style.  Voyager was a successful show for a while, and many still love it and its characters (even if I am not among them, I can see how it differed from the original and why it still has it's champions). Enterprise is probably the least successful, and what did it try to do?  Create characters that were more similar in style to Kirk and crew (Archer/T'Pol/Trip = Kirk/Spock/McCoy).

To say doing something new both in terms of characters and story is the less original idea is complete and total nonsense. Yes the new movies returned to the original characters and was successful in many ways because of that...but to suggest that any new show without Kirk would be automatically bad and unoriginal is mind-boggling to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To say doing something new both in terms of characters and story is the less original idea is complete and total nonsense. Yes the new movies returned to the original characters and was successful in many ways because of that...but to suggest that any new show without Kirk would be automatically bad and unoriginal is mind-boggling to me.

It's as ridiculous as rehashing Archer or Picard. You've done it, why do it again? Movies are a slightly different animal, so resurrecting characters with five decades worth of cultural resonance makes some sense for two hours at a time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kirk and crew are Star Trek.  For me, another show is just making copies of copies of copies.  THAT is unoriginal.  Same idea, with different characters is the same idea with lesser characters.  So no, I don't really care about Captain Joe Schmoe and his Spock clone.

I think it's pretty safe to say that nothing could be further from the truth about a show about Kirk killing Star Trek.  Given that the second they returned to Kirk and crew, the first movie almost domestically did what all four TNG movies did combined, the decision to return to Kirk and crew was quite sound.

You don't have to be above 50 to see good characters are timeless. 

That's like saying that Batman would ruin a Batman show.  Some characters are timeless because they were original.  That's Kirk and crew. 

It's like James Bond.  As long as the stories work, the characters work.

 

You have to realize, nobody except for you and a small handful of hardcore geeks even cares about Kirk. Nobody. And even less people care about Shatner these days. I guess even most of today's Star Trek fans love one of the other series' more than TOS.

And even in TOS, Kirk was never the iconic hero; Spock was. Ask random people about TOS, and they'll say "the guy with the pointed ears", but nobody even remembers Kirk (unless he makes fun of this outdated 60s male role model that's become a joke by now).

And huh? A new show with new characters would be "making copies of copies of copies", but recasting Kirk in an attempt to remake a 2009 movie that was a remake of a 60s tv series is not? :P

Make the new show another TOS remake, and be sure it will be cancelled after a few episodes, because absolutely nobody except for you is watching it.

Edited by Sim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a reality that the original characters are what made the franchise popular.  Without them, there are no spinoffs, and no spinoff had the longevity of the original, which was only canceled due to stupid execs.  TNG, when canceled, was done.  They made 4 movies because they wanted to keep the movie franchise going, but those movies did not have the popularity or demand of the original characters.  The second they dumped TNG in favor of a recast Kirk and crew, the dollars spoke for themselves.

Creating copies of the original characters, from the mind of a writer who didn't WATCH and was no fan of the original series, will never recapture it.  Enterprise couldn't have been further away from the original series if they tried. 

Others can say that nobody cares about Kirk and crew, and studios will laugh at the notion given the box office totals of the last two movies, which shows that nobody cares about anything BUT Kirk and crew.

Kirk and crew bring in the numbers, and the proof of that well, is the numbers.

I don't think this is an issue though since there is a 99.9999 percent chance it will not be Kirk and crew, and the only people who will watch are the hard core Trek fans that will pay anything to watch anything with Star Trek in the title. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a reality that the original characters are what made the franchise popular.  Without them, there are no spinoffs, and no spinoff had the longevity of the original, which was only canceled due to stupid execs.  TNG, when canceled, was done.  They made 4 movies because they wanted to keep the movie franchise going, but those movies did not have the popularity or demand of the original characters.  The second they dumped TNG in favor of a recast Kirk and crew, the dollars spoke for themselves.

Creating copies of the original characters, from the mind of a writer who didn't WATCH and was no fan of the original series, will never recapture it.  Enterprise couldn't have been further away from the original series if they tried. 

Others can say that nobody cares about Kirk and crew, and studios will laugh at the notion given the box office totals of the last two movies, which shows that nobody cares about anything BUT Kirk and crew.

Kirk and crew bring in the numbers, and the proof of that well, is the numbers.

I don't think this is an issue though since there is a 99.9999 percent chance it will not be Kirk and crew, and the only people who will watch are the hard core Trek fans that will pay anything to watch anything with Star Trek in the title. 

I know you love Kirk, and I like this character too (although I always preferred Spock). Most of us probably do.

But you have to be realistic. For 99% of the people who aren't hardcore fans, Kirk is nothing but a silly role cliché from the 60s, if they even remember him. And TOS is a series younger people can only watch in order to have fun when mocking the awful acting and the cheap sets, nobody (beyond truly committed fans) can watch it today and take it remotely seriously. It's just "that weird, silly 60s show".

By far most people who are fond of Trek now, aged 30-mid40s, grew up with TNG, DS9 or VOY. That's how they came to love Star Trek. That's the lion's share of the fans.

It's true that TOS made the franchise popular originally. But that's all. TNG and the other series' easily overtook it, because of ultimately better (objective) quality. TOS lasted three seasons. TNG-ENT lasted 18 years.

I don't know about the US, but in Germany, nobody is even buying TOS novels anymore. They're the worst selling of them all, even selling worse than ENT novels. It's a niche thing, only a handful of nostalgics around the age of 50, who once watched it as kids, are still interested in this stuff.

When I ask a random non-Trekker person about Kirk, if he's a genre geek, he'll say: "Oh, that's this awful 60s cliché Futurama's Zapp Brannigan is based on, right?"

Okay, I exaggerate a little, but I think the picture I'm painting here is much more realistic than your's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a reality that the original characters are what made the franchise popular.  Without them, there are no spinoffs, and no spinoff had the longevity of the original, which was only canceled due to stupid execs.  TNG, when canceled, was done.  They made 4 movies because they wanted to keep the movie franchise going, but those movies did not have the popularity or demand of the original characters.  The second they dumped TNG in favor of a recast Kirk and crew, the dollars spoke for themselves.

Creating copies of the original characters, from the mind of a writer who didn't WATCH and was no fan of the original series, will never recapture it.  Enterprise couldn't have been further away from the original series if they tried. 

Others can say that nobody cares about Kirk and crew, and studios will laugh at the notion given the box office totals of the last two movies, which shows that nobody cares about anything BUT Kirk and crew.

Kirk and crew bring in the numbers, and the proof of that well, is the numbers.

I don't think this is an issue though since there is a 99.9999 percent chance it will not be Kirk and crew, and the only people who will watch are the hard core Trek fans that will pay anything to watch anything with Star Trek in the title. 

You have to be just trolling us now right?  TNG was not cancelled, they ended it on their own BECAUSE they wanted to make the jump to the movies.  And the movies, made just as much money as the original cast films had really.  Only until Insurrection.  In fact every Trek movie up until Nemesis debuted at #1 in the box office.  YAnd it was YEARS between the TNG cast ending their film run before they did any Trek again.  The numbers don't just say "people just wanted Kirk and Spock" back. They say that people wanted TREK back. People wanted to see Star Trek back, and the movie brought it back, and it was an entertaining film with good word of mouth. 

You are completely full of it.  There is no way that the numbers DEFINITIVELY prove that only Kirk and Spock pull in an audience, because there is 18 years worth of TV and Movies that say you are just out of your mind. 

Name one character on DS9 who is just a copy of a TOS character?  There are background characters with more development than Kirk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kirk and crew are Star Trek.  For me, another show is just making copies of copies of copies.  THAT is unoriginal.  Same idea, with different characters is the same idea with lesser characters.  So no, I don't really care about Captain Joe Schmoe and his Spock clone.

Deep Space Nine puts that argument to bed for me; it was nothing like TOS, and it was (IMO) the best of the ST spinoffs.

Kirk and crew are Star Trek.  For me, another show is just making copies of copies of copies.  THAT is unoriginal.  Same idea, with different characters is the same idea with lesser characters.  So no, I don't really care about Captain Joe Schmoe and his Spock clone.

I think it's pretty safe to say that nothing could be further from the truth about a show about Kirk killing Star Trek.  Given that the second they returned to Kirk and crew, the first movie almost domestically did what all four TNG movies did combined, the decision to return to Kirk and crew was quite sound.

You don't have to be above 50 to see good characters are timeless. 

That's like saying that Batman would ruin a Batman show.  Some characters are timeless because they were original.  That's Kirk and crew. 

It's like James Bond.  As long as the stories work, the characters work.

 

Hogwash.  Kirk is not the end-all be-all of Trek. Never was.  In fact if you go back to the original genesis of Trek...Kirk ain't there. 

Kirk was an important element to the original's success, but TNG proved that Trek could carry on without him.  DS9 was a creative step away from format and character archetypes that stretched the boundaries of Trek's storytelling style.  Voyager was a successful show for a while, and many still love it and its characters (even if I am not among them, I can see how it differed from the original and why it still has it's champions). Enterprise is probably the least successful, and what did it try to do?  Create characters that were more similar in style to Kirk and crew (Archer/T'Pol/Trip = Kirk/Spock/McCoy).

To say doing something new both in terms of characters and story is the less original idea is complete and total nonsense. Yes the new movies returned to the original characters and was successful in many ways because of that...but to suggest that any new show without Kirk would be automatically bad and unoriginal is mind-boggling to me.

^
Very much this.  The spinoff that was closest to TOS was also the least successful (4 years instead of the usual 7).  

I would hate to think that in 50 years of Star Trek, the only thing they could come up with would be to do exactly what was done 50 years ago and call it a 'new' Star Trek series.   That's a clone; a 1 for 1 copy of the original.  

Picard and his crew were a very different makeup than Kirk and his; they were more of an ensemble, and with very different personalities.   Yet the show also popularized ST for an entirely new set of fans.   THAT'S what a new ST has to do; not just stoke the dying embers of Captain Kirk, but find its own voice and create a whole new wing of the franchise that will reenergize the brand. 

A reboot of a reboot is not only a terrible idea, but it will only invite comparisons to the the two versions of K/S adventures that preceded it.   It would most likely fail.  Miserably. 

 

I don't think this is an issue though since there is a 99.9999 percent chance it will not be Kirk and crew, and the only people who will watch are the hard core Trek fans that will pay anything to watch anything with Star Trek in the title. 

.... or the more adventurous and open-minded fans who want a show that will add to the canon of ST and not just repeat it.  

There's a reality that the original characters are what made the franchise popular.  Without them, there are no spinoffs, and no spinoff had the longevity of the original, which was only canceled due to stupid execs.  TNG, when canceled, was done.  They made 4 movies because they wanted to keep the movie franchise going, but those movies did not have the popularity or demand of the original characters.  The second they dumped TNG in favor of a recast Kirk and crew, the dollars spoke for themselves.

Creating copies of the original characters, from the mind of a writer who didn't WATCH and was no fan of the original series, will never recapture it.  Enterprise couldn't have been further away from the original series if they tried. 

Others can say that nobody cares about Kirk and crew, and studios will laugh at the notion given the box office totals of the last two movies, which shows that nobody cares about anything BUT Kirk and crew.

Kirk and crew bring in the numbers, and the proof of that well, is the numbers.

I don't think this is an issue though since there is a 99.9999 percent chance it will not be Kirk and crew, and the only people who will watch are the hard core Trek fans that will pay anything to watch anything with Star Trek in the title. 

You have to be just trolling us now right?  TNG was not cancelled, they ended it on their own BECAUSE they wanted to make the jump to the movies.  And the movies, made just as much money as the original cast films had really.  Only until Insurrection.  In fact every Trek movie up until Nemesis debuted at #1 in the box office.  YAnd it was YEARS between the TNG cast ending their film run before they did any Trek again.  The numbers don't just say "people just wanted Kirk and Spock" back. They say that people wanted TREK back. People wanted to see Star Trek back, and the movie brought it back, and it was an entertaining film with good word of mouth. 

You are completely full of it.  There is no way that the numbers DEFINITIVELY prove that only Kirk and Spock pull in an audience, because there is 18 years worth of TV and Movies that say you are just out of your mind. 

Name one character on DS9 who is just a copy of a TOS character?  There are background characters with more development than Kirk. 

Easy on the insults, KM. 

Accusing someone of trolling and saying they're "full of it" is berating another user.  Let's not go there, OK? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean to be berating or insulting.  I only meant that the argument seemed to not hold any water and had little basis in the facts of Trek's popularity or history.  Sorry if it came off harsher than intended. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean to be berating or insulting.  I only meant that the argument seemed to not hold any water and had little basis in the facts of Trek's popularity or history.  Sorry if it came off harsher than intended. 

Just consider that a friendly tap on the shoulder... :P

Gotta do my Barney Fife bit for Trekcore.  :laugh:

barney.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deep Space Nine puts that argument to bed for me; it was nothing like TOS, and it was (IMO) the best of the ST spinoffs.

By light years. It still holds up like none of the others, to be honest.

 

And from up the thread, no TNG wasn't cancelled. It voluntarily ended its run. Huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deep Space Nine puts that argument to bed for me; it was nothing like TOS, and it was (IMO) the best of the ST spinoffs.

By light years. It still holds up like none of the others, to be honest.

 

And from up the thread, no TNG wasn't cancelled. It voluntarily ended its run. Huge difference.

I think the fact that it's spin-off was still running and it's production was essentially kept going with Voyager right thru to Enterprise is evidence that the Studio had no intention of ending the show...they kept asking for more! Studios don't do that if they don't make money off of a property.  They aren't known for funding a product for 18 continuous years if it is only creatively inspiring to them.  They want the dough.  

I didn't mean to be berating or insulting.  I only meant that the argument seemed to not hold any water and had little basis in the facts of Trek's popularity or history.  Sorry if it came off harsher than intended. 

Just consider that a friendly tap on the shoulder... :P

Gotta do my Barney Fife bit for Trekcore.  :laugh:

barney.gif

Consider this bud nipped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean to be berating or insulting.  I only meant that the argument seemed to not hold any water and had little basis in the facts of Trek's popularity or history.  Sorry if it came off harsher than intended. 

I agree with you and sympathize with your sentiments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that it's spin-off was still running and it's production was essentially kept going with Voyager right thru to Enterprise is evidence that the Studio had no intention of ending the show...they kept asking for more! Studios don't do that if they don't make money off of a property.  They aren't known for funding a product for 18 continuous years if it is only creatively inspiring to them.  They want the dough.  

^
This.

The only ST series in those 18 years that didn't end on its own terms was ENT, and even that one got 4 seasons.   If TNG thru VGR were all failures?  None of them would've existed beyond TNG's first couple of seasons.   Even in first run syndication or smaller networks, there are duds that don't make it; I remember a few one-two season wonders in syndication in those days like "War of the Worlds" "Friday the 13th: The Series" "Baywatch Nights" etc.   ST endured because of the brand name at first; but everything past season 3 of TNG was because it became successful on its own merits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Renegades will probably not effect the new series plans, as it is a fan film series, even though it does use prime actors. It's not likely CBS will go back to using Berman and Braga era actors as explaining that away would be fan service. Whatever they do, they will not go back to that well. Hopefully they will pick something that works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0