Hammer

Discovery delayed 4 months

Recommended Posts

Sim   

Taking time to do it right is better. That was the difference in both Battlestar Galactica series. The original was rushed after the 3hr pilot to the point where they were sometimes shooting scenes for two episodes at once and getting scripts the day they were to be shot. The reboot was given pretty much a year after the mini-series to get things set in place.

TMP is of course a big example of rushing things too. Had Paramount not foolishly locked in the Dec release date and instead told Wise to shoot for Memorial day 1980 or July 4th at the latest, he and everyone else involved would have had more time to do things better instead of the rewrites on the fly and maybe we wouldn't have needed the Director's Edition as some of the fx ideas could have been realized. 

Even VGR and ENT were both rushed to air because the studio didn't want a year without a Star Trek ship series.   I'm currently reading Mark Altman & Ed Gross' book "The Fifty Year Mission" vol. 2, and it goes into detail about how VGR was practically thrown out onto the stage because Paramount didn't really have enough faith in DS9 to support the ST franchise at that time.    Many who were involved in DS9 (and a couple involved in VGR) believed that both shows could've benefitted from the delay.   DS9 would've had more room to 'breathe' and VGR could've refined its concept a bit. 

I'm hoping that Fuller and company will use their extra little pocket of time wisely.

and that truly disappoints me. I'm in the camp of considering DS9 one of the best in the franchise and it's my personal favorite followed by TNG. By rushing Voyager it hurt DS9 and killed the chances for them to get the much deserved movie treatment. It's something a few of the actors have talked about before.

I remember reading an old article in Mark Altman's old 1990s scifi magazine SciFi Universe (one of the better ones of that time, IMO) and they had a great article/editorial about how DS9 could've spawned a smaller scale, "Pulp Fiction"-type movie franchise instead of a big budget, space opera-type Star Trek film.    

I think DS9's feature films (assuming it ever had the chance, or the breathing room, to warrant them) could've been the smaller, but eminently more interesting films of the ST movie franchise.   

In the '90s, a lot of smaller independent ('indie') films were breaking mainstream barriers (like "Pulp Fiction" and the Kevin Smith movies).  I think DS9 could've been a studio film but perhaps produced with a lower budget (via Paramount's independent Vintage wing) rather than a traditional ST feature.  Precedents include the crowdsourced "Veronica Mars" movie, or "Serenity."   A smaller scale ST movie that is all about character; with a smaller emphasis on spectacle.  

Maybe it could've been about the return of 'the Sisko' or Bajor's admission to the Federation.  Again; it wouldn't necessarily have to be some $100 million epic.  Just a smaller, indie-style ST movie using existing sets and actors.   It could've set the tone for a wave of smaller feature films based on scifi TV franchises (like the X-Files movies, but for Star Trek).   It wouldn't be designed to do Star Wars-style business, but using existing TV sets (which were built to look like a feature film) and mainly actors from the series, they could've kept costs phenomenally low.   I think that was one of the best suggestions I'd ever heard for DS9.   Could you imagine seeing those DS9 sets in 2.35:1 on a big screen?

To quote the late Kor (who also appeared on DS9 in a far more interesting fashion than his TOS appearance), "It would've been glorious..."

Sorry for the derail (my fault!).

But BOT: yes, I wish DS9 could've enjoyed the delay that DSC is getting... a year or two on air by itself with no VGR spinoff crowding the airwaves.  

Wow, I didn't know such a plan was ever on the table... it could have been glorious indeed!

The "what could have beens" in the ST universe sometimes are amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking time to do it right is better. That was the difference in both Battlestar Galactica series. The original was rushed after the 3hr pilot to the point where they were sometimes shooting scenes for two episodes at once and getting scripts the day they were to be shot. The reboot was given pretty much a year after the mini-series to get things set in place.

TMP is of course a big example of rushing things too. Had Paramount not foolishly locked in the Dec release date and instead told Wise to shoot for Memorial day 1980 or July 4th at the latest, he and everyone else involved would have had more time to do things better instead of the rewrites on the fly and maybe we wouldn't have needed the Director's Edition as some of the fx ideas could have been realized. 

Even VGR and ENT were both rushed to air because the studio didn't want a year without a Star Trek ship series.   I'm currently reading Mark Altman & Ed Gross' book "The Fifty Year Mission" vol. 2, and it goes into detail about how VGR was practically thrown out onto the stage because Paramount didn't really have enough faith in DS9 to support the ST franchise at that time.    Many who were involved in DS9 (and a couple involved in VGR) believed that both shows could've benefitted from the delay.   DS9 would've had more room to 'breathe' and VGR could've refined its concept a bit. 

I'm hoping that Fuller and company will use their extra little pocket of time wisely.

and that truly disappoints me. I'm in the camp of considering DS9 one of the best in the franchise and it's my personal favorite followed by TNG. By rushing Voyager it hurt DS9 and killed the chances for them to get the much deserved movie treatment. It's something a few of the actors have talked about before.

I remember reading an old article in Mark Altman's old 1990s scifi magazine SciFi Universe (one of the better ones of that time, IMO) and they had a great article/editorial about how DS9 could've spawned a smaller scale, "Pulp Fiction"-type movie franchise instead of a big budget, space opera-type Star Trek film.    

I think DS9's feature films (assuming it ever had the chance, or the breathing room, to warrant them) could've been the smaller, but eminently more interesting films of the ST movie franchise.   

In the '90s, a lot of smaller independent ('indie') films were breaking mainstream barriers (like "Pulp Fiction" and the Kevin Smith movies).  I think DS9 could've been a studio film but perhaps produced with a lower budget (via Paramount's independent Vintage wing) rather than a traditional ST feature.  Precedents include the crowdsourced "Veronica Mars" movie, or "Serenity."   A smaller scale ST movie that is all about character; with a smaller emphasis on spectacle.  

Maybe it could've been about the return of 'the Sisko' or Bajor's admission to the Federation.  Again; it wouldn't necessarily have to be some $100 million epic.  Just a smaller, indie-style ST movie using existing sets and actors.   It could've set the tone for a wave of smaller feature films based on scifi TV franchises (like the X-Files movies, but for Star Trek).   It wouldn't be designed to do Star Wars-style business, but using existing TV sets (which were built to look like a feature film) and mainly actors from the series, they could've kept costs phenomenally low.   I think that was one of the best suggestions I'd ever heard for DS9.   Could you imagine seeing those DS9 sets in 2.35:1 on a big screen?

To quote the late Kor (who also appeared on DS9 in a far more interesting fashion than his TOS appearance), "It would've been glorious..."

Sorry for the derail (my fault!).

But BOT: yes, I wish DS9 could've enjoyed the delay that DSC is getting... a year or two on air by itself with no VGR spinoff crowding the airwaves.  

Wow, I didn't know such a plan was ever on the table... it could have been glorious indeed!

The "what could have beens" in the ST universe sometimes are amazing.

^
It wasn't on Paramount's table; it was suggested by an editorial in SciFi Universe magazine (an editorial is an opinion piece, not a straight news article).   But when I read that back about 19 years ago, it definitely gave me a 'eureka' moment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sim   

Taking time to do it right is better. That was the difference in both Battlestar Galactica series. The original was rushed after the 3hr pilot to the point where they were sometimes shooting scenes for two episodes at once and getting scripts the day they were to be shot. The reboot was given pretty much a year after the mini-series to get things set in place.

TMP is of course a big example of rushing things too. Had Paramount not foolishly locked in the Dec release date and instead told Wise to shoot for Memorial day 1980 or July 4th at the latest, he and everyone else involved would have had more time to do things better instead of the rewrites on the fly and maybe we wouldn't have needed the Director's Edition as some of the fx ideas could have been realized. 

Even VGR and ENT were both rushed to air because the studio didn't want a year without a Star Trek ship series.   I'm currently reading Mark Altman & Ed Gross' book "The Fifty Year Mission" vol. 2, and it goes into detail about how VGR was practically thrown out onto the stage because Paramount didn't really have enough faith in DS9 to support the ST franchise at that time.    Many who were involved in DS9 (and a couple involved in VGR) believed that both shows could've benefitted from the delay.   DS9 would've had more room to 'breathe' and VGR could've refined its concept a bit. 

I'm hoping that Fuller and company will use their extra little pocket of time wisely.

and that truly disappoints me. I'm in the camp of considering DS9 one of the best in the franchise and it's my personal favorite followed by TNG. By rushing Voyager it hurt DS9 and killed the chances for them to get the much deserved movie treatment. It's something a few of the actors have talked about before.

I remember reading an old article in Mark Altman's old 1990s scifi magazine SciFi Universe (one of the better ones of that time, IMO) and they had a great article/editorial about how DS9 could've spawned a smaller scale, "Pulp Fiction"-type movie franchise instead of a big budget, space opera-type Star Trek film.    

I think DS9's feature films (assuming it ever had the chance, or the breathing room, to warrant them) could've been the smaller, but eminently more interesting films of the ST movie franchise.   

In the '90s, a lot of smaller independent ('indie') films were breaking mainstream barriers (like "Pulp Fiction" and the Kevin Smith movies).  I think DS9 could've been a studio film but perhaps produced with a lower budget (via Paramount's independent Vintage wing) rather than a traditional ST feature.  Precedents include the crowdsourced "Veronica Mars" movie, or "Serenity."   A smaller scale ST movie that is all about character; with a smaller emphasis on spectacle.  

Maybe it could've been about the return of 'the Sisko' or Bajor's admission to the Federation.  Again; it wouldn't necessarily have to be some $100 million epic.  Just a smaller, indie-style ST movie using existing sets and actors.   It could've set the tone for a wave of smaller feature films based on scifi TV franchises (like the X-Files movies, but for Star Trek).   It wouldn't be designed to do Star Wars-style business, but using existing TV sets (which were built to look like a feature film) and mainly actors from the series, they could've kept costs phenomenally low.   I think that was one of the best suggestions I'd ever heard for DS9.   Could you imagine seeing those DS9 sets in 2.35:1 on a big screen?

To quote the late Kor (who also appeared on DS9 in a far more interesting fashion than his TOS appearance), "It would've been glorious..."

Sorry for the derail (my fault!).

But BOT: yes, I wish DS9 could've enjoyed the delay that DSC is getting... a year or two on air by itself with no VGR spinoff crowding the airwaves.  

Wow, I didn't know such a plan was ever on the table... it could have been glorious indeed!

The "what could have beens" in the ST universe sometimes are amazing.

^
It wasn't on Paramount's table; it was suggested by an editorial in SciFi Universe magazine (an editorial is an opinion piece, not a straight news article).   But when I read that back about 19 years ago, it definitely gave me a 'eureka' moment. 

Ah, sorry, guess I didn't read your posting carefully enough. Anyway, that idea indeed is (was?) amazing.

If DSC will be to our liking and CBS and Paramount indeed get back together in some form, maybe they should consider making low budget feature films of DSC while the show is still on air (and perhaps parallel to the big NuTrek movies... they could bridge the time between them by making one or two "smaller" movies in between. SW has the anthology movies too, after all).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am disappointed by this. I was really looking forward to sitting down with the wife on those cold winter nights and enjoying Star Trek again.  I hope that the product we get after this delay is truly great.

May worries me, people are starting to think outside and summer, not sitting down and watching TV.  I guess the streaming factor could indeed help that, since its not relying on appointment television.  Maybe CBS can shoot for a memorial day weekend premier on the network and go from there.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am disappointed by this. I was really looking forward to sitting down with the wife on those cold winter nights and enjoying Star Trek again.  I hope that the product we get after this delay is truly great.

May worries me, people are starting to think outside and summer, not sitting down and watching TV.  I guess the streaming factor could indeed help that, since its not relying on appointment television.  Maybe CBS can shoot for a memorial day weekend premier on the network and go from there.  

^
You have a point.  May is usually when most broadcast shows go off for summer hiatus.   On the other hand, that also might be an ideal time for a new show to break out; when the competition is taking a nap... 
;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammer   

I'm surprised, and as a fan somewhat relieved that it wasn't delayed a full year and is instead releasing in the spring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now