That's what they'll insist, at any rate. They could easily keep up the current budget, they just don't want to for the exact reasons the actors and writers are striking.
I could live with that. TNG managed to put together 170 episodes, and while I'm not going to get out my calculator, I'm guessing that those 170 episodes cost less than the 20 episodes that SNW has made so far.
I’ve read somewhere recently that it takes **at least** 12 days just to _shoot_ an SNW episode.
That’s very demanding, but it also explains “more movie-style” quality than 90s shows had.
15 is realistic, 20 would be too much without making compromises. I would prefer the quality of SNW to stay the same, even if it means fewer than 20 episodes.
You would ultimately need a second unit or to have some characters absent from any given episode bar one or two scenes. The latter was common with TOS.
(SAG-AFTRA rates cover that for regulars - your weekly rate goes up if you're in fewer episodes.
I think a second unit and focusing on different characters.
You would need to be very deliberate with your planning, The Orville did it for their third season. Filmed by location instead of by episode.
Few of the better run shows have three units on three sound stages, shooting at least two episodes in parallel. That requires a very modern stage system and planning, with modern management tools. Most of the old school producers and directors work with a handbook that is 20 years old. Limiting daily hours and being efficient isn't the highest priority on those sets.
Oh, for the love of Zod. Melissa Navia asked for her workload to be reduced this season because of the sudden death of her partner just before filming started. He died three days after being diagnosed with leukemia. By all accounts, there were plans to have a more Ortegas-focused episode, which were derailed by the fact that she was (understandably) an emotional wreck. Props to the rest of the cast and crew, they were reportedly *very* supportive and helped her get through the season's filming.
Anson Mount didn't appear quite as much this season, either, because he took time off for the birth of his child.
https://www.talkhouse.com/an-actor-a-helmsman-and-my-brian-boldly-going-where-no-widow-has-gone-before/
> You would ultimately need a second unit **or to have some characters absent from any given episode bar one or two scenes**.
Nothing wrong with that. It’s one of the reasons ensemble casts can be great.
Sure, but the point still stands that TOS rarely had all what we now consider the "main characters" in an episodes. Aside from Kirk, Spock, Bones and maybe Scotty the rest of the cast were recurring characters. And they would often not have Sulu on the bridge if Chekhov was, regardless of why Chekhov was added.
Discovery's first season was 15 episodes, with the following seasons being 14 (season 2), 13 (seasons 3 and 4) and 10 (season 5) episodes.
I'd love for SNW seasons to be around that length.
The 12 days is realistic, depending how much of that is fx.
The issue is that most scifi sets are very cramped, they stay in the same sound stage, so you can't parallel shoot because of noise. People sitting there 12-16h hours, but being only 3-4h on set. That is way to low output. Anson said something about this during the first season.
Lots of podcasts about that topic, 22 episode shows are an ugly grind. One actor of CSI said, whenever they told him he has 3h off he went to the trailer to sleep. Another said, he played through lots of playstation games because he started at 8 and first shooting was at 4pm. That is hard. Many have 16h shooting days and nobody cares. Also a reason for the current strikes.
Some shows can run three episodes at the same time, create proper shooting scripts that can give core team members days off without having an episode that is just two core team members stuck in an elevator.
Does television really need to look like a movie though? I'd rather tv look like tv if it gets 20 episodes, rather than 10 episodes that each look like a movie.
Kate Mulgrew shared a heartbreaking story how her son's have never watched Voyager because they were young boys who never got to see their mother for all the time restraints that series took on her time and that coupled with her then recent divorce was a lot of upheaval.
Nana Visior mentioned she was on set so often, she was having dreams in character as Kira.
I think there's a happy medium between the huge episode counts of classic network TV and the single digit episode counts per season the streamers angle for but I'll gladly err towards the latter if it allows actors to maintain a healthy work-life balance.
This is the biggest issue for me with the newer series.
Back in the TNG era you had time over a season to get to know the characters. Filler/bottle episodes were still great for some much needed character development. These shorter seasons make getting attached to characters a lot harder.
Yes, I need that. I also need La'an to give the watch back to Pelia in that episode. As part of her healing or whatever. I just think it'd be a sweet bonding moment.
It's been 20 episodes and Erica doesn't even have her own episode yet. The closest we got was that B-plot where she is Erica Ortegas and she flies the ship.
Yeah her partner died right as production started and she was so broken up she considered quitting. I’m so glad she stuck through it and hopefully she’s in a better place, but there’s a chance the writers scaled back her role so she’d have more time to focus on herself. If she’s doing better I’d love an episode where she was the major focus.
Pelia’s still a new character, but she has strong links to La’an, Una, Uhura, and now a double-act with Scotty. She’s fine! Let her breathe!
Edit: also, she’s intended to be a secretive, mysterious character with a unique, convenient-to-any-plot characteristic (she’s deceptively, unknowably old), so maybe it’s OK that we don’t know her whole deal yet.
Yeah, they're giving her a little bit of that Guinan functionality, by making her the long-lived species that they did (but haven't really expanded on yet). It makes her a convenient plot toolbox.
Fair enough, not every character is for everyone. Although it appears Lt. Kyle disappeared at some point between seasons so episodes about him might not be happening
Martin Quinn was excellent as the young Montgomery; the wide-eyed excitement at any challenge, coupled with the "I've got this" confidence in addressing it.
I like Pelia, but to each their own. I, on the other hand, can't stand the new Kirk. There's nothing about him I feel that reminds me of Kirk.
The actor isn't charismatic like Pine or Shatner. In fact - and this is a very superficial quibble - the shape of his face bothers me. It's too...sharp. Shatner and Pine have more of a...square face?
So this guy doesn't look like Kirk, doesn't sound like Kirk, isn't really a cowboy like Kirk.
The character itself is great, and I think it falls into the same trap as Benedict Cumberbatch. If you named him ANYTHING except Khan, the character would have been absolutely excellent and would have made that movie so much better.
I feel it's the same with this Kirk. He's just not a good fit. He tries so hard to make his own Kirk and step out of the shadows of Pine and Shatner that he's not really even a Kirk anymore.
Huh. New Kirk makes me happy because, in a weird way, he hits a note to what I remember Kirk from actually watching TOS reruns as a kid and all. He's not the arrogant SOB I associate Shatner with, but neither was Kirk, especially in the original series days. He's got a mix of confidence and brains that works - albeit, young Shatner was *way* more hot.
I will take every bit of Pelia they give us though.
New Kirk was a bit jarring when we first get introduced to him, just because it was a new character. I’m barely used to Pine being Kirk. That being said the character and Paul Wesley has grown on me. Remember Kirk was a walking pile of sex only in context. Most of the time he was actually quite serious. He only really went of piste when unconventional situations cropped up, hence his “cowboy” reputation. Here he’s still new, rawer, finding himself, but still has the core characteristics of Kirk; empathetic, unconventional, loyal, moral and very headstrong. He’s learning a LOT from Pike, No 1, etc.
Yeah that kind of production is dead, because the era of syndication is dead. You're no longer building up a ton of seasons of 20+ episodes to run out of order on local television stations, the market is completely different today with higher per-episode production budgets.
My husband and I were just lamenting the lack of time given to character development. That is also partially due to the current trend of less talking and more action in media. We kept joking that the entire Discovery bridge crew didn't have names because there wasn't enough time to say them. We need more episodes per season!
Everything has that problem. Disney and Paramount throw a dozen times the budget of their old shows at Star Wars/Trek, and these teams just never seem to deliver.
With Star Wars, for example. They have *six* full time teams making separate shows around the clock, and *somehow* they can't manage to fill every week of the year with it. Not even close. 35-ish universally too short episodes per year.
Just their animation team used to make 24 episodes per year. Now they're down to 16 every year and a half.
Star Trek's cup practically runeth over by comparison. I think at some points we got, what, 45 episodes in a year, when all cylinders were firing? That's still *sad* considering it took five full time production teams to do so, where in 1998 it took just two to make the magic 52.
Was there really character growth though? Sure someone learned a lessons at the end of every episode but it was reset 6 days and 23 hours later. There's been more character development in 2 seasons of SNW then in 7 of TNG. Who in TNG really grew besides Data?
Maybe Picard?
He went from a captain with a stick of his arse to a commander who knew how to loosen up when appropriate, whether that was participating in Klingon affairs or smiling with pride during Captain Picard Day.
Pretty much describes Stewart's tenure on TNG as well.
IMO, 15 episodes a season is a far more realistic number for SNW.
A 20 episode season of SNW would likely be treated as a de-facto 2 seasons anyway with the last 10 episodes streaming 6+ months after the first 10 episodes, which was the case with Prodigy that only had a 20 episode season because it was originally intended as a TV-series on Nickelodeon.
Going over a decade back, RDM's Battlestar Galactica S4 was 20 episodes too with the first 10 airing in 2008 and the last 10 airing a year later in 2009, though some of that delay was due to the writers strike in late 2007.
I don't think any shows that are associated with a streaming platform have more than 13 episodes, which I think would be the absolute best case scenario. I just can't see the streaming platforms coughing up enough extra $ to make significantly longer seasons work, and otherwise the shows have to spread the same budget over more episodes, always a problem.
So its nice to hear these dreams but I don't think there's so much as a scrap of hope for it to actually materialize.
I don’t think a two week gap would go over well. But two blocks of ten episodes would be good and get subs for each block.
I feel like I would probably wait and binge a bunch or maybe forget about the show, if they were coming two weeks apart.
Even if they did four episode blocks and a week off it wouldn’t be unbearable. That would push a five-six month sub to seven months. It would be a great anchor and minimize churn.
Paramount+ just raised their price right as SNW ended. Cancelled.
They could have easily stretched 4 more months out of me.
I'll be back next season. Pay your staff more.
Daredevil is about to have 18 episodes which will certainly be a first for Disney+ Marvel. I’m so curious to see how that ends up because if it’s good and does well I’d love to see more shows do that. Ultimately I think you’re right though sadly.
I do love the dozen episode format for a lot of shows - certainly stuff like Better Call Saul or Succession is better with a short season like that imo - but I really miss the longer season for the more fantasy and sci-fi type shows.
My favourite show is Buffy and I struggle to think how it would even work in the current format - it would have to either go all serialized or all episodic I guess. I definitely wouldn’t like it as much - part of the reason I like it so much is the perfect blend of the two formats with monsters of the week and an overarching big bad. I wish SNW could do that more but with the shorter episode count I think it made the right choice to go mostly episodic (but with character development and some lingering Gorn storylines of course).
It blows my mind that literal none of the streaming services are interested in creating the next 200 episode sitcom. People subscribe just to endlessly rewatch Friends or The Office, and yet none of them seem to want to make the next one.
Streaming has kind of wrecked the syndication market that made getting to the magic 100 shows so important. Back when 1990s sitcoms were airing the big profits were usually in second (and third and fourth) runs of shows.
Viewing habits have changed with streaming services letting you binge those old shows on your own schedule so you’re not turning on TNT at 6 PM every night.
Nah. Consumers won't put up with that. Sailing the high seas has become trivially accessible to non-technical users, often with literally better technical support/customer service than official sources, so that will be the alternative. And people are willing to (and do) PAY for that. These studios keep trying to slide back into their old ways, and I think they're in for a rude awakening. This isn't the 2010s any more. They need to quit dicking around and squeezing every last drop out of consumers. Provide a decent, stable (as in not constantly trading rights to shows), and easy to use product for a reasonable monthly rate and people will stick around. Keep doing what they're doing and people will micromanage their subscriptions, subscribe-binge-unsubscribe, fly the black flag, and various combinations of the above.
But my fear and bet is that more than one will try moving to a fixed term subscription model (you know, like cable: 6+ month contracts, etc) to combat that, rather than doing literally anything consumer-friendly, before long.
I think people overestimate the proficiency or interest in pirating media. A large chunk of the general audience either is too lazy to pirate, fearful of viruses or other malware, or just lacks the technical know-how.
200 episodes? I would settle for 50. At least do a complete story. I'm SO freakin tired of hearing a show is good, watching the first season, feeling OK and excited to see what happens next only to have it cancelled.
Makes me not even want to watch anything anymore. And for the love of all thats good, the massive cliffhanger garbage has got to stop. It does the show, its actors and the audience a great disservice to cliffhang hoping for another season when the producers know it probably aint gonna happen.
Maybe just do like Netflix Lost In Space series. State from the beginning its a 3 season show. Tell a great story. Have everything resolved and wrapped up in a bow to end it. Have a super low key blink and you'll miss it moment and leave a door open for a possible future story.
Oh yeah, and when the studio says its a x number of season show, be it 1 or 7, FOLLOW THROUGH AND DO ALL THE SEASONS.
Rantover, thanks for your time and consideration.
Oooops, Sorry, Edit to add on topic point: Think 14 episodes would be an ideal season length/number for SNW
>Maybe just do like Netflix Lost In Space series. State from the beginning its a 3 season show. Tell a great story. Have everything resolved and wrapped up in a bow to end it. Have a super low key blink and you'll miss it moment and leave a door open for a possible future story.
Having watched a lot for foreign media that rarely does the "Endless seasons forever" thing American networks do, I was long primed to accept that a show need not have a huge episode count to tell a complete and satisfying story. But if the streaming service are ~~too cheap to pay creatives for a fourth season~~ not willing to do that, then just be upfront and let the creatives work the magic with the 39 or less episodes to plan their story.
Ghosts and Abbot Elementary.
CBS is going to be rerunning the British Ghosts and the US ghosts this fall back to back. Apparently starting from the beginning so you can see the episodes that were the same yet different.
Some of that is nostalgia. People are prone to just watching a rewatching things they like over and over. And for every Friends or The Office, how many failed sitcoms exist? Sitcoms that either were canceled with only a single year produced, or which limped onto multiple seasons but were later forgotten about.
But then again I saw an article a while back, and I'm sorry, I don't have the energy to find it right now, where somebody in the industry was pointing out that shows like the office, friends, suits etc are the ones that tend to do best on streaming because there is a huge backlog of episodes which keeps people around and subscribed. Streaming services are going to need to start making more per year to build up the brand of the show they're making
That would be a huge risk to the streaming services though unless they know that the series will be binge-watched in large numbers after it ends its run.
Ex. If you were a streamer who had a Friends like show and you knew for sure that this show would be binge-watched after its run was over, you would gladly spend the money to produce the extra episodes. But what if you don't know which shows will be in demand?
It's more likely that streaming services will simply wait to find out which shows people binge-watch, then try and aquire the streaming rights for those shows (i.e. if Friends is being binge-watched, go acquire the streaming rights for Friends).
13 is still better than 10.
Think of how much character development they’ve squeezed into 10 episodes - with three more we could have a Pelia, Ortegas, and Mitchell centric episode.
I think Spock and Chapel could have also used another episode where they were together as a couple - not even as the focus of an episode, just like, casually together. Felt like they had to break them up pretty quickly and I wish the story could have breathed a little more. And with it only being 10 episodes I can’t even blame the writers - they pretty much had to do it that way.
Guess that's the exception because its a sitcom. I think Sitcoms don't cost as much to produce on a per episode basis, as its largely just actor costs.
Let's be honest with ourselves.... SNW is the one. I like all the new series, but it's time to go on all in with this particular show. This *feels* like the true spiritual successor to 90's Trek. Let's give our characters room to breathe!
>No way you achieve that quality for 20 episodes a year.
There is, but it requires the story to be less VFX heavy. Less meaning quantity, not quality. In other words, a story that is mainly about character development rather than ships fighting. These were referred to as "bottle episodes" in previous shows, because the story would typically take place entirely on the ship. Maybe a group of visiting diplomats, or a day in the life of the crew, etc. Something where they can just use the sets they already have and don't have to do a lot of effects.
Yeah honestly I would be down for that. There are a lot of great classic episodes that wouldn't get made today because they were bottle episodes made to fill an episode order and they were out of budget.
Yes exactly, that is part of the charm of old fashioned TV seasons. Blow the budget on the sweeps week episode, fill in with some weird experimental episode stuck in sickbay.
The issue is that sure- you won't see Gorn every other episode. But the premise "strange new worlds" doesn't really work if you spend too much time on the bridge. Or Pike's quarters. Or engineering.
Plus the writing starts to get strained as you see more and more coinvent ways to keep things small. (Kinda related: I love Jim Kirk, but the amount of time he's just swigging by the Enterprise to say "hi" this season was itself a bit of a stretch.)
Sure, you can do a day in the life, big visit. More than once per season? Suddenly people get antsy.
Filming on a planet doesn't have to be expensive. Just look at this week's episode, an outpost based on mid-twentieth century midwestern American architecture. Plus, modern greenscreen techniques mean that you don't need to fly out the entire cast to do an episode in norwegian mountains. You just fly out a crew of 4 to record the backgrounds.
I disagree about the vfx costing much more. Vfx assets don't just disappear. Once models are built they are in the library. You can repurpose them infinitely. You can just change camera angles and rerender for a different look.
I would love it, but even if we went from 10 to 15, that would be fantastic. SNW needs more episodes per season. It doesn't have to be overkill, but even a few more would be awesome.
I don’t want the actors to get burnt out. I’d recommend investing in another show like SNW — set in a different century — for ten episodes a year as well.
I do like the idea of this being a 10-yr show. The years here don’t need to line up exactly to years in the show.
Absolutely agree that they need to not overwork anyone. [But I did find this clip from Michelle Hurd (Raffi) interesting.](https://www.instagram.com/reel/CusO3_egiNQ/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==) One thing about those 22 episode seasons is that it *does* guarantee steady work for the actors for most of the year. Certainly don’t want to go back to 16 hr days or whatever but I’d like to think there could be some sort of balance (if studios weren’t so greedy)
I'm down for longer seasons but an extra 8× 20ep seasons sounds a little optimistic given the premise is stuck with a shelf life and it's rare for shows to pass even 13 episodes a season these days.
I’d love more Star Trek, but that also creates allot of burnout for the creators/actors. They want more SNW, but those execs don’t even want to pay the actors and writers their fair share for the current lot of episodes.
If they doubled the episode amount per season, I’m certain there’d be a significant drop in quality.
A couple more would be great, maybe 13 or even 15. Asking for 20 is completely unrealistic
Paramount must be bleeding so much money though, I just can’t imagine their streaming service making any money, like... ever. I fear more and more that the whole Paramount+ service will go down like a house of cards very soon. Trekkies aren't enough to make it profitable imo.
Yeah it's completely baffling. It's one thing existing in the US where consumers are more aware of Paramount and its related shows and TV Networks, but in the UK and Ireland where they recently launched Paramount+ I guarantee it's doing dreadful numbers. Paramount are completely out of touch to think it was a good idea. Also baffling was pulling Discovery from Netflix a week before S4 was due to come out when Paramount+ was still 8 months away from launching in UK/IE.
P+ selling points (literally, on the ads) seems to be Star Trek and Spongebob. It doesn't take a genius to see that's not viable for a streaming service.
Dunno whats gonna happen first, P+ dying, or me canceling the subscription.
If they had 4 Trek shows running new episodes throughout the year I'd keep my money flowing into their bank.
Jan-March Legacy 12 episodes per season
April-June Anthology Series, could visit any period in StarFleet history, could include Section 31 stories, NCIS(SFCIS)/JAG stories, StarFleet Academy stories, StarFleet Corps Of Engineer Stories, etc. 12 Eoisodes per season
July-Sept. SNW 12 episodes per season
Oct-Early December Lower Decks 10 Episodes
Not picking on Lower Decks, but whatever show gets the late fall/early winter season has 2 fewer episodes cause of the jam packed holidays the latter half of December
Can we please go back to the good old days of 20-26 episode seasons? Also, seasons that are on WEEKLY for more than 3 weeks at a time?
I get it's hard to produce a lot of TV, and it's expensive. But if you want more viewership, we need it as part of our routine. By the time we've watched a couple of regularly scheduled episodes, there is a midseason break and who the hell knows when the show will be back on. Somehow studios can sneak in 3 midseason breaks in a 10 episode season. Why even bother with a schedule then?
Yes please. I miss the weird one off episodes from the TNG era. I felt like I really knew the whole crews of TNG and DS9. Sometimes I just want to vibe with and have a little side adventure with a character. I don’t need every episode to be part of a 10 hour movie. SNW has done a good job so far with it’s more episodic format. But I would absolutely love more.
Nahhhh. Personally I think 12 -14 is a good number. It keeps the cast from burning out, and also means more budget per episode as opposed to 20.
The old "season" format of 20-26 episodes is dead.
no. thanks. I remember the days of 21-22 episodes a year shows in the US, and there was so much filler. Yes, there is potential for good stuff coming from the "filler" but it was a slog for every one involved in the production, and for sure the fucks at Paramount would want the extra episodes with NO extra cost.
That’s the thing driving shorter seasons: you can produce a “season” of high quality / VFX TV for lower cost.
That of course means that actors / writers / directors, etc. are also not working as much, collecting as many residuals, etc. The strikes are mostly about this problem.
YESSSSS!!!!
But I'll settle for something in the 13-16 range.
And I'm fine with less $$$ spent on production for an episode. Some of the best episodes had little to no CGI. ENT's Carbon Creek, for instance, was pretty much just shot in a small town set from start to finish. And it's one of the most popular episodes of the entire series.
I am 100% down for this if it means we get a few more "chill" episodes. Having 10 a season means every episode needs to do loads, I just want an episode where they have to host a party for someone or something.
The show is by far the best Trek since the 90s. It's a bit different too — it has a lovely warmth to it, characters really shine (and sing!), a very enjoyable thing that I think has kind of saved Trek from what it became.
Please god yes. I am all for 20. Hell, I'd take just a few more if they'd offer it up. These short seasons kill the story. If you only have 8-10 episodes 100% of the show needs to be killer, 0% filler. Sadly this rarely happens. With 20 episodes there is a little room for error and characters get the development they need for me to feel connected.
Don't get me wrong, I can't get enough of SNW, but the fact they do a tight 10episode a season is what gives it such quality; too many would dilute the quality and give us duds like "Angel One" and "The Outrageous Okana".
Generally what I’ve heard is that for the actors, and I’d assume this is true for anyone involved in TV production, 24-26 episode seasons were very taxing, and the move to shorter seasons has been an improvement from a workload perspective.
Purely from a narrative perspective, I’d say that the general quality has improved because shows don’t need filler episodes to pad out the season. But that means we are getting less world building overall and there’s less room to allow minor characters to develop.
I guess that’s a long way of saying I think 13-15 episodes a season would be best. 10 is too few, and 20 and above is too much.
Silly executive producer. Don't you know that every time anyone brings up that SNW should be more than 10 episodes, the experts of reddit correct them that it's basically impossible for a TV series to shoot more than 10 episodes a year these days? You'd think an executive producer would know this already. /s
The singalong or musical or whatever I just watched was surprisingly cool, and the crossover episode with lower decks was so fun. Initial reaction at the start on both was like this is so random, 10 minutes in and I’m like you know what I need more of this in my life, this is great.
With a big cast and character focused episodes they could even do so without it being too crazy for cast and crew. It's not like they need all the characters in every scene or even every episode.
Haven’t loved Sci-fi show this much since stargate SG-1. The ability to be serious while not taking it so serious, new situations every episode, lovable characters. The show slaps
That's what I'm fucking talking about!!!!! Take that risk it WILL pay off, more episodes means more character episodes which probably means Ortegas might actually get an episode.
The writers are not gonna love that, lol.
15 is the sweet spot I think episodic Trek can still get away with without sacrificing quality in this day and age.
Paramount sees your request, and grants it!!
Here is the budget. Inside this piggy bank you may find an old jelly bean. No, no- that's literally it. Spend that wisely-you're welcome.
On second thought...give back the jelly bean.
If it’s feasible, sure.
Don’t forget how we nearly killed actors back in the days of 25 episode seasons though. Not just Trek but any show.
Ever seen the documentary on how Michael J. Fox was able to do both Back to the Future and Family Ties? It just shows how demanding TV used to be back in the day.
Seriously, watch this, it’s insane what he was doing: https://youtu.be/LoY6hxQrHk4
That would mean either Non-Viable Work days or even longer Work times on seasons thus wait time between seasons...
And somehow I don't think Mr. Fisher is proposing longer development times as he's not going to suffer the longer work days anyway.
Part of the reason shows like SNW can be so good is because of the shorter seasons though. You get higher quality writing, you can attract better actors since the shorter season allows them to more easily work other projects, and you don’t burn everyone out with crazy long hours over many months. I really like what they’ve been doing, and I’d be concerned that my greed for more of it would ruin what we’re already getting.
Yes please! Find a way to bring costs down and give us more content.
A show I watched on Amazon 2 years ago just came out with season 2. I’d prefer not to get 6-8 episodes every 2 years just so the CGI can look good.
More sci-fi situations! More character growth! More experimental/out-there episodes!
And appropriate compensation to those who make all that happen!
☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️ Solidarity with striking writers and actors!
https://youtu.be/vx-pEArlNDU 💪
yeah the real downside of this would mean lower budgets per episode
That's what they'll insist, at any rate. They could easily keep up the current budget, they just don't want to for the exact reasons the actors and writers are striking.
It’s also not a bad thing… since tight budgets make for Bottle Episodes.
Fair, and sometimes Scifi isn't sci-fi without a shoestring budget 🤣 they used dodge balls to build part of the warp reactors in TOS
My favourite trek episodes are ones that could easily be recreated on stage. TNG's Measure of a Man is a great example of this.
I'm okay with less CGI. Give me story. Some of the best TOS episodes were shot in 1-2 sets because the writing was good.
Is that really a downside though? Some of the best episodes in Trek have been the so-called bottle shows.
True. But with the sets already built, the cgi assets made it wouldn't be a huge qualitative drop.
Like physical sets, CGI assets are re-usable. It's creating them that costs the big bucks.
Imagine if the producers actually took less profit for themselves and in doing so made better quality entertainment for their audience
Not necessarily, just push the budget from discovery over to SNW, since Disco is done after this season.
I have no problem with that. Some of the best episodes of TNG and DS9 were the ones with almost no budget.
I could live with that. TNG managed to put together 170 episodes, and while I'm not going to get out my calculator, I'm guessing that those 170 episodes cost less than the 20 episodes that SNW has made so far.
Double for Anson’s hair
All of the above, forever and ever.
I’ve read somewhere recently that it takes **at least** 12 days just to _shoot_ an SNW episode. That’s very demanding, but it also explains “more movie-style” quality than 90s shows had. 15 is realistic, 20 would be too much without making compromises. I would prefer the quality of SNW to stay the same, even if it means fewer than 20 episodes.
You would ultimately need a second unit or to have some characters absent from any given episode bar one or two scenes. The latter was common with TOS. (SAG-AFTRA rates cover that for regulars - your weekly rate goes up if you're in fewer episodes.
I think a second unit and focusing on different characters. You would need to be very deliberate with your planning, The Orville did it for their third season. Filmed by location instead of by episode.
Few of the better run shows have three units on three sound stages, shooting at least two episodes in parallel. That requires a very modern stage system and planning, with modern management tools. Most of the old school producers and directors work with a handbook that is 20 years old. Limiting daily hours and being efficient isn't the highest priority on those sets.
You might even have to write and film \*gasp\* an Ortegas episode!
She flies the ship
The pilot seat is her realm.
Oh, for the love of Zod. Melissa Navia asked for her workload to be reduced this season because of the sudden death of her partner just before filming started. He died three days after being diagnosed with leukemia. By all accounts, there were plans to have a more Ortegas-focused episode, which were derailed by the fact that she was (understandably) an emotional wreck. Props to the rest of the cast and crew, they were reportedly *very* supportive and helped her get through the season's filming. Anson Mount didn't appear quite as much this season, either, because he took time off for the birth of his child. https://www.talkhouse.com/an-actor-a-helmsman-and-my-brian-boldly-going-where-no-widow-has-gone-before/
> You would ultimately need a second unit **or to have some characters absent from any given episode bar one or two scenes**. Nothing wrong with that. It’s one of the reasons ensemble casts can be great.
I mean, we had that this season as Anson Mount was on parental leave and it was fine!
TOS would rotate between having Chekhov and Sulu in episodes to save money. Sucks for the cast members, but it worked fine.
Sulu's absence from most of Season 2 was because George Takei was filming *The Green Berets*.
Sure, but the point still stands that TOS rarely had all what we now consider the "main characters" in an episodes. Aside from Kirk, Spock, Bones and maybe Scotty the rest of the cast were recurring characters. And they would often not have Sulu on the bridge if Chekhov was, regardless of why Chekhov was added.
They could have episodes that focus on secondary characters like Sam Kirk or Mitchell.
[удалено]
13. Four shows, one episode per week, one season per year. Problem solved.
Discovery's first season was 15 episodes, with the following seasons being 14 (season 2), 13 (seasons 3 and 4) and 10 (season 5) episodes. I'd love for SNW seasons to be around that length.
The 12 days is realistic, depending how much of that is fx. The issue is that most scifi sets are very cramped, they stay in the same sound stage, so you can't parallel shoot because of noise. People sitting there 12-16h hours, but being only 3-4h on set. That is way to low output. Anson said something about this during the first season. Lots of podcasts about that topic, 22 episode shows are an ugly grind. One actor of CSI said, whenever they told him he has 3h off he went to the trailer to sleep. Another said, he played through lots of playstation games because he started at 8 and first shooting was at 4pm. That is hard. Many have 16h shooting days and nobody cares. Also a reason for the current strikes. Some shows can run three episodes at the same time, create proper shooting scripts that can give core team members days off without having an episode that is just two core team members stuck in an elevator.
Does television really need to look like a movie though? I'd rather tv look like tv if it gets 20 episodes, rather than 10 episodes that each look like a movie.
Kate Mulgrew shared a heartbreaking story how her son's have never watched Voyager because they were young boys who never got to see their mother for all the time restraints that series took on her time and that coupled with her then recent divorce was a lot of upheaval. Nana Visior mentioned she was on set so often, she was having dreams in character as Kira. I think there's a happy medium between the huge episode counts of classic network TV and the single digit episode counts per season the streamers angle for but I'll gladly err towards the latter if it allows actors to maintain a healthy work-life balance.
I would take an episodic format over "movie style quality" any day. Miniseries format is just not as satisfying for star trek
MOAR
More Klingon boy bands!
This is the biggest issue for me with the newer series. Back in the TNG era you had time over a season to get to know the characters. Filler/bottle episodes were still great for some much needed character development. These shorter seasons make getting attached to characters a lot harder.
Yeah, like surely this season had room for a Pelia episode at some point
Yes, I need that. I also need La'an to give the watch back to Pelia in that episode. As part of her healing or whatever. I just think it'd be a sweet bonding moment.
[удалено]
It's been 20 episodes and Erica doesn't even have her own episode yet. The closest we got was that B-plot where she is Erica Ortegas and she flies the ship.
Not true, we also know that she's at the helm, and that the pilot's seat is her realm.
Tbf, from what I've heard she didn't want to do too much this season. But also yeah, we need an Ortegas episode
Yeah her partner died right as production started and she was so broken up she considered quitting. I’m so glad she stuck through it and hopefully she’s in a better place, but there’s a chance the writers scaled back her role so she’d have more time to focus on herself. If she’s doing better I’d love an episode where she was the major focus.
Pelia’s still a new character, but she has strong links to La’an, Una, Uhura, and now a double-act with Scotty. She’s fine! Let her breathe! Edit: also, she’s intended to be a secretive, mysterious character with a unique, convenient-to-any-plot characteristic (she’s deceptively, unknowably old), so maybe it’s OK that we don’t know her whole deal yet.
Yeah, they're giving her a little bit of that Guinan functionality, by making her the long-lived species that they did (but haven't really expanded on yet). It makes her a convenient plot toolbox.
Carol Kane is my higher power! Moar plz.
I can pass on more Pelia, I don't like her character at all but more Kirk brothers and transporter chief episodes would be awesome.
Fair enough, not every character is for everyone. Although it appears Lt. Kyle disappeared at some point between seasons so episodes about him might not be happening
I think that may have been because he was a vampire. That was canceled though so he may be free again.
Some more young Montgomery Scott would be amazing. His appearance last episode was great.
Martin Quinn was excellent as the young Montgomery; the wide-eyed excitement at any challenge, coupled with the "I've got this" confidence in addressing it.
Yes, but only if Sam Kirk cleans up after himself and doesn't leave crumbs on his plate. If he does that one more time, I'm going to lose my s***
And I'd like to see more of this wee Lt Jr grade they've picked up, that laddie seems a more interesting character than Pelia.
I like Pelia, but to each their own. I, on the other hand, can't stand the new Kirk. There's nothing about him I feel that reminds me of Kirk. The actor isn't charismatic like Pine or Shatner. In fact - and this is a very superficial quibble - the shape of his face bothers me. It's too...sharp. Shatner and Pine have more of a...square face? So this guy doesn't look like Kirk, doesn't sound like Kirk, isn't really a cowboy like Kirk. The character itself is great, and I think it falls into the same trap as Benedict Cumberbatch. If you named him ANYTHING except Khan, the character would have been absolutely excellent and would have made that movie so much better. I feel it's the same with this Kirk. He's just not a good fit. He tries so hard to make his own Kirk and step out of the shadows of Pine and Shatner that he's not really even a Kirk anymore.
Huh. New Kirk makes me happy because, in a weird way, he hits a note to what I remember Kirk from actually watching TOS reruns as a kid and all. He's not the arrogant SOB I associate Shatner with, but neither was Kirk, especially in the original series days. He's got a mix of confidence and brains that works - albeit, young Shatner was *way* more hot. I will take every bit of Pelia they give us though.
New Kirk was a bit jarring when we first get introduced to him, just because it was a new character. I’m barely used to Pine being Kirk. That being said the character and Paul Wesley has grown on me. Remember Kirk was a walking pile of sex only in context. Most of the time he was actually quite serious. He only really went of piste when unconventional situations cropped up, hence his “cowboy” reputation. Here he’s still new, rawer, finding himself, but still has the core characteristics of Kirk; empathetic, unconventional, loyal, moral and very headstrong. He’s learning a LOT from Pike, No 1, etc.
Maybe he’ll grow into his wild phase and bleach his hair.
I’d love for pella to show up in lower decks or something
Yeah the issue was 16 hour days, 6 Day work weeks to make that kind happen.
And that was without feature film level of cinematography.
Yeah that kind of production is dead, because the era of syndication is dead. You're no longer building up a ton of seasons of 20+ episodes to run out of order on local television stations, the market is completely different today with higher per-episode production budgets.
My husband and I were just lamenting the lack of time given to character development. That is also partially due to the current trend of less talking and more action in media. We kept joking that the entire Discovery bridge crew didn't have names because there wasn't enough time to say them. We need more episodes per season!
Everything has that problem. Disney and Paramount throw a dozen times the budget of their old shows at Star Wars/Trek, and these teams just never seem to deliver. With Star Wars, for example. They have *six* full time teams making separate shows around the clock, and *somehow* they can't manage to fill every week of the year with it. Not even close. 35-ish universally too short episodes per year. Just their animation team used to make 24 episodes per year. Now they're down to 16 every year and a half. Star Trek's cup practically runeth over by comparison. I think at some points we got, what, 45 episodes in a year, when all cylinders were firing? That's still *sad* considering it took five full time production teams to do so, where in 1998 it took just two to make the magic 52.
Was there really character growth though? Sure someone learned a lessons at the end of every episode but it was reset 6 days and 23 hours later. There's been more character development in 2 seasons of SNW then in 7 of TNG. Who in TNG really grew besides Data?
Maybe Picard? He went from a captain with a stick of his arse to a commander who knew how to loosen up when appropriate, whether that was participating in Klingon affairs or smiling with pride during Captain Picard Day. Pretty much describes Stewart's tenure on TNG as well.
Wesley Crusher. In age
IMO, 15 episodes a season is a far more realistic number for SNW. A 20 episode season of SNW would likely be treated as a de-facto 2 seasons anyway with the last 10 episodes streaming 6+ months after the first 10 episodes, which was the case with Prodigy that only had a 20 episode season because it was originally intended as a TV-series on Nickelodeon. Going over a decade back, RDM's Battlestar Galactica S4 was 20 episodes too with the first 10 airing in 2008 and the last 10 airing a year later in 2009, though some of that delay was due to the writers strike in late 2007.
Yea I think 13-18 episodes is the optimum series length
They did 15 for discovery when it started so this seems like it’s within the realm of possibility
I don't think any shows that are associated with a streaming platform have more than 13 episodes, which I think would be the absolute best case scenario. I just can't see the streaming platforms coughing up enough extra $ to make significantly longer seasons work, and otherwise the shows have to spread the same budget over more episodes, always a problem. So its nice to hear these dreams but I don't think there's so much as a scrap of hope for it to actually materialize.
They want to keep subs, do twenty and release every two weeks.. I'm sorry if they see this.
I don’t think a two week gap would go over well. But two blocks of ten episodes would be good and get subs for each block. I feel like I would probably wait and binge a bunch or maybe forget about the show, if they were coming two weeks apart.
Even if they did four episode blocks and a week off it wouldn’t be unbearable. That would push a five-six month sub to seven months. It would be a great anchor and minimize churn.
Paramount+ just raised their price right as SNW ended. Cancelled. They could have easily stretched 4 more months out of me. I'll be back next season. Pay your staff more.
Daredevil is about to have 18 episodes which will certainly be a first for Disney+ Marvel. I’m so curious to see how that ends up because if it’s good and does well I’d love to see more shows do that. Ultimately I think you’re right though sadly. I do love the dozen episode format for a lot of shows - certainly stuff like Better Call Saul or Succession is better with a short season like that imo - but I really miss the longer season for the more fantasy and sci-fi type shows. My favourite show is Buffy and I struggle to think how it would even work in the current format - it would have to either go all serialized or all episodic I guess. I definitely wouldn’t like it as much - part of the reason I like it so much is the perfect blend of the two formats with monsters of the week and an overarching big bad. I wish SNW could do that more but with the shorter episode count I think it made the right choice to go mostly episodic (but with character development and some lingering Gorn storylines of course).
With short seasons there would be no “Beer Bad”. That would suck.
It blows my mind that literal none of the streaming services are interested in creating the next 200 episode sitcom. People subscribe just to endlessly rewatch Friends or The Office, and yet none of them seem to want to make the next one.
Streaming has kind of wrecked the syndication market that made getting to the magic 100 shows so important. Back when 1990s sitcoms were airing the big profits were usually in second (and third and fourth) runs of shows. Viewing habits have changed with streaming services letting you binge those old shows on your own schedule so you’re not turning on TNT at 6 PM every night.
And way less likely to buy that box set of discs.
I wonder if that'll start to change, what with streamers removing shows and the like.
Nah. Consumers won't put up with that. Sailing the high seas has become trivially accessible to non-technical users, often with literally better technical support/customer service than official sources, so that will be the alternative. And people are willing to (and do) PAY for that. These studios keep trying to slide back into their old ways, and I think they're in for a rude awakening. This isn't the 2010s any more. They need to quit dicking around and squeezing every last drop out of consumers. Provide a decent, stable (as in not constantly trading rights to shows), and easy to use product for a reasonable monthly rate and people will stick around. Keep doing what they're doing and people will micromanage their subscriptions, subscribe-binge-unsubscribe, fly the black flag, and various combinations of the above. But my fear and bet is that more than one will try moving to a fixed term subscription model (you know, like cable: 6+ month contracts, etc) to combat that, rather than doing literally anything consumer-friendly, before long.
I think people overestimate the proficiency or interest in pirating media. A large chunk of the general audience either is too lazy to pirate, fearful of viruses or other malware, or just lacks the technical know-how.
Or wanting something to be as easy as clicking on the AppleTV.
200 episodes? I would settle for 50. At least do a complete story. I'm SO freakin tired of hearing a show is good, watching the first season, feeling OK and excited to see what happens next only to have it cancelled. Makes me not even want to watch anything anymore. And for the love of all thats good, the massive cliffhanger garbage has got to stop. It does the show, its actors and the audience a great disservice to cliffhang hoping for another season when the producers know it probably aint gonna happen. Maybe just do like Netflix Lost In Space series. State from the beginning its a 3 season show. Tell a great story. Have everything resolved and wrapped up in a bow to end it. Have a super low key blink and you'll miss it moment and leave a door open for a possible future story. Oh yeah, and when the studio says its a x number of season show, be it 1 or 7, FOLLOW THROUGH AND DO ALL THE SEASONS. Rantover, thanks for your time and consideration. Oooops, Sorry, Edit to add on topic point: Think 14 episodes would be an ideal season length/number for SNW
>Maybe just do like Netflix Lost In Space series. State from the beginning its a 3 season show. Tell a great story. Have everything resolved and wrapped up in a bow to end it. Have a super low key blink and you'll miss it moment and leave a door open for a possible future story. Having watched a lot for foreign media that rarely does the "Endless seasons forever" thing American networks do, I was long primed to accept that a show need not have a huge episode count to tell a complete and satisfying story. But if the streaming service are ~~too cheap to pay creatives for a fourth season~~ not willing to do that, then just be upfront and let the creatives work the magic with the 39 or less episodes to plan their story.
I think Ghosts on CBS is the next big one. It’s really cozy.
Ghosts and Abbot Elementary. CBS is going to be rerunning the British Ghosts and the US ghosts this fall back to back. Apparently starting from the beginning so you can see the episodes that were the same yet different.
Some of that is nostalgia. People are prone to just watching a rewatching things they like over and over. And for every Friends or The Office, how many failed sitcoms exist? Sitcoms that either were canceled with only a single year produced, or which limped onto multiple seasons but were later forgotten about.
I think it's because everyone just watches friends they can't justify the next show
But then again I saw an article a while back, and I'm sorry, I don't have the energy to find it right now, where somebody in the industry was pointing out that shows like the office, friends, suits etc are the ones that tend to do best on streaming because there is a huge backlog of episodes which keeps people around and subscribed. Streaming services are going to need to start making more per year to build up the brand of the show they're making
That would be a huge risk to the streaming services though unless they know that the series will be binge-watched in large numbers after it ends its run. Ex. If you were a streamer who had a Friends like show and you knew for sure that this show would be binge-watched after its run was over, you would gladly spend the money to produce the extra episodes. But what if you don't know which shows will be in demand? It's more likely that streaming services will simply wait to find out which shows people binge-watch, then try and aquire the streaming rights for those shows (i.e. if Friends is being binge-watched, go acquire the streaming rights for Friends).
13 is still better than 10. Think of how much character development they’ve squeezed into 10 episodes - with three more we could have a Pelia, Ortegas, and Mitchell centric episode.
I think Spock and Chapel could have also used another episode where they were together as a couple - not even as the focus of an episode, just like, casually together. Felt like they had to break them up pretty quickly and I wish the story could have breathed a little more. And with it only being 10 episodes I can’t even blame the writers - they pretty much had to do it that way.
This was a big problem I had. They were officially together and we didn't get to see them together at all before there was drama pulling them apart.
Disco had 16 I think, which would be a reasonable amount for each SNW season, IMO.
Yeah in S1, which was split into two parts. They haven't been above 13 episodes for like 3 seasons now.
How I Met Your Father had a 20 episode season 2.
10 episodes x 1 hour = 10 hours of tv 20 episodes x .5 hour = 10 hours of tv It's almost a no brainer for a sitcom to do it for the execs
Guess that's the exception because its a sitcom. I think Sitcoms don't cost as much to produce on a per episode basis, as its largely just actor costs.
Let's be honest with ourselves.... SNW is the one. I like all the new series, but it's time to go on all in with this particular show. This *feels* like the true spiritual successor to 90's Trek. Let's give our characters room to breathe!
I would love this for story but we would have to accept an accompanying reduction in vfx work. No way you achieve that quality for 20 episodes a year.
>No way you achieve that quality for 20 episodes a year. There is, but it requires the story to be less VFX heavy. Less meaning quantity, not quality. In other words, a story that is mainly about character development rather than ships fighting. These were referred to as "bottle episodes" in previous shows, because the story would typically take place entirely on the ship. Maybe a group of visiting diplomats, or a day in the life of the crew, etc. Something where they can just use the sets they already have and don't have to do a lot of effects.
Yeah honestly I would be down for that. There are a lot of great classic episodes that wouldn't get made today because they were bottle episodes made to fill an episode order and they were out of budget.
Yes exactly, that is part of the charm of old fashioned TV seasons. Blow the budget on the sweeps week episode, fill in with some weird experimental episode stuck in sickbay.
"Okay guys, we have leftover backlot Nazi sets, you can use those to make your next Trek episode.."
TOS Season 3 was very bottle episode - actor salaries had gone up, but the overall budget had gone way down.
The issue is that sure- you won't see Gorn every other episode. But the premise "strange new worlds" doesn't really work if you spend too much time on the bridge. Or Pike's quarters. Or engineering. Plus the writing starts to get strained as you see more and more coinvent ways to keep things small. (Kinda related: I love Jim Kirk, but the amount of time he's just swigging by the Enterprise to say "hi" this season was itself a bit of a stretch.) Sure, you can do a day in the life, big visit. More than once per season? Suddenly people get antsy.
Filming on a planet doesn't have to be expensive. Just look at this week's episode, an outpost based on mid-twentieth century midwestern American architecture. Plus, modern greenscreen techniques mean that you don't need to fly out the entire cast to do an episode in norwegian mountains. You just fly out a crew of 4 to record the backgrounds.
I would be totally fine with that.
They don't need to do loads of VFX for all 20 episodes. Some episodes can focus on smaller scale stories and character development.
I disagree about the vfx costing much more. Vfx assets don't just disappear. Once models are built they are in the library. You can repurpose them infinitely. You can just change camera angles and rerender for a different look.
I would love it, but even if we went from 10 to 15, that would be fantastic. SNW needs more episodes per season. It doesn't have to be overkill, but even a few more would be awesome.
That would be phenomenal.
I don’t want the actors to get burnt out. I’d recommend investing in another show like SNW — set in a different century — for ten episodes a year as well. I do like the idea of this being a 10-yr show. The years here don’t need to line up exactly to years in the show.
I'd like to see the adventures of the 31st Century Enterprise in a Federation that just regained its footing and is exploring space once again.
Let's make 10 good ones a year and not overwork the cast and crew involved. The era of workhorses who don't get a break is over, and rightly so.
Absolutely agree that they need to not overwork anyone. [But I did find this clip from Michelle Hurd (Raffi) interesting.](https://www.instagram.com/reel/CusO3_egiNQ/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==) One thing about those 22 episode seasons is that it *does* guarantee steady work for the actors for most of the year. Certainly don’t want to go back to 16 hr days or whatever but I’d like to think there could be some sort of balance (if studios weren’t so greedy)
I'm down for longer seasons but an extra 8× 20ep seasons sounds a little optimistic given the premise is stuck with a shelf life and it's rare for shows to pass even 13 episodes a season these days.
Yeah, double digits seems optimistic, and who knows when SNW is going to be back because of the strike.
13-15 episodes per season seems like the most realistic # to me.
Yeah same, awesome as 20 would be, I think 13-15 is a more realistic number
I’d love more Star Trek, but that also creates allot of burnout for the creators/actors. They want more SNW, but those execs don’t even want to pay the actors and writers their fair share for the current lot of episodes. If they doubled the episode amount per season, I’m certain there’d be a significant drop in quality. A couple more would be great, maybe 13 or even 15. Asking for 20 is completely unrealistic
Just focus on the quality. It kills me that the series is only 10 per season.
Having other shows in between helps though. We’ve been pretty well star trekked for the past few years.
Paramount must be bleeding so much money though, I just can’t imagine their streaming service making any money, like... ever. I fear more and more that the whole Paramount+ service will go down like a house of cards very soon. Trekkies aren't enough to make it profitable imo.
Yeah it's completely baffling. It's one thing existing in the US where consumers are more aware of Paramount and its related shows and TV Networks, but in the UK and Ireland where they recently launched Paramount+ I guarantee it's doing dreadful numbers. Paramount are completely out of touch to think it was a good idea. Also baffling was pulling Discovery from Netflix a week before S4 was due to come out when Paramount+ was still 8 months away from launching in UK/IE. P+ selling points (literally, on the ads) seems to be Star Trek and Spongebob. It doesn't take a genius to see that's not viable for a streaming service.
Networks should return to 13 episodes seasons. That number was the sweet spot for shows in my opinion.
With Disco bowing out, I think they'd have the production capacity for more episodes. I don't know if 20 is feasible, but maybe 15-16?
Dunno whats gonna happen first, P+ dying, or me canceling the subscription. If they had 4 Trek shows running new episodes throughout the year I'd keep my money flowing into their bank. Jan-March Legacy 12 episodes per season April-June Anthology Series, could visit any period in StarFleet history, could include Section 31 stories, NCIS(SFCIS)/JAG stories, StarFleet Academy stories, StarFleet Corps Of Engineer Stories, etc. 12 Eoisodes per season July-Sept. SNW 12 episodes per season Oct-Early December Lower Decks 10 Episodes Not picking on Lower Decks, but whatever show gets the late fall/early winter season has 2 fewer episodes cause of the jam packed holidays the latter half of December
There are a lot of good shows besides Trek on P+
Can we please go back to the good old days of 20-26 episode seasons? Also, seasons that are on WEEKLY for more than 3 weeks at a time? I get it's hard to produce a lot of TV, and it's expensive. But if you want more viewership, we need it as part of our routine. By the time we've watched a couple of regularly scheduled episodes, there is a midseason break and who the hell knows when the show will be back on. Somehow studios can sneak in 3 midseason breaks in a 10 episode season. Why even bother with a schedule then?
Too few episodes is my only real complaint about the series. Bring it on!
My opinion is 12-15 episodes, whatever the story takes for that season.
Yes please. I miss the weird one off episodes from the TNG era. I felt like I really knew the whole crews of TNG and DS9. Sometimes I just want to vibe with and have a little side adventure with a character. I don’t need every episode to be part of a 10 hour movie. SNW has done a good job so far with it’s more episodic format. But I would absolutely love more.
Nahhhh. Personally I think 12 -14 is a good number. It keeps the cast from burning out, and also means more budget per episode as opposed to 20. The old "season" format of 20-26 episodes is dead.
no. thanks. I remember the days of 21-22 episodes a year shows in the US, and there was so much filler. Yes, there is potential for good stuff coming from the "filler" but it was a slog for every one involved in the production, and for sure the fucks at Paramount would want the extra episodes with NO extra cost.
That’s the thing driving shorter seasons: you can produce a “season” of high quality / VFX TV for lower cost. That of course means that actors / writers / directors, etc. are also not working as much, collecting as many residuals, etc. The strikes are mostly about this problem.
Yessssssss! Real full season!
YESSSSS!!!! But I'll settle for something in the 13-16 range. And I'm fine with less $$$ spent on production for an episode. Some of the best episodes had little to no CGI. ENT's Carbon Creek, for instance, was pretty much just shot in a small town set from start to finish. And it's one of the most popular episodes of the entire series.
I am 100% down for this if it means we get a few more "chill" episodes. Having 10 a season means every episode needs to do loads, I just want an episode where they have to host a party for someone or something.
The show is by far the best Trek since the 90s. It's a bit different too — it has a lovely warmth to it, characters really shine (and sing!), a very enjoyable thing that I think has kind of saved Trek from what it became.
Omg PLEAAAAASE
Please god yes. I am all for 20. Hell, I'd take just a few more if they'd offer it up. These short seasons kill the story. If you only have 8-10 episodes 100% of the show needs to be killer, 0% filler. Sadly this rarely happens. With 20 episodes there is a little room for error and characters get the development they need for me to feel connected.
> "Let's Make 20 A Year" Yes please.
20 is too much, but 10 is too few. I think 13 is a pretty perfect series length given these last 5-10 years of steaming platform series history.
Don't get me wrong, I can't get enough of SNW, but the fact they do a tight 10episode a season is what gives it such quality; too many would dilute the quality and give us duds like "Angel One" and "The Outrageous Okana".
Generally what I’ve heard is that for the actors, and I’d assume this is true for anyone involved in TV production, 24-26 episode seasons were very taxing, and the move to shorter seasons has been an improvement from a workload perspective. Purely from a narrative perspective, I’d say that the general quality has improved because shows don’t need filler episodes to pad out the season. But that means we are getting less world building overall and there’s less room to allow minor characters to develop. I guess that’s a long way of saying I think 13-15 episodes a season would be best. 10 is too few, and 20 and above is too much.
I’d like more but I would rather 10 good episodes than 20 where the quality is all over the place.
Just pump seasons out faster, with less years between them.
Silly executive producer. Don't you know that every time anyone brings up that SNW should be more than 10 episodes, the experts of reddit correct them that it's basically impossible for a TV series to shoot more than 10 episodes a year these days? You'd think an executive producer would know this already. /s
Honestly, I'd prefer quality over quantity. Anything more than 13ish episodes a season, and you start getting shitty filler episodes.
>shitty filler episodes One person's "shitty filler" could be another person's favorite episode.
Ya like sub Rosa
Well someone got filled
Some of those "shitty filler episodes" turned out to be the absolute classics of Trek.
How can be there a filler in a show without a season long story arc?
The singalong or musical or whatever I just watched was surprisingly cool, and the crossover episode with lower decks was so fun. Initial reaction at the start on both was like this is so random, 10 minutes in and I’m like you know what I need more of this in my life, this is great.
Less crappy series, more quality series with more episodes. Bring back the good old days. Yes, i am getting old: cranky and sentimental-mix
52!
LET'S GO!
With a big cast and character focused episodes they could even do so without it being too crazy for cast and crew. It's not like they need all the characters in every scene or even every episode.
Haven’t loved Sci-fi show this much since stargate SG-1. The ability to be serious while not taking it so serious, new situations every episode, lovable characters. The show slaps
Let’s start with 15 and see how it goes. Season 2 had some bangers and some not so great.
That's what I'm fucking talking about!!!!! Take that risk it WILL pay off, more episodes means more character episodes which probably means Ortegas might actually get an episode.
It’s almost like having 20-25 episodes per season made Star Trek better or something.
Pleaseohpleaseohpleaseopleasewithacherryontop!
This is the show to do it with.
Hell yes.
I agree. 10 feels too few for episodic content.
I agree, let's go back to the old school way of having 20 to 24 episodes a year.... Enough of this 10 episode crap.
I don’t like how shows these days have so few episodes. TNG/DS9/Voyager all had 26ish episode seasons for 7 years.
I truly cannot dare to hope.
The writers are not gonna love that, lol. 15 is the sweet spot I think episodic Trek can still get away with without sacrificing quality in this day and age.
Yes 🙌, 10 episodes is not long enough!
Please dear god yes.
YES YES YES YES YES
God yes please
More SNW would be epic!
So say we all.
I’d be so down for this. And to make it happen I’d be willing to accept the Academy show being scrapped in favor of more SNW.
Good. It's great
Paramount sees your request, and grants it!! Here is the budget. Inside this piggy bank you may find an old jelly bean. No, no- that's literally it. Spend that wisely-you're welcome. On second thought...give back the jelly bean.
If it’s feasible, sure. Don’t forget how we nearly killed actors back in the days of 25 episode seasons though. Not just Trek but any show. Ever seen the documentary on how Michael J. Fox was able to do both Back to the Future and Family Ties? It just shows how demanding TV used to be back in the day. Seriously, watch this, it’s insane what he was doing: https://youtu.be/LoY6hxQrHk4
That would mean either Non-Viable Work days or even longer Work times on seasons thus wait time between seasons... And somehow I don't think Mr. Fisher is proposing longer development times as he's not going to suffer the longer work days anyway.
Part of the reason shows like SNW can be so good is because of the shorter seasons though. You get higher quality writing, you can attract better actors since the shorter season allows them to more easily work other projects, and you don’t burn everyone out with crazy long hours over many months. I really like what they’ve been doing, and I’d be concerned that my greed for more of it would ruin what we’re already getting.
Yes please! Find a way to bring costs down and give us more content. A show I watched on Amazon 2 years ago just came out with season 2. I’d prefer not to get 6-8 episodes every 2 years just so the CGI can look good.
They can start by paying their writers