Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by Tom Robertson, Nov 2, 2015.
Press release: http://www.cbs.com/shows/star-trek-series/
Yay, another subscription and another monthly fee just to watch an "exclusive". I'll pass... I'm getting tired of being montly fee'd to death.
And so the reluctant broadcast net has set a date. But I'm not sure what it means - CBS will stream "first-run" episodes of an original show on its streaming service January 2017? Presumably by then they will have a "no commercials" plan, though they have remained strongly committed to their affiliates.
I have been operating on the assumption that 2017 will be the year we will begin to know what the new age of TV will look like cost-wise. That's the year my current commitment to Dish expires.
But the idea of the show is fun to think about.
And looking at the supported devices, I'd have to watch it on my computer. No listed support for either the Amazon Fire Stick or Playstation.
In 14 months, I expect this will radically change one more time. New devices will be introduced and CBS will embrace more devices by then. Or they will not survive.
My guess is they are still negotiating contracts with the other devices.
I actually completely missed that this was 2017. You're right, they have some time
CBS All Access does work well, albeit I watched on my Intel Computer Stick until I cancelled the service. Because our CBS station is an O&O we could watch it live. But CEO Les Moonves will be looking for strong revenue streams and right now the commercials make it worthless IMHO even though I have to wait 8 days for AutoHop to work. Still, the year 2017 looks like the year almost every network, broadcast or cable, will have found a place in the streaming lineup.
I just canceled after getting 30 day free trial to CBS: All Access. Like Hulu Plus with commercials but 2.00 cheaper per month. You get next day showings of new CBS shows whereas they are not giving these to Hulu. But with Hulu I get next day for NBC, ABC, FOX, and CW shows plus I got 2 months free with purchase of a new Roku 3. Then I got another Roku 3 for 49.99 by paying 60.00 for 3 months of Sling TV. Now I just need a Roku 4 to go with a new RCA 4K 65 inch TV I got at Samsclub for 799.00! All this after canceling Directv and the 6 HD DVRs I had amassed paying 199.00 for many just to lease them. After reading about what would be offered to someone out of contract on here I called to cancel but was going to keep it if they gave me the same deals they gave to some of you: 30.00 off for 12 months, Free DVR for 12 months, 5.00 credit for 12 months plus Sunday Ticket FREE with a new 12 month contract. Well I got none of that and a lecture about how they had given me over 900 in discounts the last 2 years! So I canceled and then they add 200.00 saying I am still in contract. So I write and email 3 times telling them the only new DVRs activated in the last 2 years were replacement units under their PROTECTION PLAN. So they finally clear my account so that is why I got no good offers. But I am happy all this occurred and I am free from the approx. 3,000.00 I was paying them each year! Anyway back to the topic: I will try CBS: All Access again to get this new Star Trek no doubt! But keeping Hulu Plus for now and may upgrade 4.00 per month to commercial free plan once my trial is over!
I does say:
"Star Trek franchise will also be distributed concurrently for television and multiple platforms around the world by CBS Studios International."
I read this as becoming available on tv stations as well as streaming. If we have to subscribe to CBS All Access, then I will just wait and buy the Blu Ray season sets. I won't pay monthly DirecTv, monthly CBS and buy the Blu Rays.
Lets see, its still over a year away, hopefully something more will come out in the next week or two.
That's not for the USA, CBS Studios International is the division that distributes CBS produced programming and formats to foreign channels around the world:
Each network slowly unveils their streaming services at a $6-$10+ per channel monthly cost... then starts to have unique content on those streaming services, hoping you will "cut the cord" and go to them... then you find out that unless you only want to watch a couple of shows a month, you're suddenly spending WAY more than you were spending for your satellite/cable subscription just to get a few new shows you like.
Welcome to that less-than-awesome less-costs-more future some of us have been leery of...
There are some really good award winning programs that I will never see because I refuse to pay for them.
I've only recently realized just how many such shows - award winning or just shows I'd enjoy - are out there. And with streaming they will be out there until I get around to them or die.
I'm paying a lot for satellite TV.
In the meantime I'm paying a lot for high speed cable internet, and would do so anyway.
And I'm paying for Amazon Prime, and would do so anyway.
I'm also paying for Netflix in frustration specifically because A&E dropped "Longmire" which was its highest rated scripted show but the ratings came from undesirable old people like me.
And I've discovered Acorn TV where there is some really great TV that (1) was made elsewhere and (2) appeals more to old people like me.
The Millennials already stream, many never having had a cord to cut. Like many old people, I'm pretty sure they've got the right idea but I'm still addicted to "regular" TV. I have to figure out how to avoid withdrawal symptoms.
Next: Jon Stewart comes to SVOD on HBO Now: http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/219833-svod-jon-steward-on-hbo-now/
The trend is continued. We'll see how the market evolves.
I'm a little more concerned about carrying the ST torch than I am about distribution. What commonly happens is that when something gets this large or iconic it starts to crumble under its own weight. The multiple series and movies sort of prove this. As much as I like and respect JJ Abrams, I'd watch the old movies over and over before I'd watch another Transformers-inspired ST movie.
My advice on the cancellation of Enterprise was "OK, you've wrung about every drop out that you can for now, so everybody involved go do something else not tied to this franchise for now and then we can rebuild it from the ground up in 5 or 10 years without the baggage of all the people currently involved, hopefully with fresh ideas (and fresh people)." Times up.
ST is big, demonstrated by how I can talk about it using just two letters, and everyone still knows what we're talking about. Its a really high bar, and nearly impossible without full self-consciousness holding everyone back. IOW, good luck with that. Success has many fathers while failure is an orphan, and so everyone wants to be involved or attached or claim territory or fame regarding something as big as ST (which is why the long hiatus was suggested in the first place). Maybe they would be better off just doing ST without calling it ST and without referencing or paying tribute to the mythology or the historic narrative altogether, which would unshackle them nearly completely, and lower expectations.
What they should capture is the familiar Kirk-Spock-Bones dynamic by using 3 new characters completely different from all of the original three. That relationship is what the core of the show was about. Go there; do that.
I think a better space show could be built on the sensibilities and art direction of Alien, actually, which got it all very realistically (believably) correct, 36 years ago.
Chuck Lorre had this on a vanity card, at least on Big Bang:
1948 - 2015
CBS recently announced that it was bringing back the series Star Trek, but not for the CBS network, for a streaming video on demand system called CBS All Access. In lieu of flowers, CBS has requested that mourners send them six bucks a month.
It helps that you are posting in a thread with the title spelled out. I was slightly confused until looking back at the thread title.
Star Trek jumped the shark when they blew up the planet Vulcan. They left the timeline I cared about. I realize that makes it easier on the writers ... they do not need to fit their universe into the universe of TOS, TNG, DS9 or Voyager. The current movies are not a prequel to the universe I grew up with. They are an alternate to the universe I grew up with.
As long as they are still doing "wagon train to space" (for the most part) I'll watch the movies. Not first run, since it isn't my universe but they will eventually be on something I already pay for.
If CBS makes the new series "CBS All Access" only I won't watch. My wife suggested that we could buy DVDs eventually but there are plenty of interesting shows I already get ... I do not believe I'll miss this one.
And I think there are plenty of Star Trek fans that won't pay the $6. I know a guy that was very willing to pay $500 for a ticket to the Star Trek convention in Vegas plus all the regular costs of going out there etc for 2016, but won't be getting this.
I'm looking forward to the completion and release of Star Trek Axanar.
The demo for folks who are really looking forward to this skews heavily towards those savvy enough to find ways to get the episodes by the next morning. Or even before they are streamed.
For instance, Napster and iTunes are not what killed the record industry. What killed the record industry was them gouging us at 18 bucks a CD for 2 good songs and 8 mediocre ones. Now, its $1.29 per cut, which we can preview and cherry-pick, which seems reasonable, finally. People will pay for value, but will look for other avenues when they feel like they are getting a bad deal. I would not say $6 for CBS is a bad deal, but mine is not the only opinion.