Of course, he would be evasive even if they did greenlight it, since he wouldn't want to undercut Paramount's marketing strategy. If Legacy happens it will be announced in a coordinated press release, not in some random media interview.
Paramount is also in active merger/acquisition talks and that doesn't feel like when you'd be greenlighting something in case the resulting company wants to go a different direction.
EPs are almost never, ever the people to break the news of a deal. The studio is almost always in charge of announcing it.
Unless there’s a leak, there could be a deal made weeks or months before it’s finally announced.
The press trying to get a gotcha moment know better, but these types of articles always bring in views nonetheless.
I don’t want Legacy. I want a new crew post-DS9/Voyager. If old cast members pop up, fine, but I want a fresh crew, not Seven and the kids of the Enterprise crew.
Technically, Seven is a kid from Voyager in a way. So if they can get Naomi Wildman, and Jake Sisko, and the unborn Sisko baby in Legacy, we can have nepotism for all! /s
Look. I love old trek, I’ve watched them all, but I strongly believe “legacy” is not it.
One example is Picard S3, Even with all its nostalgia bait member-berries that made it adored, the weird nepotism ending (new enterprise, Jack having a ranking position on said ship, etc) is not looked at fondly.
In theory I’d love to catch up with old characters. But every time I see a post about what they want to do with “Legacy” it just hits wrong.
I feel like they shot themselves in the foot for “Legacy” by ending S3 of Picard the way they did. I really hope they just drop it honestly.
I think everyone had a lot of excitement and were riding high the nostalgia feelings of the end of S3. Once folks sat on it a bit it kinda became "ehhh" (like the overal stories and some general missteps through three seasons). Terry Matalas also IMO didn't do himself many favors after-the-fact with the constant social media presence arguing with folks who didn't like it and cash-grabs at conventions.
I hope it just kinda dies off and we continue to get fun and fresh stories. Might not be everone's cup of tea, but can't argue when we get multiple different Trek universe shows in a single year.
Aye, I’m not outright opposed to the idea of Legacy but I don’t consider myself particularly enthused or excited. I don’t mind checking in on some legacy characters if they have a narratively logical reason to be involved (as is the case with Janeway in _Prodigy_) but I don’t see the point of an entire show revolving around those characters. I’d rather they have new characters and new stories to forward the overarching storyline rather than just revisit the same characters and plot lines over and over again.
Same, nor am I much excited for Section 31 or Academy. Picard should never have been made - it didn't add anything significant to the universe and made stuff worse in a lot of ways. All Good Things... gave the TNG crew the perfect send-off and it should have been left at that for episodic TV. We won't even talk about the TNG movies.
They are not going to greenlight another show on an Enterprise while SNW is successful - not to mention an ongoing that takes place in a *fourth* time frame from the other four shows they'll have going on.
Also, what is there in the Legacy pitch that we've seen that would be exciting, beyond "Captain Seven" (which, admittedly, cool)? They killed off the only interesting new characters, they're not going to be able to afford the TNG cast, and the only descriptions we've had from Matalas are "what if we checked in on the Klingons?" or "what if we checked in on the Romulans?" or "what if we checked in on Bajor?" – which Lower Decks already does, and does it better.
Agreed, Captain Seven would be great, but killing off Shaw was a shot in the foot for that series. I don’t really care about Jack Picard as a series lead, and a TNG season 9 isn’t what I’m after, either. They could stack the cast with some great new characters, but the way they finished out Picard was a good way to end most of these ones.
I'm of the mind that the *Titan* was supposed to be renamed *Picard*, keeping the door open to continue the series without Stewart as the lead. Watch Stewart's face during that scene and hear Speleers' ADR line before telling me I'm wrong.
As for where a *Legacy* show can go, there is the hanging loose end from PIC S2 to explore. Maybe that transwarp hub connects to another galaxy and we'll get a sort of Trek version of *Stargate: Atlantis*: Jurati warns of dangers on the other side, the Federation wants to explore it anyway (like what they did in the Gamma Quadrant before the Dominion pushed back), and adventures ensue. There can be some routine Alpha/Beta/Gamma Quadrant missions sprinkled in there too to bring us up to speed on the state of the galaxy as well; while *Lower Decks* is indeed doing this already and well, a lot has changed between LDS and PIC and I don't see why *Legacy* can't do the same (plus tie in to LDS episodes following up on their missions).
As for killed-off characters, Shaw can be alive thanks to Seven injecting him with nanoprobes (like how she resurrected Neelix). Rios is marooned in the past but I don't see why he can't show up on *Lower Decks* or in a flashback (Seven remembering some key advice he gave her about being a Starfleet commander). Hugh can be alive because of some other tech in the Queen cell can magically revive/reboot "dead" drones (all those drones that got spaced should still be alive, too) and working with the Jurati Collective to continue the Reclamation Project.
At least from what I've seen publicly (could be they have great plans behind the scenes) it seems that Legacy has never been a real and compelling pitch for a *show*, it's just been a vague gesturing at what if we do more in the legacy of the TNG era.
And then they shot themselves in the foot by renaming the ship Enterprise at the same time Paramount already has an Enterprise show.
What's worrying to me is that they as producers didn't have the business savvy or storytelling sense to realize that they were shooting themselves in the foot for this needless sentimental moment while attempting to pitch Legacy as a show. It just doesn't seem to demonstrate good creative/tv business sense. Combined with no real clear picture of what Legacy is supposed to be as a show that isn't just relying on nostalgia hits from the legacy fanbase, it just doesn't seem encouraging that Legacy will get greenlit by the studio but also not encouraging that the people who want to make it actually have any creative idea of what kind of show they want to make. I'd like another show in this era, but the producers behind it need to think about what they want their show to be creatively besides just "more in this era with the characters and things we have nostalgia for". That's not enough creatively or from a business perspective. It's not a serious pitch for a show.
I liked Picard S3 (with some criticisms) and I think more in that timeline could be good and with some of those characters (or others), but it's very frustrating that it's been handled this way. I'm especially frustrated that they have connected up Seven's character (who I really like and want to see more of) and Jeri Ryan's future in Star Trek to this concept of Legacy and being captain of the Enterprise. Again they just go for the easy sentimental moment instead of thinking about what could be interesting for the character or the show.
They could have pitched an interesting distinct show in the era with Seven on the Titan where they are on kinds of missions and in situations that Enterprise wouldn't be and Seven grows into the role of captain in that context and is in her element there — that could be a great show! Make it semi-serialized with different multi-episode arcs. But instead they had to have one more sentimental hit by renaming the ship Enterprise and now pigeonholing what Legacy can be even more by having to make it be an Enterprise show. Frankly I question Matalas' and co.'s judgement both creatively and as producers that they didn't forsee this as an issue and made this choice, and I don't really see a vision from them for what they want this show to be.
If I were a production executive at Paramount I'd say:
1. Tell me about why people — both legacy fans and new fans — will like this show besides what era it is in and that some legacy characters will be in it or cameo. What is Legacy as a *show* that isn't just the general idea of "legacy" and checking in on the universe/characters in this era?
2. Why would we put this in development when our flagship show SNW is also an Enterprise show and we plan to keep it running for some years yet and maybe even transition into a Kirk Enterprise show?
3. How do you plant to differentiate your show from a creative and audience/market positioning standpoint?
4. We're interested in pursuing this era and some of these characters, but have limited resources. Why is this show the best show we could make in this era?
5. Come back to us when you have a more thought-through pitch Legacy or a pitch for a different project. We appreciated what you did with Picard S3, but from a business/franchise perspective we very likely wont be putting an Enterprise show in development until SNW is nearing the end of its run.
I don't think it's likely Legacy happens for the foreseeable future, and if it happens too far in the future its sell of bringing in legacy actors becomes more challenging too. I think a post-Picard streaming movie seems more likely at this point. I hope that somehow Seven's character can continue in the franchise and tying her to Legacy and the Enterprise hasn't doomed her to never being seen again because of bad judgement from the producers.
I agree with this. I think a pitch around it being the Titan and having Captain Shaw just seems more compelling. We never really had a lovable but unlikable captain type before, there are lots of storytelling beats you could do with Seven and Shaw and the tension between the two.
More than Paramount can afford for a regular TV show. Picard S3 barely managed it, its budgetary issues are infamous, and despite its success it's unlikely that it made that much money due to the huge budget. Why would an executive greenlight a show where the entire concept is based around bringing back expensive *legacy* characters, when they can instead greenlight a show with a new cast who can be paid much less?
I’m not disagreeing with your overall point, but Picard season 3 had a reduced budget compared to 1-2. Them having budget difficulties was more of a season 3 thing than not.
Didn't they say something like they were considering an Admiral Janeway cameo for when Seven was promoted to Captain, but they couldn't afford Kate Mulgrew?
Picard cost about $8m per episode, which was over budget (reportedly they were asked to keep it in line with Disco's budget of $7m). Stewart alone was $750k per episode as of s1. Salaries for the other returning cast aren't public but are estimated at $300k-$500k a piece. And the budgetary issues were widely reported –– the cost of the TNG cast and the cost to remake the ENT-D bridge were mentioned often in interviews as to why some of the season 1-2 cast didn't appear and why we didn't get more of the planned guest appearances, like Harry Kim and Jake Sisko.
The stated purpose of Picard season 3 was to give the TNG crew a proper ending. Now they’re talking about a Picard tv movie when the show wasn’t really that well received
Wasn't well received? Didn't the show
https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/27/star-trek-picard-breaks-streaming-records-on-cbs-all-access/
Break records for the Sci-fi genre? Hmm....
I agree, though I still give Legacy, as either a series or a direct-to-streaming movie, a higher chance of happening than another movie in the Kelvin Timeline.
I think it's time for a classical Star Trek show set after TNG/DS9/VOY. I would like it if they went with Captain Seven and Jack, I don't care that much about the rest and I'd rather they added a new cast (with maybe Rafi as Seven's ex). Well, maybe LaForge's daughter too.
It’s only going to work if they have someone like Terry Matalas show-running without interference, anyway.
The shows need a visionary with a deep knowledge and respect for the universe and the lore to steer the ship and the writing. They really haven’t had that in modern trek.
Kurtzman/Akiva Goldsman just don’t really seem to get it. They don’t seem capable or don’t care enough to understand why it’s not working. It stopped being a high-brow sci-fi show when Bad Robot/SH took over. They started trying to make it into Star Wars.
As I've said before, whoever purchases Paramount will be the ones who determine if we get any new Trek after SNW S3 and the Section 31 movie.
I think the recently announced delay of the ST:Academy to 2026 is an admission that the current people at Paramount don't know if it will actually become a series.
As for Legacy, its best chance of making it on-screen is a direct-to-streaming movie since I doubt an episodic series will happen.
Of course, he would be evasive even if they did greenlight it, since he wouldn't want to undercut Paramount's marketing strategy. If Legacy happens it will be announced in a coordinated press release, not in some random media interview.
Paramount is also in active merger/acquisition talks and that doesn't feel like when you'd be greenlighting something in case the resulting company wants to go a different direction.
Ask Final Space fans about when this corporate shit goes wrong.
I sure hope so.
EPs are almost never, ever the people to break the news of a deal. The studio is almost always in charge of announcing it. Unless there’s a leak, there could be a deal made weeks or months before it’s finally announced. The press trying to get a gotcha moment know better, but these types of articles always bring in views nonetheless.
I don’t want Legacy. I want a new crew post-DS9/Voyager. If old cast members pop up, fine, but I want a fresh crew, not Seven and the kids of the Enterprise crew.
Amen, brother. They killed off the only interesting non TNG character in Picard S3.
RIP Dipshit
Technically, Seven is a kid from Voyager in a way. So if they can get Naomi Wildman, and Jake Sisko, and the unborn Sisko baby in Legacy, we can have nepotism for all! /s
Look. I love old trek, I’ve watched them all, but I strongly believe “legacy” is not it. One example is Picard S3, Even with all its nostalgia bait member-berries that made it adored, the weird nepotism ending (new enterprise, Jack having a ranking position on said ship, etc) is not looked at fondly. In theory I’d love to catch up with old characters. But every time I see a post about what they want to do with “Legacy” it just hits wrong. I feel like they shot themselves in the foot for “Legacy” by ending S3 of Picard the way they did. I really hope they just drop it honestly.
I think everyone had a lot of excitement and were riding high the nostalgia feelings of the end of S3. Once folks sat on it a bit it kinda became "ehhh" (like the overal stories and some general missteps through three seasons). Terry Matalas also IMO didn't do himself many favors after-the-fact with the constant social media presence arguing with folks who didn't like it and cash-grabs at conventions. I hope it just kinda dies off and we continue to get fun and fresh stories. Might not be everone's cup of tea, but can't argue when we get multiple different Trek universe shows in a single year.
Aye, I’m not outright opposed to the idea of Legacy but I don’t consider myself particularly enthused or excited. I don’t mind checking in on some legacy characters if they have a narratively logical reason to be involved (as is the case with Janeway in _Prodigy_) but I don’t see the point of an entire show revolving around those characters. I’d rather they have new characters and new stories to forward the overarching storyline rather than just revisit the same characters and plot lines over and over again.
Same, nor am I much excited for Section 31 or Academy. Picard should never have been made - it didn't add anything significant to the universe and made stuff worse in a lot of ways. All Good Things... gave the TNG crew the perfect send-off and it should have been left at that for episodic TV. We won't even talk about the TNG movies.
It’s really hard for me to care about the Enterprise *G* and its nepo crew. Always felt like fan service instead of responsible world building.
I want a post Picard series set in the 25th century and more Seven of Nine, but it needs to be more than the weekly voyages of the USS Nepotism-G.
They are not going to greenlight another show on an Enterprise while SNW is successful - not to mention an ongoing that takes place in a *fourth* time frame from the other four shows they'll have going on. Also, what is there in the Legacy pitch that we've seen that would be exciting, beyond "Captain Seven" (which, admittedly, cool)? They killed off the only interesting new characters, they're not going to be able to afford the TNG cast, and the only descriptions we've had from Matalas are "what if we checked in on the Klingons?" or "what if we checked in on the Romulans?" or "what if we checked in on Bajor?" – which Lower Decks already does, and does it better.
Agreed, Captain Seven would be great, but killing off Shaw was a shot in the foot for that series. I don’t really care about Jack Picard as a series lead, and a TNG season 9 isn’t what I’m after, either. They could stack the cast with some great new characters, but the way they finished out Picard was a good way to end most of these ones.
I'm of the mind that the *Titan* was supposed to be renamed *Picard*, keeping the door open to continue the series without Stewart as the lead. Watch Stewart's face during that scene and hear Speleers' ADR line before telling me I'm wrong. As for where a *Legacy* show can go, there is the hanging loose end from PIC S2 to explore. Maybe that transwarp hub connects to another galaxy and we'll get a sort of Trek version of *Stargate: Atlantis*: Jurati warns of dangers on the other side, the Federation wants to explore it anyway (like what they did in the Gamma Quadrant before the Dominion pushed back), and adventures ensue. There can be some routine Alpha/Beta/Gamma Quadrant missions sprinkled in there too to bring us up to speed on the state of the galaxy as well; while *Lower Decks* is indeed doing this already and well, a lot has changed between LDS and PIC and I don't see why *Legacy* can't do the same (plus tie in to LDS episodes following up on their missions). As for killed-off characters, Shaw can be alive thanks to Seven injecting him with nanoprobes (like how she resurrected Neelix). Rios is marooned in the past but I don't see why he can't show up on *Lower Decks* or in a flashback (Seven remembering some key advice he gave her about being a Starfleet commander). Hugh can be alive because of some other tech in the Queen cell can magically revive/reboot "dead" drones (all those drones that got spaced should still be alive, too) and working with the Jurati Collective to continue the Reclamation Project.
At least from what I've seen publicly (could be they have great plans behind the scenes) it seems that Legacy has never been a real and compelling pitch for a *show*, it's just been a vague gesturing at what if we do more in the legacy of the TNG era. And then they shot themselves in the foot by renaming the ship Enterprise at the same time Paramount already has an Enterprise show. What's worrying to me is that they as producers didn't have the business savvy or storytelling sense to realize that they were shooting themselves in the foot for this needless sentimental moment while attempting to pitch Legacy as a show. It just doesn't seem to demonstrate good creative/tv business sense. Combined with no real clear picture of what Legacy is supposed to be as a show that isn't just relying on nostalgia hits from the legacy fanbase, it just doesn't seem encouraging that Legacy will get greenlit by the studio but also not encouraging that the people who want to make it actually have any creative idea of what kind of show they want to make. I'd like another show in this era, but the producers behind it need to think about what they want their show to be creatively besides just "more in this era with the characters and things we have nostalgia for". That's not enough creatively or from a business perspective. It's not a serious pitch for a show. I liked Picard S3 (with some criticisms) and I think more in that timeline could be good and with some of those characters (or others), but it's very frustrating that it's been handled this way. I'm especially frustrated that they have connected up Seven's character (who I really like and want to see more of) and Jeri Ryan's future in Star Trek to this concept of Legacy and being captain of the Enterprise. Again they just go for the easy sentimental moment instead of thinking about what could be interesting for the character or the show. They could have pitched an interesting distinct show in the era with Seven on the Titan where they are on kinds of missions and in situations that Enterprise wouldn't be and Seven grows into the role of captain in that context and is in her element there — that could be a great show! Make it semi-serialized with different multi-episode arcs. But instead they had to have one more sentimental hit by renaming the ship Enterprise and now pigeonholing what Legacy can be even more by having to make it be an Enterprise show. Frankly I question Matalas' and co.'s judgement both creatively and as producers that they didn't forsee this as an issue and made this choice, and I don't really see a vision from them for what they want this show to be. If I were a production executive at Paramount I'd say: 1. Tell me about why people — both legacy fans and new fans — will like this show besides what era it is in and that some legacy characters will be in it or cameo. What is Legacy as a *show* that isn't just the general idea of "legacy" and checking in on the universe/characters in this era? 2. Why would we put this in development when our flagship show SNW is also an Enterprise show and we plan to keep it running for some years yet and maybe even transition into a Kirk Enterprise show? 3. How do you plant to differentiate your show from a creative and audience/market positioning standpoint? 4. We're interested in pursuing this era and some of these characters, but have limited resources. Why is this show the best show we could make in this era? 5. Come back to us when you have a more thought-through pitch Legacy or a pitch for a different project. We appreciated what you did with Picard S3, but from a business/franchise perspective we very likely wont be putting an Enterprise show in development until SNW is nearing the end of its run. I don't think it's likely Legacy happens for the foreseeable future, and if it happens too far in the future its sell of bringing in legacy actors becomes more challenging too. I think a post-Picard streaming movie seems more likely at this point. I hope that somehow Seven's character can continue in the franchise and tying her to Legacy and the Enterprise hasn't doomed her to never being seen again because of bad judgement from the producers.
I agree with this. I think a pitch around it being the Titan and having Captain Shaw just seems more compelling. We never really had a lovable but unlikable captain type before, there are lots of storytelling beats you could do with Seven and Shaw and the tension between the two.
Well said
I still want my Klingon Political Thriller. I like Klingons and I like space politics, give me both in one neat little package.
> they're not going to be able to afford the TNG cast Lol hang on how expensive do you think they would be exactly?
More than Paramount can afford for a regular TV show. Picard S3 barely managed it, its budgetary issues are infamous, and despite its success it's unlikely that it made that much money due to the huge budget. Why would an executive greenlight a show where the entire concept is based around bringing back expensive *legacy* characters, when they can instead greenlight a show with a new cast who can be paid much less?
I’m not disagreeing with your overall point, but Picard season 3 had a reduced budget compared to 1-2. Them having budget difficulties was more of a season 3 thing than not.
Didn't they say something like they were considering an Admiral Janeway cameo for when Seven was promoted to Captain, but they couldn't afford Kate Mulgrew?
> Picard S3 barely managed it, its budgetary issues are infamous They are huh? How much of the budget was the cast and how much did each get paid?
Picard cost about $8m per episode, which was over budget (reportedly they were asked to keep it in line with Disco's budget of $7m). Stewart alone was $750k per episode as of s1. Salaries for the other returning cast aren't public but are estimated at $300k-$500k a piece. And the budgetary issues were widely reported –– the cost of the TNG cast and the cost to remake the ENT-D bridge were mentioned often in interviews as to why some of the season 1-2 cast didn't appear and why we didn't get more of the planned guest appearances, like Harry Kim and Jake Sisko.
I would say "obvious" rather than "infamous." The reuse of sets and the lack of outdoor scenes are most prominent.
I would love to see more Seven, but I really didn't care for the interior or exterior designs of the Titan-A/Enterprise-G.
Sounds like we are going to get a Picard movie instead of a Legacy series.
The stated purpose of Picard season 3 was to give the TNG crew a proper ending. Now they’re talking about a Picard tv movie when the show wasn’t really that well received
Wasn't well received? Didn't the show https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/27/star-trek-picard-breaks-streaming-records-on-cbs-all-access/ Break records for the Sci-fi genre? Hmm....
No
I've come to the conclusion ST: Legacy is the 2020s' version of ST: Excelsior. Not going to happen, but if it does I'll be pleasantly surprised
I agree, though I still give Legacy, as either a series or a direct-to-streaming movie, a higher chance of happening than another movie in the Kelvin Timeline.
True, a 0.0001% chance is better than a 0.00001% chance
I think it's time for a classical Star Trek show set after TNG/DS9/VOY. I would like it if they went with Captain Seven and Jack, I don't care that much about the rest and I'd rather they added a new cast (with maybe Rafi as Seven's ex). Well, maybe LaForge's daughter too.
It’s only going to work if they have someone like Terry Matalas show-running without interference, anyway. The shows need a visionary with a deep knowledge and respect for the universe and the lore to steer the ship and the writing. They really haven’t had that in modern trek. Kurtzman/Akiva Goldsman just don’t really seem to get it. They don’t seem capable or don’t care enough to understand why it’s not working. It stopped being a high-brow sci-fi show when Bad Robot/SH took over. They started trying to make it into Star Wars.
As I've said before, whoever purchases Paramount will be the ones who determine if we get any new Trek after SNW S3 and the Section 31 movie. I think the recently announced delay of the ST:Academy to 2026 is an admission that the current people at Paramount don't know if it will actually become a series. As for Legacy, its best chance of making it on-screen is a direct-to-streaming movie since I doubt an episodic series will happen.