You know, after thinking about this a bit, it occurred to me that Sir Patrick Stewart is perfectly suited for such a production! He's a trained stage actor and is capable of such a production! Perhaps it could lead into a nice new career for the TNG cast. Of course, that could appear to be biting the hand that fed them. But if it was a nice production and not parody, why not! They did stage musicals for The Thunderbirds and Forbidden Planet. On another note, I came across an article in the Star Trek Into Darkness blu ray thread that I thought was both kind of insane and disturbing.Here's the link: http://www.thewrap.c...ambitions-91766
But essentially, it says that JJ Abrams was trying to set up a multi media kind of deal with Star Trek where he not only wanted to make the films, but his company would also want to develop a new TV show and do the comics and other media. The article goes on to say its a natural because Disney does exactly that and does it well for über profits.But the huge gating thing is that the Star Trek brand is now split. CBS retains the rights for the TV series as of 2006 and the characters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest. I knew they had the TV rights, but not that they own the characters. And Paramount owns the film rights. This caused an unexpectedly frustrating situation for Abrams as he didn't have full access to the characters. What I didn't know is that CBS licenses our heroes to Paramount for the films. Plus this puts the brakes on any TV projects and other projects that Abrams wants to do with the characters. Unless he wants to play nice with CBS.What the article also says is that this has caused a split in the brand and is confusing the audience and potential dollars CBS can earn from merchandising. CBS current is raking in millions from sales of Star Trek TOS materials. And that puts a limit on what Paramount can do to market the films. They have to work with CBS to make agreements in merchandising. That might have had to do with the maddenly split bonus materials on the Into Darkness blu ray release, I don't know. If Abrams wants to do a project now with Star Trek, it's a headache. The article thinks that's why he's jumping to Star Wars. Disney is quite happy to do the kinds of deals and projects like the ones I mention above. It's all under one roof.The sad part for me, and perhaps it's because I come from the time when Star Trek wasn't the huge juggernaut it is now and during the dark days of the 1970's there was no real hope of it coming back and no one cared about it. It was great during the 80's and the resurgence the brand had. That was nice as the name Star Trek became respectable in the mainstream and no longer in the cult fan world. So it seems like its being exploited now. I never imaged a soulless conglomerate would want to have Star Trek for exploitation like it is now for mere profits and just making up stuff for the sole purpose of making junk that they hope the fans will buy up. I guess I'm imaging things like the big theme parks and how Star Wars is handled. I've never seen the parks and how it's done, I'm just imagining it. I always felt Star Trek was a cut above that. It has more to it them mindless action, such as the new films like to have. It's fine and dandy and probably the way of the future. It's the new generation and perhaps people like me have to accept that. I'm sure Gene Roddenberry would be happy to see how popular Star Trek is, but I'm guessing even his vision for it might have been over ruled and he'd be kicked out of the corporate plan. I at least hope that Rod Roddenberry is getting some cut from all this. Sorry, had to get that out there.Edit: to quote Kirk, am I standing in the way of progress? Am I being old fashioned?
Edited by Nelson Au, September 15 2013 - 10:17 AM.