Trekmovie.com is reporting that their are some pitches being made to CBS for new Trek TV shows. Tim Russ ('Mr. Tuvok') is quoted as saying:
Star Trek’s been around 40 years, spun off 6 series and 11 movies. Is it time to give the Trek franchise a rest?
“In a sense it is in hiatus right now, because there’s nothing on. "(Star Trek) Enterprise" was the last series, and that’s been off several years. They’re discussing other Star Trek projects, other series. I think there’s still a loyal audience out there that would love to have something to watch that’s Star Trek-related.”
1. It is possible to overdue things so that people suffer brand-fatigue. However, given the success of the rebooting of Battlestar Galactica and the rumored Star Wars TV series, I think it is possible for a Star Trek series to again become relevant for a new generation, if it is done right.
2. I don't think the issues of which timeline you could do a series in is important, I think they way to have success is to do something relevant to a broader audience that is true to the spirit of Star Trek. If you catch and reintroduce the notion of a 'wagon train to the stars' and focus on real character development in a science fiction storyline, you will have a recipe for success. (a) People appreciate the optimism of Star Trek if their is a struggle to realize the ideals of human exploration with a potential for creating a better world. (b) If Star Trek is not too sterilized by over dependance of technology. As much as I like Star Trek (and believe me, I enjoy it). When I watch some of the later Voyager episodes and even the Enterprise episodes, I don't always get the sense that the technology always works and can always bale them out. Sometimes the universe seems a little too perfect.
Second, this is why I think the writers of the lastest Star Trek movie, who are now working on a sequel, 'get it' as it were. Robert Orci has said:
One of the big challenges is all of the characters are together now. A prequel is a pain in the butt, but one of the nice little advantages was that you get to meet the characters as you go through the story and they get to meet each other. That’s fun. We don’t [have] that luxury of not having the entire family there together at the start of the story. So now you want the character stories to be good for everybody but also not just be there to be stories but also fit into the plot and be organic. We’re looking at a lot of the old episodes for inspiration, still. Whereas the last movie was all about breaking free from “Star Trek” and its canon, now that we can do whatever we want, we still want it to feel like good ol’ “Star Trek” even though it’s a new story.
You cannot just make a science fiction movie with spaceships and slap the Star Trek label and lingo to it. You can't just slap the characters names of people. You have to "get the feel." I think they did the smart thing to reboot the canon in a way that feels natural in a science fiction world. They did it without just 'dumping' all that Star Trek was as if to say 'that 1960s TV didn't happen.' But now they are free as a sort. Yet not only do they want to make a good movie, they want to be faithful, as it were, to the spirit of what has gone before.
I think this is an exciting time to be a Trekkie.