• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

TV Show Remakes

FreddyE1977 said:
The first couple of seasons of Star Trek TNG were quite tedious.
It was only when Gene Roddenberry died and the producers gave up on
his vision of a "non-violent action/adventure series" that they were
free to build it into a successful show.
Roddenberry's original edict to Rick Berman was "no conflict among the main characters." So, if Riker questioned one of Picard's orders, he was just expected to go along with it (no doubt Picard would have some technobabble-explanation of his reasoning). In later seasons, if Picard was questioned, it usually led to some sort of tension between the characters, which is more realistic IMNSHO than a conflict-free crew.

But Roddenberry also believed in an unrealistic, utopian future for mankind. While it helped TOS a bit in the '60s (they were better able to tell "morality plays" then), it bit him in the butt in the first two seasons of TNG. The only saving grace was that the show was syndicated and stations signed a 5-year contract (the show ultimately ran for 7).
 
"Mission Impossible. Though both series featured Peter Graves, the 80's revival was a pale
shell of the original."

The ABC late 1980s remake of the series wasn't even supposed to happen.

It was rushed into production by the network, using a mostly new cast but as many as possible of the original CBS scripts from the 1967-74 era that were around and not so Cold War-centric that they were hopelessly outdated, because several of the new ABC shows that were supposed to hit the air that fall were delayed by a Writers' Guild strike. Other than the name changes of most of the characters, they were exactly the same plots and exactly the same situations you'd seen before--that way they wouldn't have to do a rewrite and risk the results of a strikebreaking effort. (A couple of the shows that were supposed to go to air that fall either arrived on air a year late or never got into production at all because the strike was so prolonged.) The season itself didn't even start in earnest until Thanksgiving time and new episodes of returning shows didn't hit air until the holidays.

The Mission: Impossible revival didn't last long beyond the resumption of full production after the strike. It was never really intended to, and ratings weren't strong enough to recruit a writing team to keep it going.

Had the writers' strike lasted much longer, we'd have probably seen still more revivals of old adventure shows with new casts and all-too-familiar scripts and story lines. No comedy remakes were in the works because at least the networks understood that most sitcoms either tended to date badly as the years went along, or depend too much on the performing talents and comic timing of their original stars, many of whom were unavailable because they'd either passed away (Lucille Ball, Jackie Gleason) or gone on to major motion picture careers (Tom Hanks, John Travolta, Robin Williams, Ron Howard, Henry Winkler).
 
The revival of Mission: Impossible was actually shot in Australia.
Couldn't they have just continued to crank them out using Aussie writers?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom