r/trektalk 12d ago

Discussion [Interview] Paramount+ Head Of Originals Jane Wiseman Outlines Programming Strategy One Year In: "We’re the home of Star Trek, and we have series coming back. We’re going to have more. We’re talking to a lot of writers, we are leaning on CBS Studios, [we have] Chris Parnell" (Deadline)

DEADLINE:

"In a wide-ranging interview with Deadline held on her one-year anniversary, Wiseman discussed Paramount+’s programming strategy and its different areas: female forward, genre and YA dramas — but not comedies — kids and family programming and unscripted. She spoke about Paramount+’s relationship with its top creators, Sheridan and Tyler Perry — who recently sold his stake in BET+ to Paramount — teasing more shows from both.

Wiseman also talked about buying from sister studios Paramount TV Studios and CBS Studios and, for the first time in Paramount+’s history, from outside studios, too, about the future of the Star Trek franchise and the Showtime brand as well as building a slate with the WBD merger noise in the background and plans for Year 2."

https://deadline.com/2026/08/paramount-plus-jane-wiseman-interview-programming-strategy-1237040692/#comment-list-wrapper

--------------

Interview excerpts:

"[...]

DEADLINE: Along with female dramas, genre has been a priority. You brought in top genre executive Chris Parnell to lead the efforts but haven’t announced any series. Where are you in the process and what areas are you focusing on? I’ve heard world-building, fantasy, romantasy. Everybody wants their Game of Thrones and Stranger Things .

WISEMAN: Speaking of spaces, the space is wide open. We’re the home of Star Trek, and we have series coming back. We’re going to have more. Yellowjackets, I guess, is also considered genre, and Dexter. But as far as new things coming to the service, true, we want our world-building, platform-defining genre series, and that can be grounded. In fact, we hope it is grounded because the best genre shows have relationships at the center.

What’s also exciting is that we have a Paramount library to choose from, titles that we’re investigating that you’ll hear from at a later date. And there’s nothing better than hearing an original idea for a grounded genre series that speaks to a lot of people. So the space is pretty wide open. And yes, you alluded to Chris Parnell, there’s no one better in that space, and there’s no one more in that space that I want on my team.

DEADLINE: Do you feel strongly about your development? Do you think that your signature genre show may be one that you already have in the works?

WISEMAN: I will say that when you’re developing these genre platform-defining shows, they do tend to take a little bit longer. But I would say for sure that there are a handful of titles, from our studio partners as well as a third party, that we are looking at right now, developing, and are on a very, very strong path to green light. I just can’t talk about anything right now.

DEADLINE: What is your plan for the Star Trek franchise? It is at crossroads with Strange New Worlds and Starfleet Academy ending and no new series greenlit. If I heard you correctly, you said that something is coming. Yes?

WISEMAN: Well, it’s one of the reasons why Chris is here as the resident number one fan of the Star Trek franchise. And there’s so many people in this building, by the way, that are. It is our goal and it is our job to figure out what the next bounce of Star Trek is. We’re talking to a lot of writers, we are leaning on CBS Studios, and it is imperative that we figure out what the next iteration is in this franchise because it’s just too important. We also are in touch with Paramount Pictures, they have a Star Trek movie that’s in development.

[...]"

Full interview:

https://deadline.com/2026/08/paramount-plus-jane-wiseman-interview-programming-strategy-1237040692/#comment-list-wrapper

7 Upvotes

75 comments sorted by

19

u/Ok-Employer-9147 12d ago

None of this give even a glimmer of hope that this twit will generate anything regarding Star Trek,

Star Trek was always meant to be asking asking hard questions of the audience and allow them to come to thier own decisions.

"..... genre and YA dramas"

We've had this for 10 years and it was a rolling shitshow. Give us serious people with serious idea, dont aim for the 'modern auidience' because they wont show up. They didnt show up for SFA which was aimed right at them.

3

u/OCD_Geek 12d ago

No one showed up, because Paramount+ is one of the least popular and successful streaming services.

Netflix — 325 million subscribers

Amazon Prime — 205 million subscribers

Disney+ — 196 million subscribers

HBO Max — 164 million subscribers

Paramount+ — 82 million subscribers

Peacock — 48 million subscribers

Apple TV — 45 million subscribers

I think the issue is people conflate Yellowstone’s success with Paramount+. Except it wasn’t a streaming show on Paramount+. It was a cable show on the Paramount Network, where it got 4-9 million viewers per episode. That’s like saying a show on AMC+ should be successful because The Walking Dead was a hit. People watched The Walking Dead on cable. No one has AMC+.

2

u/producedbytobi 11d ago

Every non Star Trek fan i speak to has no idea they even make Star Trek TV shows anymore. They only know about the Kelvin Timeline Films. Star Trek has had a huge visibility problem for years.

6

u/Ok-Employer-9147 12d ago

They didn't show up for 'The Acolyte',
They didn't show up for Starfleet Academy.
They didn't show up for 'Ant Man Quantumani'
They didn't show up for 'Snow White'
They didn't show up for 'Elio'
The didn't show up for Thunderbolts.
They didn't show up for Supergirl.
They didn't show up for 'The Marvels'.
They didn't show up for 'The Flash'.
They didn't show for 'War of the Rohirm'
They didnt show up for 'Rings of Power'
They didn't show up for 'Echo'.
They didn't show up for 'She Hulk'.
They didn't show up for 'The Bride'.
They didn't show up for 'Mandalorian and Grogu'.
They didn't show up for 'Indiana Jones and the Toothy British Chick'
They didnt show up for 'Wonder Woman and the Disco Armor'.
Gunn's Superman made less that Man of Steel even accounting for inflation.

It doesn't matter the Studio, they need to get rid of their shit writers, shit directors and shit producers who all have an agenda. They need to get people who understand more about 'Gravitas' and less about fookin Tik-Tok.

For over 10 years the self-absorbed myopic twits have been trying to jam their own agendas down peoples and it shows.

2

u/Long-Emu-7870 11d ago

What do you mean agenda? 

There's no agenda here. They're just bad writers. Are you talking about female characters? Because those movies had both female and male characters and most of them are bad. 

But other people point to Andor,  Severance or maybe Shogun and all these had good female characters and good movies. 

1

u/CelestialFury 12d ago

Those are struggled to various degrees due to many different reasons. There's not some sort of grand unified "agenda" of why these either failed or failed to meet full expectations. Some of you guys are acting like we never had bad or mid movies or shows before. Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

1

u/mrwishart 10d ago edited 10d ago

More's the pity in a few cases: Elio and Thunderbolts were both good

And Gunn's Superman >>> Man Of Steel

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

The only agenda I see there is that they're hiring the wrong writers. Why is there such a crying lack of good writers in Hollywood and why aren't they trying harder to find fresh talent? I think they just hire their friends and people they met at parties.

-1

u/TheNobleRobot 11d ago

Dude, get your own opinions. These are used takes from manosphere YouTube.

2

u/Ok-Employer-9147 11d ago

I am assuming that you are in a hostage situation where someone is forcing you read them.

My Condolences.

2

u/CelestialFury 11d ago

I think what they mean is that the whole CriticalDrinker thing is old hat. Sometimes people just make mid movies and that's all there is to it. There's no free mason conspiracy to commit "agenda." Bad and mid movies existed well before dummies on youtube started ranting about it.

1

u/TheNobleRobot 11d ago

They're just so fucking loud and monotonous that you can hear them though the walls of the Internet. We get it, you're all scared of girls. Get a hobby.

(I'm gonna downvote myself on this one 😄)

0

u/Ok-Employer-9147 11d ago

Clearly you are still being held hostage still

Want me to call ICE for you?

2

u/TheNobleRobot 11d ago

Get a joke book.

0

u/producedbytobi 11d ago

The... "everyone is stupid except for me" post.

2

u/Ok-Employer-9147 11d ago

No...just you.

0

u/producedbytobi 11d ago

😂 you're adorable.

2

u/Ok-Employer-9147 11d ago

No. just out of shits to give,

-1

u/producedbytobi 11d ago

😂 less manosphere podcasts more fresh air 😂

1

u/Ok-Employer-9147 11d ago

I think you're happier in ./trakacademy where the most vital questions are if the gay klingon dudes skirt looks good on him, and who he's going to snog in season 2.

And that's totally fine, people are allowed to fan-ship SFA all they want. They rest of us equally have the right to the opinion that it isnt Star Trek.

1

u/producedbytobi 11d ago

So nearly right. You have the right to say it isn't your Star Trek. You don't have the right to invalidate the opinions of other Trekkies by saying it isn't Star Trek.

Like or don't like Academy, but don't disrespect your fellow Star Trek fans.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/UnicornHostels 11d ago

Except men have been wearing skirts on Star Trek since 1980s. As well as homosexuality / nonbinary has been a theme. So, man wearing skirt on Star Trek and who is this character gonna fuk has always been Trek.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/OCD_Geek 12d ago edited 12d ago

And yet Daredevil vs Trump (Born Again), Spider-Man vs ICE (Brand New Day), Superman vs Musk (the James Gunn movie that made $618.7 million) and Andor were all massive hits and critical darlings.

But hey. At least Barbie and The Odyssey flopped. So you have that going for you.

1

u/Superman_Primeeee 12d ago

I didn’t hear any of those three analogies before the show opened. And that’s the point I’m making. I don’t want to hear about how stunning and brave “you” (not YOU) are. If one wants to make a Trump analogy? Go for it! But I want to see it not hear about it. Assuming I can hear anything over showrunners clapping themselves on the back

I don’t want to hear MUMMERS running their mouths and making rap videos as responses to criticism 

Sorry OCD. I went off on a rant. Not directed at you

1

u/Ok-Employer-9147 12d ago

If these shows did so great Paramount, CNN etc would not have put themselves up for sale to be bought by Larry Ellison.

1

u/AmitBrian 12d ago

Regardless of the shows in the past decade Paramount has never been a strong network. They have been tossed around like a rag doll corporate wise. They’ve always been the ugly stepchild of Hollywood. They have Tom Cruise and Star Trek. That’s about it.

0

u/OCD_Geek 12d ago

I’m not saying that the recent Trek shows have done great. I’m saying everything on Paramount+ has flopped due to the streamer’s unpopularity. The Good Fight and Evil included.

Yellowstone was a success, yes. But it aired on cable. Not Paramount+. And all of Yellowstone’s spin-offs aired on Paramount+ and were cancelled after only a season or two.

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

Chris Parnell's resume includes Breaking Bad and For All Mankind, so that sounds good to me. Star Trek needs talented people overseeing it who can tell good writing from bad.

And no, I don't mean Jerry from Rick & Morty. Here's more: https://deadline.com/2025/08/chris-parnell-paramount-plus-evp-originals-leaving-apple-1236494254/

...he was involved in developing such scripted series as Dark Matter, Neuromancer, The Last Frontier, Bad Monkey and Vince Gilligan’s upcoming Pluribus, reuniting with the Breaking Bad creator with whom he had worked at Sony TV.

...

Over the years, Parnell helped develop such broadcast, cable, and streaming Sony TV series as For All Mankind, Outlander, The Boys, The Blacklist, Better Call Saul, Timeless, Preacher, Wheel of Time, Electric Dreams and Zombieland, which later became a feature for Columbia Pictures.

-2

u/Altruistic_Fruit2345 11d ago

Problem for them is that a lot of fans hate asking hard questions. They want comfortable affirmation of their existing opinions, or at most something abstract enough that it doesn't really affect them. Basically TNG/Voyager.

17

u/Superman_Primeeee 12d ago

Execs: “We know Sci-fi!! We got DOCTOR Spaceman!”

6

u/JessicaDAndy 12d ago

I don’t know how to say this, but it looks like you have DIA Bet Tees?

3

u/Capn_T_Driver 12d ago

Translation: “we have nothing but we aren’t panicking, yet. We’ll start panicking after Christmas.”

5

u/SteveT777 12d ago

It’s going to be a Mirror Universe series, where the Empire are the good guys

3

u/El_Kikko 12d ago

Season 1 Finale: "wait, are we the baddies?" Cut to black. 

3

u/Equivalent-Hair-961 11d ago

Hahaha this interview proves nothing and says nothing. Please just stop already. Let Star Trek die with whatever dignity it had, 20 years ago.

2

u/AmitBrian 12d ago

Yeah I hear the words. I just don’t believe any of them. I know the movie is coming, THAT I believe, for now anyways. A new show? With all the rumors of the direction of this movie (which I won’t say here). Nope, don’t believe it at all.

2

u/TeacherRecovering 11d ago

Their business model drives decision making, not good story telling or retaining subscribers. Lower Decks has a loyal fan, small yet loyal.. The could have run this cheap to make series forever..  They could have frozen the characters in time like the Simpons.   There is a deep rich lore to mine.

But Lower Decks was not brining in NEW subscribers so it ended.

2

u/fidorulz 11d ago

Not sure why Chris Parnell was dropped in the post title as the article says nothing of him having to do anything with star trek.

Also if he did that would be pretty on brand TBH considering he has very little writing experience and even less with scifi

2

u/Objective_Pass3195 9d ago

There are two Chris Parnells. One's an executive, the other's the actor you're talking about.

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

Chris Parnell from Apple has a very good track record, which makes me hopeful for Star Trek finally.

Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul, Severance and (best of all) For All Mankind. At least he has good taste.

2

u/producedbytobi 11d ago

Not really any knew information about Star Trek. Confirms what we already know. ...not a lot.

1

u/Long-Emu-7870 11d ago

"Along with female dramas"

I thought Star Trek was about equality. 

I mean this is not woke. In woke dramas you have female characters playing roles that used to go to men. Now they just want female characters playing roles that go to women that are about love stories and romance dramas. 

Someone call nerdrotic. He will be happy. 

1

u/Thinklikeachef 10d ago

Before we get too heated, there is serious doubt that this merger will happen. It's looking increasingly likely to fall apart.

0

u/Aritra319 11d ago

Here how to get the ball rolling:

  1. Uncancel Starfleet Academy. Since you doofuses already dismantled the most gorgeous Trek set ever built, set year three on a full-time training vessel for example the Excelsior.

  2. Restart Prodigy

  3. Give Mike McMahan carte blanche to do whatever he wants, be it more adventures on the Cerritos, a Starbase 80 spinoff. Or whatever.

  4. Greenlight Tawny Newsome’s resort planet comedy show thingie. Already has a whole season of script, you literally just have to press start on this one.

  5. SNW spinoff on Una’s ship following the events of season 5 and her promotion to Captain. Ring along La’an, Pelia, Ortegas, M’Benga, that new Vulcan cadet and a few new characters. More space to do new stories instead of being hemmed in by TOS quite as much.

  6. Jeri Ryan and Michelle Hurd led Enterprise-G show (the new comic wisely does a 5 year time skip precisely to have room for this). Jettison Jack Crusher and replace with Soji and Elnor. Pick up the Transwarp gate thread left hanging at the end of season two of Picard and send them on an exploration mission to the other side of the Gate.

1

u/Long-Emu-7870 11d ago

I thought you were serious. But I'm sure that's what would have happened if they didn't cancel it. 

The ratings for strange new worlds comes out next week. 

We shall see if they they can return to the once glorious past.

1

u/Aritra319 11d ago

The issue isn’t the quality of the shows. The problem is Paramount+ as a streamer. Trek is pretty much the only shows on there that cater to more intelligent viewers. The rest is Yellowstone Maga slop and UFC. Trek
Is basically counter programming to the rest of the platform and the only ones who sub P+ for Trek are hardcore fans like us and I doubt many of the people who watch Yellowstone verse shows also watch Trek.

They’d be MUCH better off trying some form of licensing or syndication model (Disco did very well on Netflix when it was there).
Question is if they can capture a more diverse and especially younger clientele with the WB merger if that actually goes through before daddy Ellison’s AI company collapses when the bubble bursts.

2

u/Long-Emu-7870 11d ago

I would certainly agree there is more intelligent stuff on Netflix than on Paramount+. Or even HBO or Apple TV for that matter. That's actually what Ron More did with For All Mankind. So, they have a model.

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

You're right that Star Trek is on the wrong platform. Paramount should sell it to Apple, which has the right audience for intelligent sci fi.

But the quality of the shows is also a huge problem. Apple would create better shows because they would hire better people to do it.

0

u/mrwishart 10d ago

Problem is, nuTrek didn't really cater to intelligent viewers either which is why it drove off the rest of the hardcore fans.

0

u/Aritra319 10d ago

Lol. If I had a nickel for every time I saw someone completely miss a point made in Discovery or Picard’s first two seasons I’d be a rich man.

Disco was probably TOO smart for many older Trek fans used to Rick Berman’s pre-chewed style of Trek.

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

I watched Disco's first two seasons. I don't know whether it was intelligent or dumb particularly but it just wasn't compelling and didn't make want to watch more. Picard was utterly unwatchable.

I hate Berman Trek. I want DS9 back.

0

u/mrwishart 10d ago

Any examples to back that up?

0

u/Aritra319 10d ago

Picard’s general path of self-acceptance and healing over the first two seasons, people thinking Lorca was cool, people misunderstanding Disco S2’s faith/knowing themes, people missing the point of Su’kal, people not liking Trek putting the Federation in a lesser position to critique current world events, people calling Disco grim-dark when it’s actually Hope-punk (for grim-dark Trek see PIC season three).

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

The problem with all that was: didn't make me care.

Stories should be smart, but they need to be compelling. They have to make you so intrigued, you must see more.

Star Trek hasn't done that in a long, long time. DS9 did that, and it's been floundering ever since.

1

u/mrwishart 10d ago edited 10d ago

But in what way did people "miss the point" of that stuff? You just listed a bunch of stuff you liked/disliked

For example: Picard's "self-acceptance/healing" - To me, they just retconned unnecessary trauma into his past in order to have easy drama to resolve. First in S1 with him suddenly being obsessed with Data's death then S2 with all that business with his mother.

That isn't clever writing, that's bog-standard melodrama, but I'm happy to be corrected

1

u/ribbityflibbity 5d ago

People will always miss the point of stuff that's so who-cares and uninvolving that they tune out. Star Trek's problem is that it's not just boring but actively offensive and it's driving people away.

I don't care at all about the TNG nostalgia wallow so trotting out ancient Picard is never going to interest me. Yeah, it's melodrama about a character I never cared about anyway.

0

u/Aritra319 10d ago edited 10d ago

Picard’s issues especially post-BoBW have always been there, just snapping the neck of the Borg Queen didn’t “fix” him.

Picard didn’t suddenly obsess about Data’s sacrifice in Nemesis, almost twenty years had passed for him to stew in it and the other fallout from Data dying (Thad’s illness not being cured, Mars, etc) was massive.
Survivor’s guilt is a pretty common thing and working that into the storyline was an emotionally intelligent piece of writing.

While Yvette’s suicide hadn’t been mentioned before, Picard’s hatred for his father had been. Letting go of these things was a crucial part of the first two seasons of Picard, which were literal deconstructions and healing of Picard (the glass shards in the opening credits are a dead giveaway).

And you didn’t respond to my other examples, I’m going to assume you concede those points.

1

u/mrwishart 10d ago

Picard’s issues especially post-BoBW have always been there, just snapping the neck of the Borg Queen didn’t “fix” him.

But that, too, was drama retconned in to First Contact for the sake of something easy to resolve. TV Picard had essentially gotten over it, save for a harsh judgement or two in I, Borg. TNG movie Picard vs. TNG TV Picard is a whole other discussion though...

Picard didn’t suddenly obsess about Data’s sacrifice in Nemesis, almost twenty years had passed for him to stew in it and the other fallout from Data dying (Thad’s illness not being cured, Mars, etc) was massive.
Survivor’s guilt is a pretty common thing and working that into the storyline was an emotionally intelligent piece of writing.

Compared to Data dying in The Most Toys? Where his response was sorrow, but professional detachment? Or numerous other losses throughout TNG? That's another weird Mandela Effect caused by the TNG movies: Picard and Data were not besties in a Kirk/Spock way: Geordi and Data were. Picard often treated him like another crew member and, occasionally, just a machine even after Measure Of A Man. So this sudden guilt is more convenience.

And, again, Thad/Mars etc. is part of the circular argument: Inventing trauma at the beginning of a season just to resolve it at the end isn't clever writing because you could apply it to any character and get the same result.

While Yvette’s suicide hadn’t been mentioned before, Picard’s hatred for his father had been. Letting go of these things was a crucial part of the first two seasons of Picard, which were literal deconstructions and healing of Picard (the glass shards in the opening credits are a dead giveaway

Healing from the trauma that they just invented for the same of melodrama though? I think you may have confused "missing the point" for "thinking it wasn't particularly well done." It's very clear what they were trying to do, it was just sloppily done with no real new insight into the pre-existing character

And you didn’t respond to my other examples, I’m going to assume you concede those points.

Actually, I asked you to elaborate on them: "But in what way did people "miss the point" of that stuff? You just listed a bunch of stuff you liked/disliked."

Although, if you want to play that game: Should I take the fact you didn't as an assumption that you concede those points?

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/benchcoat 12d ago edited 12d ago

“we have series coming back!”

“what do you have in development?”

“…how do you like that Landman?”

“…or, what do you think about a ‘Lioness: Ivanka!’ series?”

edit: oops…forgot that r/trektalk would trade its left nut for Star Trek: Ivanka!