Slashdot Mirror


Could TNG Stunt Casting Save 'Enterprise'?

Tycoon Guy writes "It seems Star Trek: Enterprise isn't about to go down without a fight. TrekToday is reporting that Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis will guest-star on the season finale of Star Trek: Enterprise, to reprise their Next Generation roles of William T. Riker and Deanna Troi. Hello stunt casting! The news has been confirmed on Sirtis' official fan site."

16 of 785 comments (clear)

  1. Stick a fork in it please... by TempusMagus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone really care? I'm sorry but with Battlestar Galactica reinventing the science fiction genre in the same fashion the Sopranos did to the gangster genre - it's hard to watch anything Trek related. It's the visual equivalent of listening to Cyndi Lauper records from the '80s - you can't believe people ever liked the stuff when you look at it with some hindsight.

    Plus, IMHO, most science fiction is really science-themed fantasy. I enjoy the Stargate shows most times (with all the light beings and whatnots) but I don't really count it is SciFiction. Trek was true SCIFI but after years and years of prostituting its original ideas for meagre ratings - there is nothing but a shell. I mean how many Borg related episodes did they drag out for sweeps? It's like gay marriage and abortion to republicans - whenever they wanted to get attention they would drag out the Borg! I'm sure the last Enterprise episode will feature a half-vulcan/half-borg Picard with large breasts.

    --
    -_-
    1. Re:Stick a fork in it please... by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Does anyone really care? I'm sorry but with Battlestar Galactica reinventing the science fiction genre in the same fashion the Sopranos did to the gangster genre - it's hard to watch anything Trek related. It's the visual equivalent of listening to Cyndi Lauper records from the '80s - you can't believe people ever liked the stuff when you look at it with some hindsight.

      First, let me say, I thoroughly enjoy Battlestar Galactica. But I take offense to the idea that just because BSG discovered that handheld style camera movements makes for a more dramatic show makes it worthy of being presented as "reinventing" science fiction. Take away the handheld camera style and you're still left with your traditional sci-fi drama. BSG is just lucky in that it doesn't have to respect canon and can kill off or change characters however it sees fit.

      So give Trek a break, it's doing a lot better this season story-wise with Manny Coto, and if there is a season 5 I'm sure we can expect a whole lot from him.

      --
      All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
    2. Re:Stick a fork in it please... by realdpk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      BSG doesn't shove as much bullshit ("Let's transport the deflector dish into holodeck 3 and reverse its tachyon pulse to the 4th power!") into its lines as TNG, which I find refreshing.

    3. Re:Stick a fork in it please... by Leo+McGarry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Can't they get the terms right. It should be Battle Stations or Red Alert--not Action Alert.

      Actually, they say "action stations," not "action alert." "Action stations" is correct military jargon ...for the Royal Navy. They also say "set condition one," which is correct jargon for the US Navy.

      The milieu of the new "Galactica" is a blend of US Navy, Royal Navy, US Marines and a few of the less silly aspects of the old, 1970s show. For instance, during the series pilot if you listen carefully you can hear a voice on the 1MC say, "Do not radiate or rotate antennas while personnel are aloft," which is exactly what you'd hear aboard a ship in the US Navy. I mean, word for word. On the other hand, the order of battle for the officers goes lieutenant, captain, colonel, commander, which is not similar to any existing military force structure. It's a direct lift from the old show's character names: Commander Adama, Colonel Tigh, Captain Apollo, Lieutenant Starbuck.

      There's no great technical advances in the show as far as the character's technology.

      Correct. This is by conscious design. The show was written from the start to be a very low-tech science-fiction show. The in-band story behind that is that cylons were able to infiltrate and corrupt any computer system they encountered, so the Colonials got rid of almost all of their automation. After decades of peace, the Colonials reinstated their automation, and it was because of this automation that the cylons were able to so overwhelmingly defeat the Colonials with their surprise attack.

      BG has no such exscuse besides the laziness of the wanna-be writer.

      It's not laziness. It's much, much harder to write a sensible, internally consistent story from realistic premises than it is to just make up technobabble every week. When he sat down to write "Galactica," Moore asked, "What if this happened to us?" In doing so, he set a nearly impossible task for himself: to tell a story set in a distant solar system about spaceships and robots in a way that would be not merely alien-of-the-week science fiction but character-driven high drama.

      Now, you may not like that sort of thing. But it seems like, from looking at things like TV ratings over the past few years, that most people do. Shows like "The West Wing," "NYPD Blue" and "Lost" have been both critically lauded and phenomenally successful. "Galactica" is in the same class.

      If you're looking for space aliens and shoot-em-ups and jargon and gadgets, "Galactica" probably isn't the show for you. Doesn't mean it's bad; quite the contrary. In my opinion, with the lackluster performance of "The West Wing" this year and the fact that "Lost" isn't paying off quite like I think it should, I think "Battlestar Galactica" is the best scripted drama show on US television right now. Not just among genre shows, but among all shows.

      But if you don't like those kinds of shows, then you're not gonna be happy with "Galactica." That's not because it's trying to be genre science fiction and failing. It's because it's trying to be character drama that happens to be set in outer space ... and it's succeeding.

  2. Oh, no more... by dswensen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much as I wouldn't mind seeing Frakes and Sirtis in action again, it would only be because for nostalgia's sake. When your show becomes characterized by this kind of hysterical desperation, it's a pretty good sign you should just let it die.

    TNG and DS9 were at the top of their repective games in their later seasons -- they just got better and better, IMHO. Neither shows needed this kind of nonsense to shore them up for another handful of weary episodes. If Enterprise doesn't have enough momentum to propel it after all this time, then it's just plain out of gas, and stunt casting is not going to save it.

    Especially when I, as a not-so-fanatical Star Trek watcher, can probably tell you the plot of this episode right now. Picard and Troi, on board the Titan on a diplomatic mission to Head-Ridge VII, run into a subspace anomaly and are transported back in time, and must deal with the cultural and technological gaps while...zzz...

    I'd advise letting Enterprise, and Trek, rest in peace for another few years while it still has some dignity, but unfortunately that moment is already long past (for me, the last of TNG's dignity departed with the introduction of Retarded Data in Nemesis). I guess now the best we can hope for is that these sorts of decisions don't bury the franchise altogether.

    1. Re:Oh, no more... by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Well DS9 did it too. They brought in Worf as a regular character in order to make it more attractive the TNG fans

      Two key differences. First, he was, as you note, a regular character. It wasn't just a guest appearance.

      Second, it made sense in terms of the story. One of the things DS9 did much better than both earlier and later ST series is flesh out other races (yes, other ST series had important aliens, but they were isolated...only DS9 made it so the whole alien race was important--compare, for example, the Ferengi on DS9 and TNG). The Klingons were an important part of the ongoing story. Even if there had been no Worf from TNG, it would have made sense for them to invent the character for DS9.

  3. Gee... that'll save 'em by popo · · Score: 4, Insightful


    So... their strategy to save a show which suffers from incredibly poor casting, is to bring two of the previous generation's casting gaffes.

    I can't think of two more expendible characters from TNG (After wesley crusher of course) than Riker and Troi.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:Gee... that'll save 'em by hammerofhope · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Troi maybe, but Riker? Come on, the man is a legend.

  4. OK, give the show a chance by runenfool · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Despite the fact that this is probably the last season being abandoned on a Friday night ... I think Enterprise is finally hitting its groove. I know everyone has their opinion, but while it isn't comparable to the very best of DS9 or even TNG, its certainly miles ahead of Voyager in terms of quality. I don't think its the casting that's necessarily weak - but probably more the characters. Still, TNG didn't have characters as good as TOS ... and DS9 was weaker than TNG until they brought Worf aboard. It took Avery Brooks until probably Season 3 or 4 to really start getting into Sisko ... he wasn't like Patrick Stewart who had a great screen presence almost from the beginning (sorry, it took me a while to get used to the bald captain :) ). Voyager never .. NEVER had good characters .. at least the new series has Hoshi :) And really there isn't anyone groan inducing like Neelix (which is strange - because the doctor kind of reminds me of him - just not annoying) or Nog from DS9 or Wesley (sorry Wil .. still think *you're* cool) from TNG.

    Seriously ... go back and watch enterprise lately .. I think they are doing a great job. Not as good as it could be, and certainly not as "cool" (now the in thing is to be anti Star Trek) as Battlestar (now that we decided not to kill anyone for a female Starbuck and human cylons) or Stargate (but not Atlantis, because thats NOT cool in the eyes of the SF culture police) ... but they are making it entertaining at least ...

    1. Re:OK, give the show a chance by TexVex · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ... I think Enterprise is finally hitting its groove
      I think Enterprise got stuck back in its groove of crappy writing. Take the last episode, for example. Here it is in a nutshell: "humans are special, they are different than ALL OTHER RACES, they are more compassionate and willing to take risks, so they should eventually be First Contacted by some superadvanced aliens."

      Excuse me while I go vomit. It's thinly disguised xenophobia and megalomania. That, and these fucking aliens apparently can't have a private conversation without borrowing a couple ephemerals' bodies. Nonsensical crap like that is a big turnoff to me, even though I'm sure the vast majority of the show's audience either didn't catch it or doesn't care.

      Now, Galactica paints people as the imperfect beings we really are, and pits us up against one motherfucker of an enemy. Technically, and artistically, the show is great. Very high quality. Unfortunately, I'm not too fond if it because it's just so dark.

      I do like my entertainment to be positive, happy-endings and all that. With Trek and Galactica, however, the choice is between saccharine and vinegar. Bah, they both leave a bad taste in my mouth.
      --
      Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
  5. well duh.. by raehl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The good casting decisions have agents who won't let them on Enterprise.

  6. Re:nah.... by waynetv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Time travel was used to good effect in Babylon 5. They even had part of the time travel arc in the 1st season and revisited it, in the other timeframe, in the 3rd(?) season.

    That single instance of time travel was an essential element to the entire mythology of Babylon 5. StarTrek, of course, uses it as a cheap plot gimic.

  7. Re:Oh Dear God by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have to disagree with that.
    I'm not a Star Trek fan nor have I seen all of the movies.
    I don't know all of the character names in any of the shows. In fact I hardly can recall the names of the main characters.

    However, out of all of the TV shows that I have given a shot, including the other Star Trek series when they ran, I really enjoy Enterprise.
    It is one of two shows that I try to watch every week and would hate to see it die off.
    Out of all the crap that they try to shovel down our throats on national television, Star Trek is most certainly a relief from it.


    If you look at the bolded text - this is why the show is tanking - Non - fans are starting to dig it, and the fans were told to sit down and shut up.

    That's why the neilsen ratings are teh crap, and they have to jump the great white every fifteen minutes in the show.

    Had they not gone with the stupid premise of being a prequel, and outstanding cast could of done Oh so much, unfortunately, they were saddled with berman and Braga - the "ren and stimpy" of the star trek world.

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
  8. Depends... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think that the number one thing they need to do right now for Enterprise is to 'cat script | grep temporal' For every word about time travel that shows up, you get to beat the writers with a 2x4. They abused time and time travel so horribly it's beyond reason. The Voyager two-part 'year of hell' was hard to believe, but Enterprise made it look downright quaint.

    Okay, an occasional foray into time travel is cool. An entire season based on a 'temporal cold war' it is a sign that the idea factory has burnt to the ground.

    Just my $.02...

  9. No. by istewart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've given the show multiple chances so far.

    I have to admit that I was against the idea of a prequel to start with. It just seemed like the Berman/Braga team saw that George Lucas made a financial (if not artistic) success of the idea and therefore decided it was worth copying. I watched the pilot anyway, but gave up about halfway through. Now, Trek pilots are classically weak, but this one was just boring. Like Voyager on Sominex.

    So I waited a while. I still didn't like the whole prequel idea, didn't like the fact that the tech seemed to be more advanced than the first TOS pilot, and wasn't that impressed by the cheesy technological substitutions for stuff from chronologically subsequent eras of Trek like "polarized hull plating" and "protein resequencers." (Now of course the obvious reason is that "The Cage" was 1966 and "Broken Bow" was 2001, but how do they go from "phase pistols" to "laser pistols" back to "phasers?" Why does the Romulan ship look like it belongs in the 24th century with the similarly-styled D'Deridex rather than the 22nd? But I digress.)

    So when an anticipated "event" episode that all the reviewers said was good came up, I tuned in. I did this with the Borg episode. How cute, they managed to work one of the the most recognizable Trek villains in and made all sorts of in-jokey references while leaving the principal cast in the dark as to what they had just encountered! I did this again with the first Xindi episode, when half of Florida got taken out. The terrorist metaphor and somber mood just seemed forced to me, like they were groping for something to write into the script.

    I did this again for the last Xindi episode. That was pretty neat, even though Archer's action-hero stint left me cold. The Death Star ripoff was kinda cool, and seeing the CGI P-51s was neat even though I knew the twist was coming, but the alien Nazi thing was just blah. I didn't really care how that turned out, fearing similar convolution to the concealment of the Borg and the intro of the Xindi. Since then I've tuned in once more, to the Augment episodes with Brent Spiner. He was kinda cool (my mom even walked into the room and exclaimed, "It's Data!") but the actors playing the Augments (who had to carry much of the story) kinda sucked. It was partly what they had to work with. The most memorable thing, to me, was that it was the first time I had heard the word "bitch" in what was ostensibly a Star Trek episode. Ooh, edgy.

    That being said, I have to respect Manny Coto for tying in old plot elements. It looks like the next hyped "event" episode will be the Mirror Universe one, and I may tune in for the "ooh-ahh" of a CGI battle damaged Constitution-class. But the TrekToday preview I saw made a point of noting how much more aggressive and backstabbing the mirror Archer would be. Big whoop. Another problem I've had with the show is that Scott Bakula seems to have lost his acting talent since "Quantum Leap." All the Archer performances I've seen come off as wooden, and I have no reason to believe this won't be the same.

    Another point in Enterprise's favor is the awesome special effects that trump just about anything else in Trek, but SFX do not a show make. Without characters to fly all them nifty ships in a convincing manner, it ain't worth much. A lot of people have cited the addition of Worf to DS9 as something similar to the Enterprise gimmick castings, but think about what they did with Worf on DS9. He got married, got captured and thrown in a POW camp, met Martok and joined his House, watched his wife die, and at the end of it all wound up a diplomat instead of a warrior. Tell me, is Arik Soong gonna be back, ever? Are Riker and Troi going to be stranded in the 22nd century and join the NX-01 crew, and thus explore new situations we haven't seen their characters in before? Hell, is any of this gonna happen with the already-established Enterprise characters as a result of these castings? Somehow, I doubt it.

    This comment is already way too long, but I'm also gonna h

  10. Stargate: progressive discovery by coyote-san · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While it has its flaws, I would say Stargate is one of the hardest science fiction shows in history.

    The reason why is because it's progressive. If you exclude the introductory and wrap-up episodes common in more recent series, you could swap the first and last episode of ST:TNG. ST:TOS. Quantum Leap (other than Sam regaining his memory). Seven Days. And on and on and on. It's all fantasy - the actors have a magic box or two and roam the universe or timeline without really changing anything.

    Stargate is one of the few shows that shows progression. The Tori'i were clueless in the first few episodes (after Teal'c joined them). But their hard work introduced them to the Toik'ra, gave them naquida generators, introduced us to the Asgard, bootstrapped the development of our own fighters, allowed us to run the Prometheus, got us advanced engines from a grateful Asgard, and on and on and on.

    Have they had missteps? Sure. Are they on the verge of having so many goodies that they run the risk of having the rabid viewer ask "why didn't they use the gozmotron from the 3rd season?" In fact they've turned that to their advantage - after a few seasons those goodies are reintroduced in a natural manner. The "safe" bullets are used for training. The virtual reality pods are used for training and planning.

    Sometimes the science is hokey, but you have a very real sense that they're trying to figure things out and often get it wrong. But they keep at it until they succeed.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken