Slashdot Mirror
TrekUnited Reports Mission Successful at Trek Rallies
Lord Prox writes "TrekUnited.com has the scoop on the LA/Paramount, Tel Aviv, and New York rallies. Surprises include a group of donors pledging a resounding $3mil and the appearances of cast and crew members. Reuters and Wired have details on the rallies and I took a few snapshots as well."
c'mon people...
we need a 20 year break from teh Trek.
Okay before things get out of hand let me make a few points on behalf of myself and fellow Star Trek fans.
1 - To BSG fans, while it may be a good show, it's still not Star Trek. It's not set in the familiar setting and universe that Star trek fans like and know.
2 - Why is having only one good sci-fi show on good enough
3 - To all of you who watched the first couple of seasons, it's a gotten a lot better and is hardly the same show. I stopped watching midway though the second, but came back in the fourth and it's much better. If it continues the way it has gone in this past season it should easily pass Voyager in quality and could potentially reach TNG standards
I also watch BSG and the two Stargate shows, but I also like Enterprise, and would like as many options as i can get.
nuff said
Don't get me wrong, Enterprise is an okay show but there are many others out there that are so much better that don't even get to see the light of day. In an era where Battlestar Galactica and Babylon 5 are superior in almost every conceivable way is there really any room left for Star Trek?
TrekUnited campaign speeds up on an energizing Friday
Rallies draw attention on fan efforts / TrekUnited fund passes 50,000$
Posted by: Chris R. - 02.25.05
As fan rallies in Tel Aviv, New York City and Los Angeles to protest the cancellation of Star Trek: Enterprise have come to an end, first reports indicate a "Mission successful!"
On Thursday, Israel-based Star Trek fans met inside Tel Aviv University for an information lecture and Star Trek screening, as a first of several global rallies voicing support for the show. BBC Entertainment reported on the event.
In New York, rally participants had a busy Friday despite the icy temperatures, touring from CBS, NBC, Viacom, Paramount's New York headquarters and FOX station to the Sci Fi Channel office - the logical home for Enterprise, as a "Save Enterprise" funded L.A. times ad stated one week ago. Several members of the group managed to get on the "Today Show". Local media and ABC reported.
Meanwhile in Los Angeles, hundreds of fans gathered at the gates of Paramount studios for the main rally of the day, led by Tim Brazeal, founder of the SaveEnterprise and TrekUnited campaigns. From 8:30 in the morning, the rally did not only draw attention from the bypassing cars on Melrose Avenue, which showed their support by honking and driver's waving. Cast and crew of "Star Trek: Enterprise" present at the day joined the crowd and thanked fans for their help to save the show, among them executive producer Manny Coto (as he had promised during a live chat at TrekUnited the previous week), writers Mike Sussman and Judith and Garfield Reeve-Stevens as well as actors Jolene Blalock ('T'Pol'), Anthony Montgomery ('Mayweather') and Jeffrey Combs ('Shran') and Mike Okuda, Doug Drexler and Michael Westmore from the production team. Special guests Eugene Roddenberry, son of Gene Roddenberry, and Larry Nemecek from Star Trek Communicator also attended the rally.
Major media were present to follow the fan efforts, including ABC, WB, Discovery Channel and local tv and radio stations, interviewing fans and present Trek United staff members. Startrek.com devoted a special feature to "Demonstration Day". In a Reuters news article, Candice McCallie, director of PR, pointed out the creative peak "Star Trek: Enterprise" is experiencing during its 4th season. "We believe Star Trek is worth keeping", chimes in Chris Wales, Chief of Operations, at startrek.com.
The rally dispersed at around 3:30pm local time, with a special Trek United / Save Enterprise party coming up later the evening with Manny Coto, Larry Nemecek, Mike Sussman and others from the Star Trek: Enterprise production crew.
Just an hour later, the TrekUnited fund for sponsoring production of a fifth Enterprise season surpassed 50,000$, with contributions having sped up thanks to the tremendous positive attention for TrekUnited's bold mission as well as a single contribution of 5000$ by a devoted fan.
The earlier surprising revelation that a group of donors had pledged a resounding $3m to TrekUnited certainly helped to increase enthusiasm for the fan campaign and its mission to keep "Star Trek: Enterprise" on the air and Star Trek alive. "As long as we can make a major impact with funds and fan support, I think we have a chance here.", Tim Brazeal told wired.com
And the campaign keeps making an impact. Tomorrow, European Star Trek fans will rally in London, UK. Stay tuned for exclusive information and footage for Saturday's main event, as well as the rallies on Friday.
But I tell you, this outpouring of support is amazing. Say what you will about the quality of the show, or the usage of the money - and I know the flood of comments about what a pitiful waste of capital this is will be starting soon. Hell, I'd like to have $3 mil to blow on [name of pet project] - who doesn't?
But here on Slashdot we love to piss and moan about the state of the entertainment industry and how people ought to vote with their money. I, for one, see this is a perfect example of some devoted fans doing just that. Too bad we didn't get this for Firefly - but we've got a film coming, so...
Bravo, fans!
Is this another Star Trek series? I keep losing track. That's like, what, seventy or so now, right?
I'm just asking for clarification, because it seems like the different sites linked are displaying very different numbers for the amount of capital these protestors have amassed. Wired seemed to think that someone was claiming they'd give $3mil, but had not actually handed it over yet. Reuters said they had $48,000 or so. I'm just wondering whether the $3 million is in the hands of the fans right now or if there's just someone out there claiming to have a few million to spend on Enterprise. I mean, it certainly helps the cause get attention. I'm just wondering whether this money has actually been ponied up or not. Anyone have more details? Is there something I'm not seeing?
I think when you see this level of support for a show like Star Trek it shows it has passed the point of being a mere "TV show" and has become a full-fledged cultural phenomenon like jazz or abstract art or classical music.
I have a friend who is a grant writer. She does work for charties applying to government agencies and private foundations for to get money.
I think there is a good chance of supporting Star Trek through the use of grants from the government and from charitable foundations, the way PBS and NPR do. Museums do this kind of thing all the time, look at the MOMA in New York, that thing isn't funded by selling commercial time. Someone from Star Trek should look into this.
a few snapshots
Please, I'm eating. Oh good, the server is dead...
Not the series, the poor guy's server.
/sniff
http://www.western-alliance.net/lordprox/trek/
What happens to the money?
Theres a good chance they won't raise enough money, and a chance that even if they do the studio won't be interested or they won't find anyone to air it.
If such a thing comes to pass, what happens then?
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big trek fan. I've probably seen every episode of TNG. I at the very least found all of the movies to be entertaining, even if they weren't that great. I actually liked Voyager a lot. But, Enterprise just doesn't feel like trek to me. I admit I haven't watched much of it. But, in my opinion the acting, the atmosphere, it's just not what any of the other trek series were (which is a bad thing). I don't have a link, but I remember reading an article where Gene Roddenberry's son commented that Enterprise didn't live up to the ideals that his father had for trek. Please Enterprise fans, use the money for something better. Do something to make the world a better place. Gene would have wanted it.
More power to the server - we are being slashdotted !!
The mistake here is that these dedicated fans are essentially casting their cash into the coffers of a company who has it out for their TV show. This shouldn't be viewed as a project that requires their donations to make it happen. This should be an investment, something with a potential return on their capital.
I agree with everyone who said that the first couple of seasons sucked, although it had its moments; season three was sometimes pretty cool, definately an improvement. The lack of other good shows on TV (I hate reality TV) kept me watching.
Now that Coto's in charge, season four kicks ass! Too bad so many people already wrote the show off. I just saw an episide that explains beautifully why Klingons looked different in the original series, and even fits in with Worf's comment in the DS9 "tribbles" episode ("We don't talk about it"). That's the kind of thing they should have done from the get-go, rather than screwing around with that "tempral cold-war" crap.
Here's hoping the show can continue!
We apologize for the inconvenience.
The thing is, these days, most young people see 'Star Trek' as a sort of nerdy, antisocial thing that only geeks and non-popular social outcasts would watch.
"These days"? I must have missed something - at what point in time was watching Star Trek up there with "Freinds" or "Seinfeld"?
I am a 'Trek fan, but I have to agree with the parent's sentiment (except for the comment on "giving away software for free"). There are much better uses for $32M US.
As long as we keep trying to maintain the old franchises, there is no incentive for new material.
nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
I don't know... there's a market for quality shows. It's just not very big anymore.
Thing is, networks doesn't fund shows because of the desire of making a quality product (most of the time, at least). They want them to make money. That's why you see so many teen-soap-operas and reality shows: they have a limited life, but they milk every cent out of them in the meantime. When the cash cow is dead, they just raise a new one. Quality shows do have it's place and audience, it's just not big enough anymore.
It's a pitty. To be honest, i never cared much about Star Trek, but i hated to see Firefly go - similar deal. I just got hooked on BSG, and like it a lot aswell; The shield is another show (outside sci-fi) that i love unconditionally. I hate to never know if they're gonna be cancelled out of the blue someday. Hell, it happened to Family Guy.
Enterprise has the same problem that Firefly had. For some reason, they want to run directly against Stargate. That simply will not work. If Stargate was new, or sucked, then maybe they would have a chance, but neigther of these are the case. Just becasue you cans say "Sci-Friday" doesn't mean that every Sci-Fi show must run on Friday. I loved Firefly. It was a great show, that broke new ground. It tried something new, and it worked. Unfortuanatly, I didn't get to see it until it came out on DVD. I certainly wasn't going to miss a show that I KNOW I like, and have been watching for several years, in the hopes that maybe this new show might also be good. If it would have run on Tuesday or Saturday, I would have been a faithful view.
What this tells me is that people are unwilling to vote with their money except for, in general, tripe. People will not provide material or spiritual support to change the status quo of the entertainment industry, but will provide both in great quantity to preserve the fact that status quo contains somewhere the name "Star Trek"-- though absolutely no preference whatsoever is expressed as to what is done with that name. We're doomed.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
1. DS9 > TOS > TNG > VOY > ENTs3 > ENTs1 > ENTs2
2. ENTs4 > DS9
3. ENTs4 =~ BSGs1
I just watched the last episode today, and I'm loving it. All 15 episodes are great.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I would be all for saving Enterprise if it wasn't for the fact that every episode is a propaganda machine for the Iraq war. Ever since 911 most of the episodes have something that sounds like it came off the news channel, "We must stop terrorism", "A stable empire is good for us", "our enemies don't want your people to have peace, the only way to stop them is too stand up to them"..etc..etc
There is no creativity to this, it is simply hearing whats on the news and putting it in a Star Trek Universe. If they go back to exploring then it might be worth saving.
yea, you're right. TOS had humor (Mudd, Tribbles, Gary Seven), surprises(Son worshippers not Sun worshippers, running gags (I a dr, not a ...; He's dead, Jim.), social commentary(black/white guy), better music to support the action. TNG was awful in the first season, but got much better, DS9 and Voyager had most of the attributes of TOS, but Enterprise, even though it *has* gotten better, still lacks hugh parts of the formula. They are out saving the universe when they should be making mistakes, going oh-wow!, discovering strange new worlds etc.
Nonsense. Good Show does not equal Ratings. The networks, UPN included, do not care about quality. They care about money, which means they care about ad revenue, which means they care about large numbers of people watching their network. Many Hollywood careers have been built on the reliability of Americans to devour cheap, mass-produced, pandering junk. Hell, promising shows are scheduled for timeslots after popular, established shows because executives know that viewers will be too lazy to change the channel! And that strategy works! Enterprise didn't fail because it was a bad show. It failed because it sure as hell doesn't belong on UPN. Just take a look at the front page of the UPN website! If that Star Trek Enterprise picture on the sidebar hadn't been there, would you have ever turned on UPN to catch the latest sci-fi series? Trek either belongs on Sci-Fi channel, or it belongs in syndication. Anything else, and nobody will continue to watch it, no matter how much money the fans pump into it.
I'm the last person to criticize why someone would want to tell someone what to watch, or how they spend their time or money relative to it. In general, I question the value these days of viewer campaigns (the Internet has increased their frequency, which, in turn, has diluted their value).
In the case of "Enterprise," I have to wonder. People are talking about funding an additional season on a network, in a serious fashion. And I do believe it is only a matter of time before a series is, at least in a significant part, funded by fans. I hope it is a quality gem that is given a truly raw deal by a major network.
However, I don't think "Enterprise" is it. It was given numerous renewals on the strength of shaky ratings. It's storytelling and acting are relatively weak. It has had some strong moments, but overall, I always found it lacking.
It's main redeeming quality has been that it is "Star Trek." Even that has almost been a detriment. When it tries to close a continuity loop with the other series, it does so with too much of a wink, and too much hype. It never felt much like "Star Trek," from the types of stories to the sets and costumes.
But it is this "Star Trek" connection that probably has given this campaign series traction. There is likely a noteworthy percentage of people who are rallying, raising funds, etc, for this simply so that Star Trek stays on the air, not "Enterprise." To them I say, "is this the Trek you really want to put your money into?"
Suppose it works. There might be one more season. But, unless you can truly identify and resolve the reasons for the poor ratings, you'll either have delayed the cancellation, or have to pass the hat one more time.
The only upside is that you'll prove the viability of a fan-supported show. And, one day, there will be a not-even-one-season wonder that benefits from fans funding the balance of a season/a second season. With luck, this provides the show a better audience, both by the simple fact it is still on, as well as because it gets a lot of publicity by being fan funded. A third season may become self-sustaining, perhaps even providing some dividend to the fan investors.
So to the people who want to fund "Enterprise" only to keep "Star Trek" on the air, I ask that you save your money, and get behind a new Trek show (already rumored to be in development (think 2006 or 2007)), or one of the new SciFi shows that demonstrates quality worthy of your devotion.
Just today I finally got around to watching that fanfilm.
I can't help but think that the dudes who put together "Starship Exeter" could probably get a lot more bang for the buck with that $3 million that anything Paramount could ever come up with.
Sure, the acting was obviously amature. Those guys are no professional actors. Strangely enough, it wasn't really that much worse than the average Shatneresque episode, and you had to give them credit for putting their heart and soul into those 35 minutes. And it showed.
And, heck, the audio and the video FX was far above than any computer-generated eye candy pablum that a few million bucks would buy you these days.
I say - if they can't raise enough cash to save the show, give whatever they got to the Starship Exeter dudes. They'll put it to good use.
Yeah. Fucking great.
Star Trek doesn't need great acting just less time travel, space Nazis, sucky theme tunes, and transporter cock-ups. Shatner. I rest my case.
Want to save Star Trek? Call JMS.
He calls a friend on the mobile communicator and says, "I have just had the worst nightmare in which I lived a version of the ancient history taught at Star Fleet Academy. The entire universe was screwed up. Hand-held phasers are called 'phase pistols', and on-board phasers are called 'phase cannons'. Further, some incompetent moron was serving as Captain. Also, one of the engineers spoke Ebonics, which was eradicated from earth centuries ago. Also, there was this Vulcan with big breasts, and she tried to act sexy. Ugh. It just did not work. Bit breasts with a boyish haircut but without emotions just does not make "sexy". She looked horribly repulsive. It scared the living daylights out of me."
The voice out of the communicator says, "Don't worry. It was just a nightmare. Everyone knows that Vulcans do not have big breasts. [laughter] Go back to bed, James."
Your criticisms essentially boil down to "WAAAAH, IT WAS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I'M USED TO!"
What was wrong with "phase pistols/cannons?" What would make you assume that "phaser" was not a contraction? "Phase" is not a transitive verb. You can't phase something.
Ebonics? What? Trip is from Florida and he has a slight Southern accent. If someone had an urban African-American accent, why would that be surprising? This show takes place not too far in the future after the events depicted in First Contact, and that wasn't too different from modern America.
T'Pol is a complicated character who happens to be hot. She is anything BUT a typical emotionless Vulcan.
Stop whining and pay attention to the content. Not everything in the Star Trek universe is going to be just like TNG or TOS, and you shouldn't want it to be or expect it to be.
Personally, I'd like to see another show focus on the civilian part of the Trek universe. Maybe something similar to Firefly.
+++ATH0
This is pretty insane on the part of the trekkers. I mean, they are DONATING money to produce a COMMERCIAL PROGRAM! The program gets produced, shown on tv crammed full of commercials and the studio gets to bank all that profit from the distribution.
Pay for production, get zero points in the profit. What a great investment!
You! Have you ever kissed a girl? I didn't think so...
At least have some balls... Posting AC and making fun of Trekkies is pathetic.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
don't watch it dumbass, and let those of us who want to, to continue to watch.
What about those of us who want to watch it, but only if it doesn't suck? We're getting screwed!
You can't take the sky from me...
Money that is spent another tired Star Trek crapfest could be getting spent on a new show.
It's dead, Jim.
The cake is a pie
I'll see your chain of US Sci-fi and raise you British Sci-fi:
Doctor Who > Blake's 7 > Red Dwarf > all the takes-itself-too-seriously-American crap
(Am actually a fan of the TITSAC so don't burn me too badly. Also haven't seen the new Doctor Who yet, which may suck relative to Tom Baker, so will have to wait and see.)
I feel sorry for the actors who signed aborad Enterprise. I'm sure they were expecting a nice 7-year ride and some chances to do some challenging acting once in a while. Instead, they got Breman and Braga'd into a 4 year soap-opera.
If you take a look at the history of the Star Trek franchise, the show's quality started out remarkably good (considering it was a campy 1960's wagon train in space). They got a good diverse set of writers to write about topics of the day and tried to both produce fluffy entertainment AND slip a few social messages through the censors.
When TNG was created, Gene Roddenberry had the chance to tell the kinds of stories he wanted to tell back in the 60's, but without the overwhelming concerns of money and the delicate ears of the country. The success of the original show in syndication(!) and the movies gave him all the clout he needed, and so he made a show that revived ST and fired it up for years to come.
Expanding the franchise, he came up with the ideas for DS9 and Andromeda. DS9 would be a story about the invasion and corruption of the Federation, possibly culminating in its fall. The show that is now Andromeda was originally to have been the story of what happened after the fall of the Federation.
All well and good. Unfortunatly, he had Beavis and Butthead -- errr... Breman and Braga as assistants from TNG days. As his health started to decline, he was forced to hand over more and more of the day-to-day operations of the show to them. When the network balked at the idea of the Federation collapsing, they rethought the whole dominion wars aspect of DS9 and came up with Voyager as a way to explore a galaxy without the Federation.
By that time, B&B had taken the helm and thrown the idea of social commentary out the window. They believed in old-schoold demographics. Ratings slipping? Ok, Hire 7 of 9 and put her in a illogically tight jumpsuit.
Just as DS9 was supposed to be about a seedy and corrupt corner of the Federation, and Voyager was supposed to be a dark Federation-less corner of the universe, Enterprise now took on the challenge of being the 'Really-Dark-This-Time' Trek. Pre-Federation, we wouldn't have to worry about Prime Directives, or about fleets of starships showing up to save them. Transporters were supposed to be flaky and unreliable. Phasers were supposed to be little more than laser guns. Communication would be limited to launched probes.
Instead, we got a captain who (through no fault of the actor!) has a split personality -- swinging back and forth between concerned pacifist and vengeful hitman. We got a hot vulcan chick who could have developed into a really interesting character -- if she were allowed to do more than change uniforms every season. And we get to encounter most of the familiar alien races which act much the way they acted towards us in the future... even though it should have been first contact.
I'll say what I said with Voyager. If Paramont wants to save the franchise, they must fire Breman and Braga and hire people who care about the show, not just the ratings. I can't remember which one (does it matter?) but one of them actually bragged about having never seen the original series.
Spoiler warning.
Better? You call this better? Because I live in a TV-backwater, I just got to see the last episode of season three, which I had been led to believe was one of the good ones. What I got was a cliff hanger with time travel and Nazis. Please. All we're missing now is that they introduce a little kid...
I'm sorry, they screwed around with the background story too much in the first two episodes for me to be interested. So far, it is more fun to watch Buffy reruns. No Nazis, no time travel, and when they introduced a little kid, it wasn't a little kid at all.
2. They get some decent writers. Far too much of Trek in the past few years has been about moralising rather than just telling a good story. I definitely vote for Michael J Straczynski doing some of the writing for the shows.
3. They stop dicking about with the movies. Stop doing Trek movies "for the masses", keep them within the Roddenberry guidelines and for the fans. For example, I do not want to see our favourite bald captain spending 15 years or so following the Prime Directive only to tear around the surface of a planet like a lunatic in a sand buggy (as in "Nemesis")! Definitely not in Picard's character...
4. Go forward rather than back. Why wasn't Enterprise just set after Voyager rather than before TOS? Prequels always introduce plot discrepancies which are going to be picked up by a fan-base as involved as Trek fans are. This seemed the ultimate stupidity with "Enterprise", IMHO.
5. Look at entertaining the fans first, then worry about the money-making. If the fans like it, they'll by the merchandise and go to the conventions.
I'm a middle-aged geek who's followed the shows since childhood - TNG was great, DS9 was good, Voyager had about half-a-season's worth of good episodes, Enterprise was rubbish. Now I've about given up on Trek completely and won't be coming back until I feel I am being entertained rather than just ripped off by Paramount for as much money as possible.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Why relative to Tom Baker? Was he your favorite Doctor? Personally, I preferred Jon Pertwee, but I think I would rank Tom 2nd in the pantheon of Doctors Who. (Peter Davison would come a close 3rd.)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
If people are willing to pay for the show, I wonder why the studios don't just release the show a la carte over the net or something? Perhaps shows that have a niche with a strong interest should ditch the advertisement model and just charge per show, or sell subscriptions to the series...
Yes. A much better use would be to design a cyborg assassin with an Austrian accent and send it back in time to kill Rick Berman before he became involved in Star Trek TNG.