Slashdot Mirror


Paramount Says Enterprise Cancellation Is Final

Kethinov writes "The Save Enterprise campaigns appear to have been for naught. Paramount has declared that they will not be accepting any amount of money from fans to continue to produce Star Trek Enterprise. With the decision final, Star Trek Enterprise will be the first Star Trek show since the original series not to run a full seven seasons." From the letter: "Paramount Network Television and the producers of Star Trek: Enterprise are very flattered and impressed by the fans' passionate outpouring of attention for the show and their efforts to raise funds to continue the show's production." Commentary also available from TrekToday.

35 of 583 comments (clear)

  1. Just like TOS by Kethinov · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Enterprise never had a chance to grow. The first two seasons of Ent were decent, but still a bit mediocre. The third season was a nice ride, but not the show we really wanted out of the prequel. Manny Coto's 4th season is EXACTLY what the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd seasons should have been, but too little too late. I love the show, always will, but TV politics have ruined many a good show. Look at the original Star Trek, or look at Farscape...

    In their place, reality TV dominates. Why watch intelligent TV when we can have Growing Up Gotti?

    --
    You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    1. Re:Just like TOS by bryanp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      B5 isn't really a good example. B5 ran it's full story arc. The sequel series was cancelled, but it really wasn't very good.

      Firefly ... now there's a great show struck down before it could get going. As much as I'm enjoying Battlestar Galactica I'd trade it for a new Firefly tv series in a heartbeat.

      --
      "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
    2. Re:Just like TOS by TexVex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Enterprise should not have needed a chance to grow.

      After TOS, TNG, DS9, and Voyager, Enterprise should have come sprinting out of the gate. It didn't. Blame those who did the writing and producing for the first two seasons for giving the show a gimp leg and dooming it right from the start. Its potential audience tuned out. And, once that happens, there's no saving it. Those people no longer care, and you're not going to recapture their attention.

      --
      Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
    3. Re:Just like TOS by Abalamahalamatandra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the case of Firefly, I can tell you why.

      First off, Fox put it in a cruddy timeslot on a cruddy day - Friday night.

      They didn't advertise it worth a crap.

      They showed it out of order.

      They preempted it CONSTANTLY so that it got to the point that, unless you had a really good guide, you didn't even know if it was going to be on or not.

      Basically, just about everything a network can do to not encourage a following, they did.

    4. Re:Just like TOS by Illserve · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Never had a chance to grow through 4 seasons?

      As a Firefly fan, I'd like to be the first to tell you to shut your goddamned piehole.

    5. Re:Just like TOS by larkost · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with you on FireFly, we can just hope that the move that is due out in September (Serenity) will re-ignite the TV series. But the fundamental flaw in FireFly was that the dialog an plots were too thoughtful. There is a chance that the darkness of Battlestar Galactica will allow the networks to give it a second chance though.

    6. Re:Just like TOS by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      B5 isn't really a good example. B5 ran it's full story arc.

      B5 got futzed about by the uncertainty over the fifth season; consequently, the intended end of the arc was moved to series four, and when series 5 got the go-ahead, it was missing the main plot that drove the whole series.

      I found it inconsequential and disappointing. Of course, some would argue that the replacement of Michael O'Hare with Bruce Boxleitner was also a major kink in the story arc. Although some criticised O'Hare's acting, it was at least as good as Boxleitner's and his style was way more appropriate (pseudo-gravitas versus Boxleitner's regular-guy character acting). Apparently, Boxleitner was more of a "name" than O'Hare; well, maybe in the US, but I'd never heard of him before that.

      Funny how B5 exhibited some of the worst aspects of sci-fantasy (ropey acting and characterisation- e.g. Marcus and various second-league characters-, messing stuff around, cliched sets) as well as the best (genuinely planned long story arc, good characterisation and acting- e.g. London and G'Kar).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    7. Re:Just like TOS by Etherwalk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > After TOS, TNG, DS9, and Voyager,

      *coughs pointedly*

      Actually, Not to go into the long history, but I've always thought Voyager was largely to blame for the downfall of the franchise. No, no, let me explain (briefly):

      TNG - great, largely episodic, we got used to 2-parters, though.

      DS9 - great, took a while to really get on its feet. It was competing with B5, which showed us that Yes, Story arcs longer than two episodes can work in sci-fi. It also gained its own momentum, shifting away from a purely episodic series into an ongoing bit of war. The war was the beginning of the end- they did it well enough, but it was responsible for trek getting away from being about ideas, and getting towards being about shooting the funny sci-fi weapons. When Voyager rolled around, this mentality had invaded the minds of the writers, and consistency had gone completely out the window.

      Voyager really showed a lack of artistic understanding. They had one or two good actors, and I'll admit that for some of them I don't know if its the actor or the character that was bad- but for the most part, it lacked quality. The show got away from its core demographic and wound up with a much more transitory audience. So when Enterprise came along and actually had some decent writing again, much of the franchise audience was gone, and it had to start from scratch.

      The most glaring example of artistic failure in Voy is, of course, the borg. There are others, but the power of the borg as an evil was in their evil, not in their weapons. When the ratings drooped, Voyager brought out the borg. It effectively transformed them from an unknowable menace that was so different from humanity that it was practically pure evil, to a bunch of pansy-ass default bad guys that drove around in blocks and spheres.

    8. Re:Just like TOS by R.Caley · · Score: 4, Insightful
      [...] a bunch of pansy-ass default bad guys that drove around in blocks and spheres.

      Bad girl you mean. The give away that they had lost all clues was the queen. That personalised the borg. Originally the borg weren't a military/imperial force, they were something more like a disease. They couldn't be fought just by sending in more and more powerful ships, and they couldn't be negotiated with. That was a real threat.

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    9. Re:Just like TOS by TrentC · · Score: 4, Informative

      B5 got futzed about by the uncertainty over the fifth season; consequently, the intended end of the arc was moved to series four, and when series 5 got the go-ahead, it was missing the main plot that drove the whole series.

      No, that's not what happened.

      All that happened at the end of S4 was that the end of the Earth Civil War was wrapped up at the end of season four -- it was intended to finish early on in S5 -- and the final episode, "Sleeping in Light", was filmed at the end of S4. (It takes place several years after the events of S4 and S5, so isn't really out of place at the end of either season.)

      When B5 got renewed, they replaced "Sleeping in Light" with "The Deconstruction of Falling Stars" (filmed first thig in S5) and showed SiL at the end of S5 -- which is why it's the only episode in that season that has Ivanova in it.

      The Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5 has numerous posts from JMS about the show, written at the time it was happening (I was a regular reader at the time).

      Jay (=

  2. Funeral Plans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    There should be plenty of room for all 3 fans in my parent's basement

  3. Oh no No *NO*! by Skyshadow · · Score: 4, Funny
    Jesus, this is horrible news. Seriously, how could something like this happen?

    I mean, what could the network possibly be thinking? Don't they understand that they're cancelling the most original, innovative and entertaining Sci Fi show of this generation? How can they cancel a show with such a devoted following? How can they turn their backs on well-developed characters with their flaws and nuances? What about the great staging and the inspired writing? How can they ignore such incredible potential?

    What about the tremendous buzz behind the show? What about the devoted legions of fans who are careful to never miss an episode? The ratings on this have to be through the roof -- everyone I know watches it religiously! Christ, I know people who went out and got TiVO just so they could start going out on Friday nights again without chancing setting their cheap VCRs wrong and missing it!

    I mean, I'm upset, I'm angry and most of all I'm just plain astonished. I just can't get my head around this. I mean really, it just doesn't compute. I think the SciFi network ought to be ashamed of themselv...

    (whispering, pause)

    Oh, wait, they cancelled Enterprise?!? Just 100% for sure this time? Pft, well duh! Gee, you really had to be Miss Cleo to see that one coming. All the attention this was getting, I just figured that they must have cancelled Battlestar Galactica! Heh, oh Jesus, don't scare me like that! Heh, my hands are still shaking, man, you freaked me out! Whew...

    C'mon, are you serious? You mean there were actually people willing to pay to see more of this crap? Like, real money? C'mon! An online petition with two signatures I might buy, but *pay*? Riiight....

    Cancelling Enterprise... Yeah, whatever. Tragedy for all three fans of the series, I'm sure. Heh, pft... "Save Enterprise". Yeah, let me get right on that! What will the galaxy do without the heroics of Captain Archer, inspiration to mildly retarded people everywhere? What about all the memorable characters we know and love, like... er.. You know, hick-sounding white guy! Or british-sounding white guy? Or the chick in with the big boobies? (okay, 100% seriously: I will miss those boobies, but then again there's always the internet). LOL, "Save Enterprise". Ooh! We got to save Enterprise! Because, you know, it's, um, like a TV show with spaceships or something. Heh.

    Whew.

    Hey, is it July yet? Man, I couldn't believe that cliffhanger -- I tell ya, I haven't been genuinely surprised by a TV show in ages...

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Oh no No *NO*! by falcon5768 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      you do realize that for all the hoopla over BSG Enterprise still beats it in the ratings.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

  4. Good riddance to bad TV by Flounder · · Score: 4, Funny

    One down, reality shows, Friends reruns and 60 Minutes to go.

    --

    No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

  5. It's never worked with my parents either by rob_squared · · Score: 4, Funny
    "But I'll pay!"

    "I'm sorry son, we'll never allow a hooker in this house, and that's final!"

    --
    I don't get it.
    1. Re:It's never worked with my parents either by panaceaa · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your parents used to pay for hookers to come to your house?

      No wonder you chose to live in their basement!

  6. OH SNAP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Breaking news: Cancelled show cancelled.

  7. The real reason by 14erCleaner · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...was all the counter-offers of money from fans if they DID cancel the series.

    Good riddance, if you ask me.

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
  8. Too little, Too late by vivin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Season 3 tried to bring in a good story arc (it was good). Season 4 is pretty good, but it's too little, too late.

    Seasons 3 and 4 are what seasons 1 and 2 should have been like. That Cold War temporal thing when NO WHERE.

    The first seasons didn't have very gripping episodes. You had the same moral dilemmas and tired clichees and the blatant use of T'Pol (Jolene Blalock) as a sex symbol to attract testosterone-pumped young males. This is something she herself didn't like - Blalock wanted T'Pol to have more depth.

    But anyway... Enterprise was interesting at first. It was interesting to see starfleet outmatched against pretty much everyone they met and how they dealt with the situation.

    It is certainly sad, but I guess they had their chance. Blame the Diabolical Duo Berman and Bragga. They have the negative Midas effect. Anything they touch turns to crap. Which is why the first few seasons of DS9 were also not that great. It didn't get interesting until Michael Piller took it over and Berman turned his attention to Voyager. The actors in Enterprise, I think, did a decent job.

    --
    Vivin Suresh Paliath
    http://vivin.net

    I like
  9. I'm just guessing that...... by TechnoGrl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Paramount might be waiting for Berman's and/or Braga's contracts to expire before they relaunch another ST series again?? Perhaps they want a producer that can create something other than crap? Hellooooo... Coto or Joe??

    Maybe they have more neurons then we give them credit for...then again

    Well a girl could hope....

    --
    ----- In Your Cubicle No One Can Hear You Scream...
  10. Re:Rephrase by vivin · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Star Trek Enterprise is yet another Star Trek show since the original series to run a full six seasons."

    Maybe because it's getting cancelled after the fourth season? :)

    --
    Vivin Suresh Paliath
    http://vivin.net

    I like
  11. Obvious by Renraku · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Paramount has declared that they will not be accepting *any amount of money* from fans to continue to produce Star Trek Enterprise."

    This should tell you something important.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
  12. Quantum Leap Storyline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can just see it now. Sam Beckett going back in time and saving Scott Bakula from making the worst career move of his life (After Major League 3, that is).

  13. Obligatory by SpottedKuh · · Score: 4, Funny

    All they need to do is go back in time and kill the Nazis that cancelled the show! ...Oh wait, that's why they're being cancelled...

  14. Let it die the death it so richly deserves by redswinglinestapler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TOS: enjoyed it in reruns as a kid. Thought the first season ruled, the second season was mostly good, the third season was headed downhill fast. Lesson: the quality (read: intelligence level) of the show's producer(s) matters. TNG: first seasons wildly uneven. Cheesy opticals (FX), unclear story lines, characters were thin at best. Season 5 was generally good. In the end, okay, but cut out about half the episodes. Lesson: quantity does not equal quality. DS9: A great idea, indifferently executed. The whole Bajoran gods idea could have been a fantastic bit of sci-fi, but in the end they just were used as deus ex machina. The introduction of the war story arc (although probably a response to Babylon 5) rescued it and made me actually want to tune in. Lesson: go somewhere with your big idea by giving the writers a framework. Voyager: Interesting idea (lost, out of touch), horribly executed. Janeway was in need of serious medication, as she was at a minimum bipolar. I wouldn't follow her as a leader for a month, much less years. The producers introduced ideas and at the end of the episode would use the "magic reset button" of time warp, tech change, or the jargon of the week. The ship acquired technology which gave it advantages, then the next episode it would be gone and might as well have never existed, to say nothing of frequently suffering damage which should have required time in dock. Utterly uncompelling and frustrating. Lesson: there's no point in having a show if it's not going anywhere with the characters, story or even the technology. Enterprise: I knew that when I heard who would produce that it would be garbage. When I heard the theme song, after cleaning up the vomit, I knew my worst suspicions were nowhere near what they should have been. The time-machine reset button, the unbelievable screwing with the canon, the notion that a ship could be remote controlled all the way from the Romulan Empire... Just...let...it...die, folks. The idiots who produce it are incapable of doing good work. It's just a money machine to them. Giving them your money is counterproductive. Find someone talented like Joss Whedon or Strasczinsky (sp?) instead. Don't save Enterprise.

  15. Re:Guess you've missed... by Skyshadow · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Nope, I sure didn't.

    B5 was a reasonably entertaining show, but IMO it was critically flawed because of the extreme "cringe factor" that worked its way in, especially in the later episodes.

    C'mon, we're talking about a series where two advanced races spend thousands of years and unimaginable amounts of effort to influence the evolution of the galaxy only to suddenly pack up and leave because, at the denoumont of the entire serious, Bruce Boxleitner yells "Get the hell out of our galaxy!". The cheese was too thick to get past. "As my grandfather used to say, 'cool!'"...

    B5 was better than Enterprise and Voyager and, IMO, it was the reason that DS9 was forced to become watchible in its last couple of seasons. But overall (and still, obviously, in my opinion), it was still a flawed show in a way that BSG is not (at least, not yet).

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  16. Bullshit by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Your comparison is lame, because TOS had a lot of good scripts during the first two seasons. They didn't start to falter until the third and final season, when most of the best writers and producers had left.

    I do get pissed when I see a good TV show cancelled before it has a chance to find an audience. But a proper chance is two or three months, not 3 years.

    Even most Trekkies found the early Enterprise scripts rancid. Stand back from your Trekkieness for a minute and consider that from the network's POV. They spend millions of bucks on a TV show, and it can't even inspire enthusiasm among hard core fans who are supposed to be a lock. Any other show that screwed up that badly wouldn't have lasted a full season, never mind getting renewed twice. Didn't get a chance? Spare me.

    1. Re:Bullshit by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, he's talking about the original Star Trek series from the '60s. And he's right -- it started out fairly good, but the third season wasn't all that great, e.g. Abraham Lincoln flying through space.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  17. one season short by The_Rook · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the one surprise about this is that they didn't let the series go for a full five seasons. common wisdom has it that in order to successfully syndicate a series you have to have at least five seasons (about 130 episodes) of a series for it to be really profitable.

    syndicated series are typically stripped - one episode a day five days a week. one season, 26 episodes is enough for just over five weeks. 2 seasons is ten weeks (two and a half months). 4 seasons is five or six months of programming. maybe a little more. it's kind of iffy for a 3 or 4 season series to be successful in syndication. classic trek was exceptionally successful with only 3 seasons. other series aren't always so successful.

    perhaps the dynamics of syndication on cable, sales of dvd box sets, and the reduced profitablity of conventional teevee and cable broadcasts are changing how expensive series like 'enterprise' are financed. but i always thought that it was with the fifth season that the accountants could finally throw away the bottle of red ink.

    --
    when religion is no longer the opiate of the masses, governments will resort to real opiates.
  18. Give the money to Nasa.... by Malluck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    earmarked to keep the voyager probes up and running.

    That way you'd be funding real space stuff and it still has Star Trek relevance.

  19. The real message by Johnboi+Waltune · · Score: 4, Funny

    Paramount Network Television and the producers of Star Trek: Enterprise are very flattered and impressed by the fans' passionate outpouring of attention for the show and their efforts to raise funds to continue the show's production... but please fuck off already, you fucking nerds.

    --
    "The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
  20. Star Trek has too many white people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When Gene Roddenberry created the original series, he attempted to make the series as inclusive as possible. The TOS included characters such as Uhura (black African, NOT African-American), Sulu (Asian, not Asian-American), Chekov (Russian), and many other diverse characters. In one eposiode of the TOS, when Kirk was going through some kind of court-martial based on video evidence, the Starfleet judges (admirals, actually) included not only a person of Mongoloid descent but also of Asian Caucasian descent (he looked like a South Asian). That is two out of 5 judges which is quite impressive given that the TOS was made during the 1960s when racial equality was just coming of age.

    After the TOS, successive Star Trek shows became more and more white and American-centric. Anyone who looked Asian in those successive shows could not be mistaken as a person who came directly from Asia as their behavior was too American. Ditto for the "blacks". Travis Mayweather is a prime example of this American-centric nature of the successive Trek shows. Why couldn't they just have named him Emekah Olowokandi or something like that??

    Where the heck were the Africans, the Indians, the Chinese, the Middle Easterns, the Egyptians, the Brazilians, the Mexicans, and of course, the Australians in the Trek shows after TOS??

    Only Trek: Deep Space Nine even tried to come close to Roddenberry's ideal. Dr. Julian Bashir was obviously Middle Eastern. But they could have had a Nigerian or a Kenyan as the black commander instead of Benjamin Sisko from Louisiana.

    Unfortunately, Star Trek TOS was and still remains the ONLY Sci-Fi show that attempted to be inclusive of all cultures and individuals around the world. After TOS, nothing came close. Not even Battlestar Galactica.

    1. Re:Star Trek has too many white people. by MagicDude · · Score: 4, Informative

      TNG - Geordi was black. In his original character description, they wanted a black character but in the description they sent to casting agencies, they specifically said they didn't want "street types" for the role, and they even would have prefered a slight Jamacian accent. Levar Burton obviously doesn't have that, but it's a slight consession for getting an actor of his caliber. Not to mention that he plays a blind character. There's also Worf, played by a black actor, but even more important was that he was a Klingon. Remember that at the beginning of TNG, all we knew of the Klingons was all the strife Kirk and his crew had with them. Troi (Marina Sirtis) was greek, or medeterrian or something like that. Picard was french, Riker was american, Data was a robot.

      DS9 - Sisko was black. Kira was Bajorian, Dax was Trill, Odo was a changling, Bashir was arabic, O'Brien was Irish. The differences are more fictional about people being different aliens, but the spirit is there.

      Voy - Janeway was the first female captain in a starring role. Chakotay was a native american (Or a native something or other, I forget). Tuvok was a black vulcan. Doc was a hologram. Kim was chineese. Paris was american. Torres was half Klingon and from her last name, I imagine she was supposed to be hispanic as well.

      Compare all the diversity there to what TOS was, Kirk and Bones were American with McCoy being from the south. Spock was vulcan. And then you had a black woman, a japaneese man, a scot, and a russian. I wouldn't say that numberswise it's more diverse than any of the other series. It's just that society has improved itself that was don't consider a ship with a female captain, and native american first officer, a black alien security officer, chinese ops officer, and holographic doctor as shocking as 1960's america would have considered an educated black woman.

  21. Re:how come not this time? by IWorkForMorons · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are the fans just less hard core?

    Uh...no. I consider myself a hardcore Trek fan. I've never once gone to a con or even put on rubber ears. I kinda pride myself on that fact. But the shows...I know my Trek. I recently decided to download all the episodes and watch the full series. I hadn't watched any shows before, because of all the bad press other fans had given it. But I wanted to give it a chance before making a final decision.

    And my final decision is this: let it die. As much as I hate saying that, I believe it's the right thing to do. It was a good concept, but poorly executed. The first problem I found was that there was too much emphasis on "filling in the gaps." They tried to explain away everything that the other shows introduced. The most glaring offence was the Borg episode. For god's sake...BORG?!? This says that the Enterprise-E crew were stupid enough to leave a whole crapload of future technology laying on Earth, potentially polluting their own timeline. AND that the Temporal Police or whatever they want to call themselves didn't do their jobs. For what? To explain away why the Borg invade the Alpha Quadrent 200 years later? Wasn't that already explained in TNG? The whole episode should have been killed in writing.

    Besides that was the over-sexual use of T'Pol. You saw this happen with Voyager when Seven was brought in. They decided to start off with some hot babe in skintight uniforms on this one, killing the show's credibility in the process. Then there was the sterile acting of Reed and Archer in the first 2 season. Most of the cast was guilty of this actually. This I think was more caused by letting nearly every actor in previous shows have a chance to direct on Enterprise. And speaking of previous actors, there was far too many actors from previous shows playing in Enterprise. Part of the joy I got out of watching the show was spotting recycled actors. I've seen the guy who played General Martok on DS9 play at least 3 other characters in other Treks, including playing a Klingon on Enterprise. And they should have NEVER let Ethan Philips play a Ferengi, since he was the easiest to spot from playing one on Voyager. I didn't really like them bringing in Ferengi in the first place, but it sorta fit with the Star Trek Universe laid down by TNG. Storyline-wise, I wasn't impressed with the Temporal Cold War, and it really didn't do anything except introduce even more inconsistances in the Star Trek Universe. But at least they wrapped that up. The fourth season was picking up steam, and I would have liked to see that have been the first season. But it's too late. The damage is done. This is a hardcore Star Trek fan saying: Let It Die...

  22. Why the vitriol? by hazee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Blimey, the knives seem to be out for Enterprise now. It's like some sort of anti-fanboy brigade or something. Do people think it's fashionable to knock Enterprise or something?

    Yes the series had plenty of problems. Yes, there were plenty of lost opportunities to explore the implications of the absence of things like the universal translator and teleporter.

    But compared to some of the utter shit that infests tv, was it really so bad? Worse than soap operas? Or reality tv? Or those pop idol things?

    To those people who seem intent on shouting "good riddance" after it, were you strapped to a chair and forced to watch it or something?

    Maybe it could have been better, but as one of the few shows to portray the future in a positive light, it provided me with a good few hours of undemanding light entertainment.

    I for one will miss it.