TrekUnited Campaign Ends

ForteMaster writes "TrekUnited, the controversial campaign to save Enterprise from cancellation, has ended its campaign today. Interestingly enough, the article mentions that "a multiple of the money raised by TrekUnited so far" was being offered, with "further details to be released shortly". A case of counting the chickens before they've hatched, maybe? Here is some commentary from TrekToday on the subject."

Comments

Sad

[elid]

Unfortunately, the article doesn't explain why Paramount turned down the Canada offer. That would seem to make the most sense, as the Trek fan fund itself wouldn't have been able to actually fund a season, while an actual production company would.

Re:Sad

[0x461FAB0BD7D2]

It's all here: Trek Report: "Bound"

Paramount is owned by Viacom, whose owner is a bitter rival of Rupert Murdoch, who owns SkyOne, one of the participants in the deal.

Re:Sad

[toolz]

I guess that's an easy one.

If Paramount were to accept the Canada offer, it would have, for the first time, let someone other than Paramount produce a ST product. What if it turned out to be a success? Can you imagine the finger pointing at the current ST overlords?

ST is a valuable Paramount property. No way anyone is going to get his grubby fingers on that! :)

Re:Sad

[FidelCatsro]

Could have been many reasons , but i think they are probably right to do so .
give star trek a rest for a few years and bring it out again and make a killing in the market (too much of a good thing .. you know).
Im a long time Sci-fi fan and as much as i tried to love enterprise is was turning me a bit sour towards star trek , fair enough i respect the fact that alot of people did really love the show , i just thought it was worth the chop.
So in about 5 years we can get a new , truely inovative star trek show that will shine to not only the hardcore fans but to the masses aswell.

That and i doubt they would want to hand star trek production over to a subsiduary news corp.

Re:Sad

[squiggleslash]

I suspect it's a ma[tt]er of keeping creative control, though I don't know the full details of the Paramount offer. While Enterprise might be a separate part of the entire series, what happened during it clearly has an impact on later shows. Outsourcing such a key series would constrain the keepers of Star Trek canon.

In some ways, it's sad because it shows Paramount do plan to continue extending the series further and further. It's kind of the equivalent of that Mercury Grand Marquis or Buick Park Avenue you see with the Canadian license plates in the left lane, blinker on, vehicle driving at 5, 10, 20 below the speed limit, annoying just about everyone. You can't fault the drivers, they're clearly too old to know better, but it'll continue doing the wrong thing at the wrong pace until different drivers come along, and, truth be told, at that point you're probably looking at the type of kid who'll do the car up with spinners and under-the-body neon lights.

So you end up feeling, really, that maybe the old people, with their poor eyesight and slow reactions, really are the best people to drive the car, and once they no longer have use for it, that the car should, really, be sent to the dump.

Of course, the other solution is we move to driverless cars. Then this whole business of people going at 75, or even 80, on a highway clearly marked as 70, will be a thing of the past. In the analogy, I guess, this would mean handing over control of the Star Trek series to a computer. With the right AI, this would be in many ways the most fitting solution and the best tribute to what Trek stood for. Technology being used to help mankind, exploring areas never explored before.

To boldly go, indeed, where no man has gone before.

Re:Sad

[Councilor Hart]

Outsourcing such a key series would constrain the keepers of Star Trek canon.
hahahaha, lol, OMG, snif.
Oh, man. That was the best laugh in days.

Well, actually not. With the way it has been going lately.
Continuity is a huge problem. And fans are very sensitive of canon.
One or two writers who get paid, regardless if they uphold canon. Or a bunch of bloodthirsty, dressed up klingon/Borg/Ferengi, trekkies debating over the slightest intonation of a character.
Now, who would hold up canon more...

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

You're abusing the [tt] mod point system you fuckwit. You call that a troll? It's more like talking to my grandfather after I've taken away his meds and has the attention span of a lobotomized gnat. Losers like you are the fuckwits that ruin everyone else's toys.

Re:Sad

[ZorbaTHut]

Are you on drugs?

Re:Sad

[ZorinLynx]

If it's so valuable, then why the heck did they cancel Enterprise in the middle of its run?

Isn't making some money better than making no money? It's not like Paramount wouldn't see a cut of any profits that come about...

-Z

Re:Sad

[FriedTurkey]

Kirk: Bones. What is wrong with this post?

McCoy: He has taken an analogy way to far.

Kirk: Can you fix it?

McCoy: Dammit Jim. I am a doctor not a moderator.

Re:Sad

[dknj]

apparently its troll tuesday, just one more reason to stay off the forums of slashdot...

Re:Sad

[Professor_UNIX]

ST is a valuable Paramount property. No way anyone is going to get his grubby fingers on that! :)

Well, it WAS before they let Berman loose on it. Congratulations Rick, you've killed Star Trek. Gene would be so proud of you.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Good trolling is like being in that Grand Marquis in the left hand lane with the blinker on. In that respect, the post was an absolutely perfect example.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Or post in yesterday's forums. For example, this is an excellent story. My advice would be to take a quick look, keep a note of the link, and then, perhaps, refer other people to the same link in a related discussion if you want to read some non-troll fodder.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

You dummies! This was all just a big, strained joke! Mod it FUNNY.

Re:Sad

[squiggleslash]

I'm sure no solution is perfect, and it might even have factored into the decision to cancel the series that it was, if you'll pardon the pun, a "loose canon".

Ultimately though, I'd still go with the computer. A computer at least would be able to formulate millions of plot lines that are ultimately consistant, even finding ways to make the various versions of Star Trek internally consistant where there are problems now.

As a good example, in the original series (which, you may remember, takes place in the future compared to the version we're discussing), there's this scene where this old guy, whose name temporarily escapes me, comes across two robots and doesn't recognize them. Yet, in the current series, he's in it too he actually deals with the same robots throughout the show proving he must have recognized them in the original. There's a lot of problems like that that have to be resolved. And while a lot of the movies tie in, I'm still trying to work out how, if they were able to destroy the robot that was trying to kill Kirk's mother and prevent the future machine world in the second of the two films, how the machines still could have taken over the world in the future so they could come back for the third movie.

Ultimately, a fitting use, I think, for modern AI. At the very least, you could have the computer generate the plots, and then a good writer can make it enjoyable.

Re:Sad

[toolz]

One word - syndicated reruns.

OK, that's two words :)

Point is, even now, Paramount will make more money on Enterprise reruns in syndication that it has in the first run.

Why pay for production when you can make more money off reruns and syndication of what has been produced so far?

In case you havent noticed - the ST franchise is self-sustaining. ;)

Re:Sad

[Drooling Iguana]

As a good example, in the original series (which, you may remember, takes place in the future compared to the version we're discussing), there's this scene where this old guy, whose name temporarily escapes me, comes across two robots and doesn't recognize them. Yet, in the current series, he's in it too he actually deals with the same robots throughout the show proving he must have recognized them in the original. There's a lot of problems like that that have to be resolved. And while a lot of the movies tie in, I'm still trying to work out how, if they were able to destroy the robot that was trying to kill Kirk's mother and prevent the future machine world in the second of the two films, how the machines still could have taken over the world in the future so they could come back for the third movie.

It's because the robots were actually aliens from the planet Zeist.

Re:Sad

[Sj0]

*SJ Zero waves his fist in anger!

CURSE YOU RUPERT MURDOCH!

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

The local UPN station here used to run 2-3 hours of Star Trek reruns per day, PLUS new episodes of Voyager and DS9. Now they run 0 hours of reruns, and frequently pre-empt new episodes of Enterprise. ST reruns aren't the hot property they used to be.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it WAS before they let Berman loose on it. Congratulations Rick, you've killed Star Trek.

Oh my God, you've killed Star Trek. You Berman.

Re:Sad

[TheoGB]

Maybe it would give those companies legal rights to produce Star Trek things in the future, a-la the two James Bond franchises that were threatened (or maybe made?) at one point, courtesy of the Thunderball script being in Connery's hands?

Re:Sad

[InvalidError]

In case you havent noticed - the ST franchise is self-sustaining. ;)

Not for much longer if Paramount starts a tradition of starting a new ST show and abort it half-way through. Questionable commitment is bad for both fans and network/advertiser support.

If Paramount starts another ST show only to cancel it again because it did not beat UNreality shows, they should quit the ST business.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

That's one way to look at it. The other way is that Berman kept Star Trek alive for 15 years while every other sci-fi show failed after a short period of time.

(Not a fan of Berman-Trek, but you can't deny that it did have mainstream appeal and decent ratings back in the 90s.)

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

That made me smile, Thank you.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

squiggleslash wrote:

With the right AI, this would be in many ways...


excuse me sir... are you on drugs right now??

Re:Sad

[blincoln]

As a good example, in the original series (which, you may remember, takes place in the future compared to the version we're discussing), there's this scene where this old guy, whose name temporarily escapes me, comes across two robots and doesn't recognize them. Yet, in the current series, he's in it too he actually deals with the same robots throughout the show proving he must have recognized them in the original. There's a lot of problems like that that have to be resolved. And while a lot of the movies tie in, I'm still trying to work out how, if they were able to destroy the robot that was trying to kill Kirk's mother and prevent the future machine world in the second of the two films, how the machines still could have taken over the world in the future so they could come back for the third movie.

I don't think the first thing is a continuity error. He could have been intentionally deceptive in the film where he's older. He could have become senile, or forgotten. Those models of robot could be so common that he isn't sure if they're the same. He could be an anti-robot bigot and pretending like he doesn't know them in order to be a jerk and feel superior to the metal slaves.

The other question is answered by the films themselves. Even in the original timeline, Kirk doesn't stop the rise of the machines, he only defeats them after they've wiped out most of the human race. The machines send an assassin to Iowa in the first film which fails to kill his mother, and in doing so actually allow him to be born since it's his father that comes back to chase the machine.

In the sequel, the machines again fail to kill Kirk or his mother, so Kirk will still be around to lead the human race to victory after the nuclear war. Kirk thinks he has won at this point by destroying the Starfleet R&D lab that develops the technology, but what he fails to realize (he is just a kid) is that the technology still exists in the form of patents and the rubble of the building. It may take a little longer for the machine race to be developed, but the possibility hasn't been eliminated.

By the third film in this little mini-Trek trilogy, it's revealed that this is exactly what has happened. Admiral Nagura wants to build autonomous space weapons systems, and has procured the technology developed in the destroyed lab.

This particular story takes a view of time/history similar to that in the last couple of Legacy of Kain games - where fate/destiny is a river that flows around minor obstructions like the bombing of a Starfleet lab to get to its goal.

Some of the other writers are not nearly as good. It was cute when they did the crossover with Sisko visiting the tribble-infested Enterprise, because they made reference to the design style of the time. That continuity was broken with Enterprise the series, because now we see that even early Starfleet ships look suspiciously like the ones in the 24th century. If the tribble episode hadn't been made, TOS could be written off as a fuzzy approximation, like the early Red Dwarf episodes where the ship is all ghetto and barren. But now BOTH must be reconciled. Was the 23rd century some sort of aberration in style, like the 1970s?

Another example is the Romulans. In TOS we see that their ships look really fucking lame, but in Enterprise they are awesome. What the hell?

They really should have kept that Kirk-killing machine writing team around until Manny Coto took over, that would have been awesome.

Re:Sad

[ThePlague]

Kirk: Bones, what is wrong with this story?

McCoy: It's for a cause that instills at best indifference and at worst hostility in the readership.

Kirk: Can you fix it?

McCoy: Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not an editor.

{slight pause}

McCoy: Dammit Jim, I'm a doctor not an editor.

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

CURSE YOU RUPERT MURDOCH!

God, are you some young naive hippy type who thinks the big evil corporations are going to take over?

Grow up.

Re:Sad

[Sj0]

Nobody around here has a sense of humor...
*SJ Zero shakes his fist
CURSE YOU SLASHDOT!!!!!

Re:Sad

[Anonymous Coward]

TrekUnited was full of their own speculation. There was no way another season was going to be produced. Last season's budget was cut by half, meaning everyone took a pay cut and the show still didn't generate enough to make it worth keeping. Why not take the Canada deal? Because there wasn't one, the industry doesn't work that way, production companies have no money, the studios give it to them and their budgets come from the studio. Production companies are just the labor. Trek United didn't even raise enough for a TV movie, in what alternate reality does that equate to a chance to save a show? I'm sure the actors would love to get on with their lives, who wants to be an actor on a show no one watches?

Re:Sad

[squiggleslash]

I don't think the first thing is a continuity error. He could have been intentionally deceptive in the film where he's older. He could have become senile, or forgotten. Those models of robot could be so common that he isn't sure if they're the same. He could be an anti-robot bigot and pretending like he doesn't know them in order to be a jerk and feel superior to the metal slaves

I guess that explains a lot. IIRC, the current series is going to end with the first appearance of Khan, where he fights this old guy at the top of a volcano and ends up falling in it (hence his conversion into an embittered old psychopath in the "original series"), it could be something happens during the fight that makes the guy hate robots or lose his memory or something.

IIRC the old guy is friendly with Kirk in the later series, and it might be the whole thing about the robots going back in time to kill Kirk's mother (and then Kirk) would explain how he's become an anti-robot bigot. Who can forget the terrifying scene where C3PO drives the mobile crane chasing the younger Kirk and R2D2 through the streets of Los Angeles?

Re:Sad

[blincoln]

I guess that explains a lot. IIRC, the current series is going to end with the first appearance of Khan, where he fights this old guy at the top of a volcano and ends up falling in it (hence his conversion into an embittered old psychopath in the "original series"), it could be something happens during the fight that makes the guy hate robots or lose his memory or something.

I'm really looking forward to that scene, seeing the "birth of Khan," as it were. Knowing Berman, he'll probably make reference to the older films by having the old man yell "Khaaaan!" right before he delivers the blow that knocks him into the lava.

Maybe it's one of those ear parasite things that Khan comes to love later in life the ends up making the old man lose his memory of the robots?

I just really hope they don't screw it up with a musical number or more of that comic relief crap. The TOS pilot with the dance party and the little chrome robot going "bee-bee, bee-bee" was really awful. Then I thought they had decided to stop doing that stuff forever because by the mid-80s all the films were pretty serious, the odd naked elderly Uhura dancing scene or two notwithstanding.

Of course, as soon as the late 90s roll around and Berman's kids turn five, he starts putting in things like the fifteen minute holodeck scene where Lore, Data, Troi, and Locutus of Borg do that obvious knock off of "Under the Sea" from The Little Mermaid. What, did Braga just not want to piss him off by saying that having Lynn Minmei do the vocals wasn't enough to make it seem cool? I kept wishing they hadn't killed off Roy Fokker so early in the franchise's history so he could have come in and kicked all their asses, then drank a bottle of scotch as if it were their blood.

I mean, even the shittiest Trek ever, with the villain who amputates body parts from people who displease him and have them grafted onto his own body, that one didn't have any musical numbers.


IIRC the old guy is friendly with Kirk in the later series, and it might be the whole thing about the robots going back in time to kill Kirk's mother (and then Kirk) would explain how he's become an anti-robot bigot. Who can forget the terrifying scene where C3PO drives the mobile crane chasing the younger Kirk and R2D2 through the streets of Los Angeles?


The action in that scene kicked ass, but it would have been so much better if C3PO hadn't smiled. The 3PO that learned to smile DIED in the movie before that. Stupid scriptwriters.

Re:Sad

[squiggleslash]

Maybe it's one of those ear parasite things that Khan comes to love later in life the ends up making the old man lose his memory of the robots?

That could be it. The other thought that occurred to me is that as different actors played the old man in the original and recent serieses, it could be something that has to do when he changes to the next generation. Of course, we don't know how many regenerations he's already been through, and how many occur between the end of this series and the start of the original, but my recollection is that if the regenerations don't occur in carefully controlled circumstances (such as inside that ship of his, you know, the thing shaped a bit like a police telephone box... the Gallactica? I can't remember), all sorts of problems can occur.

Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

Where do I send money to if I want to make sure Paramount continues to not make Star Trek shows?

Just askin', is all.

Re:Donations

[capt.Hij]

Please send all donations to capt.Hij@slashdot.org on paypal.com.

Re:Donations

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

In other words, you really do want to save Star Trek from ill-concieved and poorly executed spinoffs?

Re:Donations

[grasshoppa]

Where do I send money to if I want to make sure Paramount continues to not make Star Trek shows?

Yeah, I'd like to know this as well.

I used to like ST, but I don't have any faith for them to execute anything trek related without completely fucking it up with time plots.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

A serious question is "What happened to the money I donated".

Do they just keep it now?

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

Consider it a 'Lamer Tax'.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

Just seems like a hustle to me. Same as the LokiTorrent thing.

They collected $144,173 (none from me actually but I am sure many /. Can't say the same).

Now they call off the battle and wow, look they are $144,173 richer.

Re:Donations

[Mysticalfruit]

Oh phew...

So, I wasn't the only one who threw popcorn at the TV the first time the enterprise encounted a "temporal distortion" and howled at the screen:

"NO!!! NOT ANOTHER FUCKING TIME TRAVEL PLOT LINE!!!"

Re:Donations

[Syberghost]

I answered something similar to the SPAM that TrekUnited sent me.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad you asked,

I am having trouble transfering the money from my account overseas, if you give me your bank account number to help me with this transfer, I'll be glad to contribute a percentage of the total transfer amount to your campaign.

Thank you for your time,

Some_really_long_name

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

No, what I meant was that Paramount should've just canceled Shit trek way back when TOS was canceled, they should not have let the fucktard Gene Rottenberry produce another Shit Trek film/series. They did own exclusive rights to it and still do, they would've had the rights from him going somewhere else and producing it, and could've kept TOS "or I like to call it POS" from seeing the light of day. Now, hopefully Paramount will do that, just bury all of Shit Trek and let it die out permanently so it will be totally forgotten eventually.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm... the AC who just replied is not the original poster.

Just sayin' (again.)

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

They're returning the money. If you sent money by PayPal, your money will be returned minus the PayPal service fee, while if you sent a check, it will be mailed back to you.

Re:Donations

[Aurin Wildfire]

Now they call off the battle and wow, look they are $144,173 richer.

"Our final proposal was knocked down by Paramount. We will not see a season five for Star Trek Enterprise," wrote Jane Braz in a post at the Trek Fans United Forum, speaking on behalf of TrekUnited founder Tim Brazeal. The group said that it would begin refunding donations on Monday or Tuesday."

Re:Donations

[Golias]

Genius!

I think I'll start a "Save Charmed fund."

Has it been cancelled yet? I haven't really watched the WB since Buffy & Angel were there. I'm going to assume that it has been... or if it hasn't, it's probably "on the bubble." I seem to recall hearing they tried to shoe-horn Rose McGowen into the cast after firing that 90210 chick. Anyway, the show sucked, but if Voyager and Enterprise had a core "loyal" fans, I bet Charmed does too.

The hope of seeing Alyssa Milano's legs on TV again ought to fetch me at least a few grand from the same sort of ignorant boobs as those who donated to TrekUnited.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

"Has it been cancelled yet?"

No, I watch every sunday night (two eps in a row) in the blind hope that they will have the magic episode where her boobs are shown and then Tony Danza comes out of Magic school in some incest love fest.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, prove it. Otherwise shut the fuck up.

Re:Donations

[Anonymous Coward]

One can't "prove" it, but it is possible for the rest of us to sort it out by looking at literary style and context. Original post was brief, witty, and funny. The attempt by another AC to claim authorship was bitter, crude, and unamusing, not to mention writen with a different style of grammar.

Just a sad attempt to bask in the mod-point love another person got. I feel bad for him/her. I really do. What a wretched life that person must have.

The post which then replied with the rebuke was most likely made by the original poster.

Re:Donations

[elrous0]

They collected $144,173

Wow, it's a shame they called it off. With that kind of scratch, they could have funding almost 1/10 an episode.

-Eric

Re:Donations

[Dionysus]

They're keeping 5%. BTW, Paypal charges maximum of 2.9% + USD 0.30

Re:Donations

[ArsonSmith]

1) rais money to save Enterprise
3) Profit!!

Re:Donations

[RichardX]

Maybe we could somehow save the series if we can just reconfigure the subspace sensor array to emit anti-tachyons into the hoojimagig with the ohsoddit and the Ican'tevenbebotheredthinkingupthesetermsanymore.

Re:Donations

[clem]

Dude, we used the money to send us all to Vegas to see Star Trek: The Experience. It was incredible! Then Patrick Stewart showed up to give us a tour of the bridge.

What? Didn't you get your plane ticket delivered? Bummer.

I'd take this up with FedEx, if I were you.

Re:Donations

[gotacap]

note that if it has been over 30 days you can't just do a refund on the transaction in paypal, you have to SEND the money back to them.

Paypal charged a 2.9% + 0.30 transaction fee when the money was sent to TrekUnited, and Paypal will charge a 2.9% + 0.30 transaction fee on the return amount.

that's 5.8% plus 60 cents, without TrekUnited getting anything.

they are using those who did not use paypal to balance it out, and they specifically state that any excess left over after the refunds will be donated to tsunami relief funds, a worthy cause. The TrekUnited people are not pocketing a hundred grand, not by any chance.

Also, they never actually received the 3 million, just the $144,173. The 3 Million was in the form of 3 1 Million dollar pledges, which were only to be paid if the campaign worked, they were not in the form of cash and certainly not through paypal.

Berman and Braga

[George Tirebuyer]

These two should have been cancelled. A while back.

Re:Berman and Braga

[rob_squared]

I was working on it, but my sniper scope just can't see that far.

It's a shame

[nightsweat]

I was starting to enjoy the series. The last year and a half they got their act together and the show was as good as any of the others.

I'm sure some people here will now question my sanity, but for every Borg in TNG, there was an episode featuring Troy and her mother doing something stupid.

Enterprise was pretty good, heading towards borderline great. It's too bad they killed it. It's going to be tough to bring the franchise back credibly.

Re:It's a shame

[nlinecomputers]

I'm sure some people here will now question my sanity, but for every Borg in TNG, there was an episode featuring Troy and her mother doing something stupid.

Agreed. The only Trek series that I really liked was DS9. They allowed SOME character development in that series and did things that they wouldn't do in any of the others. Voyager was a waste and there are episodes of it I've never seen. The 4th season of Enterprise has been unseen by me as I just could hold myself to watch it. The space Nazi's was enough for me. I soon forgot about it. Battlestar Galatica and both Stargates are far better then any of the trek's have been. And neither SG is all that good....

Re:It's a shame

[Dionysus]

Well, with Manny Coto (who was responsible for this season) leaving for 24, it was probably a good idea to end it now. Unless you wanted a repeat of the two first seasons of Enterprise. And that's what you would have gotten, with Berman and Bragga in charge. Can you say, Temporal Cold War?

Re:It's a shame

[kfg]

I think you will find the root of the problem embeded in a single word from your post:

"Franchise."

KFG

Re:It's a shame

[stlhawkeye]

I'm sure some people here will now question my sanity, but for every Borg in TNG, there was an episode featuring Troy and her mother doing something stupid.

I TiVo the Next Gen and DS9 episodes on Spike, they show two of each every day. I can't watch the next gen episodes any more. The writing is so god-awful. In fact, it really improved after Roddenberry was gone, in my opinion. I enjoy DS9 much better, the writing is far more polished, to say nothing of the acting. Too bad it turned into Dungeons and Dragons for the last season.

Re:It's a shame

[ergean]

Yes I can say: "Temporal Cold War". But it hurts.

Re:It's a shame

[hey!]

Possibly in the same episode. Each episode typically had multiple intersecting plot lines. We remember them as if there were a separate episode on Troy and her mother, but that's not the case.

Re:It's a shame

[dahlek]

I gave up on the show during the first season. I didn't mind the captain, or the theme song, or all of the other "silly" reasons that irked people. I wasn't so up on Trek trivia that I could catch the continuity screw-ups either...

I hated that Voyager-like, hoytee-toytee, scooby-doo, crap-happy, bs.

Other Treks are much better at showing that people are still people and have real problems even in "paradise".

They need to make a DS9 movie series. The can do this by making the first movie full of flashbacks, or something, to catch people up.

Re:It's a shame

[k96822]

Indeed. It blows my mind that a show with so much potential like Enterprise could be so terribly executed. I mean, the founding of the Federation of Planets, working out the bugs in the technology, forming the Prime Directive -- how much more fertile a ground for new, interesting, mind-bending stories can you have? But, Boring Berman managed to make such ground into Snoresville. They really under-utilized Bakula too. Quantum Leap showed what an amazing character he is. It seems like he is pretty much sleep-walking on Enterprise, with an occasional moment of being rattled awake, where he is for a time really pissed-off until he slumbers off again. He is such an amazing actor, but it is the writing that brings his character down.

Re:It's a shame

[k96822]

Roddenberry brought wonder to the series. There was supposed to be moments that are a little campy. That's true Trek :-) I think it is the opposite; that Trek got WORSE after the first few seasons. It was entertainment, which is what keeps Trek fresh and fun.

Good!

[decipher_saint]

Any movement that justifies the current state of Trek should fail.

Ok, flamethrower off...

Star Trek is like a burnt out rocker, it's been on the road for years, it's out of creative juice, it's just going through the motions. I say, let Trek rest up a few years, you know, like get some new material and come back stronger than ever!

Re:Good!

[capt.Hij]

Actually, I wonder if any movement that is instigated over something as worn out as the "current state of Trek" will doom this thing for the long term future. I doubt that any studio watching this will want to get mixed up with the passions generated by people who can motivate the quote from the article below. When the studio execs decide to cut and run from a series, especially an expensive one like a sci-fi show, the last thing they would want to do is have to deal with the people who are just a little bit too wrapped up in a teevee show for their own good. It's a no win proposition.

TrekUnited is now looking into the future and will continue to explore other means of bringing back Star Trek: Enterprise or another series. In light of Paramount's rejection of our current proposal, the campaign will restructure itself and discuss future approaches. We believe that in any case, we have shown and want to keep showing that Star Trek lives on through the fans, their optimistic vision of the future, and their commitment to make a difference, together. We will build upon our achievements of uniting fans world-wide in the past two months and intend to continue to establish a global fan organization and uplifting community for all Star Trek fans.

Re:Good!

[teslar]

I say, let Trek rest up a few years, you know, like get some new material and come back stronger than ever!

But therein lies the problem. Obviously it needs new material, but where would you find it? There's only so much a ship in space can do and if Kirk hasn't done it then Picard has or Janeway, in a rare moment of originality has. And if you get rid of the ship idea, then your chances are good that whatever episodes you want to write were aired in DS9 already. Besides, how far away from spaceships can you stray and remain Trek?

Difficult to come up with something new, when so much has been done before.

Re:Good!

[TheStupidOne]

Star Trek is like a burnt out rocker, it's been on the road for years, it's out of creative juice, it's just going through the motions. I say, let Trek rest up a few years, you know, like get some new material and come back stronger than ever!

Metallica did that and we were "rewarded" with St. Anger. Bleh... =P

Re:Good!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you kidding?! Star Trek isn't just the Federation -- it's an entire universe! So try these setting premises on for size:

* Space pirate ship
* Klingon ship

Even if you're stuck on the Federation, there's no way to go wrong with Nimoy directing a Captain Sulu based show.

Star Trek has been pinned down and raped by bad writing, bad casting and bad direction for far too long. Universal needs to give the franchise a five to ten year hiatus then bring it back with some people in charge who don't suck and actually give a fuck about something besides the numbers on their paychecks.

Re:Good!

[operagost]

You forgot

* Starship Oo-mox, the Ferengi singles cruise ship

Re:Good!

[lgw]

TOS was special because the writing was done by some of the best SF writers of the day. Half of the results were pretty good. SF writers approaching B&B were generally rebuffed.

Can there be new ideas for Trek? The broader SF writing community seems to have no problem with new ideas. A return to the approach of turning to up-and-coming SF writiers would solve the "what next" problem, and I *sure* have ebtter respect for Cannon than B&B.

Re:Good!

[Golias]

Perhaps Metallica just needed a longer hiatus between albums?

Might I propose they wait until the year after I die to release the next one?

So sad

[ZWarrior]

Although I did not get to see any of the series, it is rather sad to hear that it is being canceled. I have heard a great deal of praise for the series, and something about taking showers with Vulcans.

What does surprise me is that Paramount has refused to accept the demand from the fans, including 3.1 MILLION dollars raised to fund it. It makes you wonder what they are up to, and why they are allowed to monopolize the Star Trek world in such a way.

Makes you wonder what Roddenberry would say at this point.

Re:So sad

[deltatype0]

I'm rather surprised they turned it down as well, considering Trek isn't the only failing property of the UPN Network, now that any reason to watch it has been taken over by SpikeTV.

>>Makes you wonder what Roddenberry would say at this point.

Honestly, I'm willing to guess he would of probably supported the idea, just given the fact that he was the type of personality to accept new ideas and create new things. Trek has always been centered around the idea of "seeking out strange new worlds and going where no man has gone before" which he fostered in TOS and TNG. Berman tried to carry that same idea through into DS9 and Voyager, but he got caught up in Paramount's quest for TV supremacy against the bigger networks. This was especially the case of Voyager since it was the flagship show of the then new UPN Network. With all that ratings crap, the show had to please fans often by retooling the same shit, like Borg, timetravel, etc. It's no wonder the series never lived up to TOS/TNG, they weren't given the freedom to make a creative story.

So really it's hard to blame Berman or any of the successors to Roddenberry for the past 2 series completely, because as we should know, no matter how good of a story you write, it can only go as far as the limitations given to you by Big-Wig Hollywood.

Re:So sad

[Mant]

How many episodes would 3.1 million make? A quick Google tells me its about 1.6 million per episode, so about two. So it isn't going to be much of an impact when looking at making a new series.

They can monopolize Trek because they own the rights, that simple. This is true for just about every creative endeavour these days. Indeed, it's rather the point of copyright to grant a limited time monopoly (although you can argue the limited time part has been effectively removed, and the rights holders are often not the creators).

Re:So sad

[AKAImBatman]

What does surprise me is that Paramount has refused to accept the demand from the fans, including 3.1 MILLION dollars raised to fund it. It makes you wonder what they are up to, and why they are allowed to monopolize the Star Trek world in such a way.

It seems pretty obvious to me. Paramount leadership has woken up to the fact that Berman has been destroying the series for over a decade. Prior to now, such destruction was at least profitable. Now that margins are thin, Paramount intends to give Trek a rest.

Why the "rest", you ask? Simple. The problem with just kicking the producer off the show is that the machinery alredy in place continues to produce the same old crap. To actually *change* things, you need to either hire someone who's willing to duke it out with the staff (difficult and doesn't always work), or you can wait until they are fully disbanded and then start over from scratch. Paramount has wisely chosen the later.

Makes you wonder what Roddenberry would say at this point.

He doesn't have to say much. The ISS is currently being powered by the spin imparted on his ashes.

Re:So sad

[kc01]

You never got to see any of it? It's been on for years!

You post on an internet tech site, yet you haven't got access to a VCR?

*puzzled look*

Re:So sad

[AKAImBatman]

So really it's hard to blame Berman or any of the successors to Roddenberry for the past 2 series completely, because as we should know, no matter how good of a story you write, it can only go as far as the limitations given to you by Big-Wig Hollywood.

So the Indian planet/Weseley Traveller idea was all the network's fault? Or the rip-off-B5-but-without-a-plot-and-a-really-bad-rel igion concept was all the network's idea? Or how about the casting of Mr. "Gay" Chakotay? (The actor stated that his character was intended to be gay, but the producers ended up backing off the idea.) What about such memorable lines as "I can remember being born!"? Or the concept for a series where the technology is almost as good as that of two centuries later? Or idiotic "firsts" like a transporter malfunction? "Ooooo, ahhhh, stuuuuuupiiiid."

I will agree that the studio did some dumb things (like changing the ending to the Enterprise episode about the two races evolving on the same planet), but the studio's decisions were far eclipsed by the stupidity of the producers. I mean, these are the same people who do a prequel while being PROUD of the fact that they've never seen the original series! WTF?

Oh, and did I ever mention how much I HATE the buzzword "species"? And if I hear the terms "EPS Conduit" or "Deflector Dish" one more time, I swear I'm going to hurl.

Re:So sad

[farbles]

According to Dominic Keating, who plays Malcolm Reed on Enterprise, the series was cancelled because of politics. He says it was the number two show on UPN. The studio and the producers have fought all this season with the studio asking for changes like a boy band in the mess hall. About the theme music that everyone seems to hate? The studio asked for and got a tambourine added to it.

I knew when I saw the scene with the caskets of the dead servicemen that these guys were playing with fire. Good on them that they kept it up as good as they did given the amount of crap they must have been getting from above.

Re:So sad

[Reignking]

#2 on UPN doesn't mean much :) Still, if the show was too expensive to make, and couldn't make it up with advertising, it is going to canned.

Re:So sad

[operagost]

Or how about the casting of Mr. "Gay" Chakotay? (The actor stated that his character was intended to be gay, but the producers ended up backing off the idea.)

Hmm, a gay Native American. Now we just need a biker, a policeman, a sailor, and a construction worker and we're ready for the Starship YMCA series.

What I never understood...

[thundercatslair]

was why paramount didn't consider their offer, how much did they raise? Somewhere in the millions? Was it ever said how much it would cost to produce the season? Now all the sets and everything are pretty much useless. Enterpirse ratings must have been really hurting.

Finally, the end of Enterprise

[gowen]

It's been a long road
Getting from there to here
It's been a long time
But my time is finally near.

And I will see my dream come to life at last
Enterprise has finally been cancelled!

Re:Finally, the end of Enterprise

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyway of working into the better ;-) lyrics how "Enterprise" is the bastard child of Star Trek and should never have been made in the first place?

It's about time

[WD_40]

It's time for Star Trek to die. IMO, the last really good series was TNG, although DS9 got pretty good at the end. The whole thing is way too runout and it all lacks originality.

Another thing that pisses me off is the pussified political correctness. In the old days they didn't "target the weapons array", they freakin' took care of business.

It's time for Star Trek to die for awhile and hopefully come back in a decade or two a reborn entity that is worth watching.

Re:It's about time

[MagPulse]

Because there's so much other great TV waiting to take its spot.

And if you hate it, its fans shouldn't be able to watch it.

Re:It's about time

[Jerf]

In the old days they didn't "target the weapons array", they freakin' took care of business.

And the funniest thing to me, these pussies are so Politically Correct that they still give the order to "target the (small) weapons array", when it is demonstrably impossible for them to even hit a ship with more than about half their shots.

They're just lucky everybody else's engineering is as crappy as theirs and if you so much as tap the one and only "weapons array" on the hull, not only will it be out of commision for hours, but it'll probably take out a couple of bridge members with PTTF; might even score the other ship's captain if you're lucky...

Re:It's about time

[Anonymous Coward]

And the funniest part of it all, is, you're complaining about how unrealistic it is.... a show about an interstellar spaceship... because we all know thats sooooo real...

Re:It's about time

[Snaller]

It's time for Star Trek to die.

No, its time they hire someone ELSE to producee it. Perhaps someone like me :)

www.m-w.com

[AnonymousKev]

"TrekUnited, the controversial campaign to save Enterprise from cancellation, ...

Was it really controversial? Unconventional, maybe, but not controversial.

Re:www.m-w.com

[Enrique1218]

Controversial, no. Unconventional, maybe. Dorky, absolutely. Troll me if you like but people devote too much of their lives to a TV show. They would rather go out their way for a fantasy than to put effort in real life causes. I know the world isn't perfect as the UFP but that is why we need people to get off the TV and get involved.

Re:www.m-w.com

[r3b00tm0nk3y]

It violated the prime directive: not interfering with decisions of network programming executives, even in the event of cancellation.

Re:www.m-w.com

[Monkey-Man2000]

It was controversial because a lot of people thought it was bad to waste money on a crappy show. Better to fund something worthwhile. Personally, I'm of the opinion that they can spend their money on whatever they like. Even if it's stupid.

Re:www.m-w.com

[optimus2861]

Their PR was so bad that it became somewhat controversial among certain circles of Trek fans. There's a very long thread at TrekBBS about it (check the "Trek Today News Items" forum) that chronicles a lot of what went wrong. TrekUnited made a lot of cryptic and secretive statements during the campaign, along the lines of, "We're in meetings with Paramount, but we can't say who or about what", and last week it was revealed that Paramount had told them, "Thanks but no thanks" back in the middle of March yet TU didn't inform its members of that and continued soliciting donations up until the present. There was a twisted relationship between TU head Tim B. and some toy company that he used to be associated with, and some incidents in that history, that didn't help matters, not to mention Tim B.'s criminal record that he explained in a confessional-like posting at the TU forums that didn't help their image. Add the perception that TU supporters really trashed its detractors on the TrekBBS and Startrek.com boards -- TrekBBS eventually banned all discussion of TU from its forums to end the flamewars -- and you've got enough to call it "controversial".

In the end, it was a bunch of well-intentioned individuals who were in way, way over their heads and it showed.

Save Enterprise? No.

[dbolger]

Well, I watched the first episode of the new season of Enterprise, "Storm Front" last night. I'm sorry, guys, but I can't keep this up any more. Let me set out my stall, before I begin. I have devoted large amounts of time, energy, and interest to Star Trek over the years. In school, it was probably one of the things that people used to define me - hell, it was my number one interest, so there was undoubtedly a good reason for that. I have, as long as I can remember, been a Trekkie. As soon as I saw "Encounter at Farpoint", I was hooked. I went on to watch every single episode of The Next Generation, and with very few exceptions, I loved it all. I went out of my way to find and watch every episode of the original series, being honestly excited when the pilot, "The Cage" was aired on BBC, and I couldn't believe how deep and powerful the stories were. I owned, in one format or another, all the films up to "The Undiscovered Country", and stuck with Deep Space Nine through what I considered a bad start, to the very end where it became the best Star Trek I'd seen. I bought action figures. I bought t-shirts. I bought numerous books. I bought the "Star Trek Factfiles" until Eason's stopped stocking them. Even when it came to Voyager, where I saw more bad episodes than good, I stuck with it. I watched. I hoped. I've seen all the new films, even though I've seen their quality slide since "Generations". I am not a "fairweather fan".

When I first heard about "Enterprise", I was really looking forward to it. A show set before the original series? Fantastic! We would see wars with the Klingons and Romulans! We would see how Earth and Vulcan came together, and the birth of the Federation! Surely it would be amazing! I looked at the crew they were giving us, and was impressed. There was so much potential. I thought that this would be the series that brought Star Trek back from the ridiculous "time travel saves the day" plots of Voyager, and returned it to its roots. But I was wrong. From the outset, my hopes were trampled on. From the very first episode, "Broken Bow", I saw time travel, the "temporal cold war", the complete ignoring of even the most basic points of the Star Trek timeline - poor and insulting plots which must be seen cliché by even the most blinkered science fiction fan. And yet still, I kept watching. Deep Space Nine, I reasoned, was weak to begin with too - it took a few seasons to get into its strike, but turned out to be amazing. So after two seasons, I found myself still sitting in front of my television, hoping against hope and reason that Enterprise would be redeemed, but I was, once again, disappointed. No redemption came. Season three came to a close with the plot still tied up with the Xindi and the temporal cold war - threads which began in the very first episode, and if the producers had any sense, would have been cut there and then. There has been no real development, no dealing with serious social issues, nothing at all of what made Star Trek great. The season ended, and I was left feeling cold and unemotive.

From America, then, I heard that a fourth season had been promised, and soon afterwards, I read that Enterprise had been cancelled and would not receive a fifth. Quite frankly, I was relieved. Not only was this series not good Star Trek, it was bad to such a level that it was tainting the other series' which bore the name. Of course, then there came the protests. Obsessive fans - not of Enterprise, I believe, but of Star Trek, protesting against the cancellation, and fundraising to have Paramount produce another season. Why did they do this? I do not believe these people love Enterprise. Hell, if they did, then they wouldn't be obsessive Star Trek fans, because to love Enterprise is to love the complete antithesis of what Trek should be. I believe these people were protesting because they were afraid - afraid of not having a Star Trek on television with which to centre their lives, afraid of being forced to think for themselves, and made to find a new focus that wasn't based aroun

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[QangMartoq]

"Right now, I believe that is the only thing that can rescue what is left of the show's core, and that is, despite all the hurt, something I still want to do. "Save Enterprise"? No. To hell with Enterprise. Save Star Trek."

dbolger, if I had mod points right now, you'd have them!

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[David Horn]

I don't watch Star Trek for the "serious social issues."

I watch it for the spaceships. And Seven of Nine.

There was one Enterprise episode, however, that did leave a marked impression on me, and that was the one with the clone of Trip. It was written and acted perfectly and deserved a better review than it got.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[barawn]

Well, I watched the first episode of the new season of Enterprise, "Storm Front" last night.

The guy in charge of the fourth season of Enterprise (Manny Coto) was asked "Why Nazis?" regarding Storm Front. His response (bitterly)? "You'd have to ask Berman and Braga." Storm Front is the last vestige of the crap that Berman and Braga have been spewing for the first three years.

Watch the second episode of Storm Front, and you'll see what I mean. Suddenly, all the annoying characters and stupid plotlines that Berman and Braga put forward just vanish in one episode. That was the whole point. Coto had to have the Nazis in there. So he did as little with them as he could - two episodes, and they're gone, and all the crap gone with them.

The fourth season of Enterprise is much better than the previous seasons. Unfortunately, Paramount (and Berman) had no intention of letting Enterprise run for more seasons anyway, because it was under someone else's control. There's simply no way that Enterprise, on UPN, could've drawn enough viewers to make Paramount realize Berman was an idiot - which, of course, was the point. Berman hands over reigns, says "okay, if you can do a better job, go ahead." ... and then promptly sets the show up to fail miserably.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Rude Turnip]

"...all the films up to "The Undiscovered Country",..."

Useless tidbit: The term "undiscovered country" comes from a Shakespeare play (Henry the V I think), which William Shatner covered in his 1968 album, "The Transformed Man." Coincidence?

Really good album, btw. Don't let any cynics tell you otherwise.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[gowen]

The term "undiscovered country" comes from a Shakespeare play (Henry the V I think)

Hamlet. It's from the soliloquy that starts "To Be, or Not To Be".

"the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?"

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[pklong]

Your post may be a troll but anyway...

I'm sorry to break this to you, but when it comes down to it they are just TV shows. That includes TOS/TNG/DS9/Voyager/Enterprise. It's just telly. If you don't like it turn it off and watch/do something else. Your life is too important to waste obsessing about something you don't like. You seem to just have an obsession with Trek, just like people get watching really bad reality TV like Big Brother. There is more to life...

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Dunkelzahn]

Holy crap. Awesome post. You're already maxxed on mod points, so I will reply instead of mod you up.

I've been a Trek fan for years. Much like you, I stood by and was loyal to every series, up until season two of Enterprise. Interest was slipping, though honestly it had begun to slip somewhere during Voyager's run. I liked the Hirogen, but they ruined the Borg. In the beginning it looked to me like there was a lot of potential for good storyline about the birth of the Federation, with episodes such as The Andorian Incident and the one that followed it up (I liked Shran), but for every good episode I watched I would see six or more completely ludicrous episodes. There were cheesy episodes in TOS, DS9, and even TNG, but they were the exceptions rather than the rule, for the most part.

Anyways, I abandoned Enterprise a bit over a year ago. Evil Time Travelling Space Nazis. They should just tack on a "From Hell", make it a B-Movie and be done with it.

Star Trek was over with First Contact. That was the end.

At least Star Wars still has one good movie left... and at least Lucas has the wisdom to let Star Wars die (as a movie franchise) after Revenge of the Sith.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what happened to you ?

You grew up.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[ahecht]

Actually, Lucas doesn't. He's been taking a Star Wars tv series to the networks recently, and hopes to have it on the air by 2007.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[antdude]

Watch the later episodes in season 4. That episode wasn't good.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[zoney_ie]

Ditto for me, as a fellow Irish trekkie, in terms of sticking with Star Trek... except I gave up at Voyager Season 2 and DS9 season 6 (Ezri Dax?) Oh, and gave up on the Factfiles after about 5 folders or so (wonder can I sell them on ebay or somesuch).

Recently housemates have had Voyager on in the afternoon at the weekend. I don't know why. Absolutely pants. Really stupid stuff (ohhh, lets bust up the ship, that'll be great for viewership).

Lets face it, Trekdom always had a lame side (think that soap opera in space episode of TNG where Worf sitting in a mud bath asks "do we just sit here" - very apt line). Unfortunately, the lame side has had the upper hand for a while now.

Let it die. Who knows, there might be a day for good Star Trek again. Failing that, we always have a large amount of good Trek. If you want new stuff with old crews just read the better novels. If you want new decent sci-fi, try something else (there's not always something worthwhile, but some shows come and go that are good).

ATM, I'm enjoying the admittedly light (not serious sci-fi) Doctor Who as decent entertainment. Hope that continues to go well. Also enjoying reruns on occasion of DS9 and Red Dwarf (although both seem to have ended on Sky recently) as well as Trek movies (II and III on SciFi channel was nice light weekend afternoon viewing).

I have no intentions of ever watching Enterprise. Nor have I seen ST:Nemesis (though I may relent on that when it's on TV).

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well put, my friend.

All the effort put into saving a lemon like Enterprise should have been better spent elsewhere. Enterprise doesn't deserve to be saved...it's garbage.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[NutscrapeSucks]

Having Nazis is 1000x more interesting than Generic Star Trek Butthead Alien of the Week. (Which unfortunately Storm Front had also.)

Why Nazis? Because Star Trek is SUPPOSED to be pulp action-oriented science fiction. Having a totally silly time-travel episode was a very fitting end to that overbearing and incoherant "temporal cold war" plot arc. Get back to the roots.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[thebdj]

Ok, I can say I was one of the first Trekkies to drop Enterprise right on its head in Season 1. Gave up on it before it got started, and boy was I glad I did. I will admit Season 4 has gotten better but it is too little too late. As for your comment on the movies declining post-Generations, go watch First Contact again. That is the best TNG film and only movie that comes close to Wrath of Khan in many peoples eyes, though I personally prefer Undiscovered Country myself.

Insurrection had considerably more potential and from what I've heard if you ask Frakes about it he'll probably bitch about Braga and Berman, though I don't know who hasn't. In the end those two let the franchise die a painful death post-DS9 and their only gleaming moments were a few surprises late in Voyager.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to just have an obsession with Trek,... There is more to life...

There are different types of obsession. Many hobbyists become "obsessed" with their passtime, but in a way that it doesn't affect the rest of their lives and that's healthy. That's what seems to be the case with the grand-parent poster. Obsession only becomes bad if it makes the person neglect other aspects of their lives. Furthermore, one part of each person's life should be a hobby and Star Trek is as good a hobby as any other. I would even say, if you don't have a hobby, then there is something wrong with you.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[sdsichero]

If you dropped Enterprise in season 1, how do you know this season is better?

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[CaptnMArk]

>Star Trek was over with First Contact. That was the end.

Actually, it was mostly over in first 5 minutes of ST 7, which was great until and including the moment Kirk died saving the ship. If the movie ended immediately after that it would be one of the great ST movies.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[STrinity]

The guy in charge of the fourth season of Enterprise (Manny Coto) was asked "Why Nazis?" regarding Storm Front. His response (bitterly)? "You'd have to ask Berman and Braga." Storm Front is the last vestige of the crap that Berman and Braga have been spewing for the first three years.

Casual Viewer: I tried watching Enterprise, but it's just pathetic crap trading on the "Star Trek" name.

Fanboy: For the first three seasons, maybe. But Season Four r0x0rz!

Casual Viewer: I just watched the first episode of hte fourth season, and it's just as bad as what came before.

Fanboy: You saw the bad episode. Trust me, it gets better.

You know, after a certain point, these excuses wear thin. When more than 75% of a series sucks, it deserves to get canceled.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[dmaxwell]

Let's drag Freddy, Chucky, and Jason into the mix. We can call it Star Trek: Red Shirt Massacre. Somehow, the supernatural psychopaths will always just miss killing the bridge crew. That suck?

Okay, how about a new series where their flexable take on physics always saves the day. It'll be called Star Trek: Ex Deus Machina. I know, I know, but at they'd be up front about it this way.

Either idea is guaranteed a few seasons if they don't forget to put in a healthy dose of T&A.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[blincoln]

Evil fucking time travelling goddamn Space Nazis.

You are so my hero. I need to remove some people from my friends list to make room for you.

I like what I've seen of season 4, but that hasn't included the first two. I did notice in the earliest one I watched that there was some obviously dismissive handwaving about time travelling anything. I think it was the Vulcan chick, someone asked her what happened to the time travelling aliens and she replied "oh, who fucking cares already? They're not coming back!" I only caught the subtle message there because I watched the first episode of the series when it originally came on. It was probably more obvious for people that have been following it.

Check out the three that begin with "Borderlands," and the ones around 4x12 that have the blue aliens with the antennae from TOS. If you still have any patience, that is.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[barawn]

Careful with italics tags. You should preview more often.

You know, after a certain point, these excuses wear thin. When more than 75% of a series sucks, it deserves to get canceled.

More than 75% of season 4 does not suck (2 episodes out of the entire season suck, and they don't suck if you use them as a cathartic release. It's enjoyable seeing characters who annoy the crap out of you die). That's what they were trying to get renewed.

Besides, the grandparent was just upset that Season 4 looked as bad as Season 2 & 3. It's not. It's just that the first two episodes are a massive cathartic purging of all of the combined crap of 3 years.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[imidan]

Another useless tidbit: "The Undiscovered Country" was the title that Nicholas Meyer originally intended for Star Trek II. It was kind of a cool title, given that Hamlet was referring to death when he spoke the phrase. I'm sure you can draw the whole Spock/Genesis Planet metaphor thingy.

In Star Trek VI, the phrase referred to the future, and the metaphor still applies, but it kind of a different way that I like, too.

</nerd-out>

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely agree. I picked up Star Trek: TNG from when my dad used to watch it. I liked TNG, DS9, and most of Voyager. However, Enterprise... was horrible.

I gave up on the first episode because of the horrible plot. But, even before that, I saw the foreshadowing -- how the hell do you change the traditions of "Star Trek: Whatever" and just call it Enterprise? More so, why the fuck would they put a Rod Stewart song on and change the usual opening?! C'mon! That's just tradition.

Likewise, I hate that they destroyed the Star Trek history. If you happen to own a copy of Star Trek: The Chronology, compare what's in there to references in Enterprise. They completely screwed it up.

And, the last offense was to create a ship that seemed to have technology superior to that of TOS... if its supposed to be before, then they should have made the technology seem less impressive. I realize that FX and such improve over time, but that doesn't mean you have to make everything look all sparkly and the technology perfectly crafted.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

apparently you missed the (as a movie franchise) part of the parent.

Idiot.

Re:Save Enterprise? No.

[David Gould]

As for your comment on the movies declining post-Generations, go watch First Contact again. That is the best TNG film and only movie that comes close to Wrath of Khan in many peoples eyes, though I personally prefer Undiscovered Country myself.

Uh... you mean the one where they completely destroyed the entire concept of what the Borg are by introducing the "Borg Queen"? Sorry, but that one's gotta be pretty low on the list, even if it was relatively good cinematically. If anything, I'd say that was the point from which (inclusively) nothing decent has come out of the Trek universe. Or at least, it was through that act of dumbing-down that what had been one of the Trek universe's most interesting plot elements became one of its most lame.

As for all the other post-original-cast movies (i.e., Generations and all that followed), my biggest general complaint is that they all failed to do anything "grand" enough to warrant being motion pictures in the first place, as opposed to regular two-part episodes. It felt like we might as well be watching any of the season finale/premier two-parters, only on the big screen and with marginally better special-effects and no commercials. Even Generations wasn't really "special" in any way other than being the first motion picture with the TNG cast, and the insultingly dismissive Kirk cameo. And Insurrection? How original was that story?

I agree about The Undiscovered Country being, out of all the Trek movies, the next best after The Wrath of Khan, though.

Re:No surprise

[1800maxim]

Seeing as this is ./, I take it you took a poll? Ran a survey?

Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

I love how the only thing that with all the wrongs in the world that require funding, the only thing that can mobilize some people is a television show.

Poverty? Government and corporate corruption? Yawn. Just don't takes away my tee-vee, or else we'll take to the streets!

Sigh.

Re:Sigh.

[JohnFluxx]

Bah, you're not gonna solve poverty with a couple of million dollars. All movies cost several million dollars. Do you never watch dvd's either, or listen to music in protest of the wasted money?

Re:Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

The ancient Romans called this "Bread and Circuses"

Re:Sigh.

[Hydrogenoid]

Yeah, solve corruption now by throwing more money on the problem!

umm...

[Tibe]

so wait, in soviet russia... is it 'you pay for tv' or 'tv pays for you' ?

Health care? Domestic violence?

[EvilCabbage]

Look, it's a shame the show was canned, but does it bother anybody else how many people were prepared to dig very deeply to keep a television show running, when there are some issues out there they could actually put their money to and do some good?

Re:Health care? Domestic violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

Like the man said, the poor will always be with you.

New Star Trek episodes won't.

Re:Health care? Domestic violence?

[Reignking]

As many will write, you can do what you want with your money. That said, I thought it was f'ing moronic to throw money at this "problem". Hell, I thought it was a joke that people were actually serious about it...

Re:Health care? Domestic violence?

[The Good Reverend]

there are some issues out there they could actually put their money to and do some good?

So, I assume then that you've never, ever, in your life paid for any sort of entertainment?

Re:Health care? Domestic violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm getting so damn sick of these posts.

The money that I would have given to save Enterprise would have been spent on a DVD set of a different show or something. Or maybe a new Xbox game. It wasn't being "thrown away" - it was part of my entertainment budget anyhow. I already donate to a few causes every year and I give my time once in a while to help people in need. But my entertainment money goes towards entertainment. That may be video games, may be a movie, may be trying to save a TV show.

Re:Health care? Domestic violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

Geeze, let people spend their money how they like. If you have a problem with it, go out and earn some of your own to contribute to your 'higher causes.'

Re:Health care? Domestic violence?

[hey!]

Well, Mr. Cabbage, I'd agree with you, except I'd prioritize my list of things to stop spending money on, starting with the downright stupid and harmful things. It'll be a while before targetting a little harmless escapist entertainment gets to the top of the list.

...and it didn't matter...

[maxzilla]

something tells me that paramount really didn't take the money because all the actors probably had new contracts with other shows. when Enterpize announced this would be the last season I'm sure the actors already had new projects to work on. i'm sure another Star Trek series will kick off eventually, and then people will forget about Enterprize. either that or that $3 mil that they collected could be put towards starting a new series from scratch. either way I dont really care.

Re:...and it didn't matter...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahaha... I'm sure some poor bastard was all over Scott Bakula when the news broke.

Re:...and it didn't matter...

[Anonymous Coward]

something tells me that paramount really didn't take the money because all the actors probably had new contracts with other shows. when Enterpize announced this would be the last season I'm sure the actors already had new projects to work on.

Is this a joke? You should be modded Funny. These actors are nothing remarkable. None of them are going to get any work after this.

How was this controversial?

[Tim_F]

I fail to see how a bunch of dorks raising money to save their favourite show is controversial?

Happy Troll

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a big fan of those Star Trek television shows, but I do like that Jam Jam character.

Screw Trek...

[chman]

...And save our Bluths instead.

Arrested Development is easily the best TV show to come from America in a long, long time. Stop watching reality TV you imbeciles and watch a show that's intelligent enough to not have to tell you when, and for how long, to laugh.

Re:Screw Trek...

[Darth_brooks]

If it's really that good, it wouldn't be on Fox.

Re:Screw Trek...

[jmelloy]

No, there's a lot of cases recently of Fox taking a good show and intentionally sending it down the shitter.

Firefly is the best example (episodes shown out of order, at different times, and no advertising), and then Wonderfalls.

Arrested Development just barely squeaked through, and will probably not see a 3rd season.

Fox actually tends to take the most chances of any network (would you see 24 on NBC?) ... they just understand that Simon Cowell pulls in amazing numbers, so play to their base.

Re:Screw Trek...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, intelligent? Please, it's a sitcom. It's an updated version of Faulty Towers or Soap. Nothing original or interesting there at all.

Re:Screw Trek...

[numark]

Firefly is the best example (episodes shown out of order, at different times, and no advertising), and then Wonderfalls.

Actually, I'd say that the killing of Futurama was probably the best example of Fox ruining a good show. Putting it on right after NFL games was definitely a good way of killing off what was developing a very interesting and entertaining series of plots. Instead, Futurama ended much too early.

Re:Screw Trek...

[Anonymous Coward]

P.S. - this is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated.

You won't get rid of Q that easily; he's a highly advanced being!

Re:Screw Trek...

[ShockTerminal]

Out of all the shows you coulda picked you said Arrested Development? Wow you have very little taste, I say little and not none cause you did bash reality TV (although I'm not sure what it has to do w/ here).

Now my hopes are dashed

[RealProgrammer]

I guess I have to move. It's been nice living here in the basement, but Mom isn't getting any younger and complains about fixing breakfast now. Oh, but wait -- there are still reruns! I've still got the original series on VHS and TNG on DVD! Still, it'll be harder to lure chicks down here without a new episode coming on.

Look at Doctor Who

[Marillion]

If the success of the Doctor Who revival is any indication, sometimes a long running series needs to take a few years off.

Bring it back when you can assemble a fresh creative team that hasn't burned out from years of doing the same thing over and over.

Still an impressive effort

[beef3k]

Just over $3 million raised in 60 days is a better indicator of the popularity of the show than any amount of signatures on a petition if you ask me.

Re:Still an impressive effort

[Anonymous Coward]

What is a better yardstick: a bunch of signatures which may relate to a bunch of eyes watching, or a bunch of money which might relate to a bunch of eyes that contributed a small amount, or more importantly a small number of eyes that contributed large amounts?

You are essentially arguing that the amount of money contributed to a political campaign is a good indicator of the popularity of the candidate (or issue), when it may just be an indication of a small number of very active special interest groups that do not represent the population in general.

Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[justanyone]

The quality of a TV show is often irrelevent to its cancellation. As best I can tell (based on experience with many beloved shows) it depends on:

* Buffy, MASH, etc.: Great shows, cancelled because producers and/or actors felt the show had 'run its course'.
* Wonderfalls, Firefly, Space:Above and Beyond (and HUGE numbers of others): F$*&^$'ing FOX had a political axe to grind and decided that progressive shows (with a Democratic leaning) should be killed and the rights to restart them never released;
* (Almost Buffy): production costs due to special effects were so high that it almost didn't balance the quite significant Advertising revenue;
* Ellen: Advertiser pullout due to a controversial actor;
* 1970's Space:1999: Bad writing, including implausible, inconsistent plotlines, characters that just 'show up', stilted language, etc., will kill a show through bad ratings - people recognize quality, to some degree.
* Sonny and Cher: Some shows deserve to be killed (grin); Seriously, this was a good show for its time but the TV 'Variety Show' went away with cable because the variety was available on different channels instead of all in the same show.

Just my 5 cents.
- Kevin

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[BenjyD]

IMHO, Buffy should have been cancelled two seasons before it was: quality was seriously down.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Otter]

I know, I know, it's pointless to argue with a conspiracy theorist but -- why exactly would Fox put on HUGE numbers of leftist shows* and immediately cancel them for ideological reasons? Wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to not put them on in the first place? Isn't it, perhaps, more plausible that they canceled the shows because no one was watching them but you?

* Never mind whether anything you mentioned is "Democratic leaning", anyway...

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Reignking]

Way to make things up! Ellen was canceled, like many shows, because the ratings sucked.

Joan Garry, executive director of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said the cancellation was a disappointment but not a surprise. "We're all disappointed ABC made a decision based on ratings. We really wish that they had seriously considered the impact of Ellen's work and looked at it from a broader perspective," she said.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[FidelCatsro]

Futurama is another great example of a show that was canceled well before its time ,season 4 was one of the best seasons.but it just cost too much aparently ... god i hate fox ...

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Chris Burke]

Isn't it, perhaps, more plausible that they canceled the shows because no one was watching them but you?

Oh, but that's just another level of the conspiracy!

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[TigerTale]

Firefly...progressive shows (with a Democratic leaning)

If, by "Democratic leaning" you mean the sort of Democrat who wore a grey uniform and fought the Union in the War of Northern Aggression, then sure, Firefly leans Democratic. Otherwise, I don't see how you categorize a pro-gun, anti-government, Western-in-space as either progressive or "Democratic leaning." Libertarian, sure--but just throwing a professional hooker into the mix doesn't make a program "Democratic."

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Otter]

And MASH was unwatchable for its last five years.

Topic for debate: There's only one sitcom I can think of that ran for more than five years without suffering a truly bad season -- Cheers. It's not my favorite show, or even in my top ten, or even something I watched regularly, but the most forgettable seasons were still pretty funny.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[zoomba]

MASH had run its course. The show lasted longer than the war it was based on. I think its best when shows go out while they're still on top, instead of dragging down into a mire of crap for a few seasons. My memories of MASH are very fond because of this.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Anonymous Coward]

why exactly would Fox put on HUGE numbers of leftist shows and immediately cancel them for ideological reasons?

Same reasons we still have elections here- you can't make a liberal really feel like crap unless you raise his or her hopes first.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[BenjyD]

The Simpsons had at least 9 or so excellent seasons, too. I agree in general, though.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Anonymous Coward]

The last few seasons of M*A*S*H were really nothing but bleeding heart liberal dreck - Alan Alda was so over the top in injecting his political agenda into the show that it was really just a shell of its former self. It started out as a damn funny and ironic comedy, but ended up as a preachy, overwrought screed - interestingly, much the way that most of the Star Trek franchises have ended up.

Ellen? Bad ratings. Space:1999? A bad show is a bad show. Wonderfalls et al? Never watched 'em. I guess nobody else did either.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Otter]

The Simpsons (and Married With Children and Seinfeld and ...) rank much higher on my list of favorite shows. But they all had awful seasons -- Cheers comes to my mind as the only long-lived sitcom that didn't.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Blakey Rat]

Wonderfalls, Firefly, Space: Above and Beyond all sucked ass. I'm sorry, but they were cancelled because the shows didn't pull in enough viewers, not because of Fox's "political views." (BTW, that's one of the more insane conspiracy theories I've seen on the Internet in a long while... do you perchance have a homepage with a long rant discussing the TimeCube in various fonts and colors?)

I never watched Buffy, but MASH was only cancelled after it *had* run it's course. That show was on forever. Hell, I wish they'd have cancelled The Simpsons 5 years ago when it had run its course-- the new episodes suck.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[MBraynard]

....but just throwing a professional hooker into the mix doesn't make a program "Democratic."

It sure helps as they have the shared identity of 'whores.'

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[tsotha]

but just throwing a professional hooker into the mix doesn't make a program "Democratic."

An intern, then.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Anonymous Coward]

Strictly speaking, Firefly is probably closer to "anti-authoritarian", which would put it at odds with the more authoritarian ideals of the current republican party.

Re:Show Quality Is Often Irrelevent

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of Fox, don't forget Family Guy, Farscape, and Futurama (Maybe they just hate shows that start with 'F').

Idea For Next Show

[DanielMarkham]

"Vulcan Bay Watch" You heard it here first.

Re:Idea For Next Show

[will_die]

Wouldn't it be better to call it Bay Watch: Vulcan?
That way the bay watch crowd would think it is some fantastic beach.

Re:Idea For Next Show

[IronicCheese]

You, sir, are a genius.
All the money for the "Save Enterprise" fund should be put into advertising to support this new show.

Re:Idea For Next Show

[earthbound kid]

"Vulcan Bay Watch"?

Sounds highly logical.

Re:Idea For Next Show

[RocketScienceGeek]

Naah, I'm holding out for CSI: Vulcan

Just when you think it couldn't get worse

[noewun]

The site also stated that many Trek crewmembers are now working on executive producer Brannon Braga's new CBS series Threshold, which stars Brent Spiner (Data).

The night that show premieres may be the night I throw away my TV.

Re:Just when you think it couldn't get worse

[Anonymous Coward]

Extra points if you can hit B&B in the head.

A whole $144k? And Paramount didn't reconsider?

[BrianRoach]

Really. The article states that $144k was raised by fans (with $3m in commitments from corperations).

Even if the average contribution was $1 (which I'm sure was actually higher) ... that's only 144k fans.

You could probably get better viewership and advertising dollars re-running ST:TNG (Or say .. "Alf")

- Brian Roach

My question is...

[Holi]

Who gets the money now that this ridiculous idea failed?
Damn I wish I had started this. I'd be sitting on a beach some where wiping margarita off my mouth with a $10,000 towel.

It didn't work for Farscape, why would it work for Enterprise.

Finally!

[borg1238]

Now maybe these "Save Enterprise" news posts on Slashdot will finally come to an end. God... you'd think the show was good or something.

Re:Finally!

[zrk]

I hear ya. I'm sure someone knows the answer, but I'm convinced that the most recent episode was written AFTER the cancellation announcement. I think that gave the writers the freedom to try writing a TOS-style ending, right down to the the forced "oooo, the Vulcan made a funny. No I didn't!" epilogue.

OY!

Re:Finally!

[borg1238]

Yes, I agree. What predictable garbage that ep... hell, the whole series, was.

I couldn't believe that episode was written by the Manny Coto. You know... the guy that was supposed to save the show. But what can I really expect from the guy who gave us Star Kid.

DIE!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Watched that Orion slave girl episode the other day and yea....

Death couldnt have happened to a crappier series.

nice doggie

[kabdib]

Once, just /once/, I wanted to see the puppy save the ship.

[That very first scene with the "bio gel" set the tone for the whole series; shallow and uninventive. Backed ourselves into an unreconcilable plot corner again? No problem! Just whip out the goddamned time machine and hit "undo" a couple more times... sheesh]

Why don't the fans...

[cnelzie]

...create their own positive thinking fictional future universe based upon the ideals of Gene's vision, but removing all of the trappings of Star Trek.

They could create a new series that can captivate audiences, tell stories in a new world that starts sometime 100 to 200 years from now. Sure, they couldn't use much of the Star Trek hardware; no Transporters, no Warp Drive, but is all of that really necesary to tell a SciFi story along the lines of Gene's vision?

Re:Why don't the fans...

[petermgreen]

are transporters and warp drive really that innovative concepts? they were both introduced to solve otherwise largely unsolveable problems (transporters were about not being able to stage lots of landings on a low budget, warp drive was about faster than light travel which is pretty essential for any sci-fi series) sure you might have to do them in slightly different ways but doing a star trek like series would be basically impossible without some form of faster than light but still finite speed drive for the ship (wormholes stargates etc are ok but they imo lead to a very different dynamic with basically instant travel to largely defined locations) and doing it on a low budget would be near impossible if you had to do a shuttlepod landing for every planetry visit.

Re:Why don't the fans...

[cnelzie]

If the fans can come up with enough money to film one season of a Trek series, the fans could come up with enough money to fully finance their own series and if that series can be sold, it can be become a self-perpetuating series.

With modern computer graphics, the costs involved in filming shuttlepod landings could be fairly easily handled.

Who says the starship needs to be some kind of large traditional Starfleet type vessel?

You don't even really need to describe much about the FTL system. You could go the "Firefly" approach and just never explain it, just have some interesting effect take place and go from there.

Can't be saved

[Anonymous Coward]

According to this article, Enterprise will be cancelled no matter what.
Sorry guys.

Luck for them it's over...

[IdJit]

Now they have more time to camp in line in front of Grauman's theatre for Revenge of the Sith!

Don't worry

[tobybuk]

In a few years time they'll be looking for what new programs they can make and yes, instead of creating something really new and interesting, they'll figure that the golden goose as a new egg to hatch.

The milking of this baby will go on and on.

My proposition to use the money:

[Kosi]

Use it for bribes and other things being neccessary that the next series does not suck like ENT and hopefully can tie up to the quality of TNG.

Let others run with Trek

[Anonymous Coward]

Take a look at the various fan films being made on the web, like:

www.newvoyages.com
hiddenfrontier.com
www.star shipexeter.com

These prove that Trek can still work. All it needs is people with PASSION behind it, making it GOOD. True, the fan films aren't perfect, but they are far more enjoyable than what Paramount puts out.

If Paramount insists on hiring the "it's just a gig" crowd, like they have been, they will continue to turn out mediocre shows. The "it's just a gig" crowd can't be bothered to make plots work, develop characters, or keep continuity.

Personally, I have wondered why fans don't just get together and make their own ORIGINAL series which has nothing to do with Trek. Flying around the universe in spaceships is nothing patented or copyrighted by Paramount. It's a genre, and it's not owned by anyone. Think of the wonderful freedom which comes with making your own universe.

Re:Let others run with Trek

[zakezuke]

Take a look at the various fan films being made on the web

Wow, you mean I can actually get access to fan based trek stories without having to put up with the annoying self righteous people in the fan clubs? This is the best news i've heard all day.

I like star trek. I even would look at a technical manual and blueprints. But I've met some pretty awful people in the fan clubs who adopted Federation ideals as their own, and rank their friends in a pseudo military hierarchy based on how long they known each other, even those who never made a commitment to the cause.

Re:Let others run with Trek

[Mant]

Fan films don't prove anything can work as a commercial TV series, even if they are actually any good.

Fans don't make their own original stuff, because they aren't all likely to care about something one of them made up in the same way. Plus someone is going to have to come up with the new vision, and other people are somehow going to have to find out about it.

Using a pre-existing setting means everyone already knows about it and likes it and wants to be involved, and hopefully won't argue to much about it.

Re:Let others run with Trek

[mink]

They should have taken the 3.1 MIL and grabbed Jeffery Colmbs and anyone else who wanted in to do a series around the Shran character.

Was there a Canadian offer?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Canadian offer would have been a lot more credible if the credentials of Al Vinci were verifiable. And when asked why the credentials couldn't be verified, it didn't help their cause to have their attorney refuse to talk with anyone who wasn't in the press.

Speaking of Bound...

[krudler]

Was it me or did this episode just blow? Seriously not a flame, I even enjoyed the "fighting the evil alien nazi" episodes. Are they trying to put a bad taste in our mouthes so we won't want the show to be renewed? I wonder if they will fuck up the mirror universe episodes.

Obligatory...

[Anti Frozt]

"It's dead, Jim."

Re:Obligatory...

[pklong]

Obligatory Kahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhnnnnnn

Theme tune

[Anonymous Coward]

I liked enterprise maby not the best ST serise made but it deserved to die because of the rubish power balard theme tune what the f*^k was that about?

All Star Trek Sucked.

[Belial6]

Face it, all the Star Trek series sucked. Bad acting, Bad special effects, and they kept wanting to run episodes from previous series with the new actors.

I'll give TOS a break, as they were doing something new with a comparatively small budget, but TNG that everyone seems to rave about was crap. The first season was crammed full of -The Enterprise had to deal with a similar issue with Captain Kirk-. I lost count of how many times they made referece IN THE DIALOG to the original series. The special effects were atrocious! All of the, hey this is an alian planet, so we should make the sky pink by anging a big screen and shining colored lights on it.

TNG sucked, but we were all so excited to get a new Star Trek that we ignored that it sucked, and watched it anyway. Heck, don't you remember Season 1 where they tried to convince us that in the future men will be wearing mini skirts as official military dress?

Enterprise was by far the stronges Star Trek to be released to date, and the special effects were dramatically better than any previous Star Trek. The biggest problem for Enterprise is that there is so much decent to good Sci-Fi now, that it is being judged in a completely different class than any of the previous series.

Re:All Star Trek Sucked.

[Anonymous Coward]

Enterprise was by far the stronges Star Trek to be released to date...

Wha...? Oh, wait, I know you're making a joke! Excellent sense of humor there. For a minute you actually had me going! Especially when this "Enterprise" travesty actually makes the worst ST series, Voyager, look like one of the best science fiction out there!

Man, you're an excellent comedian! You should be on Leno or Letterman or something! :-)

Re:All Star Trek Sucked.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know. I thought Andrew Robinson and Avery Brooks from DS9 were brilliant actors. I certainly didn't see any better in LOTR, etc, or whatever movies people think have good acting.

Where are our writers?

[Zombie Ryushu]

Where are our writers? I Understand that Gene Roddenberry and Issac Asimov are dead. (Arthur C Clarke is still alive.)

I see science fiction/fantasy these days and I ask myself... where are our new generations of young writers and producers with the creativity or vision to produce new stories and new ideas in our time.

Where has all our intellectual capital gone?

Re:Where are our writers?

[insulto]

Well, Stephen Baxter and Orson Scott Card have been writing some really good stuff. Not to mention Gene Wolfe, but he's not very young anymore.

let it die!

[Madman]

Personally I never thought Enterprise was any good. Maybe the failure of the series will spur paramount to put some effort into making the next one less crap.

Well, if Enterprise didn't suck...

[Marthisdil]

...and had more viewers, this wouldn't be an issue. I like Star Trek...I hated Enterprise. Better to kill it, than to waste more money on a show that doesn't pull in the advertising. I couldn't see Paramount selling rights to anyone else.

They will just follow the others

[night_flyer]

look at Battlestar Gallactica & The Honeymooners

Starbuck a woman? Ralph Crandon played by Cedric the Entertainer?

They will just redo the original series with Capt Kirk played by Grace Jones, Spock by Jessica Alba, Bones by Jet Lee, Sulu by Ron Howard... etc...

it will be a masterpiece!

Re:They will just follow the others

[MrCopilot]

Damnit Jim, I'm a Doctor, not a Kung-Fu Master, Oh Wait I'm Both.

Shatner School of Punctuation?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think, this poster, went, to the Shatner, school, of, punctuation. ;-)

Re:Shatner School of Punctuation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the poster's punctuation was mostly correct. So who looks foolish now?

Re:Shatner School of Punctuation?

[RichardX]

Still, it could have been...........worse, he COULD have gone to the..............Tony Blair school of...........punctuation, and THAT is something...... I believe deeply and sincerely.

Re:Shatner School of Punctuation?

[pipingguy]

Which of course, would have to be in the Shatner Building.

"That is not the legal name of the building, and the administration will never call it that," said Drummond of the University Centre, a.k.a. the Shatner building. Showing no appreciation for the myriad times that William Shatner saved humankind from Klingon invasions, Drummond said: "He's hardly our most famous graduate, and there are McGill graduates that are more significant contributors to the world than Shatner."

The whole Star Trek needs to be saved

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll repeat it ad nauseam: the only way to save Star Trek isn't in making prequels or new series with intradimensional-spacetime-bending-transwarping powered ships, but making it return to its roots: exploration+conflicts+development, and it can be done by finding a way to start it again from a new beginning.
Make the Federation fall somehow after being hit by the strongest enemy ever, then we'll have tons of possibilities on how create new series/movies.
I'm sure the old Trekkies would love a movie trilogy involving fugitives on all kind of ships escaping from the occupied known galaxy, teaming together to find a new place where they can settle, grow their forces, find a weak point in the enemy and after a credible amount of time starting the long trip back to fight for their original homes. From this point a new TV series could start.

This could bring new ideas and more drama to the show without making it suck to the level of Battlestar Galactica.

Just my .02 grams of antimatter.

Re:The whole Star Trek needs to be saved

[VAXcat]

They should start out with an episode where Kirk rolls over in bed and tells Yeoman Rand,"I just had the craziest nightmare", and have everytihjng after TOS have been a bad dream.

Re:The whole Star Trek needs to be saved

[knarfling]

Make the Federation fall somehow after being hit by the strongest enemy ever, then we'll have tons of possibilities on how create new series/movies.
I'm sure the old Trekkies would love a movie trilogy involving fugitives on all kind of ships escaping from the occupied known galaxy, teaming together to find a new place where they can settle, grow their forces, find a weak point in the enemy and after a credible amount of time starting the long trip back to fight for their original homes. From this point a new TV series could start.

This was actually the plot of Starship Andromeda. Originally it was supposed to be in the Trek Universe, but (wisely IMHO) it was decided that it would be a completely different setting. Changes were made to the way space travel worked and the species. I actually followed it for a few seasons, but it never gathered a huge fan base.

I don't really know if it would have made much difference if it was based on the Trek Universe. I believe that it would have caused almost as many problems as Enterprise did.

Re:The whole Star Trek needs to be saved

[slothman32]

I personally like the relativally utopian aspect. All the other sci-fi's are dark. You can watch one of those for societies where millions of people hate each other and are fighting all the time.
Yes it could bring more ideas but so could making it a teenage drama.
Now whether this particular series, or others, is good is a different story. But at least it doesn't have ships that have wires and tubes everywhere, a ship being shot at every episode, or fire fights all the time
Even games are too distopian for me in many cases.
In summary, keep the friendliness and remove any suckiness.

Rah rah

[marevan]

So. They were outmanouvered by Paramounts "Resistance is futile" - campaing.

Yeayea. Old and louzy yadayada beam me up.

Don't worry about Shatner

[ClosedSource]

He's doing quite well in his new career of playing caricatures of himself in movies, TV, and commercials.

Count me in.

[jspoon]

Brilliant. Where can I send my money?

OSF

[Quiet_Desperation]

How about an open source fiction project?

The first phase is to construct the universe in which the stories will take place.

Then you start hashing out plots for a first season run.

Then you start in on the actual scripts. Seems like you could eventually converge on logically plotted and entertaining scripts.

You could also wind up with an unholy mess, but if you had the right people in charge you might get something. You'll need someone who knows how to pitch ideas once it's ready.

Re:OSF

[werewolf1031]

How about an open source fiction project?

Already in the works. Try Orion's Arm for an "open-source" sci-fi universe. Some very interesting concepts there, though none of it's aimed at film or television.

It has to end

[CypherXero]

It has to end sometime, it can't go on forever, TV shows and movies don't last that long...wait, nevermind. A Star Wars trailer just appeared on TV...

It's too bad.

[JMZero]

The last season of Enterprise has been fairly strong. I think a lot of people built up some irrational hatred over the first couple seasons.

I also think people have clouded memories of the quality of past shows. TNG was horrible for most of its run - just horrible. It redeemed itself now and again, but mostly it sucked (especially early seasons). Voyager was poor. DS9 was ridiculously bad. Remember the final episode? One of the worst things I've ever watched.

Are some themes played out? Of course, but so what? Sure the "let's clone Tucker" Enterprise episode was a rehash - but they did as good a job at it as Star Trek ever did.

As to "not addressing social themes" - I'd say they've tried. What do you think the "mind meld disease" was? Who do you think the Xindi represent? What is implied by the Tellarite/Andorion feud?

Is the social stuff ham-handed? Yes, of course. And it always was, from the original series on - it's just you were younger then.

Enterprise has all the stuff you once liked about Star Trek. Maybe you don't like that stuff anymore - but it's still a good show.

Re:It's too bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

DS9 was consistently the best stuff put out in the Star Trek franchise, with more quality episodes than all the rest of Trek put together.

Sure, they had some weak ones and the ending could have been better, but ridiculously bad it wasn't.

Re:It's too bad.

[FreeUser]

The last season of Enterprise has been fairly strong. I think a lot of people built up some irrational hatred over the first couple seasons.

Having seen a number of episodes in the first seasons before giving up on the show, I would have to say there is nothing "irrational" about the hatred. Misguided, perhaps, if the show did indeed improve in the 4th season as some have said, but not irrational.

The first two seasons sucked so badly, decorum prevents me from using the necessary adjectives and nouns to accurately describe just how much.

this is the end

[nashy-nunu]

I never watched any of the Trek

No its not a shame

[Viol8]

Enterprise was just a tired old rehash of everything thats gone before in star trek. It had precisely zero new ideas or concepts and should never have been brought to the screen in the first place without a serious rethink by the writers. Perhaps now this 3rd rate Me Too series has been binned the money can be spent on some original sci-fi (though I won't hold my breath).

Odyssey 5

[cappadocius]

The guy in charge of the fourth season of Enterprise (Manny Coto)

Speaking of Manny Coto, how come there was no protest when Odyssey 5 got cancelled? I thought that show was very promising and enjoyable science fiction.

Irrelevant?

[smchris]

At risk of being considered a flamer, I would like to propose that the Startrek vision is now irrelevant.

1. United Federation of Planets? Give me a break. Not when we are going to send someone to the UN who wants to dismantle it.

2. Science? Not when you got Jesus

3. Technology? Not when you got China

4. Prime directive? Why are we in Iraq? (Well, at least _one_ of the reasons thrown out)

5. Human rights? Where to start.....

Most "damning" probably is the loss of American Positivism: the idea that a rational society can make "progress". We are actively dismantling that progress of the last century every day.

Put in that light, why on earth should anyone expect there to be a TV show like Startrek on network Television? Unless it is reworked into Startrek Revelations.

Unfortunately, I"ve found the movies profoundly mediocre to awaful so if they think they can revive interest in a few years with a movie, they've lost me. I'll pop a bottle of wine and toast the loss of my youthful ideals at the last episode.

Re:Irrelevant?

[Dhalka226]

At risk of being considered a flamer, I would like to propose that the Startrek vision is now irrelevant.

If what you say is true (not a big Trek fan, for one, nor am I interested in getting into the politics of your statements), wouldn't that make the vision more important? "We're not that way so it makes the vision irrelevant" is silly. That's the purpose of a vision. If it simply reflected reality, it would be just that.

As to whether or not the shows/movies suck, well, that's a different argument. I'll leave that one to actual Trekkies to debate.

Re:Irrelevant?

[skintigh2]

"Most "damning" probably is the loss of American Positivism: the idea that a rational society can make "progress". We are actively dismantling that progress of the last century every day."

I think I can pinpoint the day where I lost my optimism: the day I learned that we officially saction torture, by our own forces and by "rendition" (outsourcing), is the day something in me died.

"This is a battle between good and evil" Bush said.

I'm not sure which side is which anymore.

Re:Irrelevant?

[Dogtanian]

"This is a battle between good and evil" Bush said.

I'm not sure which side is which anymore.

Or what about "This is a battle between evil and evil". This is the case much of the time.

I figure one way of knowing you're growing up is knowing that (a) Sometimes 'you' (whoever 'you' are) are on the wrong side, (b) Sometimes neither side is good (Stalin was fighting Hitler; which one was 'good'?), (c) Sometimes there is good and evil on both sides.

Re:Irrelevant?

[nigelc]

But that's what works in science fiction -- you can explore and challenge the ideas/politics/religion/philosophy of the day in ways that make people think.

Look at the furor about (for example) that recent movie about the Reagans -- the Republican Church of St. Ronnie the Forgetful were all over that, and that was a craptacular movie in the first place.

But you could write a really good science fiction story around any of your dystopian points above, and be able to express some alternative points of view. Sometimes Star Trek did this (at least as far as Voyager), and certainly Babylon-5 explored some of the dark side of humanity.

David Drake has written some good (and some really bad) SF stories based on classic tales, and has written a lot about the War in Vietnam against the backdrop of a group of very successful space mercenaries.

But to a lot of people at the networks, "science fiction" means set it on a space ship, put the women in skimpy costumes (not a bad thing) and blow shit up! Glen Larson (who created the original "Battlestar Galactica") was at a convention back last century where he bitterly talked about how the network had come in and offered the following notes:
* the Cylons must never be shown killing a human
* the humans must win every encounter against the Cylon menance
* you can't show the good guys doing bad things
and a few others. As he said, it made it hard to tell a story about a group of survivors that were fighting for their lives in the face of a superior menace.

So Star Trek (or whatever follows it) needs to get back to the roots of science fiction, and explore ideas that may be distasteful to some and boring to others. And Sturgeon's Law applies, of course, so a lot of it will be crap.

Re:Irrelevant?

[tsotha]

I'm sick of this shit. Why does every discussion on slashdot have to include infantile political blatherings? Can we have one thread that doesn't tie back to some moron's BushIsHitler fixations?

Re:Irrelevant?

[smchris]

If what you say is true (not a big Trek fan, for one, nor am I interested in getting into the politics of your statements

I thought I was noting sociology, not politics. When I was watching classic trek as a kid, we were progressing to the moon for real and that was a heady social vision. That isn't an "opinion". America was #1 in education. America was the manufacturing engine of the world and "Made in Japan" meant junk. UNICEF was a good cause at halloween. Kennedy challenged the young to foreign service in the PEACE Corp. State college tuition was about $12/credit (free in some states) in large part because education was considered an essential good to society. Roddenberry was well known as a humanist instead of an evangelical. Just facts. This isn't the same society. There isn't even room to discuss the Startrek vision now without angry divisiveness (and being called "political").

Remember that we are talking a mass medium in television. Not only is it an uphill battle to transmit quality when you have to stop to hawk Pizza Hut every 10 minutes, as a mass medium it really does have to reflect the values of the society to maintain adequate ratings. Heck, Great Britian once had a meet-the-philosopher-of-the-week talking head show that I understand was actually quite popular. Don't hold your breath for that to show up on UPN either. No, the fact that the Startrek vision is quite opposed to current reality _is_ a reason to keep it off TV and a reason that isn't so easy to overcome IMHO.

Now that the "Save Enterprise" campaign is over...

[UnclePunk]

Some things to keep them busy: 1. Get in line for the the new Star Wars movie 2. Spend more time with their virtual girlfriends 3. Coordinate a write-in campaign to release Duke Nukem Forever 4. Go to Union Square in NYC and join in whatever they're protesting today

OMG!

[BigBadBus]

Geeks fail to raise millions of dollars! Seize the opportunity to get a life!

It's time to move on.

[hey!]

Look, the problem isn't Berman. It's Paramount. Star Trek is a property, a "franchise". You can love Star Trek all you want, but as long as it's Paramount's property, it will never love you back.

Things were different in the Roddenberry era. He was responsible for a lot of what was ridiculous and stupid in ST, to be sure. But also what was captivating and fun about it. The two weren't unrelated. He wan't afraid to try something people might (probably would) think was stupid, like a character with pointy ears. You never get that kind of balls from a committee.

Re:It's time to move on.

[k96822]

Would somebody mod this guy up already? He speaks truth.

No.

[Anonymous Coward]

People spending their time and money on things they enjoy is good.

Possible cause...

[Spy der Mann]

Apparently the TV producers arranged a deal with the TrekUnited people:
They would get them girlfriends.

Brazel Druggy?

[micromuncher]

Reading throught the controversy, The Vicci Link was insightful!

I guess anyone who experimented with soft drugs isn't worthy of fundraising! Pot heads are all criminals after all!

The moral decline of America is what killed interprise. My Bill O'Reilly sense is tingling ( if neo_conservative then make_shit_up ) - al Trekkies (Trekkers) must be pot heads! Tepol was a druggie! WTF!

Arrg!

more like "Botany Bay Watch"

[JPelorat]

They even had plenty of sand. Want to watch out for the little earwig things though.

I'll tell you why it was cancelled

[slapout]

It was cancelled because it's on UPN and UPN just doesn't reach enough people. They put Star Trek on their network to try to help their network. Now their network is hurting Trek.

When Voyager started it was in syndication on my local CBS affiliate. Then my area got a "local" UPN station. When I try to tune it in all I get is static.

Throwing money into a hole...

[Svartalf]

Considering that the two things you list are things that just simply won't get fixed with one throwing money at the problem (In the case of Health Care, we happen to have some of the best in the world in this country- however, because of the ways Health Insurance runs things and the needs of the medical community to have things like Malpractice Insurance, it's not possible for everyone to have it, even if you threw money at it... In the case of Domestic Violence, it's a different story but the results are the same...)- it's putting money into a black hole.

Putting the money to it wouldn't do any good (this is not to say that we shouldn't work on the problems, but the root causes are something that need working on as the problems are merely symptoms of a deeper problem that you're not going to fix with money. Time and education, possibly- but money won't fix it ever...). Putting the money to entertainment, well, that's easier- it produces some results and you end up with something in the end (a TV show, movie, etc. that you can get a copy of at some point...).

Hate to say it guys

[GMFTatsujin]

Take a tip from Doctor Who. Let the TV franchise die the death it so desperately needs; put the stake through the heart and bury the heaving corpse in its native soil. Give it 15 years or so to regenerate. When it comes back, it will be more awesome than before with fresh twists on the old canon that'll make your jaw drop.

In the meantime, satisfy your cravings with the assloads of DVDs, magazines, audio dramas, and novels. Spinoff media tend to have more leeway, and so that's where the reinvigoration starts. Once the powers that be see that the productive fan base can actually improve the franchise instead of lapping up the table scraps from the studios, they'll come around and meet you at least half-way.

Time heals all wounds. It worked for Who, and it'll work for you too.

Re:Hate to say it guys

[Anonymous Coward]

They have started a new Doctor Who series, but releasing the DVD's was still a great idea for Doctor Who!

Trouble with Tribbles and Enterprize

[skintigh2]

If nothing else, at least they explained the rest of the Trouble with Tribbles. DS9 explained why Tribbles kept falling on Kirk's head at the end of the episode - Dax was chucking them - but brought up the question of why Klingons were white. Worf simply said it was something they do not talk about.

Well, Enterprise explains it: genetically modified Klingons had some human genes mixed in which makes them look more human.

That sticks out as the main piece of history of Trek in Enterprize... There are hints all over the place of who's Spocks parents are, but that's it. I love when they cope up with everthing but "red alert," but I was hoping for more. I like the aspect of engineering, and I love the building of a new universe from the foundation, but it's really not grabbing me.

It needs more character development, but not just for the characters. It needs it for the universe, for the different races, for alliances and enemies. It needs intrigue like in DS9. I loved not knowing if Garak could be trusted, and my favorite epsisode was the one where they trick the Romulans into joining the alliance. I loved the complex, more-than-one-dimentional relationship between Odo and Quark. Enterprise is missing that.

Re:Trouble with Tribbles and Enterprize

[mink]

I think there were a few outstanding characters that did bring life to the Enterprise universe. Shran for instance.

The obvious opportunity

[podperson]

...is to create a series set in the Star Trek Universe that covers new ground rather than going over old ground and screwing it up.

There are many unanswered questions about the Star Trek universe...

1) How do you buy a donut?
2) How is the president elected? Is the president elected?
3) What do the 95% (say) of the people who aren't in Star Fleet do with their time?

So, you might, for example, make a series that isn't set on a Starship (or a Space Station -- DS9 was basically just Star Trek does Babylon 5).

Oh wait, how about we do Federation Away Teams going through stargates...

Or no, the last survivors of a war against robots of their own creation trying to get back to Earth...

No, wait, a small Federation team establishes a base in another galaxy and has to fight space-faring vampires...

I've got it, a Federation Away Team led by an eccentric ... Q ... finds a time-traveling London Police Box and travels back in time to destroy the Cardassians before they got started.

Has it occurred to anyone ...

[Chris Daniel]

That the series simply sucks? I stopped watching it in the first season, so I can't really speak for any other seasons, but the little I've seen when my dad watches during dinner has really been crap. Where has the wit and wonder of TNG and DS9 gone?

Re:Has it occurred to anyone ...

[ShockTerminal]

You know your right, if you haven't seen past 1st season you don't have place to say. If your only catching little bits then your probably missing what your looking for, that is how it works. I'm going through all of THG and DS9 now and I must say the 1st couple seasons SUCKED as hard if not worse then Enterprise's first couple, it takes a while to establish and gel. The show has hit it's prime and being cut short.

Re:Has it occurred to anyone ...

[whitehatlurker]

Where has the wit and wonder of TNG and DS9 gone?

Did you see the first season of TNG?!? It sucked pretty hard, mostly because they were trying to reshoot TOS.

Re:Has it occurred to anyone ...

[ShockTerminal]

While I like the quantum flux episodes, I do have to say the humanity episodes are very good for the series/franchise and play a very important part. It started to drift from that and I feel Manny Coto did a GREAT job bringing it back to where it needs to be.

Re:Has it occurred to anyone ...

[Dionysus]

You do realize that Enterprise had timetravel in their very first episode, AKA the pilot?

Re:Has it occurred to anyone ...

[ShockTerminal]

Yaaaaa....... I'm not sure I see your point.

Well actually I like it when..

[Anonymous Coward]

..they let a pervert do the directing...

"Yes, T'Pol to walk away from the camera...linger on her ass!!!"
"T'Pol to stand with her back to the camera while talking about some techie mumbo jumbo. Move that console out of the way, its blocking the camera's view of her ass!!"
"T'Pol to find a coin on the floor, and picks it up s-l-o-w-l-y, camera to get a good shot of her ass!!"
"Captain Archer to enter from stage right.. never mind, have T'Pol have a conversation with him while still bending over and talking between her legs..Archer can sit on the floor bringing his face to T'Pol's ass level so we can zoom in a bit!"

huh?

[David Rolfe]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=save+odyssey+ 5

These schemes (almost) never work, that's probably why you didn't hear about it. I mean the most people ever really get for all their clamoring is maybe one extra season or, like with Farscape, an extra couple hours.

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

The schemes don't work because people don't do them properly.

The proper way to get a show saved is as follows:

Announce a "Save the Show" Campaign.
Announce a boycott of everything else that is part of the company that produces said show. So for Enterprise, you would boycott all purchases of Paramount stuff.
Tell everyone to save the money they would have spent on Paramount stuff (like DVD sets of other shows) for a minimum of 6 months.

Simple as that. People just have to hold off on buying from the company for 6 months, while optionally putting the money saved into the "Save the Show" campaign.

With one hand you hold the carrot; in the other, you hold the stick.

For all public companies, a large drop in profit over two quarters will be enough to make them reinstate the show, or face huge pressure from their shareholders and a loss of most board members.

You must always threaten as well as praise - with money-grubbing companies, it's the only thing that gets through.

TrekUnited campaign NOT over.

[Anonymous Coward]

It is only the 'fan-supported donation' part that is over. Al Vinci (Canadian producer) is not giving up. The fans sure aren't giving up either. Tim Brazeal and the rest of the TrekUnited crew have mentioned that they will continue to do what the fans want them to do, so they haven't given up either. So, no, it is not over.

Has it occurred to anyone ...

[jeffc128ca]

I actually enjoyed the first season of Enterprise. After watch several years of TNG I couldn't take DS9 or Voyager. It was excrutiating for me to watch those shows. There were ocasional decent episodes. But you can tell when a star trek show is loosing ideas when they revert to use time travel or far out made up technology to solve a problem.

The best Star Trek episodes have always been about people solving human issues. In the beginning of Enterprise it was so refreshing to see Humans stumbling with space travel. A back to the basics type of show. When a trek series episode reverts to how some smart crewman reversed the polarity of quantum flux thingy magigy to save the day it's time to change writers or kill the show. Enterprise got there quicker than I thought they would.

I know there are fans who like the quantum flux solution crap, but those types are few and far between in the public at large. Mark my words, when a science fiction show reverts to time travel and quantum flux solutions the show is over. Its like the Happy Days Fonzie on water ski's moment.

extreme disappointment

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but after that "The women run their society?!" smart ass comment in the orion episode, this show deserves to end... I don't want to see it revived.

The producers should be ashamed for losing sight of what Star Trek represents.

Fan films are one way

[glasse]

Right on. Alternately, I was hoping this episode would make everyone realize, "Hey, we've got a whole bunch of money.. why don't we just pay the cast to make another season?" Something like that, community-sponsored media, would be quite cool as well (because let's face it, Straczynski's never going to make fan films).

Ethan

In other news...

[halcyon1234]

The TrekUnited fund has now been renamed to the MakeJeriRyanChangeHerNameToSevenOfNineAndWalkAroun dInTightShirtsAllTheTime Fund.

Is it just me...

[johnmearns]

It seems like some of the largest supports are the huge star trek fans with shatner underoos and a model warp enging humming in their bedroom, but the same group is also the most vocal for saying good riddance. I like star trek, I loved growing up watching TNG. I just got UPN last year so I missed out on the first few seasons of enterprise. I really on the whole like what I've seen since then. I get the feeling that alot of fans are too much into going "OOOOOOOOOOO but that breaks star trek rules in episode 426 scottie tried that and the wormhole collapsed because tetrayon particles are unstable in subspace!!!!" instead of giving a little creative license to the writers.

I am heart-broken

[CdnZero]

Now I will never get to see Dean Stockwell in his navy whites pop onto the bridge of the Enterprise and tell Scott Bakula "Ziggy says there is an 8...8...*smack* 87% chance that if you nail T'Pol in the next 48 hours you will leap."

I am a sick sick bugger.

J. Michael Straczynski on Star Trek

[dotMantle]

I didn't think to post these when the last Enterprise story went up, but here's a couple of comments from JMS about writing a Star Trek series.

The first talks about JMS thoughts of Star Trek, and his interest in doing a series, the second (written a day later) talks about finding out that Paramont had no interest in doing anything more with Star Trek for a few years, and he was busy anyway.

you mean...

[David Gould]

Khaaan

Re: Robots in TOS

[some guy I know]

in the original series (which, you may remember, takes place in the future compared to the version we're discussing), there's this scene where this old guy, whose name temporarily escapes me, comes across two robots and doesn't recognize them.

???
I don't ever remember there being robots in TOS.
There was an episode ("I, Mudd") where there were some androids, and there were also androids in the episode where Nurse Chapel's former squeeze turns out to be an android himself, but that's about it, AFAICR.
What episodes in TOS had robots in them?

Re: Robots in TOS

[squiggleslash]

It was in the first three films they made. I know one of them was called something like "The Trouble with Ewoks".

Sci-fi as we know it is dieing....

[Starraisin1]

Think about it. Star Trek is canceled next month and Star Wars has it's last movie out next month with no new movies in the works. I think May of 2005 will be a sad day in sci-fi history.

Re: Hillbilly Robots

[some guy I know]

It was in the first three films they made. I know one of them was called something like "The Trouble with Ewoks".

OK, I get it now.
You aren't talking about "Star Trek"; you are talking about "Star Wars of Mayberry", where Opie Juan Ken Opie didn't recognize R2 Andy 2 and Aunt Bee PO.
I got mixed up because I thought that we were talking about "Star Trek".