Slashdot Mirror
Trek Producers Will Provide World A Break
David Crumpton writes "Star Trek Producers have finally agreed that Star Trek fans are oversaturated with the show, and are planning to provide a break. This does not mean they wont bring something new to the screen; they will just wait a few years. They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs."
Fans are tired of Star Trek. Fans are tired of THEIR Star Trek. And, this choice was hardly theirs to make.
>They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs."
That, and the stupid Enterprise theme song they would never apolgize for.
Mr. Bermann, I am looking in your direction.....
when this same sentiment is expressed on slashdot at least once a week, every week for over a year?
"Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
I think that goes for OS's too
...Enterprise was horrible.
Commonly heard in conjunction with the phrase "Don't orange all your noodles in one exoskeleton"
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
Today's NY Times also has an article on the impending death of Enterprise.
Won't all new star trek series compete against reruns? They'll probably still have reruns of old Star Trek in a few years.
:) /Erik
I'm hoping the break won't be too long. I'm not "saturated" with Star Trek
Erik Dalén
I have to admit though that the show in the last 4 episodes here are keeping me right on the edge of my seat. Even the different opening and "The Alliance" theme was just awesome to watch. yes the "alternate universe and timelines" plot is old, but to see it played out on Enterprise is awesome. Not to mention Jolene looks great in that alliance outfit - NICE!
I'm probably the only one who actually liked the theme (I'll only admit to it anonymously). Too bad they ruined it in season 2 or 3 by replacing it with a country-inspired version.
Or perhaps the ratings dropped... because they decided to replace strong plots and good character development with gratuitious sexual situations in order to attract UPN's 18-25 year old male target audience. Or perhaps they relied too much on time travel stories, which have become rather cliche in Trek of late. Or perhaps not calling it Star Trek for two years didn't help? Or perhaps the really BAD theme music for Enterprise? Or the tortured script of Nemesis, which was an obvious attempt to combine the elements of the higher rating treks into a new movie? Or Berman and Braga not understanding what Trek audiences really like?
Just a thought...
voice type="Haley Joel Osment"
I see dumb people. And the worst part is, they don't even know that they're dumb. They don't see each other. They just believe what they want to believe.
At least they changed it to something better in the last two episodes :)
Erik Dalén
If they want a show to compete against other trek reruns, then give us something we WANT TO WATCH other than what we've already seen dozens of times. It says something about the quality of the show if you think that people would rather watch TNG (which I would) than this Enterprise crap. Voyager was better than this.
.
Never fear... alt.binaries.startrek is here!
If Enterprise was offed due to TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY reruns, how the hell is any other future series going to make it? Paramount isn't going to just pull those 4 moneymakers off the market.
Let's try: "this show sucked bad, but we just don't have the cajones to admit we failed Gene Roddenberry (again)."
Seriously, did they clone Bill Gates and Steve Jobs so as to hide within their own Reality Distortion Field and sling piles of FUD at the fans? Brannon Braga wanted a baby of his own from the start, he got it, and fans said "hell no". End of story, have a nice day.
No penguins were harmed in the making of this post.
That, and the stupid Enterprise theme song they would never apolgize for.
I consider their changing it for a parallel universe to be an apology.
if they dont bring anything new the stations will certainly bring re-runs which is probably much worse...
Star Trek Producers have finally agreed that Star Trek fans are oversaturated with the show, and are planning to provide a break. ... but after the moratorium, what we want are new producers.
What will I do without my 4-Hour Sci-Fi block every Friday?!?!??!?!? I don't think I can live with only 3 hours. 8:00pm - Star Trek: Enterprise 9:00pm - Stargate: Atlantis 10:00pm - Battlestar Galactica 11:00pm - Stargate SG-1
... and in the DRM, bind them.
They should remember that no matter how long they wait, a new 'Trek' as bad as enterprise won't get good ratings eigther.
I would much rather re-watch a episode of the original series, TNG or DS9 than a brand new episode of Enterprise. Which says more about Enterprise than it does about any of the older series.
They simply need to do better than enterprise, otherwise a break will have no effect on ratings.
over the reality crap that permeates TV today. And while they're at it rename the Discovery Channel the motorcycle channel.
And lets talk about branding you silly media companies... The 6 minutes of ad time are gone... poof... My tivo guarantees that I'll never watch them. A friend just bought a new house and I was surprised to find that his cable provider includes a DVR in the standard package.
We won't watch these stupid ads, they are ANNOYING... Start thinking 3 dimensionally--If a TV show begins to become interactive like a webpage, (ie: Hyperlinks to elements of interest in the show) I would be much more inclined to look at ads--willingly.
I'm really not against advertisements, but I want them on my terms.
I am tired of hearing this "trek needs a break" comment from the producers of Star Trek. Trek does NOT need a break for the reasons the producers say! What it needs is good writing. It needs to break itself away from being a action-oriented series where every episode is predictable. All of those episodes are nothing more than an old western gunfight redressed with new technology. Its all been done before.
The reason why nobody was watching Enterprise was that there was real reason to watch it. The writing was okay at best. It seemed like there were too many episodes that were created to titilate, and not enough episodes to provoke thought. We need to have some depth in the characters. In Enterprise, there is only depth in T'pol and Tucker. I have found their relationship to be one of the hilights of the series. OTOH, there is the pilot Mayweather who is still on the opening credits, but hasnt had any significant development since the first season. Why do you have a character in the spotlight, yet give us nothing intriguing about him?
What we need is another DS9. That series was great in that it had continuity. The characters actually *gasp* changed over the few years! I find it sad that we know more about Garak, a plain simple tailor, than we do Jonathan Archer. Or Will Riker.
I will welcome a new Trek series with open arms, IF they can provide character development worthy of my time.
Not even! The reason people didn't watch is because the writers kept doing stupid things like using the Borg, Nazis, and time travel. All these alien races to have first contact with, and a damn Borg cube shows up on screen.
Oh yeah, the opening theme was substandard too.
they certainly don't need to get rid of star trek...they just need to make it GOOD again people would still watch the new battlestar galactica no matter how much sci-fi stuff they ran at the exact same time on other channels. why? because it's GOOD.
Being on UPN probably didn't help much either.
I found this posted originally to another article and modded flamebait, but I think it raises issues pertinent to Star Trek and which should concern all Star Trek fans.
--
This has very little to do with the article, but a few days ago the L.A. Times published an article regarding the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit that focused on their fight against child pornography ("Sifting Clues to an Unsmiling Girl"). They are the law enforcement organization that photoshopped the victims out of child porn photos in order to get the public's assistance in identifying the backgrounds (it worked). In any case, the article had this amazing claim:
Wow. All but one in four years. Seemed rather unlikely to me.
So, I called the Child Exploitation Section of the Toronto Sex Crimes Unit and spoke to Det. Ian Lamond, who was familiar with the Times article.
He claims they were misquoted, or if that figure was given it was done so jokingly. Of course, even if the figure was given jokingly, shouldn't the Times reporter have clarified something that seems rather odd? Shouldn't her editors have questioned her sources?
Nevertheless, Det. Lamond does confirm that a majority of those arrested show "at least a passing interest in Star Trek, if not a strong interest." They've arrested well over one hundred people over the past four years and they can gauge this interest in Star Trek by the arrestees' "paraphenalia, books, videotapes and DVDs."
I asked Det. Lamond if this wasn't simply a general interest in science fiction and fantasy, such as Star Wars or Harry Potter or similar.
Paraphrasing his answer, he said, while there was sometimes other science fiction and fantasy paraphenalia, Star Trek was the most consistent and when he referred to a majority of the arrestees being Star Trek fans, it was Star Trek-specific.
I don't think he was trying to be flamebait...
You == Idiot && You != funny
Maybe it just plain sucked. Not all of it, and I'm not bashing the actors involved but the writing and plots...who wants to watch that kind of garbage?
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
Using words you don't understand is not recommended on Slashdot. In particular, please refrain from using "construction" instead of "construct" in common writing. It makes you look like a high school dropout loser.
Leave it to the producers to blame anything or anyone but themselves! If they had some original IDEAS and good WRITING, Enterprise would be an enduring hit, and people would prefer it to reruns of the other series. They need people in charge who will think outside the cookie-cutter.
They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs.
:-)
:-)
Gee, sounds like Microsoft's main problem; they're competing against Windows 98.
Seriously, though. Would you rather watch a classy show like TNG any night of the week, or watch a crappy show like Enterprise that is bad even by normal Sci-Fi standards to say nothing of Trek standards on Friday night? Put a bad show in the death slot and ratings go down. Put a good show in the death slot and ratings go down. That's why it's called the death slot. Duh.
Enterprise's competition isn't reruns of old Trek, it's wanting to do something entertaining on a Friday night.
Wait about 3-4 years, then bring back the Enterprise Season 4 team (Manny Coto, the Reeves-Stevenses, etc.), and make sure that Berman and Braga are not permitted anywhere close to the sound stage, and you'll probably get a good show out of it.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
I stopped watching all trek shows back a few weeks after Deep Space Nine started. I enjoyed my TNG and was thrilled when DSN started, but after a few weeks I realized that it was more of a chore to watch 2 whole hours of space story a week.
Not every fan is a fanatic, not every trekker can recite facts about dilithium crystals- some of us just want to watch a good tv show.
don't panic-- clowns can smell fear.
They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs.
So, they admit that the new show isn't as good as the shows produced between 4 and 40 years ago? We don't need a rest, we need new blood! Or we need another Babylon 5 to scare the crap out of Berman and Braga, which really improved DS9.
Here come da fudge!
A good idea, An excellant cast, a solid fan base - All destroyed by two men that were too busy cranking out stupidity rather than listening to the hard core fans.
Berman and Braga are the ren and stimpy of the television Industry. This little "Oversaturation" bit is just to aviod the two of them being the confessing to have single handedly destroyed the interest for a trek series on television.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
but it got better... Enterprise DESERVED to cancelled in the first two seasons, seasons 3 and 4 are actualy pretty good, but nobody is watching anymore.
Is that they make you sit through 2-3 seasons of crap stories and character development before they introduce the REAL threat that seems to last all the way up to the final episode.
TNG, DS9, VOY & ENT all were slow & boring up until the 2nd or 3rd season. Production wise, It works if your a syndicated show, but not if your Network.
So they can wait 10 years if they want, who cares. They''ll make the same mistakes.
No Berman, we're not tired of the franchise.
We're tired of you.
When Voyager came out it had to compete with DS9 new episodes as well as TNG and TOS reruns. But I guess it's foolish to expect them to say "yeah, Enterprise sucked, sorry." The whole premise of the show was stupid. Kirk's crew was supposed to be "the first" and Enterprise ruined all of that backstory time and time again. I remember when they were brainstorming ideas for the new show, one of them was like Star Fleet special ops or something, I felt sure they'd go with that since it really sounded interesting. I even said "Man, they'd never do a show that predated Kirk, the fans would throw a fit," but apparently they aren't that in-touch with their fanbase. Which I guess is logical, since Star Trek isn't that popular, and finding fans must be very difficult.
ST: Nemesis was also a flaming pile of dung, rivalling Star Trek V in the crap department. No need to rehash the reasons that movie sucked. But suffice it to say that while oversaturation probably contributed to people being sick of the show, the quality of the content they're producing has gone down the tubes.
rooooar
So, the true test will be seeing how STE does against those re-runs once IT becomes a re-run.
The problem here is that most episodes of "Enterprise" suck. The writing, the directing, and the acting is horrible.
Here is proof of the accuracy of my analysis. Consider "Star Wars". You could argue that our society has been saturated by "Star Wars" themes: action figures, late night jokes, the 2 sucky pre-quels, etc. Yet, why will "Star Wars III" rival the the popularity of "Star Wars IV", "V", and "VI"? Good writing, directing, and acting is the answer.
"Right, you are! At the opening in May, see you!" exclaims Yoda.
For the "Enterprise" finale, the writers should use the situation in Tibet as the basis for a story. That would be an excellent basis for a story, which just might bring back some disenchanted fans.
"May the force be with you!"
They have it wrong. The ratings didn't drop because Enterprise was competing with Trek reruns. They dropped because it couldn't compete with Trek reruns.
The ratings dropped because there just wasn't any excitement anymore. Trek used to be like a Christmas present you could open up each week.
Look at Battlestar Gallactica. Why couldn't Enterprise have been more like that?
Like I have always said: Trek needs a series that goes into political life on Romulus, just around the time of Picard, or slightly before then. Leave out the original cast and focus on new parts of space, with new actors. No BORG. No Cardassians. Just Romulan prison camps and their back room dealings. Sex, drugs and weapons being moved around Romulus. Assassins. Experiments gone horribly wrong. Etc...
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Trek does not need a break, it just needs to stop suckings. Berman and Braga are probably the worst producers ever. They ran Star Trek into the ground. I would bet my left nut that if those two got hit by a bus the next Star Trek series would be a good one.
Beam me out Rick!
thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you!
Dear Rick,
While we have enjoyed the "Star Trek Universe" for what seems like decades now, we have begun to get a little nauseated at the thought of YASTS (Yet Another Star Trek Series). Please remember the words of some wise sage from the past: "Everything is good, in moderation" and apply it to future Star Trek endeavors.
Warmest Regards,
The Star Trek Fans
No matter where you go... there you are.
The Borg in Enterprise? WTF are you talking about?
I agree totally.
Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing a series based entirely in the mirror universe...and with as few mirror-mirror universe episodes as possible.
The 'In a Mirror Darkly' episodes are definitely my favorites of Enterprise series.
They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs.
I can attest to this. When the choice became suffer through another episode of Enterprise vs watch a re-run of TNG (both in the same Wednesday timeslot, TNG on SpikeTV), I chose TNG every time. If Enterprise had been even almost as good as TNG, the choice would be different. But when the only advantage it has is that it's new, forget it.
$ make work
make: *** No rule to make target `work'. Stop.
And guess what, all criminals breath air. Thats not the point. The Internet is used by billions, Star Trek (as the story here proves) is fetishised by hardly anyone normal. Not even enough people for it to be worth making new series or episodes. Get the picture?
Umm, ya, that's the ticket, blame the fans ! Damn oversaturated lot of 'ya ;)
Regards, Lex
>They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs."
somewhere in a darkened room rick berman sits against the wall...with his fingers in his ears and quitely whispers...
"I'm a GOOD Star Trek producer...and GOOD Star Trek producer...by stories are epic gems...EPIC GEMS!
"Star Trek Producers have finally agreed that Star Trek fans are oversaturated with the show, and are planning to provide a break."
Is it just me or wasn't Enterprise PULLED from TV? Now they're acting like they meant it to happen to give everyone a break. Geesh.
"Time is an illusion, lunchtime doubly so." - Ford Prefect
I thought that was one of those fake stories edited up by some troll but that thing about the klingon sash is even in there! Wow, that's pretty freaky. I'm not gonna look at trekkies the same. Before I thought they were just dorks now I think they're perverts.
They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs.
Could they pick any worse time slots, or another network with lower penetration? If it appeared on cable at all, not the rare UPN low power stations, then perhaps it would have gotten *some* ratings. However, when it's new Trek on a station I don't get vs. old Trek on SciFi, then I know what I'm going to choose.
Matt Slot / Bitwise Operator / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Well, at least we know what to expect of Star Trek on TV for the forseeable
future.
Neko
TOS, TNG, and DS9 had great writing.
TOS: Yes lots of the writing was kitchy and the humor as mostly slapstick, fine but mostly it was well placed. The plots were not new, they in many was resembled westerns or adventure stories. Still they managed to ask some questions and do things that were not possible in those more conventional genres at the time. When they did use kitch and slapstick it was not over done, except in a few episodes, "Trouble with Tribbles" anyone?
TNG: Largely continued the traditon of TOS. There was a little more character development which gave the show a little more dimention but the writers did a great job of not over doing to th point where the show had to become serial. They also took the kitch down an notch. All and all the show was very inteligent like what had come before it and felt like it had some more depth. They still had an incredible freedome of plot to do anything they wanted and keep the show mostly fresh for its entire seven years.
DS9: Ok, I felt this was a radical departure from the TNG and TOS. It had a much stonger focus on charater development and relations ships then the others, and it was a serial prime time soap, lets just face it. Still there was plenty of chance for variety. It was a busy port where different charater could resonably come and go. The writing never felt streched or unnatural it was consistant with the timelines the other shows had established and played by the rules created in the other series. The new format allowed them to expolre some political issues that could not be address in the episodal format of the other series.
VOY: Holly crap! Lets write ourselves into a corner with the very first episode, the flog the plotline out for seven years. Yes the show had its moments but there was really only one goal they could have from day one. The first seasons had long streches of "What clever trick to advance our homecomeing will we find and fail at this week?" it got old real fast. The writing was miserable the dialog was not even kitchy more just bad. Then they started introducing plot arcs like the borg and breaking all the rules. Come on the Borg were supposed to be this highly adaptive and terrible enemy which nearly vanquished the entire starfleet. In TNG every tangle the enterprise had it incurred serious damage and often needed repairs at space dock. The Enterprise, a bigger more war-ship inspired vessal usually had help too. Where exactly did Voyager a science ship all alone refit, how did they survice the attacks with no backup? Sure they did it in the writing but it seemed so far feched and generally inconsistant. I think that had to irritate lots of true fans.
Enterprise: Personally its a step up form Voyager I don't care what anyone says. It still suffers terribly for consistancy problems regarding the transporter, the state of technology at the time and lots of other stuff. Archer's character is irratic at best, wholly inconsistant at worst. The relationship with the vulcans is entirely to close, in TOS we get the impression humans and vulcans have peaceful relations some exchange of goods and technology but little real cultural connection, to the point that they barely understand each other. Yet on Enterprise years earlier then TOS humans and vulcans are in constant meetings and already serving together. It feels like they are at least trying to get it write unlike VOY which it felt like they were throwing the story to the wind.
We don't need a break we just need someone besides UPN sheparding the writers. UPN is trying to go for cool or sexy as the shows cake when that has in the past been the icing. Past Treks worked because they were philisophical stories and often played with some actual science even in their world of fantasy and embelishment. These things were just not present in VOY and ENTERPRISE.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but in regards to Enterprise, if I -wanted- to watch -Quantum Leap- reruns, I would watch that instead.
;-)
I keep expecting the guy with the "remote control" device to show up.
I could go humorous here, but I'll try not to:
How was the Klingon cloaking device developed? Did they develop it themselves or steal the tech from someone else?
How about a Klingon series? How would a Vulcan do in a Klingon culture?
Living planets, stars, asteroids, etc. Crew beams down and all their metallic equipment gets digested.
More about manufacturing, social problems, and the ramifications of absurdly advanced technology on society. Does manufacturing consist of a CAD designer with a replicator? Does every house have a replicator, a transporter, and a holodeck? How do these changes affect society?
Star Trek has always been unrealistically utopian; I'd like to see a nice civil war (between humans on Earth, not on some disposable alien world). Even a labor dispute now and then would be refreshing.
OK, the funny part: Star Trek, the reality series! A female Klingon, a male human, a gay Vulcan, a Christian Romulan, (and so on) have to live in a shuttle craft for 13 episodes. Well, *I* think it's funny.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
I want to weep now.
That was beyond watchable. it was entertaining.
Screw a break, I want a series based of the Mirror Universe.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Mr. Bermann was a Bush-loving Republican. Anything made during the 2001 to current time period had a better than not chance of sucking. He drank the kool-aid. Cutting edge sci-fi doesn't write itself when you force your writers not to tackle topics that might make the government uncomfortable. Fabricated fear is dumb. Succumbing to it and trying to force your audience to play along is a recipe for low ratings.
Data: I must deactivate you.
B-4: For how long?
Data: Indefinitely.
B-4: How long is tha...
Data: A long time, brother.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0253754/quotes
--
Left sigs long time ago!
95% of all sigs are made up.
"Everything in moderation, including moderation."
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
However, I think Berman needs to understand that, by and large, fans think that the last few years of Star Trek have been pure, utter crap. Only the most rabid Trek fans have enjoyed anything from DS9 on. DS9 was a soap opera (much more so than the last two seasons of TNG; at least TNG had some compelling story lines) and Voyager and Enterprise just plain old sucked. This from a guy who can more or less recite lines while watching Wrath of Khan.
Berman, Braga, just think about this: I hear more sci-fi fans talk about Andromeda than Enterprise. In that case I think it's more due to the fact that Andromeda is in syndication and local channels use it to fill out their lineup, as well as Sci-Fi and WGN, among others, carrying it. I mean, c'mon, guys, you're being beaten out by something that carries Gene's name! I'd much rather watch one of the Stargate shows or the modern Battlestar Galactica than watch that dreck you call Enterprise. Why? Well, it may not be the best acting, but the shows are just better. And that's sad, because compared to old Trek, all of them suck.
No, Rick, it's not merely oversaturation; if oversaturation was the only key problem, sitcoms would have died out years ago. No, Rick, it's you and Paramont. Craptacular story lines, craptacular acting, and no offense to LeVar, but craptacular directing too. Add to that that the show is stuck on the least-popular network in the U.S., and it's not hard to figure out why Trek is dead.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
Hey! How about we let real fiction writers take a stab at writing some episodes? Maybe Stephen King, the Law & Order writers and Johanna Lindsey would'nt mind taking a stab at an episode each! Can't be any worse than what Rick & company has produced!
I rarely actually sit down in front of the TV. I have a lot more time on the computer when I can have a video window open on another monitor.
So I picked up torrents for some Enterprise episodes in HD, thinking "hey, I'll just watch it here, and if I really like it, I'll make time for it."
A group called BayTSP started sending abuse notices to my ISP, threatening to sue me if I didn't stop sharing Enterprise episodes. So I stopped. And I don't watch it. I do, however, watch Battlestar Galactica, for which I have not received any file sharing complaints.
I didn't watch enterprise for a reason, I saw the first eppisode, they showed the klingons as they were in TNG NOT as they were in TOS as they would have been in TOS and that would have been closer to thier time... but that's not the big thing that bothered me, I didn't like the show because it was going backwards, every star trek out there was getting bigger better technology, we were watching not only the technological evolution, but also the relationships between the species, it was an excellent show, but enterprise went back to the begining of the star terk universe when the federation first started, they couldn't even do warp 6, if you compare the technology it couldn't even survive a battle in 23rd century, the show enterprise was going against everything we were used to.
I loved DS9, TNG, and VOY, yes even TOS when I was a kid I loved to watch DS9 and TNG re-runs, but the thing is TNG and DS9 where in the same time frame, they had similiar technology, we got to meet up with character from the other show (Thomas Riker on DS9, and Bashir in TNG)the only thing the I didn't like about VOY was that they weren't in thier classic federation dealing with the klingon/romulan empire and it was all these small (in comparison)groups that Voyager needed to depend on to get home I still enjoyed Voyager.
to finish up I'd just like to say that we didn't lose interest in Star trek, Star Trek was going in another direction. I would love to see a Star Trek series that takes place from the same time era as TNG maybe slightly more into the furutre with newer technology, dealing in the classic ferdation situation going out on a mission of peace, exporing and from time to time dealing witht he klingon/romulan empires, and of coarse meeting the other species the the federation as met b4
Like I said on my EpiosdeList blog, oversaturation isn't the answer, just look at Law and Order, and CSI, they run just about everyday with new and re-run episodes on many different channels, and are still going strong.
The demise of Star Trek has more to do with lack of direction and vision. Ever since the passing of Gene Roddenbery (ok he coun't write), the shows have lost their purpose and direction.
The totally obsurd storylines on Enterprise (come on a Temporal Cold War!, Aliens taking a pivitol part in WW2?!?!) are the reason for Star Trek demise.
Instead of simply shutting down everything why don't they take a couple years to hammer out a real script/plot for the next show?
Voyager was better than this.
Whoa whoa whoa, going a little too far there are we?
I may be crazy, but I have the sneakiest suspicion that Garak is, in fact, more than just a simple tailor. There's something about his eyes, but I can't quite pin it down.
Oh well, I guess we'lll never know more.
--
RumorsDaily
Yeah. I was also fairly dissapointed. They have no feeling for development at all.
All the Star Trek "history" at hand, and what do they do? Show technology and species not even seen in TOS. And what about all the species found in TOS? Most begin appear in the 4th season. Previously, there seemed to be more species from later series than from TOS.
And couldn't they do the story without a transporter? Photon torpedoes? Or sub-space communication? Or phaser? Would be starting with a laser be so bad?
Couldn't be space traveling and making contact with new species challenging enough? No, they had to invoke a new earth destroying time-war in a unheard region with unheard species.
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
Started with the introduction of the Borg queen and breathed it's last breath near the end of voyagers 2nd season and midway through it's third. The female captain thing induced a politically correct brain fart causing overlooked obvious storyline's and potential series direction. She's still my favorite captain from any star trek series but in the desire of doing something special because of the exception of her being a her, ordinary cast character progression/growth suffered.
The original idea of the borg was one of no central intelligence, just rudimentary command structures. The concept was new and had a firm foundation in reality.
They had a lot of opportunity with voyager in offering a healthier well-balanced male/female relations with parodies found in the disease ridden, pathological creating, dysfunctional popular media. Instead they chickened out and attempted to gain more female viewers which alienated their demographic majority.
Poor choices in where the series should go and constant erosion in the quality of scripts (seemed to choose partisanship unimaginative copy/paste scrips with good ones getting rejected), character direction/collaboration under the directors and acting coaches. Lastly, the 25,000 threating letters to their fan base over mostly frivolous IP infringement left a sour taste in just about everyone's mouth.
The funny thing is that I'm actually capable of following a number of different shows at the same time. Just because I'm watching re-runs doesn't mean I'm not watching the new stuff. For instance, I can tell the difference between Captain Kirk and Captain Archer. It's uncanny.
Now, if they would just keep from putting out schlock like Voyager, that would be a bonus.
I swear that horrible song was the reason the show failed. The first time I tuned into enterprise I barely made it through that hideous intro... it really sets you up for something that is going to suck.
:("
Last weeks episode where the whole crew was evil... that was a tight into. When it first came on I was thinking "woh they finally changed the intro!!! Too bad the show is already gone
Even further than the Delta Quadrant.
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
The best Trek series I've seen in years just ended its season a few weeks ago.
Battlestar GalacticaNO MORE TIME TRAVEL!
Seriously, time travel episodes are really silly. And over done. A lot.
Did i mention they were over done?
I suffered through the first few seasons scraping what little tibbits I could enjoy and being happy with that.... and now, when the show is actually getting interesting they cancel it.
Not that I'm bitter.
Wiwi
"I trust in my abilities,
but I want more then they offer"
Ive just started watching again with whatever season is currently airing on UK Sky tv. The problem for me was the running plot with the Xindi. I missed a few episodes midway through the first season and just couldn't get back into it. For me they killed it by making it so you had to watch every episode to follow the running plot. I don't really remember anything like that with TNG which I think most people would agree has been the best series.
Oh and the fact that in the 22nd century any joker can build a temporal contraption on their lunch break!
No... just tired of _bad_ Star Trek.
LOL, yup... If Jerry Goldsmith asked for more money I would have doubled his earnings and be done with it.
Episode 21, and there were a few that I missed in there. Most of which I was downloading by bit torrent. I thought the first 10 or so were pretty good, after that it was slim pickings.
I say swap out producers and writers. What they 'ought to do with this downtime is hire a tiger turnaround team. Like what's done on a refinery, but with 5 years of fucking scheduled maintenance instead of 3 weeks. Come up with some new plots and episodes. Run them by Carrie Fisher and figure out what can actually be acted, and what cannot.
The lack of continuity. Show one new episode.. and then three weeks of reruns? Not a way to keep a captive audience..
I am the maverick of Slashdot
No it wasn't. You'd just gone insane from watching it.
It's as if they saw the first part and said "Holy frack! Hide the next part on CKVR or the non-fans will see it and like it! Cover the CITY hole with Sex in the City and Friends and run Spiderman opposite Enterprise and maybe even the geeks will be distracted!"
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Of all the stations in NYC, UPN's transmitter is second only to ABC's in term of suckiness. Given a choice between recording from CBS or NBC and crashing my PVR-350's encoder trying to record UPN, I'll take CBS or NBC. (I did download all of the Enterprise shows, but if it weren't for BitTorrent, I wouldn't have watched Enterprise at all the past year or two.)
And UPN's digital broadcasts are even worse. WWOR-DT (piggybacked off of FOX 5 WNYW's signal in a subchannel) was actually WORSE than the crappy analog reception at my house. Not only was it a 480i transmission, it was a HORRENDOUS 480i transmission with horrendous macroblocking. I haven't seen MPEG that looked that bad in years.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
It's quite simple; they now make shows they think we would want to see rather than make fresh and inventive shows. None of the TV companies seem to have a margin for taking risks, they don't seem to understand that we're all tired of the same old formulas. I wish they would just stop trying to second guess their audiences and just give us something original.
I was conned by an old man in a cloak. It turns out those *were* the droids I was looking for.
No offense to the cast as they are probably very nice people, but unfortunately they are lousy actors. I just don't find them believable in their roles. They seem a bit awkward and unnatural.
They're good looking but wooden and one-dimensional. Kinda reminds me of star wars episode 1 and 2. Good looking actors but without a soul. All vestiges of personality have been surgically removed.
And all those flashing lights in the background on the bridge can't make up for this.
while (!asleep()) sheep++
I could watch another 200 episodes of TNG if they were produced in the format of Roddenberry ST/TNG/DS9. Mr. Bermann's mindset reflected in the shows since Roddenberry's death is just - simple.
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/library/epis odes/ENT/detail/128643.html
End of Line.
In other news, Saddam Hussein declares he will provide the Iraqi people a break from his rule, due to oversaturation of his dictatorship...
That doesnt mean I'll watch the new one.
I really liked it too!
I think it gave a totally different feel for the series...
goes to show you Mr. Bermanm.... it does matter
Any good sci-fi helps the other works in the story, not subtracts from them.
For example, I read the Hobbit as a kid and liked it. Then found out about LOTR. Read those and loved them. Found out there was essentially a prequel, The Silmarillion. Read that and loved it.
None of these books subtract from the experience of any other. Why? Because each book adds to the experience of the other. When Aragorn is singing about Luthien, it's a beautiful moment. After you read the Silmarillion, you know what he's singing about and why - and it adds to the moment.
But the new Trek shows don't do this.
They take off on their own and (to me anyways, this is all opinion, YMMV, etc) don't add to the story.
A good example is Khan. Seriously great villain. But now when I look at Khan, I have to picture that ship full of whiny kids pining for Brent Spiner. Doesn't add to it.
And most of the new stuff feels that way to me. Seems like right after DS9 decided it was a war show, the whole magical exploration thing that I liked so much was lost, and it never really came back.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
This was about 20 years overdue...
ST: Nemesis was also a flaming pile of dung, rivalling Star Trek V in the crap department. No need to rehash the reasons that movie sucked.
I have never watched Nemesis all the way from beginning to the end - whenever it's on HBO or Showtime, I might pause for a minute or two, before moving on to something else [Stargate, BG, Matrix I/II/III, Starship Troopers, whatever].
Last night as I surfed through HBO/Showtime for the umpteenth gazillion time, and didn't pause at Nemesis for more than a second or two, it finally dawned on me why I can never summon the enthusiasm to watch that damned movie: Because I don't want to waste two hours of my life watching a narcissistic, self-absorbed, self-glorifying, idolatrous paean to Patrick Stewart.
See Patrick as a young man. See Patrick as an old man. Watch Patrick the young struggle with teen angst. Watch Patrick the old struggle with octogenarian angst.
No thanks - I've got better things to do with my time.
PS: When was the last time Picard got laid? At least Kirk had the decency to leave the galaxy littered with his bastard offspring by way of union with a veritable army of hot, sexy, vixen-ish, Russ Meyer-esque, 1960's sex kittens.
I think that deep down inside, Picard may suffer from the Eton Disease.
HAND!
>They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs."
I am SORRY. The problem is not the re-runs. The problem are the people who are there in charge now. Rick Berman and his staff have continued to turn out LAME scripts. NOTHING new. Designing a prequal that looked like it was a century above the next gen series, yet smaller. TERRIBLE casting choice for the Captain. Scott Bakula is not captain material. They'd have bene better off with Michael Ironsides or Someone more captainly. I stood beside the producers when they selected a Woman for the role of the Captain in Voyager. I stood behind alot of the dumb coices made. Deep Space Nine, while not the best of the new stuff (TNG is WAYY better), it did not make sense within the Star Trek ethos. How can you go boldy with no starship?? That's why they added the Defiant. The Defiant and the War with the Dominion is what saved DS9 from sinking into mediocrity. Star Trek was known for thought provoking plot lines and for translating the current events to the show. Where's the terror attacks and idiotic security? If Berman and crew think they can just take a couple years off and come back with the same screenwriters and producers, you got another thing coming. Unless there's MAJOR changes AT THE TOP, you won't see a difference in the new trek series in a couple years.
Gorkman
BitTorrent is not your friend. NNTP + newzbin + nzb-o-matic is your friend. get a pay news server for $15 a month and you're good to go.
Being on UPN probably didn't help much either.
It hasn't helped that they have shown fucking baseball games the last two weeks.
If there have been new episodes, I have been unable to see them! >:|
Guess I'll have to find out the episode number/names so I can find them on eMule or some sort of bittorrent.
Damned UPN! Even more-so, DAMNED SPORTS!
bork bork bork!
I add to the cacophony of "they just don't get it" as well and add...
The time travel only exacerbated the inconsistancies in the Trek storyline since The Cage instead of fixed any of them.
The purposeful deviations were born of arrogance, ego, vanity, all the things that don't work well in Trek.
The fans were never listened to and they used blatant sex to sell it.
This was way beyond not getting it. This was homicidal cluelessness, killing what had been a useable franchise. RIP, Star Trek.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
I'm of the belief that taking it from syndication to a station that is not widely available, or at least to a station that won't expose the show nationwide as did syndication is the single largest factor.
Let's face it, we can nitpick to our hearts' relative desire about each show. There have been stinkers in each series but what series doesn't have them?
As for the references to using sex this confuses me. Has anyone ever seen the original series? Kirk gets it almost every episode and the women on the show were, for the time I believe, far more provactive than what we get on Enterprise or Voyager.
It's a sad day when people don't want to watch a show with Jolene Blalock in it. Who cares what it's about. Fools!
I'd love to sit down on a Thursday night, and watch the adventures of Louis Wu, Speaker-to-Animals, the Pierson's Puppeteers, and the rest of that whole bloomin' universe. Plus, think of the merchandising! I want a toy Kzin, I want it, I want it, I want it!
"Knowledge, sir, should be free to all!"
~Harcourt Fenton Mudd
To begin with, the reason why Nemesis failed is clear if you just watch the film, while it's a fairly good idea for a storyline, it's actually pretty painful to watch in some places.
There are parts of the film which just go on for WAY too long, especially at the end, we don't need to see another long dogfight scene, it's just boring and pointless. The scene when Riker fights the Reamon guy the end; really really pointless, you could have cut that out of the film and just made it better.
And Insurrection was another dull and pointless film, that needed a better storyline and better direction. I dont like films where you forget whats happening halfway though because you just had to sit through a long and pointless scene.
The part in Insurrection, where Riker takes manual control of the Enterpise, and a fucking joystick appears... WHAT THE HELL? is that meant to be funny? THIS IS WHY YOUR FILMS FAIL!! whoever wrote that part should have been buried alongside nuclear waste in a very deep pit.
Interestingly enough, First Contact was a brilliant film, it had a great story behind it, and it kept your attention all the way through. Learn from that film.
Enterprise failed because it was poor, not because there's too much star trek on TV, because its simply not as good as the other star treks. Aside from the obvious (theme tune, and then the stupid backing track added to theme tune, made it 10x worse), there are so many reasons why Enterprise just wasnt as good as previous attempts. For a start there are no interesting characters in it, TNG had Data, Voyager had the Doctor, DS9 had, well maybe Odo, the most interesting character in Enterpise is perhaps the captain's dog Porthos. The other shows were about the characters, that's what made them interesting.
Enterprise wasn't bad, but it just wasn't all that good, neither were the films. It dosnt take a genius to see that, why cant the producers just listen to the fans and stop making bad decisions.
Enterprise 4x18 In a Mirror, Darkly Part 1
Enterprise 4x19 In a Mirror, Darkly Part 2
Which to choose, which to choose?
...
On the one hand, it's an entirely new episode of Enterprise
On the other hand, it's a repeat of a show with dated material, bad effects and hilarious acting. Looks like it will be the repeat.
Isn't it strange how none of the other series on TV have to compete with reruns?
Will people skip the new Batman movie to watch the old Batman and Robin TV show?
Will people skip the latest hospital drama to watch reruns of Emergency!?
Did anyone skip Firefly to watch reruns of Space 1999?
I think I'll skip CSI and re-watch some old Columbo and Baretta episodes.
Right.....
That's a lot more work, although thank you for letting me know usenet is still kicking. :)
Yes UPN usually never really help with the matter of an show. It seems like when all else fail go to UPN see if that help but it NEVER really does.
Isn't it a sign when they invoke the "evil twin?" And in the recent promos, didn't they also invoke several other "shark-worthy" paradigms? It looks to me like they forced the writers to suicide the series once they got the official axe. That axe probably coming months before it hit the fansites.
Rick Berman, executive-producer of Star Trek: Enterprise, told SCI FI Wire that he believes the decline in ratings that led to the series' cancellation was the result of an oversaturation of the franchise
Rick Berman took a good show and ruined it, Just like G4 did to TechTV's Screensavers. Corporate sabatoge for vanity.
Even when people offered to the buy the rights for the shows, they refused knowing damn well that it would make the everyone involved look like idiots. Too late.
BTW, the new Altered Universe Enterprise was very entertaining. That show had so many possabilities. Shame, it was such a great idea.
I miss Firefly.
They finally ran out of ideas on how to work in time travel scenarios.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
Just a word of advice, be very wary of downloading BSG; I did receive a BayTSP notice through my ISP for downloading episodes. This was back in January, when the episodes had already aired in the UK, which may or may not have anything to do with why I got one and you didn't.
At any rate, just wanted to spread the word. If you're going to continue downloading, I'd recommend you at least use a program called Peerguardian; it certainly doesn't guarantee protection, however it does filter out a large amount of IPs (many of them belonging to BayTSP). You can see them trying to hit your connection as you use BitTorrent, so it does provide at least some small amount of protection.
Blasphemer!
Wrath of Khan was an utterly splendid piece of cinema. I can't think of another film that managed to generate such massive amounts of tension and drama between its main protagonists, and here's the real kicker, without them ever meeting.
Plus, bonus points for Ricardo's Moby Dick death scene.
"Knowledge, sir, should be free to all!"
~Harcourt Fenton Mudd
Friendly word of warning; BayTSP did send me a notice for downloading episodes of BSG off BitTorrent (more specifically from ISOHunt). This was back in January, when the episodes were all copied in the UK but hadn't aired yet in the US. This may or may not explain why you haven't gotten anything from them or not, but just be aware that at least at some point, BayTSP were looking for BSG users.
Let me recommend a program called PeerGuardian if you're going to continue to download - it's far from completely safe, but it does block out many known IP addresses of companies like BayTSP. When you're downloading with BT, you can actually watch the PeerGuardian log as these companies try to hit you, so at the very least it provides some minimal protection.
The shows are still owned by Paramount. But they may have multi-year syndication contracts with the channels that are showing them. And anyway, they are probably making as much or more money off of the re-runs as they have been making from Enterprise and other "new" Trek product.
The answer is to let the re-runs continue to air for several years without competition. Eventually they will start to seem more dated (altho I personally think the best TNG was timeless, and will remain entertaining for years). Then there will start to be an "itch" among fans and the general public for more Trek.
Oh, and KEEP BERMAN AND BRAGA OUT OF IT.
My Grandma is a serious hardcore Trekker. When the original series was playing on Friday nights she would refuse to go out and if any of the kids would talk during the show they would be in for the beating of a lifetime.
And there's no UPN where she lives...
... and in the DRM, bind them.
Remove "Enterprise" from the mix, and can you even name a single UPN show?
I can name one, "Veronica Mars", and that's only because UPN seems to have an ad for it whenever I do decide to watch Enterprise.
One recognizable show does not a network make.
Anakin Simpson: If you're not with me, then you're my enemy--ooh, donuts!
Thank you very much! We'll see if PeerGuardian ends up being easier than trying a news server again. :)
>> ...I liked Star Trek: TNG for the ethical dilemmas, the hints at mankind's potential, goodness, discovery, and the general sense of something bigger than our own petty modern squabbles...
To each their own, but conflict and combat have aways been key components of Star Trek, and every other drama. Shows depicting a bunch of ethically mature humans displaying their wholesome goodness while they unobtrusively research the galaxy would be thundersously boring.
When one of the Trek series, like TNG, had the budget we'd see conflict and war as grand battles between starships. This has the effect of depersonalizing the conflict. On series with smaller budgets, like TNG and Enterprise, conflict and combat were often depicted as phaser and disruptor fights between a few actors on a set. Or, worse yet, between Trek heroes and a Monster of the Week.
I'm not sure what "payback" you've seen as a theme in Enterprise. The Zindi arc was the most combative and it was about preventing an attack on Earth, not payback. The long Dominion War dominated DS9; Klingon culture made its debut in TOS; and the Borg wreaked havoc in TNG.
In the end, Enterprise and the last few movies were brought down because they weren't telling good stories. Tell a good story and people will watch.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Stargate in the same time slot.
> That, and the stupid Enterprise theme song they would never apolgize for.
Re-runs don't exactly kill the Simpson's new series figures.
How PC is that ? Why you ask. Remember Vulcan women don't look manly ; Vulcan series with spock needing to go home to find a mate ,Vulcan women dress like women.
They made her hair like a man and dressed her as a man. What a 'penis' turnoff.
Bring Back Kirk and Spock and the miniskirts with hot women. Where is the good action ? Hot women like in the original series. Most beautiful chicks in the world ! = Good ratings.
Then, DS9 came out. The first few episodes were interesting, because it was a "different" kind of Star Trek, but taking place in the same time period as TNG. Unfortunately, there were only a few really innovative episodes. DS9 got old fast because it degenerated into a political show based in a science fiction environment, but with hardly any good wholesome science fiction. Seemingly, every episode was about some political problem with the Cardassians and how it was going to be solved with various political maneuvering. If I had wanted to watch politics, I could have switch to Fox News and seen it there. Those politics get me worked up enough; why should I get any more worked up over nonexistant politics in a nonexistant place, with nonexistant people?
Nearly all TOS and TNG episodes had this interesting quality that no show was about one specific thing. In other words, there was always some overall plot, and then there were other things happening concurrently that complicated things. This was good because the overall plot was usually solved by pushing some button or reprogramming the scanner array or something, but the other things made the episode interesting and thought provoking. DS9 episodes didn't have that quality. There was usually just one thing going on, and personally, it didn't provoke any thought.
When Voyager came out, it once again seemed interesting. Here was yet another show taking place in about the same time period as TNG. Unfortunately, it quickly became quite boring as well. Here they are, 70 years from home, assuming they travel nonstop at maximum warp speed, right? How come everybody there speaks English? Am I supposed to believe that some universal translator exists that can immediately translate languages it never heard? Even the Klingons had their own language, for crying out loud, and they were much closer to home! Then, the question arised of why in the heck they would make so many stops if it will take so long to get home anyway? At this rate, they'll get there in 140 years! Once again, most episodes lacked that quality present in TOS and TNG episodes. It quickly lost its luster.
When Enterprise came out, I only saw the first episode, and I came to the conclusion that I just didn't care anymore. It didn't seem right for some reason. I had grown to know Star Trek as being a show with Kirk's crew or with Picard's crew. Those crews gave the shows some kind of feeling that all these other crews just tried to hard to mimic.
I hope they release a DVD boxed set of all TOS and TNG episodes; I'd buy it in a minute.
TOS = The Original Series
TNG = The Next Generation
DS9 = Deep Space Nine
...was that the vulcan chick was not nearly as hot as Seven of Nine. Naked chicks + Borg = Good show
I think it's alot of problems rather than just one thing that hurt Enterprise from being a success. For one, the lack of ability to access the show. I live in Montreal, Canada and I don't have cable because I can't afford it. This had not stopped me from watching shows like Voyager when it was new or Babylon 5 (even if it was at a crappy time slot). I was even able to see Deep Space Nine on fox (in reruns) from the states even if the signal was terrible. Enterprise on the other hand has only been available on Space (Canada's version of the Sci-fi channel) and from what I read here, not much else then UPN in the states carry the show. I don't know about the states, but here I have access to Andromeda, Outer limits and Doctor Who the 1st and second of which I consider utter crap but just love Doctor Who BTW (thank you CBC).
I suspect that other regions have access to different Sci-Fi shows as well. Add to that the fact that there are other types of sci-fi shows out there like StarGate SG1/Atlantis and BattleStar Galactica and you have alot of factors to figure out why Enterprise is doing poorly. Give the audience access and you'll end up with more accurate ratings as opposed to people having to resort to bit torrents to get access because too many that would watch Enterprise just aren't going to want to bother to use such methods and will simply settle for whatever crap is on and accessible (like Outer Limits which used to be good but went downhill since).
Meanwhile shows like Survivor or The Apprentice do well because you just need good old regular TV with a tuner to see them as opposed to paying for expensive cable services that a lot of us still can't afford.
something like "Stargate: 2030". Take the Stargate scenario from the present to about 15 years in the future, and throw in a similar feeling like in Space Above & Beyond. (Instead of the Chigs, you get the Goa'Uld, the Aschen, the Wraith....) Now THAT would rock. The show would be about mankinds first real steps to space colonization - the Stargate would be public knowledge by then, obviously.
As for Star Trek, I would like a show that:
a) does not throw around with lots of technobabble
b) does not imply time travel
c) has a consistency in the introduced technologies (for example, there was an advanced cloaking technology built by the federation allowing not only invisibility but flying through matter too - this technology was never mentioned again. Stargate SG-1 actually makes use of past storylines)
d) get the federation consistent again. first, they were utopia. then, in DS9, they became something else. in voyager, they were utopia, in a manner of speaking. whats going on?
e) no more episode-by-episode only, please.
f) use some of the less known races! what about the breen, for example? they appeared in ds9, but thats it.
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
I guess you found the decon-scenes homoerotic then?
TNG is my favorite series, but Enterprise is a good second.
The ideas was to create a darker, dirtier show with weaker, near normal human characters. They thought it will appeal more to the current post 9/11 uncertainty. This might have worked, but they failed to develop the characters and kept falling into the old gung ho, can do attitude of the other series. To me the only character enjoyable to watch was Phlox, and that was due to the skills of John Billingsley.
Any piece of enjoyable fiction, be it television or movie or book, has one thing in common: characters we care about and whom we want to follow through a fictional world. That one point of interest can make up for a lot of other shortcomings in writing and directing. This is exactly what happened with TOS, which happened to get exactly the right mix of actors and writers for the job. No one will ever mistake William Shatner for a good actor, but as Captain Kirk he captured exactly the right mix of swashbuckling charm and leading officer charisma, and it made him plain fun to watch. The same is true for the other major characters which, despite being relatively stock (the engineer in love with his ship, the cranky doctor with mixed feelings about being on a neo-military ship, the ultra-nerdy science officer) were imbued by their writers and actors with believable, engaging internal lives. These great characters allowed TOS to overcome its sometimes pedestrian writing and plotting. Most importantly, these characters were human - they had good days and bad days, character faults and bad decisions and often had to overcome their own limitations in order to survive. We could identify with their struggles and wonder how we would do in similar circumstances.
When the writing was firing on all cylinders the show was very, very good, and the conceit of the ship's five year mission allowed the writers the freedom to introduce new information with each episode, keeping the crew, and us, surprised at all times. The writers were able to take chances and write episodes which ranged from the purely speculative (City on the Edge of Forever) to plain funny (Mudd's Women, A Piece of the Action). The combination of engaging characters and writers with a free hand to create as they felt necessary meant we had a show which allowed us to suspend our disbelief and overlook plot problems because it was so damn fun.
The newer series (TNG, DS9, VOY) never had engaging characters. Roddenberry's decision that humans had developed past emotions by the time of TNG always baffled me, because it meant we were no longer looking at characters with whom we could identify. We were now looking at logical audioanimatrons, men and women who went through the motions of their lives precisely and efficiently. This spread out to the Star Trek world as a whole: I remember Picard mentioning more than once that the Federation no longer had money, or greed, or internal strife. Instead of a world alive with the ups and downs of humanity we had a world in which all the drama had been removed, all the potential for strife erased. This is an enormous problem, because engaging characters must have an engaging internal life, and our internal lives are not smooth and efficient. We are always caught in the tension between our logical half and our human half, between the urges of the animal and the control of the human.
Conflict in the new series was limited to simple, black and white moral problems. You always knew the crew would do the right thing and come down on the side of good and proper order. Without the messiness of true human interaction and decision making all conclusions were forgone and we were left with nothing but pretty special effects and the gleam off of Picard's head. Nowhere did I see an episode like A Piece of the Action, in which the Captain and his crew were forced to work their way towards a messy, and entertaining, compromise. The ultimate result of this, for me, was the show's increasing reliance on resolving plot through technobabble (we can reverse the polarization of the deflector dish, releasing a cloud of negatively charged anti-posi-neutrons!) With no tension and no uncertain outcomes, we are left with no real drama.
The second half of the problem, in my opinion, rests with the diehard Trek fans who insist on the hermetically sealed perfectness of their universe. The original writers had only a rough idea of the future timeline to go on, and thus were free to invent t
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
Exactly. We don't get UPN in this town, and haven't had it for the last 2 and a half years. Its not even included in the enhanced digital cable package.
Maybe if they let the SciFi channel do reruns it might get more popular.
Seriously, I hadn't noticed. I know that Spike shows TNG during the day and that SKIFFY shows TOS from time-to-time. What reruns are they talking about? The DVD offerings? The books?
When Spike showed TNG at primetime, I watched it. Did I kill Enterprise?
I just couldn't get into Enterprise. I couldn't get into Voyager either. I hated the temporal stuff.
Also: Does this mean the recent Shatner pitch about Starfleet Babies, or whatever it was, is dead?
If Nalgene water bottles are outlawed, only outlaws will have Nalgene water bottles.
There you'll see just how beautiful Blalock really is.
So I agree with you. The Enterprise producers were idiots.
Here in business speak - the last producers could probably relate to that: Mr. Bermann just got promoted at Paramount. There are two ways to look at what he did: one is that he drove the star trek franchise into the ground after having gotten a top-notch running iconic asset from Roddenberry. The other is that he has been "successfully"? spawning derived shows, and so on and so on. The people at Paramount probably were unaware of what momentum Trek has, and thought that he (Bermann) was able to extend it way beyond the life time of the average show. Turns out, that the first scenario is the one that most people here relate to. A pitty since a promoted Bermann is unlikely to fire himself.
In the end, Enterprise and the last few movies were brought down because they weren't telling good stories. Tell a good story and people will watch.
I sure hope somebody sees this and mods you Insightful because that is _*IT*_. The problem is idiots like Berman are so egotistical and blind to the fans that they figure if the ratings are low it's the fans' fault. Their stories are perfect--who could ask for better?--so it must be for some other reason that the show is dying.
The best thing for Star Trek would be if Berman and Braga simply disappeared.
Just for fun, here's an example of just how stupid (coral cached link) the last Trek film was. Funny, yes, but sadly accurate.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Two episodes were enough to convince me to stay away from Enterprise.
So, as far as I'm concerned, there hasn't been a Star Trek series since Voyager ended in 2001.
Some would go further than that (given how much Voyager also sucked) and claim that the last Star Trek series was Deep Space Nine, ending in 1999.
Add to that the fact that Enterprise was cancelled, which indicates that most people were NOT watching it.
What this means is that people do NOT need a break from Star Trek. On the contrary, they've already had a break of between four and six years.
Now all we need is a new series that, unlike Enterprise, is good enough to bear the Star Trek name.
It was only in competition for loyalty. Star Trek episodes haven't aired in a while time in the same slot. It's not an excuse for season 4's ratings. What they did was effectively put the nail in the coffin themselves with the scheduling. Enterprise at 8PM. Stargate SG-1 at 8PM. I wonder which one is going to win with the reputation each show has. It's also competing with the rest of the shows on Sci-Fi Friday. The only chance they had was to move the show when SG-1 was moved into the same slot to add Atlantis. I still believe that the should should've aired syndicated like TNG was. It's be more likely to attract viewers being placed in less competitive slots.
same here.. TNG first, Enterprise second.. never really liked DS9 or Voyager.. they were too much the same thing over and over again "quark is selling something, Cpt. Janeway is making a friend and an enemy and fighting to try to get home while her mix and matched crew have internal conflicts" same ole same ole.
Your ignorance is infinitely greater than you realize.
I'll accept my award in the form of a check to the Obvious Foundation. Thank you.
You people complain too much. I am a die hard star trek fan, and loved every single series. I am looking forward to the next one, and hope the wait isn't too long.
But for most different reasons than Berman suggests. He seems to imply that too much of a good thing is just too much no matter what the subject is. I disagree. Life Long Star Trek fan but like a lot of people, I started losing interest in the Deep Space Nine 9 era. For me the shows got worse and worse each iteration (although there are some great Next-Gen epsiodes that rival what the original did) but it finally reached the point where that bar was way below what was acceptable to average people. Star Trek Fanatics might argue that Enterprise is improving but for me 0+1 isn't exactly a big leap. Too many repeated concepts and themes. It seems like the show really had run out of steam way back at DS 9 and that's before Voyager, and Enterprise ever hit the air. I just think a break from Trek is overall a good thing. There is plenty of precendent from other media. The Batman movies, Battle Star Galatica, Dr. Who, etc. I think we need to have a break for some time to pass and someone to bring it back with a new take and a new vision but still holding on to the core concepts of what makes the show special. I'm at a lost myself to point specifically at any one thing except to realize that the franchise has been off-track for a long time. I'm glad Enterprise is done. I'm glad Star Trek is done for a bit. And here's to someone coming along in a few years to breathe some life into it. It's not like Star Trek is going away forever or anything. The franchise is too valuable and has made too much money for it to ever go away. Someone just needs to have a new compelling vision for the show that resonates with a modern audience. In other words I need to miss it before I can welcome it back.
Kirk gets it almost every episode
If by "almost every episode" you mean "three times in the entire Trek canon", then yes.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
I stopped watching when T'Pal was in High Heels in the desert with a bandana.
I had already had issues with the dropping of the star trek name, the theme song, and their pick for captain. But I was willing to go with it until the stupidity of that scene.
However I don't think Star Trek needs a break, I think it needs new writers.
I dunno...I could get used to Hoshi sleeping with the universe and more girl on girl decontamination scenes. 8-)
I wonder how Majel Barr...er...Roddenberry weighs in on this turn of events...
What was great about Trek was the sence of explortion that it gave you. The feeling of wonder. Where has that gone? They need to find it before they start another serries.
When i herd of Enerprise I thought they would go and explain how things all started, how they got shields, transporters, and so on. How they made the fedration and met all the races we know now.
That's the sad part of it. This season has been of a substantially higher quality than the past 3. But I guess the mediocrity of the first 3 seasons turned a lot of people off so they didn't come back to see the new and improved story lines. A shame.
"They are convinced the ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs."
Yes, becuase Enterprise was CRAP, and shows like TNG and DS9 were amazing, Spike TV's DS-9 and TNG ratings are higher then enterprises ended at, I would say mainly becuase EVERY Star trek fan i know DESPISES the enterprise series, and We are all pretty big star trek nerds (eg can name stardates and events corresponding)
A significant number of households in this country are tuned into "basic cable". This means they have access to the first three Trek series. A long-time Trek fan or someone new to sci-fi could quickly and more easily get involved in those series than a show stuck at 7PM on Fridays, even if the Friday show is the newest.
I think a significant number of Trek fans also couldn't get over the fact that Enterprise was trouncing on their precious canon. While I disagree with that group on principle, the writers did resort to TNG and DS9 tentpoles (Borg and Ferengi) to attract the Trek audience, which ultimately left the crew of the NX-01 with nothing to distinguish themselves. In the fourth season, we get some sense of pre-TOS events, but it was too little too late. What I hated about Enterprise is that it seemed to ignore canon then strictly adhere to it. The canon-clutching was a factor in the show's problems.
Berman and Braga exploited the franchise rather tended it. How they got away with seven seasons of Voyager is a mystery to me. The most punishment they received were slightly reduced seasons and slightly reduced air-times toward the end of the series. Enterprise had the potential to erase the problems of Voyager, but they continued the over-glossed, over-produced, sterile approach to sci-fi with the occasional gratituitous titilation that ultimately turns viewers away.
The Star Trek franchise has left a bad taste in many mouths, and I think we need three to four years to cleanse our palate. Hopefully, Paramount will look to what I hope is continued success of the Stargate franchise, the new Battlestar Galactica, and whatever new series may appear as examples of how to approach any new Star Trek series. They must make the hard choice of maintaining the lengthy, often-contradictory canon or of starting over. They must also decide which network will be the best venue.
return;
So you're not watching it because you can't rip it off? That's the lamest thing I've ever heard. People like you don't watch adverts, nor do you contribute to ratings, so why do they care whether you watch it or not? Face it, unless you have one of those ratings boxes, your opinion counts for shit.
In truth, I think the factors Berman and Braga, et al, have mentioned as reasons for the cancellation of Enterprise did have an impact. But, the primary reason people stopped watching (and a lot of people stopped watching long before Enterprise aired) is that the stories were inspidid and repetitive.
Putting aside all the usual reasons cited for Trek's success, it is, fundamentally, a character-driven drama: Take compelling, believable characters and place them in compelling, believable conflicts and you're halfway home. Mix in good story telling and you're home. Those alone won't guarantee success, as TV proves every year. But success is impossible without those elements.
As I see it, every Trek series has had good characters. Every Trek series has often burdened those characters with silly plots, unbelievable conflict, and insipid dialogue. (E.g., any monster of the week episode on any series.) Enterprise suffered more than the other series. (I think, for the most part, because they avoided the conflict surrounding the formation of the Federation for three years.)
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Yes, I think part of the problem has to do with the idea of Star Trek itself.. in our current entertainment world ((being dumbed down Reality TV garbage)).. but perhaps as much a problem is the way these programs get to us, by networks or cable or syndication.
here's an excerpt of an interview with The Man himself, in 1991:
I feel syndication is what let TNG become the success that it did. There was clearly good hype behind it, but the first season or two were really bad. And me, I'm a big fan.. but it was bad. But syndication is much more flexible, can reach people at any time, and TNG was able to get its footing and finally take off.
But who actually watches UPN? I mean, even if you -wanted- to watch the network, they don't make it easy.
It may not seem like a lot, but ABC/CBS/NBC/FOX have got this 95% to 97% access to the nation's households.. while WB and UPN have 84%-86% access. (So if your show is being compared to others on a basis of 2.1 million viewers to 1.9 million viewers, that 10% penalty right there is potentially making a 200,000 person difference.)
Worse than that however--- the few times I've tried watching Enterprise in the States (I'm Canadian, we get Enterprise on the cable Space channel only (another problem)) the UPN reception was horrible! No other stations had this problem those nights, but UPN in this city would cut in and out, making it utterly unwatchable. So I'd change channels, with plans to download the episode later when I got home. So I wonder how many other people have the same problem with a third rate UPN station or affilate.
.Anyway. I don't want to rant too long but.. five more things, in brief: TNG had great, thoughtful, supsensful 30 second teasers for upcoming episodes while the VOY/ENT ads that UPN airs are loud, utterly idiotic garbage;; UPN has its own interests at heart, its own expensive bottom line to worry about;; All the while UPN is trying to make a name for itself at the big kids table, -- so UPN plans their national program schedule to compete against top programs on other networks,,, while a syndicated station would try to pick up viewers in a timeslot that is most open for their local market;; And up in Canada anyway, you can only get ENT on Space, a station included in a package that costs an extra 15-20 dollars more than basic cable-- while TNG used to air around here on 'Global', a basic cable network-- and that takes a bite out;; and, unfortunately, "Reality TV" is what most people apparently want these days, rather than a thoughtful, well written, suspensful TV show;; lastly, even though I enjoyed it, Enterprise wasn't a very well written show in its first 2 1/2 seasons.... but its writing trumped TNGs first couple season in just about every single way. It's just unfortunate that Enterprise won't be getting the same chances that TNG g
Yeah it's boring if you break it down into a single formula. But what about your life? I'm sure even voyager is more exciting than your day to day routine if you look at the larger picture.
That was the 60's, man. They were pushing it just to have an interracial kiss...they weren't about to have on screen shagging. It was implied.
Dailies from 2/3/05
The above's a nice cartoon with Captain Archer on the left talking to the new 9th Doctor (from the new Dr Who series by the BBC). The sixth episode of the new series featuring the Daleks was broadcast in the UK yesterday.
Here's my transcript from the cartoon:
Archer: ENTERPRISE is canceled as of its season finale in May.
Doctor: I heard. It's interesting DOCTOR WHO was canceled about the time when the NEXT GENERATION came on.
Doctor: Now WHO is going to be back again and TREK is going to be gone again.
(Silence)
Archer: This is all your fault.
Doctor: Oh please. Cancellation after a season on Friday night is historically the best thing that can happen to a STAR TREK.
SCIREV.NET - fanfics,reviews & more
Am I the only person who read that as
:-\
"Most beautiful chicks in the world [are not equal to] Good ratings"?
Too much code I think
I liked the theme song. Usually, space operas' themes are symphonic, and they have a flavor of 'going-to-war'. The Enterprise theme was actually a soft guitar song, which was really calm and showed clearly that the USS Enterprise was not gonna save the world, but rather learn from it.
that Trek needs a break.
What Enterprise suffered from was poor writing, especially in Seasons 1 and 2. The classic example of this is the ep where Archer takes his dog on a diplomatic mission...rubbish.
Contrast that with Seasons 3 (to some extent) and Season 4, with Season 4 in particular being excellent.
I think that Berman and Braga are full of shit and are trying to cover their ineptitude and lack of originality.
And it was only implied three times. 60's or not, I'm responding to the spurious claim that Kirk was a womanizer.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
I'm not holding my breath waiting for the people behind these reposts to announce that they're taking a break.
I had almost given up on ENTERPRISE last season, when I heard that Berman and Braga were essentially stepping back and letting Coto take over as producer.
My reasons for giving up were the pointless story arcs and liberal re-imagining of the TREK Universe until it was barely comparable to the initial vision of Roddenberry...and being a survivor of the "Arnold Wars" for the heart and soul of Trek, I saw this coming a long time ago.
When I found that Berman and Braga had written ENTERPRISE into a corner last season for Coto to resolve without help, it showed Berman and Braga for what they were...petulant weasels who desired all credit and spread all blame.
Considering what Coto was left with, he did a brilliant job of pulling the series out of the corner, and eliminating the 'Time Wars' arc at the same time.
But Berman and Braga had done their damage...if the fans didn't like _their_ version of TREK, then Coto would be the 'fall guy' for their errors...and he is.
Berman and Braga are _NOT_ science fiction fans, let alone writers...they are TV hacks, trying to cash in on the work and imagination of others, and being given the keys to the kingdom through control of TREK.
They wrested control of the TREK franchise from Gene when he had his stroke, and they cut out Majel, reducing her to comic relief or computer voices. They ignored quality of content for T&A and shoot-em-ups.
A simple check of IMDB on their records indicates that they have no real experience in production of programming, aside from the pocket universe of TREK; it's not unreasonable to presume that they chafed under Roddenberry's "rules" and decided to change the TREK Universe completely to their own interpretations.
Mind you, this is not to argue that the TREK Universe is inviolate...but their interpretation of the original concepts that Roddenberry laid out bear little or no resemblance to those concepts.
We could do worse than Manny Coto...in fact, we _have_ done worse with Berman and Braga.
We would all be better served by getting Paramount to remove those two and letting Coto, or anyone else with a _real_ programming/writing background, take over the TREK Universe.
Roddenberry created his universe with people who have worked on cop shows, soap operas, adventure shows and films, and all manner of programs, having done the same himself.
Berman and Braga have incestuously drawn the circle of TREK so tightly that it has developed the same stagnation we would see in inbred hillfolk...the hideous and pointless sterility that we would expect has hit TREK because of them.
Dump Berman and Braga...let in some 'fresh' genetic material to allow TREK to regenerate as it moves along, and not lock it away for Berman and Braga to continue screwing it all up again.
"Eustace? Eustace? Are you there? Are you there?" = John Leeming
Not many sci-fi shows are going to do well on Friday nights in the US when they are going head to head with the Stargate serie(s).
While being on UPN didn't help any, not being on the sci-fi channel and having to compete was more deadly to the show.
I wasn't much of a fan , but all the people I know IRL that were, said that the time slot was the killer.
They would tape Enterprise, and watch Andromeda and Stargate instead.
Best to cleanse society of these obsessed Trekkies and to send the recordings into outer space. And do it with booze. And hookers. Ah, forget the Star Trek thing.
[/futurama reference, politically correct moderator friends]
It's not pissing on the timeline to have goofy stuff go on in a dark universe where Earth is conquerors.
Now, much of the rest of the show *does* piss on the timeline. So, if you want to dislike the only two episodes with NO TIE IN to the rest, based on emotion, go right ahead.
error in perception.
no c code ever in my comments. lol.
Klingon 1: "How did he die? We have little evidence."
Klingon 2: "I killed him to avenge my honor!"
Klingon 1: "Aha! Well done!"
[Klingons begin to fight]
Obviously you never watched the original series, which was all about baseball. Remember "The Omega Glory"? Its talk about the "yangs" and the "kohms" is nothing but a thinly veiled reference to the New York Yankees and Commisky Park, home of the Chicago White Sox.
Remember the scene where Kirk holds up the flag and sings the national anthem?
Remember the three-run homer by Sulu at the bottom of the fifth?
Remember Spock and Sox commentator Harry Caray singing "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" in the seventh inning stretch?
Remember Scotty's cry of "Captain, my arm cannae take much more of this!"
Ah, the good old days, before ST:Voyager and MLB:Free Agents. Sigh.
Deep Space Nine managed to be Nazi-free, assuming you're talking literal Nazis (or at least, aliens dressed as literal Nazis). A quick Google search suggests a lot of people see allegorical Nazis in various DS9 aliens. Whatever.
But this actually reminds me of something I noticed myself: The longer a science-fiction show runs on television, the more likely the show's heroes will have to fight Nazis. Check these out if you don't belive me:
X-Files
Galactica 1980
Lois and Clark
Sliders
Lone Gunmen
Screw it, I can't list them all. Search Google and you'll find Nazis in all sorts of science fiction and fantasy shows, including failed shows (or maybe I should say, especially failed shows) like "Brimstone", "Time Cop", and "The Burning Zone".
It's just like Godwin's Law: Eventually, every sci-fi series must have a "Nazi episode". And then it gets cancelled.
I blame this on lazy writers, and an unhealthy abundance of cheap Nazi costumes in Hollywood.
Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
The original Trek was funny, interesting, had some great character actors, who were bad actors, explored the depths of what it means to be human by comparison with other imagined lifeforms, and overall provided an interesting atmosphere. All these spin offs are missing 1 or more of those ingredients. TNG was OK, but took itself too seriously, and lost almost all the humor of the original series. Don't even get me started on the last few...
Here's an idea. Put together a new trek that had all the features of the old but with all the new tech available for film, CGI, etc. Nothing low budget on tech, and nothing high budget on acting, just the most attractive multi-cultural crew you can put together. Add the soft filter when the flawed captain meets female aliens. Bring back the psychedellic style music. Bring back the go-go boots. Get rid of the shitty neoprene one pieces that make hot chicks like councilor troy look bad. Have porn stars be the aliens!
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
They're tired of Rick "everything I touch turns to shit" Berman fucking up the series beyond redemption. Not only does Trek need a rest but Berman should be banned from doing anything remotely Star Trek for the rest of his life.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Yeah, yeah, we know. The problem with Enterprise is that it doesn't have .
*cough*
Yeah, yeah, we know. The problem with Enterprise is that it doesn't have .
Oh, the hell with it.
People like me are advancing the business model. I'll buy it on DVD, and if it's offered in an on-demand fashion on my computer before that, I'll buy it there, too. Labelling me as a pirate because you can't be bothered to recognize market changes is exactly why the media conglomerates have to monopolize in order to profit.
What pisses me off the most is that the later (post season 4) enterprise eps were actually GOOD...
If if was kept at this level of quality, I would enjoy more seasons...
just kill Berman and Braga and keep the show running with the new writters...
I for one, welcome our new hot grits... PROFIT!
Yeah, but science-fiction fans don't. The real problem with putting a science-fiction show on a Friday night in America? The science-fiction fans are watcthing the Sci-Fi Channel. When "Sci Fi Friday" isn't in reruns, it's the 800-pound gorilla of sci-fi TV.
In fact, Neilsen ratings for Enterprise started hitting all-time lows (below 2.0) this January, when the winter season started on the Sci Fi Channel. Believe it or not, Stargate SG-1 was the final nail in Enterprise's coffin. (The first nail, of course, was the fact that Enterprise wasn't a good show.)
Battlestar Galactica actually gets better ratings than Enterprise! I'm almost embarassed for UPN, because they apparently turned down Battlestar Galactica four years ago.
Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
Sorry to be a prude, but I don't think they will miss a fan that didn't bother watching it with the commercials in it. Skipping advertising with tivo and replay seems to upset them as it is. sharing it with no commercials attached seems to really make them angry, and I don't like them (whether they are angry or not!).
I have three words that will reveal that any and all variations on the "too much Trek" argument as unequivocally wrong. Those three words?
Law and Order
Just like Trek, every episode of Law & Order is "competing" with decades of its own reruns -- the original L&O is currently airing its 15th season, Special Victims Unit its 6th, and Criminal Intent its 4th. That means there's 22 (14 + 5 + 3) years of L&O reruns on cable right now.
Star Trek has 24 years of reruns in play at the moment -- 3 for the original, and 7 for each of three spin-offs. (Enterprise reruns aren't syndicated yet, and the cartoon isn't airing anywhere.)
I'm pretty sure L&O reruns air more often than Trek reruns, so let's consider it even -- Both franchises have an unhealthy number of old episodes to "compete" with. Yet Dick Wolf and NBC can get general audiences to watch four new episodes of Law & Order every week, while UPN and Berman/Braga can't get a fraction of the same audience to watch one episode of Enterprise.
See my point? If the problem was as simple as "general audiences" burning out on over-exposed franchises, they would have given up on L&O, too. But they didn't. The problem isn't in the audience. It's in the the show.
We could argue all night long about why L&O has longer legs than Trek. I figure L&O has two things going for it -- better marketing (NBC is just better at promotion than UPN) and consistency -- whether you like L&O or not, you have to admit that it's pretty much the same show it was 15 years ago. (The producers know their franchise's strengths, and stick to them.) The last ten years of Trek on the other hand, have been all over the place. Star Trek has no quality control.
Which is my long-winded way of agreeing with half the posters here: The problem isn't "too much Star Trek", it's "too much bad Star Trek". Trek's been going downhill since Voyager and it's not going to get better with hacks like Berman and Braga. Even letting the show "rest for a few years" won't help, unless they get some new, smarter producers.
Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
But, yes, the rest of it was lame.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
One of his more memorable quotes I thought was when someone asked him to explain the declining interest in the Star Trek francise. He replied that it was strange to hear that question because for years and years the question was always "why is Star Trek so popular even to this day?" Of course to that question he would talk about how it reaffirmed many of our hopes and dreams for the future and reflected on our own lives, etc. etc. But now that he was being asked this question, he attributed the decline in interest was, as has already been stated, due to an oversaturation, that audiences needed a break. He said that Episode 501 of the Star Trek series could be just as good as Episode 1 but it's still the five-hundred and first episode. There's just only so much we can take.
What I thought was more interesting, though, was that he claimed that the actual writing quality hadn't declined throughout the years, that Star Trek episodes were just as innovative and interesting as ever, but that the audiences were just too tired of stories about time travel and worm holes. (This point I think I would have to disagree with but as a writer for Voyager and the Creator/Writer of Enterprise, I think I gave him the benefit of a doubt.)
He pointed to "Lost" as a promising show that he classified as science fiction which was going in a new direction that he felt other shows should follow.
Finally, I thought I would just add that Brannon Bragga seems to be a little more generous with how much time it will be before Star Trek comes back. When asked if Star Trek would continue on in any other forms, he said that certainly fans would continue on efforts to keep the show affloat (he sited the group of fans who tried to pay for an additional season of Enterprise by raising money themselves) but he said that Star Trek wouldn't be back for at least another ten years.
Wait, what if he goes NOT as the wolf?
A CEO runs a company into the ground and blames the comsumers. Nobody is buying the product! Wheres my golden parachute.
Same thing with the StarTrek franchise, ran into the ground, blaming the consumers for his poor run of the company.
My problem with this franchise from the beginning of TNG is there are no realistic characters anywhere to be found. Think about it: the reason we love Serenity and Battlestar is because the characters are fallible. They swear, (frak!), sweat, make bad descisions, and occaisionally think with the wrong head. When the sh*t hits the fan, their military (yes, kids, StarFLEET is supposed to be a military organization) training kicks in and they get serious. (Remember when Kirk was hell-bent to start a war with the Klingons on Organia? Spock never said that wasn't a good idea. They just followed orders.)
The reason the alternate universe trek stories are so much fun is all the characters are more realistic -- granted, aggressive, but real.
Ten years of Trek can't measure up to the moment when Adama told his Master Seargent that a good man was in the brig because he couldn't keep his fly zipped.
I think Berman is more of an investment banker then a writer.
I really thing that the decline of people watching Enterprise is the result of it being against two Stargate Series and Battlestar Galactica. Working out a deal to put it on Sci-Fi would be their best move. -Andrea-
*It's not what you can do for the Dark Side but what the Dark Side can do for you!*
Are there any good stories left in the Trek Universe? Between the books, the movies, and the television shows, what more could they do that would be a "good story"?
Well to be fair, the two mirror episodes this latest season had pretty cool intro credits. 'Course it's kind of sad that only in an alternate universe can we get cool intro credits...
My apologies: Here's Braga's bio:
A native of Bozeman, Montana, Braga was educated at Kent State University and The University of California, Santa Cruz, studying Theater Arts and Filmmaking. He began his career in entertainment in 1990 when he received the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences Writing Internship that led to a writing/producing post on Star Trek: The Next Generation. In all, he has written more than 100 Star Trek episodes.
My point remains, however...NO PRACTICAL TELEVISION EXPERIENCE TO USE TO CREATE.
An intern is handed the power?
Perhaps a geek's wet dream of power, but in the real world of trying to produce a television program?
Sorry...regardless of his resume, he has no real strengths to handle TREK save his own ego.
"Eustace? Eustace? Are you there? Are you there?" = John Leeming
BSG provides a refreshing contrast. Their fleet is an aging relic, the cast are humanly fallible and their treatment of the cylons raises some very contemporary questions of how civil societies react to enemies within their ranks. BSG is to Star Trek as Bladerunner was to Star Wars. For those of us who aren't 13, that's a lot more interesting.
One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there
Speaking as a Trek fan since forever...
ratings dropped due to the show competing against other Trek re-runs
The ratings droped for "Enterprise" because, quite frankly, it sucked.
Likewise, "Star Trek: Nemesis" tanked because, quite frankly, it sucked.
Paramount and The Powers That Be apparently decided that they could slap the name "Star Trek" on any old turd pile and it would sell. Only now are they realizing the truth...now that its almost too late.
When even actors in the series think it sucks, that should have told them something about "Enterprise". While I will watch the end just to see how it wraps up, I'm not at all sorry to see it go. I'm not sure I'll even bother to buy the DVDs of "Enterprise".
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
Seriously, it seems like science-fiction fans start complaining about "soap operas" every time a show asks them to remember what happened the previous week. Continuing storylines aren't what hurts Star Trek with normal audiences. Normal audiences watch shows with continuing storylines all the time. Here's the current Nielsen Top 20:
1 CSI
2 DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES
3 AMERICAN IDOL-TUESDAY
4 AMERICAN IDOL-WEDNESDAY
5 CSI: MIAMI
6 SURVIVOR: PALAU
7 GREY'S ANATOMY ABC
8 HOUSE FOX
9 EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND
10 E.R.
11 TWO AND A HALF MEN
12 COLD CASE
13 WITHOUT A TRACE
14 LAW AND ORDER
15 EXTREME MAKEOVER:HM ED
16 APPRENTICE 3
17 60 MINUTES
18 CBS SUNDAY MOVIE
19 JUDGING AMY
20 REVELATIONS
Yeah, there are some procedural shows there, but there's also a bunch of shows with continuing storylines. And they're all getting better ratings than Enterprise, which has been hovering around a 2.0 rating all season. If continuing storylines are a problem for Trek, it's not because normal audiences are too lazy to keep up with the show, it's because Trekkies are too lazy to keep up with the show.
Highest-rated sci-fi show on TV right now? Battlestar Galactica. Continuing storylines can't be that bad for a show....
Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
to what? my wife really liked that theme!
Not Free SF Reader
The thing is, if you ask someone their favourite order, everyone likes something different.
:)
I loved Enterprise and Voyager, enjoyed The Next Generation and DS9, and barely could stomach TOS as an adult. (I'll admit that I enjoyed TOS as a kid. But I outgrew it, just like I outgrew Doctor Who and Worzel Gummidge)
PS. I take it back -nobody can outgrow Worzel Gummidge.
(Make it Catweasel instead
...fans are just saturated with the nose/ear/forehead prosthetic alien of the week that can only save the galaxy through time travel enabled by reversing the polarity of the neutrons. maybe what the Trek series need are a break from the boring, non-creative garbage that Berman and Braga pump out every week. Apparently, they're too busy pissing on Roddenberry's grave to sit down and come up with watchable TV.
Worst ST character ever: Deanna Troi. Whiny mistress of the obvious. (Angry alien: "I'll destroy you and the entire Federation!" Troi:"Captain I sense hostility")
Uh, what?
Dude, Voyager was a UPN show. Not one of the great Star Treks, but it did better (ratings-wise) than Enterprise.
Which only works, of course, if the differences are real.
I agree that the "saturation" argument is bogus. I think you're underestimating the "poor matchup with UPN content". Enterprises's premiere got 12 million viewers because UPN heavily promoted the show outside UPN -- Billboards, magazine stories, commercials on cable channels, etc.
After the premiere, however, they mostly depended on advertsing the show on UPN, which is where the "poor matchup" becomes a problem. As the NYT article points out, most UPN shows skew "young female" (Veronica Mars, America's Next Top Model). That's not an audience that can be turned Trekkie with mere commercial. (Another "mismatch" the NYT is too polite to mention -- UPN's entire sitcom line-up is aimed at urban African-Americans, another demographic that's less enthusiastic about science fiction than the white males who form Trek's (and Slashdot's) core audience.)
Never underestimate the power of a "network demographic". Unlike it advertises off-net, UPN can only market its shows to people who already watch UPN. That makes it hard to promote shows that don't match the existing viewers. Shows that aren't promoted well usually don't suceed. It becomes a vicious circle that's hard to escape. (Look at CBS. They've spent years trying to get a younger demographic, but they had trouble promoting "young" shows, when all the people watching their commericials are retirees.)
Considering that Enterprise was a bad show saddled with poor promotion, it's a wonder it lasted as long as it did.
Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
Good stories never go out of style.
Unfortunately, Trek has been the unfortunate recipient of mediocre storylines and plot devices ever since ST:Voyager began.
Voyager had the greatest potential of any of the recent Star Treks. Imagine, a ship in a totally unfamiliar region of space. Imagine all of the possible new situations and stories. Now come back to reality and realize that Berman and Braga basically have ruined the franchise with rehashed stories, plot holes and inconsistancies, situations with arbitrary and easy solutions, and more technobabble than should be legally allowed.
After Voyager, B & B have taken their brand of talent to Enterprise and similar results have occured. The Season 4 addition of Manny Coto to the storywriting staff happened too late in Enterprise's life to have an effect.
After 11 years of such rubbish, is it any wonder why the ratings have plummeted?
Rick, you are sorely mistaken. The fans of Star Trek are not burned out on the franchise. We can't get enough good Star Trek. The problem is, Star Trek is not good. It has nothing to do with viewer fatigue.
What is the problem with Enterprise, then? Bad writing, boring characters, awful stories, and absolutely no respect for continuity with previous series. Vulcans getting "STDs" from mind melding? A stigma against mind melding? Vulcans being aggressive, deceitful and shortsighted? The borg? Romulans? T'Pau a rebel? Give us a break! Stop fucking with things that are dear to viewers! Make up something new instead of rehashing and mangling old standards. This series had unlimited potential to do new and interesting things, and you squandered it.
Most importantly, get someone less tired than yourself to run things. And more talented.
Heh, Even tho Topol was mannish and asexual, she was still too much stimulation for most Trekkies. Those toads like their space morality plays emily bronte-style.
As I see it, every Trek series has had good characters.
As I see it, the fundemental problem with all the post-TNG series is that the characters were conceptualized as repressed boy scouts and were incapabible of generating any tension or conflict themselves. Rather than Kirk & Spock, you got wooden Rodenbury-utopia parodies of real people. In other words, the characters were bad.
And that is the main reason the the plots weren't compelling and the dialog was insipid -- the characters simply had no motiviation except "Go Starfleet" and "Prime Directive" and the writers had nothing to work with.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
That was the 60's, man. They were pushing it just to have an interracial kiss...they weren't about to have on screen shagging. It was implied.
Implied how? Did the Enterprise fly through a tunnel?
Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
What a bunch of lame, self-centered, piracy-apologising drivel.
You're not advancing the business model, no more than I'm advancing the business model for football matches by sneaking in rather than buying a ticket. It's just copyright infringement. I'm not labelling you a pirate, you're a pirate by definition, because you pirate TV programmes.
You make it sound as if ripping off stuff for free is making the world a better place or something. Of course you'll be the first to complain when you get sued.
Since the writers develop the characters, it is facile to argue the characters gave them "nothing to work with". Quite the opposite: the writers could have changed those characters anytime they wished. The fact that they didn't points to bad writing and bad story telling.
The Kirk in TOS was a one-dimensional hormone-driven cowboy, and Spock was an immature Vulcan fixating on repressing his emotions. As the actors aged and played the roles in the movies, the writers did add depth to their characters, e.g., Kirk became very aware of his own mortality and Spock became one of the more emotional figures in Trek.
The quality of TOS is often greatly overrated. Many of its shows were among the cheesiest of teh franchise.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
...the alien Nazi season opening. Bad leftover from 3rd season.
Since then I had a lot of hope for it until the last couple of episodes.
Orion Syndicate? With three almost-naked girls doing erotic dances? Alternate universe with Hoshi in underwear and T'Pols bare midriff?
Seems to me the basic tone was "Well, we've tried this old-school decent stories now for half a series, let's try T&A again."
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
at least they didn't strip her naked and cover her with oil... oh, wait...
So, let's see. TV is available for free, over the airwaves, or I can download it for free. You, sir, are an idiot.
Wish I had mod points, that link had me ROFL, so sad but true. Good one!
The show kills the producers
Yes, they do seem to have gotten confused and mistaken controversy for controversial. Hence the space battle seasons vs. the poignant social commentary episodes that were a significant part of all the Star Trek series until Enterprise.
Miss those days, I do.
a.k.a. The Suc-cu-Bus?
Nobody seems to have mentioned that DS9 was competing against B5 in DS9's 2nd half, and basically copied the story-arc formula of B5 with story events being important later, etc etc. at the time when B5 was killing DS9 in the ratings.
What if all those pedophiles just buy Trek DVDs because pedophiles like Wesley Crusher?
As if being a child actor didn't suck enough....
Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
Since Manny Coto kicked out Braga, and became the new show=runner, Year 4 has been telling GOOD stories.
It wasn't Trek that was burned out.
It was Braga.
troy
I was drinking something, you know.
> the writers could have changed those characters anytime they wished.
Not true at all, the writers are handcuffed by the production, and they stated explicity that it was "Gene's vision" that Starfleet officers lacked major flaws or conflicts.
A good example is the guy in Voyager who was a anti-federation rebel in the pilot. Obviously there could have been a lot of potential there, but they immediately turned him into paper-pushing desk jockey and only highlighted his rebelious qualities once in a blue moon when it suited some contrived plot point. At which point, his motiviation had little or no traction with the audience.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
I doubt you have evidence the writers were contractually obligated to portray characters as unflawed and unconflicted. Roddenberry, a writer himself, imbued the TOS characters with a significant amount of personal flaws and conflict, from which grew the best stories.
I am certain that Paramount constrains the Trek creative staff from making major and surprising changes to established characters. That makes sense because viewers and readers expect the characters to behave in a familiar way.
Ultimately, Trek is an ensemble drama, just like shows like LA Law, Law and Order, or Desparate Housewives. We watch those shows because the characters are interesting and we care about them. A show has only one chance -- one episode -- to convince people that the characters are interesting and worth caring about. Enterprise, in particular, failed to do that. None of the S-F trappings, none of the multi-episode arcs, none of the references to Trek's legacy make any difference when you're watching you don't care about doing uninteresting things.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Now we have decent stories AND T&A.
Where's the problem here?
+++ATH0
They did get attacked by a cornucopia (a.k.a. horn of plenty) once.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
The trick to using bittorrent and not getting in trouble with asshats is to use Azureus (java client) with the latest sun java and a plugin called "safe peer" it keeps the bad ip's out (mostly).
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
I think they'll miss a fan who owns all the DVD sets for the other series, eh?
If by "implied" you mean "beaten over the head with hints because I have no imagination", then yes.