Quote:
Originally Posted by Trinity Zeldis
I don't know whether to wince or to laugh hysterically.
From what (admittedly, little) I've seen of fan shows, I'm going to go with "wince."
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trinity Zeldis
I don't know whether to wince or to laugh hysterically.
From what (admittedly, little) I've seen of fan shows, I'm going to go with "wince."
I'm sorry to hear the news that UPN has cancelled ENT. While I was disappointed in the beginning, I have grown to like the show & I think the 4th season is the best yet. I hope we will see a new Star Trek TV series but I recommend they stick to the 24th Century setting.
Here's more news:
Berman Reacts To Enterprise
Rick Berman, executive producer of the just-canceled Star Trek: Enterprise, told SCI FI Wire that he was surprised not by UPN's decision, but by the fact that viewers continued to tune out the series despite a marked improvement in quality, strong reviews and guest appearances by the likes of Brent Spiner.
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire2005/i...ory=0&id=30325
Hmmm......seems that it was not a post by an Enterprise-basher.....LOL.
I for one am a little sad that things are going pear-shaped for Enterprise as, after a dodgy start, it seemed to have found it's feet. That said, it is probablu a good idea to let the franchise rest and breathe for a while. What a shocking thought, huh?
Cheers
Tas
Well, I do agree we need a break. But why can't they just let Enterprise finish at least one more season? I mean let the cast and crew fulfill their five-year contracts. After that, take a very looong break that includes Berman & Braga cleaning up their office desk at the franchise HQ building.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poolshark
That's a very decent thought coming from you, Reg! :)
For me, this sucks big time. I've liked Enterprise almost from the start, in spite of the frequently-bad writing (IMO, the first couple of seasons of TNG were often worse), and for me, it picked up from the end of season 2. The Xindi arc was good and what I've heard about the new stuff sounded very promising. Coto was definitely a Good Thing.
Ok, so the characters were a little bland, but that's usually the case with Trek for the first couple of years. I still say the continuity issues were blown out of all proportion. From my POV, I watched to be entertained, not to see if they got this or that little thing spot-on. And "no prizing" the gaffes is a favourite hobby of mine :)
What I hate to point out is that, judging from the Sci-fi.com article, the show seems to have been axed because of the new direction. Viewing figures dropped from 13 million to 2.9 million. Given that Trek has always relied on casual viewers to keep going (the given reason why it avoided complex arcs like those in B5), its change to a more arc-based formula would have driven away many of those viewers (whose numbers were already down because it was "just another Trek"). This basically left the hard-core fans, who contrary to popular belief, were never enough to sustain a show like this. Hence, kaput :(
Don't worry folks, we didn't kill it - there were too few of us to save it in the first place.
The sad thing is, if Coto had pursued his mini-arc concept in the beginning, it might have kept things going. Most casual viewers can muster the energy to follow two or three episode stories.
Having said all that, it's probably a good idea to let it rest. We've had a glut of Trek in recent years, and I sense some belly-ache from some quarters.
Now, the fans are needed - to keep it alive until the next revival :)
With all due respect, I don't trust certain fans, even in here. I can only trust myself, and I still believe the first three seasons are crap, but the fourth season is coming around to my liking: The Birth of the Federation. More episodes filled with Andorians, and now Tellarites. We need to see more founding member species/culture that will form the Federation. And the war that will unite us: The Earth-Romulan War.Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagus
But I guess the fans don't want to see that. :rolleyes:
No, the fans just want the spineless Age of Diplomacy and Viking-Samurai Klingons, with psychopathic captains lost in the Delta Quadrant and holier-than-thou politically-correct Brits pretending to be French. :mad:
But, I'm not bitter. :p :D
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sea Tyger
Well, as Winston Churchill once said: "Jaw jaw is better than war war."
You having a pop at brits?! :D
handbags at 40 paces! :D
A handbag duel?
You'd think they would come up with something more civilized, like teeth-baring contests.
Tobian, really. You should know me better than that. ;) I wasn't making a pop at Brits...just Picard. :rolleyes:
Err hence I said Handbags at Dawn, and not pistols words or small portable canons :D You've just got to see the TV show *shooting stars* from the Uk to get that joke :D
:D I believe in Bald Captains make the best captains: :D
Sisko with Hair Sucked...Sisko with out hair rocked
Picard was bald...taking the term Baldy Going Where no Man has Gone Before :D
Kirk-Wears a Topee
Look at These Two
Janeway no Thining Hair and Most Hair of Any Captain...
Archer not Bald or wearing a topee.
:D Result Bad Shows = Captains with Hair in Star Trek :D
I don't think William Shatner nor his character Kirk wore a toupee during TOS.
As for Sisko, he probably did not want to resemble his Hawk character to the new Trek series.
Actually it was Avery Brooks who wanted to return to his bad bald self. He just didn't really have the clout until the series had established itself.
Really? He's missing his shades.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sho-sa Kurita
Yep. He did. The only episode he appeared in without it was "The Deadly Years."Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
Really? Never figured for him to lose his hair that early.
Quote:
Originally Posted by REG
I have friend to introduce you to, then. :) He lost most of his hair before he was 25. :D
I have seen younger bald men. I just never figured HIM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Tyger
I must disagree... I'm pretty sure that in TOS that was Shatner's real hair. My mom worked in the hairdressing business for years and she can spot toupees and the like miles away; her toupee-busting super-powers are even keener when the perpetrator is on TV. And she'll tell you that was his real hair. You can tell because you can also see that it was thinning even then. Although to hedge my bet I *think* they made him wear one near the end of TOS.
The same pattern happened with Sean Connery in the James Bond films.
And going back to that hair = bad ST; you could sometimes tell that Bakula was a predecesor to Kirk... sometimes under some lighting angle you could tell he's thinning.
Me... I cheated by having hair transplants and taking Propecia. You can laugh now. I'm waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay OT.
Nope. A friend of the family met him prior to TOS. He was performing a play and was adjusting (or reapplying, can't remember which) his toupee in the dressing room...Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake_Plissken
A lot of people think the same thing about Burt Reynolds. He's had a rug since the mid-seventies. They've just been very good rugs... ;)
So that the old blood can blame the new blood for the shows demise and not have to take responsibility for it?Quote:
Why did they go to all the trouble of bringing in new blood, just to cancel the show almost immediately afterwards? They didn't even give the show time to get turned around in the new direction before they pulled the plug.
--First of Two
I read this on Shatner's web site, in that he didn't always use the rug, and it was heavily dependant on the lighting of the scene. If it's harsh, his hair would look really bad and so the rug was used. It wasn't used often in outside shots, etc.. where the lighting was more natural (obviously) and didn't look so wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Burke
He apparently went through a variety of 'tricks' for a long time to deal with his thin hair, and dealing with the fact that 'it looks fine in real life' for a lot of it. (It's very thin now, of course, but that's just age).
I imagine that Manny Coto's hiring was in the works, probably as far back as mid-late third season; in my considerably uninformed opinion, these things take a fair amount of time to set up and organize before they become actualities, especially if the person is still commited to another job. At the very least, I figure that there was speculation that it might be time to let someone who actually knew how to drive take the wheel for a while. Unfortunately - and again, this is coming from someone who hasn't so much as looked at the show since early first season and is going entirely by third-hand reports - it was too little, too late: Berman and Braga had driven this thing irreparably into the ground.Quote:
Originally posted by redwood973
So that the old blood can blame the new blood for the shows demise and not have to take responsibility for it?
Again, for me this entire series is going to fall into the category of "A bad dream that Jim Kirk had after a head-cheese hoagie". The grievous continuity errors were one thing, the malignantly bad stories another...but together, they rendered this thing to the point where it was facing what was basically a snowball's chance in Hell. God willing, the next person to bat - in another five or ten years, however long it takes for Viacom/Paramount to clear the gangrenous taste of this venture from its palatte - will be able to look to the future and take some risks rather than retreating back into a past that's already been written.
I suspect the reason is that Berman and Braga knew the end was drawing near. So they wanted to step away and pursue other projects, leaving Enterprise in the hands of a custodian good enough to complete its run -- for Coto's part, he's happy because it gets him some "cred" in television.Quote:
Originally Posted by redwood973
There are a number of hints, like this, that suggest the handwriting was on the wall before this season even began.
Agreed - I remember that Jolene Blalock was quoted several months ago in either Maxim or FHM as saying that this was likely their final year. There...there may have been some photographs attached to that article...I can't really be sure... :)Quote:
Originally posted by Balok
There are a number of hints, like this, that suggest the handwriting was on the wall before this season even began.
We must do everything we can to preserve the Show. We can send letters,emails, or sign the petition at http://www.startrekfans.net/ or at http://www.saveenterprise.com/
http://www.saveenterprise.com/banner/redfield.gif
thanks for the support!
Just reading the Production report on part 2 of the Mirror Universe episode, and it looks like the show will total only 98 episodes. Is the 100 number a hard line for syndication?
I don't think it's a hard number; I think 98 rounds up to 100 nicely enough for a syndication package.
Personally, I just want them to get the DVD sets out, and then I can just put this whole ugly incident behind me.
Radio station KZOK in Seattle is holding a Star Trek contest, winner gets a walk on role in the last episode. For those Ent fans, last chance to be part of Trek history.
Yay, (as Treefrog dances around the living room)...
To all those that know me, I've been a vociferous hater of Enterprise for a very long time!
It just goes to show that if your patient, persistent (aka stubborn) then anything is possible.
Well I enjoyed the show and have been feeling depressed that it was canceled :(
Interesting development in the fan drive to keep Enterprise continuing:
Investors in commercial space flight industry anonymously contribute $3-million to TrekUnited
And I think it's just stupid:
1) It's been figured that 'the fans' would have to raise about $30 mil. in order to produce the series at 'current production value', and that's assuming that Paramount would even allow outside funding directly by private citizens (they have enough problems satisfying advertisers...can you just imagine trying to do the same to ALL 'their' investors... :eek: )
2) 'They' don't have a network to show, nor is it being 'shopped'. I heard/read the 'Spike rumor', and to that I say, Spike should just buy the rights to Smackdown (which has waaaaaaaaaay better ratings/demographics [compared to Ain't] and Spike has a fantastic track record with WWE programing: Raw, Velocity, Sunday Night Heat,... Bsically, it's more of a match [pardon the pun]).
If these 'fans' (and any want-to-be/would-be investing fan) really want to improve the state of 'Trek; invest in some of the fan-films out there: Exter, Final Frontier, Stone Trek, and even Capt. Hunter's very own Intrepid. These films/projects deserve the money a lot more then Ain't-a-prize ever does or did:
- The fans (most of the time) don't get paid, they do it for the love of acting and the source material.
- The films/projects usually do not have sponsers (Stone Trek did get Starland, but that's a rare event), so they need all the support they can get...and lastly.
- Look at what they (the fans this time, not 'They') did/could do on their limited budget vs. what 'They' (this time I do mean 'They') did with 'Theirs'...now imagine if the fans actually got a serious ammount of money to work with...WOOOOOOOOW!!!! Blow the mind!!!
Just a thought...
I meant 'Exeter', as in Star Trek: Exeter; one of the best fan-Treks going...carry on:).
Hmm. Never heard of it.
Starship Exeter:
http://homepage.mac.com/starshipexeter/
Better? :)
You mean it's not out in DVDs? Bummer.
Trek United has reported they are in discussions with Paramount since the three million dollar donation.
Trek United Contribution Total: $ 3,107,224.62 (As of Mar. 9th, 3:49pm ET)