A new movie and there are still more threads active about the new LOTR movie than Nemesis.
Is this a sign?
Is Trek dying?
Printable View
A new movie and there are still more threads active about the new LOTR movie than Nemesis.
Is this a sign?
Is Trek dying?
For me it's been dead since DS9 went off the air.
It could in my mind ressurrect itself, if it went back to doing morality plays, instead of panderint to the lowest common denominator.
I'll admit I haven't seen Nemesis & likely won't till it hits DVD or video, but Trek lacked something another movie apparently had -- Jennifer Lopez :rolleyes: So much for the LCD theory.
I'd just like them to get back to morality plays & social commentaries. But that's just me.
This is the end...
My friend, the end.
I think that Star Trek is indeed on its last legs. While overall I enjoy watching Enterprise, it doesn't excite me the way earlier shows did. I get the feeling of "been there, done that" a lot. And I'm an Enterprise fan.
While that's just my opinion, ratings and the performance of Insurrection and Nemesis would seem to indicate that the general tv-viewing and movie-going public is not excited either.
Can that be changed? I think so, but I think a Trek is needed that totally changes perception of what Star Trek is - Enterprise is very similar in concept to TNG and TOS and Voyager, for example. Yes, there's a ton of differences, in time period and technology, but these are relatively minor when you really come down to it.
To get Trek ratings up, Trek needs to change in such a way to get attention and hold it. Something radical. Not showing more skin or a more dangerous version of TOS. Something to really shake things up. This means risking losing some hard-core fans. I'm thinking something innovative, like NYPD Blue was to police shows when it first came out.
I should note that I've yet to see Nemesis. We had a babysitter tonight for our daughter and we chose to see Lord of the Rings over Star Trek. I plan on seeing Nemesis, but it doesn't excite me like LotR does.
Make of that what you will. Obviously, this is all just my opinion.
Yeah, Nemesis is not doing awesome business..but then, who will with The Two Towers out? I think STN's slow start is a combination of factors. I think the economy has a lot of people thinking that they can only afford one of the two right now and in that situation, TT is going to win hands down. And I have seen Nemesis twice and enjoyed it more the second time. but I suspect the movie's climactic event may have turned off some of the fans as well. It really is a good movie, imo. I see a lot of people carping about the editing..maybe this is a case of "just enough knowledge is a bad thing"...I know nothing about editing, ergo it didn't bother me.
Star Trek dying? I don't think so. it does need some new blood and some fresh ideas, but I'm not sure that will work either, because if you change something, it seems to me the fans will have a fit. And that's too bad, because that's what needed.
allen
Nah.. it ain't dead yet. I saw STN twice as well, also enjoying it the second time. Heck, I'm looking forward to Star Trek: Titan!
Also, I think the new second edition card game rocks!
Nope. Not dead.
Yup. Unless this rumoured ST: Titan is the Phoenix that ressurrects the franchise from the ashes that is Ent.
I think it's on life-support personally. I remember in '86 (yeah one of THOSE stories) when @ STIV they had everyone in costumes, posters, art, etc...Nemesis just opened. "Not with a bang but a whimper.."
I've been looking around and I'm amazed at the lack of material for it. With Generations & First Contact there were artbooks, story guides, magazine articles. All I've seen so far is a few articles and a book, and yes, I'm quite aware of ST:Magazine doing a full issue of it, at the end of December AFTER the movie has already been out awhile.
Someone should shoot the Nemesis PR people
I don't think it is dying. The two movies are simply in two different planes.Quote:
Originally posted by AslanC
A new movie and there are still more threads active about the new LOTR movie than Nemesis.
Is this a sign?
Is Trek dying?
On one part of the universe, you have this cult following for Star Trek that have grown from a short-lived series to a franchise.
On the other part of the universe, you got a classic fantasy literature that is an epic tale and loved by many fans even before Star Trek, even some of the Trek fans here.
Star Trek is not dying. They simply going head-to-head with a better competition. Then again, you can't treat Star Trek like a long-running soap opera series. Take a break. Fire Braga. Always leave the audience wanting more.
FWIW, I'm planning to see both films in one day.
One thing I should note - quality need not be linked to success. You can still enjoy Nemesis and have it bomb - one of my favorite movies is a Costner/Eastwood film which lasted all of one or two weeks in theatres - "Perfect World".
Trek is a shadow of what it was. I remember in the 90's when everyone in my dorm would watch it, at my job everyone would talk about the latest episode. All the big name Hollywood people wanted to gues star on TNG.
Today there are people who have no idea "Enterprise" is even on the air.
A note from the Friday box office. According to initial estimates from www.boxofficemojo.com, "Nemesis" came in 8th. "Maid in Manhattan" fell to only 3rd. "The Hot Chick" came in 7th.
Whether because of oversaturation, Berman & Braga, the work of Innsmouth Hybrids, Star Trek is not what it once was.
(I sometimes speculate on the oversaturation aspect - NBC airs three Law & Order shows, all of which do rather well and Law & Order reruns are a big money maker.)
"Whether because of oversaturation, Berman & Braga, the work of Innsmouth Hybrids, Star Trek is not what it once was."
I would say that sums it up rather nicely....we need a breath of fresh air and a break. Give it a year or three off, and then come up with a fresh new approach.
Enterprise is fun to watch but it has a been there and done that feel to it. Going back to the past is something that was a small error. Pyschologically ST has always been about moving on and forward, the ENT story should have been the source for an episode or stand alone movie series, not a series. TNG and DS9 were set in the same time frame and gave wonderous continuity and that should have been bult off of.
Even if it was moved further ahead into the future.
After all seeing us in the far future, suceeding and growing is what is all about.
It needs a rest for awhile, but IMHO Trek will never die, it touches something deep inside it's fans, diehard or casual.
"For me it's been dead since DS9 went off the air..."
Yup. Actually, I'd say since TNG went off the air.
this is something I have been wanting to discuss... good call Aslan!
you're right on when you talk about LOTR getting more attention than ST... on a ST gaming board.
I think ST is on life-support and in a deep coma. Not dead, but it would take a lot of work to rejuvenate it. I think ST suffers from the same syndrome as SW, which is that no matter what kind of drivel you feed the hard-core fans, they'll love it nonetheless. The difference here is a matter of popularity; SW is much more popular than ST and thus even if the prequels are terrible they still make tons of cash.
Personally, I'm a big sci-fi fan (more in the space opera tradition); I'm really not into comic book heroes or the medieval/D&D stuff. So usually I should prefer movies like Attack of the Clones or Nemesis over movies like Spiderman or The Two Towers. Actually, I prefered Spiderman 1,000 times over Attack of the Clones (hell, I'd prefer a tampon commercial over AOTC), and I also thought that TTT was a most superior movie to Nemesis. That alone should speak volumes. (Hey, they should let Peter Jackson do the next ST movies :D )
Before Nemesis, Patrick Stewart said that it might not be the last time that he would wear the captain's uniform; now he came out and declared flat-out that he would never do ST again. I wonder what will happen to B&B with the ratings failure of Enterprise and the box-office disaster of Nemesis?...
As it has been stated earlier, Enterprise is a fairly good show, but it smacks of the "been-there; done-that" syndrome. I think it should be ended quietly and there should be NO new ST for a couple of years, no TV series or movies. They should let people discover DS9 on syndication (which IMHO is as good as TNG... Voyager could be a problem though since most episodes could turn potential regular viewers off)
This message has been removed on request by the
poster
I agree that Trek is on heavy life-support.
But I don't think 5 years of no Trek will help.
Berman in his I guess well-intentioned attempt to make sure the new series are "Trek" has only copied and watered down what has made TOS and TNG so interesting and popular.
What Trek needs is innovation.
And innovation won't suddenly appear because Trek has been off the screen for five years. What Trek needs is a couple of writers who know what they're doing, who don't rely on their old bag o' tricks and who aren't afraid to challenge the audience with their storytelling.
Until that happens Trek will continue to stay on life support.
Rather than Trek, I'd rather see other sci-fi shows out there. Something new and different from the same ol' of Trek: head of the week aliens, utopian prattle, technobabble...
I'd rather have Firefly... No sound in a vacuum...how novel! Crisp dialogue and well-defined characters...even better!
While I don't think Star Trek is dying, and I do like Enterprise, I believe that they reeally need to do something 'new' to get people interested again. As others have already pointed out, Enterprise is just another crew, on another ship, sailing around the galaxy.
DS9 had it's faults, IMHO, but it did take some risks wit hthe setting, and broke some new ground. Enterprise doesn't do that. Which is a shame.
Though unlike some lunatics (Trek BBS anyone?) I bear no grudge against B&B, who are, after all, just trying to do a joband make money. There are far more people in the world deserving of vitriole than a couple of TV producers.
I voted for the "in a lull" option. I believe we're at one of Trek's lower points, but I'm not sure if things are going to get better or worse from here.
ST Titan?
Quote:
Originally posted by Cmdr Powers
Nah.. it ain't dead yet. I saw STN twice as well, also enjoying it the second time. Heck, I'm looking forward to Star Trek: Titan!
Dying??
NO!
As long as there were players and GMs playing the rpg star trek will never die!!
I do believe this is more than a lull. I agree with those who feel it is dying. It is not dead and on life support. It can come back with major help but the wrong doctor will send it into the ground.
Oh, trust me, I have plenty of venom to go around. :pQuote:
Originally posted by Capt Daniel Hunter
Though unlike some lunatics (Trek BBS anyone?) I bear no grudge against B&B, who are, after all, just trying to do a joband make money. There are far more people in the world deserving of vitriole than a couple of TV producers.
And while I undersand they're trying to do their job and make money, they're in the business to maintain and expand Trek viewing audience. If they can't impress somebody like me, then perhaps they should do something simple like a sitcom. They can make money from that, right?
For me, Trek went into convulsions the minute the producers said they were only going to do episodic format because arc-heavy series would have trouble appealing to the casual viewer. Now, I don't know about the US, but here in Blighty even soap operas have story arcs, yet the unwashed masses have no difficulty tuning in.
The next bad sign was the lack of character development on Voyager, not to mention the Magic Reset Button and "Technobabble is your Friend" philosophies. At this point a defibrillator was needed.
Then we got the Busty Borg Babe. Now, don't get me wrong - there's nothing wrong with casting an attractive woman. And, if she can act as well as Jeri Ryan can, there's even less wrong. But, c'mon! Like she wouldn't still be attractive if dressed normally instead of in a spandex bodysuit that pushes even the phrase "skin-tight"...
And now Enterprise. Don't even get me started. Shower scenes. Yet another busty but sexually unattainable science officer (Do you think Braga might have issues, here?). Rehashed plots (Ooh, look! The plot for the upcoming episode "Dawn" appears to be a retread of "Enemy Mine"!! Surprise!". The most popular character is the beagle for Pete's sake!!!
I look back at DS9 and the better episodes of TNG and wonder where it all went wrong...
I understand the desire some have for a pause, but I'm not convinced this is what Trek needs.
First off, I think people underestimate the dangers of totally ceasing production - if it goes off the air, it may never come back on. Shows rarely cease production for a couple years and then come back.
Secondly, what will change? For whatever reason, Trek does not have the appeal it once does. People don't watch it now, whether it is on the air or not will not make a difference - the audience that Trek does not have will not even know it is no longer being aired if it takes a break. And therein lies the problem.
Trek is dying. The ratings of the shows and box office take are the greatest indications of that - you can argue quality all you want, the most important thing in the businsess is money. TOS made gobs of money for Paramount in syndication. TNG was a huge moneymaker. The later incarnations less so, with each passing year. Forget about competing with the glory days of TNG, I read Enterprise cannot match the numbers of its prior season. Nemesis fell from 2nd to 9th place - yes, Lord of the Rings came out, but seven other movies fared better than Nemesis.
My wife and I have yet to see Nemesis. We'll try to, but we're now parents, our options in going to the movies are limited. We arranged for a babysitter Saturday night - $30 right there. If we're lucky we make it to a movie every 6-8 weeks. Which did we want to see more, knowing we get out to the movies only rarely - Lord of the Rings, easily. And we're both Trekkies. I've been a fan since the 70's, I've got tons of DVDs, RPGs, you name it. I collect deckplans - heck, I help edit deckplans. I've playtested for the RPG. I am not a casual fan. And if I'm not excited enough by the first Trek movie in four years, how likely is it that the casual fan is.
The solution, I don't know. I can speculate. But something needs to be done to energize the franchise. That probably means a risk, one that might fail. Yet staying the course seems doomed to fail.
I look at other long-running franchises. Star Wars is not quite a valid comparison, as it is simply a single storyline, spread out over six movies. But look at the others - Bond, Superman, Batman, etc. These have all had the luxury of reinventing themselves. You can make a Superman movie tomorrow if you wanted to, and the makers would not worry about contradicing the events of Action Comics #89, published in the 1940's. Yet Trek made the choice to keep the universe consistent - while that has huge advantages, I wonder if that decision is now beginning to crush the franchise. The die-hard fans go nuts if the word Romulan is mentioned and the casual fans get tired of shields always failing. ;) It starts to feel the same.
I've heard people mention a fresh start being needed. I think it's a good idea, but that's not just a new production crew setting a show on a new ship in a new time period, it's re-evaluating everything. Who should the main characters of the show be? How many do we need? What should the setting be? Do the 25 or so seasons of Star Trek history present an advantage or obstacle to good storytelling? Is the show to be set aboard a ship? The only show to even question this in the slightest was Deep Space Nine, and to be honest, it wasn't the most radical of changes. My opinion? Question everything. Be prepared to throw out "sacred cows".
Perhaps it should just end. Think about it - 25 or so seasons of science fiction - only Dr. Who rivals that, typically with shorter episodes and seasons. Not a bad run.
And the kicker - I'm still an Enterprise fan, just not an overly energized one. I'd hate to see someone who doesn't like Enterprise.
Trek is still big to me. Between working on stuff for the RPG and writing short stories for the annual Strange New Worlds contest, Trek will never be gone for me. I also have DS9 on DVD to look forward to in 2003.
I'm not watching ENT and I haven't seen Nemesis yet, but I'm still a Trek fan. I'd like to see Paramount take a break, clean house, then hit Trek fresh with something new and exciting.
(1000th post! Whoohoo!)
It was reported somewhere that Patrick Stewart made a call out to the fans to make a strong showing on opening weekend. So when some of the strongest fans on this site have NOT seen Nemesis yet, some ten days after release, that tell you that Trek is gone.
Let it go into hibernation again. Let another "generation" go by and maybe, just maybe, Trek will be revived. If Paramount does suck the very last drop of creativity out of it.
At first I couldn't figure out why so many critics didn't like Nemesis, because I thought it was a great movie.
Then I read Roger Ebert's review, in which he didn't attack Nemesis, he attacked Star Trek in general. He said he was sick and tired of shields failing all the time, and big ship battles, and sparks flying, and all that jazz. Basically, he said he was tired of seeing the very things that all of us love on this board.
Then I realized something. For us, the movies are different because we've seen all the episodes. Big ship battles and epic stories don't happen that often in the television series, so the movies are a big-budget change of pace. But if the only Star Trek you got was from the movies, they would all start to blend together and seem the same by now.
Think about it. Pick any sub-genre you like, but aren't nuts about (Star Wars, Highlander, Tolkien, Spiderman, you name it ...). Two or three movies could be great. But do you think that anybody but a die-hard fan would keep going back after the fifth or sixth movie in the series? Heck, the Superman movies starting going downhill on the third movie, and really tanked by the fourth! And even if they had all been great, how many people could really be counted on seeing Superman 5, or Superman 8, or Superman 10?
There were about 75 episodes of TOS. Add to that 175 episodes of TNG, 175 episodes of DS9 and 175 episodes of Voyager. Even without seeing the movies or Enterprise, most of us on this board have seen 600 hours of Star Trek. 600 hours!!! So watching a tenth movie is just part of the fandom for us. But for Joe/Jane Average out there, just watching ten movies on the same subject is a bit too much to expect.
The Star Trek fanatics -- the ones of us who have seen every episode of TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager -- are a miniority of the population. The average person, however, is getting tired of Star Trek. And those average people -- not the rabid fans -- are the ones who bring in the money Paramount needs to keep the franchise going.
The only way I think to keep Star Trek going is to make it so different that it seems to most people like a totally new series. It needs new writers and new directors willing to take it a whole new direction. That's what happened with TNG. And that's what needs to happen now. Only even more so.
Otherwise, Star Trek will fade away largely unnoticed to all but its strongest fans. Like the last closing hour of Northern Exposure. Like the last episode of The Incredible Hulk. Like the last episode of The Bionic Woman. Who remembers watching those episodes?
I think Dan made some good points here - Trek has become something too big. It's an utopia, an universe, a certain philosophy, a certain type of plots, a certain type of heroes... and also some hundreds of episodes.
So the trouble here is, no matter what the writers do or how talented they are, there are some fans who won't like it - be it because it has already done before, because it disrupts continuity, because it's not daring enough, because there's not enough action, or whatever.
I don't know if a pause could solve this problem - it will be the same in 30 years.
Lots of good points in your post, Jabara Eris. One remark : the James Bond franchise managed to pull out something like 20 movies, and remain rather successful. Maybe the exception to the rule...Quote:
Originally posted by Jabara Eris
Think about it. Pick any sub-genre you like, but aren't nuts about (Star Wars, Highlander, Tolkien, Spiderman, you name it ...). Two or three movies could be great. But do you think that anybody but a die-hard fan would keep going back after the fifth or sixth movie in the series? Heck, the Superman movies starting going downhill on the third movie, and really tanked by the fourth! And even if they had all been great, how many people could really be counted on seeing Superman 5, or Superman 8, or Superman 10?
Yeah, but the James Bond franchise is centered around lots of mindless action and scantily-clad chicks.Quote:
Originally posted by C5
Lots of good points in your post, Jabara Eris. One remark : the James Bond franchise managed to pull out something like 20 movies, and remain rather successful. Maybe the exception to the rule...
It that really what we want Star Trek to become?
This message has been removed on request by the
poster
It could happen! ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Chang
ST Titan?
Nothing quite like starting your own rumor.
Seriously, there have been a lot of comments on this thread about the continuing viability of Trek- many of them quite astute and perceptive. Upon reflection, I will change my choice to lull. But it won't last long. As long as we have fans like us here at TrekRPG.net there's not the faintest hope in hell of Star Trek dying off.
I'm an old fan and remember quite well the period between TAS and STMP. It was a renaissance of amateur fiction, conventions, conception, and artwork. If the same thing were to happen again I won't be unhappy. The true strength of Star Trek has always been with the fans- no matter who's running the official ship.
I think it's in a lull. While it was a good story and i think it's up there with #'s 2 and 6, there is no way it will be able to draw crowds from LOTR. This could very well spell the end of at least the movies.
Who was the marketing genuis who decided to release this film at Christmas time with LOTR opening the next week. This film was finnished durring the fall and could have been released around thanksgiving (the time most of the trek films have been relesed scince trek 4).
Enterprise on the other hand, while i do enjoy it, good use some better direction. They set up the Sulliban as the threat for this series, Lets use them! Here it is, almost mid season and we only had 1 story with them. Lets see some multi episode archs. let's see the Suliban trying to change history in the 22nd century. Let's see more of the plight that Suliban who are not in the Cabal suffer because of the ones who are!
It's like with Voyager when they relized that the Kazon as a threat were pretty dopey.
To summerize, it could use some better storry planning.
Looking at the box office figures today, I really don't think varying the release time would have done much. It would have "flooped" anytime.
Here are my views on how Trek needs to be revitalized.Quote:
The solution, I don't know. I can speculate. But something needs to be done to energize the franchise. That probably means a risk, one that might fail. Yet staying the course seems doomed to fail.
1. Throw out the sacred cows, as Dan said. If trek needs to be revitalized then we need to rethink everything (and I mean everything) about Trek. Not only to bring back the spark that make us fall in love with the francise in the first place but also bring new fans in. Purism and Braga's half hearted revisionism isn't working so its time for something radical.
2. Hire the best writers you can find. Look at the most beloved episodes in Trekdom and bring them back. Do whatever it takes to bring them back and writing - even if it means dipping into the special effects budget. Heck Enterprise has the best special effects I have seen in a series and obviously it isn't doing the ratings any good.
3. Take a hard look at Trek and find out what works and what doesn't both in terms of storylines and in terms of trek history. Be prepared to rewrite history - I love Trek continuity as much as anyone but honestly its getting in the way. Specifically the silly and ill-concieved plots, especially in the later years, that really gummed up the works. A serious retcon is in order, and at this point I really don't care as long as cleans up a lot of crap.
4. Make a new series. Look at the crew and design for maximum interaction (and in some cases conflict). Look at Firefly for an example. Don't see the crew or group as just a collection of interesting characters (though that should be concidered too), but in terms of the "group dynamic" as it were. Importantly, if you have a main character, use them, make us care about them, and have them develop both personally and professionally. No more Harry Kims who languish in Ensign-hell while guys like Paris get promoted-demoted-promoted. Don't necessarily jam them down our throats like Wesley but utilize in a meaningful way every once every two-or-three episodes and not ignore them in favour of Holograms, Ex-Borg Drones, and Half-Klingons.
5. Use the Arc format. I don't buy Braga and Bermans view that the episodic format is superior. Buffy, DS9 and Babylon 5 both proved that if a story is writen properly and has sufficent vision, a plot arc can work. The trick is mixing both episodic and arc elements. Lets not assume that public is too dumb or has too short an attension span in order to "get" a plot arc. The trick here is to grab the fan and make them want to watch every week - the big problem with Enterprise is that the individual shows are lackluster and the metaplot is moving too slowly. Bablyon 5 and DS9 had its share of poor episodes but the allure of the Shadow/Dominion War arc kept me turning in during these lulls in quality (as few as there were).
Now this might no help Trek. Heck, it might be the killing blow. Many of my examples, such as Firefly, boasted great acting, good interaction, and nifty plots (and plot arc) but it got cancelled. So, this might not save Trek.
But honestly, I'd rather have the franchise die that continue on life support for a few more years. Better go out in one big bang, a serious attempt to make a great television show and fail. No more riding on the coat-tails of the Trek legacy in hopes that one day the fans might come back. If Enterprise is all we have to look forward to, then it isn't going to happen.
My guess is when Rick Berman chose Braga to replace Michael Piller and Jeri Taylor as VOY executive producer.Quote:
Originally posted by Capt.Hunter
I look back at DS9 and the better episodes of TNG and wonder where it all went wrong...
JMHO, of course...
I think that there should be a year or two off, and that time should be used for development.
For what, you may ask?
I think that, with a new creative team in place, that there should be a new series called... Star Trek.
Seriously. I think that they should do a remake of TOS. Same characters, same background, new cast, new creative team. Keep a healthy respect for the original, but remake it as a new series for the 21st century.
When you have lost your way, sometimes the best place to go is back to the beginning...
YMMV
Hugh
As much as I love Star Trek, it's having a serious cardiac arrest. My suggestion would be to stabilize it (the end of Voyager did nothing to stabilize the universe, as a matter of fact, it did quite the opposite) and put it away for a decade. It's not like Paramount or any of the muckety-mucks are going to suffer with their already garnered riches.
It's become overexposed.
Could they have push the film a little early, around the time of the James Bond movie (Die Another Day) or the second Harry Potter film?Quote:
Originally posted by Karg
Who was the marketing genuis who decided to release this film at Christmas time with LOTR opening the next week. This film was finnished durring the fall and could have been released around thanksgiving (the time most of the trek films have been relesed scince trek 4).
Then again, this is about the same time they release Trek movies as in previous films. I can recall at least three Trek films prior to NEMESIS to be released closer to Christmas holiday.
But AFAIC, I'm going to see both films on Christmas day (now that I got the free moviepass when I bought the LOTR gift set). :cool:
I don't believe Trek needs time off. I believe what the Star Trek franchise needs is people who know how to tell good stories, put those stories into a teleplay, and then get that teleplay onto the screen.
From what I have seen, most of the recent stories for Enterprise have all been stories created by Berman and Braga and then pounded out by a staff writer. They shy away from strong choices, and go with the old and tried...which comes out as old and tried.
Enterprise has a lot of potential, but all of that potential is being buried in a vat of decontamination gel.
Berman and Braga need to step back a few paces, and let someone who can tell stories, who can write stories, and who can put those stories on the screen in a new, fresh, imaginative way.
If they can't step back, then I have a feeling that Trek will die.
Quack!
One reason that TOS and TNG has a lot of good stories is that Gene Roddenberry hired outside wirter and sci-fi writers to write episodes for the series. Voyager and Enterprise have suffered form the fact that there is only two people writing sstories for them.
What I would do is steal a page from MArvel and start a whole new universe..."Ultimate Trek" Start from scratch...and integrate the elements of Classic Trek in a new, fresh and consistent universe.