How many people agree with me?

**Phantom** · 07-26-2001, 01:18 AM

I love these posts by people who say the nay-sayers should stop knocking the show until we have all the facts, and end their comments with something like the show will have a one in ten chance of success. Guess what, you just knocked the yourself.

As far as I'm concerned the show has the same chance of survival that a tuna has in a tank filled with Great White Sharks.

Oh, and BTW I'm not that Canadian you spoke of. Just in case you thought you found him.

**Evan van Eyk** · 07-26-2001, 08:23 AM

Yes Kane, you are right. It is standard procedure in capitalist societies to destroy and end products which makes profit in billions of dollars...

Actually I think that is ridiculous. And although said otherwise I do not think there is no possibility for a DS9 or Voyager movie. E.G. Sisko said he'll come back and we never get to know what happens to Voyager's crew after the return.
And as ST X will be the last one featuring the TNG crew, there is a need for a new crew...

------------------
"I am a great one for rushing in where angels fear to tread." - Cpt. Kirk, Star Trek VI

www.farrealms.de

**Maverick** · 07-26-2001, 04:32 PM

Yes, I know I knocked the show, in a way, Phantom (although not as much as you believe). And it seems to me that you chose to miss my point. Here it is again in concentrated form:

You can voice your opinion from time to time and that is okay, in fact it should be encouraged. But voicing an opinion ad nuasium is just bad form. I mean there is a point when voicing an opinion goes from exercising a right and freedom to a simple smear campaign, and in several places on these boards it has reached that point. Like posting almost the exact same message verbatum to separate threads, or jumping into threads not on the subject and adding that opinion once more, with out even bothering to try and adress the thread's actual topic.

I'm not saying the collective naysayers are wrong, per se, although I think I made it abundantly clear that I feel most aren't giving the venture a fair shot. I think the collected posts here give ample evidence leaving only the definition of what is "Fair" open to debate. I'm saying you've had your say, and you know who agrees and who does not. There is no need to repeat.

I realise it is unrealistice to expect all posting on the subject to stop. I don't expect that. I'm just trying to say, we get your point, chill out. No need to get all rabid everytime the subject comes up.

Oh, and I find it interesting that you assume (We all know what you make out of U and ME when you assume) based on my one in ten statement to know my mind. Yes I rate Enterprise's odds at one in ten based solely on the producers' pasts. Just in case you missed that before I have added emphasis. In other words, my rating is based on incomplete data and will change as new information officially comes to light. There is reason to hope, as it has been rumored that talented writers are on the staff but that is rumor, so I can't apply it to the odds yet. So to be accurate I wasn't knocking Enterprise, I was knocking its producers. While that reflects on the show, I think I have made my opinion of those men clear as well. But as I said before Two men, even the producers, do not make the show. Remember that Speilburg, one of the true greats, was Executive Producer for a time on the travesty known as SeaQuest DVS. An example of how much one producer can effect a show...or NOT effect it. SeaQuest was passable Sci Fi during that time but nothing to grow giddy over. And from there it went down hill.

one in ten, for now. Until more data becomes availible. I think that's fair.

One last thing, what has really motivated these posts was the fact that top naysayers have a habit of seizing rumor and using it as evidence. This is why I call it a smear campaign and lay the charge of unfairness. Rumor is not fact, but as the threads mature it starts being treated as fact. It's disinformation at it's worst.

If the negative opinion would back up their arguments with verifiable facts then I wouldn't have posted this in the first place.

**Phantom** · 07-26-2001, 06:07 PM

Wow, relax Maverick I was only playing with you. A little less caffine might be beneficial.

In my own defence yes I have, inadvertantly placed a complaint on thread where it should not have been placed, I admit that. It shows how mad I am over the whole situation. As you say it was improper and I have apologized for such situations. I have, however, not placed the same complaint verbatum on another thread. I know you were not aiming those comments directly at me, I just want to make the point.

I believe that Spielburg was producer during the first season of Seaquest, the only good season of the show. I loved the first season of Seaquest, still think it is a good example of good sci-fi. Everything after the first season, when he left, is trash. So, it does show what a good producer can do for a show. Too bad B&B will never be classified as good producers, there track record speaks for itself. And this is what I am slamming, not the show I personally think it could be a good premise, but I have seen what B&B can do to a series...Voyager. That is what I can't stomach seeing these two morons murder a show I have watched and loved since I was 8 years old.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

**Treefrog** · 07-26-2001, 09:13 PM

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk:
Actually I do not understand what all of those Enterprise-haters have. I think it will revive Star TRek instead of being the end. The concept is more Star TRek than TNG or DS9

Enterprise more Star Trek than TNG and DS9!?!

I have to disagree with you there! TNG was created by Gene Roddenberry (the guy who created Star Trek). 'Enterprise' is nothing more than Paramount trying to force a series down our collective throats.

I know one thing! This is one person who will NEVER watch an episode of this so-called Star Trek series.

I have now officially denounced 'Enterprise' as being non-Star Trek!

**Treefrog** · 07-26-2001, 09:22 PM

Originally posted by KlingonZ:
Ster Trek will live on and Enterprise will be Great. You people will be left behind if you don't at least watch it. And if you don't like it , too bad. Star Trek will move beyound your limited thinking.

Oh really!!!

I have limited thinking???

I have been a fan of Star Trek up until Voyager's 4th season. I could see right then and there that Paramount had put too much Star Trek out there, and there now is a glut of Star Trek on the airwaves.

The quality of Star Trek has now eroded to the point that Star Trek is no longer a viable franchise.

**Treefrog** · 07-26-2001, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by Maverick:
I find this all terribly interesting. Amusing in a kind of petty way.

I don't mean to be insulting but it IS very petty, all of the relentless attacks on show that isn't even out. I understand it in a way. I have made my own opinions about some things I don't like about a game being developed by WotC known on thier web boards. When you have a complaint there is an urge to voice it and it is a free country. I believe that so long as you obey the rules and speak with a modicum of respect you should be able to vice your opinion...But there's a point when it just becomes bad taste.

This minds me of fellow, a canadian fellow...something I point out for context not to bash canadians. Some of you may know him, heck, one of you might BE him, but I have long since forgotten his namem who frequented the Star Terk RPG mailing list a few years back.

Every Wednesday this fellow would jump on this at the end of that weeks Voyager episode and paint a scathing negative review of the show. Which was seriously off topic in my opinion. Yes it was a Trek related list and the occasion review or complaint could work well to keep things interesting but a weekly review by the same guy? That's just wrong. There were certainly other lists he could have taken it to. And worse, he was so often just plain wrong. pointing out continuity error where none exsisted, and attacking plots that worked just fine. Voyager, more than any other Star Trek, by virtue of a premise the even Bermann admitts to have been faulty, had continuity problems but in retrospect I think a large amount of the "problems" were manufactured by fans looking to down the show. Like this canadian fellow. It didn't matter to him whether his review was based on fact, it was simply a new chance to bash Voyager.

Not that Voyager didn't earn some bashing, but there are limits.

And here, I see that mentality playing out again. None of has actually SEEN Enterprise. But there is a huge push to pronounce judgement. And worse it has little to do with the show as a whole but more to do with conceptions of the poster.

I for one have a serious dislike of Rick Bermann, and even more for Brannon Braga, but I realise something important. The Producer is like the GM of a game. His roll is important but very over rated. My personal view is that the GM brings only 5 percent of the "juice" needed for a good game. A critical 5% but the lion's share belongs to the players, who are part scriptwriter and part actor. The GM provides direction but it is the Players who bring the game to life.

So it is with Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry provided a direction but it was talented actors (even if one can only play one role, he did play it well) and talented writers who brought it together. Beyond Star Trek Roddenberry's work is no more impressive than that of you typical hack, and in someways it's not even that good. But he had a moment, a shinning vision that has endured far beyond it's entended life time. And That is whay I Hate Bermann abd Braga. because they don't like that vision, and are there for dangerous to it.

But they are not the whole of the Trek enterprise (pun most obviously intended). There are Writers unkonw, and at least one actor of obvious talent, it will be they, not the producers who make this show work.

So much time is spent attack them that no one wants to give them there due. For example the question of Five enterprises, yet now we have a sixth! But bermann had his loophole planed. Where all five known Enterprises have Been NCC-1701 U.S.S. Enterprise and Federation starship, this vessel is NX-01 Enterprise a Untied Earth Starfleet...ship. It's thin but it leaves cannon perfectly intact.

Just an example, and I know I'm inviting counter examples but please, hear me out. I expect the Bermann and Braga will contiune to be as lack luster as ever, but at the same time they HAVE geven us a NEW take on Star Trek with the potential to take us in exciting directions. And another bonus is that as a Producer Braga will have less time for writing. and thing that gets his hands of the Trek keyboard is a good thing.

Star Trek the Next Generation met with the same out cry that plagues Enterprise, but the irony is that now TNG is bench mark by which Star Trek is judged. And is irony. I have and have see (On this very forum no less) people use Kirk to defend Janeway, and get shot down on the grounds that Kirk's swagger no longer applies. That's just silly! Jame Tiberius Kirk IS and should be the bench mark by which starfleet captains are measured. How ironic it is that Jean-Luc Picard has usurped the position. A testament to Patrick Stewart and TNGs writers indeed, but ironic no less.

Mind you, in the end, Janeway fails to measure up, but Jim Kirk is a hard act to follow.

A friend of mine struck to the heart of the Problem with Rick Bermann. He doesn't see the fans base as anything but a constraint. But worse he hasn't the sense to keep that fact under wraps. But the fans often commit and equal sin. The belief the fans should dictate the direction of Star Trek. That is, in a single word, absurd. Yes the fans should begiven their due, but if the creators gave us only what we expected... the whole of Star Trek would be very very very dull.

Much of the attack on Enterprise has been fueled by rumor, some of which may contain a grain of fact, but like the canadian fellow, there seems a need to seize that and use to flogg the show, which, has yet to air. Like seize upon the beyond our galaxy bit. I happen to know for simple fact that a show's production staff has minimal imput on the advertising for thier show. In most cases a studio has another department to handle that and number of errors I've seen from various shows is staggering. Because the blub writers often haven't the foggiest idea what they are blurbbing about. Interviews in TV guide and on line with the hated Bermann show he actually has some grasp of the scale the Enterprise's warp 5 speed gives the show. So why seize upon such a flimsy complaint?

Sherlock Holmes touched upont this. He spoke of forming theories with out suffcient evidence. Holmes was very much against theories althogether, and prefered to gather evidence and sort it for the useful information. This applies here. Bermann and Braga have created a New Trek and set it in canonical dead zone that WILL challenge fans views of Trek history. Based on that small evidence it has been theorised by many that this will be a bad show. With out a shred of actual evidence. Now these theorists have poisoned their chances of enjoy the FICTIONAL PROGRAM, and have lauched a campaign to poison others. Based on no real evidence at all.

Personally, I think Enterprise has a one in ten chance of being good Trek. Based solely one producers' pasts. But I'm willing to give it chance. I'm NOT say you must do the same, but those of you wh have decided to hate the show have made your positions clear. There is no need to dig up more evidence to support you point of view. No reason to poison the enjoyment others might derive from the show. No reason to seize upon every item that fails to fit your view of Star Trek and attack. I say let the show pass or fail on it's own merit.

Of course I expect nobody will listen to me when the day is done.

I do have one prediction for Enterprise. The first 13 episode will have a steady viewer ship so long as they write passible sci fi. Why? Because the casual view will watch because it's okay TV. The Die Hard Trek booster will watch because it's Trek, and the nay sayers will watch in order to complain, in the biggest irony of all.

Just like a certain canadian fellow who wrote a weekly attack on Voyager, a show he obviously felt was lacking, and tuned in the next week to watch it again, and again, and again...

And Again.

I happen to respect your opinion on this. On some points I have disagreed with you on, for example, I was a fan of TNG before I had even seen one episode (and that was in the third season, when TNG had already proven itself).

The one thing I will disagree with you on, vociferously, is the statement that I'll watch it just to complain about it. The problem is, is that I won't watch it. My boycott of Enterprise started when the first pictures of what the Enterprise would look like, although it has upswept nacelles, its still an Akira-class cruiser, which is a 24th century starship, not a 22nd century starship.

Mark my words, this show will be the death of Star Trek!!!

**KlingonZ** · 07-26-2001, 11:26 PM

Treefrog, will you chill out! It's only a TV show for gods sake. You owe it to yourself to at least watch the first episode. If you don't then you can't speak with any authority on the subject.

I for one think it will be very good. At least give it a chance. You are basing your opinion on rumers. Watch it, THEN judge it.

**Phantom** · 07-26-2001, 11:43 PM

Rumours that seem to be baring fruit.

------------------
In the Praetors Name!

**Evan van Eyk** · 07-27-2001, 06:11 AM

Originally posted by Treefrog:
Enterprise more Star Trek than TNG and DS9!?!

I have to disagree with you there! TNG was created by Gene Roddenberry (the guy who created Star Trek). 'Enterprise' is nothing more than Paramount trying to force a series down our collective throats.

I think you dd not get my argument. What I wanted to say was that at the time of Enterprise this 'Star Trek' is an even greater challenge than later and so they 'more boldly go where no man has gone before'. Its this pioneer like idea we will see in Enterprise, one major element of Star Trek...

------------------
"I am a great one for rushing in where angels fear to tread." - Cpt. Kirk, Star Trek VI

www.farrealms.de

**Dan Gurden** · 07-27-2001, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by Treefrog:
I happen to respect your opinion on this. On some points I have disagreed with you on, for example, I was a fan of TNG before I had even seen one episode (and that was in the third season, when TNG had already proven itself).

OK, so let me get this straight.

You were a fan of a program without ever seeing an episode? Was that because of its Star Trek moniker? I cannot see how you judged the show on its own merits?

And likewise, you state how bad the world will be with Enterprise in it, and you will categorically NOT watch any episodes?

I just want to clarify, as many of your posts are very self motivated;

for example

I have now officially denounced 'Enterprise' as being non-Star Trek!

I dont think you can do this, you can personally denounce it? I already had define it as generic SciFi set in the Trek universe before your denouncement...

Your posts seem to indicate personnal anger over the show, and if you have no plans to watch it, then I recommend that you get over this...
Try plexing if it helps, but there is nothing that any of us can do at this point.

Like it or not, its there, watch it or not, it only effects your universe if you let it.

And from the sounds of it, you are REALLY letting this get to you.

I assure you the course of the show is not a personnal attack against you or your kin, so best rest and use these energy reserves at more fruitful pursuits than flogging this dead herse...

------------------
DanG.

"Hi, I'm Commander Troy McClure, you might remember me from other academy training holo-simulations as, Abandon Ship, the quickest way out, and I sense danger, 101 things you dont need a Betazoid to know..."

http://www.theventure.freeserve.co.uk

**Michael Brinkhues** · 07-27-2001, 08:34 AM

Originally posted by Phantom:

I believe that Spielburg was producer during the first season of Seaquest, the only good season of the show. I loved the first season of Seaquest, still think it is a good example of good sci-fi. Everything after the first season, when he left, is trash. So, it does show what a good producer can do for a show. Too bad B&B will never be classified as good producers, there track record speaks for itself. And this is what I am slamming, not the show I personally think it could be a good premise, but I have seen what B&B can do to a series...Voyager. That is what I can't stomach seeing these two morons murder a show I have watched and loved since I was 8 years old.

Shows nicely how opinions might differ. I considered the 1. season of seaQuest pretty lame (Oh nooo TNG under water!) and liked the third (half) season the most. (And TNG after mid of 3. season).

As for bad producers <=> bad show. There is more to that. Like basic plot (I don't like the timeframe) and setting of mood. The producers are but a part of it. Given good writers, even Voyager had it's great moments.

Not that I will watch the show. But that has nothing to do with the producers. I just dislike the base setting. I want more 24th century stuff.

Michael

**Jonathan Talbot** · 07-27-2001, 10:45 AM

Let us take a moment to relax, folks, as with others I'll withhold my opionion til I have seen the first season thru. Now what I have seen of the new series, I do like, it does look interesting. But I have grown up on Sci-Fi, from things like SPACE:1999, The Prisoner, The Avengers, Space above and Beyond, SeaQuest and many more that I cannot remember.

"Star Trek" itself, the vision as set forth by Gene Roddenberry cannot die, and will not die. This Dream is and will always be immortal. No matter what Paramount tries to do. The new series will take it's place in the Star Trek pantheon as have all the others. The one thing that I have liked about this new series, is the antiquatie of it. SO what if the ship looks like a rip off of the Akira class(big deal), just shows that some one didn't really put on their thinking caps. I would have liked to see a passing nod at Mark Jefferies, but alas Poor Mark we knew you well...

We have to remeber that as fans we are probably the most demanding, rabid fans of any televised series out there. Not even The Beauty and the Beast(TV: Vincent and Catherine) fans can hold a candle to us.

SO i shall hold may judgement til I have watched the first season. Til then let us not forget that this show is going in to new areas, so what if it re-writes History, in the process. I haven't seen anything yet in startrek that has remained consistant any way, so why start now.

------------------
Jonathan Talbot.
Medical Officer
"First Away Team Mission... Beaming down to a Hostile Planet... Captain Kirk is leading the Away Team... I am wearing a red shirt... No Fear!!! Unknown Crew Member

**Gabriel** · 07-28-2001, 12:46 AM

I disliked most of the latter seasons of TNG.

I hated DS9.

ALL the TNG movies have been utter drek even worse than Star Trek 5.

Voyager was definitely the killing stroke even if you presume Trek to be on life support all this time.

As far as I'm concerned. Star Trek is dead. It's been dead for some time. Star Trek ended when the Enterprise sailed off into the sunset with Kirk and crew in Star Trek 6.

I won't be watching Enterprise, and I won't be watching Trek X. Everything for the past several years has been utter crap, and there is no reason to think the situation will improve.

------------------
Gabriel Alexander Vampyre

**Weyoun11** · 07-28-2001, 06:45 AM

Originally posted by Talon Kane:
Personally, I think Paramount is trying to kill the Star Trek franchise. Yes, I know it sounds absurd and ridiculous since it rakes in millions of dollars a year. But, here are the things I noticed:

* They brought DS9 to a final close without any segway into movies. The producers even said there would not be any DS9 movies. In my opinion, why not? The series was good enough to deem at least one and I'm sure every Star Trek fan would have seen it.

* They did the same to Voyager. No segway into movies and once again, why not? They could have made a great movie with Voyager and the Borg or some other species finding Earth.

* Instead of going into the future with the series, they went backwards. In my opinion, it shows a lack of creativity. We already know about things that happened in the past, so its not like they can reinvent the future, they can only fill in the gaps.

But, will the Star Trek franchise die? I doubt it highly. You have a better chance of getting hit by lightning. Star Trek fans are so dedicated to the series and books that the chance of them ever stopping it would be slim to none. The next couple of series, like Enterprise, may not appeal to the fans, but Star Trek will live on.

Hmm. Actually on the points about DS9 or Voyager "movies" Berman was quoted as saying he was not against the possibility but nothing was being planned at the time. What could happen are made-for-TV movies. He made these comments early this year during the press conference for Voyager's last episode.

One has to remember that the actors would have to come back to reprise their roles and some never want to again. Then again they could change their minds if the moneys right.
Secondly the sets for DS9 at least were destroyed from what I heard and the Defiant bridge set was converted for alien ship bridges in a few Voyager episodes namely "Live Fast and Prosper".

Even though DS9 left a number of lose ends
in its finale (ie. fate of Sisko, his unborn child, etc.) that can be expanded upon in a future project what premise could be devised for Voyager? The crux of the Voyager series was it was a ship lost trying to get to Earth. In the finale it ended...for good. Also there are split camps in Trek fandom as to whether or not one favoured DS9 more or Voyager. Then you have older TOS camp too. There is already plenty of Trek on TV. Four series in constant reruns. We are indeed Trekked out already. With TNG it was the only Trek show out on TV since TOS was cancelled on NBC way back when so it appealed to a wider audience.

For me the coffin was closed on Trek when DS9 ended and writer Ron Moore quit Voyager after penning just one episode for them. He believes the franchise should be shut down in a similiar fashion as was done between TOS and The Motion Picture in the 1970s. Then you have a audience hungry to watch Trek again and hopefully have a fresh premise with great ideas instead of the recycled stuff the current regime had spewed in Voyager.

I agree too that Trek should go forward and not in reverse. Braga was be in his element with "Quantum Leap" essentially merging into a Trek show. Can anyone forsee this series running for SEVEN seasons?

Thread: How many people agree with me?

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions