How many people agree with me?

[Treefrog]

How many people agree with me that the new series is the beginning of the end of Star Trek?

After I see Star Trek X, I will go home and have a toast to Star Trek, lamenting the death of one of the cornerstones of a major portion of my life.

[Cmdr Powers]

Nope. Sorry. Got to disagree with you. It looks like it will be exciting.

Am I completely happy with the way continuity is being bent? No, but I understand why they have to do it.

And, finally, its just a TV show. Turn the channel if you can't stand it after, oh say...13 episodes.

------------------
"The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank" -Montgomery Scott

[Protius]

And here I thought this was going to be a satirical post poking fun at all the "What Do You Think About..." posts lately.

Having nothing to compare it with, I'm not sure I could say with any certainty that "this is the end of the franchise" or "from here on it's all downhill". Being that Trek is so much a facet of society, I can see it outgrowing one audience, so there are old-school and new-age fans, or what have you.

But I'm looking forward to the new series, especially the movie.

[Dan Gurden]

Me?

I dont like it.

But I plan on giving the show an opportunity to prove itself to Me before I denounce it as the spawn of hell, or not as the case might be.

My position has already changed from rabid frothing, to acceptance of a new Sci-Fi series (Although it doesn't het the 'Trek' zone with what I have seen)

So its entirely possible that my position may change again.

BUT;
It will be my descision, based on what I see, NOT on someone else's opinion.

I am basically putting my money where my mouth is. I have said for years about the Voyager bashers that if they didn't like the damn show, vote with their feet and turn the TV off, theres a whole world out there that you could enjoy for an extra hour a week...

If I dont like the show, I wont watch it... If nobody likes the show and doesn't watch it, it wont sell. If its that bad, and doesn't sell, it will be cancelled and forgotten like the Animated Series.

IF it deserves to be.

If its the hottest thing since Rodeo Red's Chilli, I'll watch the show and enjoy it.

And like Voyager, I will dismiss the petty rantings as innefectual. After all someone that doesn't like a show but watches it anyway is still selling the show to the networks...

------------------
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

[Phantom]

Me too. I will probably watch the pilot. The series will have to work real, real hard to bring me in as a fan. All the yea-sayers out there say give it a chance, hard to do when all you have heard is negative.

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

[spyone]

I do strongly suspect that "Enterprise" will be the last Trek series, and may spell the death of Trek.

Basicly, I feel that the continuity issues will drive away much of the core Trek fan base, even moreso than Voyager. I feel that many Trek fans who would otherwise enjoy the show will be bothered by it's lack of "trekness" to the point of not watching. I feel that the "trekness" of it, plus the widespread bashing by Trek fans leaking into the popular media, will serve to keep the show from attracting a large audience of non-Trek fans.
Its ratings will, therefore, suck. It probably won't last more than a couple of years (I'll be surprised if it makes it passed four, and not shocked if it doesn't finish one).

Trek X will attract a large audience, but not by mainstream film standards. I mean, TNG fans will all want to see it, as it is the farewell of some of their favorite characters, and there will also be people who got into Trek through Voyager who will want to see it. I expect it to do well. However, it will not rake in the mega-millions that the studio might hope for. It will also be the last Trek film for Stuart and Spiner, most likely, so there aren't likely to be any direct sequels.
Now, nobody loses money making a Trek film. They all turn a profit. However, the profit they turn is not as large as with some other films, so the studio isn't likely to want to put a lot of money into Trek films in the future. However, it is possable that they will see the potential for a DS9 film, or even a Voyager film in the future. I hope so.

What I really hope for is a move to more genaric Trek films. I mean, perhaps a new ship and captain in a film-only setting. Or even TV movies. Best of all would be a number of films that didn't have to be part of Trek, but are. I mean, Enemy Mine with a Starfleet Officer (not the best example). If Paramount were to look over the Sci-Fi scripts they're considering with an eye towards which ones fit into the Trek universe, then we could see a lot of stories set on colonies, or remote outposts, or even core Federation worlds. The bonus for Paramount is that this is a film they were going to make anyway, but now they're drawing in Trek fans who would have skipped it. It also allows them to use a number of existing props and models, which saves a little money on the production end. Also, those props and models you do have to make new are going to be reused in the future, making you more willing to spend money to make it look good.

I hope.

But, frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Trek X is the last Trek movie, and the failure of "Enterprise" convinces Paramount that the horse is dead.

------------------
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.

[spyone]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by spyone:
I feel that many Trek fans who would otherwise enjoy the show will be bothered by it's lack of "trekness" to the point of not watching. </font>

That isn't exactly what I meant to say, but I couldn't figure out exactly what I did want to say.

Here's an explanation:
I loved the movie "Highlander". I rented "Highlander II:The Quickening". I was appalled.
I read a review that was titled "Highlander II:The Sickening, there should only have been one" that I largely agreed with. This film was so great a travesty that the next two sequels and the TV series that spun off all took the path of pretending that it never happened. Star Trek 5 was high art compared to Highlander 2.
HOWEVER, Highlander 2 was not actually a bad movie. My brother said right after the film that he had enjoyed it, and considered it a pretty good film, "I just have no idea why they called it Highlander 2."

Highlander 2 took everything we knew about the main characters of Highlander and declared it to be wrong. It seemed like the guy who wrote 2 had never understood 1, and probably was taking hallucinigens when he saw it.
So, an otherwise good movie gets turned into "crap" by being an unworthy successor instead of a stand-alone film.
If Captain Archer was commanding the Saratoga, and his Vulcan sidekick were instead short and furry, and the words Star Trek never appeared, I think we'd all like the show just fine.
But I think we will view "Enterprise" as an unworthy successor.

------------------
You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.

[Trinity Zeldis]

The man who wrote H:2 was proud of the fact that he hadn't seen the first one, and that he could give the characters a real history.


WHAT!?!?!?!?!?

How can you give characters you know nothing about a real history?

------------------
Sit.
Listen.
Challenge.
Learn.

[calguard66]

I think you're making some pretty broad assumptions.

I'm very worried about the tack that Trek has taken the past few years, and I'm not real happy with what I've seen of Enterprise, and I think Trek (and the world in general) would be a better place if B&B took a long walk off a short pier.

But I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet. Trek came back after 20 year... maybe somebody at Paramount will wonder where their cash cow went, and make needed changes. Maybe they'll figure Trek is washed up and sell it to some minor production company that will revitalize it.

Maybe winged monkeys will fly out of my a@@, too.

But you never know...

------------------
"I'd rather die standing than live on my knees..."
Shania Twain

[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 ( although I really like this shows very much ). It is 'to boldly go where no man has gone before'. Humans at the beginning of real spaceflight and exploration, maybe perhaps the founding of the Federation. It will be fun. There were other series and people made bad rumors about them at the beginning. They did not likle DS9 cause the starship-idea was betrayed and they did not like Voyager ( although it to did 'boldly go where no man has gone before' ) for whatever reason. But at least the mass of fans did like it if this would not have been the case both series would not have 7 seasons. And maybe those Enterprise-haters should stop and at least reconsider and wait, cause my experience tells me that the Star Trek people did a great job in the past years. Now have trust that there good work will carry on and at least give it a chance. And for all those who say that I did not see an Epsiode of Enterprise and so cannot say if its good or not - true. But I saw this promo and I liked what I see. And I'll assume that I also become a Enterprise fan like I before became a fan of the other series. Give it time, something like one season and I think you like it too ( the first seasons of all trek-series was not that good, cause the crew had to train and work up, but I think that does also coutn for any other series ).

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


www.farrealms.de

[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.

[qerlin]

This show might do it, but it'll take 7 years. Personally, I thought they should have stopped at DS9.

I think Enterprise could have real potential, if it were an original universe, not in the Trek one.

If I want originality, I tune into Farscape.

[Liquidator Queeg]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Talon Kane:
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.</font>

Yes, Star Trek will live on ... in greater and greater infamy.

During the past decade there has been too much Trek, IMHO. The "Trek TV market" has been saturated so badly that the same archetypal stories have been re-done and re-done and re-done to death, and the quality of the scripts has continually dropped further into the depths of ... of ... of just plain hella-suckiness!

Voyager had its moments, true, but I really wish the break had come after DS9, and that Voyager had been shelved until after Star Trek X. Perhaps after a few years of "Man, there's no new Trek on TV!" the show (and the core Trek audience) may have found some spark and heralded a fresh revival of "The Wagon Train to the Stars."

It is time for a break. A "five year mission" of boldly not going where everyone has gone before. I hope Enterprise is good, but I really have my doubts. But I'll reserve judgement and be patient.

Steve

[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.

[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.