Does UPN have a clue?....(re:Enterprise) (1 Viewer)

[Will_B]

Ch'torr series is excellent and I dont mind the wait. The advantage of books over television is that the actors don't age.

But about Enterprise. I just saw a show called Firefly which did many things that Trek needs to do - real violence (um, let me redefine the word "real" for a moment to mean "accentuated, not neutered"), real sensuality, real conflicts between crewmembers, etc. The show isn't perfect (in most ways it is just Andromeda with better characters) but it was a sharp reminder of just how SAFE Enterprise plays everything.

What I mean is, sure, there's conflict on Enterprise, but you KNOW everything will be just fine. Sure, there's an occasional nude stomach, but it is always in the safest most sterile environment (literally, in the case of the decontamination chamber!). Sometimes people may be punched on Enterprise, but they won't bleed or anything. A person might be abducted by a sentient space station, but they won't suffer any damage from it. Enterprise is basically a fuzzy teddy bear. And if you squeeze this teddy bear, it might utter some sentimental morals.

Enterprise is geared towards presenting safe, sterile, and child-safe content. Yet most of its fans are adults. No wonder we're bored.

Enterprise needs to kick some major ass. The pilot started out well, with opportunity rife for culture clashes like we've never seen, as humanity blunders its way into the cosmos. But they dropped that quickly, and now everywhere they go is essentially like Earth. McDonalds after McDonalds after McDonalds.

I hope that B&B will watch Firefly and see what space exploration can be like, see what new frontiers are being pushed by shows that aren't trying to dumb themselves down for eight year olds.

Take the action and edgyness of Firefly, add the morality plays of Trek, and you might have a winning show that will engage viewers.

 

[doug zdanivsky]

I will stick by Enterprise, and hope for the best.

I just read about the possible J. Frakes spin-off. What network would that be on? I'm neutral on this one. On the one hand, it would give Enterprise competition, and hopefully the kick in the ass they need to make improvements.

On the other, it might put Enterprise out of business, if it gets some good writers (can't be worse than B&B). And I don't want that..

 

[Jason Seaver]

I like Firefly. I like it quite a bit. But I don't want Enterprise - or any Star Trek series - to be Firefly or Farscape. That's what Firefly and Farscape are for.

I just read about the possible J. Frakes spin-off. What network would that be on?

Well, it won't happen. But if it did, my money would be on CBS or UPN. Viacom would want to keep it in the family.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

I'd guess syndication, primarily airing on UPN stations personally

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Will_B wrote:

Quote:

I think Firefly is plenty "dumbed down" for audiences who want to see rehashes of American Old West action adventure programming that has NOTHING to do with how it would actually be to live one's life in, and travel through, deep space.
As bad as Enterprise may be dramatically at times, it has nothing on "dumbing-down" like Firefly and its ilk.

 

[DeathStar1]

As I've said before, instead of bitching about it, do something about it. Start a phone in campaign, for instance. And if no proper phone numbers can be found, start a write in campaign. Remind them that if we saved Trek in the 60's, we can certainly kill it in the 00's.

As to what I think needs to be done....Scour the Sci-Fi book market and find Trek fans. There are probably thousands of writers they could rotate in that way and keep the show fresh.

Get someone else in charge. B and B may still care about the show, but they are obviously burnt out after 600+ hours of weekly television. Probably don't even realize they are repeating themselves. If they don't care about continuity, why go back and check to see if this was done before as well?

GET RID OF THE RIDGE HEADED ALIENS! One original Alien of the week dosn't cut it anymore, especially as someone said earlier, when CGI is getting cheaper these days. Who's to say aliens have to look like us? Why not a Rock Monster like Shatner had invisioned for Trek 5? Or a race that looks like Fluffy Thunderstorm clouds? SOMETHING F'ing different than the bump headed alien of the week.

Did I mention hire someone different than B and B? How about Stewart and Spiner? They know the shows history better than those in charge I'm willing to bet...

 

[doug zdanivsky]

Agreed. As I've said before, surely there is something more pro-active we could be doing than bemoaning Enterprise's impending doom on this forum.

I've searched out some web-sites, but I'm not that skilled when it comes to this kind of stuff.. Even if we could start an email campaign or something on this forum, how would we get it to the people who would care? Ideas?

 

[Dewitte]

Remind them that if we saved Trek in the 60's, we can certainly kill it in the 00's.

There's an incredible book called Inside Star Trek by Herb Solow (VP of Programming for Desilu) and Bob Justman (Associate Producer of TOS). A very interesting revelation about the letter-writing campaigns is contained therein.
But....writing letters does a heck of a lot more than signing Internet petitions and e-mailing the studio.
Enterprise has the potential to be the greatest of all the Trek series to date but the clumsy writing has left me less than enthusiastic of late.
"A Night in Sickbay" totally brought out a romantic spin from nowhere that was not only gratuitous, but unnecessary. Why couldn't Archer's irritation with T'Pol stem from the fact that he still has a way to go before totally getting over his prejudice. Makes a lot more sense than throwing in sexual tension for the sake of erotic dreamscapes.
"Marauders" reminded me of the "rodeo" shows that I would see on many other series growing up. Having trouble writing an episode? Make it take place at a rodeo! (see Knight Rider, The A-Team, etc.) This cookie-cutter plot teamed with incredibly ludicrous plot holes (wouldn't the Klingons beam down to the same place?) made this cliche a chore to watch.
"The Communicator" wasn't too heinous save for taking the pseudo-Prime Directive as a given without telling us why Archer has suddenly decided that it's okay to die for it. I'm also getting a little tired of cloaking devices as everyday technology.
Which brings us to "Vanishing Point." The title should have been "What was the point?" I understand that fear of the transporter is only natural given the disasters that have occurred but all we got out of the episode was "Hoshi's not so afraid of the transporter anymore." Whoopideedoo.
A couple of the episodes slated for February Sweeps look interesting. "Stigma" with its AIDS-esque storyline (provided the easy way out isn't taken) and "Cease Fire" with war brewing between the Vulcans and the Andorians and Archer caught in the middle.
De

 

[Will_B]

Remember that many studios stopped accepting mail from the public soon after 9/11.

It would be more of a statement to buy a full page ad in Star Trek Communicator with a well-reasoned open letter to the producers.

Bear in mind that B&B have apparently assured the higher powers that Trek fans are just a bunch of rabble rousing idiots who don't know what they want and should not be listened to. It would be up to an open letter to present a calm, considered suggestion that would disarm that claim and push the show in a better direction.

Full page ads cost a tremendous amount but if you got a few thousand fans together it could be done - you could even afford a 4-color ad.

 

[TheLongshot]

As bad as Enterprise may be dramatically at times, it has nothing on "dumbing-down" like Firefly and its ilk.

At least it is more entertaining, and has interesting characters. It may not be "Farscape", but it is far better than "Enterprise"...

Jason

 

[Dewitte]

Full page ads cost a tremendous amount but if you got a few thousand fans together it could be done - you could even afford a 4-color ad.

I'm as surprised as anyone that with all the Internet petitions being "circulated," that almost none of these groups seems willing to put any money forth to do something on this grand a scale. Is there any leadership in fandom anymore?

De

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Quote:

Damning with faint praise, indeed . . . .

 

[Jack Briggs]

Re science fiction, and how the characters react to situations that are new in their experience: Rex, I've been saying the same thing over and over. And it's obvious that B&B want to take a business-as-usual approach and boldly muck around in mediocrity and retreads. Where's the sense of excitement and wonder in this series? Can't find any.

 

[doug zdanivsky]

Full page ads cost a tremendous amount but if you got a few thousand fans together it could be done - you could even afford a 4-color ad.

Sign me up, Will! I for one can and will put my money where my mouth is.

Who's with me?

 

[Chris Beveridge]

Jason,
Don't avoid the uplift material! Start with some of the self-contained books first before going into the extended series. At the least, you don't have to wait years between volumes like some of us did.
Brin's Uplift stuff is among my favorite SF out there. The trilogy is much denser than the standalones. Try Sundiver first and then go from there. It's deceptive how they've been retitled to a six volume series, since they weren't intended to be that way. While they all share the same universe and aspects of the stories (Eventually), the final three volumes is the real trilogy. The others stand alone and "complete" each other.
Or just read Earth a dozen times and love that

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Is there any leadership in fandom anymore?

Nope. Typically any coalition that forms dissolves in infighting within 2-3 years