"Is Trek Dead?": Discuss

[Tabitha]

"Is Trek Dead?"

I would like to hear thoughts on whether this long running series is hitting the wall pr whether with a bit of creative thinking it has a long and productive future ahead.

Or, like Doctor Who, perhaps Trek will never die, even if it is not longer in production for tv and film, comics, books, games and other related merchandise will keep the trev-verse alive whether there are new shows or not.

[ray gower]

I wrote a long dissertation on this theme to explain my answers, but gave up when I reached the fourth page!

So I'll just answer the questions and provide proof if challenged.

It is claimed there is not a day in the calender when Star Trek (TOS) is not playing somewhere in the world! (apparently it is more popular than TNG)
So if they stopped being produced today, Trek would still be running. Trek would lumber on under its own inertia for 20/25 years of repeats, when it would be revised again?

Is it hitting the wall?
I reckon it hit the wall the day they started DS9 running with TNG. It was too much and led to Trek Fatigue.

Has it come to a creative dead end?
No!
The Star Trek Universe is huge and the shows have barely scraped at it.

Have the current creative team come to an end?
Yes!
The B's have been at this since TNG. If I am in generous mood, I would say they have done more than well keeping everything going this long!
I'm not that generous, I don't think they are capable of the sort of writing required to encompass what Trek has become outside of the US Enterprise.

To sum up: Trek needs to rest. Then in 15 years time it will be ready for a new creative team that is more capable of the subtle changes required.

[markpud]

Originally posted by ray gower

To sum up: Trek needs to rest. Then in 15 years time it will be ready for a new creative team that is more capable of the subtle changes required.

I'd have to agree. Admittedly I'm not watching as much tv as I used to, but Enterprise isn't on my "must see" list, and they really need to either get a bunch of new writers in, or just leave off it for a while. Sad but true.

[LT25]

I would agree to let it rest for a while. Give it some time for the writers to think up of some new stuff. Also, the fans would be more excited/anxious to watch when a new series/movie is released. Just like the Star Wars following.

[Dave]

I don't think it's dead, but I think someone should go and get the priest quickly. Either that, or find a very good surgeon to operate.

[LT25]

Check out this post from another board, similar discussion(it's a little long) :

************************************************** **


DON'T KILL THE MESSENGER

This is an exact copy of an article that appeared in the
entertainment section of the Miami Herald and Ft Lauderdale New. It
was a follow up to the writer past comment from a meeting he had
attended with writers from other new service. It was at meeting with
Network press office on New shows and current series. This part
pertain to his last article on what he wrote about Enterprise. The
reason will follow after what was printed today

"What I wrote base on Enterprise's lowly ratings, is that it could be
the first of the Star Trek line since the mother ship [TOS) not to
make it to seven seasons on the air. Ratings are disappearing now and
when the a show performs like this early, it usually moves downward.
as it ages. Enterprise cant' afford too much more audience erosion.
For the immediate future, which would include next season is probably
safe

His early article (got to dig it up) was that if it was on NBC, ABC
or CBS) that the ax would have fallen already. He said that
Paramount's UPN, has been rather shocked at the responses it has
received on the negative side towards Enterprise. That they seemed
rather shocked. Yet on the other hand, in a discussion with Gene
Shallet and Leonard Maltin. They laughed at UPN's dismay. From what
they have been told and heard is not that shocking. Many that lost
interest or were disgusted. The fingers pointed to B&B. That they
have broken the number one commandment. They have tampered with Star
Trek's canon laws. They got carried away with tampering with Trek
history. Making old villains to advanced, giving technology that was
Star Fleet's first to it's adversaries. That it seem that every warp
civilization the run into has them ducking for cover. Making up
history that if it was that crucial it would have been mentioned
before. Tampering with the all mighty time lime. Other complaints
that they have heard floating around was that some episodes were
loosely remakes of some old TOS shows and worse other TV shows and
movies. The joke they have been hearing that it is time for Bragga
and Berman to be impeached, and after Nemesis's showing at the box
office and Enterprise's ratings. That the day may be coming.
Paramount can not justify reaping the profits from it's Star Trek
merchandises and franchise right, while it allows Berman and Bragga
to tamper with a beloved icon
************************************************** **

[ray gower]

First welcome to AsciFi, IT25 :wave:

Nice to see people get stuck in.

As for the post above. It rather implies Paramount may be doing ST a favour if they were to stop Enterprise tomorrow.

Which I think might be a pity.
If we lose the "Temporal Cold War" thing, then it becomes a genuine Original Series make over and not so bad for all that.
The relationship between the crew is the same and the Suliban take the role introduced by the Klingons. Perfect parrallels

[Dave]

Shall we have the how to improve 'Enterprise' discussion here, or start a new thread?

One thing is certain, if they keep 'making-over' old TOS and B-Movie stories for five more seasons, even die-hard fans like me will fall asleep!

[Tabitha]

I think we should probably not start a new thread - there is going to be so much overlap in this topic anyway.


I agree that Star Trek should be rested, but I cannot see that happening. The people at the network will be thinking with their wallets, and not worrying about the 'health' of the concept. It is obvious that Enterprise has not been the cash cow it was expected to become, but, with the way things are, I would expect them to try another angle, rather than resting Trek for a while.

It is such a shame that an attitude like that is likely to prevail when so much quality non-Trek SF is looking for new homes.

[ray gower]

Originally posted by Dave
Shall we have the how to improve 'Enterprise' discussion here, or start a new thread?

One thing is certain, if they keep 'making-over' old TOS and B-Movie stories for five more seasons, even die-hard fans like me will fall asleep!

Think we may have some http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthr...threadid=14465 and http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthr...threadid=15093

No excuse for simply warming over the plots though, no matter how TOS the show is

[ray gower]

As we seem to have concluded that Star Trek is living dead, perhaps we ought to ask the really obvious question- Why?

Or more specifically. Why are only the newer series (arguably TNG, but certainly DS9 onwards) dead?

It cannot be just because of the dated format.

TOS repeats are still receiving viewing figures that Enterprise can only dream of, cardboard sets, wooden acting and gravity defying toupe included. Even now I am more likely to watch a TOS repeat than a TNG and I've seen them so many times that I can almost repeat the script verbatum.

Shows like Stargate have not lost the same level of audience as Trek, yet it also largely follows the same format of simple and unrelated episodes.

Nor can it be claimed that TOS is original, not after 40 years of repeats.

[Dave]

But the Original Series was original at the time!

600+ hours of Trek makes it hard to continue to be original, especially when you have the same restricted format - a vessel of exploration with a quasi-military crew.

Firefly, for instance, was different and fresh because it wasn't bound by that convention - a crew of renegades, a darker galaxy.

I would disagree over Stargate, not only has it's format become tired, but it has even begun to resemble Trek too with it's starship journeys instead of Gate trips.

I think that 7 years is the usual maximum life of a series for a good reason, they all become tired (even Friends and Frasier, Dallas and Dynasty) after a certain time.

Berman has said recently that the thrust of the series is going to change soon, the region of space that they are exploring is going to change.

Edit: There is now a report about it, this is from SciFi Wire:

Producers of UPN's Enterprise told TV Guide that they will make a "slight revision" in the show's course to make it more epic, according to a report on the official Star Trek Web site. Executive producers Rick Berman and Brannon Braga said the show will soon embark in a new direction.

Expect "epic challenges ... that better exploit the sense of awe and danger" for the crew, Braga told the magazine.

Berman added, "Let's just say there will be a slight revision in our mission, and a slight revision in the part of space that Enterprise is heading into."

Something like that needs to happen, and quickly, if it is to stop being repetitive.

I would move them into Gorn or Tholian space, somewhere with a species we know little about and what we discover will be fresh.

Failing that, they should fast forward X years into the Earth-Romulan Wars and the formation of the UFP, and lets have more gritty DS9-style adventure and political stories.

Lets face it, Vulcans are boring (waits for outcry ) and we know more about Qo'nos than we do about Earth.

Since they fully expect to last for 7 seasons, and that is a luxury only Enterprise has these days, you would have expected a longer story arc - something like Babylon 5. Apart, from the Temporal Cold War they don't appear to have this, and that plot is very weak to IMHO.

But above everything else, they just need to find some fresh stories, that needs new blood on the writing staff, and a little taking of risks.

[ray gower]

But the Original Series time was 40 years ago. Difficult to see how it can still draw good viewing figures and all of the repeat showings simply because of that!

Stargate viewing figures are going down. But it has run for 6 years. It is still getting better figures than Enterprise, which hasn't finished season 2.

I agree that the number of plots available are limited. Repetition of plot is going to occur inside a single season, let alone 7 seasons.
The idea is to treat the plots differently.
Different people treat the same challenge differently and sometimes to different results. I haven't seen much of Enterprise Season 2 yet, but Season 1 did manage that basic requirement reasonably well.

Also agree about the Temporal Cold War. There is insufficient involvement to make it a theme. It is an irrational, haphazard and occaisional irritation, thrown in to try and fool people into thinking there is a purpose.

But perhaps that is the difference?

TOS was a bunch of programmes that did not try to be contiguous. They just happened in what ever order they were taken from the shelf. Individual shows were either good or bad, but it did not matter to the series as a whole.

Enterprise, was trying to be more serial, like B5. But it was done half-cocked. They ran out of continuity about episode 6.

It takes more than saying it was a week later to create a serial. You need to know exactly what the final episode is going to be, (even if not actually written) when you film the first. And final scripts at least 3 or 4 episodes ahead of what is being filmed.

In B5 there were references to what happened last week, the crew at various times became visibly and mentally more haggard as defeats built up, or buoyed by better news (evolved). Yet missing one or two shows did not mean the instant loss of the global plot.

It does not have to be deliberately dark to do that. It can even be done to fit into a well lit room (personal gripe at B5 and other 'dark' shows, everything is done in dark rooms). Darkness will appear if it is written with an eye to realism.

It didn't happen on Voyager, where such writing was essential for the series to make sense! And it does not appear in Enterprise.



BTW If they start including the Gorn and Tholians, won't that cause more complaints about it not following canon and/or upsetting fan based Mythology?

[LT25]

Originally posted by ray gower
First welcome to AsciFi, IT25 :wave:

Thanks :coolorang

Actually it's L T 25, but it does look like an I.

[Dave]

I think the complaints about continuity/ canon have been more about aliens having technology that Starfleet was meant to have first. As well as introducing aliens that Starfleet is not meant to meet yet.

I specifically mentioned Tholians and Gorn because they are Alpha Quadrant species, but we barely got a look at them in TOS, and they haven't been seen since. Hence, they have a clean slate to work with.

Agreed on the other things. I don't know why TOS is shown so much, except that the rights are probably very cheap.