Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Stephen of Borg

A Question For Those That Like Enterprise

57 posts in this topic

There's "no way"? They were approached sometime in 2005 but that means that the idea was there before they were approached. Of course I'm not suggesting that this was the reason for the cancellation. I simply said that I'd be disappointed IF that was the reason.

 

I also don't accept that 'Star Trek (2009)' was their 'last chance' just as i don't accept that they 'had' to create an alternate and parallel timeline in order to attract new viewers. Those were the choices that were made, but they could have been just as successful had they made other (and some would say the right) choices. Another thing that I don't accept is everyone saying that the franchise was "dead". The way the franchise will 'die' is if the people in charge turn their backs on the very fans that made the franchise possible.

 

As for the Nielsen Ratings, I don't believe they're relevant any longer. They're out dated. Don't forget, it was the "ratings" that got Star Trek cancelled in 1969, but shortly after the cancellation they began tabulating the ratings differently and come to find out that under the new method Star Trek was a top rated show that never should have been cancelled.

 

Don't put so much faith in Hollywood and the studios. I've learned through family members that are connected to the industry a little bit about how they work out there and they do NOT deserve your faith.

I meant last chance in the sense that if Paramount did not make a successful Star Trek product before a certain deadline, they would lose the ability to do so in the future (i.e. the option to), because the full rights of the franchise would then revert to CBS (who at this time still holds the TV rights to the Star Trek franchise and to everything past) as a result of the CBS/Viacom split of 2005. If they had not made Star Trek or if it had not been successful, CBS would then be fully in charge and the general consensus is that Chairman of CBS, Les Moonves, is no fan of science fiction. So the franchise would be in an even worse place than it was following the cancellation of Enterprise and it was for all intents and purposes, dead (or at least dormant) at that point, in an official sense.

 

I admit that Neilsen ratings may no longer be relevant but unfortunately, they are the metrics by which TV shows are evaluated, for the most part. And with respect to that metric, Enterprise was a failure and therefore its expense could not be justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I admit that Neilsen ratings may no longer be relevant but unfortunately, they are the metrics by which TV shows are evaluated, for the most part. And with respect to that metric, Enterprise was a failure and therefore its expense could not be justified.

I'm not at all convinced that it was a failure, if by failure you mean that it was cancelled before 7 seasons then yes it was. But I'd be interested to see the true numbers that are on the books. Meaning, how much did the series cost to produce for the 4 seasons it was on and how much money did they make or lose when all was said and done on the series.

 

In those numbers I would say that DVD sales and rentals (if they make money per rental from Netflix and places like that) must be included because those are part of what Enterprise made (or lost).

 

Was it a question of Enterprise losing money? By "losing money" I mean if it cost $10 to produce a full season and once the season was over they only made $4 back so they were $6 in the hole. Or was it a matter of costing $10 to produce and they wanted to make $40 profit above the $10 production cost yet when all was said and done for the season they only made $25 profit?

 

I don't know the answers to those questions, if it was a matter of being in the red at the end of the season and actually physically losing money then I totally understand. It's a business and they aren't in the business of losing money. If it was a matter of not making enough profit then I'd put a curse on the head of the person or people that made the decision to cancel the series (if I believed in curses lol).

 

I suspect, though I don't know that they just weren't making as much profit as they wanted to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't know if Enterprise was losing money or not. All I know is that it was one of the top five most expensive shows on television to produce during at least one portion of its run (a full season allegedly cost $30 million, based on what Save Enterprise were attempting to raise) and it lost over ten million viewers from its first episode to its final episode (most of the lost came within the first season: 12 mil to 3 mil), which obviously led to a major hit it any potential advertising revenue it could bring in (i.e. the amount UPN can charge for advertising). Now there are a number of factors for that loss. Enterprise was poorly promoted and was on a lousy network (and its didn't fit with the core demos that that network was targeting).

 

I don't know if Enterprise was flat out in the red, or if it just wasn't making what CBS/Paramount consider to be a reasonable return on their investment. Which is perfectly understandable. Nobody invests in anything to just make their money back.

 

Don't get me wrong, I liked Enterprise and wanted it to continue, but CBS/Paramount made a business decision and unfortunately it resulted in Enterprise's cancellation. But based on what limited numbers we have, it seems like it was the correct business decision. But I do not believe for a second that the new movie is in anyway responsible for Enterprise's cancellation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But based on what limited numbers we have, it seems like it was the correct business decision.

There's where I believe you're putting too much faith in them. The numbers can be manipulated to support whichever decision they'd make. I agree that the new movie probably didn't have anything to do with it, but again I wasn't saying that it did. I was simply saying that I'd be very disappointed if it did.

 

From a quality standpoint of the product on the screen, a case could have been made to cancel TNG and Voyager after just a couple of seasons. Enterprise was a quality show from start to finish though. As you said, it was a crappy network that was making crappy decisions and moving the series around the way they did didn't help any. If it had been a syndicated show like TNG and DS9 were I really believe that things would have been different.

 

But none of that is either here nor there, it was cancelled and TPTB are idiots lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's where I believe you're putting too much faith in them. The numbers can be manipulated to support whichever decision they'd make. I agree that the new movie probably didn't have anything to do with it, but again I wasn't saying that it did. I was simply saying that I'd be very disappointed if it did.

 

From a quality standpoint of the product on the screen, a case could have been made to cancel TNG and Voyager after just a couple of seasons. Enterprise was a quality show from start to finish though. As you said, it was a crappy network that was making crappy decisions and moving the series around the way they did didn't help any. If it had been a syndicated show like TNG and DS9 were I really believe that things would have been different.

 

But none of that is either here nor there, it was cancelled and TPTB are idiots lol.

I really don't think I'm giving them too much credit. You can manipulate numbers, true, but there is a logic to Enterprise's cancellation. Nothing really gets canceled that there isn't some logic to. It usually comes down to ratings and expense and in Enterprise's case, the ratings did not justify the expense.

 

I agree about Voyager, I believe it did come close to cancellation at certain points. I don't think it was the case with TNG (But don't quote me on that) because with first run syndication, it brought in a lot more money in syndication fees before it aired. Since that was the case, I would very much agree that VGR and ENT would both have been better shows if they had been on first run syndication, because UPN would not have been able to interfere the way it did, and they would have been far more financially viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re TOS, and my colleague VBG's previous reference about the re-considered ratings standards, I am suprised, but pleased, to hear that the numbers were in truth much better than previously thought..if alternately thinking, well..what could have been. As Brent Spiner himself said , ''that's why they call it show business''...and people like ourselves, who love these series sometimes feel like we are on the outside looking in. Whatever the cause, the point is, that , well, Enterprise didn't get its chance to prove what it could do...and, heck...don't some say, that for ex, TNG didn't hit its stride, until Season Three or so...?As VBG said, as well, it was doing something in that last year...not that I did not have eps I liked before then. I liked the addition of people like Judy and Gar Reeves-Stevens, who cut their eye teeth on writing ST novels, several of which I own. like ''Federation''-which has tie-ins to pre-STE...and the Shatner books. I think they understood elements that made Star Trek work, as well as Manny Coto, who all brought the taste of 'Classic'(And it willl ever be, of course) as it used to be called-a still-good-monicker, in some ways-to one of my always-favorite series-Trek...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Xindi arc was probably the best of all Enterprises's arcs. Along with the Vulcan/Andorian feuding, the Xindi arc really showed that forming a Federation of planets is not necessarily going to be easy. Huge obstacles often have to be overcome first.

 

My problem, though, was that Enterprise was a total serial. Nothing but arc upon arc. I didn't care for it. If you missed one episode, or got a DVD from Blockbuster that was out of order, you were screwed (which is why I now prefer Netflix).

Edited by youbroughtheryouRiker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Xindi arc was probably the best of all Enterprises's arcs. Along with the Vulcan/Andorian feuding, the Xindi arc really showed that forming a Federation of planets is not necessarily going to be easy. Huge obstacles often have to be overcome first.

 

My problem, though, was that Enterprise was a total serial. Nothing but arc upon arc. I didn't care for it. If you missed one episode, or got a DVD from Blockbuster that was out of order, you were screwed (which is why I now prefer Netflix).

Yeah, the third and fourth seasons were very much serialized but the first 2 seasons weren't really. I suppose you could take the whole temporal cold war as a massive 3+ season arc (3+ because it went into the Th season a little). The fourth season had a few 3 part arcs, but I don't hold that against the series at all.

 

DS9 was very serialized as well starting with the 4th season and the Klingon arc then the Dominion war after that. I really think it worked well though, but I can understand how a "casual viewer" might be turned off by that kind of series. When DS9 was in it's first run I wasn't always able to catch every episode but I was still very into the episodes that I could catch and I knew that I'd 'catch up' with re-runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, even with the P'Jem Incident... there was arcing going on. That one wasn't as bad for me, though it did spoil the ending for me of the first episode of those two. But yeah, it wasn't as bad then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking back on Enterprise now that it's been gone for 5 years, season 3 is my least favorite of the series. I enjoyed it as it was playing out in first run but now I tend to skip through most of the season when I watch the DVD's. I'll hit an episode here and there, like North Star or a few others but on the whole I skip through them.

 

Why? Well the whole arc was somewhat of a downer. The whole concept. I wish they had focused more on developing the Human/Andorian (Archer/Shran) dynamic and moving toward the formation of the Federation than coming up with a new alien race that will never be seen again to fight with.

 

There were some good stories but all in all they just didn't fit the franchise very well. Seasons 1, 2 and 4 were great. I especially like the Vulcan trilogy in the 4th season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well, Enterprise didn't get its chance to prove what it could do...and, heck...don't some say, that for ex, TNG didn't hit its stride, until Season Three or so...?

 

I do not understand how you think here. Enterprise did get its chance to prove itself but didn't take it. That was part of the problem. Like TNG the show had a mediocre start, but they did work steadily to build things up for the first two seasons. They introduced things like the Temporal stuff and the Suliban, the Vulcan-Andorian conflict and The Nausican pirates and probably other things I've forgotten about. By the beginning of the third season, just like TNG they had an established universe to begin telling good stories in, What happen was, they ditched it all and the fruits of two seasons of hard work was thrown away or placed in limbo.

 

I don't from what place they pulled out the Xindi and the whole threat to Earth but they had to start over from nil. Also they made a capital offence for a television series, they changed format mid-series. In the first two seasons episodes were selfcontained, or at most part of a double/triple. A viewer had a decent chance of missing and episode and still be able to follow next episode. Viewers get used to such things. Some viewer enjoyed the Andorian episodes and not so much the Temporal, some viewers the other way around, and no one knew if the next episode might not deal with their favourite topic. Then comes the Xindi arc, ensuring that not only was there no chance to get the continuation of the storyline you enjoyed the most up to that, but if you didn't happen to like the Xindi story you were stuck with an entire season of episodes that wouldn't appeal. Because the arc was so long the story also felt like it was crawling forward. And the new format meant if you missed one episode you were basically out of touch.

 

Taken together it is a series killer.

 

It might have been different if they had begun like season three. If they had made their viewers expect this format and this long ongoing story. Then if you have a story that hooks them you get them coming back every episode not to miss anything. But you can't change everything at a critical moment halfway into the series. Babylon 5 season 4 did a similar blunder though possibly for different reasons. But Enterprise did it just at the moment when it was set to prove itself. Just when they had a chance to make all the ground work they built in the first two seasons come to life and pay off, they shot themselves in the arse with the Xindi instead. A million reasons may have been the cause of this, already poor rating probably the most important ones, but desperation can seldom save a series. Either way Enterprise had one chance to hit a stride and they wasted it magnificently.

 

As for the Xindi arc. Enterprise always suffered a little from post 9/11 patriotism, and could never quite shake a distasteful us vs them mentality. Archer himself seemed always like an overgrown teenager. Instead of maturing in the third season they came up with the Xindi arc, which took all of those problems with the show and multiplied them manyfold. Archer said and did things in the third season that would have made Gene Roddenberry sick to the heart. Poor Archer was alwasy a pompous posturing kind of leader of the kind that is hard to like, and in a way I am glad the final episode of Season 4 spared us his Federation speech. To steal a line from Amadeus he would have made his speech so lofty he'd shit marble. And every single drone present in the event would have applauded him with relish for it.

 

Well, Enterprise was always a troubled show, but I shouldn't be surprised if the third season doomed it.

Edited by Hooray for boobies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2) If Hooray for Boobies is going to have Uhura as his avitar he should have the new Uhura. She has nicer boobies.

 

I should have Leeta then I think. Or if it needs to be from the new one, perhaps the green skinned woman.

 

Or infact, come to thnk of it, didn't old Uhura field an impressive rack in The Motion picture?

 

Maybe I should begin a study to determine the deepest cleavage in Star Trek.

 

Or no, better not. Chances are of ending up with some weird looking unattractive Alien.

 

No Uhura will have to do, unless I can find a good picture of Leeta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhura did have a nice rack in TMP, but wasn't she like 50 or something?

 

The new Uhura doesn't mind her boobies being grabbed (or at least she didn't press charges). That counts for a lot.

 

The Orion girl did have nice boobies, but she was a bit chunky. Plus you might get green makeup all over your face and hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uhura did have a nice rack in TMP, but wasn't she like 50 or something?

 

Oh that's alright. I'm not too picky. Lots of women look gorgeous still when they are 50. Raquel Welch comes to mind, though as far as I can remeber she never did Star Trek.

 

Don't worry about the green smearing of on you either, it just shows that you lived a little.

 

But if you go for Zoe eh.. the new Uhura, well, I bet she can teach you all sorts of things in all sorts of languages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There will only be one Uhura! But if you wany cleavage check out Marina pic on Mrs Picards post.

 

Looks like Patrick Stewart in her avatar. Tough for all I know he may have a cleavage that can't be what you meant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There will only be one Uhura! But if you wany cleavage check out Marina pic on Mrs Picards post.

 

Looks like Patrick Stewart in her avatar. Tough for all I know he may have a cleavage that can't be what you meant?

 

Go to her Jan. 31 post and click on here and see what I mean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There will only be one Uhura! But if you wany cleavage check out Marina pic on Mrs Picards post.

 

Patrick Stewart could still pass for his character from the late 80s. Marina Sirtis looks like an old hag now. As much as I like boobies I draw the line at old boobies.

Edited by Lt. Van Roy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There will only be one Uhura! But if you wany cleavage check out Marina pic on Mrs Picards post.

 

Patrick Stewart could still pass for his character from the late 80s. Marina Sirtis looks like an old hag now. As much as I like boobies I draw the line at old boobies.

 

Maybe it is because I am old, but I think she looks great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0