Ths issue of continuity - how important it is, and so forth - has been done to death. So too has the question over the target audience, but I'd like to look at it in a different way. I'll get back to B&B later.
We're told that Enterprise is returning to the very soul of Star Trek. This is simultaneously a very clever idea, and a very brave one.
Clever, because Star Trek is a part of popular culture - and by 'Star Trek' I mean TOS. People who remember Kirk will identify with Archer, see McCoy in Tucker, Sulu in Mayweather, Uhura in Sato, and Spock in T'Pol. They'll click with setting the phase(r) pistol on stun, beaming down and "Ahead Warp 5."
It's brave because it's so easy to screw up. And, while they may not care, they run the risk of alienating the hardcore fans who've kept them employed this far. It'd be VERY ironic if you people - who never really got Star Trek, grew up on Star Trek: Funny Forehead of the Week, really liked Star Trek: Space Battle of the Week and got so annoyed with Star Trek: Spatial Anomaly of the Week - ended up hating Star Trek: Continuity Nightmare because it wasn't what you'd come to expect expect after 14 years of Braga fodder.
Which is where story comes in. If there's one thing I can say with certainty after all these years here, it's that story doesn't matter to the likes of 'us.' "The Sound of Her Voice" was a nice little story but all I've ever seen discussed about it here was what class the Olympia might be.
Trek has gotten really stale. Even the non-arc eps of DS9 were pretty turgid most of the time. Why? Because the stories weren't very good. In a fundamental sense, the crews were encountering much the same situations that, say, David Banner did when he came to a new town in The Incredible Hulk. That's a sweeping generalization, which most of you will nitpick in a way only teenagers can. Indulge me in my aged vices.
Berman and Braga are partly to blame for this. Voyager may have been a very flawed show, but it could have been turned around. Look at Babylon 5 - something I know most of you REALLY hate to do, but indulge me once more. It survived the departure of its leading man after one season, and turned it into a bonus. Shame it couldn't do the same with the departure of its leading lady in the last season. . . All I'm sayting is, Voyager could havebeen turned around.
But we're also partly to blame. Why should they put a lot of time into the story and the actors when, in the final analysis, just giving us a glimpse of a starship with a partly-visible registry will keep us occupied for months?
So. Never mind that the SS Enterprise is just an Akira with its nacelles pointing upwards (and it is: no amount of "the hull's a slightly different shape" apologism can contradict that). Also, no matter that they CAN make contact with, say, the Betazoids without violating any continuity that'll really matter. They need good stories. Different, unusual, X-Files-like episodes that make you say "whoa, neverseen that before." A good arc structure that leaves you guessing where they're going with it, not telegraphing each new move like The Jem'Hadar - "oh no! These are our new enemies and they're really mean!"
I'm looking forward to it. I'm not confident, but I want to see what happens. After all, if you'd asked me month ago when I was going to do an Enterprise weapons page, I'd have said "when Hell becomes a popular tourist destination among the Breen." 8)
That's what made DS9 a great show, because on a station, a space station, you have to suffer for what you did the week before. Then you have continuing story arcs such as Gul Dukat and the Dominion among other story arcs
Since they are doing things for the first time they will run into the same things established in TOS. Klingons, Vulcans, and other aliens are among them. This is TOS all over again which I think people wanted.
Oh, come on!
I disagree that we are just watching Star Trek for the ships and tech to debate about. I think it was pretty well understood that story is the deciding factor of how we rate a show or entire series. Of course "In the Pale Moonlight" and other deep episodes have made us think of the message behind them, and when story fails, many people express their opinion on it.
Just look at Voyager! That series had a new CGI "cool looking" sequence, new tech, ships, and aliens practically every week. Lots of things to discuss (and argue about). So why is it thought of as the weaker of all four current Star Trek incarnations? The stories, of course. When "Endgame" aired in the US, the first topics were reviews of the plot, not the flashy things put in (just check the older topics). Sure, later we wondered about the registries of some ships and the way some new things worked, but our first reactions were of the story.
Insurrection didn't fare as well either, even with new shuttles, ships, and effects.
Why did we watch TNG and DS9 with anticipation?
We cared about what happened. We wanted to know how the Dominion War would end. We wanted to know what the Prophets meant when Sisko would suffer great sorrow. We wanted to see how Picard would deal with the new threat of the Borg. We wanted to see how he would defend humanity to Q.
We cared about the characters and the setting they were in.
What about VOY? Well, that's the problem: What about Voyager? We didn't care what happened in the "bottle" episodes that lasted just one episode and didn't make a difference overall in character or series development. At the end, they were still lost. Nothing mattered. When the ship was damaged last week, we knew it would all be fine and dandy this week. They treated us like idiots. If the crew were in trouble, you knew the senior staff would live and the extra guy would die. They didn't develop their recurring characters like TOS (only Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were the stars), TNG (Barclay), or DS9 (too many to name). Besides basic sadness over loss of any life, we didn't care if the extra guy died.
If Enterprise has a good overall "series plot", it will succeed and be thought of well compared to the other series, and if it has cool tech, all the better.
[ August 06, 2001: Message edited by: Ace ]
Which in my oppinnion should have been the best trek series. Afterall it had so much potential, a ship lost in space, on its own, its crew part starfleet and maquis, a new quadrant of wonders to see and face....it should have been so great...
but it turned out in general so bland...so boring...the only reason i watched every episode was because its trek and i wanted to see the ships...LOL 
Now for enterprise, i hear they are bringing in entire new teams of writers...well here's hoping for the best.
"If there's one thing I can say with certainty after all these years here, it's that story doesn't matter to the likes of 'us.' "The Sound of Her Voice" was a nice little story but all I've ever seen discussed about it here was what class the Olympia might be."
Well, for one thing, you're hanging out at a place that started out as a Treknology board. We're a bunch of tech junkies. Of course we're going to discuss that stuff.
Not to mention, what do you expect us to discuss about liking the stories?
Trekkie 1: "Hey, did you see 'The Sound of Her Voice'? Good episode."
Trekkie 2: "Yeah, I liked it. It was good."
Trekkie 1: "Yeah, I liked it, too."
Trekkie 2: "'The Sound of Her Voice', you said?"
Trekkie 1: "Yeah."
Trekkie 2: "Yeah, good episode.
Trekkie 1: "Yeah, I liked it."
...as opposed to...
Trekkie 1: "Hey, did you see 'The Sound of Her Voice'? Good episode."
Trekkie 2: "Yeah, I liked it. Say, what class do you suppose the Olympia was supposed to be?"
Trekkie 1: "Well, given the time frame, and the fact that it was a deep-space explorer, I'm guessing it was a Constellation."
Trekkie 2: "Yeah, you could be right. I thought I saw a nacelle in that wreckage."
Trekkie 3: "This screencap clearly shows that it was an Oberth! Look! (Oh, and I really liked the episode, too!)"
Trekkie 1: "Hm... He could be right. I dunno..."
Trekkie 2: "Yeah, I wonder..."
See how people can like the story, but still primarily discuss the tech more?
Oh, and if Berman or Braga or both of you are reading this, start pushing the envelope with your stories like TOS...
[ August 07, 2001: Message edited by: Michael_T ]
OH MY GOD! They were sleeping together and having sex?!
You do realize, of course, that the term "sleeping together" usually means that two people are engaging in sexual intercourse?
"Yeah, I'm sleeping with this girl Kate," doesn't mean, yeah, you know, we just share the same bed. That's all. Hell, I've never even seen her naked.
No, it means we're engaging in some sort of primal mounting behavior, involving the insertion of one body part into another.
Now, if you meant somethimg besides "and having ... ummm ...", please tell us.
)Okay I'll stop. 
Speaking of several species mixing in Star Trek...how can that work? Isn't a species defined as a population that can only breed within itself (not through mating with other species)? 
TOS developed it's recurring characters? When?
There's also been mention of differing placement of sexual organs in TNG's "First Contact." Riker and Lilith get it on despite Riker's warning that there are differences.
Back in TOS, only Kirk, Spock, and later McCoy were the stars (they were the only actors in the opening credits). Uhura, Scott, Sulu, Chapel, and so on were only signed on to do a few episodes (not all) just like the recurring characters of DS9. Only later in the movies were they bumped up to "main character" status. I actually think it is better to just list two or three actors as the main character. Then, we don't run into problems like on Voyager where you have too many characters to deal with. There, the writers cheat out by just focusing on the easy to write characters (Seven, the Doctor) instead of the human characters like Kim. After all, it is easier to write about how a holographic doctor tries to fight for equal rights and how a former Borg deals with humanity (i.e. just like Data and Spock) but not how a 24th century "perfect" human deals with life.
This "focus" on only two or three characters in a large ensemble cast has spread to the TNG movies, as well. Now, it's all about Picard and Data. When was the last time we hear of Crusher, LaForge, Troi, etc.? They're just nice set decorations now...
[ August 07, 2001: Message edited by: Ace ]
All kidding aside, it's difficult to spend and adequate amount of time on each character in a large-ensemble cast. Most features run two hours long, and that simply isn't enough to do a lot of character development on anyone save one or two people. That's why the TOS movies have always been focused on Kirk, Spock, and McCoy and why the TNG movies are always focused on Picard and Data. Those movies focus on the most beloved characters.
The writers on Voyager simply have no excuse for not developing the characters. Some of the fault also goes to Berman, Braga, and Biller for not pushing the writers into exploring the psyche of Chakotay, Kim, and Neelix. Tuvok, Paris, and B'Elanna were treated somewhat better, but Janeway, Seven, and the Doctor hogged all of the character development. There should have been better direction in this regard; the writers simply got lazy.
Developing a large ensemble cast is not too terribly difficult in series television. There are usually twenty to twenty-five episodes in a season, and several episodes can be spent focusing on one particular character. In this regard, TNG and DS9 did fairly well. TNG spent a good deal of time developing Geordi, Troi, and Crusher (only to have them essentially ignored in the movies). DS9 did fairly well giving time to O'Brien, Bashir, Kira, and Odo. Hell, even Rom, Nog, and Morn got their moments in the glory. Jake seemed to get lost in the shuffle quite a bit, though.
We missed out on alot of good character eps , By the last season I was hoping they'd rename it to "Star Trek : Three's Company"
The Voyager writers just never made the effort to make their other characters deeper than just "Yes, Captain Janewway" and "Red Alert!".
Who do you know more about, O'Brien or Kim? Also, like you wrote, they can't even further develop other characters from other series. At least when DS9 brought Tom Riker over, we learned about how he was having trouble living in the shadow of Will Riker. What about Voyager? Well, Barclay has an obsession with the VOY crew, but how does that change things? He's always been obsessed with things! Troi? I won't even go there, but at least she actually works as a counselor in those episodes.
quote:
Sol System: I just hope my just made conjecture, re: Harry Mudd being TOS' only recurring character, proves correct. I'm pretty sure it is. None of the three Klingon captains ever did more than one episode.
FrankG: Uh...Lt. Kyle? Lt. Riley (I think)? Pike?
Sol System: Hey, you're right about Riley. And Kyle, I suppose. Though he was less character than living prop. I don't know if Pike counts. He wasn't exactly living. Don't recurring characters have to, oh, I don't know, move? : )
FrankG: Oh, shush.
Sol System: There were also a few extras who appeared multiple times, but it wasn't even clear whether they were really supposed to be the same people or not.
FrankG: Such as?
Sol System: They didn't have names. There was the guy who threw Charlie X around in the gym, who also played The Guy In Phaser Control, A Security Guard, and The Guy In Engineering.
He did top him though, by actually being killed in "The Omeg Glory", and then coming back in season 3! Wow!
There's Dr M'Benga too.
And there are other background people seen in more than one episode: Ensign Berkeley, DeSalle, etc.
You're ignoring the facts. The actors and actresses who played Uhura, Sulu, and the others were not being paid every episode, only when they appeared. William Shatner was getting $5000 plus bonuses; Leonard Nimoy was getting half that amount. Everyone else was just downhill from there. Sure, now Uhura, Sulu, and the others are considered part of the main cast because of the movies, but Gene Roddenberry even said that William Shatner was and had been planned to be the main star. Going by your logic, Keiko O'Brien, Molly O'Brien, Nog, Morn, Brunt, etc. would all be part of the main cast.
quote:
And we have Christine Chapel and Janice Rand (who was btw supposed to be a regular, but was kicked out because of budgetary reasons).
If by budgetary reasons you mean she lived inside a bottle, yeah.
All these characters were in multiple episodes and many were featured as (if not more) prominently as the TOS crew.
Total number of TOS episodes, including pilots: 79
Total number of TOS episodes wherein Uhura appears: 68
Total Uhura content in TOS: 86%
Total number of DS9 episodes: 174 (I think.)
Total number of DS9 episodes wherein Weyoun appears: 20 (Possibly 21, but I think just 20.)
Total Weyoun content in DS9: 11.5%
When I meant featured prominently, I meant character development wise. We know about Dukat's background, family, etc. at least as much as Uhura's (if not more). The same goes for Garak as well. What do we know about Uhura? She was born in the United States of Africa, speaks Swahili, and contributes to the show "Captain, I'm afraid" and "Hailing frequencies open, sir."
Sheesh...
A chacter who appears in a 1000 episodes could be less developed than one who only appears in a single ep. Ouside the triumvarate there wasn't much character development in TOS.
Of course I think that DS9 and Voyager tried to develop too many characters. Alot of episodes feel like "Well, we have to do a Kes episode because we haven't done one yet," instead of waiting until they actually have a good idea for a Kes episode.
Um.
I don't understand.
Perhaps, before we proceed, I should know what exactly your definition of a main character is?
[ August 09, 2001: Message edited by: Ace ]
As I said, you'll get no argument from me that Uhura is more of an unknown than, say, Garak. But that doesn mean she wasn't part of the main cast. The same goes for all the others.
And Neexlix does have another name; Whisker-face.
[ August 11, 2001: Message edited by: TLE ]
Oops...lapsed into Omega logic there for a sec...