posted
Paramount, and the parent company Viacom, have a dilemma. Their latest ST film, Nemesis, has dropped out of the top ten and has earned 34 million dollars at the domestic box office. Enterprise's last two new episodes are ranked last in the Nielsen ratings. There is a contractual agreement with Braga and, I think Berman, for their work on Star Trek for three years (2001-2004). This is a very bad time for the franchise which in the past earned money for Paramount. What options are available for the future of this franchise?
I have read on the internet a call for cancelation for this series. I do believe this is not an option. There is a contractual relationship existing with the executive producers and, I believe, the players. If the show is canceled, one or both may sue for contractual breach. (Or could Paramount ordered a severance of the contract on performance issues? Is there a clause in the contract which outlines such a step?)
Another proposal. Bring in new blood. I think this idea died at the box office. Logan, a new writer to Trek, and Baird, also new to Trek, couldn't create a product which had the staying power to compete against another sci-fi/fantasy work.
Those are two options I can think of at this time. Do you have other, more creative options for this franchise?
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I'd b very surprised if UPN's contracts don't allow them to chancel a show. That's unheard of in the TV industry. Typically, it's the show staff that's under contract meaning that if the show is renewed for the length of their contracts, they're obligated to do the work. If the show is cancelled, well, then the obligation is severed. The only real variation would be if actors or staff had "pay or play" provisions in their contracts...which you have to have a lot of clout to get.
That's the way Hollywood works.
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
I mean who here has seen EVERY episode at least TWICE!?! Once + repeat?
I'm sure one or maybe two - and we are die-hard Trekkies here.
I've seen nearly every episode once - I think I might be missing mostly TOS. I have only seen 2 episodes of TAS. I have seen TNG the most - several episodes over and over again. DS9 and Voyager I've seen EVERY episode at least once. I seen Season 1 and Season 2 DS9 multiple amounts of times.
PLUS there is now Enterprise.
There is enough Star Trek for a Trek Channel for crying out loud.
Leave it for a while. They should have done this before Enterprise.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Well... I haven't been *overly* disappointed with Enterprise, though I had hoped it would do better things. However, I'd hate for the series to simply be cancelled and leave us hanging right in the middle of everything. That wouldn't be good either.
After Enterprise, though... Star Trek definitely needs to be shelved for a bit. Think of it... 5 years... 10 years after Enterprise ends, all of us are nice and middle aged and we get to revel in the joy of a new Star Trek series.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Leave Star Trek alone for a few years.
I mean who here has seen EVERY episode at least TWICE!?! Once + repeat?
I'm sure one or maybe two - and we are die-hard Trekkies here.
Yes, because not having any new episodes means we will see less repeats! Your logic is watertight!
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well I admit that I haven't been watching Enterprise. Not because I don't like it, but because it only runs at 6pm on saturday. Not the best time for any show(stupid Fox). It was a little early for a new trek series but that doesn't change the fact that Sci-fi shows never really do all that well in tv land.
-------------------- The Poster formally known as Tec.
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:However, I'd hate for the series to simply be cancelled and leave us hanging right in the middle of everything.
To be perfectly honest, I wouldn't mind having that happen at all.
The formation of the Federation is perhaps the single most important & interesting event in this show's fictitious history. Apparently, that was the original basis for having the prequel show in the first place. However, I highly doubt that we'll see that happen in this show. Whatever direction Enterprise had has now evaporated by UPN. They're not interested in showing the formation of the Federation. They're just interested in getting whatever ratings they can, which means, as your friend & mine Dawn Ostroff has stated, that the show will revolve strictly around the characters getting laid.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
In a few days I get my Farscape back for a bit... but that is a hollow happiness...
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
