quote: Star Trek producers said today they hoped Enterprise would revitalise fan interest in the franchise by recapturing the original Star Trek spirit. "It's time to get back to the fundamentals of Star Trek."
Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Rick Berman and Brannon Braga described the premise of Series V, which will be set approximately 100 years before the events in the original Star Trek series. "You'll see the first guys who go out into space, the Chuck Yeagers of space exploration," said Berman, referring to the aviator who first broke the sound barrier. "Fans will see all the things they recognize from Star Trek, but in the developmental phase."
Like Deep Space Nine and Voyager, which featured regular characters that were not in Starfleet, the new series will allow the producers to evade some of Gene Roddenberry's restrictions on conflict between characters. "The formula must evolve," said Braga, though acknowledging that an important part of the formula is that people in Star Trek are better. "(There) have been some attempts to alter that with Deep Space Nine and Voyager, arguably darker shows. Was that a mistake? Might have been. Do we want to just go back to the Next Generation formula? No way. We need a show that gives us everything."
But even if Enterprise will be bending the rules a little, Berman promised that the show would still preserve Roddenberry's optimistic vision of the future. "The Roddenberry perfection of humanity is in the process of happening but will be not completed when the series begins. That will enable us to do a show within the general umbrella of Star Trek, but eliminate some of the stumbling blocks."
What do Berman and Braga think are the "fundamentals of Star Trek?" - "To boldly go where we have gone before?" The statement that frightens me most is "Fans will see *all* the things they recognize from Star Trek" - Starfleet emblems, Romulans, Ferengi, Borg, holodecks, stable wormholes, transwarp? And the "developmental phase" may be an ironic hint that they are still heavily working on the premise while filming is already on the way. Note that it's currently 100 years before Kirk again. As if it wouldn't matter if it's going to be 2107 or 2167.
Finally, "bending the rules a little" is the understatement of the century. If, apart form all the screwed up continuity, "eliminate some of the stumbling blocks" means that they are going to draw a dark picture of humanity, they will definitely lose most of their fans. One of my main reasons to watch Star Trek is because it shows an idealistic and somehow idealized world - I would hate to see Star Trek submitting to the general blunt trend of stressing the evil side of humanity.
------------------ "There is an intelligent lifeform out on the other side of that television too." (Gene Roddenberry) Ex Astris Scientia
posted
Bernd, you are one of my favorite people. So I do not want you to take it the wrong way when I suggest that you seem to not be paying attention to what is actually being said, but to what you fear is going to happen.
quote:"Fans will see all the things they recognize from Star Trek, but in the developmental phase."
Er ... see, he's not talking about the show being in the developmental phase, but the tech (transporters, etc) being in the developmental phase.
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 8.32 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux (with seven eps posted) *** "Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" -Omega 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001 *** Card-Carrying Member of the FlareAPAO *** "I think this reason why girls don't do well on multiple choice tests goes all the way back to the Bible, all the way back to Genesis, Adam and Eve. God said, 'All right, Eve, multiple choice or multiple orgasms, what's it going to be?' We all know what was chosen" - Rush Limbaugh, Feb. 23, 1994.
posted
This is supposedly one of the better aspects of the show. Can't you get it Bernd? People don't like to watch Utopias and the consistent ratings of shows like the X-Files, Law and Order, CSI and so on show that. They can't speak for you and you can't speak for them.
Like I said, targeting imperfect qualities of people, the technology and the society among them is one of the greater hopes of the show. If they can pull this off following these themes, (and not fly to another meet an alien once a week thing) they can pull it off. But I'm not optimistic so far with the premiere. They should have given us a better intro to the world and age instead of rushing to meet Klingons---there is a great sense of creative laziness in that script.
[This message has been edited by crobato (edited May 21, 2001).]
posted
Its the people that can watch a show without busting a fucking synapse because the klingons heads arnt bumpy enough that will become fans of this show. The trek fans that don't get upset cause they mentioned a stardate incorrectly or got the registry of the USS Prometheous wrong that will enjoy the show. People like bernd with thumbs up thier asses that only care about continuity can go off and be mad at people for making TV shows that apparently they have no choice but to watch.
IMO, if you dont even give the fucking show a chance because of some "continuity" problems, you really need to seek help. If you give the show a chance, you knows you may like it, if you dont, you dont have to watch it again. But grow up and get a life if continuity is all you care about.
posted
How long was it before Berman was going to say "This is like getting back to the original series..." He said it for DS9, he said it for Voyager - I mentioned that he would say it again for Enterprise... And guess what...
Does he think that that old chestnut will work again... and again. He just keeps going and going and going and going...
I'm SOOO going to have to pull out my old Magazines (before the net) which have interviews with Berman saying the exact same sentence "This new series will revitalise the fan intrest. It gets back to the feel and the spirit of the Original Series" I hacked it for DS9 - but DS9 was great in its own way. I waited for Seven years on Voyager - does he think that we all have year-long memory spans!?! Repugnant! POOP!
Andrew
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
Oh and when I said 'before the 'net' I didn't mean back in the sixties - you presumably pedantic people! (oohhh alliteration!) I mean back in '92 or '95 before I got the net - before the net got REALLY popular.
------------------ Homer: I'm gonna miss Springfield. This town's been awfully good to us. Bart: No, it hasn't, Dad. That's why we're leaving. Homer: Oh, yeah. [pokes his head out the window] So long, Stinktown!
posted
Maybe I'm taking it all too literally (and yes, I noticed that "developmental phase" should refer rather to the fictional technology). It's just that they have made so many little errors in Voyager, and people other than me have been complaining all the time. I myself have always been rather lenient about that, since it was occasional and never impaired Trek continuity as a whole.
I usually wait for the result until I judge something, but this is different. Already the basic circumstances couldn't be worse. They have a premise that allows the fewest variety of stories and where it's possible that they make virtually everything wrong - and if they don't do it from the very beginning, time will do the rest. Seven seasons of the prequel will radically alter everything we know of the Star Trek universe. It will make look TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager like a parallel universe. They know it, nevertheless they do it. I bet that those who currently don't like Voyager, be it because of lacking new stories or because of lacking continuity, will hate "Enterprise".
As I said, it's not about single things like Klingon foreheads or specific technology, it's the concistency as a whole. Aside from that, but that's a personal preference, I just don't want to see the "old-tech" era (even if they don't mess with the tech).
------------------ "There is an intelligent lifeform out on the other side of that television too." (Gene Roddenberry) Ex Astris Scientia
posted
I think Andrew has an excellent point...They keep trying to duplicate the success of TOS, but they certainly won't be able to do that by being just like TOS, because they can't. TOS already exists, and success requires something new and original.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "There are also the diphthongs ae and oe, with no English counterparts; Tolkien actually suggests substituting ai and oi if you don't care about such details...but anyone reading this document probably does care about the details." - Sindarin information
posted
I might point out that "New technology of the week" only seemed to happen on Voyager, and DS9 and TNG were perfectly capable of running seven years without constantly showing off new gadgets/particles/etc. Clearly, it's possible for Enterprise to do so as well and yet still be entertaining television. Will the writers fall back on them nonetheless? Possibly. I, like you, hope not.
------------------ "And as it is, it is cheaper than drinking." -DT on arguing with Omega, April 30
posted
They will need new technology (the famous [tech]), as well as new aliens (Westmore needs work) and new phenomena (acually many of the "phenomena" episodes are among my favorites when the ideas were still fresh). Even if it's only a small remark or a little bit of technobabble each time in "Enterprise", it will strike me that I have never heard of that before. Well, in some cases we may be able to claim that technology will get outdated or aliens will go into isolation, but it will be impossible to explain the lacking continuity of a whole series in this fashion.
------------------ "There is an intelligent lifeform out on the other side of that television too." (Gene Roddenberry) Ex Astris Scientia
quote: They will need new technology (the famous [tech]), as well as new aliens (Westmore needs work) and new phenomena (acually many of the "phenomena" episodes are among my favorites when the ideas were still fresh).
Well, DS9 had about seven phenomena in seven years ("Q-Less," "Playing God," "Rejoined," "Meridian," "Children of Time," "Time's Orphan" and "One Little Ship" are the only ones that come to mind.) and didn't introduce a single new alien race after season 4. Just because Voyager had an excess of both of the above doesn't mean Enterprise will be doomed to follow on.
While admittedly a starship show will be more likely to have aliens of the week, I'm personally quite OK with seeing a few faces we haven't seen in TOS or TNG/DS9. It's a big galaxy, (after all, we basically never saw any races from TOS again aside from the Klingons, Vulcans and Romulans) and adding a few more faces won't ruin it for me. Yeah, seeing Andorians would be great, but I wouldn't consider the alien issue a cataclysmic show-wrecker.
As for the [tech] issue, I'm mildly encouraged by the producers' acknowlegement that excessive technobabble is distracting and should be trimmed, as well as the resulting downward swing of technobabble concentration in the last 2 seasons of Voyager. (At least, I've noticed it.) Here's hoping that this trend will continue into Enterprise. Bakula is reportedly on record as strongly against technobabble. It's another wait-and-see issue, I guess.
------------------ "And as it is, it is cheaper than drinking." -DT on arguing with Omega, April 30
[This message has been edited by The_Tom (edited May 22, 2001).]
posted
I would have been much happier with a Star Trek Section31, Temporal Commission, or Indiana Jones. I will watch the series just because I have never been able put down a sequel or continue incarnation of anything, but I definitely have my reservations about a prequel.
posted
The_Tom: I agree that DS9 deviated from the usual phenomena/planet/alien/technology-of-the-week formula that unfortunately ruled much of TOS and TNG. It would have been no problem to give at least a few of the TOS and TNG aliens a second appearance, especially when it was decided in DS9 that explored space must be much smaller even as of 2370. If Berman and Braga manage to keep the new show limited to a certain small region of space with maybe a dozen new civilizations, no new technology, a minimum of technobabble and nothing that necessarily still has to be important in TOS, I will agree with it and even enjoy it. But I'm still very pessimistic. Unless they really switch to an arc format like in DS9, they will need the above features-of-the-week. It is an important part to the author's freedom of writing to invent new things and many interesting stories can be created this way. I am afraid that this kind of creativity (even if it's actually rehashed) will eventually rule over continuity.
------------------ "There is an intelligent lifeform out on the other side of that television too." (Gene Roddenberry) Ex Astris Scientia
posted
I think I'm biased against Enterprise because I hate what TPTB did to Trek with Voyager and that it is the same people that are responsible for Enterprise. And even before the show has started, they already talk about bending the rules, messing up continuity, etc. while trying to evoke interest by saying (once more) how the show will be like TOS.
Am I the only one who thinks that TOS isn't even that great? Sure, it started everything, and it's a good show, but when you watch it nowadays, a lot of things seem quite silly and outdated. Why does everything always have to be "like TOS" to be good and acceptable?
Secondly, like you Bernd, I don't like that low-tech approach. I'm not at all interested in seeing all the tech we know in a developmental stage (and I too think that transporters really SHOULDN'T be around at that time).
But that's just my personal opinion and you all have every right to say that I just shouldn't watch the show if I don't like it. I just wanted to see if I'm the only one (apart from Bernd and MIB, that is), who feels that way.
------------------ Kryten: Pub? - Ah yes. A meeting place where people attempt to achieve advanced states of mental incompetence by the repeated consumption of fermented vegetable drinks. - Red Dwarf "Timeslides"
I mean back in '92 or '95 before I got the net - before the net got REALLY popular.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
