posted
I am torn between c and d but that’s is just to be expected. Why you ask? - For one the bb's aren’t really failing miserably...yet. - Second…Fox? WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING, fox couldn't do a thing with enterprise. - Thirdly I’m sure that Enterprise will soon stray away from the voyager style and shift into it's own little part of the trek universe. - Ratings? I don’t know much about the ratings but I have a few hundred that says the ratings are doing fine.
-------------------- "Explore New Worlds"
Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Eliminate cable and the internet, return popular culture to a pre-80's era dominated by a handful of media outlets in which everyone in the United States can watch the same things.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
A. UPN is Paramount's network. Enterprise is produced by Paramount. Therefore, how would this show be able to run on any other network?
B. No one's going to "get rid" of Berman & Braga. They're the bosses. The only way they're going to leave is if they quit on their own, and that's not gonna happen.
C. Better stories doesn't always equal better ratings. Some of the highest rated shows today are absolute crap. It depend on what the viewing population wants, and Braga seems to think that the viewing population wants sex and/or dumbed down stories. Whether that's really what they want is another question. I know it's not what I want.
[ March 27, 2002, 14:16: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
-------------------- "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
quote:A. Getting away from UPN and switching to FOX or something.
Well, UPN is an automatic handicap on ratings, because it reaches a smaller proportion of American homes than the big four (only about 70% or so, I think), so it's behind out of the starting gate. Media analysts therefore avoid comparisons between the CBSes and FOXes and the UPNs and WBS. The only people who throw their hands in the air and say that Enterprise is getting the same ratings numbers as a couple of NBC sitcoms on the bubble and therefore it will soon be cancelled are Trek fans with a greater knowledge of Klingon grammar than media research.
And given Fox's past record with Sci-Fi, I'd say no on principle.
quote:B. Better management, getting rid of the double B's and putting in respectable producers.
There would appear to be a mountain of evidence that Paramount considers Berman a 'respectable' producer. In a Hollywood world of egos and icons and social climbers, Berman has quietly brought in 14 years of television on-time and on-or-under-budget. That's the reason they just gave him a fat contract extension. Whether the 1% of the viewing audience that has nothing better to do but bitch all day thinks he's respectable or not is irrelevant to the industry.
quote:C. Better stories
...will always encourage and retain more viewers, yes.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I agree Rick Berman is a keeper. He's not the problem. He's a Hollywood chameleon. You just need to step back a pace to see what I mean.
Gene loved him when he met him because in Berman he found someone who understood what he was talking about and shared his vision for Trek... But as Gene removed himself as his health started failing and Michael Piller came in, Trek shifted to Piller's notion of what Trek was supposed to be about... Piller was pretty much the one who created DS9, and Berman supported him. Note the drastic shift in DS9 from when Piller was on it to when Behr and Moore took over the big chairs. Berman then helped create Voyager with Jeri Taylor, and it was her vision that dominated the first three seasons, before Brannon Braga took over for her... and we all know what came after that...
Rick Berman is very good at adopting the creative viewpoint of the other producers he works with, and this is why he's lasted as long as he has in this very flighty town. You like the people who agree with you, and want to keep them close. He's figured out, either consciously or un-, that being a parrot is a good way to stay employed.
The downside of this is that it means Brannon "Mr. Continuity" Braga is pretty much in charge of where Trek will go for the forseeable future.
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:The downside of this is that it means Brannon "Mr. Continuity" Braga is pretty much in charge of where Trek will go for the forseeable future.
Not to defend Braga or anything, but I think Paramount is a much bigger factor for where Trek will go in the future. That's why B5 was such a great show. JMS didn't let the suits at Warner Brother dictate how he could make his show. Unfortunately, that also meant that some projects he just couldn't do (Crusade for ex.), but he felt he'd rather just not do them if they weren't going to be done his way.
-------------------- "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
posted
Oy. Then how do you explain the movies?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Flower Man
Ex-Member
posted
Yeah, man. Legend of the Rangers sucked. As well as that other movie that was narrated by an old Lando back on Centuri Prime or whatever his planet was called.
[ March 28, 2002, 11:30: Message edited by: Flower Man ]
IP: Logged
posted
But here's the problem B&B have no limits on good or bad the stories go. So there is aboslutely no excuse for stories that we had on Voyager. Enterprise has been good so far in that respect.
UPN is considered by where I live the Ghetto station. Where all the shit shows are and all the (no offense) black shows mainly are. The station is geared towards almost the blacks.
Even though I only meant FOX as an example, they have a better reputation even with all the shit reality shows they keep making. If the any of the lagrer stations like ABC, CBS, or whatever took Enterprise under their wing, we would either see better stories, with B&B threatened to be fired and new producers put in, or cancelled.
-------------------- Matrix If you say so If you want so Then do so
Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, "Legend of the Rangers" was bad. But "In the Beginning" (the movie you were referring to) I thought was very good. Same thing with the Crusade pilot movie.
-------------------- "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
posted
Oh, yes, Star Trek on one of the major networks. That's the solution. Lord knows they treat unique shows with the respect they deserve. Oh, indeed. The brilliance of this idea is blinding. I can hardly see. Oh my.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Yes, a a big three network would know JUST what to do with a Star Trek show...
Relegate it to a time slot from Hell and kill its budget, cancelling it abruptly after three seasons.
Points Matrix to the sign with big block letters that says: "TOS WAS HERE."
quote:Now, go away or I shall taunt you a second time!
[ March 28, 2002, 14:24: Message edited by: First of Two ]
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
