Stargate Information Archive

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Search     Help     Rules     Members V     Calendar V     Live Chat V  
3 Pages V  1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> UPN Cancels Enterprise, going going gone....
CitizenK
post Feb 2nd 2005, 4:39 PM
Post #1


Captain
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 893
Joined: April 11th 2004
From: The Red Sox Nation
Member No.: 4,783
Gender: Female



Bad news Star Trek Enterprise fans. scifi.com is reporting that UPN has officially cancelled the series.

I wonder if this means John Billingsley gets to make a return appearance on Stargate as Coombs ?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mrskborg
post Feb 2nd 2005, 4:52 PM
Post #2


Airman
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: February 4th 2004
From: Glasgow,Scotland
Member No.: 3,421
Gender: Female



Sadly, I've just seen this on startrek.com, so yes it's true. Actually its says UPN decided not to renew it, so it possible, however remote, than another netweok will pick it up. I doubt it, but you never know. Look what the Farscape and Firefly fans have achieved. Its a pity as Manny Coto seemed to be doing a really good job with this season.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mike
post Feb 2nd 2005, 7:02 PM
Post #3


I Piss Excellence
Group Icon

Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,016
Joined: March 4th 2003
From: New York, NY / Houston, TX
Member No.: 957
Gender: Male



It was only a matter of time before an untimely demise happened to a Trek tv show. I honestly feel that Paramont was milking the cow for all it's worth and they dried her out three times over. Moving the show to Fridays to compete against Sci-Fi Friday was suicide. It should have stayed in it's Wednesday night timeslot or at least moved to a night early in the week to gain more viewship.

Perhaps it could have gained more of an audience share if the show was filmed for syndication but UPN would rather have a Trek show as the "flagship" of it's network. It's so easy to armchair quarterback after the fact but many followers of the Star Trek series have seen this coming for a long time now.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mithwriter
post Feb 2nd 2005, 8:50 PM
Post #4


Major General
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2,438
Joined: February 26th 2003
Member No.: 885
Gender: Female



QUOTE(Mike @ Feb 2nd 2005, 7:02 PM)
It was only a matter of time before an untimely demise happened to a Trek tv show.  I honestly feel that Paramont was milking the cow for all it's worth and they dried her out three times over.  Moving the show to Fridays to compete against Sci-Fi Friday was suicide.  It should have stayed in it's Wednesday night timeslot or at least moved to a night early in the week to gain more viewship. 

Perhaps it could have gained more of an audience share if the show was filmed for syndication but UPN would rather have a Trek show as the "flagship" of it's network.  It's so easy to armchair quarterback after the fact but many followers of the Star Trek series have seen this coming for a long time now.
*


First, I have to say w00t.gif and good riddance to the most boring SciFi cast I have ever seen.

Now that's out of my system...I can't help but wonder if UPN might NOT have known that SciFi was planning their current lineup of SG-1, SA, and BG. I think if they had known in advance they would not have put the show on Friday nights. Somehow I don't think these guys and gals are on each other's email lists.

I think this is all for the best in terms of the franchise (speaking as a huge fan of Wrath of Khan). Let it die for awhile (how many years were there between ST:TOS and ST:TNG?) and then bring it back in ten years or so when the showrunners and the franchise itself has a little bit better perspective on current SciFi tastes...and who knows, maybe even bring the franchise back its sense of humor...

Star Trek was once fairly original in terms of SciFi on TV, but it got so rigid in its storytelling techniques, characterizations, and overall styles that it almost became a parody of itself because no one wanted to break with the patterns that had been developed with Next Generation. The light-heartedness and adventurous spirit that existed in The Original Series eventually got sucked out over time, leaving a somber, too-earnest-for-its-own-good series of shows (Voyager and Enterprise) that, simply put, were more of a chore to watch than a joy. That's not good tv by any scale.

I was an avid Star Trek watcher through Original reruns, Next Gen, and most of DS9, not because I'm a Star Trek fan, but becuase I am a fan of great storytelling in a SciFi element. Enterprise failed to do this overall, and no matter how many band-aids it tried to apply (like adding the name "Star Trek" to the title laugh.gif ), nothing was going to full the audience. Unfortunately, by the time it actually started to get good (from what I've read this past season was decent), the damage had been done and the viewers had drifted off.



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
seymour
post Feb 2nd 2005, 10:07 PM
Post #5


Technical Sergeant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 233
Joined: February 2nd 2004
Member No.: 3,394
Gender: Male



I think the first and biggest mistake was the casting of Scott Bakula as Captain Archer. He is/was dreadful as well as totally stiff and unconvincing in the role.

Since most of the storylines revolve around the character of the Captain Archer, I'm not surprised viewers "drifted off", like me they may have drifted off to sleep at the sound of too many boring, preachy speeches from Archer.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
X303kicksass
post Feb 2nd 2005, 10:25 PM
Post #6


First Lieutenant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 677
Joined: April 18th 2004
Member No.: 4,856
Gender: Male



Who didn't see this coming, really? They even stuck it in Sg-1/SGA's slot to compete with it, I mean that was the nail in the coffin right there. Enterprise= Beat down like a Pinto Vs a Ferrari. smile.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hoshi_reed
post Feb 3rd 2005, 12:33 AM
Post #7


Civilian
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: January 11th 2004
Member No.: 3,222
Gender: Female



QUOTE(seymour @ Feb 3rd 2005, 12:07 AM)
I think the first and biggest mistake was the casting of Scott Bakula as Captain Archer. He is/was dreadful as well as totally stiff and unconvincing in the role.

Since most of the storylines revolve around the character of the Captain Archer, I'm not surprised viewers "drifted off", like me they may have drifted off to sleep at the sound of too many boring, preachy speeches from Archer.
*



I think the drawback is the focus on the trio Archer/TPol/Trip like TOS did. What was so good about the other treks were the ensemble nature. That is why in my book TOS is the worst and was rightly canceled.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wack
post Feb 3rd 2005, 7:55 AM
Post #8


Unregistered









I has long term fan of Star Trek couldn't be any happier. The series has been on televison since TNG aired at 28-Sep-1987. The whole franchise really need to take a rest has the writers desperate for vewiers resorted to nudity. Of course this won't be the end of Star Trek has we all known. I just hope they learn from there mistakes the next time around. I also hope that Stargate doesn't fall into the traps of Star Trek.



Star Trek - Father of Modern Sci-Fi
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nyarlathotep
post Feb 3rd 2005, 2:52 PM
Post #9


Technical Sergeant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 227
Joined: April 22nd 2004
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Member No.: 4,896
Gender: Male



I'm really narked off about this...because the most recent stuff I've seen has been really good. The whole season with the Xindi plot arc was pretty good, and the new writer they got in to do the series was producing some nice, dark Trek. It looked a lot like they were solving the shows basic problems and it was getting really interesting....

bugger. mad.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mattpvd
post Feb 3rd 2005, 6:45 PM
Post #10


Airman Basic
*

Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: September 29th 2003
From: Canada
Member No.: 2,395
Gender: Male



QUOTE
wack Posted Today, 07:55 AM
  I has long term fan of Star Trek couldn't be any happier. The series has been on televison since TNG aired at 28-Sep-1987. The whole franchise really need to take a rest has the writers desperate for vewiers resorted to nudity. Of course this won't be the end of Star Trek has we all known. I just hope they learn from there mistakes the next time around. I also hope that Stargate doesn't fall into the traps of Star Trek.


Season 3 of Enterprise did suffer from too much resorting to gratuitous nudity/sexual inuendo to gain an audience. The writing was run of the mill and the stories weren't compelling. The series seemed cheapened and at that point if they'd cancelled it I probably wouldn't have cared.

Enter Season 4, with a revamp of the staff, a new producer (Manny Coto) and two excellent veteran Trek novel writers, Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens, and the series has done an about face. Some of the best Trek episodes in years have aired this season (better than most of Voyager's 7-year run). I guess it's just too little too late. Moving the series to Friday nights (against SG1 and Atlantis - what we're they thinking?!?) has probably helped seal Enterprise's fate.

The same mistake was made with Star Trek: Nemesis which opened over the Christmas holiday in 2002. It opened the Friday before Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Now which movie would you go see if you only could see one? This was nothing more than poor planning for the release. They should have delayed the film until Feb/Mar when there typically is little in the theatres in terms of action/sci-fi.

Nevertheless, Trek is Paramount's cash cow and the series will return. Hopefully, in a few years, most of the producers/writers will have moved on and some fresh blood will be boldly go with the franchise where no one has gone before.

It's a pity that the new staff this season weren't given their chance. At least Enterprise will go out with a bang. Season 4 has been Enterprise's best by far.

About Stargate falling into the trap of Star Trek, I can only say as someone that has watched SG1 from the beginning - Season 7 and 8 pale compared to say Season 3-5. Whether it's the fact that RDA is on a limited schedule, that Don S. Davis has left, or that the writers/producers are focusing on Atlantis, SG1 is starting to feel a little tired. The announcement of a new character for Season 9 is a plus - we'll have to see how it pans out.

At least Stargate will be around with Enterprise gone. There's too little quality sci-fi on tv and too much reality tv instead.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Agent923
post Feb 3rd 2005, 8:24 PM
Post #11


Civilian
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: January 18th 2005
Member No.: 7,631
Gender: Not Telling



While Season 4 has been a lot better the damage has already been done.

Someone saying about nudity and more sex in the show i agree that this has hurt the show.

Like in the first season the crew having to put lotion on each other after an away mission and do they do it professionally NO they tease each other by rubbing them sensually. Please...

Star Trek isn't what it used to be, the glory days are gone. It NEEDS a break!!!! SAD to say BUT IT DOES!!!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
CitizenK
post Feb 3rd 2005, 8:36 PM
Post #12


Captain
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 893
Joined: April 11th 2004
From: The Red Sox Nation
Member No.: 4,783
Gender: Female



I always felt that the problem with Enterprise was that they were trying to hard to create a Star Trek back story. What I mean, is that the show shouldn't have gone backwards, they should have proceeded forward. I don't think anyone really cared why the Andoreans and Vulcans were at war, because we knew that in the future, they'd be part of the Federation anyway.

If, UPN wanted to create another Star Trek series, then they should have jumped forwarded in time.

I wasn't a big fan of Voyager. I figured they should have stopped after that. The signs of story fatigue were everywhere. So, I was shocked when I heard yet another ST series was being created.

nah... the show needs a rest. How many AU and Jack the Ripper Eps can they do ??

let it go
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mattpvd
post Feb 3rd 2005, 9:41 PM
Post #13


Airman Basic
*

Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: September 29th 2003
From: Canada
Member No.: 2,395
Gender: Male



Well, it should be interesting to see what happens in the future. Enterprise will finish its run and there is talk of an 11th Trek movie (albeit with brand new characters).

I agree with the point about the bad-idea for the prequel series. One of the problems the series has run into is trying to maintain continuinity (which seems to be an impossibility in the Star Trek universe). They've introduced alien species that weren't supposed to be known until Next Generation and on, and in that way they've alienated some viewers as well.

Calling it only 'Enterprise' for the first two seasons was a bad move too. Somehow seemed to say that they were trying to distance themselves from 'Star Trek', which was probably a turnoff for a lot of diehard fans. Plus the opening song (although some fans liked it) was awful.

After 18 years of Trek on the air (1987-2005), the break might be needed. As the saying goes, "absence makes the heart grow fonder". Perhaps in a few years there will be another fan movement to bring back Star Trek.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Annunaki
post Feb 7th 2005, 4:33 PM
Post #14


Colonel
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,617
Joined: October 10th 2003
Member No.: 2,478
Gender: Not Telling



I don't even know why the show was on UPN in the first place. UPN sucks, Sunday nights at nine they play reruns of X-Files (which I don't really have a problem with) but I mean Sunday is a big prime time night. I don't see why they don't put on a newer show at a time where many people are trying to find something to watch.
Plus, UPN is widely known as a "black" sitcom channel and it is safe to say that many black people don't like Star Trek.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xayeidemon
post Feb 7th 2005, 4:45 PM
Post #15


Always a cousin, never a boochi!
Group Icon

Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,997
Joined: October 18th 2003
From: The Red Hills of Georgia
Member No.: 2,544
Gender: Female



Hey, watch it with the generalizations. Everyone living under my family's roof watched and enjoyed Star Trek. None of us watch UPN.

Besides, it's quite apparent that many white people didn't like Enterprise, either. rolleyes.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rob117
post Feb 7th 2005, 5:02 PM
Post #16


Second Lieutenant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 540
Joined: April 18th 2004
From: Albany, New York
Member No.: 4,858
Gender: Male



I actually thought Enterprise was really good.
I'm not a big Trekkie. I've never seen the original Trek, so I can't comment on it. But I did find Next Generation and Voyager to be pretty dull. I liked DS9 though, and I also liked Enterprise- I thought the idea of a backstory was good, plus it had more action than the previous ones. I'm hoping that Sci-Fi decides to pick this up. It might, as Sci-Fi needs more programming.

This post has been edited by rob117: Feb 7th 2005, 5:03 PM
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arcady
post Feb 7th 2005, 5:03 PM
Post #17


Base Commander
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4,951
Joined: November 26th 2002
From: Dallas, Texas USA
Member No.: 1
Gender: Male



QUOTE(Annunaki @ Feb 7th 2005, 4:33 PM)
I don't even know why the show was on UPN in the first place.
*



Um, UPN = United PARAMOUNT Network...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Annunaki
post Feb 7th 2005, 5:53 PM
Post #18


Colonel
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,617
Joined: October 10th 2003
Member No.: 2,478
Gender: Not Telling



QUOTE
Um, UPN = United PARAMOUNT Network...

So I am guessing from your post that Paramount and Startrek have a history together.
QUOTE
xayeidemon Posted Today, 04:45 PM
Hey, watch it with the generalizations. Everyone living under my family's roof watched and enjoyed Star Trek. None of us watch UPN. 

I'm not trying to say that no black people like to watch Star Trek. It is just that I would bet my life savings that the Star Trek series has a wayyyyyyyyyy larger white audience then black.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RJLCyberPunk
post Feb 7th 2005, 6:04 PM
Post #19


Master Sergeant
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 337
Joined: July 1st 2004
From: Ponce, Puerto Rico
Member No.: 5,415
Gender: Male



That really, really sucks!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xayeidemon
post Feb 7th 2005, 6:27 PM
Post #20


Always a cousin, never a boochi!
Group Icon

Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,997
Joined: October 18th 2003
From: The Red Hills of Georgia
Member No.: 2,544
Gender: Female



QUOTE(Annunaki @ Feb 7th 2005, 5:53 PM)
I'm not trying to say that no black people like to watch Star Trek.  It is just that I would bet my life savings that the Star Trek series has a wayyyyyyyyyy larger white audience then black.
*


You're right. But then again, many scifi shows aren't marketed to black people, but that's another rant of mine. rolleyes.gif

Anyway, just because Enterprise was on UPN, a "black" network, doesn't necessarily mean anything. Voyager spent all 7 years of its run on UPN and managed not to get cancelled.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Janos
post Feb 7th 2005, 6:44 PM
Post #21


Posts in his underwear
Group Icon

Group: Donating Members
Posts: 3,814
Joined: July 1st 2004
From: Seriously, I'm probably partially clothed atm!
Member No.: 5,403
Gender: Male



QUOTE(Annunaki @ Feb 7th 2005, 5:53 PM)
So I am guessing from your post that Paramount and Startrek have a history together.
*


Yeah, Paramount owns Star Trek. The whole franchise. Every time you see an episode of any Star Trek, there's a Paramount Logo somewhere at the end wink.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Arcady
post Feb 7th 2005, 6:49 PM
Post #22


Base Commander
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4,951
Joined: November 26th 2002
From: Dallas, Texas USA
Member No.: 1
Gender: Male



QUOTE(Annunaki @ Feb 7th 2005, 5:53 PM)
So I am guessing from your post that Paramount and Startrek have a history together.
*



Do you ever wonder if MGM and Stargate have a history? blink.gif

Of course they do.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Annunaki
post Feb 11th 2005, 8:57 AM
Post #23


Colonel
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,617
Joined: October 10th 2003
Member No.: 2,478
Gender: Not Telling



QUOTE
Anyway, just because Enterprise was on UPN, a "black" network, doesn't necessarily mean anything. Voyager spent all 7 years of its run on UPN and managed not to get cancelled.

But UPN actually had some pretty good shows at the time of Voyager. Like one of my personal favorites Martin. That was such a good show.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xayeidemon
post Feb 11th 2005, 10:07 AM
Post #24


Always a cousin, never a boochi!
Group Icon

Group: Moderators
Posts: 4,997
Joined: October 18th 2003
From: The Red Hills of Georgia
Member No.: 2,544
Gender: Female



IMHO, the humor on Martin was vapid...at best. It was originally on Fox and was cancelled after 5 years in 1997. And it was syndicated on UPN, so you were watching reruns. But that's neither here nor there because UPN is still showing some good syndicated shows depending on where you live. In fact, Martin still comes on UPN in my hometown. I don't know about here in Savannah because I've boycotted the station ever since they took off Stargate.

Just a question: do you think Enterprise would have faired any better on CBS, a stereotypically "white" network?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: April 24th 2014 - 4:53 AM
Stargate Information Archive

Stargate SG-1 © 1997-2013 MGM Worldwide Television, Inc.
Stargate Atlantis © 2004-2013 MGM Worldwide Television, Inc.
Text and images from this site may not be used without permission.

All comments on these pages belong to the author of those comments, and
do not necessarily reflect the views of the Stargate Information Archive.