Paramount Says Enterprise Cancellation Is Final 583
Kethinov writes "The Save Enterprise campaigns appear to have been for naught. Paramount has declared that they will not be accepting any amount of money from fans to continue to produce Star Trek Enterprise. With the decision final, Star Trek Enterprise will be the first Star Trek show since the original series not to run a full seven seasons." From the letter: "Paramount Network Television and the producers of Star Trek: Enterprise are very flattered and impressed by the fans' passionate outpouring of attention for the show and their efforts to raise funds to continue the show's production." Commentary also available from TrekToday.
A good idea ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Begin Quote
Our dream is to create a movie with the POV-Ray raytracer,
as a collaborative effort of many people from all over the world,
just for the fun of it, "because it can be done" -
very much like POV-Ray itself is developed.
End Quote
or a similar instance
Yes, I am daydreaming [signiform.com].
CC.
how come not this time? (Score:2, Interesting)
How come the legions of fans didn't save Enterprise from the same fate of Star Trek?
Are the fans just less hard core? Or is all that money they sink into merchandice not affecting the bottom line enough?
Re:Just like TOS (Score:5, Interesting)
Firefly
Obvious (Score:5, Interesting)
This should tell you something important.
Re:Someone at Paramount doesn't like it (Score:3, Interesting)
If you don't like it then why don't you produce your own show that has all of the qualities you loved about Voyager?
Re:Guess you've missed... (Score:5, Interesting)
B5 was a reasonably entertaining show, but IMO it was critically flawed because of the extreme "cringe factor" that worked its way in, especially in the later episodes.
C'mon, we're talking about a series where two advanced races spend thousands of years and unimaginable amounts of effort to influence the evolution of the galaxy only to suddenly pack up and leave because, at the denoumont of the entire serious, Bruce Boxleitner yells "Get the hell out of our galaxy!". The cheese was too thick to get past. "As my grandfather used to say, 'cool!'"...
B5 was better than Enterprise and Voyager and, IMO, it was the reason that DS9 was forced to become watchible in its last couple of seasons. But overall (and still, obviously, in my opinion), it was still a flawed show in a way that BSG is not (at least, not yet).
one season short (Score:5, Interesting)
syndicated series are typically stripped - one episode a day five days a week. one season, 26 episodes is enough for just over five weeks. 2 seasons is ten weeks (two and a half months). 4 seasons is five or six months of programming. maybe a little more. it's kind of iffy for a 3 or 4 season series to be successful in syndication. classic trek was exceptionally successful with only 3 seasons. other series aren't always so successful.
perhaps the dynamics of syndication on cable, sales of dvd box sets, and the reduced profitablity of conventional teevee and cable broadcasts are changing how expensive series like 'enterprise' are financed. but i always thought that it was with the fifth season that the accountants could finally throw away the bottle of red ink.
Give the money to Nasa.... (Score:5, Interesting)
That way you'd be funding real space stuff and it still has Star Trek relevance.
Re:Bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)
Dude, that show sucked. (Score:4, Interesting)
Weird aliens that always look like humans, good guys that ALWAYS win at the last possible moment with some crazy technical miracle, magical SciFi gadgets that are backed with ridiculous jargon, doctors with miraculous cures for every insane ailment.... bleh, spare me.
I love SciFi, and there was a point in time when that entertained me, but I need a new story. This one has be rehashed and told too much.
As far as space dramas go, my money is on the new Battlestar Galactica series. No doubt, it's an old title. But at least is has been reworked to avoid tired SciFi cliches.
Re:how come not this time? (Score:5, Interesting)
Uh...no. I consider myself a hardcore Trek fan. I've never once gone to a con or even put on rubber ears. I kinda pride myself on that fact. But the shows...I know my Trek. I recently decided to download all the episodes and watch the full series. I hadn't watched any shows before, because of all the bad press other fans had given it. But I wanted to give it a chance before making a final decision.
And my final decision is this: let it die. As much as I hate saying that, I believe it's the right thing to do. It was a good concept, but poorly executed. The first problem I found was that there was too much emphasis on "filling in the gaps." They tried to explain away everything that the other shows introduced. The most glaring offence was the Borg episode. For god's sake...BORG?!? This says that the Enterprise-E crew were stupid enough to leave a whole crapload of future technology laying on Earth, potentially polluting their own timeline. AND that the Temporal Police or whatever they want to call themselves didn't do their jobs. For what? To explain away why the Borg invade the Alpha Quadrent 200 years later? Wasn't that already explained in TNG? The whole episode should have been killed in writing.
Besides that was the over-sexual use of T'Pol. You saw this happen with Voyager when Seven was brought in. They decided to start off with some hot babe in skintight uniforms on this one, killing the show's credibility in the process. Then there was the sterile acting of Reed and Archer in the first 2 season. Most of the cast was guilty of this actually. This I think was more caused by letting nearly every actor in previous shows have a chance to direct on Enterprise. And speaking of previous actors, there was far too many actors from previous shows playing in Enterprise. Part of the joy I got out of watching the show was spotting recycled actors. I've seen the guy who played General Martok on DS9 play at least 3 other characters in other Treks, including playing a Klingon on Enterprise. And they should have NEVER let Ethan Philips play a Ferengi, since he was the easiest to spot from playing one on Voyager. I didn't really like them bringing in Ferengi in the first place, but it sorta fit with the Star Trek Universe laid down by TNG. Storyline-wise, I wasn't impressed with the Temporal Cold War, and it really didn't do anything except introduce even more inconsistances in the Star Trek Universe. But at least they wrapped that up. The fourth season was picking up steam, and I would have liked to see that have been the first season. But it's too late. The damage is done. This is a hardcore Star Trek fan saying: Let It Die...
Re:Just like TOS (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Just like TOS (Score:2, Interesting)
He said his reasons were because he needed a character that was closer to the Shadows to pull off what he would do later. He realized when the first season was finished that Sinclair would be sitting around on his thumbs until season 3. Sheridan was strictly a story decision.
What about TAS? (Score:2, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Interesting)
While we're at it, imagine if Rod Stewart hadn't been involved, and if Gene Roddenberry was still alive, and if he kiboshed Enterprise to keep Firefly alive
Quit Perpetuating The Freaking Lies. (Score:1, Interesting)
As far as the out of order argument, that's just stupid. What are you, 8? If you couldn't figure out what was going on in the show by watching The Train Job, then I am not entirely convinced you can operate a television in the first place. It's not rocket science, it's TV.
I could go on, but let me just sum this up for all of the Firefly, Dark Angel, Farscape, Enterprise, Roswell, Miracles, Milennium, Invisible Man, etc fans out there. These shows were cancelled because nobody fucking watched. It really is that simple. Get a top 20 rating and the network will trip over their dicks doing things for you. Flounder at the bottom of the list, nice knowing ya chump.
Instead of asking why all these networks keep cancelling all of the sci-fi shows, you should be asking why sci-fi fans cant be bothered to watch the shows in the first place. Why does a show have to be in danger of being cancelled before anyone can be bothered?
I am one of the biggest Firefly fans you will run in to, but I don't blame Fox for cancelling their last place show. I blame the crappy Whedon fans that didn't watch, and didn't tell people to watch. I blame every bastard I have seen post on a message board after seeing the DVD something like "This is a great show, why did it get cancelled?"
Re:Just like TOS (Score:2, Interesting)
Granted, some were, but that's not why they had guns...no one was supposed to get on the ship anyway. It's not like you could just stroll in.
In fact, the only person who boarded the ship against their will snuck on there, via shadowing them and an EVA. As far as we know, there is no commonly used 'hostile boarding procedure', and thus carrying guns around to protect against that would be stupid.
So if you're watching it thinking it's Star Trek and random people can beam onto your ship, sure, the guns are stupid. (Although slow slug-throwers aren't that dangerous.)
But on Firefly, worrying about people being on your ship is rather akin to worrying about people breaking into your airplane. It's silly and just going to kill you both if they try.
Re:Who are these people? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, don't we all to some degree? I watch it because it's good, but it's a good show that's getting great ratings and has a wave of critical support that supercedes even Farscape or Firefly, and especially Enterprise. As far as not seeing Battlestar, there are other ways of getting it both legally and questionably (the first episode is available on scifi.com).