XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise
From: jarod_24@hotmail.com
"Graham Kennedy" wrote in message
news:1071008520.9351.0@eunomia.uk.clara.net...
> z wrote:
>
> > Graham Kennedy wrote in news:1071004575.6058.0
> > @eunomia.uk.clara.net:
> >
> >
> >
> >>I wouldn't be especially sad to see Enterprise go. I would
> >>be sad that they probably wouldn't want to make another
> >>series if this one flops. Not for quite a long while anyway.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I"d miss it. The one thing going for making another series is that the
> > special effects costs are going down all the time so maybe as time goes
by
> > they won't need to spend so much on production -- and so could afford to
> > make a less popular show.
>
> Is that really true though? What does an episode
> of Enterprise cost compared to Voyager, DS9,
> TNG?
>
> My impression is that the budgets stay the same
> or grow; they just throw more and better FX into
> the shows. Remember they're in competition with
> other sci-fi, if they are still using 2003 level
> FX five years from now they will end up with a
> show that looks cheap and dated.
>
> Not that that is fatal; B5 never had Trek's
> budget and did very nicely indeed without it.
>
That depends on how you view it.
I didn't actually help the quality that the clips that they used were the
same for all the 5 seasons.
You see it more clearly when you watch lots of episodes in a short period of
time.
You got the feeling that this show is clearly made on a sound-stage.
> --
> Graham Kennedy
>
> Creator and Author,
> Daystrom Institute Technical Library
> http://www.ditl.org
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
