XPost: alt.startrek, alt.tv.star-trek, alt.tv.star-trek.enterprise   
   From: e.furnissfam@verizon.net   
      
   Gee, was it just 10 years ago that I would tune in every Saturday night from   
   6-8 to watch the latest DS9 and TNG episodes? Those it seems now were the   
   glory days. Who would have thought then that our beloved franchise would   
   sink to this low point? It's quite likely next year could be the last bit of   
   Trek we get for sometime. The movie franchise is toast. TV is a disaster.   
   Someone please explain to me how B & B have managed to stay employed? How   
   many flops do they need to produce before someone at Paramount wises up? At   
   this point, I blame Paramount more than I do B & B. The studio allowed them   
   to produce this mess. The studio set the release date for Nemesis. They   
   figured we'd keep tuning in or buying tickets for whatever crap they put   
   out.   
      
   I would love to see someone like Ron Moore or Ira Steven Behr look after the   
   franchise but I don't see it happening. The time to go for fresh blood and   
   new ideas was after Voyager went off the air. If we're not looking at the   
   death of Trek, it's at least on Medicare, collecting social security, and   
   living out it's final days in an assisted living care facility in Florida.   
   Short of us raising the cash to buy Paramount to run Trek ourselves, I sure   
   as hell don't know what we can do to bring it back.   
      
   Eric   
   "Jarod_24"  wrote in message   
   news:7e0212f355600a0605aa67003e5e9e7b@news.teranews.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)