From: your.name@isp.com
"AC" wrote in message
news:SXmOo.39314$uo7.36218@newsfe04.ams2...
> catpandaddy wrote:
> >
> > Then there was Star Trek, given less than three full seasons and was
> > canned, then forced into syndication by fanmail campaign, became a
> > franchise, made a bunch of movies half of which were good and half of
> > which weren't, then flamed out with two series too many.
>
> I don't understand the Star Trek thing. I like the show and would
> consider myself a minor fan, but how and why it took the journey it did
> is a complete mystery to me.
That was "thanks" to a bunch of morons in charge, as usual. The idiotic
decisions and handiwork of the fools in Paramount management and the two
morons who were put in charge of the franchise: Rick Berman and Branon Braga
(aka Beavis & Butthead) - they shouldn't even have been allowed to be the
studio's toilet cleaners. Neither knew what "Star Trek" was and neither was
interested in making "Star Trek", and at least one is reported as saying as
much! All they wanted was to have a big name show on their CVs so that they
could then make their own shows ... which unsurprisingly failed miserably
when they were given the chance. Their greatest supidity was to try to make
a "non-Trek, Trek show", which resulted in the ill-fitting nonsense called
"Enterprise". (These two idiots also produced a number of equally stupid
disciples to go around destroying existing franchises, one of which of
course is Ron Moore.)
Even worse, some idiot in high places decided it was then a good idea to
"reboot" Star Trek as a movie (which was basically what "Enterprise" tried
and failed to do on TV) with the usual silly ideas that make it barely
recognisable, and now there are two conflicting franchises under the "Star
Trek" name.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
