NY Times article discusses death/survival of Star Trek

Considering that the viewers are mostly mainstream, and prefered to watch Laugh-In and not stayed up to watch TOS third season, it goes to show ... I prefer to be a genre fan than mainstream. IOW, the TV exec got it right, and it sucks.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



One thing that might make it easier to help the series would be to come to the realization that not everyone has $100 + to spend on a series per boxed set. I was shocked when the original series had been repackaged and released at $100 bones.

I understand the economics of it but think that they could keep interest in the series much more healthy if they were charging a little less or offering the series in multiple formats. Their set with the Captain Packard episodes for example, is a step in the right direction.
 


JoeGKushner said:
One thing that might make it easier to help the series would be to come to the realization that not everyone has $100 + to spend on a series per boxed set. I was shocked when the original series had been repackaged and released at $100 bones.

Um, I don't quite see the connection between the price of boxed sets and the quality and success of the TV shows when they air.

(But I sympathize. Farscape boxed sets... insanely pricey...)
 

JoeGKushner said:
One thing that might make it easier to help the series would be to come to the realization that not everyone has $100 + to spend on a series per boxed set. I was shocked when the original series had been repackaged and released at $100 bones.

I understand the economics of it but think that they could keep interest in the series much more healthy if they were charging a little less or offering the series in multiple formats. Their set with the Captain Packard episodes for example, is a step in the right direction.
While a few like you would be shocked, many TOS fans don't mind dropping a 100 bucks for it. After all, it's not a Voyager DVD collection. :lol:

Of course, one should note that ENTERPRISE budget have been reduced to half, so the price tag is attractive to UPN. To compensate for the reduction, they'll be pumping up merchandise output.

http://trekweb.com/articles/2004/06/14/40ce147d74049.shtml
 

Staffan said:
And as a guest star on Babylon 5, she was bald.
If I recall correctly, Lwaxana Troi was also bald, she just happend to wear a "replacement". (I think it was a DS9 Episode where she showed it to Odo, after he was forced to get into his fluid form while they were stuck in a damaged turbo-lift)
Maybe Majel is actually bald? Maybe she had a chemo therapy? Or it could be just coincidence that she had two bald roles. (Could be that the two were filmed in similar time periods - her role on B5 probably required being bald, she played a Centarui woman there...)
 

CCamfield said:
(But I sympathize. Farscape boxed sets... insanely pricey...)

Haha - not so pricey, my friend. I picked 'em up in the HMV sale in January for less than £10 each. I am now the proud owner of the entire four season run of Farscape.

The Trek disks do seems to be generally more expensive now, though - although there's a Next Gen magazine series runing in the UK now with a 3-episode dvd included with the magazine for about £5 a month, which spreads the cost quite nicely.

I wasn't tempted.
 

CCamfield said:
Um, I don't quite see the connection between the price of boxed sets and the quality and success of the TV shows when they air.

(But I sympathize. Farscape boxed sets... insanely pricey...)

Let's be honest. Time is passing us by. Not everyone grew up watching Star Trek. Many people now have no connection to it. You hear from your older friends about it and want to check it out. You look at the DVD boxed set. "Man, I think I'll go buy season one of Millenium for half price. At least that way, if it's a burn, I'm not out $100 + tax."
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top