• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Why Startrek is Dead (Opinion Thread)

Since I don't get UPN, I've only managed to see 2 episodes of Enterprise. It was better than Voyager. I still don't understand how that show lasted. :confused:

Anyway, I didn't understand "prequel" direction, especially now that I hear that they used races that weren't supposed to known during that time. Post-DS9 had a lot of potential. The Romulans were allies and the Gamma Quadrant was now open. If they wanted to go back to the whole "exploration and discovery" thing, why not have them explore the Gamma Quadrant?

Getting back to why Trek in general seems to be dead, my belief is that it:

1.) Became a franchise, not a tv series. It had to play everything safe. When Peter David tried writing for B5, he's scripts were rejected as "too Star Trek". He realized that he was returning everything to the status quo by the end of the story.

Even when they killed off Data, they replaced him with a lookalike.

2.) Was locked into this utopian ideal of the future. As the writers of DS9 revealed, they had so many alien characters in that series because the Trek mandate was that, in the future, humans don't argue with each other.

Replicators did away with hunger and there's no money. Now you have a world where no one argues and there's no hunger or greed. Wow, that's one exciting place. :\
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't think that Star Trek is dead. The above poster made reference to Peter David. He's now written sixteen novels in his "New Frontier" series. Susan Wright wrote an excellent Starfleet Academy novel titled "The Best and the Brightest" which has a great concept worth expanding on. DS9 (and even Voyager) left dozens of possible directions to continue in. Not dead at all, just in need of some fresh perspectives.
 

Villano said:
Now you have a world where no one argues and there's no hunger or greed. Wow, that's one exciting place. :\
In the hands of Iain M. Banks it was... :)

In the hands of that stable of bloodless ST writers, not so much excitement, no.
 

Villano said:
Since I don't get UPN, I've only managed to see 2 episodes of Enterprise. It was better than Voyager. I still don't understand how that show lasted. :confused:
There is absolutely no way that Braga's Enterprise is better Braga's Voyager, and vice versa. They're the same ship ... stuck in the Suckara Nebula onboard the USS Suckerprise.

:] :] :]
 

Ranger REG said:
There is absolutely no way that Braga's Enterprise is better Braga's Voyager, and vice versa. They're the same ship ... stuck in the Suckara Nebula onboard the USS Suckerprise.

:] :] :]

My, you are positive! I honestly didn't think that they were that bad. Sure, they could've been improved, and weren't as good as TNG or DS9 (I don't compare to TOS, since that was a different barrel of monkeys), but they still had something. I had a friend who, the only Trek he ever watched was Voyager, and my cousin who got into Trek (somewhat) was through Voyager.
 

Hand of Evil said:
Word of mouth - The show alienated its fan base and for the most part made enemies (maybe a bad word to use) of the hardcore ST fans, which did go about ripping the show where they could and that showed in reviews, so, yes.



Everyone had a idea what the new show should be like, even I, with Captian Logs. This goes back to fan base.



And that is the failing of the internet: Information/opinion from anyone and you don't have a clue who they really are, their background or if they have an adgenda. ;)


The reason why it was cancelled, cost to produce vs companies to advertise. It does not matter how good or bad a show is, if you don't have viewers, you can't sell commercial time, companies want the biggest bang for their buck, hit shows mean more people see your ads and a network can charge more for the spot. There is a lot of disagreement with Neilsen rating but it is the one used.

dont even let me get started on what complete and utter crap I belive the Neilsons to be.
 

mojo1701 said:
My, you are positive! I honestly didn't think that they were that bad. Sure, they could've been improved, and weren't as good as TNG or DS9 (I don't compare to TOS, since that was a different barrel of monkeys), but they still had something. I had a friend who, the only Trek he ever watched was Voyager, and my cousin who got into Trek (somewhat) was through Voyager.
Then you better correct them by showing TOS, TNG, or DS9 DVDs. :]

BTW, how can I stay positive when B&B are in the command chairs? I want to demote them. The franchise need new leadership, not more of the same craps. I mean, come one! Some of you were down on Lucas for the last two films, and I support y'all! He should not be directing! All I ask is for a solidarity against the leadership of the B&B regime. They should not be producers!
 

Ranger REG said:
How can I stay positive when B&B are in the command chairs?....They should not be producers!
I'll remind you that they were responsible for the movie "Star Trek: First Contact", which most people consider to be one of the very best of the Trek motion pictures. I also thought that "Star Trek: Insurrection", while not what I had expected from a movie, worked very well when you look upon it as a two-hour Next Generation episode.
 
Last edited:

Ranger REG said:
Then you better correct them by showing TOS, TNG, or DS9 DVDs. :]

He's seen 'em. If I'm at his house, and I put it on, he'll watch it, but he's not ecstatic about it.

BTW, how can I stay positive when B&B are in the command chairs? I want to demote them. The franchise need new leadership, not more of the same craps. I mean, come one! Some of you were down on Lucas for the last two films, and I support y'all! He should not be directing! All I ask is for a solidarity against the leadership of the B&B regime. They should not be producers!

Hopefully, Braga will be caught up in his new series. And Berman's old. He's older than my dad.
 

Star Trek is dead cause Dr. Who is coming back. Star trek will never have more on screen hours than the greatest of all TV Sci Fi.

Comon, the Borg are cybermen with better special effects. Though it would be neat if they did have a sort of Dr Who, Startrek crossover. It could be done. There is an earth federation in Dr. Who, so it could happen... hey whats that at the door?

AAAAAHAAHAAHAAHAH!!!!!

STAR TREK IS IN-FERIOR. THE DA-LEKS ARE SU-PER-IOR! THE TEL-E-VIS-ION SHOW KNOWN AS DOC-TOR WHO IS THE ONLY TEL-E-VIS-ION PRO-GRAM FOR LEGAL REA-SONS THAT CON-TAINS THE DA-LEKS. THERE-FORE DOC-TOR WHO IS THE ONLY TRUE SCI-FI TEL-E-VISION SER-IES. ALL OTH-ER SHOWS ARE PALE COM-PAR-I-SONS TO THE OR-I-GIN-AL. ALL OTHERS ARE IN-FER-IOR AND MUST BE EX-TER-MIN-ATED!!!!!

EX-TER-MIN-ATE!
EX--TER--MIN--ATE!
EX---TER---MIN---ATE!
 
Last edited:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top