health of the franchise - what does the future hold?

[gr8scott]

I thought it'd be interesting to speculate on what ST should do with future efforts. Here's a quote from an article on TrekWeb (which is originally from Entertainment Weekly, I believe):

"ENTERPRISE had to hang on for an eleventh-hour pickup for its upcoming third season," Russo writes. "By the end of the season, the show averaged 4 million viewers a week, light years removed from the 20 million THE NEXT GENERATION attracted at its height in the early '90s."

Read the full article here. Very interesting.

 

[Dave]

You know that there are so many channels and so many sci-fi shows around now that you could never get audiences of 20 Million again.

Having said that, 'Enterprise' is NOT the "height in the early '90s" of 'The Next Generation'. Those seasons had very few episodes that weren't excellent in every way.

Michael Piller makes some good points about who the real audience for 'Star Trek' is and was.

Bring back Michael Piller, Ira Steven Behr, Robert Hewitt Wolfe, Rene Echevarria and Ronald D Moore, and see what stories they can come up with.

 

[gr8scott]

I agree that part (a large part) of the problem is with the storywriting, but don't you think that some of the recommendations in this article make sense? Is it possible that people are just getting sick of the same old Trek thing series after series? That maybe they should either focus on a completely different ST element (SF Academy), or just let the franchise go dormant for awhile.

I'm just not convinced that getting better writing will cure the overall problem. It may sugar-coat the problem, but will it cure it?

 

[Dave]

Well I partly agree with you too. I don't subscribe to the 'Berman and Braga have ruined Trek' camp, but I think that the franchise has probably been overmined. Realistically, there are only so many stories that can be told, and Trek has told almost all of them. You can re-invent stories so that they seem new, but not when Star Trek is on every week and the earlier series are repeated in competition with the new.

The formula is one that has worked, but it's just tired from over use at the moment. A rest would do it good, but I'd be afraid that it would kill it forever.

The idea of Starfleet Academy is fine, but it would be more of a teenage thing -- like 'Smallville' or 'Roswell' -- not for me.

I thought that the retro-'Enterprise' idea was good, it's just not been fleshed out very well. Season three sounds like a repeat of 'Voyager'. And being set in the past, it suffers from us knowing how things will eventually turn out, or else they will pull the old alternative reality thing on us -- I hate it when that happens!

There is a huge Star Trek universe that's been created, why not set some stories where they have never gone before -- Orion criminal gangs, Romulan political power struggles, Cardassian prison camps, Klingon raiding parties -- well okay they have sort of been there, but there is more that hasn't been explored yet.

They should stop creating new aliens we will never hear of again, and focus on the ones that do appear -- Gorn, Breen, Bolians -- just look what they have done with the Andorians!

 

[gr8scott]

Yes, those points are a good analysis. But, with exception of The Dominian Wars (which I never watched), I think that the only truely creative departure they did was Voyager... and even though that had tremendous promise, it also regressed into "The Formula". I completely agree that most are simply tired of the same old thing being retold time after time. An excellent example was Nemesis. Just WoK all over again.

So, maybe not SF Academy.. you're right. It would just be a teenage show. But maybe some other radical departure. With Enterprise, they're falling into the same trap as Voyager. They come out with a series idea that IS a radical departure, then they seem to fall back into the HAS BEEN.

It wouldn't be such a risk for ST to take a break. The thing that revived TOS into TNG was the movies. It kept people remembering the stories. It revived our childhood memories. Then, when the 80's rolled around, we get TNG. It was great... well, season 2 on was great. So, if movies could keep the franchise going at least in stasis for a few years... The only problem I can see is that they've almost run out of Movie ideas. What crew are they going to do next? TNG is getting old. Voyager is an option but it didn't draw the fans that TNG did. Same thing for DS9. I don't know... but you're right. It's getting old.

 

[Dave]

I think that there is a lot more mileage left in the films. Maybe not with the TNG cast, but with a mix of series. They may have become formulaic too, but look at 'James Bond', isn't that the same story every film, yet people still love it.

That's probably not a very good analogy though (with 'James Bond' being an action based film) -- many people didn't like 'Nemesis' because it had more action at the expense of character interaction -- 'Star Trek' has always been more character driven.

So, anyone else have a view on this?

edit: Braga and Berman have been under pressure from journalists about this EW report and others....

from SCIFI Wire
Braga told reporters, "I don't think creatively we were doing anything wrong. It can be debated from many different angles whether there are problems with the show. There are many people that love the show. We're very proud of the show, but we did feel that after a couple of seasons, it was time to do something differently."

So why did viewers bail last year? "Don't know," Braga said matter-of-factly. "Don't know."

 

[gr8scott]

Good info Dave. Well, if Braga can't figure it out (why viewer decline) AND he believes the shows just great, then Braga isn't living in reality. The show is mediocre. People are watching this "change" skeptically. Granted, there have been some great eps... but overall, the series is mediocre.

Also, from Trekweb:

The Doctor Phlox actor also told the site that the ENTERPRISE episodes may not be long enough to do the stories justice.

"I think it's unfair and unfortunate that the writers get almost all of the heat for the perceived problems of the show. I think the problem with the show is that there's only 39 or 40 minutes for each episode, which isn't enough time to tell a nuanced story driven by character with multiple layers of meaning." To illustrate, he talked about a pickup scene (one shot after principal photography) he did during the second season: "The director said, 'We have 39 seconds to do this scene.' Which meant that I was basically being asked to spit-out-the-words-as- quickly-as-I-could-so-we-could-get-the- scene-into-39-seconds! That's a problem. And that has nothing to do with the writers. Give us four more minutes! Let us tell a better story!"

full article here.

So, Phlox is right, they try to do to many things in an ep, and as a result, we perceive that it wasn't thought out properly. Solution imo... have more 2 parters. Is this so bad? Either that, or don't be so ambitios... However, I don't mind a storywriters ambitions. If it's true that time is a factor, then solve it. Make more 2 parters!

EDIT: I'm gaining interest in the possibilities for the Expanse concept. It could be good... as long as they develop an ongoing background of suspense and conflict. Sounds like their thinking towards this end. Good!

 

[ray gower]

"I think it's unfair and unfortunate that the writers get almost all of the heat for the perceived problems of the show. I think the problem with the show is that there's only 39 or 40 minutes for each episode, which isn't enough time to tell a nuanced story driven by character with multiple layers of meaning." To illustrate, he talked about a pickup scene (one shot after principal photography) he did during the second season: "The director said, 'We have 39 seconds to do this scene.' Which meant that I was basically being asked to spit-out-the-words-as- quickly-as-I-could-so-we-could-get-the- scene-into-39-seconds! That's a problem. And that has nothing to do with the writers. Give us four more minutes! Let us tell a better story!"

HERE, HERE!
Basically there is nothing being built, it is just assumed, so there is no 'soul' to the show. It killed Voyager and it is killing Enterprise.
I find that I really couldn't give a damn if Captain 'Leap' Archer gets it in the neck. There is nothing in him I could or would want to aspire too. He isn't an action figure like Kirk, or a smartarse like JLP and whilst we get glimpses of things between T'Pot and Phlox, or Reed and Tucker, it is rarely developed. Certainly not as we have become acustomed to between the old men of TOS.

Think I would be tempted to forget two parters as well in an attempt to build things up. Why not just concentrate on two, possibly three stories, and tell them over 9/10 episodes ala Doctor Who. All the little story plots from the 'missing' episodes would be incorporated, just it will all make a lot more sense!

I don't think I would throw the Academy idea out of the window either. Afterall, isn't Trek a teenager show?
Just because 90110, Smallville and Roswell tend to be pretty dire T&A, doesn't mean they have to be, given suitable stories and lead in (tempted to offer Academy Bound as an example, but modesty forbids).

Other thoughts from the collective deranged minds of Chairman Mao here
http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16966
http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12144
http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12811

 

[gr8scott]

Originally posted by ray gower
Think I would be tempted to forget two parters as well in an attempt to build things up. Why not just concentrate on two, possibly three stories, and tell them over 9/10 episodes ala Doctor Who. All the little story plots from the 'missing' episodes would be incorporated, just it will all make a lot more sense!

Yes. That would be my preference as well. More like B5. I don't really know the technical terms for the two different storytelling styles. One style (or model) wraps up each story at the end of each ep... and ties a little bow around it for good measure. Then there's the overall story arc like B5. Trek tries to do both, but I for one am frustrated with the emphasis on the short irrelevant stories told during each ep. I personally want more space opera... I think that's what it's called???

 

[ray gower]

Star Trek is traditionally 'Episodic'. A series of episodes with little or no relationship to each other. TOS, TNG, early DS9, Voyager, Enterprise?

Doctor Who was a traditional 'Serial'. Each series told a single story.

B5 might be an even better example, as it managed to sit between the two. It told a single story in each series, but each episode was a story in itself that inevitably lead to the climax.

 

[gr8scott]

Yes, DWho is a great example of how to tell a more complex and lengthy story. Star Trek has always put too much weight on the single ep story to the detriment of the Serial.

 

[Dave]

For the Original Series there were valid reasons: because it was syndicated, any episode could be shown in any order on any TV network, or you could even watch on different stations, and they would all still make sense.

I'm not sure that that argument still holds up today in the era of the large networks in America, world-wide syndication and synchronised video and DVD releases, internet spoilers, etc etc

It seems to be just something that they have always done, and always will do it that way.

 

[gr8scott]

Originally posted by Dave
For the Original Series there were valid reasons: because it was syndicated, any episode could be shown in any order on any TV network, or you could even watch on different stations, and they would all still make sense.

Good point Dave. I don't want to generalize, so I'll only speak for myself, but I don't like the way TOS tied up all loose ends for each ep. They were NEW and everybody loved them, but now that we have such an assortment of SciFi shows out there, and have been exposed to many different storytelling styles/models... I so much more prefer the story arc over the single ep story. I wonder how many others out there prefer this also.

I wonder if the story arc generates smaller, although more loyal viewers. I imagine that TOS style of storytelling appeals more to the general audience, but that a Serial story arc will only appeal to the smaller but more loyal fan base. I've noticed this about Alias. It's a great show and we rave about it to all our friends, but when they tune in, they don't get it. It takes 3-4 eps to get into it. But, Alias fans are fanatics.

 

[gr8scott]

Enterprise 3:1 put forth a good effort, at least for my own tastes, in solving some of the problems we've been talking about. It had a different FEEL to it. There was no cut and dry ending. Everything didn't end peachy for our crew. There was more fighting instead of the typical sterile battle scenes. The show seemed to exhibit a slightly better big picture plot style. I like how they got to the coordinates and the entire planet was destroyed. I like the look and feel of the camera work/props. It reminded me of Aliens. It seems to be going in a good direction. I hope they don't revert, but instead find a new way to tell the story. A better more realistic way.