The Irish SAVE ENTERPRISE campaign

trekker_50

Sorry if this is breaking the rules but i just like to inform you of the thread over in the star trek forum

After hearing the news of the cancellation of enterprise i have decided and volunteered to head up the irish save enterprise campaign.There is an already large campaign going on in america and i decided that we the international fan base would show their support see www.saveenterprise.com. The head of save enterprise has givin me permission to head up the Irish side but as im sure you understand im going to need help. People in other parts of the country can do there bit to save the show so far the letter writing campaign seems to be most promising and within the next few days forbidden planet in dublin will have posters and leaflets to inform others of out effort. If you want to help contact me or setup the petitions yourself.

thanks trekker_50

Individually we can do nothing
Together we can make a difference

regeneration

I know this will not go down well with people but...
Im not a fan of star trek as such (though i did enjoy parts of DSP9), but I did see why people liked it. Outside looking in as it were, and appreciating the pull.
But enterprise frankly was just plain _bad_ television, irregardless of subject matter. terrible plots and pacing (I recall a "teaser" section featuring their doctor feeding his pets - I mean wtf; that's suspenseful?), awfully inconsistent characterisation and a terrible theme tune to boot

I say let the show burn and maybe try to get together and bring star trek back to it's roots rather than try to maintain the dirge the movies & TV shows are now. I believe many fans direct fault to member of the producing team of ST?

Fenster

It was muck. Enterprise couldn't hold a candle to DS9 or TNG, let alone new series such as BSG and Firefly. I'm waiting for the JMS Trek that was proposed a while back. ^_^

Stark

I'm waiting for the JMS Trek that was proposed a while back. ^_^

Personally I think JMS is highly overrated. He managed to stick to his guns and produce a TV show with a 5-year story arc, something previously undone and that was good. But he was a bad writer. Better writers are now taking up the challenge of long-term story arcs.

ixoy

Stark wrote:

Personally I think JMS is highly overrated. He managed to stick to his guns and produce a TV show with a 5-year story arc, something previously undone and that was good. But he was a bad writer. Better writers are now taking up the challenge of long-term story arcs.

Get out of this forum and never talk again and we'll forget this
I disagree he was a bad writer - the plots and characters were all well written, something I know you've said yourself. His greatest failing was in his dialog, which often came across as cheesy with sometimes hammy deliveries.

But I don't think there's many better writers taking up long-term story arcs. The only two that spring to mind - BSG and Carnivale - are both from the same brain. Is there another I'm missing? Farscape, as good as it was, never had the same long term vision...

egan007

I think ill start a 'make the guy how cancels star trek president' campaign

David Stewart

Personally I think it's time to let Star Trek go, at least for a few years. Paramount went to the well too often and ended up with tired plots. Take a break guys. Come back in a few years with new ideas like a series set on board the Klingon Imperial Naval Vessel Rachel Garret (remember her?). Or how about retooling the entire concept. Star Trek as a half hour sitcom "The captain and science officer accidentally blow up a planet, with hilarious consequences." Or a police procedural: "The citizens of the United Federation of Planets are protected by two groups of people. The Star Fleet Officers who investigate Borg incursions and the starfleet officers who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories."

Figment

I am a fan of trek. I looked forward to enterprise at the start and loved the concept, design and old tech. However it lost me because of bad lazy writing full of reused hacknied ideas.
They hung themselves.

doh.ie

Stark wrote:

Personally I think JMS is highly overrated. He managed to stick to his guns and produce a TV show with a 5-year story arc, something previously undone and that was good. But he was a bad writer. Better writers are now taking up the challenge of long-term story arcs.

I think I know where you're coming from on this. I think he's overrated in his own view of himself, and his place in fandom. There's something about the posts he produces every now and again that irritates me.

But I do concede that he's a pretty decent TV writer (and he did a pretty good job on his Complete Guide to Scriptwriting as well, one of my favourite non-fiction ones there.) While B5 had its clunkier moments - dialogue mostly, as Ixoy said, and a few howlers episode-wise in season 1 and 5, B5 was on the whole very well conceived and realised in plot terms.

I don't think JMS necessarily mastered or perfected arc use on television, and shows which followed that trend in later years didn't necessarily look to B5 as their inspiration, but as a show which had a clearly conceived beginning, middle and end, B5 was one of the few successes in the last 10 years. And, to be fair, it was probably the first show to do an arc *well*. Far too many others, including the Star Treks, were and are from the made-it-up-as-we-went-along school.

I would actually liked to have seen what a JMS take on Star Trek would've looked like. I think he'd have done a fine job, alongside Bryce Zabel.

The only thing that always bugged me in relation to JMS is this perception of him as being slightly arrogant. (Awful thing to say, I know, but in terms of writers or producers I'd admire, I always would've looked up to him more if he didn't seem so cocky and attention-seeking. Or am I completely wrong about him...?) Joss Whedon - another genre producer who dips his toe into the fan world just as JMS does - I *do* have a lot of time for, as his posted material (albeit somewhat less) always comes from a kind of fan perspective, not a holier-than-thou one.

ixoy

doh.ie wrote:

And, to be fair, it was probably the first show to do an arc *well*. Far too many others, including the Star Treks, were and are from the made-it-up-as-we-went-along school.

Most shows are. Farscapes seems to have had a bit of plan but I still got the impression they planned only as each season came up. SG-1 and SGA, much as I love them, tend to dip into their past episodes to produce new episodes rather than having planned in advanced. Only BSG seems to be having the long term planning thing going and that's one ofthe reasons I like it.

I would actually liked to have seen what a JMS take on Star Trek would've looked like. I think he'd have done a fine job, alongside Bryce Zabel.

Aye. I'd like to have seen him get a chance to do something set post-Nemesis, in a time period we're not familiar with rather than enraging us for messing up established continuity points (which sci-fi fans are particularly neurotic about).

The only thing that always bugged me in relation to JMS is this perception of him as being slightly arrogant. (Awful thing to say, I know, but in terms of writers or producers I'd admire, I always would've looked up to him more if he didn't seem so cocky and attention-seeking. Or am I completely wrong about him...?)

Yer not at all wrong. Have you got the Babylon 5 DVDs? Ever listened to the extras? JMS, and Douglas Copeland to an extent, reek of arrogance at times. Far too often we hear "and this was something that had never before been done in the history of TV", "everyone thought we couldn't do it but we did!", "we revolutionised sci-fi", etc. Listen to his S4 commentary - he indirectly takes credit for advancing camera techniques for all tv, including the likes of CSI...

JMS is also, clearly, a control freak. IIRC, from mid-S2 onwards until the end ofthe show, there was only one episode (S5's "Day of the Dead") that he didn't write or, at least, co-write. Even those episodes where his name isn't listed in the scripting credits were touched by him. It's part of the reason "Crusade" got cancelled. I'd imagine he'd want the same level of control for any Trek series and if ya didn't like it, he'd probably tell you to go frack yourself.

Having said all that JMS hasn't got a chance to flex his creative muscles in a while. I'd love to see him tackle it, providing he took on someone on board to keep his cheesier - "Now get the hell out of my galaxy!" - lines in tow.

doh.ie

ixoy wrote:

Aye. I'd like to have seen him get a chance to do something set post-Nemesis, in a time period we're not familiar with rather than enraging us for messing up established continuity points (which sci-fi fans are particularly neurotic about).

Agreed. Post-Nemesis (shudder) is probably the best point to go from, and even then, without such an over-reliance as DS9 and Voyager had on past Trek 'novelty' ideas or species. They only get away with this on Enterprise because it sometimes fits (Andorians, Tellarites), but often doesn't ('Father' of the transporter? Good idea, maybe, but crap, crap episode.)

ixoy wrote:

Yer not at all wrong. Have you got the Babylon 5 DVDs? Ever listened to the extras? JMS, and Douglas Copeland to an extent, reek of arrogance at times.

Phew, thank God, I'm glad it's not just me, then! I thought I'd get flamed for saying something sacreligious! (I once said something similar on a genre board and was lucky to escape with my life! I suspect there are still some people out there who don't want to hear such radical statements, though!) Haven't got the DVDs yet - liked the show, but want to leave it a bit longer and do it all again in one go - but the extras sound hilarious. And that's why I like Whedon so much - he *never* comes across as arrogant - usually just geeky and over-excited! - and always as someone who just loves making films and movies! JMS seems to revel in the adoration of fans and craves the wider respect of the industry (which makes me cynically question if he wanted involvement in Trek to boost his own profile!)

ixoy wrote:

JMS is also, clearly, a control freak. IIRC, from mid-S2 onwards until the end ofthe show, there was only one episode (S5's "Day of the Dead") that he didn't write or, at least, co-write.

And wider plot aside, *this* is the very reason so many dodgy lines crept into B5 scripts. (And he didn't half boast about the record he was setting as he went along either!) But did he have to write them all? Even if he wanted story control, he should've been able to draft up a 5-10 page treatment for the way he wanted an episode to go and given it to another writer and have them do the actual teleplay. No reason to be so precious about the scripts - the story, I understand, but not the scripts themselves. He could still have fashioned how he wanted a story to play out from the treatments.

ixoy wrote:

It's part of the reason "Crusade" got cancelled.

Sounds like a story and a half. Must read up on that.

ixoy wrote:

I'd imagine he'd want the same level of control for any Trek series and if ya didn't like it, he'd probably tell you to go frack yourself.

I believe it! But still, I'd rather his creativity along with control to replace the tired stuff Berman and Braga were coming up with.

However, having said that, but I also think that as much as B&B pissed off Enterprise and DS9 staff (check out Ron Moore's famous e-mail from his 2-episode stint on Voyager), JMS would do so ten times more! There'd be just himself and Zabel on staff in the end, and Zabel may not stick it out either!

ixoy wrote:

Having said all that JMS hasn't got a chance to flex his creative muscles in a while.

True. Jeremiah didn't exactly set the world on fire. Makes me wonder again if the first of the two Enterprise posts was half designed as a kind of job interview, though what he heard to suddenly withdraw that plan so soon after is questionable. (And I don't buy the Paramount afraid to offend Berman/Braga line.)

Lawdie

Fenster wrote:

It was muck. Enterprise couldn't hold a candle to DS9 or TNG, let alone new series such as BSG and Firefly. I'm waiting for the JMS Trek that was proposed a while back. ^_^

Ah my beloved Firefly, only if you had the budget. God knows you had the writing talent and cast.

Enterprise was muck, although it did get me slightly interested in the last season. However, I was desperate for some good TV sci-fi.
Then came BSG, and back came the feelings.. Enterprise is muck.

Majella baby sell up and move on honey move on. Zeds dead baby, zeds dead.

doh.ie

Lawdie wrote:

Ah my beloved Firefly, only if you had the budget.

Beloved indeed. But I thought it did pretty damn well sets-wise, effects-wise and with location shoots than most other comparable shows. I don't think the show suffered at all for having a lower budget from series like Enterprise - if anything, in fact, it just gave them the chance to work more on its characters, something Enterprise in particular could've learned a lot from.
Can't wait for the movie, Serenity. (http://www.serenitymovie.com) This had BETTER get a release here, or I'm off to the US come September.

Lawdie

doh.ie wrote:

Beloved indeed. But I thought it did pretty damn well sets-wise, effects-wise and with location shoots than most other comparable shows. I don't think the show suffered at all for having a lower budget from series like Enterprise - if anything, in fact, it just gave them the chance to work more on its characters, something Enterprise in particular could've learned a lot from.
Can't wait for the movie, Serenity. (http://www.serenitymovie.com) This had BETTER get a release here, or I'm off to the US come September.

Yep, feel the same, I was referring to pouring money down the toilet on Enterprise that could of supported a real sci fi show like Firefly!
Not the big effects of shiny aliens just keeping something talented alive