HELP SAVE ENTERPRISE by ZiggyKarlos

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

HELP SAVE ENTERPRISE

POSTED BY: ZIGGYKARLOS
UPDATED: Sunday, April 4, 2004 10:48
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 14214
PAGE 2 of 2

Thursday, April 1, 2004 7:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
ENT is the worst show on TV. I gotta wonder about people who trash Firefly for being sexist while this crap show has that battered wife Vulcan whore mentality. The writers (if I can call them that, hmm, no guess not!) reveal thier sick mysoginist minds with every second show. Then they insult the entire Islamic world with thier racist allegories. Oh I could go on and on...

I do hope all my Firefly friends work hard to beat up every ENT fan they see. They deserve it.

What the hell are you so mad about? You don't like the show? Fine, don't watch it. People like you try to ruin any thread that you don't like or agree with. I wonder if you would use the same tough language if you were face to face with the person or persons that you are insulting instead of sitting behind a computer on an anonymous site like this one. Well, I'm a huge fan of Firefly and I like Enterprise as well. You gonna beat me up? You give all of us a bad name. Threatening violence to a fellow Browncoat just because he likes a show that you do not? Give me a break. Oh well, if you must have the blood of an Enterprise fan on your hands, look me up if you are ever in B'ham. But for now, why don't you just accept the fact that people like different things. Just because you don't agree does not make them wrong. I don't watch the majority of the genre shows that are discussed on this site, but I don't bash the people that do enjoy them. Take a break from spewing your hateful words and learn a lesson from Haken.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 7:31 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Even joking about physical violence is unworthy of those who would call one another comrade.

I suggest such talk be left for the alley and playground Browncoats.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 9:27 AM

GHOULMAN

Well, that's three of you attacking my opinion (as if it were unique

). Should I wait until you all get matching metal pipes (with stylish nails) to beat me with?

See, I desided to leave the poor guy who started this thread alone. If you want my opinion just go to the TrekBBS and use the search for posts by Plum. I've already written thousands of pages on it... been there, done that.

Would it freak ya out to find out I was the guy who suggested the so called Xindi arc? Search TrekBBS hard.

Look... everything I wrote has been discussed, written about, and deconstructed, for the last three years regarding ENTERPRISE. If you aren't aware of these things you are living under a rock...

... and don't have a frellin' clue.

Oh, and to add - if ENT does comes back that will nix chances for Firefly returning to the TV. If you don't know why you are stillunder that rock I mentioned.

Peace out. Frell ENT up the warp nacelle. And to the rest of you: grow some sagacity

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 11:45 AM

MISGUIDED BY VOICES

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
That being said, you need support, you have mine. I may not watch Enterprise, but Haken is right in that genre television is being killed off for the reality garbage that network television is spreading like a plague.

Now, a lack of genre TV is another matter, but I still don't understand supporting a show you don't watch - why should a studio make a series for people who like the concept of it being on TV, if only it were a different and better show?

I guess what I'm saying is, if you want to support the show, you need to watch it, buy the DVDs, T-shirts and mugs, action figures, comics and calenders and let them see the money flowing into the coffers. Attach all the receipts to your letter saying you like the show, and see if that gets a decent reception.

"I threw up on your bed"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 12:15 PM

MISGUIDED BY VOICES

Quote:
Originally posted by Haken:
Without any, we might as well become a CSI, Law and Order, and American Idol drone.

I kinda like CSI! CSI:Miami doesn't work so well for me, and Law and Order leaves me cold.
Bring back Homicide:Life on the Streets I say!

I would guess that if UPN dropped Enterprise, they would rest the Trek brand for a while, but that they would replace it with another genre show - all the networks are aware that SF shows have the ability more than any other genre to merchandise and make money during the life of the show, rather than drip-fed in syndication.

They also have the ability to jump to the movies, and massage the egos of the producers who can leap from TV to film. Every network would like to find the next Star Trek or X-Files and (fingers crossed) Firefly. Heck, they'd kill for a Babylon 5 which has earned plenty in the past 10 years.

We may start seeing more and more that the route to a TV series is via a successful film (see Van Helsing and Transylvania, Serenity and FF (again, crossing the lot) and Out of Sight/Karen Sisco).
Ready made audience (provided the gap isn't too great),aids international sales etc.

"I threw up on your bed"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 12:29 PM

HAKEN

Likes to mess with stuffs.

Quote:
Originally posted by Misguided By Voices:
I kinda like CSI! CSI:Miami doesn't work so well for me, and Law and Order leaves me cold.
Bring back Homicide:Life on the Streets I say!

I like CSI too, but the problem is there are too many variations on the same theme. We have CSI, CSI: Miami, CSI: New York, Navy NCIS, and Cold Case. And for Law and Order, we have Law and Order, Law and Order: Criminal Intent, Law and Order: Special Victims Unit. Well, you get the idea.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 8:55 PM

DARTHVEGAS

yeah dont flame the guy! I wish him luck. I love the Trek Universe.

Enterprise had some good bits to it, but the Trek Universe peaked with DS9 and First Contact, but since then the franchise has needed a rest desperatly, IMO.

Like I said, good luck, but for the long term of the Trek universe, I hope the let the NX-01 sail off into the sunset.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 9:43 PM

11THHOUR

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Oh, and to add - if ENT does comes back that will nix chances for Firefly returning to the TV. If you don't know why you are stillunder that rock I mentioned.

This is something that always bothered me. I wonder if UPN would have picked up Firefly had Enterprise not been around? Between the two shows, UPN would have done so much better with Firefly.

Ah well...

11thHour

__________________________________________________________

"And I'd like to be the King of Londinium and wear a shiny hat." - Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 1, 2004 10:47 PM

JERRY111

Well, I like Enterprise more now. Season 3 has been a lot better than season 1 and 2.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 12:29 AM

DECKROID

I have an idea. Let's get Joss to bring back Firefly on TV with a whole assortment of Firefly related shows.

Firefly, Firefly: Jaynestown, Firefly: Badger's Den, Firefly: Companion's in the City, Firefly: Ariel ER.

I think it would work. I would watch all of 'em!

Oh, and as far as ENT is concerned... PPfffffftttttt... stinky, stinky show!

I call her "Vera"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 4:43 AM

TOTALLYFRYED

Sorry to say so, but I've got to jump on the 'not so heartbroken if Enterpise doesn't make it' bandwagon. I used to be a big Star Trek fan, but Firefly has spoiled me. I've gone back in the last year-and-a-half and looked at the original ST, the Next Generation and Enterprise and the thing that stands out about all of those shows is that they portray people as sort of two-dimensional, sitcom-type characters - not a lot of depth. Some of the technical stuff was kind of cool on Next Generation, and there were some comical moments in the original series, but now we have seen what a space-western can be if it's done right, and I now expect this kind of quality from all of the TV shows I watch (must be why I only watch Scrubs, Angel, Wonderfalls and Joan of Arcadia - none of which, by the way, are set in outer space, which is why we fans of space fiction need Firefly back).

Ironically, I loved Scott Bakula in Quantum Leap, and I have to say that I think the performance of the cast of Enterprise is actually pretty good; it's the stories and the writing that put me off of it.

"C'mon, Kaylee. We all know I'm the funny one."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 5:09 AM

MOHRSTOUTBEARD

Speaking of "Scrubs," a friend of mine (a convert) got me addicted to the show to repay me for his Firefly addiction.

As for "Enterprise," I caught the tail-end of an episode one time. Scott Bakula kissed a woman, and she turned into a gelatinous slug. My reaction was akin to Mal's after Saffron asked to wash his feet, and I never took another look at the show after that.

"You've just gotta go ahead and change the captain of your brainship, because he's drunk at the wheel."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 5:21 AM

GHOULMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by 11thHour:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Oh, and to add - if ENT does comes back that will nix chances for Firefly returning to the TV. If you don't know why you are stillunder that rock I mentioned.

This is something that always bothered me. I wonder if UPN would have picked up Firefly had Enterprise not been around? Between the two shows, UPN would have done so much better with Firefly.

Ah well...

Good catch. Yes, last year when I was telling people about Firefly I got a huge backlash from the UPN moles on the TrekBBS. Like blogging with brownSHIRTS - Yucko. And I found out that ENT was a big reason Firefly wasn't renewed (mostly about the re-run syndication deals).

It pisses me off that people don't talk about these things on site where such nuance is of PRIMARY importance.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 6:48 AM

CAPTAINCDC

I don't believe for one moment that UPN would have picked up Firefly if Enterprise had not been on the air.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 7:19 AM

GHOULMAN

Funny, would you say the same thing about Buffy the Vampire Slayer and... oh say... Charmed? Yea. See - this is a battle for your mind.

Really, with all the talk by the Media CEOs about how un-scripted shows (so called Reality Shows) are replacing anything resembeling story it's a good bet that no cable or network station would want more than one Sci-Fi show. why? Because it's the same 'thing' to them. Same demographic, same audience, same sponsers. The fact that Firefly is this generations genre classic is beyond any consideration.

Worse, they would buy Trek out of habit.

Since all this is assumed by the CEOs, what incentive would they have for a similair property?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 7:39 AM

WULFHAWK

To refer back to the top of this mess --

Ghoulman, you're welcome to come beat up this Enterprise fan -- bring some friends, a stick, and a lunch.

And don't forget your insurance card.

Take my love
Take my land

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 9:07 AM

GHOULMAN

Just dieing to make me the bad guy eh.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 1:04 PM

GEORDIESTEVE2003

Why bother? This show is the antithesis of Firefly, a dead duck in the water and a poor pale bland imitation of how good Star Trek used to be. If you listen to Joss on DVD he says what he really didnt want to do with this show, bumpy foreheads, ambassadors etc, because it had been done and wasn't realistic enough or easy to relate to. The show is terrible pap, let it die, and also, not the best place to post a save campaign for that particular show.

Firefly rules by comparison, brighter and more brilliant in short time then all 3? seasons of Enterprise, I gave up after first, and first 3 eps of second. Boring, repititive, formulaic tv that is neither inspiring, inventive, clever, or interesting.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 2:16 PM

WULFHAWK

I didn't start with the beating up stuff, and I figgered you weren't much with the backing it up, Ghoulyman.

I'm for Star Trek on TV, I'm for Star Trek at the movies . . . I'll watch Starfleet Academy 90210 if I have to. Whatever it takes to keep Star Trek alive despite ugliness and ignorance that oppose it, I'm for it.

Try to remember, folks, that the original Star Trek was pitched as a kind of 'space western', building the very road Firefly travels today. Without Star Trek and the rabid fans who wouldn't let it die, Firefly would NEVER have happened . . .or B5, or any of the wonderful science fiction that's graced television, for that matter.

Also try to remember the original Star Trek pushed the boundries of television then like few other shows ever have. Race, sex, violence, slavery . . . they fearlessly flew where others feared to tread.

Long live Star Trek!
Vivat!
Vivat!
Vivat!

Take my love
Take my land

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 4:24 PM

11THHOUR

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfhawk:
I'm for Star Trek on TV, I'm for Star Trek at the movies . . . I'll watch Starfleet Academy 90210 if I have to. Whatever it takes to keep Star Trek alive despite ugliness and ignorance that oppose it, I'm for it.

Damn straight. Let's not stop there... how about Star Trek Babies, or Star Trek: Trading Spaceships?

Quote:
Try to remember, folks, that the original Star Trek was pitched as a kind of 'space western', building the very road Firefly travels today. Without Star Trek and the rabid fans who wouldn't let it die, Firefly would NEVER have happened . . .or B5, or any of the wonderful science fiction that's graced television, for that matter.

That's right! And if it weren't for Star Trek there would have NEVER been a 2001: A Space Odyssey, or Star Wars, or Buck Rogers in the 25th Century, or ANY brilliant Sci-Fi of ANY kind. Sci-Fi would have stopped dead in it's tracks... why, why... people wouldn't even KNOW what Sci-Fi is without Star Trek!

Quote:
Also try to remember the original Star Trek pushed the boundries of television then like few other shows ever have. Race, sex, violence, slavery . . . they fearlessly flew where others feared to tread.

Long live Star Trek!
Vivat!
Vivat!
Vivat!

Star Trek ROCKS!
(I'm saying this while simultaneously doing the Klingon chest salute AND flashing the Vulcan split finger hand thingie...)

11thHour

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 2, 2004 4:49 PM

11THHOUR

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
It pisses me off that people don't talk about these things on site where such nuance is of PRIMARY importance.

I'm a big Star Trek fan from way back. But I'm not the kind of rabid fan who'll stick with the show long after it's lost what made it great in the first place. If one REALLY is a fan, one needs to speak up when the show seriously falters and become a pale shadow of itself. Otherwise, no changes will be made and people will just keep watching out of habit... like going to the drive-thru restaurant long after the food has lost its flavor.

One of the things that works against Star Trek is its own success. Once it became a "franchise" it stopped being a creative gem, and had to start serving too many masters in order to maintain the "franchise". Star Trek is weighted down like a corporation that has too many presidents and vice presidents, and hasn't invested anything in 'R&D'. Star Trek lost the spark of its early creative vision and keeps producing the same product over and over with a different label.

Firefly is alive, and full of new ideas and experiments... this is what Star Trek USED to be. Firefly is not Star Trek in design, but is its inheritor in spirit. Perhaps this is because a show which is unique and daring requires one, or two, people at the helm guiding the show without having to go through a 'committee'... the "too many cooks" analogy. With Star Trek: TOS it was Gene Roddenberry, and of course with Firefly it is Joss Whedon.

The future of Star Trek may depend on finding a strong, visionary leader, in the spirit of Gene Roddenberry, to take the helm and get the show back on course.

11thHour

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 3, 2004 7:41 AM

WULFHAWK

Funny, shortdozen, you should mention some the the recognized classics of science fiction with apparent sarcasm. Odd how personal opinions, however wrong, are sometimes presented as fact.

2001: A Space Odessey, both film and book, are commonly and rightly used to teach folks how to perceive and produce science fiction.

Star Wars was such a huge success, some people fail to consider the huge benchmarks it set for cinema in general and science fiction movies in particular.

And good old Buck Rogers has been with us for something like 50 years...just the name conjures up rayguns and spaceships. Sneer at success as you will, it's simply sour grapes. Hambone acting isn't new; there's ham aplenty in Firefly.

You kids have no idea how good you have it. Imagination was something near impossible to bring to film or television until the last two decades. Science fiction was widely regarded as silly and incomprehensible. Philip Dick, Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, and Arthur C. Clark among many others wrote the stories we are FINALLY seeing in cinema, stories decades old now.

Kids. Oh well.

Take my love
Take my land

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 3, 2004 8:15 AM

SHANNARA

kill them all except the doctor. yes, even the friggen dog, the biggest four-legged waste of time on television. then maybe, MAYBE, i'll keep watching.

it's like a train wreck, i find myself watching when i really don't want to be and i'm disgusted with myself afterwards.

on firefly i loved every character (ok i only liked the doctor and the spaz, but they were growing on me), but on enterprise i love the doctor's character and that's it. i don't even like any of the rest. and the freaking uniforms of seven and now t'pal are THE MOST RIDICULOUS AND EMBARASSING CRAP ON SCI-FI TELEVISION TODAY!!!!!

"She ain't movin"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 3, 2004 8:33 AM

HUMBLE

I occassionally watch Enterprise. When I do see the show, it looks like they made improvements in the writing department lately. The acting is so-so. Capt. Archer is a worse Captain than Janeway. The "space hooker"/science officer, is no Jeri Ryan. All the other cast members are NOT memorable! I can't really get into the show or feel attached to it. I feel that the franchise has gone on too long. Maybe they should give it a rest for a while or just retire Star Trek altogether. If this incarnation of Trek bites the dust, I won't miss it. I wish they had started the series with more impressive writing and maybe a different perspective on a show instead of the Starship Enterprise boldly going where nobody has gone before. Hasn't this been done to death already? Does anyone do anything else in the future except ride on starships? Starfleet is so anally retentive and squeaky clean. I can't believe they don't have skeletons in their closets! Explore this kind of stuff. New and different aspects of Star Trek. I'm sorry if this offends Trek fans, but honestly, doesn't it seem like you've been kind of watching the same old stuff for 25 years?

Please bring back Firefly, these other shows SUCK! Oh, burn in Hell fox execs!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 3, 2004 12:54 PM

GEORDIESTEVE2003

Gotta agree with a lot thats been said on here, trainwreck is definately a good description for Enterprise. The real shame of it is, they had a good idea, going backwards was a bit of a surprise to many people, werent too sure, pilot was good, linking it to Zeph Cockrane and all that, and so I was pleased, but then...nothing. Its even more disappointing as some of the actors are obviously talented, they just have nothing to work with. Ok, Scott Bakula, the man is an talented actors and was awesome in Q Leap, but not in this, he is quite terrible. He is stiff and boorish, and then to perk him up, they made him, Mr On The Edge, Grrrr. Didnt work then either. Big problem is people pulling the strings, they think they can just turn the handle on their cash cow, bring in another episode that echoes so many others, and make more money for the franchise. Its lazy TV, purely that. X-file suffered from it at the end, when they too started copying themselves, shame again as good actors, could have been good, same old same old.

Yes we do have it good nowadays in response to another comment in terms of effects and the visualisation of science fiction no longer has to reside just on the page and in the imagination, but that isnt the point of the discussion here, i believe its about bad tv, bad story telling, and people putting out recycled rubbish on the TV. What's worse is, its happening over and over again, did anyone see new star wars films? Or last two Matrix films?? Awesome special effects in all, but that and twenty minutes in each film does not make a good film. Ugh, gonna stop now before I vent my entire spleen.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 3, 2004 6:38 PM

11THHOUR

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfhawk:
Funny, shortdozen, you should mention some the the recognized classics of science fiction with apparent sarcasm. Odd how personal opinions, however wrong, are sometimes presented as fact.

Oh the sarcasm wasn't apparent, it just wasn't aimed at the classic Sci-Fi works I listed.

For the genre of Sci-Fi stay healthy, and maintain some degree of respect, it needs to be kept alive with new ideas and true creativity. This is especially true of Sci-Fi because it's supposed to encompass the expansiveness and imagaination of human beings.

My disappointment with the latest incarnations of Star Trek is that they've fallen down on the job. Original Star Trek is an iconic classic... the latest versions, not so much.

11thHour

__________________________________________________________

"Doing the impossible makes us mighty." - Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 4, 2004 10:48 AM

MISGUIDED BY VOICES

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfhawk:
Quote:

Try to remember, folks, that the original Star Trek was pitched as a kind of 'space western', building the very road Firefly travels today. Without Star Trek and the rabid fans who wouldn't let it die, Firefly would NEVER have happened . . .or B5, or any of the wonderful science fiction that's graced television, for that matter.

Which is no reason why Trek should be produced today. You'll find no argument from me that without TOS you likely wouldn't have half or more of the SF shows around. You'll find no argument from me that the Trek movies have all been pretty good, and some have been excellent. Same goes for TNG and DS9, by why does that qualify Enterprise and the Trek industry for a free pass?

If they manage to re-capture the quality of what the show used to be, I'll gladly watch again.

"I threw up on your bed"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE