I think it's a telltale sign that we'll simply see more of the same imagination-free mediocrity that has come to typify the Trek "franchise" (god, I HATE that word), when the-powers-that-be choose an established genre actor to take the reins of the new series and drum up hype. Scott Bakula starred on one painfully insipid, proto-"7th Heaven" style "sciffy" show - that mind-numbing televised abortion known as "Quantum Leap." That alone, does not justify his catapulting into the command chair of a Trek series that seems poised to desecrate the memory (and timelines) of the original Trek series. In fact, I would say his role in this previous "sciffy" series would flat-out disqualify him from running for the part as Captain Archer in the new Enterprise series.

But nooooo. Paramount has ignored the fears and misgivings of the Trek fanbase and plowed ahead with a chicken-scratch of an idea to pin a series on. I'm sure rushing the pilot to the cameras next week - not even before the last episode of Voyager has aired - won't help to shore up the quality of the piece.

Every decision thus far revealed about the new series is like a fresh slap in the face of longtime Star Trek fans. There is simply NO WAY this new series can avoid treading on the toes of the original series.

Well, the new show may suck, that's for sure. And I hated Quantum Leap as much as anyone. But I still like Bakula -- and the jury's out as to whether giving him greater creative control will be a plus or minus for the new show. Given Berman & Piller's track record, it couldn't hurt.

No...I think the only thing worse than the uneven creative ground on which the franchise is standing, is the completely bitchy nature of the fans, who condemn the show before it has even begun being filmed. I think it should be given a chance, and its rather useless to run out of breath berating something that hasn’t even begun. Sure, its an uphill battle to make a good Trek series what with all the baggage that comes with it, but theres no reason to make it worse by pre-judging the thing and closing your mind before theres even been a frame of film shot.

iaido: So you're saying we should wait until "what's done is done" - after the first season is, say, completely "in the can," and only then are we allowed to voice our dismay over the concept and persons involved.

Pre-judgment is always going to be there. The Hollywood hype machine practically requires it. That's what press releases like the one announcing Scott Bakula's involvement is designed to do - drum up "excitement" for the (capital "P") product the powers-that-be have churned out for mass consumption.

I'm merely annoyed (as are innumerable others) that Paramount has completely ignored fan dismay and disgust over the concept of a Trek "prequel." Plus, based on Scott Bakula's acting resume, hope for the quality of the acting in the new series is sinking fast.

Yes, pre-judging is an unavoidable thing, but I'm speaking of total damnation, which is a different animal altogether. Look, when I think of Bacula, I think of drinking lukewarm water, or having to have sex with a condom. As an actor, the guy doesnt do it for me and his casting doesnt generate much interest in the show. BUT, that doesnt mean I'm going to go running around pessimistically bemoaning the death of Star Trek.

Hell, the show could stink to high Heaven the entire first season, but then it could find its ground, like Next Generation and Deep Space Nine managed to do. Soemtimes it takes a while and you have to give a series chance to find its creative footing. Certainly, for me, its unfair and stupid to beat the thing down and announce its death before its even begun filming.

I think Bakula can do a good job. I liked him in Quantum leap and a few other things I've seen him do. My question is when is Enterprise gonna be set? If it's pre Kirk is it the same Enterprise, because there was a capt. Pike and april before kirk but how many other captains could the ship have had.

I am looking forward to Star Trek: Enterprise. I like Scott Bacula. I haven't watched Voyager since about the second season so I need a Trek fix. My guess is the show would have to be set in the future of TNG, DS9, Voyager but who knows.

how can you possibly judge something before it's even began airing and taping for that matter?? :confused: :confused:

As much as I detest the Unbelieveable Scott Bakula, I'm looking forward to possibly seeing The Gorn again. I always thought it would be fun for some of the later characters to meet The Gorn. It would be even more fun for the Gorn to still have a vendetta against "Kiiiirrrkksss".

Marianne

IIRC there was no fan involvement in the writing of the original Star Trek series, unless you count the "name" SF writers who were commissioned to write a few episodes. And wasn't that show cancelled as a result of inadequate ratings i.e. insufficient appeal to the TV-viewing market of the day. Yet I read that a fair number of fans still look back to those episodes as representing the glory days. The writers and producers must have done <i>something</I> right.

When people talk about what "the majority" want I sometimes feel that there is an element of <i>projection</i> at work. Haven't Deep Space Nine and Voyager been panned by many fans? I suppose what counts is how they fare in the marketplace. Sometimes brave decisions pay off; sometimes promising series are cancelled before they have really had a chance.

As it happens, in contrast with some series, I thought Quantum Leap improved markedly as time went on. Some of the later episodes were, IMO, top class television! I felt the same way about ST: TNG. Early episodes were none too hot but it really matured as time went on.

As for ST:E, well, I think a show put together through polling the fan base and producing some amalgam of their collective requirements would most likely be pretty crappy.

Shudder to think....That would be too funny. Every episode would end up having Vulcans, Romulans, those green antennae guys, Klingons, and would somehow incorporate a Gorn, Sulu, ect., ect., ect. But, seriously, that would be a disaster.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by benedict mikehuntIf it's pre Kirk is it the same Enterprise, because there was a capt. Pike and april before kirk but how many other captains could the ship have had.

---

That was a cause of some grumbling. Its actually Pre-Federation, so it has nothing to do with the Federation captains. One assumes that the new series will end with the formation of the Federation, and somehow this ships exploits will inspire the Federation to name its first flagship "Enterprise".

one thing i like about the idea: no f***ing prime directive !!!

(but then again .. it is shot in an overly PC US of today, so, no kinky outfits .. )

Anybody got a link to this series or
 

where you are all gettin your info from? I'd love to read up more on it.

As for what I have read here concerning Scott Bakula, I would have to agree with the general people and say that he doesn't infuse me with a lot of expectations as captain of a starship. He seems to "nice" for lack of a better word. I would have to say it's his whole demeanor and body language. He just doesn't seem tough nor have I seen him in a role that required him to be tough. All the captains of each Star Trek series have had the "look." Each of them had their own way to convey to an enemy "F*** with me and you will regret it." They all had that ability to be rock hard and ice cold when it needed it and I don't think I have ever seen him act that way before. I only hope he can do it because if he plays the simpering fool he has been in other shows then I cannot see him or the series lasting long.

As for this being a prequel I thought that the federation began shortly after the introduction of warp technology by Zefram Cochram (Spell check that) as according to Star Trek First contact. Didn't his warp flight and the first contact with the Vulcan's introduce a whole new stage of human life and the begininng of world peace? I know it wasen't overnight but how big a span are we talking here that humans had warp capability before the federation came to be. I was under the impression that the federation was what brought man fully into the stars in heavy cruiser's and light frigate's. Didn't it take Zefram over a year or two to gather enough material to make that nuke into a warp capable ship? I thought they said that in First Contact and that is what is leading me to believe that true "ships" such as Enterprise and Voyager didn't exist without the federation.

Re: Anybody got a link to this series or
 

Try: StarTrek.com

Re: Anybody got a link to this series or
 

trektoday.com

Quote:

---

As for what I have read here concerning Scott Bakula, I would have to agree with the general people and say that he doesn't infuse me with a lot of expectations as captain of a starship. He seems to "nice" for lack of a better word. I would have to say it's his whole demeanor and body language. He just doesn't seem tough nor have I seen him in a role that required him to be tough. All the captains of each Star Trek series have had the "look." Each of them had their own way to convey to an enemy "F*** with me and you will regret it."

---

Well, the casting sheet says he is supposed to be a pretty easygoing, "filled with wonder" kind of guy. One assumes that the ability to be angry and draw a line in the sand is a requirement later on after you've been through Starfleet, which this captain wont have I guess.

Quote:

---

As for this being a prequel I thought that the federation began shortly after the introduction of warp technology by Zefram Cochram (Spell check that) as according to Star Trek First contact. Didn't his warp flight and the first contact with the Vulcan's introduce a whole new stage of human life and the begininng of world peace?

---

I dont really know too much about it, only a casual fan, but to actually get something like the Federation formed took awhile, and it took war, not peace to form it. I think it started in those formative years around when the first contact with Klingons lead to war and spawned the formation of the Prime Directive. I always thought the whole idea was the result of meeting several alien races, not just one. After all its a Federation of planets.

[Edited by iaido on 05-13-01 at 11:32 AM]

Before Star Trek II, they say that it takes place in the 23rd century (2200's). In First Contact, they say the date that the Borg go back to is 2063. Therefore, you have at least a 137 year gap btwn the 2, so I am assuming that this new series takes place sometime in the 22nd century. I for one am looking forward to it, if only to see more of the Andorians (the antenna guys).

I lost track of where this discussion is going, but for reference, the Federation was founded in 2161, as noted in a Next Generation episode where they play Federation Day: a card game where Aces, Deuces, and Sixes are Wild. Worf, appropriately points out that this is a woman's game :).

das

This is correct. So, the new series will likely be set in the 2150's and then its final season arc will most likely deal with the foundation of the Federation and the inception of Starfleet and the Prime Directive.

Basically, this show is going to be about human exploration of space, with the first officer being a Vulcan observer helping to guide humanity into the future.

On a side note, I think that the choice of Scott Bakula was a good one. Besides, many fans complain about how Star Trek always get cheap, no-name actors, who can't really act. This pretty much solves this problem. Also, he most definitely can't be any worse than Kevin Sorbo on "Andromeda".

Matt

Thought of the day: There is no Trek but classic Trek.
 

I'd like to echo benedict, the downfall of the Trek franchise can be traced largely to the inclusion of fan desires in the scripts. All too often I turn on an episode of TNG, DS9, or Voyajunk and realize that I had at some point already heard the plot in a fan discussion "wouldn't it be neat if X fell in love with Y?" or some other such garbage. I urge Berman and Braga to make the fans happy by producing a quality show, not by bowing to fan's desires for storylines.

How does getting a relatively expensive (given his lengthy contract negotiations), B-grade actor, who can't really act, solve the Star Trek problem?

Did you ever see an actual episode of "Quantum Leap?" Kevin Sorbo can act circles around the simpering, caterpillar-eyebrowed Bakula.

Actually, I think Bakula's pretty good. He didn't have much to do in American Beauty, but I liked him in Lord of Illusions... And he certainly did solid Broadway work before moving to TV.

It's too early to tell whether the new show will be any good or not, but I don't see his casting as one of the main danger signals.

I think it boils down to the producers and writers. Since these haven't changed much, I don't expect a show that's much better than Voyager... But I'll give it a fair shot.

I remember similar bitching when the cast for the first Batman film was announced...

"Mr Mom can't be Batman!"
"Beetlejuice will make a joke of it all!!"

In the end, Michael Keaton was not a bad choice at all.
Don't judge till you see it.

i think Voyager pretty much proved that a Trek show will have to really, really, really stink, and i mean bomb and have a drop off like the XFL, for it not to get the standard seven season run. Even though a good number of Trek fans abandoned Voyager and the remaining viewers were always mixed in a love/hate relationship with it, it still managed to pull in enough viewers on a low rent network to run to completion. Keeping that in mind, the odds are that this new series will probably have the same brand loyalty, and it would take some colossal creative blunders for it fail.

While I think the whole Star Trek TV show franchise needs to rest for a few years, since they won't let it, I'm glad they're making this one a prequel.

It will be refreshing to watch what happens pre-Prime Directive, pre-the medical doctor can fix anything, pre-high technology.

My only hope is that they learn from the down seasons of Voyager and DS9 and focus more on character development than on a hard situation that's fixed in the last five minutes.

This show may be getting exactly what it needs: new writers, new creativity and a new time period.

I started with Classic and followed through around second season of Voyager when I said, I've had enough of this sh!t and stopped watching.

I feel that they should have taken a few years off, cleaned out the production staff and writers and gotten some fresh folks in there. Since they are going forward right away, with the same monkeys at the helm, I have serious doubts, but will probably check it out.

I'm ambivalent towards Scott Bakula. I didn't really get into QL, but did like him on Murphy Brown. Usually it's not a good sign to me, when they feel they have to sign a name that is popular in SF to try and pull in a fanbase. It would be nice to see them sell this on the premise that it's a well developed, written and produced show.

If they're smart, they will develop and Arc and work around it. It's been working great for Buffy, Angel, Dark Angel, X-Files and show that seemed to start it all Babylon 5. If they have stones, they will keep the suits from interferring with it and make it something worth watching.

For those of you who're interested, they've announced that they're showing a clip from Enterprise next week at some point during the Voyager finale...

Also, along with the full cast and character list, they've finally made official what we already know--that it's a prequel show set in the 22nd century.

[Edited by adamblast on 05-17-01 at 12:30 PM]