# Enterprise cancelled



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

It's official. http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/9469.html

Last episode will air May 13.

Just when the writing was getting good...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

On the one hand I can't say I'm surprised... disappointed, but not surprised.

On the other hand, I wonder where the Trekkies went? I watch other shows too... like the new Battlestar Galactica, but it isn't head-to-head against Enterprise.

I know Wednesday was a problem going up against Smallville... I usually watched one and recorded the other to watch later... perhaps Friday is a problem with too much of their core audience not being home?

I wonder if a different night would have made a difference... Tuesday perhaps?


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

The Trekkers slowly went elsewhere as the quality of writing went down the tubes on both _Voyager_ and later _Enterprise_ . Many of the fans have been saying for a long time that the franchise needs to be rested for a while. The last Star Trek film tanked at the box office.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

I'm a little disappointed but not surprised.

One time I saw an interview with Patrick Stewart and he said even the producers admit that the Star Trek universe suffers from "Franchise Fatigue".

I about fell out of my chair laughing but he was so right.


----------



## Danny R (Jul 5, 2002)

_On the other hand, I wonder where the Trekkies went?_

No mystery there... the bad writing of the first season didn't keep us involved. While I heard rumors the show was getting better, every time I tuned in I got another crappy episode.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

The show was turning around a little this year, but still it was crap with a capital S. I watched because I had to.  But if you look back the thread announcing the show had moved to Fridays, I said the show was doomed because of the lousy time slot. This is exactly what killed TOS.

Again Enterprise was generally crap, but at least their target audience is HOME on Wednesdays! On Fridays their audience is watching Stargate or kicking off the weekend out somewhere! Friday at 8 is DEATH for sci-fi shows on broadcast TV.

See ya
Tony


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Plus the OLD timeline was just not as exciting. No holdecks, no federation, no big fleet battles llike DS9 had.

Plus Nemesis tanked at the box office because they released it 5 days before the Lord of the Rings and a half dozen other Christmas movies with a mid Dec. release date. The movies that did well came out either n the summer or before Thanksgiving and didn't have any scifi/fantasy competition.

What they need to do is get back to the DS9 timeline. Get a new Enterprise... come up with some new technologies to get the geeks excited again.

I agree though, let it take a year off.

More importantly, put it on a REAL network or syndicate it. Even the SciFi Channel would be better (they let them have the old Star Trek reruns). UPN decided to pursue the Moesha audience and ignore the red states entirely (other than the America's Top Model which was a fluke. Veronica Mars has been a pleasasnt surprise, but no one knows it is on because it is on a worthless network). They do have wrestling, but nothing else that appeals to that demographic. Star Trek started to wane when UPN got a hold of it. With the TV onDVD market generating such huge numbers, they should release it to a network other than their own and be content to garner the DVD royalties since they obviously can't make it work on UPN.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

My unsolisited sugestions to Paramount:

- Let the franchise rest for not less than 2 but no more than 5 years.

- Fire everybody associated with Enterprise.

- Ask anybody who applies for a job on the new show if they want to do new and unique dark message filled social commentary with complex time-travel plots that plod on for two years. If they say yes, don't hire them.

- Forget about this pre-quil crap. Start the next series five minutes after the end of the last movie, or after the last episode of TOS.

- Good guys, bad guys. Black and white. Optomistic. Future is worth living in. World is getting better. American idealism writ large. Got it?

- Complex time travel plots about temporal cold wars and paradoxes and disgronificator valves. NOT. Good guys (us) vs. bad guys (Klingons, Romulans, Cardiasians, etc). Wagon Train to the Stars. Shoot 'em up. Got it?

- Get the darn show to every single customer that wants it. That means on CBS or a cable channel. UPN isn't available to many people, and has chosen to be a broadcast version of BET. 

- Lock the new writers in a room with DVD of The Wrath of Kahn.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Add to that, anyone wanting a job writing a Trek episode must pass a "Trek History 101 course" devised by Michael Okuda or at least based on his "history" books. If they fail, the get shown the friggin' door! Don't want to be tied down by 21 seasons of "history?" Go write for another series!

See ya
Tony


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

BobMurdoch said:


> Plus the OLD timeline was just not as exciting. No holdecks, no federation, no big fleet battles llike DS9 had.
> .


I don't know about that. The had the beginnings of a bad relationship with the Klingons and a second starship which should be just about ready to launch. They got the beginnings of alies in Vulcans, ... I think they were just getting their act together this season. Oh well.... Perhaps Star Trek writers could rest a year or so and come up with a better series. But given hollywood talent, they will probably bring back a remake of the original series with johnny depp as Capt Kirk


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Don't even bring up the Klinons! 4th Season episode Star Trek TNG "First Contact" (not the movie) words spoken by Picard: "Disasterous first contact with the Klingons resulted in decades of war".

Well....there was first contact with the Klingons on the FIRST episode of this series. WHERE'S THE KLINGON WAR? Where is the war that resulted in the Klingon Neutral Zone?

Now the way the things were going with the Romulans was much more believable if the TOS and TNG era "history" are to be believed!

See ya
Tony


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

First, from a Free-To-Air perspective, every little station out there found a way to grab Enterprise. We're talking WB, even a Fox station, as well as the UPNs of course. It could be an Equity Broadcasting thing, but I find it hard to believe that a syndicated Enterprise couldn't make money. Is the problem that it can't make as much profit as the next low-budget reality/sitcom UPN will put in its place?

I took the first episodes of this fourth season to say, "Look, we're sorry about the timeline. Here's an explanation for the anomolies. We're not doing that any more, and we're working to fix everything else in continuity." I've enjoyed the fourth season better than the first three.

I don't suppose we could bring back Avery Brooks as the captain of a regular UFP starship, could we?


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

TNGTony said:


> The show was turning around a little this year, but still it was crap with a capital S. I watched because I had to.  But if you look back the thread announcing the show had moved to Fridays, I said the show was doomed because of the lousy time slot. This is exactly what killed TOS.
> 
> Again Enterprise was generally crap, but at least their target audience is HOME on Wednesdays! On Fridays their audience is watching Stargate or kicking off the weekend out somewhere! Friday at 8 is DEATH for sci-fi shows on broadcast TV.
> 
> ...


Why did YOU have to watch?


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

TNGTony said:


> WHERE'S THE KLINGON WAR? Where is the war that resulted in the Klingon Neutral Zone?


The Klingon Neutral Zone isn't mentioned until Star Trek II. It was assumed the Organians created it.


----------



## Paradox-sj (Dec 15, 2004)

I can now delete my OTA UPN station as there isnt any other show on that network I watch. Its sad as it was a very beautiful show to watch in HD and I happned to really like the story lines...I just love Star Trek and TV just wont be the same without a current serial running.


----------



## dfergie (Feb 28, 2003)

Scifi saved SG1 from oblivion after showtime in their infinite wisdom cancelled, how long ago was that? But they now have Atlantis and Galactica ( 3 reasons why Friday was a death slot for Enterprise)hope reigns eternal...


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

Capmeister said:


> The Klingon Neutral Zone isn't mentioned until Star Trek II. It was assumed the Organians created it.


True. There is/was a Romulan neutral zone which could date from around the time of Enterprise. Apparently it was set up after Earth - Romulus war, implied before Federation. But that path seems to have been derailed as there was Romulans on Vulcan this season.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Being on UPN might as well be syndication... especially since not all parts of the country have a local UPN station, so WB and FOX stations carry the show in those parts of the country. I don't think syndication is the answer, but if SciFi picked it up, that would be a cool thing.

As for why no ABC/CBS/NBC... NBC had the original series, never liked it (Roddenberry pulled a fast one and did a bait/switch on what he made vs what he had originally pitched to get it on the air) and NBC cancelled it because it wasn't doing well in the ratings.

None of the major networks wanted to touch Next Generation... so the fledgling FOX network was open to pick it up for that network's first season. Had FOX failed as a network, maybe no DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise!

Paramount produces shows for other networks, FOX produces stuff that isn't on the FOX network, Warner Brothers produced shows not on WB, etc... people sell their shows to whomever pays the most... so if they can't get the primo dollars from UPN to keep it on the air, no one else is gonna pick it up... unless SciFi wanted to beef up its growing lineup of new programming.

The first season of TNG on FOX is recognized in many circles as being crap... I hated it myself... and had it been on any other network at the time, it would have been gone quickly. The show really didn't hit its stride until they brought back the Borg in that 2-parter... DS9 had the advantage of TNG still running, Voyager had the same advantage with the overlap of DS9... Enterprise is the first show since TNG to have to stand completely on its own, no overlapping audience from another Trek show... and Enterprise is having the same kind of "success" as TNG did when it first started.

Lots of people saying it is crap compared to the classic good stuff... Remember how many Trekkie fans of the original series wanted to boycott TNG when it started?

Not saying Enterprise is high-class art... but I think it's pretty good... and the bad episodes are no worse than some stinkers I can think of from ALL the previous Trek incarnations... including a couple of the films!


----------



## jrjcd (Apr 23, 2002)

I assume since it was announced now that manny coto has two months to finish any ideas he might have to pull the series into comtinuity alignment...I do hope that the final eps are NOT written by the B brothers and after this is gone, berman is sent to help sherry lansing carry her things out the back door...NOW, if they are remotely interested in getting this francise back on track, keep that married writing couple under contract and maybe sit down and just listen to what ron moore might have in his mind...


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

pjmrt said:


> True. There is/was a Romulan neutral zone which could date from around the time of Enterprise. Apparently it was set up after Earth - Romulus war, implied before Federation. But that path seems to have been derailed as there was Romulans on Vulcan this season.


Notice no one has yet SEEN a Romulan. I think they were on a path to doing the Romulan war.


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

What garbage will UPN replace it with? Bad reality tv show? Meat market show (aka more skin than cloths). Compare to other series that UPN aired, Enterprise was high class.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Capmeister said:


> Why did YOU have to watch?


It's like a train wreck. No matter how greusome and repulsive.... I just can't turn away! 

see ya
Tony


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Well, the good news is that I will never have to watch UPN again......

Maybe they will fill the slot with a new wacky sitcom starring Cedric the Entertainer..... (yawn)


----------



## buzzdalf (Jan 27, 2003)

BobMurdoch said:


> Well, the good news is that I will never have to watch UPN again......


Bob, I rolled on the floor laughing when I read that. I couldn't agree more


----------



## Danny R (Jul 5, 2002)

_Remember how many Trekkie fans of the original series wanted to boycott TNG when it started?_

Yeah, first season of TNG was horrid as well compared to the rest and I also tuned out when it first started playing. Its not that the stories were all that bad, but the players were obviously still uncomfortable in their roles and fleshing the characters out.

But I checked back in periodically, and thus got hooked again sometime in the 2nd season.

And therein lies the difference. TNG got MUCH better as it progressed. Enterprise has gotten somewhat better, but not nearly as quickly.


----------



## Argono (May 21, 2004)

I wouldn't be surprised if UPN disappears in a year or two. All they have left is wrestling, which is in a down period, so unless they can pull out the next "Desperate Housewives" or "CSI", they're hemmoraging until Moonves puts them out of their misery.

I remember when the concept of Enterprise was announced. I wished they'd just let the franchise rest for awhile. That said, I think this was a dumb move. I liked the way Enterprise was moving. Last year was good and this season was getting even better. Still a long way from TNG, but it was improving. I think Berman is the reason for the decline. Got too far away from Roddenberry's ideas.

But, SciFi probably wouldn't be the answer. While there have been some good episodes, SG1 has not gotten better on SciFi. It's showing serious signs of age, and the prospect of no RDA and trying to plug in Ben Browder makes me wonder if SG1 wouldn't be better served to simply end at the end of this season.

I almost wish that the ideas that were floated around with the demise of Firefly (syndication, direct support, etc.) had been ventured as I would like to see how Coto's influence would have propelled Enterprise.

A possible Backula's return to QL is the only positive I see out of this.


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

Danny R said:


> _Remember how many Trekkie fans of the original series wanted to boycott TNG when it started?_
> 
> Yeah, first season of TNG was horrid as well compared to the rest and I also tuned out when it first started playing. Its not that the stories were all that bad, but the players were obviously still uncomfortable in their roles and fleshing the characters out.
> 
> ...


I generally agree. TNG was about as bad as it could be and not get canceled the first season. It wasn't until sometime late during the 2nd season it started to pick up and finished strong. Voyager was the same, bad first couple of seasons - 7 of 9 save that show. I never though Enterprise started as bad as the other "treks" but it also never got momentum going like the others either.

As for UPN, I'm not sure what will happen to them. Wasn't (a few years ago) UPN on top with Star Trek (I want to say it was TNG, but can't remember for sure) plus some other shows and WB looked dead in the water. Even though WB is minus Buffy, it still seems to be hanging on better than UPN.


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

Argono said:


> I
> A possible Backula's return to QL is the only positive I see out of this.


I don't know. The way the series ended with that last episode left a bad taste for me. Its hard to see the series starting back up. Maybe a made-for-tv movie to end it the way they should have. They did have some good stories for the series though.


----------



## zubinh (Jun 11, 2004)

Enterprise still has hope of continuing on another Network like Scifi.

All Fans, PLEASE sign the Online Petition to help save Enterprise:

http://www.petitiononline.com/NX01/


----------



## Argono (May 21, 2004)

pjmrt said:


> I don't know. The way the series ended with that last episode left a bad taste for me. Its hard to see the series starting back up. Maybe a made-for-tv movie to end it the way they should have. They did have some good stories for the series though.


I loved the last episode, but was a bit annoyed at the ending. But just as Zoey's holographic assistant essentially said, "With Quantum, anything's possible!" so I don't see the ending as anything impeding a return movie or series. Especially considering that at the beginning of the series that Sam wasn't married and Al had several ex-wives, and how that changed.

What I think would be cool (though, probably not fiscally practical) would be for shows like Enterprise (and Firefly) to be made available for PPV - it would probably mean reducing the number of season episodes to about 13, and I'm not certain how much it'd cost for a season pass, but if it limited commericals or endorsements to before/after episodes and allowed HBO-like freedom, I would seriously consider supporting a couple of shows in this fashion.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Argono said:


> What I think would be cool (though, probably not fiscally practical) would be for shows like Enterprise (and Firefly) to be made available for PPV - it would probably mean reducing the number of season episodes to about 13, and I'm not certain how much it'd cost for a season pass, but if it limited commericals or endorsements to before/after episodes and allowed HBO-like freedom, I would seriously consider supporting a couple of shows in this fashion.


It would probably have to cost so much that it wouldn't be affordable for us viewers. PPV movies are "cheap" because by the time it makes PPV, the studios have already made money from box office and other marketing proceeds... then will expect to get a chunk from DVD sales/rentals as well... so PPV isn't the sole source of reimbursement for the production company.

Notice how PPV "events" like boxing or wrestling are so much higher ($25+) because they need that revenue... then figure what an episode of a show like Enterprise probably costs to produce/how many people would be willing to pay for it... and I suspect it would be an obscenely high amount way higher than what those of us who buy the DVD sets are willing to pay for a watch-once scenario.


----------



## Charise (Jan 25, 2004)

Argono said:


> Especially considering that at the beginning of the series that Sam wasn't married and Al had several ex-wives, and how that changed.


Actually, in Quantum Leap Dr. Sam Becket was married for the entire series to Dr. Donna Eleese.

I loved the last episode right up until the tagline they added after the show was canceled. This was supposed to be the season ending episode, not the series end.

I'm enjoying Enterprise, but if it's canceled and Quantum Leap could be revived somehow, I'd watch it.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

HDMe said:


> None of the major networks wanted to touch Next Generation... so the fledgling FOX network was open to pick it up for that network's first season. Had FOX failed as a network, maybe no DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise!


TNG was always in syndication. I watched it on a Fox affiliate, but they had it because they already had the local rights to TOS reruns and thus had right of first refusal for the new series.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

HDMe said:


> Notice how PPV "events" like boxing or wrestling are so much higher ($25+) because they need that revenue...


 :lol: Riiiight. To set up a boxing ring and the cameras and stuff has got to cost waaaay more than a plain old Star Trek episode. :sure:

They charge high prices for PPV events because enough people pay them. If they could make more money charging $2 or $2000, they would. So they maximize their profit by selling the event at a high, yet affordable price. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Some sort of Enterprise post-4th-season-cliffhanger-resolution extravaganza could sell on PPV, but it would cheese off a lot of Star Trek fans who've never paid for it in their lives.  The franchise *will* return in some form, probably by Fall 2006.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

HDMe said:


> None of the major networks wanted to touch Next Generation... so the fledgling FOX network was open to pick it up for that network's first season. Had FOX failed as a network, maybe no DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise!!


As BobaBird posted, TNG was 100% in syndication. Now since at the time most of the Fox stations were just recently independents, they were still buying first run syndicated programming. I think it was something like 70% of the stations carrying TNG were also Fox stations.

But I remember the chatter about TNG when it was starting up. The magazines reported that Gene Roddenberry flatly refused Fox Network's overtures. Roddenberry wanted complete artistic control with absolutely no network weasels looking over his shoulder and second-guessing him.

The other reason he wanted to go into syndication rather than on a fledgling network was that he thought he could get better distribution by selling the program though first-run syndication. He was right! TNG had better distribution that Fox could have ever done that early in their existence.

Another thing to remember, even though TNG was terrible in its first several episodes, (other than the spike from the pilot) the ratings were constant or rising. They were also respectable. Enterprise started off with an impressive 12 million viewers (still about half of what TNG got and significantly less than Voyager and DS9). Lately they are lucky to get 3 million viewers. Take a look at this link! http://www.ece.ucdavis.edu/~mvrojo/entratings.htm

Essentially, people got sick of the continuity issues and just plain bad acting, stories and general disregard fro what made Trek popular in the first place.

See ya
Tony


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

What do you mean by bad acting??? Scott Bakula has mastered stiff, wooden, and everything in between!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I wonder what the highest rated PPV got as an audience... you'd need a lot of people to pay in order to make a PPV Star Trek viable, and I just can't see that happening. I like the current show, and will buy the DVDs when they come out... but if I had to pay the DVD price to watch an episode once... I wouldn't do it. I'd still wait for the DVDs... and if they didn't come out with DVDs? Then I'd just miss seeing it. Seriously... if it were anything more than a couple of bucks I can't see anyone paying for it... and at that price I don't think enough people would buy still to make the production money back.

I do realize I overstated one piece of an earlier post... about TNG and FOX vs syndication... other posters are right that is was syndicated in most of the country, just happened to be FOX stations in a lot of places... so confusion on my part, sorry about that. Still, the point about the major networks not wanting to touch it is valid... and if you can't get a major behind you, and the syndication/small network route hasn't worked... I dunno.

I remember Sliders on FOX... liked it, but it was cancelled... SciFi picked it up, and it was OK at first but quickly went downhill to my disappointment. I would love to see SciFi pick up something like Enterprise, but only if it could stay good or improve.


----------



## waydwolf (Feb 2, 2003)

Good riddance. Another *******ized show I could not care less about.

I hope that the present Battlestar Galactica with its inane cross between live news footage and MTV video shoot camera work will soon follow and take its similarly inane plots and writing.

Ditto Atlantis which spends more time investigating the psyches of the human characters than giving us a whole new galaxy of terrors to deal with that make the Goa'uld fade in comparison to. So far I am totally unimpressed. BTW, anyone notice that O'Neil and Carter are also somewhat non-plussed when an Ancient shuttle pod takes out an entire mothership in one short volley during the most recent episode of SG-1? It's like, "so? Another system lord down. Back to donuts and coffee." Atlantis personnel may know how powerful those things are, but you'd think Jack would be a bit more happy about a new Goa'uld killing mini ship falling into his lap. And he has Maybourne to thank for it.

SG-1 right there is headed for being on my "please kill this show" list. In that same episode, anyone catch the Gilligan's Island reference line from Daniel? The lack of emoting on the part of Carter and T'ealc? In fact, if Chris Judge smiles any more, he's going to be hard pressed to do any other expression. They all smile. And stare at each other. In that, "we know something and the people watching don't" way. They seem not to care about actually playing the characters anymore, but walking through their lines.

It's as if Farscape was the only show which DIDN'T seem like no one behind or in front of the camera was interested in doing it right. Straight through to the end of the mini-series(two episodes a mini-series makes???) Farscape seemed like there was a whole universe of stuff ahead of them at every turn and the characters were believable to a greater degree than in anything else I watched.

Don't even get me started on Lexx which must have been a wet dream for certain folks on this board with its endless not-too-veiled slaps at Bush in the last season. They went straight to jumping the shark, the tuna, the sailfish, across the bow of a small sailboat, and ran aground off L.A.

So no tears will be shed here for Enterprise. It was bad to start, stayed that way, and finished that way. A big thanks to it's head producer for the imbecilic notion that millions of Trek fans around the world would just be jonesing for anything Trek no matter how much it was *******ized in the name of the producers' ego. In no other series ever on American television has the word "cannon" been so tightly tied in the minds of fans. You can't rewrite it all higgly-piggly and say, "buy it, it's Trek." The fans aren't THAT collosally stupid.


----------



## scottchez (Feb 4, 2003)

People ask where did the veiwers go? Where did the Trekies go?

Answer: 

We are still here, we just cant get UPN. Only 70% of the contry can get it over the air.


Example: in Omaha Cox cable owns all the rights. There is not over the air. I have Direct TV , I cant get UPN.

Blame it on UPN for not putting it on a network that is seen everywhere and Direct TV for not putting up a national UPN feed like the do for WB.

Dishentwork has the Superstation package put not everyone pays the $5 a month for WB and UPN.


This is so sad.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

The "UPN is not available everywhere and that is why Enterprise did poorly in the ratings" excuse just doesn't fly. The first episode of Enterprise had an estimated 12.5 million viewers. The last week's episode of Enterprise had 2.5 million viewers. Same network. Same size or larger. Arguably more availability since DirecTV and Dish picked up many of the stations in their local packages. People just aren't watching because Enterprise was a bad show, bad concept with generally bad stories and incredibly uninteresting characters. Things were beginning to suck a little less recently IMHO, but they still sucked!

Voyager was also only available on UPN. Voyager essentially launched the network. This was the cornerstone of the new network. The Voyage pilot episode got a 14.5 rating and 20 share in overnight ratings. This means that 14.5% of all TV sets in the country (or about 15,000,000 households) were tuned to this show. 20% of all television sets that were on during that time slot were tuned UPN. This was the first and last time that UPN won a time slot in the ratings. Broken bow came close, but still only a #4 showing for the time slot.

Also to respond to the distribution of ST programs:
TOS = NBC
TAS = [Edit] NBC (Filmation)
TNG = Syndication
DS9 = Syndication
VOY = UPN
ENT = UPN

See ya
Tony


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

TNGTony: The Animated Series was aired on NBC also, not first run syndication. Filmation was responsible for the animated of the series.

Also, lets not forget that in the first season of UPN's existance, only _Voyager_ was picked up for a second season. All the other shows in UPNs starting lineup were cancelled.

Once again, I wonder how many station owners are re-examing their contracts with UPN. But, I'm also wondering why PAX is still around when most of it's schedule consists of paid programming or religious programming.


----------



## Ray_Clum (Apr 22, 2002)

Mark Holtz said:


> But, I'm also wondering why PAX is still around when most of it's schedule consists of paid programming or religious programming.


IIRC, most PAX stations are O&O's.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

The real message is that SFC's "Sci Friday" got more viewers with fewer available households.

The SF fans have spoken and it's SG1/Atlantis/Galactica over Enterprise. 

And that's sad as Enterprise has had a notable uptick in quality this season.


----------



## Argono (May 21, 2004)

Charise said:


> Actually, in Quantum Leap Dr. Sam Becket was married for the entire series to Dr. Donna Eleese.
> 
> I loved the last episode right up until the tagline they added after the show was canceled. This was supposed to be the season ending episode, not the series end.
> 
> I'm enjoying Enterprise, but if it's canceled and Quantum Leap could be revived somehow, I'd watch it.


Actually, when he first leaped, he was single. In the second episode ("Star Crossed") he gets to interact with Donna, and the viewer learns that she left him at the alter, because of her inability to commit. He was able to get Donna and her father to reconnect, and it wasn't until "The Leap Back" that we learn that it worked and that Sam and Donna did get married.

That's why there'd be no problem in picking up from the last episode. QL is all about changing time, obviously.

HDMe - I agree, it most likely isn't feasible. Otherwise Firefly would have gone that route. I guess I'd like to know how close one could come. If a show could produce 5-6 episodes upfront, secure a contract with Sat/Cable to carry PPV, then after a couple of episodes, pick up some sponsorships, I wonder how much it'd cost for people to subscribe. Again, not very likely given a sci-fi show and its costs, but if it could be done, someone would stand to make a lot of money with a good show.

My question to all is - how much would you pay/episode of your favorite show - $5, 10, more, if it would keep it "on the air"?


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

I also agree that the final episode was a great episode. Ya gotta love a show where the actor who played D-Day in Animal House gets to be God's spokesperson......

I liked what they did with Al, but also agree that I hated the tagline, "Sam Beckett Never Returned Home". All of that he went through for nothing? How hard would it have been to shoot 5 minutes extra with him climbing out of the chamber and then looking in a mirror and shed a tear in relief while a small crowd of technicians claps as he stumbles down a bright hallway to end the show properly?

The Brady Bunch can get a dozen reunion movies, but a show with a hardcore following like QL can't get one? Bellisario isn't even interested in doing one if his attitude towards the show in a few interviews I've seen doesn't change. I don't know if he has changed his tone on the new DVDs that have been released. 

Actually, knowing the greed of Hollywood, it is only a matter of time before the dreaded "reimagining" feature film is created. If they can redo The Dukes of Hazzard anything is possible.


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

Argono said:


> My question to all is - how much would you pay/episode of your favorite show - $5, 10, more, if it would keep it "on the air"?


Zero. I've enjoyed the Star Trek series greatly. But I won't pay a penny over the already high fees dish & cable charge, passing on the networks fees get to broadcast it. To get the show, commercial free, and with a DVD copy -- maybe. But in general, no.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

The budget for the current season of Enterprise was less than $1 million an episode (which was what ST:TNG cost in the 80's to produce). If they made 22 episodes the ENTIRE 4th season only cost $22 Million at worst. They can make back HALF of that off of DVD sales alone. I don't understand why someone else doesn't pick it up at that price cheap. It's not like SciFi Channel couldn't do another SG1 and rescue the show.

It has been much better this year (especially the two-three episode story arcs).


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

I agree; I can't imagine any way they can't make money on Enterprise.

Therefore, my best speculation is that they think Enterprise will never be a big hit, and that they'd rather try out a new vehicle for the Star Trek franchise. That new vehicle (New Frontier, anyone?) will perform better in the next few years than the 5th-7th seasons of Enterprise would have, at least in their thinking. If my black-box speculation happens to be correct.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

It could be that they made this seasons episodes at a loss.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

pjmrt said:


> Zero. I've enjoyed the Star Trek series greatly. But I won't pay a penny over the already high fees dish & cable charge, passing on the networks fees get to broadcast it. To get the show, commercial free, and with a DVD copy -- maybe. But in general, no.


That's my thinking... I already pay for my Satellite... to pay again to watch a TV show seems wrong somehow. I've been buying DVDs of series that I like so I can have marathon watching sessions of them back-to-back and I enjoy that.

The price of the most recent Star Trek season releases have been about $100... which is around $4 or so per episode divided out over a full season... but I get no commercials, watch whenever and again and again + a handful of extras on the DVD for that price. I wouldn't pay $4 to watch it and then buy it again for the same price... its an either-or scenario.

I'd be more inclined to have a direct-to-DVD series release where they release the whole season on DVD and I buy it without having watched it to begin with (did that already with shows like Dead Zone for instance where I missed when it started coming out)...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Mark Holtz said:


> Once again, I wonder how many station owners are re-examing their contracts with UPN. But, I'm also wondering why PAX is still around when most of it's schedule consists of paid programming or religious programming.


I wondered about that in my area... Our UPN station was the NBC station the year before that... for some reason switched to UPN and a new station became the NBC affiliate. I figured there must have been some behind the scenes stuff happening otherwise why would they have lost the NBC deal, because presumably you wouldn't knowingly drop NBC to become UPN, right?


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

Mark Holtz said:


> It could be that they made this seasons episodes at a loss.


Big producers frequently break even or lose a bit on their first-run episode sales to the networks. The big profits come with subsequent syndication.


----------



## kwajr (Apr 7, 2004)

i am so happy


----------



## Argono (May 21, 2004)

HDMe said:


> I'd be more inclined to have a direct-to-DVD series release where they release the whole season on DVD and I buy it without having watched it to begin with (did that already with shows like Dead Zone for instance where I missed when it started coming out)...


And I think that most people, sci-fi fans especially, would agree with you. I would most definitely pay for more seasons of Firefly if they were direct to DVD. The main problem I see with that would be promotion. How would new shows, direct to DVD, get enough exposure to be successful? Shows like Enterprise and Battlestar Galatica would be more likely to succeed because of name recognition, but what about something new and completely different? At least, by offering on PPV, they could get exposure by people flipping and later shows could benefit by cross-promotion.

In the end, I think you're right, for sci-fi shows, anyways, direct-to-DVD would be the most likely to succeed solution. I just think it would be neat to be able to buy a couple of better shows through PPV. I essentially did that with Showtime and Stargate SG1, and I ended up buying the DVDs. But some shows I like to watch, and would support at a small price, are not worthy of DVD purchase.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Argono said:


> And I think that most people, sci-fi fans especially, would agree with you. I would most definitely pay for more seasons of Firefly if they were direct to DVD. The main problem I see with that would be promotion. How would new shows, direct to DVD, get enough exposure to be successful? Shows like Enterprise and Battlestar Galatica would be more likely to succeed because of name recognition, but what about something new and completely different? At least, by offering on PPV, they could get exposure by people flipping and later shows could benefit by cross-promotion.
> 
> In the end, I think you're right, for sci-fi shows, anyways, direct-to-DVD would be the most likely to succeed solution. I just think it would be neat to be able to buy a couple of better shows through PPV. I essentially did that with Showtime and Stargate SG1, and I ended up buying the DVDs. But some shows I like to watch, and would support at a small price, are not worthy of DVD purchase.


I was thinking about this... and I wonder... "what if"...

How about... they make the show direct-to-DVD release... and then they promote it by buying commercial time during shows that have a similar audience. For instance... Star Trek DVD sets could be advertised in a commercial spot during Stargate and they could show teaser scenes just like they do for "coming next week"... I wonder if that air time would be cheap enough they could do that to make people aware that the DVDs are coming out.

As it is... they don't really advertise the current DVDs that well... I watch Smallville, for instance, and can't recall ever seeing a commercial telling me that the DVDs were out... I know because I go to the store regularly.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

I was thinking more along the lines of a "Movie of the Week" premiere/pilot. Offer up some episodes of Season 1 on PPV - make them inexpensive and then immediate turn around and sell the DVDs before Season 2.

With the was that media companies own so many outlets, the cross-promotion might be enough to get ther "critical mass" number of eyeballs so that the people who want to see the show will know it's available.

You have to offer the first bit on something for "free" as people won't sign up unless they have something to sample.


----------



## OakIsle (Feb 14, 2005)

I don't know, I think another network could have made this work.

It would be nice to see someone try. The show had been steadily improving. Hate to see it end.


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

Saw a spot on CNN.com - apparently fans are trying to rally support, get the series picked up by SciFi


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

Argono said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if UPN disappears in a year or two. All they have left is wrestling, which is in a down period, so unless they can pull out the next "Desperate Housewives" or "CSI", they're hemmoraging until Moonves puts them out of their misery.


I don't think that will happen since they are owned by CBS and won't want to compete with themselves.


----------

