Star Trek: Nemesis signals Trek's death?

Date: 12/23/2002
From: FogBoy

Don't get me wrong... I loved 'Nemesis.' I thought it was the first movie in the TNG era to really feel like a theatrical epic on the scale of the original crew's films (well, uh, most of them). It's gripping, it's got a great villian, it's got emotion... excepting a couple of continuity issues and some bizarre directorial choices, I think it's a blast.

But look at the numbers. The worst opening for any Trek film. The biggest drop in a second weekend (down 76%) of any movie in years. The critics despise it... indeed, the rather reviled 'Insurrection' got better reviews! It looks likely to finish with about $35 million. Smaller than any Trek film by far... especially if you start adjusting for inflation. It's close to getting merely half the gross of the next-lowest movie on the list.

Yet if you go over to the most popular Trek site on the 'net, TrekWeb, you'll find that most people who've seen it quite like it (check out the poll on the front page, currently with over 3000 votes from distinct indivdiuals). But it doesn't matter.

Couple this with how "Enterprise" is doing. Ratings are down two-thirds from last year's stellar beginning. In fact, the ratings for this season are only one-third the size of Voyager's ratings in its second season, and we all know how far Voyager fell. If Enterprise suffers a similar drop, expect this to be the first Trek series not to last seven seasons in quite some time. And the

What caused all this? Did Enterprise's failure hurt Nemesis? Was Insurrection's poor quality a blow to both? Did the reviews kill it? Was The Two Towers too close to the release of Nemesis, and the intense amount of crossover hurt Trek due to the high anticipation for TTT? Were people pissed by the injection of "new blood" into the franchise, in the form of an "outside" writer and director? Do the fans only want Berman/Braga, despite constantly complaining about them? What DO they want?

Whatever it is, things are grim for this once prosperous franchise.

If you ask me, they should end Enterprise early and take a few years off. Something like 5 to 10 years will help. Paramount will still make money off of the tapes and DVDs they release during that time, and then the demand will be up. Get some new blood, some real Trek fans who have a proven track record of quality television writing and producing to create a new series that takes the concept in a new direction, the way that only DS9 has. And see if you can't get a successful series. If you do, then maybe you can pump out an 11th film after that show ends.

Of course, no one asked me.

Your thoughts?

It's probably oversaturation

Date: 12/23/2002
From: Recall317

How much Trek can you handle?

I like the Star Trek series and used to watch both TNG and DS9 regularly, but there's only so much Trek I can take. I only watched Voyager sporadically and I've yet to complete a single episode of Enterprise. I'm just bored with it I guess. TNG and DS9 provided some 300 hours of television together. I'm not disparaging the quality of either Voyager or Enterprise, I just get this impression I've seen it all before.

As for Nemesis, I'm not going to see it in theatres. Never planned on it. The only Star Trek film I've seen in a theatre is First Contact and that's because I tagged along for free with some friends. (My favorite Trek film as it turns out.) And yeah, Insurrection was a TV movie at best and I heard extremely disparaging commentary on Nemesis prior to its debut, some of it on this very board when the first scripts starting leaking out. I just don't feel like paying $8 for something I can still see ad nauseum on TNN.

That's likely the problem. There's just too much product out there right now (and let's not even start on the six thousand Trek titles in print!) So I agree with you that they should take 5-10 years off and let the audience recharge a bit.

R317

These are good questions Fog Boy

Date: 12/23/2002
From: Shopman

My own opinion is that Nemesis was a better film than Insurrection, not as good as First Contact or Khan. The problem? There are a lot of films out there. And Trek audiences are down. Keep in mind at one time there were two Trek series on the air and they were making movies too. But the audience has dwindled. There are a lot fewer Trek convenctions too. At least with Nemesis they understood that they had to do more than make what was a theatrical release of a two part Next Gen episode, which was what Insurrection came off as. But now they have to contend with the fact that they can't depend on just the Trek fans to see the movies. Taking 5 to 10 years off won't help. The audience will drift away and people will say Star what? My guess is that there will be at least one more Trek film and they will go back to their idea of combining the Captains from the various series: Picard, Sisko, and Janeway. To bring in the audiences they have to make the film an event. Too many of the Next Gen movies have been just like the two parters they had on the series. One last comment. A question really. Wasn't DS9 regarded by the fans as the least popular Trek series? New direction is was, but the hard core Trek fans pretty much rejected it. More than they did with Voyager and Enterprise.

I don't believe so.

Date: 12/23/2002
From: FogBoy

At the time, the audience for DS9 wasn't huge... but it was certainly more than Voyager or Enterprise has gotten. Not as much as TNG, no, but more than those two.

These days, most fans seem to call DS9 either the best series in the franchise or the second-best. No small praise. It does seem as though most view the series as beginning to die slowly when Voyager became the last Trek show on the air.

Most fans seem to easily forget...

Date: 12/23/2002
From: Slider_Quinn21

...that DS9 didn't really get good until the Dominion became the big story.

I think that DS9 got good around Season 5. Seasons 1-4, with a few major exceptions, were really just...average.

So, ENT could technically become great at a later date (no rhyme intended).

But the odds aren't with it. Trek might just need to take a MUCH longer break. Remember that Trek really filled a void left by Star Wars' ending (almost exactly). Now that Star Wars is back, it might be time for Trek to stop until space stories get to be back in demand.

Quinn
http://slidersweb.net/otherworlds/214

I really don't know Fog Boy

Date: 12/23/2002
From: Shopman

Remember how they had to bring Worf in to DS9 because of sagging ratings? Then they had to bring in that space ship of theirs the Defiant? Then they had to make Sisko more proactive than reactive? Then the Dominion war came. DS9 kept having to reinvent itself over it's six and a half year run to keep on the air. Voyager brought in Seven of Nine but that's about it. In terms of ratings, DS9 had to be on a lot of different stations at different times, but rarley during prime time. Voyager and Enterprise have to compete in prime time. It's apples or oranges. In terms of fans regarding DS9 as the best Trek show, from the contact I have had with the fans it seems as if Next Gen is regarded as the best. Not that I wouldn't mind a DS9 theatrical movie. Or a Voyager reunion. I still don't think taking off ten years or more is going to help any situation. It would pretty much kill the franchise. I doubt Paramount is going to do that. Bet on there being one more Trek film and it bringing in various members from the different Trek shows. Rick Berman's problem is and was that he thought he could just do what he did for Next Gen on the big screen and the fans would flock to it. Worst comes to worst, Paramount takes the Trek films away from him and gives them to someone else.

Damn, man, ANOTHER one so soon???

Date: 12/23/2002
From: SL4ever

Damn, man, another BT??? >:-#

That was reaction when I heard the Voyager was ending in May and Enterprise was debuting in September. I really think they should have waited at least one year, perhaps two, before rolling out another Trek series. Give the fans a chance to rest and give the creators and writers a chance to recharge. I think 5-10 years is too extreme but I'm in line with everyone else who said we needed a break.

DS9 couldn't have sucked more if one of the regular cast members was a black hole. Just my personal opinion, but it remains the only ST series I have never been able to get into despite repeated attempts. This is counting Voyager and Enterprise!

What did the Original Series and Next Gen have in common besides being the two most popular incarnations? Gene Rod.'s direct creative influence. True, by the end of his life he was drooling in his oatmeal, but the series has slowly gone downhill after his death. I compare it to what's happened to the Dallas Cowboys. Get rid of the genius coach who built a back to back Super Bowl Champion and you can coast for a while on what he built, even win another Super Bowl. But then attrition sets in, more and more cracks appear, and the things that worked ten years ago no longer work. You can't just say "Let's get another Troy Aikman" you have to actually go out and find one.

I think this is the biggest problem the Star Trek franchise has. They need a new visionary, a creative genius, and B & B ain't it by a damn sight!

Btw, one final Enterprise comment. What is up with "Chef"??? I saw "Catwalk" today and they showed him, I think, for the first time. They were very careful not to show his face. In previous eps they have mentioned him often but never his first or last name and he never appeared before. This feels like a "Home Improvement" ripoff but it could turn out to be cool. What if Chef is James Kirk's Great Great Grandfather? If I were in power I'd bring in William Shatner for the final episode of the series and reveal this. :-P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Problems with Trek

Date: 12/23/2002
From: Grizzlor

First of all, the orginal Six films were all Outstanding. heck STV: final frontier did pretty good up against Batman, Indiana Jones and Roger Rabbit!

Generations was a putrid film by Ronald Murderer of Kirk Moore. Then First Contact saved TNG by being very good. Insurrection was a good movie but had a terrible script. Nemesis was very impressive. However, with James Bond and Lord of the Rings, I think most people saw those and said Star Trek, they're still making those??????

Another problem was that since Insurrection, we've watched DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise and basically forgotten TNG.

If anything, whether Trek is dead or not, I believe it's time for a change. Of cast, maybe? some of them. I think this showing should signal the end of Rick Berman, a bum who most Trek fans don't like one bit. Get back Piller!

Another bad thing was paramount's aweful promotion campaign, with this Generation's final journey garbage, like people really give a damn???
They are not Kirk, Spock and McCoy. That cast is great but they aren't part of American/Global culture the way the Original were. They should have been promoting it as from the writer of Gladiator or something like that.

I feel bad for John Logan, the writer, and Stuart Baird, director. They both did a wonderful job with an old and obviously outdated cast. I must say that aside from Patrick Stewart, Michael Dorn and MAYBE Spiner, they don't age well. I don't mean physical appearance, like Insurrection, most of them seemed pointless!!! I found that the only point of critique from me.

As for the CRITICS!!!!!
Those turds NEVER EVER commended ANY Star Trek film en masse. They always give it little regard. But does anybody really give a rat's postier what movie Critics say? Egert and the other guy gave it a decent critique. But from what I saw, the biggest problem critics had was with the majority of the cast. As I said, they've grown to be more in the way than a part of the film. Although Logan did focus on Picard, Data, and the Remans, as he should.

Gee I hated to hear Nimoy say he was done acting. Because i STILL stand by the notion that a Kirk/Spock return, if in supporting role, would bring back interest.

Though I've horridly heard many critics suggest Janeway's appearance of a sign of future things. YIKES!!! I say bring back Sisko, Kirk, Spock, Quark, Odo, Q, and lose some of the baggage!

Everyone loves the Borg

Date: 12/23/2002
From: lynnwoodcharlie

What they need to do is make a Star Trek movie which is independent of any of the generations so far. My solution: make a Star Trek movie which tells the origin of the Borg. It's the question everyone wants answered. They need to get all the writing talent ever associated with Star Trek (and maybe even a couple others) and write one hell of a script. Everyone will want a piece of this. It would be the biggest thing since finding out Darth Vader is Luke's father. People (Trekkies or not) would go out to see this movie. Don't get me wrong, I love the other movies, and despite what anyone says, TNG is the best series. Also, why does everyone say that the movies with the original cast is the best? Did you see Star Trek VI. I've had pieces of crap that stunk less.

3 films did have mostly critical support

Date: 12/24/2002
From: FogBoy

2, 4 and 8.

Voyager ruined the Borg

Date: 12/24/2002
From: Grizzlor

people don't want to see them anymore. After getting their butts kicked in First Contact, they were seen constantly on Voyager right after that for years. They have been played out.
Of course, a story on their origin would be interesting and might be nice, but Star Trek is about the HUMAN condition, always has been. The first instance of human borg contact really was in TNG series. So a past story on the borg would not be possible.

Also, lynwood, Star Trek VI was a good movie, that's why it and all of the original cast films but Star Trek The motion picture are constantly swapped and played all the time on every cable channel! Generations nobody wants to see. First Contact and Insurrection unfortunately are still with either Starz or Showtime.

Trek VI is great

Date: 12/24/2002
From: FogBoy

Up there with Wrath of Khan, I'd say. I hold those two as the best films they've done so far.

As for Voyager playing out the Borg, well, yeah, but nobody WATCHED Voyager anyway, so maybe it doesn't matter, eh? Plus, who'd want to watch a movie with no human element? No one to relate to? That'd be for crap.

And Shopman, as for DS9 vs. Voyager, well, the ratings pretty much tell the story. DS9 just plain did better... Voyager is still the lowest rated show in Trek history, until Enterprise goes on another couple of years, that is. And Voyager attempted to revitalize itself with Seven of Nine and an unbelievable crapload of Borg episodes, plus introducing an enemy "more lethal than the Borg," which is a whole mine-is-bigger-than-yours angle that always blows. It's like the whole Jurassic Park 3 angle of the spinosaurus... it's big, yeah. So? It's just like the T-rex in its behavior, so one gave a damn.

Voyager did NOT ruin the Borg...

Date: 12/24/2002
From: Slider_Quinn21

This is such a lazy argument...

I really hate to do this, because Voyager is universally hated, and it has gotten me in HUGE arguments I'd rather not get into. But I feel I have to here...

Voyager didn't ruin the Borg. The only way that argument works would be to say that the Borg were never good in the first place.

1. A Seven of Nine episode ISN'T a Borg episode. So, that eliminates a majority of "Borg" episodes.

2. An episode where the Borg are featured for less than five minutes ISN'T a Borg episode. Most of the time, Voyager ran from them anyway. Plus, they're in the f*cking Delta Quadrant. That's where the Borg are from, so you're going to see a ship every once and a while.

3.The Borg weren't all that menacing in TNG. Let's look at "Best of Both Worlds". In Part 1, they're invincible. Then, in Part 2, they're worthless

-They just allow the Enterprise to steal Locutus, knowing FULL WELL that he had tactical information. They didn't even protect him.

-They sat at Earth for about FIVE MINUTES without doing anything. They just waited for the Enterprise to come back. Earth should be LONG GONE.

-They were put to sleep. And, no, that's not a metaphor. They were actually put to sleep.

Anyone who hates "Independence Day" should equally hate the ending to BOBW. Its basically the same formula.

-Menacing enemy shows up
-Enemy ravages the humans
-Insert stupid oversight that would never work in reality (Computer virus/Sleep thing)
-Humans win

****

So, when you come down to it, Voyager had "Scorpion", "Dark Frontier", "Unimatrix Zero" and "Endgame" as its Borg episodes.

And in each episode, Janeway had a legitimate tactical advantage over the Borg. And in every instance, if anyone was going to fail, she would.

Scorpion-8472 Nanoprobes (And Janeway was the only one on the Cube)
Dark Frontier-Hanson's tech (Janeway went in a shuttle to get Seven)
Unimatrix Zero- UMZ virus (Janeway volutarily got assimilated)
Endgame- Future tech (Janeway was willing to do it herself; the crew refused)

Now, say what you will about Voyager, but the Borg excuse is lazy. I've seen it used millions of times, but I've never seen anything to legitimately back it up.

The only thing I get is that they're not "scary" anymore. But if you watch BOBW Pt. 2, you'll see they were never really all that scary to begin with. Because the more menacing the bad guy, the dumber the solution...

Quinn
http://slidersweb.net/otherworlds/214

Voyager and the borg

Date: 12/25/2002
From: Grizzlor

SQ21, you are right in your response. But I have to argue that the appeal of the Borg to most people was their mysteriousness and seeming invicibility. Their draw was the same as The Planet of the Apes. The Apes were a symbol of certain characteristics of Humans. But yet we still rooted for Heston to kick their butts. Same thing with Picard and The Borg. They were his true "Nemesis", just as Kirk had the Klingons. We love those kinds of stories. With that said, what point was there to have the Borg on Voyager? After being beaten by Picard. When the Kirk/Klingon thing ended, the Klingons kind of became like good guys. But they had the properties to do that. The Borg didn't so much. I liked the Borg episodes where former drones were returned to their biological selves. But as for battling the collective or featuring them as a series, no way!!! Too robotic to do that. But really, The Borg were Picard's bad guys, nobody else.

I've always thought...

Date: 12/25/2002
From: MissingSliderRyan

BT deserves a present since it's Christmas.

... there should be a movie with Q. Unfortunately, John DeLancie thought his character Q was just used comedy relief instead of adding more life and background to him. I agree considering what happened to Q in Voyager though I did like his son who played Q's son.



MSR

Pssssttt... John DeLancie was in BattleStar Galactica, MacGyver and Legend. :-D

Well...

Date: 12/25/2002
From: Slider_Quinn21

Picard, Borg, Voyager, ect...

That's another argument I get a lot. That Picard and the Borg were major enemies. And you're probably right there. I certainly can't argue against your beliefs.

But I just don't get the idea of Voyager just destroying millions of cubes. I once wrote a column that detailed how many cubes Voyager actually destroyed, and its alarmingly few. Considering most of the destroyed cubes in "Dark Frontier" were destroyed by the Queen herself.

I just don't like some of the VOY bashers (I'm not including anyone from here in that group) and their arguments. They're just lazy sometimes.

Voyager was a pretty good Sci-Fi show. Sure, the writing wasn't great, but even the biggest hater had to be entertained by some of the episodes.

Voyager's biggest fault was premiering during DS9's later years: some of the greatest arcs in Trek history. It really never had a chance...

Quinn
http://slidersweb.net/otherworlds/214

SQ21 I point to the UPN factor

Date: 12/26/2002
From: Grizzlor

I like Voyager for the most part. It wasn't a show that I was chomping at the bit to watch new eps. Not like DS9, TNG, Sliders, Buffy, etc. But I did enjoy most of it. I DID not enjoy the Borg episodes. Once again, because I felt Picard had thoroughly kicked their ass. I understood having Borg on the show, but I guess what really made no sense to me was to have the Borg queen return. I think that was stupid.

Anyway, my point in general is perhaps much of Voyager's and Enterprise's woes are attributed to being on UPN. Look at Buffy, almost as soon as it went from the overachieving WB to the weak UPN, it dropped ratings. I've always felt that the ENTIRE programming lineup a network offers is its greatest strength. if you have one or two good shows and the rest is crap, nobody will watch the good ones. they'll perceive the channel as crappy. I think Star Trek is hurting by not being on Syndication anymore. I think it fit there beautifully. Most Scifi shows do. The networks just hate them because they don't pull in massive numbers across all demographics.

You're probably right

Date: 12/26/2002
From: Slider_Quinn21

We should move BT to UPN, then...

Back when I reviewed Trek episodes, I'd only watch UPN for that hour. Other than that, they really don't have anything that interests me.

But its a relatively new channel, so it will probably take a few years to get "mainstream" enough to support shows other networks would.

As for the Borg Queen, I always thought it worked well. Sure, it was for ratings, but DS9 did the same thing with excellent results (both for writing and ratings).

I look to Dark Frontier for a great reason why it works. After failing twice to conquer Earth, I think Voyager was basically the Queen's little experiment. She has a ship full of humans to monitor and "experiment" on every once and a while. To test which attacks work, and what humans do when that happens.

That's a major reason, I believe, that Voyager came out unscathed. Because, as much info that Voyager got on the Borg, the Borg got MUCH more on Voyager.

BTW, I watched Voyager for the same reason I watch ID4. Just good-old-fashioned action fun. Sure, there are continuity holes galore, but its fun to just immerse yourself in that world for an hour or two.

If I want great writing, I'll watch something else. But Voyager filled that "fun" void almost every time...

Quinn
http://slidersweb.net/otherworlds/214

Voyager, Borg, the Queen and Q.

Date: 12/27/2002
From: FogBoy

Borg Queen sexy? Shoot Ebert.

Okay, here's my thing with Voyager: I hate-hate-hate Species Number-Number-Number-Number. I think it was 8472. I've mostly blocked it out. I hate them because they handed the Borg's ASS to them and made them look like a bunch of pasty pansies with funny fashion habits. That's the damage that Voyager did to the Borg, IMO. The Borg were always a battle that was difficult as hell for the human race, but then you show us Species NumberWhores, and suddenly these "liquid space" assclowns are kicking Borg asses so hard that their eye implants get knocked out.

That having been said, it was a pretty natural thing to have Voyager encounter lots of Borg action in the Delta Quandrant. And I always felt Q was Picard's true nemesis, despite how much we associated the Borg with the TNG crew. (Of course, Q got milked out to Voyager as well. He only had one episode on DS9, but on Voyager, suddenly he was just as interested in Janeway as Picard. What a Captain-slut.)

Would I like to see a TNG "Q" movie? Oh hell yes. But I'm sure they didn't do it just because the mainstream public wouldn't have understood all the reality-leaping and time-leaping and crap. And John DeLancie is finally getting too old to clown around as Q.

Final note: I don't like the Borg Queen. Never have, never will. She's a pretty good villian if you don't actually think about how much cooler the Borg were WITHOUT her. Once you realize that, it all goes to hell. She has too much personality and individuality... she makes the Borg less freaky, and thus, less cool. That's my feeling anyway.

Reply

Date: 12/27/2002
From: Slider_Quinn21

That title is ominous, no?

I want to say that I completely agree with the Borg Queen sucking. It makes absolutely no sense, but she really helps me explain away some of the continuity problems... ;-)

As for 8472, I always thought it was a pretty good idea. Something that scares the Borg. I know its revisionist, but it was pretty cool.

And the Borg being a threat to humanity? Well, if you use Wolf 359 (is that right?) and the battle in "First Contact", then you're right. Any battle without Picard was VERY scary for the humans.

But then Picard just points to the cube and says "fire there." Then, it blows up.

So, sure, the Borg are a pain in the ass for humanity...until Picard shows up. Then, the TOS Klingons are scarier...

Quinn
http://slidersweb.net/otherworlds/214

Original URL http://bboard.scifi.com/bboard/browse.cgi/1/5/545/4065677
Nominated by Blinker