Bakula: Star Trek Enterprise A Victim Of Circumstance

[TrekToday]

Scott Bakula, Star Trek: Enterprise‘s Captain Archer, has his own view on why Star Trek: Enterprise did not do as well as other Star Trek television series. Over time, according to Bakula, Star Trek: Enterprise was improving, with the last season being its best. “”I felt like our show got better and better,” he said, [...]

More...

[C.E. Evans]

I do have to wonder if ENT would have fared better in syndication than on UPN (although it was UPN that pushed for a fifth Star Trek series). If the series had been able to go to air without mandates from UPN, it might have been a very different show from the very beginning and possibly have lasted more than four seasons perhaps...

[Temis the Vorta]

That kind of syndication is dead now and was dying even when ENT was on. It's not the solution.

The larger circumstance that killed ENT is that TV has evolved so that there's no longer any place for shows like it: space opera on broadcast. Those things don't go together. It's questionable whether sci fi of any type can survive on broadcast. Grimm and Once Upon a Time have been modest successes but they don't really count, being fantasy, while Awake, Alcatraz and Terra Nova are already cancelled or as good as. (The difference is that fantasy skews more female compared with sci fi and women are the dominant factor in the broadcast audience.)

What does work: niche sci fi on cable (The Walking Dead, Falling Skies, SyFy series to the extent they do sci fi anymore). The Walking Dead and Falling Skies are two of the biggest cable hits of the past year. But the smaller audiences you are going to get need to be offset by basic cable subscription revenue in addition to advertising, and it's still a challenge to add in the larger budget that space opera would require.

[C.E. Evans]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

That kind of syndication is dead now and was dying even when ENT was on.

Actually, it wasn't since there were still quite a few scripted dramas in syndication in 2001 (the bubble for first-run shows really didn't burst until a couple of years later). In many ways, the syndication market now mirrors the one in 1986 in which all scripted dramas were reruns. As a first-run drama, TNG was a very rare one, but it was sold almost entirely on the strength of the Star Trek brand. Ditto for DS9.

It's not the solution.

But I do think it would have helped had ENT been a syndicated series in 2001. There were still first-run syndicated dramas on the air alongside ENT throughout most of its run (ironically, the last of them went out with ENT in 2005).

Ultimately, however, the only reason why ENT was even created was because UPN wanted a Trek series to replace VOY--which in itself was created only because of UPN. Had Trek remained solely in syndication, Series IV might have turned out to be a very show instead of VOY and could have come out a number of years later than it did. Heck, there might not even have been a Series V yet, really.

[CaptainMatt]

Come on four seasons is a respectable run. The problem is that so many got used to their favorite Trek TV series going seven years.

[Temis the Vorta]

I don't want ENT back. What I want is a new series (a good one) and from that perspective, it's a good thing ENT got cancelled because it means a new creative team can take over, hopefully a better one. And the show can be on cable, or broadcast can continue its fitful evolution into something that can compete with cable, and become a decent place for Star Trek to live.

[Danny99]

What happened with Voyager and the first seasons of Enterprise was a tired group that had used all their ideas six times over and had nothing left to give. Everyone reaches their end, but the group clung to Trek and brought it down instead of allowing someone else to take a shot at it.

Manny Coto may not have been the guy, even though he was producing some great episodes in ENT season four. But Trek needed new life and Berman & Braga & cohorts were not it.

[ChristopherPike]

Temis the Vorta wrote:

---

I don't want ENT back.

I do. Even Abramsversified, if absolutely necessary.

What I want is a new series (a good one) and from that perspective, it's a good thing ENT got cancelled because it means a new creative team can take over, hopefully a better one. And the show can be on cable, or broadcast can continue its fitful evolution into something that can compete with cable, and become a decent place for Star Trek to live.

Nothing will ever convince me that cancelling ENT, particularly at that point, was a good thing. If BSG could putter along on some niche cable station, with a viewership level a mainstream TV channel would otherwise pull the plug at, why not Star Trek? Too expensive didn't wash for me, given that Season 4 cut its cost to produce and instantly went up in quality.

[GemHaters]

I still maintain that they should have tried to run it during the summer. I think it would have been perfect. It wouldn't have had to compete with anything but reruns, how much better does it get? I also think that's what they should do if they attempt another series.