I doubt anything like United is going to appeal to anyone other than people who are already Star Trek fans. But United isn't going to be made, so it's kind of a moot point.
News Exclusive: Scott Bakula Eyeing Star Trek Return In President Archer Series Pitch From ‘Enterprise’ Producer
- Thread starter Laura Cynthia Chambers
- Start date
I doubt anything like United is going to appeal to anyone other than people who are already Star Trek fans. But United isn't going to be made, so it's kind of a moot point.
It's quite rare for any Star Trek show to appeal to anyone other than Star Trek fans.
And only a small segment.
UPN thought the opposite with ENT, only to quickly find out how wrong they were.
Star Trek fans alone aren't enough to sustain a Star Trek show.
Aaron Sorkin is not without his flaws.
He started as a playwright. He needs the occasional reminder that he is not writing for the stage (Literary flourishes that may work fine on stage do not necessarily translate well to TV).
True, but I still think he would be a next-level addition to any Trek writer’s room.
the general population doesn't give a shit about ENT or VOY.
Or Star Trek in general, I suspect.
That is the whole point I've been making this entire time!
DS9 either. Just to remove any kind of conscious bias.
Gene Roddenberry penned creations for the win only!
Any show at that age is going to just be remembered by fans, unless it was just so iconized into the culture that it can't be forgotten, even by people who haven't seen it (Fonzie, Spock, Daisy Duke)
Which was why a SFA episode all about Sisko was dumb. Putting aside for the moment the illogic of caring about some dude who died 900 years before, the episode was meant for DS9 fans. The problem with this is that SFA is supposed to be a show catering to 20-somethings who probably have never watched DS9 and most likely couldn’t be bothered to have seven years and 140 episodes under their belt before watching SFA. Callbacks to shows they’ve never seen is not the way to entice younger viewers.
It's what Star Trek does.bsee Unification and TUC.
And, strangely, I care about people who are 900 years old. No, it's not logical. Humans are not logical.
And, strangely, I care about people who are 900 years old. No, it's not logical. Humans are not logical.
Not me. 475, tops. After that, they are dead to me. Dead!!
In the UK at least, Voyager is really the only Star Trek series beyond TOS and TNG that has broken into the broader cultural zeitgeist around ST. It’s apparently the most popular 1990s Star Trek show in reruns, and even people who’ve never watched it closely still recognise figures like Captain Janeway and Seven of Nine.
For the general public, Star Trek isn’t thought of as a collection of distinct series. Instead, people recall standout characters and iconic elements - Kirk, Spock, Picard, Janeway, Seven, Data, the Klingons, the Borg, “Beam me up, Scotty,” and so on. If you asked people to list memorable images from Star Trek, “that hot blonde robot woman” would definitely be among them.
In that sense, Voyager is the only true TNG‑era spin‑off that has firmly embedded itself in the wider public consciousness around Star Trek, for better or worse reasons.
A fair barometer is "Simpsons did it" - and they have with Voyager, more than once, but not as I recall DS9 or ENT. That suggests its broken into the zeitgeist and mass of imagery in the public mind of what is recognised as ST more broadly.
ENT hasn't - though its definitely found a second life in repeats here in the UK with people (re)discovering it.
If the United concept happened - which it won't - it would be banking more on Scott Bakula's present name power than it would the fact that Bakula was in ENT or ST previously.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
