Who wouldn't want to know the direction their favorite series is going? Not sure about TV/movies but I followed my favorite video game series back before the internet, there were magazines and you'd still want to know about which developers were involved etc.. not to mention back then they'd sometime stick in actual advertising for the next installment. "Bond will return in.... ______".
Star Trek's Troubling 50th Anniversary
- Thread starter MakeshiftPython
- Start date
We reach, brother. We reach.
Right, maybe I didn't articulate myself properly.
The problem isn't actually that we know next to nothing about the movie, but we do know that the script they've been working with up till about six weeks ago (I'm guessing, because I don't actually want to look up when the news about Orci's exit broke) is gone, we know they've hired a director from a shortlist who feels like the least qualified (or one of the two least qualified) from said shortlist, and there's the rumor going around that Paramount wants to GotG-ify the next Trek movie.
That last one, while being a rumor, is indeed cause for worry.
And that's what I'm expressing. Worry. Not certainty of doom. Worry.
Dennis is right. Here's the chart showing what actually happened:
It could even be argued that the decline began before TNG went off the air.
What exactly makes Justin Lin the least qualified? He's worked numerous times with ensemble casts in technically heavy films.
Seems to me that he is very qualified.
Jeez, I didn't know it got so bad near the end VOY.
Here's the chart showing what actually happened:
That is what we call a ratings slide!
Last edited:
So when was it that Trek got "in the red" with the ratings? Once it went below 4 or 3?
I don't think it was about when it went "in the red" but that there was a long-term, consistent erosion of the audience. The ratings never really stabilized.
Despite the decline since TNG, Paramount was still making the shows, but it got to a point where they couldn't keep them going once it went below a certain line. I'm just curious to know when it was bad enough that they were no longer profitable.
Sometime during the third year of Enterprise, certainly, if not before.
A lot of factors entered into UPN's decision to cancel the show, one being that for a long time Star Trek in one form or another was the weblet's consistently best performing show. America's Next Top Model put an end to that.
A lot of factors entered into UPN's decision to cancel the show, one being that for a long time Star Trek in one form or another was the weblet's consistently best performing show. America's Next Top Model put an end to that.
You know what I think?
I remember Star Trek's reputation being on a steady decline in the late 90s.
It seemed to me that everyone was getting increasingly more frustrated with Berman, Braga and the rest of the creative teams in control and so fans started jumping ship.
I think the ratings would've stabilized if Paramount had given creative control to another generation of writers and executives and the change had resulted in better episodes.
I remember Star Trek's reputation being on a steady decline in the late 90s.
It seemed to me that everyone was getting increasingly more frustrated with Berman, Braga and the rest of the creative teams in control and so fans started jumping ship.
I think the ratings would've stabilized if Paramount had given creative control to another generation of writers and executives and the change had resulted in better episodes.
No, because the ratings began a steep decline within weeks of DS9's premiere (for DS9, not TNG) and never recovered - that was in the early 90s. If you look at the chart, the fall-off actually flattens as it reaches a certain point; basically, all but serious Trek fans had abandoned the shows by the late 90s.
That big audience of casual viewers just plain got tired of Star Trek and moved on - the novelty was gone and DS9 didn't hook them. There's no reason in the world to think that kind of erosion was reversible.
That big audience of casual viewers just plain got tired of Star Trek and moved on - the novelty was gone and DS9 didn't hook them. There's no reason in the world to think that kind of erosion was reversible.
A
Amaris
Guest
Let's try it! Graphic nudity, lots of one-liners, guns ahoy, and we'll have Gary Oldman narrate the sex scenes. We'd be back on top in half a season! I could do it!
Change or die. Life-forms or media franchises have to find ways to keep what works, ditch what doesn't and make necessary alterations. Even as a big Trek fan, I can see how the Trek of TNG-ENT can be compared to a musician who was a stadium filler in his 20's (TNG) but, in his middle age, played to "intimate gatherings" (DS9-VOY). ST needed to reinvent itself as a new act or retire.
I think we saw a creative rennassiance once they finally did do this and put Manny Coto in charge of Enterprise, but that was fourth season and the writing was on the wall by then. One does wonder what might have happened if there had been a change at the top sooner.....
Why do you think this is so?
A
Amaris
Guest
Probably because it was so. I remember watching it and thinking "finally, they're listening to us Trek fans!"
Similar threads
