Wade, I can only admire you're enthusiasm. These days, I only have vague recollections of starting out that way... My best advice: Illegitimi non carborundum.
I was one of them. Though I'm not in the US so it wouldn't have counted but when it first started to air here I watched it at 11/midnight on a tuesday or Wednesday...but a couple of episodes in it really started to lose me and I didn't even make it half way through before I dropped off. When I heard it was cancelled I can't say I was too upset but then after hearing good things about season 4 I started watching it and actually did like some of it. So when it did end I did actually wish there was some more, even if the finale left me incredibly underwhelmed.
in an other hand, the audience was almost twice bigger than SG1 at this period and SG1 had lasted 10 years. so, i agree with the budget issue. SciFi channel has always supported SG1, UPN, uhmmm....
UPN was also a network and they require bigger ratings to justify Enterprise's cost. The problem with scifi shows, especially good ones, is that they tend to attract very loyal, but smaller audiences. It also doesn't help that ENT, near the end, tended to write episodes in story arcs, making it even harder for new fans to join. A channel like Scifi, which has audience expectations on par with how much a typical scifi TV series can draw in, allows for scifi shows to survive longer. If only ENT had premiered on the Scifi channel, and if the show had continued the positive trend in season 4, I sometimes wonder if the show could have ran for 10 seasons as well. Wishful thinking I guess.
It always made me sad that SciFi did not pick up ENT. It would have been a perfect fit, especially with the direction season four started going and the way season 5 would have built on that.
I have always found it horrifically ironic that after they felt they were in trouble and had to revamp the show (i.e. season three) that it got so much better by bringing in arc-based storytelling, which the network from all reports absolutely hated since VGR and wanted to avoid.
HEY! This is an ENT board! ENT-ers speak up and drown out the haters. *sticking fingers in ears* "I cannn't hear you haters - la la la la la!"
It did. I even remember reading a quote from then CBS President Les Moonves stating he would have axed Enterprise in season three if he had the power--which he got the following November when he was promoted to the head of Viacom or some position that gave him the final say in UPN programming. I think a lot of the decision to bring it back for season four had to do with syndication. ENT was not a ratings draw like TNG or a critial darling like DS9 was (Eventually), but it was Star Trek all the same.
I loved Enterprise. Loved it. The first two seasons were mostly rubbish (Voyager-lite, and Voyager was TNG-lite) except a few like the pilot, shockwave, regeneration and a few others that were quite good. But from the third season on it was awesome. My favourite. It stepped out of the shadow of the other Treks and blazed it's own trail. It's just a shame the finale was an insult, and the continuation novels were rubbish, too :-(
I would not underestimate Mr. Moonves' role in both the demise of Enterprise and the fact that we wont see (any) Star Trek on television for years to come. Aside from his well known dislike of the Science Fiction genre, in my opinion, the man is an incompetent executive and manager. As evidence, all you need to look at is CBS's languishing stock price and financial results relative to the rest of the industry. This guy couldn't attract an audience if he were a magnet. I can't figure out why Sumner Redstone keeps him around. Redstone has fired far more talented executives than Moonves. The worst thing that happened to this franchise is that Redstone moved the rights to Star Trek from Paramount to CBS. (IMO)
I'll admit that they wern't the best books I've ever read, but they were far from rubbish. They performed a necessary function.
I agree with you...even the last two seasons were desperate attempts (with Brent Spiner's awful return) and the idotic KLINGON BUMPY HEAD EXPLANATION, and the "Mirror" stuff...the show had a great start and concept that was utterly ruined by bad writing and an often inconsistant lead character; Archer.. Nothing wrong with the performer though...good actors/actresses. But it got what it deserved (being axed) and cemented the tenure of Berman and Braga. Rob
The arrogance of that executive. HE doesn't like SCIFI so millions of viewers are denied the Genre. Unbelieveable. Suppose he or someone else didn't like CSI type of shows or Law and Order. So no one is able to watch those type of shows because some idiot executive hates them and others have to suffer because of it. Takes my breath away just to think of such arrogance.
I think you misunderstand how network executives think. It never mattered that Les Moonves didn't like sci-fi shows. If ENTERPRISE's ratings were through the roof, and it was making UPN bookoo dollars, then it would still be on the air today, regardless of what Moonves's personal feeling were. I'm sure he couldn't give a shit about reality shows either, but since they're cheap to produce and get sky-high ratings, that's what the networks show. As for the show itself, ENTERPRISE, like VOYAGER, had a terrific premise that the writers and producers just couldn't follow up on. The end result was severely flawed, but again, that's not what doomed the show. It was simply that the show was too expensive to produce for the returns it was getting. UPN could produce ten reality shows for the same amount of money it cost to produce ENTERPRISE, and they'd all get better ratings.
^Too True, plus I read an interview about moonves where he said if ENT didn't make it in the nielson's top 10 it was not going to be renewed anyway.