Would like to see Enterprise come back…

[Dukhat]

Really, the only audience for an animated ENT sequel would be people who are fans of ENT. And they're not going to want an animated sequel. They're going to want a live-action show that picks up right where ENT left off. Neither of which I foresee happening in the immediate future.

 

[fireproof78]

CBS don't go cheap on their Treks though.

And, as you note, it's a niche within a niche within a niche, since animated Treks don't automatically appeal to all Trek fans. Several won't watch just because it's animated, no matter how serious it is.

So, we're asking CBS to front a lot of money on something that is appealing to a much smaller part of a niche audience? I'm not a business person but that strikes me as a poor plan.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

I think there is a certain affection for Enterprise in the wider science fiction media.

I think it is seen as a show that was really only just getting it's game on as it finished. I think it's seen as a missed opportunity. But any of the above could be spun positively if it's marketed well. Plus it's got Bakula fronting it. That man's star has continued to rise since doing Enterprise and those of a certain generation still feel a lot of affection for him from his work on Quantum Leap.

I suppose I'm just saying that because Enterprise is perceived as a failure there's no reason to think that would be a bad thing for a potential new show. If anything, Nu-Enterprise wouldn't even have to try very hard to vault over the quality of many of it's predecessors blander episodes. There's no reason to think they'd knock it off as a cheap show or sneak it out as an under the radar animation or whatever.

If they did Nu-Enterprise, put together a great trailer and promoted the shit out of it it could work. We'd all watch it. It'd trend well on Twitter and so forth as well which is what it's all about these days. Just imagine the hashtags.

I'd watch it. I like it when underdogs have a chance to hit it big. I'm in the tragic position though wherein I'd like it to happen very much, but am also very much certain it will not. It's fun to speculate though.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Really, the only audience for an animated ENT sequel would be people who are fans of ENT. And they're not going to want an animated sequel. They're going to want a live-action show that picks up right where ENT left off. Neither of which I foresee happening in the immediate future.

But since ENT already has a small audience, animation is a perfect fit for them, and its most sound choice business wise. If its animated like TAS, then unless it a standout episode like “Yesteryear”, it can always be decanonized if its not well received. Whereas with live action, viewers are stuck with what is made canon forever, regardless if it is very good or very bad.

3 animated seasons, and a possible live action movie on P+ afterwards doesn’t sound like a bad deal. At least it honours the original plan of the show getting seven seasons and a movie, and builds up the reputation of CBS.

 

[Dukhat]

But since ENT already has a small audience, animation is a perfect fit for them, and its most sound choice business wise.

I fail to see your logic. If ENT only has a small audience, then what would be the point of CBS spending time and money to produce a sequel, animated or not? The idea is to target a large audience, not a minuscule one. You don’t cater to just a few people; you cater to the masses.

 

[FederationHistorian]

This “bad” logic I’m allegedly displaying is still better than this lack of logic on display in ignoring that a larger audience can be gained on streaming than solely on tv, as I proved with the streaming data.

Like, how popular do you expect ENT to be? At least I use data to show sound projection to show its not a waste of CBS’s time to give ENT another go. 7.2M on streaming isn't something to be ignored.

Everyone needs to stop expecting everything to get the same level of viewership as Stranger Things. Its preventing other potentially great shows from flourishing. There's only one Stranger Things.

 

[fireproof78]

I disagree with the projection that Enterprise will be a gain in viewership. What's the appeal?

And I don't give a shit about Stranger Things. So that does not influence my opinion.

 

[Dukhat]

This “bad” logic I’m allegedly displaying is still better than this lack of logic on display in ignoring that a larger audience can be gained on streaming than solely on tv, as I proved with the streaming data.

You’re completely missing the point. Streaming has nothing to do with anything. There are a ton of original streaming shows out there that I don’t watch or care about. For every Stranger Things, there are 20 other shows that I could care less about and honestly wonder why they’re even being made. But when it comes to Star Trek, this is CBS/Paramount’s baby, and they’re simply not going to cater to a niche audience in order to bring back a failed show from 20 years ago that in their eyes, nobody cares about. Bringing back Patrick Stewart? They know people care about that. Bringing back Connor Trinneer? Not so much.

Like, how popular do you expect ENT to be?

ENT? It wasn’t popular. It got cancelled. And everyone involved with the show, from the producers to the actors, have moved on to other things (or not, as the case may be. When was the last time Jolene Blalock has done anything of note?)

 

[FederationHistorian]

ENT? It wasn’t popular.

With you and a small vocal minority. Just like how Michael Burnham isn’t popular with a small vocal minority, despite the fact that she’s written better now and CBS has no plans to end the show any time soon.

And everyone involved with the show, from the producers to the actors, have moved on to other things (or not, as the case may be.

Give them a cheque with enough zeros on it and a decent enough script and they’d come back.

When was the last time Jolene Blalock has done anything of note?)

When even Blalock is ok appearing on the ENT DVD years after the show ended and again on Star Trek Day last year (which coincides with the 20th anniversary of ENT too, btw), it clearly shows that the ENT cast isn’t the problem. Its those that do anything to justify their narrow view that ENT remains an unpopular show, from moving goalposts to gaslighting to holding a reductive viewpoint over how much acting work has been done lately.

 

[Dukhat]

Tell you what: When they make a sequel to ENT, I’ll come back here and eat my words. Until then, keep checking this thread.

 

[valkyrie013]

Well, atleast an Enterprise has a built in audience, and it is having a bit of a renaissance,so more people are watching the show.So you probably have Millions who would watch. which would be good ratings. , unlike alot of Netflix stuff that only do 1 season, or otherwise sucks.

 

[fireproof78]

Tell you what: When they make a sequel to ENT, I’ll come back here and eat my words. Until then, keep checking this thread.

Same. Love how Enterprise is suddenly super popular that people will tune in to watch it.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

With you and a small vocal minority. Just like how Michael Burnham isn’t popular with a small vocal minority, despite the fact that she’s written better now and CBS has no plans to end the show any time soon.

I'd say it's a small but vocal minority that likes Enterprise. This is the show that performed so badly it got the franchise canned from TV for over a decade.

Michael Burnham's show got a spin off and was successful enough to justify multiple other Star Trek shows. You're really not comparing apples to apples.

Mainly though, I don't like your idea that CBS would try to sneak out a cheap show to a small audience. That's not how it works. Each new Trek show has been designed for a specific audience, but they've all gone big in their own way.

If it was to happen then it wouldn't be snuck out as a niche project. We'd have all the bells and whistles a new Trek show gets provided CBS thought it was profitable.

 

[Sci]

Well, Honestly no one has Tried a serious Star Trek Cartoon.
Tas, LD, and prodigy have mainly been kid oriented.

Prodigy is a serious cartoon. It's kid-oriented, yes, but it is also a drama.

Lower Decks, by contrast, is very decidedly not kid-oriented. That is an adult animated sitcom.

Not saying Clone Wars or Rebels aren't kid oriented, but they were made to be open to all ages, and even then had serious content, hell Rebels was on Disney XD channel.

I would say Prodigy is very much in the same vein as Clone Wars or Rebels in terms of tone and audience.

With you and a small vocal minority.

At this point, Enterprise is the most obscure Star Trek series from the POV of the general audience. It's the one that ran for a few seasons during the Bush years and got cancelled, the thing Scott Bakula did between Quantum Leap and NCIS.

Give them a cheque with enough zeros on it and a decent enough script and they’d come back.

Not necessarily. Not all of the ENT cast are still jobbing actors; Jolene Blalock appears to have retired from acting altogether, and these days her full time job is running her and her husband's philanthropic foundation. Her husband is Jordan Rapino, CEO of LiveNation, one of the biggest entertainment companies in the world -- so she's not hurting for money. She has no incentive to do a revival except an actual desire to play T'Pol again.

When even Blalock is ok appearing on the ENT DVD years after the show ended and again on Star Trek Day last year (which coincides with the 20th anniversary of ENT too, btw),

Those are very different things from starring in a new production.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Prodigy is a serious cartoon. It's kid-oriented, yes, but it is also a drama.

Lower Decks, by contrast, is very decidedly not kid-oriented. That is an adult animated sitcom.

And there can be a serious, adult animation Trek dramedy too.

From what I saw of PRO, it could easily produce a few 45 minutes to 60 minutes films. That five films a season.

At this point, Enterprise is the most obscure Star Trek series from the POV of the general audience.

Ah yes, the “obscure” series that has a much higher audience score on Rotten Tomatoes (75 for S1 & S2, 81 for S3, 82 for S4) than current Trek fare in DIS (49 for S1, 36 for S2, 40 for S3, 20 for S4) and PIC (53 for S1 and 26 for S2). For even broader comparisons, Lower Decks got an audience score of 52 for S1 and 77 for S2, SNW got 80, and PRO got a score of 73

When ENT is rated above the critically acclaimed SNW by the audience, and the rest of the current Trek series, it should be making TPTB think a bit. No matter how much they deny it, the enthusiasm is with ENT, more so than NuTrek.

It's the one that ran for a few seasons during the Bush years and got cancelled, the thing Scott Bakula did between Quantum Leap and NCIS.

That covers a lot of ground, since Bakula appeared on a bunch of shows between Quantum Leap & NCIS (ex. Designing Women, Law & Order, etc.). But he’s as famous for playing Jonathan Archer as he is famous for playing Sam Beckett and Dwayne Pride. And was even open to playing Archer again as recently as 2016 when Discovery was in the work, but was inexplicably given the cold shoulder and not given the chance to send off either the Shenzhou crew or the Disco crew in either DIS or Short Treks, despite the crew sendoff becoming a Trek tradition and it being era appropriate as well.

Maybe he’ll get to give the USS Kelvin crew a sendoff instead, at the very least, if the film writers ever follow through with the Kirk meeting his dad story.

Not necessarily. Not all of the ENT cast are still jobbing actors; Jolene Blalock appears to have retired from acting altogether, and these days her full time job is running her and her husband's philanthropic foundation. Her husband is Jordan Rapino, CEO of LiveNation, one of the biggest entertainment companies in the world -- so she's not hurting for money. She has no incentive to do a revival except an actual desire to play T'Pol again.

Those are very different things from starring in a new production.

You clearly miss the point that she will come back for her ENT castmates, so her coming out of retirement to don the ears again isn’t impossible, although I willing to bet she would probably like a large cheque and a great script and a much better characterization of T’Pol than what she got during ENT. She isn’t coming back for SNW, despite being a major TOS fan and SNW being where the enthusiasm of the studio is now. Otherwise, she would have appeared in the Kelvin films in a cameo appearance.

In any case, they aren’t too old to play those characters again if they want too. They could even borrow from the Destiny series and say that the crew jumped ahead six years due to time dilation at the highest sublight speed to bypass the indiscretions in TATV of there being virtually no changes in their professional or personal lives. And skip the Romulan War in the process. It might even be interesting to see them have to adjust to a universe recovering from the Romulan War two decades on, which they have no recollection of and have only learned about through word of mouth and various historical documents.

 

[Dukhat]

At this point, Enterprise is the most obscure Star Trek series from the POV of the general audience. It's the one that ran for a few seasons during the Bush years and got cancelled, the thing Scott Bakula did between Quantum Leap and NCIS.

Pretty much this.

Ah yes, the “obscure” series that has a much higher audience score on Rotten Tomatoes (75 for S1 & S2, 81 for S3, 82 for S4) than current Trek fare in DIS (49 for S1, 36 for S2, 40 for S3, 20 for S4) and PIC (53 for S1 and 26 for S2). For even broader comparisons, Lower Decks got an audience score of 52 for S1 and 77 for S2, SNW got 80, and PRO got a score of 73

When ENT is rated above the critically acclaimed SNW by the audience, and the rest of the current Trek series, it should be making TPTB think a bit. No matter how much they deny it, the enthusiasm is with ENT, more so than NuTrek.

You're still not getting it. CBS doesn't care about Rotten Tomatoes. They care about shows that take place either during the (nu)TOS period or the TNG period and beyond, because that's what their current showrunners want. They want to bring back iconic characters such as Pike, Kirk, Spock and Picard, not Archer.

You clearly miss the point that she will come back for her ENT castmates...

What? Where's the proof of that? Has she made a statement to that effect? It's like you simply don't listen to what people tell you because it doesn't line up with your fantasy.

 

[FederationHistorian]

You're still not getting it.

No, you aren’t listening. Bring back while you can still bring them back. They aren’t getting any younger. And the audience is more receptive to them than most of what CBS is putting out in regards to Star Trek.

CBS doesn't care about Rotten Tomatoes. They care about shows that take place either during the (nu)TOS period or the TNG period and beyond, because that's what their current showrunners want.

CBS does actually care about audience reception, since that translates to ratings and thus dollars, and can influence them to request that their shows be shaken up to spur greater audience interest if the direction taken by the showrunner isn’t working.

Trust me, now that DIS has one more season than ENT, the next step CBS will likely take with DIS to prove its better than ENT is to have a season that is more loved by the audience than anything done by ENT. Since a high rating on Rotten Tomatoes from the audience instead of the critics for a change would reflect well on the show. IDK if they’ll actually succeed in that goal, but I’m sure they’ll try.

They want to bring back iconic characters such as Pike, Kirk, Spock and Picard, not Archer.

Pike has never been iconic like Kirk, Spock & Picard. SNW stands a chance to make Pike iconic though. We’ll see how it turns out.

Next, how many times do you expect the audience to watch the adventures of Kirk and Spock, and in stories that are a ripoff of TWOK? Talk about small universe syndrome. It shows that Star Trek is lacking in imagination. Its like expecting the audience to always watch Superman face Lex Luthor with every reboot and remake, when Darkseid and Bizzaro and even the Joker exist as alternative antagonists.

And if CBS didn’t care about Archer, they wouldn’t try to have Easter eggs referencing him at all in any of their shows. They probably recommend to remove those references if they didn’t want to deal with Archer anymore.

What? Where's the proof of that? Has she made a statement to that effect? It's like you simply don't listen to what people tell you because it doesn't line up with your fantasy.

I never said she said that. Its clear that despite being retired from acting, she’s open to reuniting with the ENT cast. That was her biggest role to date, so it makes sense. She didn’t have to come back for an interview for the ENT Blu Ray back in 2013, but she did. The proof of this is on, IDK, the Star Trek website! Reuniting The NX-01 Crew (startrek.com)

Really, you should only be upset with yourself here, since I was prepared to let it rest. You decided to continue the argument because your bored and, for some reason, my stance on ENT bothers you and thus felt to need to project about “not listening” and “lining up with fantasy”. I’m not sure why. Its not like CBS is going to personally message me for a spec script. All I’m doing is pitching ideas and showing that ENT is more positively received now than during its original run, since that’s all I can do. That’s all anyone can do for now. Since none of us actually own the franchise.

They don’t want to do anything with ENT though - despite apparently knowing what to do with them according to you - so I’ll move on after PIC S3 ends next year. I already have a large tv watch list and reading list to get to anyways. Maybe that doesn’t line up with your fantasy of me being obsessive over ENT, but I do think of other things and do have other activities, both in and outside of Star Trek.

 

[Dukhat]

You’re welcome to your fantasy.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

It's like you simply don't listen to what people tell you because it doesn't line up with your fantasy.

Really, you should only be upset with yourself here, since I was prepared to let it rest. You decided to continue the argument because your bored and, for some reason, my stance on ENT bothers you and thus felt to need to project about “not listening” and “lining up with fantasy”.

@Dukhat, @FederationHistorian...you are moving away from comments on each other's posts and toward needling each other personally. Your mutual Last-Word-itis is not helping any.

You have both stated your views many times, in many ways. You have different views. Please agree to disagree, and stop trying to "win" the discussion with the last word. This is a speculation thread. It's for members to speculate, not shut down discussion. Okay? Thanks.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Ah yes, the “obscure” series that has a much higher audience score on Rotten Tomatoes (75 for S1 & S2, 81 for S3, 82 for S4) than current Trek fare in DIS (49 for S1, 36 for S2, 40 for S3, 20 for S4) and PIC (53 for S1 and 26 for S2). For even broader comparisons, Lower Decks got an audience score of 52 for S1 and 77 for S2, SNW got 80, and PRO got a score of 73

When ENT is rated above the critically acclaimed SNW by the audience, and the rest of the current Trek series, it should be making TPTB think a bit. No matter how much they deny it, the enthusiasm is with ENT, more so than NuTrek.

Rotten Tomatoes scores are easy to manipulate and should never be used as objective proof in any kind of discussion. That's a cheap shot in what looks like the last desperate gasp of a dying argument.

I love Enterprise, I really do. But let's not pretend that it has a large section of the Star Trek fanbase clamouring for its' return. Maybe @HopefulRomantic can fill us in, but I'm pretty certain given the amount of activity in here that this is one of the quietest sections of the forum. Compare the Strange New Worlds forum which has a lot of chat and active topics that spring up daily.

You've been in this topic for months. You've convinced me you want it to happen and think it could. I'm semi-convinced it's on the very edge of possibility. But you've never once given a convincing 'how' or 'why' to your belief. Just this odd stuff about a secret coterie of Enterprise fans waiting to jump out and watch Enterprise 2.0 in large numbers, exactly like they didn't the first time round.

You're free to love this show. I love it too. But you're onto a dying donkey if you think that Enterprise is in any way a popular show.

Voyager was more watched while Netflix had Star Trek and that's seven seasons long and mostly crap. Where were the secret Enterprise army in those days? Why weren't they surging onto Netflix to stream the show 24/7 just to show CBS that an audience existed?

There's a reason we've had Janeway, Chakotay and Seven in recent Trek shows. There's a reason Enterprise is pretty much limited to very deep-cut jokes on Lower Decks. Enterprise is obscure. It's the one that doesn't quite fit properly with TOS or TNG. It has it's fans but it's fans are few.