Who should really be blamed for the state of Star Trek? And Why?

Berman or Paramount?



My first instinct was to blame Berman and Braga, which they probably shoulder some of it. But at the same time, it does seem like Paramount kept clammoring for more Star Trek because it was profitable for a long while.

They both fucked it up

IMHO the rot set in about halfway through *Deep Space 9.* There was one horrible season where it seemed like the only goal any of the writers or producers had was to squeeze as much T&A and as many alien-sex-farce-type plots into the show as they could. By the time they got back to doing real episodes, I was done.

I gave *Voyager* a try, but although it was potentially a really good premise, it turned out pretty bland and lifeless, and I gave up on it. However, I have a soft spot for it because it produced "Threshold," which in my mind is the worst Star Trek episode EVER:

http://www.plaidder.com/spocks.htm

in case you have forgotten:

The badness of "Threshold" is indeed too rare and exquisite a thing to be adequately celebrated in the words of mere mortals, although a whopping 10 respondents tried. There are many reasons why this episode dominated the Voyager category the way Godzilla dominated Tokyo, laying all other nominees waste in its reeking and radioactive path; but the basic story is, as one respondent put it, that "any episode where the leads become salamanders has got to suck." But even aside from the fact that the writers of this episode managed not only to make the calamitously bad decision to rework "Genesis," but to actually make it worse (a feat for which they should get some kind of award, preferably one presented in a ceremony that involved public shaming and the chance for the attending audience to throw cow pats), there's a lot to dislike about this episode. For one thing, there's no explanation of how Janeway manages to overtake Paris on the road to salamanderdom when she got such a comparatively late start; for another, assuming that these salamanders, mudskippers, lungfish, whatever, really were the "most highly evolved" form of humanity, it was probably a real big mistake, not to mention a real big violation of the Prime Directive, to leave Janeway and Paris's young there on the swamp planet. The only way I will believe there is justice in the Voyager universe is if the final episode has a race of giant mutant salamanders with some real abandonment issues coming back to the ship to give their parents what for.

I have never watched a single second of *Enterprise* and have yet to see anything that makes me think I'm missing something.

Ah well,

The Plaid Adder

though I've watched all the others and the movies multiple times.

It's sad to see Star Trek go down the way it did. There was no need for such a undignified ending.

Everyone is to blame.

Maybe Pam Anderson should be the next captain of the Enterprise...

OK, leaving aside the "hot chicks" premise...can someone explain to me why Pamela Anderson is supposed to be hot? I caught a few minutes of "Stacked" one evening a couple weeks ago and I couldn't figure it out. Her hair looks like it's made out of nylon, her breasts are clearly inflatable balloons, and her face looks like that of a Barbie doll who has been lying in the sun for too long. What is hot about that?

It's not a rhetorical question; I'm really curious to know. It baffles me.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

I hate Berman but I think the real issue was when they stopped syndicating the shows and locked them into the UPN network.

Of course, UPN is Paramount so i guess Paramount then.

It will be OK. We can do without Trek for a few years until someone great can come up with an idea worth doing.

AFter all, who would have thought a rather campy lame show from the 80s could be retooled into one ot the better SF shows. I'm talking about Battlestar Gallactica of course. :-)

I didn't like Voyager. And I didn't like Enterprise except for this season. Those shows were on UPN, while DS9 stayed syndicated throughout its run, even well after the inception of UPN. Parallels what I think.

Star Trek started in the '60s. Spock, Captain Kirk? ring a bell?

Uhhm, I am 43 years old. I remember watching The Tholian Web episode on NBC during its initial network run.

I dont quite understand your post. Could you clarify your "point" please.

for wearing the "franchise" into the ground. Typical studio execs!

Sorry couldn't help myself. :blush:

First, it's a terrible idea to make "Enterprise" a proprietary show available only on UPN since there's, like what, ten or twenty UPN outlets in the US? It makes me angry enough that the original series and "Next Gen" are only available on cable.

The "Trek" franchise has been in decline since the cancellation of "Next Gen". I mean, Paramount wanted to cash in the series while it was on top, but the poorly performing movie franchise backfired on them. "DS-9" and "Voyager" were both absolute crap that had some huge shoes to fill. Don't get me wrong, "Next Gen" had it's terrible moments, namely the Holodeck and "Wesley Crusher Can't Lose" seasons, but compared to the three follow up shows, it was great. I say let it die until someone from outside the franchise can grow some original ideas.

...I really like DS9. I felt that it pushed the formula for Star Trek and was some of the most creative stuff aside from TNG that Star Trek have ever come out with. Voyager, I completely agree with you on.

Lost interest halfway through, but I thought the setup gave them a really interesting way of commenting on colonial occupation and its aftermath through the development of Kira and the Bajoran setting. I also thought Garak was one of the most interesting characters TPTB ever came up with. Alas, the crap blight set in, and by the time *Voyager* got off the ground it never really had a chance.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

Because it just got caught in the middle?

...I loved DS9, but I will have to agree with you on "Let He Who Is Without Sin...". It sucked so bad it isn't even funny.

The Bejoran story arc was interesting, but "DS-9" really lost my interest in a hurry. I knew it was a dead man walking when they added Worf to the cast out of desperation.

!!!!!!!!!

OK, so much wrongness there...but basically, the trouble with much of the later Star Treks was the failure to capitalize on good concepts. Dax is a prime example. What would it really be like to have lived through 8 different life spans in 8 different hosts of various genders and identities? That's a character that good writers could have hours and hours of fun exploring. Instead, Dax was mainly used as eye candy, and then she got married off to one of the least complex characters from TNG, and then whacked. Yay.

Troi was another one. Telepathy/empathy could be real interesting to work with. Instead we got, "I feel great paaaaaaaain!!!" At least they got a little better at writing her once they had been doing the show for a while, and they got her out of the special extra-cleavage uniform (what, do Betazoids breathe through the skin on their breasts or something?)

Voyager is the worst example of a good concept turned into cow patties by timidity and unwillingness to take risks. The whole idea of a ship staffed by different factions who used to be enemies but are now forced to cooperate or die could have provided much conflict and character development, and it did...on *Farscape.* On *Voyager,* that conflict basically disappeared after about the 3rd episode, and from then on they had nothing to go on.

I could go on, but why bother,

The Plaid Adder

:)

TNG got off to a horrid start by trying to be just like the old show. Then it kept improving, with a few missteps here and there. DS9 - original premise, great characters - and then contrived, stupid shows. The writers of DS9 ought to be beaten with an oar. My mother's cat could have done a better job writing a TV series.

For the hell of it, I just accessed the website to watch the old commercials for upcoming episodes, but they seem to be having some serious problems as little works.

How long can you keep recycling the same canned storylines? The franchise has finally run completely out of ideas. It had a hell of a great run; unprecedented, really. I'm kinda glad to see it go. It was like a pro ballplayer that hangs around WAY too long, trying to pad the stats or relive the glory days. It was embarrassing. I hope that people can let it die peacefully, now.

My theory on why:

http://www.plaidder.com/crackpot.htm#accident

Unless the producer has the smarts to end on a high note, which most producers don't want to do because that might mean giving up a few bucks they would otherwise make with the lame last 2-3 seasons.

Ah well,

The Plaid Adder

The best shows always left on a high note, leaving you wanting more. For my money, "The Prisoner" was the best televised science-fiction show EVER, and it's longevity was less than 20 episodes. But those 17 or 18 episodes were STELLAR in every way. That show still rings true today, with a witty paranoia that was decades ahead of it's time.

But I'll pretty much blame her for anything.

Khash.