OT: Totally P!ssed off at UPN

[Starhawk]

Captain Kwok said:
Come on guys, it's got nothing to do at all with racial motivations. It's an expensive show to make and when the ratings weren't there initially - it got moved to a bad Friday night timeslot and add to that a massive split in the trek community about the series was enough to finish it off. To suggest otherwise is silly.

Well CK I don't know if you've watched UPN in it's early days or even in recent years except for ENT but I can certainly understand where the "anti-white" feeling is coming from, UPN said in it's early days that they saught to be a second BET (Black EntertainmentTelevision for those who are unfamiliar with the channel) and 90% of their shows would have been considered racist if it had been white folks talking about black folks, the way these black folks were talking about white people. They had all black casts except for the "inept or goofy stupid" white guy or girl. And they had humor barely above an 8th grade education.

Even these days the vast majority of UPNs shows are casted either entirely or mostly of African American persons, granted they have eased up on their "The White Devil" style talk but their views that "white folks are boring dorks" is still a prominant feature of several shows. They've also made some of their shows "smarter" now a days.

Their targeted demograph is clearly not white people, UPNs only shows with prominant white casts are lucky to survive 1 or 2 seasons so in a way we are lucky ENT lasted 4 because UPN has shown a remarkable lack of patience when it comes to giving "Diversified" shows a chance.


And UPN has stated that they are "unoficially" not happy with the demograph of enterprise, which imho sounds like they are not happy with the fact that the bulk of the cast is as follows:

Scott Bakula: White (or should I say European American these days?)
Conner Trinner: White
Dominic Keating: White
Anthony Montgomery: African American
Linda Park: Korean American
Jolene Blalock: Mixed Race
John Billingsly: White

Notice the issue by UPN's "Targeted Demograph"?

[Captain Kwok]

The reason why you've seen the newer networks like UPN and the WB feature more urban comedies etc., is because that is an under-represented market in the U.S. and it offers a better chance for them to pick up market share - you could easily make the opposite "racial" claim of what you are saying with the big networks like NBC or CBS that they do the exact opposite with their "all-white" shows.

The failure of Enterprise has nothing to do with what you are saying. If you are to blame UPN, it's for poor series promotion and direction. Also be sure to blame fellow trekkies too, of which much damage was done.

[EvilGenius4ABetterTomorro]

All you can really hope for is another network to pick it up. Or maybe Fox will start another series like with Klingons or Orions Pirates or something of that nature. I've always felt glum when my favorite shows were cancelled. It all started with U.F.O. then Space 1999, Buck Rogers, Logans Run (yeah, I liked it). It happens, then something good comes around again. When SG-1 goes though I expect to check into the Betty Ford Clinic. I think your also going to see more Sci-Fi mini series instead of regualr series. Still hoping of "Ring World".

[Starhawk]

Captain Kwok said:
The reason why you've seen the newer networks like UPN and the WB feature more urban comedies etc., is because that is an under-represented market in the U.S. and it offers a better chance for them to pick up market share - you could easily make the opposite "racial" claim of what you are saying with the big networks like NBC or CBS that they do the exact opposite with their "all-white" shows.

The failure of Enterprise has nothing to do with what you are saying. If you are to blame UPN, it's for poor series promotion and direction. Also be sure to blame fellow trekkies too, of which much damage was done.

I said I could understand where their views on the fact UPN is rather racially singular being partially responsible for ENT downfall, it really is a factor, though not the only one.

[Azselendor]

I'm betting Spike and SciFi start a bidding war for syndication rights.

What got me pissed was when UPN said "We bid Enterprise a warm goodbye..."
That sounds a bit like "Good bye, good riddens, now get the hell out before we loose the dogs!"

I think a lot what hurt this series too was advertising, and program blocking. UPN didn't do half the work needed to make good program blocks like other networks. You got one sci-fi show surrounded by ethnic comedies and repeative-situation-sitcoms on UPN. Honestly, how many people can name UPN's daily lineup from memory? How many can do the same for Fox or WB?

Then advertising. I think I heard about 300 Sound-FX driven ads for Enterprise on the radio (most likely they just took the audio track from the TV ads instead of making real radio ads) and maybe 3 broadcast Ads and maybe 5 print ads. That would be like advertising a space empires to a group of woodsmen and ignoreing the sci-fi gaming community.

Enterprise is one of those productions that are plagued from the first day or pre-production. Like the original Battlestar Galactica or any other series that held promise and then exploded in everyone's collective faces.

[Captain Kwok]

Some simple facts:

• $1.6 million per episode
• Currently 3 million viewership, down from 10-12 million first season
• Bad timeslot, against shows of same genre etc, dividing "tune-in" audience
• Poor advertising
• Divisions in the fan base

Even a really good 4th season couldn't save this ship.

[Atrocities]

Kwok is of coure 100% correct in his post. It all boils down to cold hard cash.

[geoschmo]

This is the curse of TV sci-fi from the old days of Trek TOS and the original Battlesta Galactica. The need for fancy sets, makeup and special effects makes them way more expensive then the typical hour drama. The audience that is interested in sci-fi in any form is a fraction of the overall TV viewing audience. Revenue is based on ratings, but even decent ratings that would mean renewal for a sitcom or a character driven drama aren't good enough for a show with a scifi budget. Higher costs and lower potential for profits, it's really a wonder that any sci-fi show makes it.

This is one of the reasons Stargate has lasted as long as it has. Mostly planetary settings and almost all the aliens are humans too. Atlantis is a big depature from that formula, but Stargate has been around long enough now to have established a solid fan base. Even so I suspect the new series is not nearly as profitable as the original.

I am hopeful that as the computer technology advances and comes down in price, we can break out of this cycle and some sci-fi series that don't get spectacular ratings right off the bat can last long enough to develop an audience. I'd like to see some variety too. How about a sci-fi comedy series? I think there's an audience for it, if you could keep the costs down.

[Suicide Junkie]

So, if we make a show based on SE5 combat replays and voiceovers, we should be rolling in profitability...

[geoschmo]

Suicide Junkie said:
So, if we make a show based on SE5 combat replays and voiceovers, we should be rolling in profitability...

Well, that would cetainly keep costs down. But to be profitable you still have to have some revenues.

Although, it might be fun to make a quicktime sci-fi movie like that. We could interlace scenes of starfury with overhead views from the Se4 combat replay. And for dialog you could make up some chesey animation using the race pics. I'll start on the storyboards for "Rise of the Rhemoraz Society".