From JSOnline:
One fan's thoughts on TV's failing 'Enterprise'
Steve Krutzler 'Takes Five'
May 10, 2005
"Star Trek: Enterprise," the fourth show in the "Star Trek" series, will be the last for the near future. Its audience has dipped to 2.5 million, and its demise, after a four-year run, is blamed on disinterest and creative stagnation. Two final episodes air back to back Friday, starting at 7 p.m. on UPN, in Milwaukee on WCGV-TV (Channel 24). Steve Krutzler has been following all things "Star Trek" since 1996 on TrekWeb.com. The fan site, which he started in high school, now gets 200,000 unique visitors a month. Krutzler, who is in Web development, said he expected to keep the site running to keep track of developments in the franchise. Krutzler recently spoke about the end of "Enterprise" with Journal Sentinel film critic Duane Dudek.
Q. What has been the reaction to the "Enterprise" series by fans visiting your Web site?
A. I'd say it's been polarized. Some people wouldn't admit anything was wrong with it. Others wouldn't admit there was anything good in it. Most are in the middle, and I'm one of those. This wasn't the most innovative show. It probably revisited a lot of material from (the) past, though most agree that this season was the best (because of) a series of minor arcs which tied into the original episodes.
Q.Why is the show being canceled?
A. It's a simple business decision. UPN's focus is the young female and urban demographic. They needed a reason to keep it around, and the show didn't perform well enough for them to (do so). At the same time, it costs a lot to make the show. This year, the television production wing of Paramount took a hit on the license fee that UPN pays to keep it on the air in order to get enough episodes to sell into syndication.
Q.Sci-fi is thriving in movies, and TV shows like "Battlestar Galactica" and "Stargate SG-1" are relatively popular. What did "Enterprise" do wrong?
A. There's a lot of legitimate criticism about the creativity of the show. The most glaring was that it wasn't compelling. And it wasn't that different. Rather than take a bold, innovative approach, they just went back in time. They said, "It's going to be a prequel and closer to the 20th century and more relatable." But they told the same old stories. The only differences were superficial, and that was ultimately the story of the show. It was about seven characters who were (like) the exact same characters from the original series. It was too much of the same and not enough bold thinking. . . . There have been three modern series ("Enterprise," "Star Trek: Voyager" and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine") on the air since 1997 and . . . movies constantly. That's a lot of "Star Trek." A lot of people say that alone is why people stopped watching it.
Q.Scott Bakula, who played Capt. Jonathan Archer on "Enterprise," seemed wooden and lethargic in the role. How much blame, if any, does he deserve for the show's failure?
A. I wouldn't say I ever felt (he) was the best choice for the role. But (the show's problems) can't be laid on the shoulders of the actors alone. The writing was uneven. First his character was a green captain wet behind the ears, and then became (much) darker. Then he went back and forth between the two. It was a combination of uneven writing and a performer who for whatever reason didn't fit (the role).
Q.The status of women on the show seemed terribly unsophisticated. "Voyager" introduced the sexy alien Seven of Nine, and "Enterprise" reprised the stereotype with Subcommander T'pol, a shapely Vulcan in skintight outfits. What were they thinking?
A. A lot of people felt that they went that route to bring in a young male demographic. They had seen some success with that on "Voyager." But (T'pol) . . . offended a lot of fans who have a passionate feeling about the character of Spock (from the original show) and the Vulcan race. (T'pol was) sexually objectified, and whole plot lines about her were very exploitative. There were almost-naked scenes that were very un-Vulcan-like. And beyond offending the hardcore fan, it looked silly to the general fan. How are they supposed to take this character seriously? She was second in command of this starship. It was a mistake to objectify her in that way. And even Jolene Blalock (the actress who plays T'pol) said they went too far.
One fan's thoughts on TV's failing 'Enterprise'
