Enterprise vs. Rangers

Did anyone else have a shock when they read last week's TV GUIDE coverage of Enterprise?

Coming from someone who knows, there are a few similarities between Enterprise and Rangers. From the desrcription of the captain, the ship the storyline and feel of the show, I'm a little worried about another DS9, B5 standoff. And just like last time, Rangers is coming out second, making us look like the imitators once again even though both projects started at the same time.

I just hate the thought of being considered a copy-cat, especially when JMS was technically first in both cases, if I'm correct in thinking that.

Anyone else read this article?

Regards,

Dylan

------------------

I think this was mentioned in another thread. If I have the correct article in mind, someone commented that the opinion seemed to be of the author’s alone.

But you are right that this has come up before, and I guess royally p.o.ed JMS with the DS9 and B5 similarities. Right after he had pitched B5 to that network, or something like that.

I’m sure someone else will come along shortly and address this issue. Personally, I think that for me this is not very meaningful. I actually enjoyed DS9 as well as B5. I liked B5 better, after I got into it. But are the similarities as absolute as they were with DS9? The space-station in crucial territory and the characters of Sisko versus (Sinclair and Sheridan) were really quite close. But so were “Fail Safe” and “Dr. Strangelove”.

The two shows will show their differences soon enough, I am sure.

------------------
"I do not believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."-- Galileo

I haven't read the article - I'm currently stuck in a little academic bubble - but I will as soon as I get off-campus.

If I was doing public relations for Star Trek and especially Enterprise, that sort of marketing campaign would make sense on two levels:

a) as a reassurance to Trek fans, the majority of which dislike Voyager's complacency, that Trek is indeed going back to the golden age of adventure;

b) to place itself yet again in the vanguard of television science fiction, shoving aside any competitors such as Farscape or Rangers.

Let's face it - Trek is honestly teetering on the brink of failure. It's a cultural institution, but a cultural institution that is failing to satisfy its audience. I don't know about you all, but I've heard very negative buzz about the new Trek flick coming out. Enterprise is Trek's last, best hope (pun intended) to place itself top of the ratings.

The audience of your normal science fiction show is largely very intelligent - more intelligent, honestly, than ever before. However, most of them don't know how the industry works, and most of them won't know that Rangers and Enterprise stemmed from two seperate brains.

If I were a Trek marketer, I'd be very, very happy to see a show like Rangers. Not only could I mirror it's campaign, the name recognition of my product could be used to say "Look... look... we're so good, that we've been copied already!" It's a win-win situation for Trek, and lose-lose for Rangers.

I agree completely with you, Dylan.

------------------
Channe, Freelance Writer Extraordinaire and The Next JMS
--
B5 Synchroninity of the Day: I just found out that the new dorm I'm living in next year has been named Breen Hall.

I've read some stuff on Enterprise, and granted, once again, it may or may not be a coincidence that B5 and Trek have shows coming out at the same time again. However, the details of Rangers seem to be much more hush-hush, so I'm not exactly sure what similarities you're talking about.

Feel free to elaborate though . I'd love to know enough about Rangers to understand the comparisons .

Seriously though, there are legitimate claims that DS9 and B5 had similarities, and different theories and opinions as to how and why they were similar are inevitable. However, the end result is that they were also very different. I liked B5 more than DS9, but I also think that DS9 is the best Trek, I miss it, and I still enjoyed it even if I enjoyed it in different ways than I did B5.

I think your show will be plenty different from Enterprise. Plus, no matter how good Enterprise might be (let's hope), I'll still bet good money your show will be better anyway. Trek doesn't have JMS like the B5 Universe does, and that's a winning factor.

------------------
Not many fishes left in the sea. Not many fishes, just Londo and me.

ahh DS9...

i have to consider this a poor mans Babylon 5...
[dont get me wrong... i LUV DS9]

the only problem i had with it was no solid arc...

i remember missing three seasons of DS9 and everything still made sense... there is no way i could do that with Babylon 5...

also the stupidest ep of DS9 had to be when the runabout was shrunk super small with the Julian, O'brien, and Dax on board... then they fly into the Defiant, beam into the access panel, fix a computer more than a hundred times their size it seems... defeat the dominion onboard the defiant...

then miraculously return to normal size...

[This episode must have been a original idea of the DS9 writing staff]

i pray at night that nothing... and i mean NOTHING happens like this in anything JMS writes ...

------------------
I have no one to envy...
I envy you having me to envy...

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Forget "ROTFLOL", that deserved a REAL honest belly-laugh.

Mercurious420, that was a pretty pitiful ep of DS9, wasn't it? And NO parallel in the B5 universe, huh? LOL

I think JMS's family and friends would "intervene" if JMS ever had a seizure that would allow him to put a script like that forth.

I really liked DS9. My favorite Star Trek so far. But I admit, that episode was one of the weaker ones.


------------------
"I do not believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."-- Galileo

NinjaSquirrel especially -

We all know that B5 was ten times better than DS9, even though DS9 *was* a good show. We know this, because we're honestly B5 dorks who argue about the symbolism in Kosh's death. We know. But you have to remember that we, here on the B5LR messageboard, are not your average ordinary John Doe.

Your average ordinary John Doe, who walks into a Barnes and Noble and picks up an article featuring Enterprise and one featuring Rangers, will make the conclusion that Rangers is a poor man's Enterprise - from the marketing, from the marketing, from the marketing! He might have seen a bit of Babylon 5, yes, he might have seen the ads during his viewing of Farscape, he might have NO IDEA what the heck this Rangers stuff is.

You can't underestimate the power of marketing. More than the show's quality, more than anything, it is the MARKETING that ultimately matters.

Because shows don't get by on quality alone. If they did, "Voyager" would have been cancelled after Janeway and Paris turned into salamanders, did the salamander's version of the horizontal tango, and had little salamander babies.

That's when I stopped watching, at least.

------------------
Channe, Freelance Writer Extraordinaire and The Next JMS
--
B5 Synchroninity of the Day: I just found out that the new dorm I'm living in next year has been named Breen Hall.

channe, that is true that most people who look to the Enterprise series will probably assume Rangers is a copy if there are enough similarities. I think a point was made on another thread that it may be the AUTHOR'S opinion only for that. If it is the article I am thinking of, he seemed to be very B5 ignorant. So, it could be he sees Star Trek in ALL science fiction he sees. I think that was the point made by someone else in that other thread. The parallel may be in the reviewer's mind only.



------------------
"I do not believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."-- Galileo

Dylan:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Did anyone else have a shock when they read last week's TV GUIDE coverage of Enterprise?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you talking about the issue that came out last week and has TV listings for this week (Sept. 1-7), with the NFL preview cover? Because I happenned to skim through that one, and I didn't see any Enterprise articles. So I'm guessing that you're either referring to:

1) a TV Guide from a different week, or
2) the Canadian TV Guide (which is different from the American one)

In any case, I'd be curious to hear what the similarities are. They're both set on a starship in the future, but there are plenty of other shows that have done that. There are a few similarities in the crew, which I pointed out a couple of months ago. (Both have a first officer who's a member of an elder race. Both have a Japanese character.)

hypatia:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>I think this was mentioned in another thread. If I have the correct article in mind, someone commented that the opinion seemed to be of the author?s alone.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What opinion? Do you mean that in this article, they explicitly pointed out the Enterprise/Rangers similarities?


------------------

I'm so tired of Trek & all the press it gets. I was tired of it back when I liked Max Headroom in the late-'80's, so this is an old issue for me.

Tammy

------------------

"We're in here! Can anyone hear us?"
"I hear you." [giggle, laugh]
"In here!"
"We are here." [giggle, laugh]
-- Londo and G'Kar in Babylon 5:"Convictions"

Tammy's Station
http://community.webtv.net/gkarfan/TammysStation

Chris, the article I am thinking of may have been from the TV guide online. And yes, I think the reviewer did create a possible impression that all modern scifi is a Trek spin-off. I remember something about "even more original than B5 was..." some other series I can't remember.

Anyhow, if its the TV guide that is delivered to the door, I don't think that's the same article at all.

------------------
"I do not believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."-- Galileo

hypatia--Are you sure you're not thinking of the New York Times article, discussed here:
http://www.b5lr.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000290.html

What you're describing sounds like that article, but I don't think that's what Dylan was referring to because the NYT article was all about the Sci-Fi Channel's business strategy, and didn't mention Enterprise, at least as far as I can remember.


------------------

Sorry, I haven't seen the article. I must admit the same idea has been running through my mind ever since I read some details about Enterprise. In fact, I've been wondering if that is one of the reasons SciFi is delaying the release of B5LR. Perhaps they want to give Enterprise a good head start to see how it fares. Also, it would give JMS time to change the premise slightly so it couldn't be called a copy. Just guessing, folks After all Voyager didn't earn many kudos and the new series had better be a great improvement or there'll be no more Star Trek.

The other thing that crosses my mind is the similarity to Andromeda. They are all based on a starship traversing the galaxy on a mission with a small multinational crew.

------------------

Marketing a television show includes the articles in TV Guide, in Cinescape, in all of the other places where anyone can read about an upcoming show.

Interviews and articles are great ways to promote yourself - you get to talk about how cool you are, and you don't have to pay a penny to do so.

They are definitely marketing tools. Pick up one of those mags next time you're in Barnes and Noble... you'll see my point.

------------------
Channe, Freelance Writer Extraordinaire and The Next JMS
--
B5 Synchroninity of the Day: I just found out that the new dorm I'm living in next year has been named Breen Hall.

I'm referring to the American TV Guide, the week of Aug 25-31 with Scott Bakula and Jolene Blalock on the cover with the title "THE NEXT TREK".

Let me give you a few similarities.

A) Scott Bakula on his role of Capt. Jonathan Archer, "He's a renegade who writes his own rules and is a bit of a brat, but I'd absolutely follow him into space." I couldn't have described Capt. David Martel better. Now granted this describes 99.9% of all action oriented heroes on television and in film, but it doesn't help in the on-going Trek vs. B5 comparison. Fortunately Scott and I are very different in age.

B) The Enterprises technology is referred to as endearingly quaint and highly troublesome. Anyone see any similarity with a twenty year old flying "tin can" that no one else wants and may or may not be haunted with it's own technical problems?

C) The two-hour premiere of Enterprise kicks off with a never-before-seen villain race that figures prominently in the new series. I MEAN COME ON!!!

D) In regard to the crew it was stated, "...the prequel is about people who are giddy and sometimes reckless, not seasoned pros there to uphold and obey the Prime Directive." Again this sounds like a quote from the TCA convention about Rangers.

Both shows sound like my quote of Das Boot in space. In fact the article describes their ship as a "submarine starship."

Now I'm not saying that these two shows are identical, clearly they won't be. But clearly we are going to be referred to as a poor man's copy cat since that line of thinking has already been established by many in the sci-fi universe, and that's a shame. I'm just a little annoyed at coming out of the gate second, and perhaps worried that this can't help our chances in the long run if we're considered a copy cat and obviously can't compete in ratings over at Sci Fi. Obviously we're not meant to compete Nielsen wise, but if the two shows are too similar, some network suits might rightly think why pay for a clone that people are already watching somewhere else? Does any of this make sense?

So this is why I was a little shocked by the article. Any thoughts?

Regards,

Dylan

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> From Dylan Neal:
Fortunately Scott and I are very different in age. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So, what, are you calling Scott Bakula old and decrepit?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> B) The Enterprises technology is referred to as endearingly quaint and highly troublesome. Anyone see any similarity with a twenty year old flying "tin can" that no one else wants and may or may not be haunted with it's own technical problems? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know. Somehow, I get the feeling that the NX-01 will be quaint and troublesome for no more than 13 episodes, but by halfway thru the first season, the "new" (old) Enterprise will probably be doing all the advanced science-dependent stuff that they do in the 24th century shows. They may keep it scaled down, but remember, Voyager only suffered from resource problems for a little while and before you know it they're running the holodeck 24/7, replicating costumes & TV's, and spawning a new shuttlecraft or Delta Flyer every other week. If the Liandra gets up to par, JMS will probably do it gradually and have any tech improvements make sense.

Yeah, it sucks that because of marketing, you're probably going to get the shaft, but unless Enterprise pulls off some really unexpected story ideas, your show will have good writing as a solid advantage. Your ship is "haunted". That's something Trek would doubtfully have the guts to tackle. Some people watch Star Trek the same way they would watch the news or the weather channel, but it will be your show that will have the true "cult" following.

------------------
Not many fishes left in the sea. Not many fishes, just Londo and me.

Dylan, I think we all understand your concerns. In fact, I think that is why there is so much discussion on this Board about why can't SciFi show the movie sooner. I'm also positive that JMS and TPTB at SciFi are aware of the problem. They really aren't stupid people.

But even though there are vague similarities between Enterprise and B5LR there will be immense differences not only in the story line, but the writing, the characters and the CGI. Since we can't do much about this I guess we'll just have to wait and hope.

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Springob:
hypatia--Are you sure you're not thinking of the New York Times article, discussed here:
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The article I'm thinking of is older.

But I do admit, upon the run-down Dylan just gave, it does sound hauntingly familiar, doesn't it? OH, boy.

And I regret bringing up the whole "Fail Safe" thing. I remembered that "Fail Safe" didn't do well (or as well as expected) at the box office just because of this comparison/similarity thing.

I wish I had some encouraging info about this.

------------------
"I do not believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."-- Galileo

From what I've read about Enterprise, it is nothing awe inspiring, its ship is just a mixing of an Akira and the old constellation class ships, whereas Rangers has something new.I might be abit bias but Rangers has nothing to worry about ...

------------------
Emporer Turhan-"How will this end"
Kosh-"In fire"

It makes complete sense, David.

And you're right to be concerned. I still (as others do) remember the absolute, literal bulldung that went on between DS9 and Babylon 5. I'm also sorry to say this about the Great Maker, but his somewhat unnecessary war of words regarding both shows almost had me cease to watch Babylon 5 all together.

Then, a year later, a television pilot I wrote and produced here in Australia that was not aired because of its contriversial content, was ripped off by another network, and suddenly the Universe showed me how JMS felt. I recieved no credit, and no money.

The similarities between my show and theirs were beyond startling, they were ridiculous.

I sympathise with JMS more than most could imagine.

To me, the solution is obvious - though as an Australian I admittedly know nothing about the Sci-Fi channel and its bugetary constraints, nor am I aware of their plans.

But... as Channe would say... MARKETING... MARKETING! MARKETING!

To anyone other than someone uninformed, Rangers could not even be concieved as a poor mans Trek, but also as Channe has said, MARKETING will be the deciding force!

If Sci-Fi has any concept of good business practice, or any idea about how to make something appeal, they should do at least two things in response to Enterprise...

Plaster the world with information - a lot of it is on the InterNet already, but few people really use the InterNet to look for B5 unless they are fans... so screw the InterNet, cover selected print and televised media!

Then... move the schedule up. You guys almost have a finished product from all reports. Air the film in October, after the audience buzz has died a little about Enterprise and watch your show ascend.

I'd even consider to go so far as a Sci-Fi exec to invite Berman, Bragga and whoever else onto a panel with JMS and Netter, and let them discuss it, air it at prime time and watch two of the best Sci-Fi shows lay this game of insinuation to rest.

Is there better publicity? Have Sci-Fi do a deal with UPN and broadcast the debate on UPN also, and its affiliate stations.

Every Trek fan in history would watch it, THERE are a few million hits already for the ratings, and of course every B5 fan who knew about it would most likely be excited at the chance to watch these two warring behemoths discuss the allegations.

The wisest thing Paramount and Rick Berman ever did was mass market every Star Trek from The Next Gen to now. ET cover stories, TV Guide features. Come on Sci-Fi, don't you have a Publicity Department? If they do, maybe sack them. The other wise thing was that Berman did not enter into the debate on 'is DS9 a ripoff of B5' and vice versa. He commented respectively, reservedly, and let the fans decide.

I understand JMS' passion and p.o.edness, but there might have been a more professional way to get the message across, Screaming and kicking like a wronged child will rarely win you the favour of anyone but the bitter and twisted.

------------------
Sheridan: "It's... damn inconvienient!"
Delenn: "The truth often is."

[This message has been edited by SataiDelenn (edited September 04, 2001).]