From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>You hit the nail on the head. I mean, these people need a reality check. Come on, you have the same producers and basically the same writing staff which has worked on TNG, DS9, VOYAGER and 4 movies. How creative can they be? Is the word BURNOUT in their vocabulary???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Special Star Trek Request
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 16:40:53 -0500
At 09:07 PM 2/8/2003 +0000 Jose J. Ortiz-Carlo wrote:
>Is ST:ENTERPRISE any good? Does it live up to the standards set by TOS and
>the first 6 Trek films?
It has its moments - in both ends. I remember finding one of its episodes
absolutely unwatchable. Others end up being the sort of entertaining
stories we expect from Star Trek. In general, like many-a-series in only
its second season, I think that it is still searching for its stride, and
has the potential to become quite good.
Given that it is run by the Star Trek franchise, however, it will
undoubedly leave us wondering what might have been..... :(
If Kirk really, totally and absolutely had to die, IMHO, he should've died on the bridge of his ship. And I think they shouldn't have killed that character off. For me, his death alienated a large sector of the fans, regardless of whatever antics Shatner does off-screen.>(Okay, I'll give credit to ST: FIRST CONTR..err..CONTACT. But you can't >deny that Kirk's death in GENERATIONS totally sucked). :-)Amen. The Undiscovered Country is DEATH! Kirk was supposed to die to bring peace between the Federation and the Klingons! Sigh. JDG - What Might Have Been Maru....
JJ
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
