From: tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Proposed startrek split & the crossover issue
Date: 23 Jan 1993 01:50:21 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu
Keywords: crossovers, rebuttal

cstone@husc8.harvard.edu (christopher stone) writes:

>Let me first reiterate one of my main points as to why there won't be 
>many crossovers: it would damamge the credibility of both series.  

You also point out that Paramount needs to aim at casual viewers rather than
hardcore fans.  Casual viewers won't worry so much about credibility, and half
the fans I know, myself included, feel that any production team that allows
the existence of Sela has already forfeited any right to claim to care about
credibility.  :-)

>In article <C1864A.5MC@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> hades@Dartmouth.Edu writes:

>>    This is true, somewhat. Paramount uplinks the shows in a particular
>>order which should be the order that they are broadcast in by the
>>stations that have purchased both shows. And even if they didn't it
>>would be quite easy for them to have a part 1 episode on DS9 one week
>>and then have psrt 2 on TNG the next week.

>Except... suppose the TNG crew goes to ds9.  Then on ds9, the next week,
>the crossover concludes.  In the intervening time, just what are the
>Big-E's crewmembers supposed to do?  

This is like asking what happens over the summer rerun season during a cliff-
hanger, or why Harrison Ford was out of carbonite long enough to make "Blade
Runner" between the last two Star Wars films.  :-)  In short, it's a nonsense
question.

>>>3) Somone claimed that if they want to do a crossover, all they have to
>>>do is "borrow Patrick Stewart and ask him to come across the set," or
>>>something to that extent.  Sorry, but it's not that simple.  Patrick Stewart
>>>must be *paid* to appear as a guest star on ds9, as his contract only
>>>talks about tng; similarly, extras and so forth would have to be hired, and
>>>there are union rules to obey.

>>    Well, obviously they would have to pay him to appear on DS9, but
>>that doesn't mean that they aren't planning to have numerous crossovers
>>with people who have TNG contracts (Guinan, Q, Lwaxana, as well as the
>>regular cast members). And vice-versa.

>Well, aside from the logistical problems above, there is the issue of
>paying them...

TNG guest stars are not generally in a position to demand much in the way of
money.  The regulars, perhaps; but not the guests.

>>>4) Back when tng was introduced, everybody made a point of avoiding
>>>comparisions with tos, saying that the new series had to stand or fall
>>>on its own.  The same is true with ds9.  It must be given a chance to
>>>stand or fall on its own.

And thus you're planning to isolate discussions of two series that the 
*producers* intend to be related?  Chris, with all due respect, I firmly
believe that it Just Won't Work [TM].

>And when that scenario occurs, why not just
>discuss the insight under the group that pertains that show? 

Why not simply have people use the existing hierarchy and use a non-single-
digit number of brain cells to decide where to post?

Each is equally likely.

>Like I said, let's wait and see about crossovers.  

When you're proposing a permanent change to the one of the largest
subhierarchies in Usenet history, "let's wait and see" is not, in my view,
an acceptable answer.

>>    At this point there is no official proposal to split
>>rec.arts.startrek.current.

>Wasn't there a RFD on creating r.a.s.c.ds9 and r.a.s.c. tng?  

No, there was not.  Nor, in my opinion, should there be.  The existing split
was hashed out on r.a.s. for a couple of months before anybody went to 
news.groups, and hashed out *thoroughly*.

>>    You are free to predict anything you like. But the fact remains that
>>Berman and Pillar have said that the two series are linked and that
>>there will be frequent crossovers with the cast members. This is one of
>>the main reasons they set DS9 in the same time as TNG.

>Logistics have a way of not bearing out people's promises.  

The same, of course, applies to your assurances about how crossovers *won't*
happen and that the groups will work beautifully.

My money's on the ones who actually control Trek, personally.

>>    The upcoming Worf episode is more than just a crossover, it is a
>>cross-series 2-part episode that starts in DS9 and ends in TNG. Even if
>>Paramount only does one of these a season the amount of cross poting
>>would be phenominal between tng and ds9 newsgroups.

>For two weeks, yes.  But that's better than a phenomenal amount
>of postings in a unified r.a.s.c. the whole year round.

Crossposting will be way too large with this split no matter what Paramount
does; choosing many crossovers like the above would only exacerbate the 
problem, not create it.  And if you think this is a phenomenal amount of
posts, you never saw r.a.s during its peak volume periods.

Tim Lynch
Newsgroups: news.groups