From: kogoma@triton.unm.edu (Taki Kogoma)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Proposed startrek split & the crossover issue
Date: 22 Jan 1993 03:44:47 GMT
Organization: Nit-Pickers for a Better Tomorow Afternoon
NNTP-Posting-Host: triton.unm.edu
Keywords: crossovers, rebuttal

In article <1993Jan21.111734.19612@husc3.harvard.edu> cstone@husc8.harvard.edu (christopher stone) writes:
>Much of the opposition to doing a ds9/tng style split has centered
>upon the objection that there will be a lot of crossover episodes
>which will generate too much crossposting.  I have in turn contended that
>there will not be so many crossover episodes, for the following reasons:
>
>1) In many markets, tng and ds9 air on different channels.  Despite what
>some people claim, this does have an impact on the number of crossovers.
>Someone sent me e-mail (which I tried to post but couldn't) pointing
>out that, say, NBC affiliates won't like it if the second part of
>TNG episodes appear on a rival FOX affiliate!

Irrelevant.  Paramount is prducing both shows for direct syndication
and doesn't give a fig about whether or not NBC and FOX are annoyed
that their affiliates are showing them opposite each other.

>	
>2) I would go even farther and say that it is not necessarily in
>Paramount's interest to do crossovers very often, as they will soon
>discover, because in some parts of the country,
>any given week's tng air before ds9, whereas in others, ds9 will air
>before tng.  Here in Boston we get ds9 on Sunday and tng six days later.
>Perhaps in other cities tng is on Saturday and ds9 the following Sunday.
>It is obvious that this will create huge logistics problems and confuse
>mass audiences -- which, after all, Paramount must please to a far
>greater degree than us trekkies.

Irrelevant.  See above.  Paramount doesn't give a rat's posterior
about when each station chooses to show the shows.

>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.

Being the individual who proposed the scenario so simplistically
dismissed here, allow me to expand it.

[Patrick's agent]: I've got a contract for you to shoot some scenes
for DS9.  I understand you're not all that busy in the TNG set that
week.  It's at scale plus some incentives.  Interested?

>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.

Er...Since TOS had been off the air for some 18 years, this isn't
all that relevant either.  Because the series are being produced
concurrently and are apparantly intenionally engaging in
cross-polination, comparisons are inevitable.

>5) Lastly, some people have said, "well, Lursa and Bator appeared on
>Past Prologue, so where would we discuss that under a ds9/tng split."
>But come on, be reasonable. 

Reasonable?  Keep in mind that this is rec.arts.startrek.* we're
discussing here. ;-)

                                Lursa and Bator obviously appeared within
>the context of ds9.  I don't think you can reasonably contend that it
>was a true crossover.  If tng ever follows up on their appearance, 
>a) it will probably be in a few months, and discussions of *old*
>episodes belong in .misc, or b) it will be within a context of tng,
>so the new discussion would go in .current.tng.  Obviously, there
>would be some reference back to PP.  I'm not trying to claim antecedents
>aren't important.  But there would be more than enough new action to 
>stimulate a lot of new discussion on tng.

I do not share your confidence in the 'common sense' of usenet
readership.  (I've been hanging out in news.groups too long. ;-)  I
can easily see somebody saying "Ah.  .ds9.  Well, this has something
to do with ds9..."

>In a few weeks -- probably before we decide how and whether to split
>r.a.s.c -- we'll see how well the planned crossover works for Paramount
>(you know, the one with Worf.)  I may change my mind then, but for now
>I predict that crossovers will be rare.  Of course, we may have different
>definitions of crossovers -- I do not say that Lwaxana Troi coming
>on ds9 is a true crossover, since all the plot would take place within
>the context of ds9.  I say that true crossovers will have plot so that
>*actions taken on one locale -- the big E or ds9 -- will affect
>the course of both series' major characters*, such as the Worf
>episode coming up.  Let's see how the crossovers bear out

I have a better idea.  Let's see how the traffic bears out before we
start trying to solve a problem that may not manifest.


-- 
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk  (Known to some as Taki Kogoma)  kogoma@triton.unm.edu
 I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
                          what I have now...