From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Brian Hughes)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Proposed startrek split & the crossover issue
Keywords: crossovers, rebuttal
Date: 21 Jan 93 22:21:44 GMT
Reply-To: hades@Dartmouth.Edu
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Disclaimer: Personally, I really don't care who you think I speak for.
Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info

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

>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!

    What the hell are you talking about? TNG and DS9 are SYNDICATED
shows owned by Paramount. They are not owned by any network. The fact
that an NBC affiliate and a Fox affiliate in the same area both bought
the shows from Paramount is irrelevant. They have no pull in what
Paramount will or will not uplink to the satellite for all of the other
stations that have purchaced shows from them. Basically Paramount
couldn't care less what some station thinks about another station
showing a episode that they didn't show.

>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.

    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. There would certainly be no
conflicts with this method of handling 2 part episodes that span the
series. Actually it could be well within Paramount's best interest to
have crossovers because that will cause audiences to pressure those
stations that have only purchased one of the shows to get the other.
This, of course, means more money.

>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.

>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.

    You can't just say that the 2 situation are the same. Back when tng
started tos had been off the air for about 10-15 years (my math skills
are out to lunch just now).  And even though "everybody made a point of
avoiding comparisons" this did not help cut down on the number of Kirk
vs. Picard, Spock vs. Data, etc. posts from filling rec.arts.startrek.
And if you don't think the same kind of thing will happen, especially
when we know that there will be frequent crossovers, then you know very
little about rec.arts.startrek.

>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.  Lursa and Bator obviously appeared within
>the context of ds9.  I don't think you can reasonably contend that it
>was a true crossover.

    This is true, and you're right I don't consider it to be a true
crossover. But this is because Lursa and B'etor aren't TNG regulars. But
when Worf appears on DS9 in a couple of episodes it will be a crossover,
and then the question asked above does apply. Where do those posts go?

>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, 

    Wrong. Since the episode that contains the followup would be
current, then discussion about that episode should be posted to
.current, but I suppose that if people were really being particular a
few cross posts to .misc wouldn't be out of order.

>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.

    For now, lets use the groups we have before people start trying to
justify some new newsgroups that do not exist.

>In a few weeks -- probably before we decide how and whether to split
>r.a.s.c 

    At this point there is no official proposal to split
rec.arts.startrek.current. The proposal under discussion is to create
rec.arts.startrek.reviews as a place for non-discussion reviews of Star
Trek related items. This in no way splits the traffic of 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.  

    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.

>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.

    Lwaxana Troi is a recurring character on ST:TNG, her appearance in
DS9, while not central to the plot of whatever episode she will be
appearing in does in fact constitute a crossover of characters between
the two series. Even if she is there wholly within the context of a DS9
episode, chances are she will be talking about it on a furture TNG
episode which also makes it a crossover.

>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

    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. Not to mention the
number of articles that would be incorrectly posted between them.
People would end up having to read both groups just so they can be
assured of seeing all the traffic pertinent to one of the shows. If that
is what you call making life easier, I'll stick with the complicated
UseNet existence I have now.


--
-Brian V. Hughes 
"December 1 - What begins as a friendly transitional get-together between
 the Bushes and the Clintons ends in tragedy when Millie ralphs up what
 is later identified as Socks the cat." Dave Barry 1992 Year in Review