test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
What if Enterprise...
mimey2
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
...was simply Archer's telling of events, garnished to make him look the best and such? It'd certainly explain quite a bit of why Ent is the way it is. Like why Mayweather's only real characteristic is 'he was in space' for the whole show despite apparently being a main cast member.
Or say, the time when Reed was trapped by the Romulan mine, and Archer went out to save him, but in reality, Reed figured something out, OR an actual member of the crew who might've been TRAINED to do something like that, came out instead to save him.
Or say, the time when Reed was trapped by the Romulan mine, and Archer went out to save him, but in reality, Reed figured something out, OR an actual member of the crew who might've been TRAINED to do something like that, came out instead to save him.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.pwlaughingtrendy wrote:I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
Post edited by mimey2 on
0
Comments
My favorite of the Trek series, the cancellation of which made me quit the fandom for about ten years in anger due to the Trekkies who worked to get it cancelled? I only recently got back in a few months ago due to finally deciding to give STO a shot, and still only self-identify as "a fan of Star Trek" rather than a Trekkie.
I loved everything about the series. Sure, it had bad episodes. Every series had bad episodes. Voyager could have filled up an entire season with nothing but its bad episodes - two seasons, even. Yet Voyager got a full run of seven seasons of generic space opera that never found its own voice, and Enterprise was cancelled after four seasons just as it had found its voice in Season 3.
Not to mention watching Season 1 of The Next Generation leaves me honestly wondering how that series ever made it to Season 2, which was itself hardly an improvement.
With the launch of the United Paramount Network (UPN), Star Trek: Voyager was the network's anchor show. That new TV network relied heavily on the Star Trek brand, despite declining viewership.
ENT didn't pull the audience numbers to remain viable. Pure and simple.
I understand that, though frankly its time slot placement I do not recall as being a friendly one. Nevertheless, there was an active attempt by a not insignificant number of Trekkies to get the series cancelled, and the fact that that portion of the fandom ultimately got their way incensed me, as does the fact that the series still has to struggle to get any positive recognition at all.
In particular, the fact that the series was cancelled before we could get to the Earth-Romulan War, something I'd wanted to see ever since first seeing "Balance of Terror..."
The novels, at least, exist. But it's not quite the same, especially considering their dubious-at-best canon status. Star Trek is and always will be a very visual medium, and not being able to see the Earth-Romulan War...
I agree with this 100%. Another thing that really drew me in with Enterprise is, starting with Season 3, it really started embracing a more serial approach instead of episodic, and in season four it mastered it with several arcs with maybe 1 episodic between each arc. It really carried the torch of DS9 imo, and is severely underrated.
And really, every single trek series takes atleast 1 or 2 seasons to find its legs, though even seasons 1 and 2 have plenty of good episodes in Enterprise. Really, i never have and never will understand the fan hatred of Enterprise. After i learned what was planned for season five, i was and still am, completely pissed off at the cancellation.
The real sad part is cancelation prevented us from seeing the Romulan War, which probably would have made season 5 the best of the series.
Amen. If they'd delayed launching ENT a few years, it probably would have gotten a full seven seasons. People were burnt out from 15 years or continuous Trek, and when ENT didn't immediately satisfy them they just gave up on it without giving it time to find its legs.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
-Thomas Marrone
KZINTI!
THERE WAS GOING TO BE A FREAKIN' KZINTI EPISODE!
They perhaps would not have been called Kzinti, but still!
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! SO much ANGER. So much bitterness, even to this day...though I live a thousand years I will never get over the cancellation of Enterprise, and I'm not gonna lie, whatever its faults, the bitter tears and rage of Trek fans over JJ Abrams' films wiping TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY from existence was like the finest wine - and the scene in Into Darkness where we glimpse a model of NX-01 was the best chaser.
Sure, the series' still happened somewhere, blah blah blah quantum realities, but the point is that for a good while there there was nothing but rage from Trekkies over the mere possibility of everything but Enterprise being wiped, and I drank it in gleefully.
Which actually went a long way towards me getting back into the fandom - JJ Abrams had, knowingly or otherwise, gotten Enterprise its revenge, and partially slaked my own thirst to even the score in some way.
Among other things yes, we were in store for some good stuff if it hadn't been cancelled, including a nifty Enterprise refit. As for travis, he got some much needed development in Horizon and i think, had the show gone on he woud've gotten more.
Riker's beard.
Always trust in the beard.
Riker's beard didn't happen until Season 3. (Edit by me: Whoops, wrong there) Season 2 was where we have...ugh...Dr. McCoy's distaff counterpart.
Trust me i feel your Anger completely. I've always been a huge Trek fan but the fall of Enterprise still has me down. That was a show that was ENTERING its prime, it was about to hit the golden years, they finally got the right writers, the right producers, eveything was clicking just right. Then BAM. Ugh....
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Child_(episode)
Season 2, episode 1. Riker with a beard.
Eh...
While I understand and fully acknowledge that without TOS we wouldn't be here, and that TOS was groundbreaking for its time...its time was the 1960s, and it is very obviously a show from the 60s. I wasn't even born until the late 80s.
TOS has fantastic episodes - "Devil in the Dark," "City on the Edge of Forever," "The Trouble with Tribbles," "The Squire of Gothos," and "Balance of Terror," to name just five - but it also has stuff like, well, "Spock's Brain," or "A Piece of the Action." And even at its best it just retains too many mannerisms and tropes from the 60s for me to ever truly enjoy it on the level that many others can, a combination of both my distance from when it originally aired and just my own personal tastes.
However, none of that applies to the TOS movies, which I thoroughly enjoy all of. Even V, because who doesn't want to see a train wreck? Plus whatever else can be claimed of V, it is not boring, unlike, say, Insurrection (which is why Insurrection ranks as the lowest Trek film for me and not Final Frontier). And Trek V has at least three truly great scenes - namely, the opening and closing camping scenes, and the scene in the observation lounge between Spock, Kirk, McCoy, and Sybok.
For me, the rating goes ENT > TNG > TOS > VOY. DS9 doesn't get a rating because I largely missed it when it was originally airing, and am only watching it now on NetFlix. Currently I'm five seasons in, and...
...eh...I get a feeling I'd be enjoying it a whole lot more if I hadn't seen Babylon 5 back in the day and still occasionally pop in my DVDs of it. I don't know whether B5 is necessarily better from an objective standpoint, but I do know that there are enough similarities between the two series that watching DS9 just mostly leaves me with a feeling that I've seen all this done before...and done better.
If Manny Coto had been given the reins in season 3, or maybe if Berman/Braga hadn't decided the cliffhanger to leave him with should be freaking time-traveling alien TRIBBLE lizards... ah, well, what might have been and all that. The ratings just weren't there after the Xindi War arc, although they were starting to uptick just before the cancellation.
Oh, come on, that was awesome. Much as I can't really get into TOS because of how very 60s it is, I still love it for just how incredibly silly it could be at times. Time-traveling alien TRIBBLE lizards fit right in with Trek.
Is it any more ludicrous than "we have to go back in time to save the whales so that they can save the Earth"?
While I admit, Enterprise didn't start feeling like I was watching a Trek show until series 4, the rest of it was good entertainment, and I'd have happily let it continue. It actually felt like people were out exploring the great unknown, being out of their depths. Ah, if only Coto had been in charge from day 1.
A Romulan Strike Team, Missing Farmers and an ancient base on a Klingon Border world. But what connects them? Find out in my First Foundary mission: 'The Jeroan Farmer Escapade'
IDK, for me TOS is darn difficult to watch. IMHO, the worst STO mission is better than all but the absolute best TOS episodes. This also extends to many of TNGs season 1 and 2 episodes, and I grew up with TNG.
I'd very much like to see an alternate universe where Enterprise was not poisoned by sloppy writing. If it would be necessary to have Patrick Duffy step out of the sonic shower and declare all 4 seasons a dream and start over, so be it.
As I mentioned, wouldn't it fill in the plot holes and a lot of the stupid issues (at least in regards to season 1 and 2 of Ent, due to B & B being **** of course, I actually liked season 3 and 4 for the most part), if it was Archer's retelling of events?
Like the Vulcans of the time weren't REALLY asses they were, perhaps advising caution in regards to some things, but not totally assish like they were portrayed as.
Or T'pol wouldn't have been so...Well, the words I was thinking of would've been a bit too much for the forums. The other characters probably did a LOT more and had much more depth, but Archer stole all the credit for it (makes sense when you see Reed and the others in the nose-bleed section of the seats when Archer is about to give his big speech in Ent's finale), and so on.
Oi. Lay off STO. It's a different medium catering to a different group of people with different needs.
It was so "me too" that it was shopped around to different studios by series creator Straczynski for years before it first premiered - he in fact pitched the idea to Paramount in 1989 and provided Paramount with a series bible, pilot script, 22 episode summaries, artwork, and lengthy character background histories. Not to mention that DS9 wasn't announced until two months after Warner Brothers announced that it was doing B5.
Curious, that...
I think that Deep Space 9 was greenlighted by Paramount to compete against Babylon 5 - and, sadly, it ultimately won - but I think that most similarities after that are mostly a result of the fact that when you have a series set on a space station, similar story arcs are just gonna crop up - especially since writers were shared between the two series.
Not really. For the same reason that Total Recall doesn't make sense, no matter how much people try to justify it, if it was all in Quaid's head:
How did he know about the parts he wasn't there for?
I like the TRIBBLE Vulcans. You should be able to argue with elves, and frankly Vulcans had previously come across as just too damn perfect in Trek series. I liked seeing them as antagonists.
Honestly i disagree, i liked a lot of the writing and there were actually quite a few veteran trek writers brought on board, especially in season 3 but especially in season 4. Each character had flaws and was more realistic in comparison to their TNG/Voy counterparts because it was closer to our time and humanity was not in its "Federation glory days". Season 4 was some great trek writing and I'll vehemently disagree with anyone who says otherwise, and if you take a look at what was planned next, you too would hate that it was cancelled. Enterprise was just getting into the groove when it got cut.
Hell TNG was abysmal in seasons 1-2 and DS9 was practically a mythical chore to watch for the first 3 seasons. Ent was never that bad, i enjoyed good portions of seasons 1 and 2, thought 3 was a great experiment with the serial format and season 4 mastered it and got the writing and format perfect. Season 4 also managed to take things in the first couple of seasons that at the time felt pointless and make them more precursors of what was to come.
Season Two was a huge improvement but Doctor NOT. CRUSHER. made some of the episodes a chore to watch. But we did get some gems out of her and that season. Three is where things really started to take off.
DS9 was a chore to watch first season while they got all the exposition and background stuff settled.
Voyager -- eeh, wasn't a fan of the series... there were some good episodes here and there but not my go-to when I want to Trek. Plus midway through I started having some life-problems that distracted me
Enterprise... now this is difficult. That was a very difficult period in my life and I had little time for TV shows of any sort, getting into another Trek series proved troublesome at best. I can honestly say I watched maybe six episodes total over the years, but what I saw I liked.
If we are going to do a new series, lets lay the 90s Sensibilities of the TNG era to rest and create a new cast set in the Alternate JJ Trek universe. I think JJ Trek's biggest failing is two hours isn't enough time to develop characters and stories. If we could see the Alternate Universe through the eyes of a series, it just might grow on people.
Well, sure. But you could make the same argument about pretty much any of the Trek series. Or any series at all, for that matter.
Also, I fail to see how "A Night in Sickbay" made Archer look good.
"Critics who say that the optimistic utopia Star Trek depicted is now outmoded forget the cultural context that gave birth to it: Star Trek was not a manifestation of optimism when optimism was easy. Star Trek declared a hope for a future that nobody stuck in the present could believe in. For all our struggles today, we haven’t outgrown the need for stories like Star Trek. We need tales of optimism, of heroes, of courage and goodness now as much as we’ve ever needed them."
-Thomas Marrone