Anybody ever watch Enterprise? by truk

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Anybody ever watch Enterprise?

POSTED BY: TRUK
UPDATED: Saturday, January 24, 2004 23:58
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 13821
PAGE 1 of 2

Sunday, January 18, 2004 6:37 PM

What a stupid show...Kirk would have self-destructed the ship at this point.

The Star Trek franchise is not worth pursuing. Either get a brain behind it or give it up. How many times are these creative midgets going to use time-travel to save a story?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 18, 2004 7:08 PM

REDKOMMIE

I have to agree... The New Star Trek is just not worth it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 18, 2004 7:24 PM

STEVE580

I've seen a few episodes - it's probably my favorite of the Star Treks: the plot is somewhat continous, the charactors occasionally interact, several of the crew members border on having personalities, and best of all, they don't use that damned transporter.

But yes, it sucks a lot.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 18, 2004 7:59 PM

HUMBLE

TRUK-I couldn't agree with you more. The scripts are tired and boring. The special effects have nothing special about them. They've looked the same for a good 15 years. The characters are not memorable. Have the same mix of people:Doctor, Science Officer, Captain, etc. Their mission seems to be getting their a**'s kicked by anyone and everyone. T'Pol looks like a hootchie momma. Did I mention the awful bucket of bolts their traveling in? I think it's time to put Trek franchise to rest. Maybe pick it back up in 20 years. R.I.P. Trekkies!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 18, 2004 8:26 PM

SAINT JAYNE

Quote:
Originally posted by truk:
What a stupid show...Kirk would have self-destructed the ship at this point.

Ha. Or Ricker would have driven it into a planet.

I loved the idea of seeing all the original technology invented. But the soft-core porn, time travel, and meeting the Borg (didn't they meet for the first time in ST:TNG?) just didn't do it for me. And Scott Bakula? I'd rather the dog was captain. (IMHO)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 18, 2004 8:35 PM

HUMBLE

Maybe Hoshi can be the dog's translator.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 18, 2004 10:02 PM

TALONPEST

As a life-long Trek fan, I loathe Enterprise. I think I might hate it even more than I hated Voyager, since it took me three seasons to give up on Voyager and only one to give up on Enterprise. Actually, I pretty much gave up on Enterprise after the frist episode, when they screwed up Trek continuity at every oppertunity, started flying around in that POS ship that's ripped off of the design of a ship from 200 years later, and having Vulcans get pissy and raising their voices when they don't get their way so that Archer can say "Ah ha! You're not so great!" Add to that forgettable characters and insipid plotlines (they really overdo the time travel stuff, and it never works if you think about it) and you've got one crap-ass show.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 1:11 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Actually, they did have a vaguely interesting plot opportunity - the tale of humanity breaking the vulcan suppression and dominance of other species, a struggle which (from what I gather) lead to the creation of the Federation.

But that was too cerebral for the sex-it-up-dumb-it-down crowd.

So they went to the same thing that obliterated voyager, tabloidising the plot and advert bits, and then running the same garbage plots over and over again - and yet, sickening that this is, there's precedent, as a friend demonstrated to me recently.

Romance novels.
(generally considered crap with no artistic or literary value whatsoever, might I add)..

The key to writing the damned things is to never, EVER deviate one iota from "The Formula", period.
The whole plot, characters, 'development' (if you could stoop to call it that) and the like is all pre-dictated from go, and you could very well have a friggin machine do it, and it would not make any difference.

The end result has little if any 'spark', literary or entertainment value, and exists as 'page filler' to sell books - end of story.

Star Trek has fallen into the exact same trap, they've come up with a "formula" to produce saleable screen filler with no artistic or entertainment value worth mentioning, they just slap the "Trek" logo on it and shovel it at us.

S'why I've taken to calling it "Star Drek", cause that's really all it is... Drek.

-frem
diefuxdie

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 5:22 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

What I find laughable is that every single Star Trek has had it respective crew as the first to do damn near anything. Kirk & crew were the first to time travel. Opps, guess they weren't since Archer & crew did it first. Guess they kept it so secret even Star Fleet didn't know about it.

I think the problem w/ Enterprise is that it is supposed to be the predecessor of all the others, and there is little in the way of continuity between it and the other shows. Picard & crew were the first to encounter the Borg. Opps. Guess not since Archer & crew did in the distant past. Another Star Fleet cover up, or another script/timeline screw up?

I thought the show would be cool, as I had liked the original series, STTNG, & DS9 (I HATED Voyager), and the fact they would be low tech was appealing. What do we get? Borg, races that have never been heard of, including a race who attacked Earth bent on our destruction (all seemingly forgotten by the earlier shows) who time travel to Earth's past to wipe us out (again a memory lapse on the part of Star Fleet).

The characters are dry, cardboard cutouts, and the fact they try so hard to use sex to sell the show is degrading.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 5:48 AM

THEREAVER

I like Enterprise but Firefly>Enterprise

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 6:13 AM

LADYJAYNE

Enterprise truly sucks. I watched a couple of eps the first season and I had to watch "Carpenter Street" this fall to see the shots of Detroit, but other than that, I just can't stomach it.

It's truly sad to see a franchise that prided itself on being cutting-edge television fall back on safe characters and plotting. They actually started doing that with Voyager, but that wasn't quite as bad as Enterprise.

Where are the social issues being tackled in an outer-space setting? Where are the surprises? Who's questioning the status quo? It just doesn't happen.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 7:51 AM

CAPTAINCDC

Well, it looks like I'm very much in the minority here, but I love Enterprise.

As for the crew encountering the Borg, when the Borg went back in time in First Contact, they altered the timeline. Picard and crew shot down the vessel but not before some of the crew were able to transport on to the Enterprise. The Borg that popped up to fight Archer and crew were from that downed vessel from First Contact. Was the episode a stunt to try to boost ratings? Yes, but I think they did a pretty good job at preserving continuity. I love the show, the story, and the cast/crew. But it looks like I'm the only one on this board that feels that way. Oh well. To each his/her own.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 9:07 AM

BOOMERGOODHEART

I have to say that I really enjoy Enterprise as well. I like the fact that they're flying around in a tin can. I believe that the basic concept for the ship Enterprise, was from various submarine designs...tiny and crowded. I like that they have a somewhat faulty universal translator (god, I hated that plot point in all of the other STs...new alien? No problem, we can still talk to you!) I also like Dr. Phlox. He's one of my favorite characters.

As per Captaincdc, it seems I, too, am in the minority here.

BoomerGoodheart
"I love my Captain."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 9:26 AM

MOONSTARRR

At least you're not totally alone. I like it too, but hated when they drug the Borg back into things. I do think some better writing would help.

I would give it all up if I could have Firefly back.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 9:53 AM

GEORDIESTEVE2003

Yawn. Its so dull I think it might be worse than Andromeda, or Farscape, or Mutant X and they are all terrible!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:07 AM

CAPTAINCDC

To me there are only three Star Trek series: TOS, TNG, and Enterprise. I never could get into Deep Space Nine and I hated Voyager.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:13 AM

CAITLYN

Enterprise is definitely not as bad as Andromeda or Mutant X. SciFi bought up the rights to Andromeda and season five will be the last.

I don't like the way Enterprise has found so many excuses to muck up or ignore the original timeline. Temporal cold war? Good grief!

It has had some good episodes and good ideas. It just never follows through on them. Mostly Enterprise has been boring and woodenly acted.

I want to like it. I surely do. I just can't seem to.

"Hey, sweetie. Don't feel bad. He makes everybody
cry. He's like a monster. "

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:18 AM

CAITLYN

Wait one gorram minute! I liked DS9.

Well... not at first I didn't. It took a while then it got better. It stayed better for a while and then it got worse again. It had about two or three good seasons.

Still, DS9 had a lot of good episodes.

Watching Voyager must be what "special hell" is like. OK, I liked a few episodes, but a pitiful few.

"If you take sexual advantage of her, you're
going to burn in a very special level of hell.
A level they reserve for child molesters and
people who talk at the theater. "

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:20 AM

HJERMSTED

I'm a TNG and DS9 fan. Voyager didn't do it for me and Enterprise seems completely unnecessary.

However, just before the holiday hiatus this season, I remember being impressed with something like three episodes of Enterprise IN A ROW! That's the first time in three seasons of Enterprise this has happened. Obviously, the potential is there. I just think the Trek premise gets ground down to the nub by the big Paramount corporate machine.

Plus, there's this silly requirement that the show produce 26 episodes a year. Why not cut that in half and focus on developing episodes of consistent quality?

Ever wonder why BBC shows are so consistent or why great BBC shows are really great? (Monty Python, Fawlty Towers, The Young Ones, Coupling, The Office, etc)? It's because the BBC rarely, if ever, produces more than 13 episodes of a show in one year. Often, only six episodes of a show are produced.

US TV execs could learn something from the BBC.

Matt

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:22 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

I think Andromeda had some real potential, it just suffered from bad writers and mediocre actors/actresses.

I watched the first season, & it was not too bad, though it left me a bit flat. The second season was horrible & I gave up on it like 4 episodes into it. I am surprised it has lasted to make it into a 5th season.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:41 AM

CAITLYN

Worst thing lately about Andromeda (other than horrible stories) was that the one actor I actually liked, Keith Hamilton Cobb (Tyr) left. I've given up on it completely.

"Jayne is a girl's name"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 10:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by geordiesteve2003:
Yawn. Its so dull I think it might be worse than Andromeda, or Farscape, or Mutant X and they are all terrible!

Wait one gosh darn minute there! What do you have against Farscape? Farscape was probably the best science fiction show after Firefly in my opinon. You had complex characterizations, an imperfect crew that doesn't always get along, long woven plots, off the wall humor, moving drama. In otherwords Farscape has most of the aspects that I love about Firefly.

Okay, now that I've defended Farscape back to the main point of this thread. Enterprise is a flawed show. This I will grant anyone without argument. But it does have some things that I think makes it at least worth watching. The first is the character of Phlox--he's probably the most alien alien Star Trek has ever had, and an interesting character to boot. The actor playing him brings the most to his performance even when its only two minutes in an entire episode. The next is the character of Trip--on the surface I'll admit there doesn't seem to be much to him. But he has a good natured charm that I've always liked, and his relationship with everyone else is fun to watch. Even better since loesing his sister there's been a darkness that has added depth to his character. Anyone who needs proof of this should see the episode 'Simlitude'(I'm proabably spelling this wrong)which aired earlier this season--its one of the finest hours of TV that I've seen in quite awhile(at least since Firefly). The captain is in some ways my favorite character just becauuse of how utterly flawed he is. Here is a guy who screws things up a lot and then has to put them right. Its a refreshing change from earlier Star Trek shows and fits with the premise of him being the first captain to brave the greater universe. He's also benefited this season from a new darkness and drive. As for the show itself, it is always well produced. Easily one of the best looking shows on TV(which I think counts for a small something). And when it does a good episode, it does a really good episode(once more, everyone should see 'Simlitude'). And sometimes even when it does a bad episode theres at least a redeeming quality to it(last weeks episode comes to mind for me).

The shows main flaw is consistency of the writing. I think that there is a lot of potential here and am going to keep watching to see how it develops.

"Time is a face on the water."
-Stephen King, The Dark Tower Book 4: Wizarid and Glass-

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 12:24 PM

LADYJAYNE

Oooooo...I'm a HUGE DS9 fan. That was the last time the franchise ever went out on a limb and did daring story lines. Even toward the end of TNG the writing got a little too "safe" for my taste. But then the same thing happened to DS9, too, I suppose. I've never cared much for how commitment-phobic Star Trek writer's are. They are so terrified of long-term relationships, it's not even funny.

I agree with Caitlyn that DS9 had two or three really awesome seasons. I also adored two out of the three story arcs they did for the end of the series: Kai Winn's crisis of faith and Odo's return to his people. Hated the lame-ass idea they had for Cisco, but two out of three isn't bad, I suppose.

I have the first 3 seasons and have rented the 4th. I hadn't seen "The Visitor" since it first aired. It still just gives me chills.

And Nana Visitor just rocks. 'nuff said.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 1:42 PM

HUMBLE

The crew of Enterprise couldn't find their a**'s with both hands, a map, and a seeing eye dog. It's flat out awful.Archer is a putz! I hope they do a time-travel where Kirk comes back and b***h- slaps him into submission! Andromeda is the worst series since Starhunter. It should tell you something about the show when cast members start to jump ship. Sorbo, you're getting old. Time to head to the retirement home, hoss! Mutant X had some improvement in writing and stories, but when Lauren Lee Smith left, I lost interest. Why, oh why, don't they bring back FIREFLY?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 1:53 PM

LJC

From what I've read, the dramatic increase in ENT's writing is solely due to Manny Coto (who joined the writing staff this year, after Odyssey 5 was cancelled).

Having just seen and fallen madly in love with O5, I'm almost tempted to start giving ENT a chance. After all, TNG was wretched until midway through it's third seaosn at least--tho it never reached the heights DS9 did in quality, the eps of TNG that were excellent were all written by DS9 staff writers. So if ENT actually has better scripts, then it might turn out to be worth watching.

As it is, I usually caught the last few minuets while waiting for Jake 2.0 to start. Now that UPN has cancelled Jake I will probably just not watch the network at all...

ETA: If you loved DS9, the producers have a 6 hour mini-series they're making for USA Network called 4400, I read today. That sounds hella cool.

--
Some take the high road. Some take the low road.
And some just go screaming down the highway, dropping flaming bits of wreckage.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 2:05 PM

LADYJAYNE

LJC, I have found that the quality of the Star Trek franchise has a direct link to one thing and an inverse link to another.

Michael Piller is highly involved: Quality increases dramitically.

Rick Berman is given creative control: Quality drops quickly.

Michael Piller came onto TNG at the beginning of S3 and stayed through S4. He was also one of the driving forces in the creation of DS9. He left as Exec. Producer after S3 and worked as a creative consultant through S4 of DS9.

There's a pretty funny bit in the interviews on the S2 DS9 disks. Piller talks about how DS9 was the first time ST incorporated religion into its characterizations. He goes on to say that "I think Gene would have loved it..." I laughed so hard, I had to pause the disc when. Roddenberry would have DETESTED the religious aspects to DS9. He was old-school sf who believed that we'd have grown "beyond religion" by that time. A rediculous assumption, I think. The spirituality of the Bajorins is one of the crucial aspects that made DS9 cutting edge. No other sf series, including the ST franchise had ever dealt so intricately with religious issues.

The only hope for Enterprise is if Berman and Bragga leave. They are too comfortable resting on the weight of the name Star Trek to do anything interesting.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 2:19 PM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave

Worse than FarScape? FARSCAPE?

Okay, Enterprise has its faults, granted. And very little has been done in the current season was so much as hinted to in the original. Not to mention the technology is not what it would have been had this show been aired before the original.

NEWSFLASH - the original was aired in the 60s, in a time when they had just started broadcasting in color. They might have had one-tenth of the technology we have now. The craft John Glenn used to orbit the earth had only one computer - ONE!! And given the computers of the day, it's a miracle of human engineering the man made it back at all (the remaining space shuttles, by the way, have six supercomputers each - you do the math). Based on what the producers had to go on at the time of the original, they created certain technological advancements. Based on the technology we have now, Enterprise is doing the same thing - in keeping with Star Trek tradition.

I'll admit I can pin a prior story line or theme from the original to Enterprise - just did it last night in fact (yes, still watching it). But again, still in keeping with Star Trek tradition - taking current headlines and placing them in a futuristic setting. Take away everything else, and that is basically what Star Trek has been - a study of the human condition.

Now to say T'Pol's wardrobe isn't exactly designed for optimal efficiency would be a HUGE understatement. Nor does it have much in the way of Vulcan cultural influence at all - how can it? There isn't enough of it to give it any. However, as a Vulcan, she's holding her own - gratuitous decon chamber scivie scenes and fight sequences notwithstanding. She's even learned how to "exaggerate."

Bottom line? I'm having a love-hate relationship with the show. I love the ship, and I'd give much to see the drawings in the captain's ready room. I've enjoyed most of the episodes thus far, although I could see improvements in about a third. I enjoy the ensemble cast, and in particular Connor Trinneer - that man can do more with an expression than Kirk...ever...did while he...was trying to...remember his...lines. I'm a Scott Bakula fan from way back, but I'm not entirely pleased with what he's done with his character. Then again, I'm more used to him as Sam Beckett in Quantum Leap.

But saying it is worse than FarScape is like comparing tangerines to watermelon. FarScape is one of the most innovative and entertaining science-fiction programs ever developed. And even though you disagree with me, and maybe even dislike Muppets (*GASP*) at least you can say that FarScape didn't rely on nose bumps and turtle shells or grease paint and really bad wigs to create new aliens every week. My apologies to Michael Westmore, but honestly, a little more creativity would have been appreciated.

Now as to Andromeda and Mutant X being stink-o-rama, on that I SO completely agree with you. I should have seen the signs when Trance lost her tail - that was the beginning of the end. And of the two episodes I did see of Mutant X, I found it painfully formulaic with really strong doses of overacting. I won't even mention the effects - why bother.

FarScape and Enterprise shouldn't have even been in the same sentence together, and if you had watched all four seasons, you'd understand why. And if you're ever interested in really good Star Trek, find the Deep Space Nine series - now THAT's science fiction!

All opinions my own - any and all feed back welcomed. I'm a Gemini, it's in my nature to see two sides of things.

I draw, therefore I am
http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 2:23 PM

LJC

heh. see, replace "berman" with "Braga" and you've got my Trek rant almost verbatim. To this day, I'm amazed at the criminal waste of potential that was VOY. The Maquis added one of the very first shades of grey to that universe, and VOY dropepd the ball just about every way one show *could* creatively. What made me so giddy about Ron Moore's Battlestar galactica was the fact that in a lot of ways, BG is VOY done right.

--
Some take the high road. Some take the low road.
And some just go screaming down the highway, dropping flaming bits of wreckage.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 5:53 PM

STEVE580

Quote:
Originally posted by Ax:
The captain is in some ways my favorite character just becauuse of how utterly flawed he is.

Flawed? You can say that again.

I saw this one episode. Two ships were coming to steal a passanger from his ship, and then leave. The captian knew all this. However, even with his huge crew, and superior spacecraft, they managed to do exactly as they intended, flying off unharmed. He saw the ships fly in, watched them dock, and was aware of their departure. The captian hardly did a thing.

What a dumbass. If that's all the better he can protect his crew...

What kills me is when he tries to act tough. Like, threatening prisoners and the like. It's as if the writters wanted him to have a dark side, but the result is just him looking like a fool.

With Mal, I could actually beleive he would kill prisoners or enemies if they didn't do what he wanted. Indeed, he did this in the very first episode aired!

But with this guy? No.

You know what I've always hated about every Star Trek series? How the captain always goes on the missions with the crew. He'll be there, with one of those damned foolish laser pistols in his hand, in an intense shoot-out with the enemies. And I'm like, "You wanna know where a responsable captain would be at this point? On the fucking bridge!" On Navy aircraft carriers, the ship's captain doesn't take F-14s out for bombing runs! That's what a crew is for. Do these Star Trek captians mop the damned floors, too?

Eh-hem...sorry - just had to rant. What were we talking about? Right -- Star Trek...it sucks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 7:47 PM

DESIGNFLAW

Enterprise defintely has some problems and I almost gave up on it until this season. I think it's finally getting a little better with its continous plot and what not.. It sure has a long way to go but I'm giving it a chance as it's one of the only prime time sci fi show left.

As far as the whole first people to meet the borg thing everybody seems to get upset about.. I think you should definitely read BOOMERGOODHEART post and then what I have to say about it. The TNG crew were the first to meet the borg.. until they went back in time in First Contact. It would stand to make sense that if a ship got downed over Earth in the movie(which it did) and the TNG crew didn't go clean it up(which they didn't) that eventually somebody would find whatever remained from the crash(which happened in the borg episode of Enterprise).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 19, 2004 8:40 PM

CAPNRAHN

I like the concept but the writer have forgotten what they were doing.

All the inconsistancies are because we are not in the smae timeline of Kirk and Co.

Picard and crew frelled up the time line a bit in "First Contact"

About the NX 01 ... Remember when Cochran looked thu the scope at the Enterprise in orbit?

Now pretend you are Cochran and do not know what the E-E really looks like ... and now you know you have done some thing VERY historical ... well dammit! lets trump my future and make it 'better' by working HARDER on warp travel and get warp 5 long before it was achieved in the TOS timeline.

Thus this entire timeline is a split and the future will be differant ... allows the buggers at ViaCom to re-invent the Trek stuff ... most non-SciFi fans would LAUGH if they tried to do the sets and costumes that were used in the 60s Trek...

Gotta remember ... they want NEW fans...

Sigh, but they have lost their ideas on the Temporal Cold War and gone and smashed it in with this September 11th parallel... sigh ...

DesignFlaw brings up a point about the borg ... in the Ent epi, they never said their famous statement ... So archer and the crew did not know what the Race name was...

Firefly, FarScape ...

"Remember, there is only ONE absolute - There ARE NO absolutes!!!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 4:21 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by ladyjayne:
Enterprise truly sucks.

Seconded.

The setup for all the various Star Treks were pretty good, the characters, the setting, the ships. What they lacked, since about season 6 of Next Generation, was writing. They had these great ideas and setups, and essentially wasted it on lame anti-morality tails and unrealistic adherence to the "Prime Directive"

Enterprise lost me when their ship's doctor argued to allow an entire race suffer and die from a disease he could cure, solely to allow some other species to maybe evolve intelligence.

If I were Captain Archer, I would have spaced that damn doctor and given the folks instructions for curing their disease. How any doctor could even consider such a course of action, well...

Ain't seen it since.

Voyager suffered the same problem. Janeway trying to keep two crews together, good premise. Then first chance they have to go home and she blows it to prevent violating the Prime Directive? Chakota would be Captain and Janeway would either be locked up, or spaced.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 6:19 AM

STEVE580

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
If I were Captain Archer, I would have spaced that damn doctor and given the folks instructions for curing their disease. How any doctor could even consider such a course of action, well...

Actually, I saw that ep...and they did give the alien species the cure. Perhaps what you're referring to is when the doctor kept a tiny strain of the disease, and put it away in storage, to allow the other alien race to survive in some form.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 9:00 AM

CAPTAINCDC

Quote:
Originally posted by Ax:

"Time is a face on the water."
-Stephen King, The Dark Tower Book 4: Wizarid and Glass-

Sorry, this is completely off topic, but when I see a Dark Tower quote I get excited. Did you love Wolves of the Calla as much as myself? Can't wait till the next book. It will give me something worthwhile to do while all of these terrible shows are on the tube.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 10:06 AM

GEORDIESTEVE2003

Farscape? Innovative? Hehehehehe. I like the Muppets, well I did when I was a small child growing up, not really anymore except to keep my nephews entertained. Farscape was muppets in space, and I dont just mean the thing in a floating chair or the Pilot (which was the one exception, since it was a good idea and only looked a little crap). I found the show dull, quite like a soap opera, in the bad bad way, like daytime TV kind of fashion.

Enterprise; lots of potential, some good actors, some terrible people in charge of the whole operation who couldnt be bothered to put much effort in and so have turned the handle on the cash cow and brought out another dull series. X-Files anyone? How to turn a good franchise into a bag of brown smelly stuff and leave a sour taste in the mouth of memory when looking back. I think Trek is now going to be the same. They should have taken a break, thought about it a bit more, and brought out something new and original.

Mutant X - terrible terrible awful show, anyone heard of The Matrix for costumes, and the X-Men for story/characters/ideas. Pushing two ideas together does not make a new show, look at Fearless (alias/daredevil) and its now dead.

Enterprise might not be the worst out of this pile of refuse, but its near the bottom now, even the new series had zero pull for me.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 12:44 PM

LADYJAYNE

Quote:
If I were Captain Archer, I would have spaced that damn doctor and given the folks instructions for curing their disease.

You know who else would have done that? Ben Sisko. Hence why I like DS9 better.

LJC, I concur with the Braga addition. Both Berman and Braga are completely out of touch with what makes good television.

From Chanain:

Quote:
But again, still in keeping with Star Trek tradition - taking current headlines and placing them in a futuristic setting.

No, no. I must disagree. Enterprise does not so much keep with ST tradition as much as it strictly adhere's to ST FORMULA. Plots are predictable, character actions are predictable, heck, the *dialogue* is even predictable. I really hate being able to say the line before the character says it. It's just bad writing when your audience can predict on that level.

I can't really think of any particular current headlines that they've tackled either. Granted that may be because I have only watched one ep in two years, but I sure didn't see any current social issues the entire first seaason.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:28 PM

LINDEN

Ok, now I feel like I should throw my two cents in on Farscape, because I really don´t see how it can be considered "dull". Granted, I think that they could have gotten on quite well without both Rygel and Pilot but storywise Farscape is beautiful and yes, innovative. Episodes like "Won´t Get Fooled Again", "Die Me, Dichotomy" and "The Choice" are some of the most emotional and brave stories I have seen depicted on tv.

Also, Ben Browder and Claudia Black are amazing, amazing actors who I easily rank among the most respected in the business. Period.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:37 PM

BROWNCOATS

I Love Enterprise. I Think it is one of the best Star treks yet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:54 PM

FAHQ

Enterp00p is better than AnDUMeDUH. I'll leave that one to individual interpretation.

The most incredibly stupid thing I recall when Enterp00p was first announced, was that there was not going to be any mention in the title(s) of "Star Trek", in hopes that they would attract viewers who normally shunned anything trek.

"My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 3:46 PM

SADLITTLEKING

I watched the first season of Enterprise and I started to watch the second season but got bored with it about half-way thru and I stopped watching this season because I got bored of it again. I try to like Enterprise, but the characters are too much lacking in some sort of personality (except the doc and the dog). You could probably swap lines between them and it wouldn't matter cause it'd still come out the same.

I didn't like Voyager after too long either. I also really hated the way UPN would advertise a show as being one way and then you watch it and find out that the story is completely different from what the teasers hinted at. UPN does the same thing with Enterprise. Like when they showed teasers of Trip sacrificing his own life to save the crew and ship and made it out to be a "can't miss/everything changes from here" episode and in reality it turned out to be some story of Trip getting knocked out of action, being cloned because they need him to repair the ship, and it turns out that it's his clone that dies at the end. That kind of misleading advertising is a turn-off for me. But it really doesn't make a difference cause the show is normally a letdown for me anyway.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 4:24 PM

LADYJAYNE

One of the many reasons I don't watch teasers. Thank the gods for Replay TV! No commercials!

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 10:00 PM

STEVE580

Quote:
Originally posted by ladyjayne:
One of the many reasons I don't watch teasers. Thank the gods for Replay TV! No commercials!

--Kala

Nah man, Tivo is where it's at.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:24 PM

SQUEE

I like star trek in general, but I couldn't get into Enterprise. the characters sucked.

as for the other shows... I discovered Next Generation when I was young, and liked it cuz it was sci fi. but as I got older, I realized that they were all just a bunch of old fudy dudies, and that Riker made me want to throw up.

Then I discovered Voyager, which in my opinion is much better than TNG, so I fell in love with it. I liked the trying to get home thing, thought they did a good job with the bad guys (ie Seska, the Nistrim and the borg) BUT I never saw the last 2 seasons... maybe a couple episodes. and from what I've heard about the end, its not worth seeing.

Anyway, then last summer, Voyager stopped playing and out of desperation for something Sci fi to watch, I tried gettign into DS9. its the best. the characters are very real and developed. I followed most of the first season all the way through the war, which made for an interesting plot... and then they killed Jedzia (probably spelled wrong) I wanted to shoot the TV. actually, I didn't care about Jedzia as much as I cared about Worf. As far as start trek love relationships go, I thought theirs was by far the best- and then they go and kill her. The new Dax was a complete flop, so was Du Kat's character after he lost it and then I lost interest.

So I have very mixed feelings about star trek. I guess I stopped watching all of them before they when too far down hill so I still think well of them. but I have to agree that they definately could use some better writers. a good show shouldn't go down hill and Enterprise just pulled them down even further.

BUT FIREFLY IS GREAT! and it was canceled... whats up with that? the sucky show plays for seasons and the good one gets squat.
Well, keep flying all

When you can't run, you crawl, and when you can't crawl, you find someone to carry you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 12:23 AM

TALONPEST

Rant on Enterprise:

First and foremost, they completely wreck Trek continuity. Rick Berman's name shows up as executive producer on the episode of TNG when Picard says that first contact with the Klingon Empire led to war between the Klingons and the Federation, so you'd think he'd respect that as fact. But no- very first episode is about first contact with the Klingons, and no war is started- in fact, the Federation hasn't even been formed yet, so they shouldn't have met yet. At this point, according to the episode of TOS that introduced the Romulans, Eath and Romulus should be at war, fighting with lasers and nukes- but there's only been one episode with the Romulans (that I know of- I've pretty much given up on watching anymore).

Which brings me to my next point- the technology is waaaaay off for what they should have at that time. They should be working with a cross between present day technology and Kirk-era equipment. They could really have brought back some of the sense that they were exploring space in a rickety and somewhat dangerous spaceship. But no. The ship is every bit as comfortable looking as Kirk's Enterprise, and only marginally less so than the Enterprise D, in that it has no holodeck. They still go to warp at the push of a button, have no communication delays with Earth, and they have transporters (although they are reluctant to use them, it didn't stop them from using it in the pilot). Oh, and then there's the re-named technology that is effectively identical to the stuff from the other shows. They don't raise shields, they polorize the hull plating. They don't have phasers and photon torpedos, they have "phase cannons" and "photonic torpedos." And all the technology they don't have they've seen other races use- cloaking devices, tractor beams, shields, even holodecks. And this is supposed to be 100 years before Kirk?

And of course there's the ship itself. It looks nothing at all like a ship from that era should, according to everything we've seen in the other shows. It is in fact a blatent ripoff of the Akira class, the only difference being a few tweaks like having the warp engines jutting upward instead of down, and changing the style of the hull plating. Zero points for originality or creativity.

And then they bring in all the people they shouldn't, like the Borg (yeah, I know they're from First Contact, but go back and look at the exploding sphere and see if you think anything could have survived that and then atmospheric reentry) and the Ferengi (yes, I know they didn't mention the name of the species, it was still stupid).

Oh, and I HATE the way the Vulcans are done on the show. They obviously didn't pay any attention to how Leonard Nimoy or Mark Leonard played Vulcans, or they wouldn't have them getting angry and pissy all the time. They're portrayed like stuck up children rather than a race who've devoted themselves to logic for millenia.

I won't even go into the characters other than to say they're shallow and derrivative and that T'Pol's catsuit reduces her to the status of worthless space bimbo.

Goddammit I want Firefly back.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:09 AM

PANIC

I have mixed feelings about Enterprise. I love Firefly.

Farsacpe, however, gets my vote for best science fiction series ever produced. No other series can match it for orinality, depth of characterization, evolution of story arc, and overall sense of wonder. Firefly might have been a contender, but alas it seems we'll never know.

Bag on all the other sci-fi you like, but don't mess with Farscape.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:46 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
Actually, I saw that ep...and they did give the alien species the cure. Perhaps what you're referring to is when the doctor kept a tiny strain of the disease, and put it away in storage, to allow the other alien race to survive in some form.

My recollection may not be perfect. I do not recall them giving the cure. I remember Archer agreeing with the doctor, and refusing the cure, but allowing such medicine that would ease the suffering as the folks were dying.

I still would have spaced the doctor for even seriously considering refusing to save a patient. Would never trust him with my crew ever again, that is for sure.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 2:35 AM

DRAKON

Quote:
Originally posted by ladyjayne:

Quote:
But again, still in keeping with Star Trek tradition - taking current headlines and placing them in a futuristic setting.

No, no. I must disagree. Enterprise does not so much keep with ST tradition as much as it strictly adhere's to ST FORMULA. Plots are predictable, character actions are predictable, heck, the *dialogue* is even predictable. I really hate being able to say the line before the character says it. It's just bad writing when your audience can predict on that level.
--Kala

Hmm... this gets into what makes good television versus what makes good science fiction.

Especially during the Cold war, science fiction was pretty much dismissed by the old soviet authorities. Which allowed writers to talk about the failings in the Soviet system without drawing undue attention.

To me, science fiction is best when it explores the potential benefits and flaws inherent in new technology. Gataca and Brain Storm are pure, real science fiction, of the old John Campbell school.

Firefly, well... marginally so. It is more space opera than science fiction. The deal is not the exploration of technology, or man's place in the world, but how people interact in a world. Whether it is the American West, or some terriformed planet, fantasy Europe, or what have you, if it just a good story, then it just opera, or fiction, not necessarily what I would qualify as scifi.

Sometimes you just want a good heroic story. Sometimes you want to think about what's ahead, work out potential pitfalls before you are up to your ass in alligators. Sometimes, you get both.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 3:10 AM

FRV

Well, I have to agree with those ranting about Enterprise - from the non-continuity to B&B (who are indeed ruining the show.) I get the feeling they think they could have done it better from the gitgo and they tried with DS9 - generating a law suit with B5 for various reasons - and Voyager, which I enjoyed since they got back to EXPLORING at least.

The second thing, a cultural thing, is that all the new STs miss the joy of life from the original - which is what sets it apart from the others. Those were the days when humans (and others) weren't know-it-alls with THE solution to everything. Ah, where are the Organians when you need them?

Firefly was born, in part, as a response to what the ST franchise had become.

Farscape - don't pick on Farscape - it was good fun with a good cast and a pleasure to watch.

BTW - on the Trek boards there is talk that UPN is thinking of canning Enterprise - either end of this season or end of next. (End of next will give it 100 episodes and useable for syndication - since there is so little SF on TV these days, I hope that is the case.)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 12:19 PM

WEGG

Took my wife and I a few weeks to get through the DVDs. Enjoyed every second of it. Then we went back to Enterprise. Boy what a jolt. So sterile. All this "edge of science" technobabble. . . a gabillion alien races whose only difference being the type of 3rd degree burn scars on their forheads and noses. And the stories. . . Oh man.

This new season has hints of interest. With the Xindi and the big ole spheres from an ancient race. But then they feel like they have to go back to their "roots" and throw in episodes with time travel back to earth. . . or just happen to find a planet full of cowyboys. . . Didn't Captain Kirk do all this before?

Please please please bring back Firefly.

Is Angel any good? I try and bring myself around to watching it but. . . Vampires? Devels? It looks so. . . goofy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:41 PM

LADYJAYNE

Quote:
I followed most of the first season all the way through the war, which made for an interesting plot... and then they killed Jedzia (probably spelled wrong) I wanted to shoot the TV. actually, I didn't care about Jedzia as much as I cared about Worf. As far as start trek love relationships go, I thought theirs was by far the best- and then they go and kill her.

Yep. Typical Trek writer fear of commitment thang goin' on there. The only reason the allowed Worf & Dax to marry in the first place was because Terry Ferrel said she was leaving the show. What a crock.

Quote:
Hmm... this gets into what makes good television versus what makes good science fiction. To me, science fiction is best when it explores the potential benefits and flaws inherent in new technology. Gataca and Brain Storm are pure, real science fiction, of the old John Campbell school.

I am in complete agreement with you on your definition of sf. Good sf generally doesn't make very good television. Sometimes it can make a good movie (MINORITY REPORT leaps to mind...) but rarely good TV.

Now space opera, which I also love, makes GREAT television when written well. I have never considered Trek or Firefly to be science fiction. It's space opera. Humans in space. That's all space opera has to be. It doesn't make it better or worse a genre, just different. I happen to enjoy both.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE