TiVo Community Forums Archives - So who here doesn't like Enterprise (spoilers)

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

So who here doesn't like Enterprise (spoilers)
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: TDSLB

ME!!!!

Did anyone watch The, I think, season finale? All I can tell that they are doing is repeating the standard StarTrek Episodes over agian with new CGI and a different name for the effected planet. The captian gets kidnapped? what kind of plot was that?

I'm sick of watching it. Season pass (deleted)

Posted by: csantoni

I agree. I gave up on the show a few months back.

With TiVo, there's just too much other good stuff to watch. I've got a whole Summer of first-run West Wings to get to. :)

Posted by: Bryanmc

I think someone around here doesn't think too highly of it.

Not sure if I remember who, though.... :D

Posted by: Uther

Me too. But I'll keep watching it and silently cursing at the writers, producers, and anybody else involved in the creation of the show... Well, maybe I won't be so silent. :D

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
What's not to like? :)

It'll be better once T'Pol and Trip finally hook up!

Posted by: sean67854

Time Travel makes my head hurt.

Posted by: Tasky

Exactly, just forget that it's Star Trek and watch it for what it is. A pretty lame Sci-Fi show :)

On a side note, my TiVo did catch an old episode of JAG that had Jolene Blalock in it. She looked a lot different in a Marine uniform, I would even go so far as to say she looked hotter in the Marine Uniform :)

Posted by: sean67854

So since this is tagged as a spoiler thread, let's talk about this time travel stuff a bit.

In the scene where the guy pulled archer off enterprise and back to his apartment, and the guy says that that archer is still there but the apartment archer is not there, or something like that. That seems wrong to my feeble mind. Let me explain my "Oh-so-Lame Time Travel Theory".

In my head, I see a given timeline as a list of interconnected objectects, with each instant of time being a new object. Each object get a copy of things that exist at that instant in that timeline. Therefore, when archer was removed from Enterprise, he should have been physically gone from that timeline as far as the other inhabitant of that timeline are concerned. Also, he should have seen himself in his apartment because he was introduce to that object as it was when it was originally created.

Geez, I'm lame.

[edit] Also, in the final scene where the guy says, "I can't take you back, our technology is gone". It seems to me that they could just decide to begin making it anew and they would have it in that instant because at some future instant someone could travel back and insert the technology.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
No, a lifetime is like a string...and if we ball up the string, the lifetime interconnects with all the other parts of the string that touch it...so we step into the Quantum Leap Accelerator...and vanish! Oh boy! :eek:

In that case, Captain Archer is going to live a LONG time!!!

Didn't he *leap* to the 31st century, or something like that, at the end? :D

Posted by: MighTiVo

Time for Archer to leap......

Posted by: Tasky

quote:
Originally posted by sean67854
So since this is tagged as a spoiler thread, let's talk about this time travel stuff a bit.

In the scene where the guy pulled archer off enterprise and back to his apartment, and the guy says that that archer is still there but the apartment archer is not there, or something like that. That seems wrong to my feeble mind. Let me explain my "Oh-so-Lame Time Travel Theory".

In my head, I see a given timeline as a list of interconnected objectects, with each instant of time being a new object. Each object get a copy of things that exist at that instant in that timeline. Therefore, when archer was removed from Enterprise, he should have been physically gone from that timeline as far as the other inhabitant of that timeline are concerned. Also, he should have seen himself in his apartment because he was introduce to that object as it was when it was originally created.

Geez, I'm lame.

[edit] Also, in the final scene where the guy says, "I can't take you back, our technology is gone". It seems to me that they could just decide to begin making it anew and they would have it in that instant because at some future instant someone could travel back and insert the technology.

This is the "Bill & Ted's" theory of time travel. When they are trying to bust out (in??) of the jail, they start saying stuff like, hey later on, steal the key, travel back to yesterday, and hide it behind this plant. Then they walk over and grab the key which they will put there later...

The whole crazy idea of time travel is just dumb. It will never happen, it couldn't possibly, because we would already have wackos coming back to now upsetting everything.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
He went "off the scale" or something. I remember they shot their originally theory all to hell when he went back to the Civil War, anyway! :rolleyes:

You're right! Forgot about that.

As long as he doesn't become Elvis we should be okay. :D

Posted by: sean67854

quote:
Originally posted by Tasky
The whole crazy idea of time travel is just dumb. It will never happen, it couldn't possibly, because we would already have wackos coming back to now upsetting everything.

How do you know we don't?:confused:

Posted by: Tasky

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Here's a wild site...Robert Beltran (Chakotay from Voyager) made a personal appearance in England recently and, according to the reports by this "bloke", he said some pretty disparaging things about the show, the Star Trek franchise, Brannon Braga, and even Enterprise....

VERRRRRY interesting to read.

That was a very interesting read, and quite funny...

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun

VERRRRRY interesting to read.

How do you find this stuff, Pan?

Everyday I wonder what corner of the internet you're going to share with us next.

Posted by: JYoung

the thing is after reading that Beltran page, I believe every word he says, especially after just watching the last 5 episodes of Enterprise.
(I couldn't watch Enterprise for several weeks after that pile of steaming dung called "Oasis", but the TiVo faithfully recorded them....)

Posted by: feldon23

http://www.feldoncentral.com/TiVo/EnterpriseLeap.jpg

Posted by: TreborPugly

1. The best thing about Enterprise is the opening credits/theme song. One of the few openings I don't FF through.

2. I recently read a book by Orson Scott Card, "Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" which had a really interesting explanation of time travel paradox. Basically, if you travel back in time at all, you wipe out all the time from then on, creating a new time line. But you don't wipe out the Cause of the change. The Cause exists, because it did exist, and it caused the change. But the people, events, etc. Don't exist and never did exist. But the Cause for you and your existence in the past from the future is still there. In the book, this was explained to the primary characters by the physicists and mathematicians, but nobody really understood it.. :)
Also, they only had one-way travel to the past, and any travel at all would wipe the time line clean. No bopping back and forth. It is an excellent book BTW, although this discussion is a bit of a spoiler.

Posted by: ehopper

A great time travel book (and very funny) is The Technicolor Time Machine. It's an old book and you probably have to buy it used.

Posted by: ehopper

Whenever I don't like a Star Trek show, I just remodulate the deflector array to emit reallygoodsfian particles and all is well. If the security interlocks get in the way, I just say the magic word "Override Security" and all is well yet again.

Posted by: Uther

quote:
Originally posted by TreborPugly
1. The best thing about Enterprise is the opening credits/theme song. One of the few openings I don't FF through.

You have GOT to be kidding me. If I hear more than two notes of that song my ears bleed. I think it melts a bit of my brain, which then leaks out of my ears... much like the entire show does.

Posted by: bigray327

Did you guys see Jolene Blalock on Howard Stern last night? She is one stone cold hottie. She talked about what she likes, too, if you know what I mean.

Posted by: bobcarn

quote:
Originally posted by Uther

You have GOT to be kidding me. If I hear more than two notes of that song my ears bleed. I think it melts a bit of my brain, which then leaks out of my ears... much like the entire show does.

Actually, the theme song is one of the things that I actually like about the show. Not the song itself (it's such a wussy song), just the fact that it's not yet another version of Star Trek music that you constantly hear on all of the ST shows. I'd prefer if they did away with a lot of the canned music and used some popular songs instead, kind of like what you get on "Smallville".

I read the interview with Beltran (Chakotay). He obviously had a lot that he didn't like about Voyager. But one of the things I liked least about Voyager was him! He was just always so smug and stuffy! If there was ever someone I wanted to see locked up on a prison planet and having to pick up a bar of soap in a shower while surrounded by 10-foot-tall aliens named Klurg or Grok, it had to be him!

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Here's a different site with another angle on the Beltran event in England. :)

This was real funny.

(Don't read the spoiler if you plan to actually read the link. I'd like to see if it strikes you as funny as it does me.)

I enjoyed it most of all because of:

Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
The author is whining about how bad they look in the picture taken with RB, and how cute RB is, and what RB was wearing, and how they only way the author would get a chance with RB is if RB was tied up.

Then you get to the end of the write up and see the author's name.

-Bill.

Struck me as funny.

Posted by: Tasky

quote:
Originally posted by Bryanmc

This was real funny.

(Don't read the spoiler if you plan to actually read the link. I'd like to see if it strikes you as funny as it does me.)

I enjoyed it most of all because of:

Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
The author is whining about how bad they look in the picture taken with RB, and how cute RB is, and what RB was wearing, and how they only way the author would get a chance with RB is if RB was tied up.

Then you get to the end of the write up and see the author's name.

-Bill.

Struck me as funny.

I noticed this too and was a little confused.

But he also says he kissed him on the cheek. And he says he put his arm around her like he did all the girls...

So, did Bill just post the thing for a woman, or is Bill a woman's name in England?

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
but my gay friends clued me in on SEVERAL celebs who later "panned out" to be gay (Ellen, Rosie, one or two others), so I tend to believe them until some sort of very obvious hetero activity brings it into question.

The gaydar is strong with this one. :D

Posted by: cancermatt

Other than the timeline differences, aren't both shows basically "to boldly go where no man has gone before?"

I've been catching reruns of TNG I haven't seen in years after my season pass with Enterprise (THANK YOU TIVO!!!) and I've noticed several differences, sometimes the writers notice and try to explain, sometimes they don't or don't care.

Just kinda confuses me sometimes.

ONE MORE VOTE TO KILL ENTERPRISE's theme song . . . I saw some online petition after the pilot show aired that EVERYONE in the Star Trek community hated the theme (almost at least) and braga and rick berman actually enjoyed pissing them off and totally refused to change it, so here's to six more years of fast forwarding thru the intro credits.

cancermatt:mad:

Posted by: DLiquid

Wow, I'm really surprised you guys don't like Enterprise. I think it has started stronger than The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, or Voyager, all of which I thought were pretty bad in the first season. IMO, TNG got very very good after the first season, DS9 got quite good in the last few seasons, and Voyager was just okay through it's entire run. I think Enterprise is already better than Voyager ever was, is better than DS9 was for its first four years, but still isn't as good as TNG was for most of its run.

You can't think too hard about things like time travel or the universal translator, because there are so many inconsistencies there. But this is science fiction folks, and if you're an SF fan you should be used to suspending disbelief and just enjoying the ride. I think Enterprise is great!

Posted by: Raspewtin

it's okay, i do enjoy good episodes and the engineer guy is funny (nothing beats ST:TNG)

Posted by: dmdeane

Frankly, Star Trek has been going downhill since TOS. TNG and DS9 had their moments, but on the whole the Star Trek "franchise" has been getting progressively worse, and Enterprise continues this trend.

Thank God for Babylon 5 and Farscape; otherwise I would have given up on TV Sci Fi altogether.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by dmdeane
Frankly, Star Trek has been going downhill since TOS.

Hmmm.... I wonder what could have happened near the end of Next Gen that would cause the franchise to go downhill.

I'll have to give that some thought. ;)

Posted by: Raspewtin

is it possible for there to be a Star Trek thread to exist to not eventually turn into TOS vs TNG? (TOS sucked! ;) )

Posted by: Ereth

I dunno. I think the best Star Trek episode we've seen in a while was Futurama a couple weeks ago (which I just got around to watching on my TiVo last night). It was much better than Enterprise.

Posted by: holee

I finally saw the season finale...

Okay, what kind of morons make a base on a planet that will EXPLODE if anybody visits it???

I mean it's like camping inside a nuclear reactor. WHY?

I mean for crying out loud, one cigarette and EVERYBODY DIES.

Couldn't they have come up with a less idiotic premise for blowing up a planet?

"Hey, look, this planet will kills us all if we set off even the slightest spark. Let's spend 20 years building a home, because every alien species we run to will respect our wishes and know exactly how to land without killing us."

Posted by: bigray327

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid
Wow, I'm really surprised you guys don't like Enterprise.

There are those that wouldn't like anything, no matter what was produced. The story lines are just as good as any other Trek show, if not better. How quickly we forget Wesley Crusher. Some people just need Prozac (or a life).

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by holee
I finally saw the season finale...

Okay, what kind of morons make a base on a planet that will EXPLODE if anybody visits it???

I mean it's like camping inside a nuclear reactor. WHY?

I mean for crying out loud, one cigarette and EVERYBODY DIES.

Couldn't they have come up with a less idiotic premise for blowing up a planet?

"Hey, look, this planet will kills us all if we set off even the slightest spark. Let's spend 20 years building a home, because every alien species we run to will respect our wishes and know exactly how to land without killing us."

There could be a lot of plausible reasons. It was a mining colony of a few thousand people, right? Maybe mining the substance they were mining was dangerous (because of the plasma reaction possible in the upper atmosphere) but was highly profitable (because of the danger), so they were willing to accept the risk. Maybe they didn't know that plasma would cause that reaction in their upper atmosphere until years after they started the colony, when the exhaust from their mining operations changed the atmosphere.

It's easy to find gaping holes in almost any Star Trek plot from any series, but this does not seem like a hole to me. If you're scrutinizing ST this carefully, I can't see how you could possibly enjoy it. I mean, what do you do when a human says a few Klingon words to impress a Klingon, but then you realize that the universal translator would make it impossible to hear the difference? :D Just be entertained, this stuff isn't perfect.

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid

There could be a lot of plausible reasons. It was a mining colony of a few thousand people, right? Maybe mining the substance they were mining was dangerous (because of the plasma reaction possible in the upper atmosphere) but was highly profitable (because of the danger), so they were willing to accept the risk. Maybe they didn't know that plasma would cause that reaction in their upper atmosphere until years after they started the colony, when the exhaust from their mining operations changed the atmosphere.

It was mentioned in the episode that the gas was a product of their mining operations, and it setled at a particular point in the atmosphere. Still a bit silly.

Posted by: bigray327

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
They should be...most were lifted almost verbatim FROM the other Trek shows. :rolleyes:

Not true. <and please don't have a tantrum here>

You continue to watch, so they must be doing something right.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
You continue to watch, so they must be doing something right.

Uh oh. :D

Posted by: bigray327

That's what you say, but you seem to know an awful lot about the show.

You can compare and contrast all you want. Some of the stories may be similar, but for the most part, it's good stuff. No magic transporter saves, no ensigns riding the helm of the Federation flagship, no starship winning every battle, etc.

Are you this critical of other shows? Ever say "Oh my god, that episode of Everybody Loves Raymond was horrible" over and over and over? IMHO, this is good television and should be taken for what it is: a sci-fi show.

And I like the theme song, too. :)

Posted by: dmdeane

quote:
Originally posted by Ereth
I dunno. I think the best Star Trek episode we've seen in a while was Futurama a couple weeks ago (which I just got around to watching on my TiVo last night). It was much better than Enterprise.

I'll second that! :)

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Here's a fun site that puts ENT in perspective. [/B]

Pan, thanks for the link, that web site is pretty funny.

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
\No magic transporter saves, no ensigns riding the helm of the Federation flagship, no starship winning every battle, etc.

Are you sure that you are watching the show? The transporter save was in the pilot, Mayweather is an ensign, and Enterprise always comes out on top (even if Archer has to say "Please Mr. Alien, save my ass!" in Fight or Flight and Fallen Hero). Nope we get holodecks, holograms, Risha, Ferengi, Klingons, and shapeshifters

quote:

Are you this critical of other shows? Ever say "Oh my god, that episode of Everybody Loves Raymond was horrible" over and over and over?

Simply put, like it or not, Enterprise is a Star Trek show and should be held up to superior standards. TOS and TNG were original and had good writing with real meat and not recycled pablum. Otherwise, they should just call it Andromeda....

quote:

IMHO, this is good television and should be taken for what it is: a sci-fi show.

And I like the theme song, too. :)

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, as long as it's your opinion and not denial.......

Posted by: bigray327

I was wondering what took you so long to reply. Sheesh. There's no arguing with a fanatic, so we'll continue to hear the whining for the next seven years until this show is canceled (and replaced with something else you don't like). *sigh*

Posted by: bigray327

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
Simply put, like it or not, Enterprise is a Star Trek show and should be held up to superior standards.

Somebody needs to replay the Shatner Saturday Night Live bit. :)

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
Mayweather is an ensign

Yeah, but he's not 13 years old. I'm sure you knew what I meant.

Posted by: bigray327

Boy, the I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I schtick must have been a big hit in the playground. I'm not in love with it, I'm just not on some kind of jihad to get rid of it.

I gotta go see some sunlight and touch a girl now... you should try it sometime. :)

Posted by: keirgrey

Can't we all just get along? It's not the best sci-fi show, but it's not the worst one either. Personally, I'd vote for "Earth, Final Conflict" or "Cleopatra 2525" for that dubious honor.

Flinging imprecations at each other only leads to closed threads and angry mods.

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung

Simply put, like it or not, Enterprise is a Star Trek show and should be held up to superior standards. TOS and TNG were original and had good writing with real meat and not recycled pablum. Otherwise, they should just call it Andromeda....

IMO, this season Andromeda has been consistently better than Enterprise, albeit with some extra cheese on top. But at least the characters don't suck like they do on Enterprise (with the exception of Dr. Phlox. That guy rules.).

Posted by: Uther

quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
I gotta go see some sunlight and touch a girl now... you should try it sometime. :)

Careful, Ray. The police will lock you up for doing things like that! Try to control your urges... Just ignore the voices in your head.

;)

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by bigray327

Somebody needs to replay the Shatner Saturday Night Live bit. :)

If that were the case and I were one of the ones targeted by that skit, I would be blindly defending Enterprise and not pointing out the obvious flaws.....

If you are going to have a franchise (say like, oh Law & Order), at least make the writing approach the standards of the predecessors and not something out of the Irwin Allen handbook...

B&B are tailoring this show for young boys as evidenced by the T'Pol factor. I found it interesting that Jolene Blalock admits that they pad her two "assets"....

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung

B&B are tailoring this show for young boys as evidenced by the T'Pol factor. I found it interesting that Jolene Blalock admits that they pad her two "assets"....

Not to mention all the camera angles from Club MTV. There's a classic example in the season finale, when she's trying to get Archer off the floor.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
B&B are tailoring this show for young boys as evidenced by the T'Pol factor. I found it interesting that Jolene Blalock admits that they pad her two "assets"....

Well that's staying true to TOS, remember all those short skirts? ;)

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid

Well that's staying true to TOS, remember all those short skirts? ;)

Believe it or not, that was a network decision.

Posted by: hookbill

Since Direct TV finally gave us UPN I have only seen 3 episodes of the show. The season ending and two other episodes. My wife gives it a thumbs up. I'm still not sure. The theme song definitely sucks. I just can see Gene Rodenbury (sp?) turning over in his grave. I kind of like the way you can relate to some of the things you see i.e. no beaming up they have to actually use a shuttle and the uniforms are not to unrealistic. There is something, I don't know just kind of strange about Scott Backula being the Captain.

I got to watch some more before I make a final judgement. Is it possible that Star Trek and it's concept has just ran its course? All good things do come to an end.

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by hookbill
There is something, I don't know just kind of strange about Scott Backula being the Captain.

Like being the biggest wimp to ever make captain in StarFleet?

Posted by: DanT

They haven't revealed it yet, but the reason Dr. Samuel Beckett was never heard from again is because he was given the opportunity to go into the future and become Earth's first intergalactic starship captain!
:D

I actually liked the finale, but most of the series has been pretty ho-hum. I just now (an hour ago) got around to watching the last 3 episodes of the season. It usually sits on my TiVo for a few weeks before I decide to watch it. If they drop it, I won't care one bit.

I second the notion that the recent Futurama episode was the best Star Trek show on television in the last 30 years. I never really liked TNG and caught maybe 4-6 episodes total. I only ever saw the pilot for DS9 before I decided it wasn't worth my time, and I watched the first 4-5 episodes of Voyager before giving up on it, too, although I did watch the series finale just to see how they wrapped it up.

And the theme song is absolutely the worst on television. Definitely at the moment, and probably for all time.

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by DanT

And the theme song is absolutely the worst on television. Definitely at the moment, and probably for all time.

I think the one for "Full House" is much worse. Not that that's saying much.

Posted by: TiVoPony

quote:
Originally posted by TreborPugly
1.
2. I recently read a book by Orson Scott Card, "Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" which had a really interesting explanation of time travel paradox.
...
It is an excellent book BTW, although this discussion is a bit of a spoiler.

I second the recommendation of "Pastwatch". It's a terrific book. Find it, read it, enjoy. :)

And to keep on topic...no, our family did not enjoy Enterprise. Had a season pass, watched a few episodes, cancelled it.

I really, really wanted to like it, but didn't. :(

Pony

Posted by: bigray327

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Yeah, but at least IT'S appropriate to the subject matter.

In what way is it not appropriate? They show a series of firsts for mankind, ending with the new starship. All steps took a lot of work and a certain amount of faith. Not going to let the Vulcans hold 'em down, etc. Seems perfectly appropriate to me, much more so than some lame trumpet anthem that would imply storming off to conquer the galaxy (which isn't what they're doing).

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
That's the biggest problem here, Pony...a lot of us "really, really wanted to like it". I think that's what makes it's overall failure such a big disappointment. :(

You say that as if it was canceled or something. It's your opinion.

Posted by: Bryanmc

For the series, the song bites. That's no opinion, that's pretty much fact.

As for a song on its own, it's okay.

But I've played the opening (muted) with some tracks from First Contact and I like it ALOT better.

Faith of the Heart. Boo.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
That's the biggest problem here, Pony...a lot of us "really, really wanted to like it". I think that's what makes it's overall failure such a big disappointment. :(

Just curious Pan, did you like TNG, DS9, or Voyager in their first seasons? Even TNG had a pretty bad first season (IMO), but it seems like you've already written off Enterprise as sucking for eternity. I can see people disliking Enterprise if they aren't Star Trek fans. But for anyone who liked TNG, DS9, and was able to endure Voyager I would expect they would at least "not hate" Enterprise. I personally think it is the best Star Trek show since TNG, although some seasons of DS9 were better. Jeffrey Combs (Weyoun) as the Andorian "Shran" is just classic.

Posted by: DLiquid

It's funny Pan, because I agree with pretty much everything you just wrote. I can totally see where you're coming from, but I guess all that stuff doesn't stop me from liking the show. I can't help myself. :)

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
... And who are these aggressive, emotionally-charged Vulcans? Would their society REALLY change THAT MUCH in just about 150 years? Possible, I suppose...but unlikely, considering how long-lived they are.
.....

Actually Enterprise is only about 100 years before Kirk and company....
But this is my pet peeve with Enterprise. The way they've handled the Vulcans. I was incredibly offended by the Vulcan who pulled a phaser on Archer and threatened to kill him and almost as offended by the fact that Archer dropped said Vulcan with one punch to the jaw :rolleyes: ....
Yeah, last time Kirk tried that with Spock he got his head handed to him....

The Vulcans as the bad guys is a blatent symptom of lazy writing. It's easier to write one dimensional bad guys then actually people who just may be mistaken......

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Holodecks were an amazing advancement for Riker. They've already seen TWO in Archer's day.

And Trip has helped repair a control computer for one of them.

Posted by: jimborst

Sorry, but I'm going to disagree with most here. I like Enterprise, I look forward to a new one each week, I know some are not the best, but still they've been pretty good. Yes the hologram has been a problem, but I can over look it.

Now for the big disagreement points, I found DS9 to be the most boring Star Trek ever, for a while it just became a big soap opera in space. I quit watching during that period. Voyager was about the same boring, I also quit taping that towards the end (yes taping before TiVo). I thought that TNG was by far the best series Star Trek has had. Enterprise is still an anticipated show for me.

Posted by: Otto

I like Enterprise, but yeah, they have been going a bit silly with some of the tech stuff. They need much more character development. You can't get into cool tech stuff with every show. However, it's fairly balanced so far.

One or two episodes set all on the ship would help. You can't visit strange new worlds every week. :p

Posted by: pjhartman

I like Enterprise, just because it's a new Trek series.

Unfortunately, my cable company doesn't carry UPN. I have to have a friend tape the show for me weekly. That works about 50% of the time, as it's forgotten, the VCR is set up wrong, etc.

Makes one appreciate TiVo all the more.

Posted by: shaunrose

Enterprise has been pretty weak. TNG started slow, as did DS9, but they both found ways to become exciting. Hopefully, Enterprise will do the same. The last few episodes showed some glimmer of hope -- I like the story arc they are developing with the interference from the future. I just hope the writing for the long-term story is better than the stand alone episodes.

Posted by: LoadStar

I hate to say it - but I second, third, and so on everything that Pan Chun said. The powers that be set this series in the past, in an attempt to get away from stuff that had been done to death in TNG, DS9, and VOY - but then in one season alone we've gotten holodecks, Ferengi, time travel, Universal Translator, and other things that they insisted we wouldn't have.

I still watch it - but for the first Trek series, the reruns that are on during the summer - I've taken a pass on. They were only OK the first time around, I don't think I could take watching them again. Instead, I've taken up watching the local DS9 reruns - and more than ever, I think that it was the best Star Trek show of them all.

Posted by: Otto

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Just make sure you have plenty of those magical hull-sealing mashed potatoes! ;)

:rolleyes:

There is nothing wrong with using mashed potatoes to seal a pinhole leak. It'll work.

Air pressure at sea level is 14.7 pounds per square inch. A pinhole for, say, photography purposes (a *large* pinhole), is 0.0073 inches in diameter, giving it an area of 0.00004185... square inches. Multiply by 14.7 to get the pressure it needs to hold, and you get 0.000615... pounds. So, mashed potatoes has PLENTY of stickiness to hold that measly amount of pressure. I exert a greater difference in air pressure by blowing on my soup.

And that assumed the starship is pressurized to sea level pressure. It's probably not. The space shuttle, for example, only runs at a little more than half that. Space suits for EVAs run at 4.3 lbs of pressure, all oxygen, which is why they require prebreathing.

So, you see, all those years of bad science in scifi movies have steered you wrong. So when something that is actually CORRECT comes along, you get all upset. :p

Posted by: net114

Well I enjoy Enterprise...I just am very hopeful it will become MORE than it is right now. TNG wasnt much to watch the first two seasons. I am not saying the Enterprise has not had some good shows- it has. Its just hard to really pinpoint a real 'direction' for the show. Kirk and crew, and TNG for that matter-- operated under the "where no one has gone before" premise. Enterprise started with, "lets just stay out here a while since the first show is done".

Enterprise now needs a real MISSION. Tell the audience what you are doing, and what you plan on doing. (Not just "can we make warp 5?")

I've seen alot of talk about people wanting a new animated Trek series-- this would be cool in primetime. Something modern, like in anime style. They could also feature all Trek eras.

Ah! To dream!!:D

Posted by: stormsweeper

quote:
Originally posted by Otto

There is nothing wrong with using mashed potatoes to seal a pinhole leak. It'll work.

I'm still 99% sure it was suppoed to be a joke on the quality of the food. It looked like Trip had taken exactly 1 bite out of them. Despite it being about the only food available for them to eat.

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by net114
... I am not saying the Enterprise has not had some good shows- it has....

When?
In the first season of Enterprise, there is no way I could rate any episode better than a B-/B. At least all of the other series had at least one episode I could rank better than a B+ in the first season.
Of course with John Shiban coming onboard perhaps now they can blatently recycle X-Files plots....

Posted by: net114

So a good show is not one that gets above "B"? That was always a good grade when I was in school:)

Before I defend several episodes, please give me the facts about why shows were not good. Not subjective opinion, facts. If I'm going to spend time defending shows, I'd like to know we don't just have a disagreement of subjective opinion.

(And yes, I thought of at least 2-4 shows I would give an "A" to).

Posted by: JYoung

think of it this way....
Episodes like "A Measure of a Man",the "Best of Both Worlds", "The Doomsday Machine", "Journey to Babel", "Duet", and "In the Pale Moonlight" get an A.

Episodes like "Spock's Brain", "Symbiosis", "Night Terrors", and "Move Along Home" get an F.

I can do a grading of each episode of Enterprise but that will take a little time to write up.
In the meantime, Pan postedthis site which is mostly correct in it's criticisms....

Posted by: net114

Well the site you pointed to is basically an "anti ENT" site through and through. EVERY review starts with "couldn't they have just" or "the idiotic writers...", etc. That is not what a review is about. I saw no experience that would qualify those reviews as being "mostly correct".
Look, I'm no ENT lover -- but on the other hand I am not going to go with the blanket notion that every single show was bad.

Posted by: Uther

quote:
Originally posted by net114
Look, I'm no ENT lover -- but on the other hand I am not going to go with the blanket notion that every single show was bad.

How about, "Every single show was not very good." ?

Posted by: TDSLB

I still think ENT is dug itself a hole that they are allready going to have a hard time getting themselves out of. The "Trek World" has pretty much disbanded them from the Trek Series as far as I can tell. Course, they did that to Voyager towards the end and still it's thought of with some respect. I really do hope that it gets better but, They have some major climbing to do before to many people will accept them again

Actually, what I think that they should do is to completely dump the STAR TREK thing that they have going. They've tryed to make a reference to things that haven't even happened yet. If they would stop trying to write to accompany the other STAR TREK series into there story lines I think that they might be able to make a decent show. Course they couldn't do that very well now seeing as the have allready said that "we are this" and there's not much anything else they can do without alienating the audience...I think...

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by TDSLB
The "Trek World" has pretty much disbanded them from the Trek Series as far as I can tell.

What is the basis for this statement? Do you have any evidence to support this?

Posted by: TDSLB

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid
What is the basis for this statement? Do you have any evidence to support this?

just from talking around. I ment that in the sense that the general fan public.
Everyone here seems to be at least at edge with them. Besides that. Everyone else I talk to about it isn't real thrilled with it either, including me, if you couldn't tell...

BTW when do I ever have any evidence for the things I say :D

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by net114
Well the site you pointed to is basically an "anti ENT" site through and through. EVERY review starts with "couldn't they have just" or "the idiotic writers...", etc. That is not what a review is about. I saw no experience that would qualify those reviews as being "mostly correct".
Look, I'm no ENT lover -- but on the other hand I am not going to go with the blanket notion that every single show was bad.

What does experience have to do with it? IMO, most of his points are correct. You may not like the way he puts up but he's usually correct about the shortcomings and the missed opportunities.

But quite frankly, I don't think that any episode of Enterprise ranks up with "Where No One Has Gone Before", "11001001", "Heart of Glory", "Conspiracy", "The Big Goodbye", "Battle Lines" or "Duet". Even the best Enterprise episode only ranks as average.....

Enterprise could be good but B&B seem to be phoning it in....

Posted by: net114

Ok, I disagree. Now you leave a message!!:)

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
What does experience have to do with it? IMO, most of his points are correct. You may not like the way he puts up but he's usually correct about the shortcomings and the missed opportunities.

Give me a break. While that site is very funny, he is definitely reaching. I've read most of the episode "reviews," and while they're certainly entertaining, the guy is trying way too hard, and a lot of what he says is just dumb. There are some good points in there, but they are few and far between. IMO.

Posted by: net114

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid

Give me a break. While that site is very funny, he is definitely reaching. I've read most of the episode "reviews," and while they're certainly entertaining, the guy is trying way too hard, and a lot of what he says is just dumb. There are some good points in there, but they are few and far between. IMO.

Here here! You can't say in honesty that a review is "correct" as keeps being pushed in this long thread. A review is opinion. It is not correct nor incorrect. Unfortunately, you either have to agree or not post at all in some cases, I'm afraid this might be one of them.

Posted by: Bryanmc

Look, I'm as big a Star Trek geek as they come.

I have Star Trek parties all the time for new shows, new movies, whatever.

I read tons of ST novels and go to conventions.

I am a Star Trek apologetic. All my friends say I know more about Trek than anyone else. I tell them, "No, but maybe within 50 miles."

All that to say, Enterprise is weak. I watch it because it is Star Trek and I'm going to keep watching it because it is Trek.

But it is weak. That guy's site does do some reaching but he also makes some fantastic observations about "missed moments." This guy knows his Trek too.

Now I'm not saying it won't get better, or that I won't give it time to get better. Dear God, Deep Space Nine was painful the first few seasons and now is regarded as one of the best (if not the best to some) ST series.

But right now, looking back, season 1 blew. B&B screwed up a lot of things.

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by net114

Here here! You can't say in honesty that a review is "correct" as keeps being pushed in this long thread. A review is opinion. It is not correct nor incorrect. Unfortunately, you either have to agree or not post at all in some cases, I'm afraid this might be one of them.

I clearly stated that In my opinion his points are correct. In other words, I agree with a lot of his opinions.

BTW, I knew a person that worked on DS9 (wrote "Destiny") and he told me some interesting things about how they worked there (there's a good reason why a lot of the episodes fall apart in the last act). Couple that with Ron Moore's comments on why he stopped working on Voyager and you can see a pattern emerging...

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
BTW, I knew a person that worked on DS9 (wrote "Destiny")

Which one?

David S. Cohen or Martin A. Winer?

Posted by: JYoung

Winer. We used to work together.

Posted by: MarkofT

Anyone else marvel that it took Bryan 6 minutes to not only see JYoung's post but then come up with the correct pair of writers for a specific episode of a TV show that has been off of first run TV for 3 years?

Posted by: JYoung

easy enough to do when you know where to look

Posted by: Dawghows

I agree with Bryanmc.

I am (should be) precisely the target for a new Trek. I am a big fan of all it's previous incarnations (including their shortcomings), but so far I'm finding Enterprise to be a disappointment. Enough of a disappointment, in fact, that I no longer watch it regularly.

I do NOT think, as some have suggested, that Trek has run it's course, but I think it is quite possible that B&B have run theirs.

We waited what--20 years?--between TOS and TNG. One reason it took that long for a new Trek to materialize was that Gene Roddenberry had a precise vision of what Trek should be and where he wanted to take it, and he wouldn't compromise many of those ideas. He knew that it is those ideas that made Trek different than other Sci-Fi. B&B on the other hand, are simply making Sci-Fi. They seem to me to have completely lost touch with what Trek is/should be/could be.

They also seem to feel the need to bring us a new Trek each time one ends. We don't need quantity. We need vision and quality, in that order. Unfortunately, I don't think we're going to get much of either from B&B.

Posted by: Jabberer

A couple of thoughts on the various series, as this thread seems to have become a general Trek thread (not that that's bad, mind you):

Star Trek: The Next Conversation, er, Generation, had a weak first season as well - "Encounter At Farpoint" was just plain awful, IMHO. However, as time went on, the series mostly recovered from it.

DS9: Many of weak moments, especially in the first season. But a full fleet action with Romulans, Klingons, Federation, Cardassian, and Dominion made up for years of crap (I just live for starships throwing photon torpedoes at each other ;) - and yes, I know I need a life...). Though the last 15 minutes of the series ender seriously sucked.

Voyager: Well, I'm just now getting to see more than season 1 it as nobody here carried it for some time and then the carrier was a station I couldn't get. But now, it's on my DTV locals, so I'm seeing it. It seems pretty predictable (as most Berman-produced work), but the characters have a certain amount of interest...I did get to see the series ender the other day for the first time - OMG that was awful.

Enterprise: Again, a weak first season. However, I, for one, liked the season ender. Blowing up Earth is a cool touch. I have lots of logic problems with the time travel aspect though - how'd the time travel agent survive? Everyone else is dead, but there he sits. Archer came through time to get there, but the equipment doesn't exist as it was destroyed before he got there by bringing him there...huh? However, despite all that, I'll still stick with it, knowing that eventually (at least up to now) all the series seem to get better as they go along.

Anyway, that's my take on ST...just an opinion...

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by MarkofT
Anyone else marvel that it took Bryan 6 minutes to not only see JYoung's post but then come up with the correct pair of writers for a specific episode of a TV show that has been off of first run TV for 3 years?

Yeah, I'm not THAT big of a geek to be able to pull things like that out of my rear.

(Though I know there are those out there who can :eek: )

Just did a quick search, I recognize some of the writers and wanted to see if I knew of the writer JYoung mentioned.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by Jabberer
Star Trek: The Next Conversation, er, Generation, had a weak first season as well - "Encounter At Farpoint" was just plain awful, IMHO. However, as time went on, the series mostly recovered from it.

DS9: Many of weak moments, especially in the first season. But a full fleet action with Romulans, Klingons, Federation, Cardassian, and Dominion made up for years of crap (I just live for starships throwing photon torpedoes at each other ;) - and yes, I know I need a life...). Though the last 15 minutes of the series ender seriously sucked.

Voyager: Well, I'm just now getting to see more than season 1 it as nobody here carried it for some time and then the carrier was a station I couldn't get. But now, it's on my DTV locals, so I'm seeing it. It seems pretty predictable (as most Berman-produced work), but the characters have a certain amount of interest...I did get to see the series ender the other day for the first time - OMG that was awful.

Exactly, people seem to forget that each of the "next generation" series sucked during their first season. I can clearly remember thinking that for each one. Then, they all got progressively better. I expected the exact same thing out of Enterprise, so my expectations were low, but I don't think it's anywhere near as bad as the other series were in their first seasons. This is Star Trek we're talking about here, folks. It's not golden, and a lot of times it's just bad, but I still love it. Go back and watch some early episodes of Next Generation, DS9, and Voyager. A lot of them were weak, but I never abandoned those series and I won't abandon Enterprise.

I understand that maybe some of you are freaking out about the continuity thing between Enterprise and TOS, and I can imagine that if that bothered me I might not like Enterprise as much. But I really don't care, I just watch the show because I find it entertaining, I don't spend my time picking apart every episode and comparing it to the events in the other series.

IMO, Enterprise has its problems, and if you evaluate it on its own I can see you not liking it. But if you're a fan of the other Star Trek series and movies, which have not always been good, it seems strange to me that you hate Enterprise so much.

Imagine that none of us had seen any Star Trek other than TOS and its movies, and that TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise all started their first seasons at the exact same time. After the first season of all four shows, do you really think Enterprise would come in last in a poll of the viewers of all four shows? I personally think it would come in first. Now, to come in first after the second season, I think Enterprise needs to get better, which I'm hoping it will, since I hate to see disappointed ST fans.

Live long an prosper.

Posted by: JYoung

quote:
Originally posted by DLiquid

Imagine that none of us had seen any Star Trek other than TOS and its movies, and that TNG, DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise all started their first seasons at the exact same time. After the first season of all four shows, do you really think Enterprise would come in last in a poll of the viewers of all four shows? I personally think it would come in first. Now, to come in first after the second season, I think Enterprise needs to get better, which I'm hoping it will, since I hate to see disappointed ST fans.

Ok, you want me to rank the first seasons of the various shows (let's not forget the obligatory, In my opinion)
In order:
TOS - Strong pilot and stand out episodes like "The Naked Time", "Errand of Mercy", "Balance of Terror", "The Devil in the Dark".

TNG - Weak pilot but had stand outs such as Where No One Has Gone Before", "11001001", "Heart of Glory", "Conspiracy", "The Big Goodbye" (which won a Peabody award)

Voyager - Strong pilot and had a couple of stand outs with "Parallax", "Faces", and "Jetrel"

DS9 - Strong pilot but only had a couple of stand outs with "Battle Lines" and "Duet" . However "Duet" was a very strong episode, A+ level.

Enterprise - so so pilot with no stand out episodes. I can't think of any episode that comes close to the ones I cited above. No creativity and a distinct lack of powerful performances.

I don't like Enterprise because I am a Star Trek fan. I want to see good Trek and it annoys me that B&B are trying to pass off Enterprise as good Trek. It's obvious they don't care. Berman seems to be just collecting a paycheck and Braga seems to be marking time in between shagging Jeri Ryan. And B&B have to take the blame for the weak stories. Not only are they the Executive producers, they wrote or had a hand in writing almost all of the episodes. It just pains me to see this recycled pablum (described by B&B as fresh, new, and innovative) instead of real meat. If this is the best Star Trek we can get, then perhaps it should die. After suffering through seasons 3-7 of Voyager, I'm not convinced that Enterprise will get better.

Posted by: Otto

I simply think they're trying to make a continuing story like DS9 did (and which is why it sucked so royally), and that pretty much explains the crappy parts of it. Overall, they need more character development and less "exploring new worlds". Once you flesh out the characters, you can go exploring. Look at early TNG, all the exploring episodes sucked, but the character developing ones weren't half bad. Then, in the later TNG, the character dev ones sucked, and the exploring ones were great. Simple enough to me.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Man, I thought TiVo had some strong apologists! They could take lessons from Trek fans!

I'm not an apologist, but as a Star Trek fan and more broadly as a science fiction fan I've learned to enjoy TV programs, movies, and books even when they aren't perfect. I would describe much of science fiction TV as pretty cheesy with pretty bad acting (B5 for example), but I've come to accept some of these shows and enjoy them anyway. I don't expect science fiction TV shows to be very good, because they almost never are. But I really like science fiction, so I watch anyway, and I really enjoy a lot of SF TV shows. My favorite, Farscape, is IMO a great show but even it is sometimes corny, with bad acting, and with bad stories. Star Trek has disappointed me countless times throughout my lifetime, with numerous bad episodes and movies, but that has never stopped me from watching it.

Enterprise so far has impressed me, although I agree there haven't really been any "great" episodes (though the finale came close, for me). It's a difference in opinion, just because you think Enterprise is bad that doesn't make it bad (and vice versa, of course). And just because I like the show doesn't make me an apologist.

Posted by: Dawghows

quote:
Originally posted by Otto
I simply think they're trying to make a continuing story like DS9 did (and which is why it sucked so royally), and that pretty much explains the crappy parts of it. Overall, they need more character development and less "exploring new worlds". Once you flesh out the characters, you can go exploring...

I agree that good characterization is the most important element in Trek. My feeling is, though, that we shouldn't be required to categorize the eps as "exploration episodes" and "character development episodes".

Maybe I just see TOS through rose-colored glasses or something, but it seems to me that, with few exceptions, we explored Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scottie, Uhura, and the rest of that gang's character through their "exploration episodes". That happened in the best of the TNG episodes, too. It has simply happened more and more infrequently as time has gone on.

So far, unfortunately, I don't see any real character development happening at all on "Enterprise". It doesn't suck, IMO. It just isn't very good. In a way, that's even worse. If it sucked, we could just simply say, "Oh well, made a mistake." Being "not good" seems like laziness, or cashing in on the franchise name, or some other inexcusable excuse.

Posted by: Blahblah2000

It appears that I'm definitely in the minority here, but I really don't see what the attraction with TOS is. William Shatner is perhaps one of the worst actors of all time. Terrible.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Blahblah2000
It appears that I'm definitely in the minority here, but I really don't see what the attraction with TOS is. William Shatner is perhaps one of the worst actors of all time. Terrible.

I like Shatner as Kirk.

But what makes it for me where TOS is concerned is Leonard Nimoy. He is fantastic.

My favorite "chunk" of ST are the movies with with the original cast.

Posted by: Blahblah2000

Even the very original Star Trek: The Movie? I haven't seen it for a long, long time, but I remember it being very slow...

Posted by: hckylvr88

Many of the poor opinions of Enterprise sound a lot like the opinions of the first season of TNG, DS9, and Voyager. I am willing to bet that things will get better.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Blahblah2000
Even the very original Star Trek: The Movie? I haven't seen it for a long, long time, but I remember it being very slow...

No. I do not care for that movie.

It has some good scenes, but in my mind TOS movies began with The Wrath of Kahn.

I still think those uniforms are the coolest.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by Bryanmc

No. I do not care for that movie.

It has some good scenes, but in my mind TOS movies began with The Wrath of Kahn.

I still think those uniforms are the coolest.

Wrath of Khan is my favorite ST movie.

"Khaaaaaaaaan!"

Posted by: Jabberer

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
...Berman....has 600 Trek episodes under his belt. 600! He goes "back to the original premise" and HE STILL can't accomplish a good, strong, COMPELLING first season?!? Hell, Roddenberry did it in 1966-67 in HIS first season of Trek!

Man, I thought TiVo had some strong apologists! They could take lessons from Trek fans!

I do have to agree with you that Berman should be doing better - he's not good for the franchise. Shatner says as much near the end of his book "Get A Life", basically saying that with Berman in charge, the days of ST are numbered and I'd agree. However, that said, I'm still willing to give Enterprise a second season to get it's legs under it.

With Roddenberry, he did have the advantage of it being a fairly fresh idea and didn't have the baggage of 30 years of shows sitting back there just waiting to be compared with his...of course if Berman were running things then, the show wouldn't have made it to the first sweeps period...

As for apologists, no, I don't think people are apologists - this is purely a matter of taste people are expressing and there's no need for anyone to apologize for differing tastes (even if it's bad taste in your opinion ;)). It's hard to say that someones completely subjective opinion is wrong...it's like saying it's that I'm wrong for liking vanilla ice cream.

Posted by: Dawghows

quote:
Originally posted by Blahblah2000
...William Shatner is perhaps one of the worst actors of all time. Terrible.

Agreed. And yet his character is nothing short of legendary, as are Nimoy's Spock and Dee Kelly's McCoy. Somehow, despite all the things that, in retrospect, were faulty or silly about TOS, those characters and their stories -- even the ship they travelled in -- became iconic. Like Coke, Pepsi, Superman, Cadillac, they are reference points of American pop culture. I think this is a result of what Gene brought to the show that Berman doesn't. I don't believe Sisko, Janeway, or Archer will ever be ingrained in our lexicon in the same way. Certainly TNG could be, but Roddenberry was still around then to keep Berman from *#@%ing things up.

Posted by: Syzygy

TreborPugly said "The best thing about Enterprise is the opening credits/theme song. One of the few openings I don't FF through."

That's funny -- the theme song at the start is the most repellent thing about the show, IMHO. After the first time, when I heard only a small part of it, I couldn't stand to hear even the first long, drawn-out note of that abysmal song.

The most appealing thing, of course, is Jolene Blalock.

Posted by: DLiquid

quote:
Originally posted by Syzygy
The most appealing thing, of course, is Jolene Blalock.

Let's just hope for a better haircut next season. None of the Vulcan women in the other shows/movies had the Spock haircut.

Posted by: Bryanmc

quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Yeesh! That's not saying much! (I find her to be extremely FAKE looking out of makeup...well, IN makeup too...!)

I can forgive funky looks if the acting's good...and I can forgive bad acting if the looks are worthwhile. She leaves me cold on both counts. :( <shrug>

Agreed 100%!!!

Give me good old Councilor Troi any day!