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
Enterprise: "Minefield" SPOILERS
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: DaveLessnau
First, I'm working under the assumption that since I've got the word "SPOILERS" in the title of this thread, everyone who reads it has seen the episode. In other words, there are un-hidden spoilers in it.
OK. Down to the meat. 200 years before the Federation is supposed to have noticed that the Romulans have cloaking technology, Earth and the Vulcans have now seen it in action. Ignoring that violation of the timeline, in all that time, those vast and mighty empires have done nothing to improve their sensors so they can detect the use of a cloak? In all that time, they haven't come up with their own cloaks? Interesting R&D programs they have.
Specific to this episode, why didn't Enterprise just use their transporter to transport the mine away from the ship? If they were afraid of the transport beam setting it off, why didn't they just use it to beam Malcomb to the sick bay? Supposedly it hasn't been approved for human use yet. But, earlier in the series they used it on Archer.
Posted by: Bryanmc
quote:
Originally posted by DaveLessnau
OK. Down to the meat. 200 years before the Federation is supposed to have noticed that the Romulans have cloaking technology, Earth and the Vulcans have now seen it in action. Ignoring that violation of the timeline, in all that time, those vast and mighty empires have done nothing to improve their sensors so they can detect the use of a cloak? In all that time, they haven't come up with their own cloaks? Interesting R&D programs they have.
The Klingons do develop it.
The Federation signed the Treaty of Algeron with the Romulans after the war that prevented the Federation from developing cloaking technology.
Assuming the war with the Romulans will be happening relatively soon (from Enterprise's POV) then they may not have enough time to work on the project before signing the treaty.
Posted by: hfwarner3
quote:
Originally posted by Bryanmc
The Klingons do develop it.
IIRC, the Klingons get it from the Romulans in exchange for warp and other technology. The Klingons trade a certain number of their ships with advanced warp engines, weapons and defenses and trade them for a certain number of Romulan ships with cloaks and plasma torpedoes.
The Klingons reverse engineer the cloak and decide to keep it but decide they do not like the tactical limitations of the plasma torpedoes. The Romulans, on the other hand, now have warp 5+ capability and become a true power in the galaxy. Of course, this was all the ST:TOS timeline, so that is worth as much as used bumwipe at this point.
Posted by: tonyoci
You didn't even mention the "lets hold these doors in the right direction and get blown away by a bomb that just destroyed three decks and get to the hanger without a scratch" thing.
Personally I don't care about that stuff, I watch the show for what it is on a week by week basis, but I can see the flaws that would annoy some people.
T
Posted by: vertigo235
If I recal weren't tri-cobalt devices really advanced on voyager? Didn't they only have like 3 Tri-Cobalt torpedos. But the romulans fit it on all of their mines?
Posted by: kazymyr
And all the talk - the episode was 95% talk. Basically no action at all. :down:
Oh yeah - they get blown behind the shuttle doors. Big whoop. The scene lasts 5 seconds at most. And what was with "it was 20 seconds, that's an order" thing?
Posted by: Pan Chun
A very similar concept was played out in an episode of Stargate SG-1 ("Message In A Bottle") and done much better.
The Trek boards are saying the transporter was NOT an option because of the way it currently works...in an episode called "Civilization", an item couldn't be site-to-site transported...it had to be beamed INTO the ship and then re-beamed elsewhere. They are also saying that any molecular activity like that would trigger the bomb just as easily as would trying to cut into the rods. <shrug> And since Reed's leg SURROUNDED the rod, the more primitive transporter couldn't have adequately distinguished between him and the device well enough to just retrieve HIM (remember the crewman with the leaves stuck in his skin early last season?).
Of course, the RADIATION of a blast like that would've fried them real good, hull plating or not...! :rolleyes:
What a waste of Romulans. The cloaking tech was WAY too advanced for their ships, LET ALONE A FIELD OF MINES! And while the ships were somewhat retro, they were GREEN instead of TOS GREY...and no giant Bird of Prey painted on the underside! :mad: In 100 years, Kirk & Spock will be astonished and amazed over the THEORETICAL possibility of cloaking. In one year alone, Archer and Co. have encountered no fewer than THREE races that do it regularly, with no difficulty...! The Xyrillians ("Unexpected"), the Suliban ("Shockwave"), and now the very same Romulans in this episode. They're really crapping all over the original Trek, IMO. :down:
Posted by: jhausmann
quote:
Originally posted by kazymyr
And all the talk - the episode was 95% talk. Basically no action at all. :down:
Oh yeah - they get blown behind the shuttle doors. Big whoop. The scene lasts 5 seconds at most. And what was with "it was 20 seconds, that's an order" thing?
Nice to see the dialogue captured your attention. :rolleyes:
When Archer was working the bomb, he asked Malcom his opinions about his leadership style. One issue Malcom had, had to do with the command structure on the bridge. Malcom felt that the crew's purpose, on Enterprise, was to simply take orders. Archer was either accomodating him or teasing him, take your pick.
Posted by: jhausmann
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
A very similar concept was played out in an episode of Stargate SG-1 ("Message In A Bottle") and done much better.
The Trek boards are saying the transporter was NOT an option because of the way it currently works...in an episode called "Civilization", an item couldn't be site-to-site transported...it had to be beamed INTO the ship and then re-beamed elsewhere. They are also saying that any molecular activity like that would trigger the bomb just as easily as would trying to cut into the rods. <shrug> And since Reed's leg SURROUNDED the rod, the more primitive transporter couldn't have adequately distinguished between him and the device well enough to just retrieve HIM (remember the crewman with the leaves stuck in his skin early last season?).
Of course, the RADIATION of a blast like that would've fried them real good, hull plating or not...! :rolleyes:
What a waste of Romulans. The cloaking tech was WAY too advanced for their ships, LET ALONE A FIELD OF MINES! And while the ships were somewhat retro, they were GREEN instead of TOS GREY...and no giant Bird of Prey painted on the underside! :mad: In 100 years, Kirk & Spock will be astonished and amazed over the THEORETICAL possibility of cloaking. In one year alone, Archer and Co. have encountered no fewer than THREE races that do it regularly, with no difficulty...! The Xyrillians ("Unexpected"), the Suliban ("Shockwave"), and now the very same Romulans in this episode. They're really crapping all over the original Trek, IMO. :down:
Thing is, the story would've been decent eough without the Romulans cast as the villians. Which suggests that some portion of this season and onward will deal with an Earth/ Romulan conflict. Just like the Dominion War was used to pull DS9 out of the doldrums...
Posted by: Pan Chun
BTW, I don't if anyone's noticed or cares, but this was the first episode scripted by new associate producer John Shiban who used to be with The X-Files.
Posted by: JYoung
I knew that and I was not impressed.
Looks like Shiban will continue B&B's tradition of stomping on established continuity.
Oh, and how much are you will to bet that the ship will be all fixed and shiny again next episode? Even though they had a good chunk of the hull blown off and another chuck ejected... it's Voyager all over again.. :rolleyes:
Also, the Romulan sensors were good enough to detect all that activity about jettisonning the hull? They could barely detect Kirk's Enterprise......
Posted by: Pan Chun
quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
Oh, and how much are you will to bet that the ship will be all fixed and shiny again next episode? Even though they had a good chunk of the hull blown off and another chuck ejected... it's Voyager all over again.. :rolleyes:
Well, that speculation I can CONFIRM as being inaccurate...
The premise of the next episode has them seeking repairs at an alien space station. So for at least 1 episode, they WILL be crippled by events from the previous one.
Posted by: JYoung
you'll excuse me if I don't believe it until I see it... ;)
Posted by: kazymyr
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Well, that speculation I can CONFIRM as being inaccurate...
The premise of the next episode has them seeking repairs at an alien space station. So for at least 1 episode, they WILL be crippled by events from the previous one.
Wow! Continuity! Who'd have thunk! ;)
BTW, Pan, are you sure you didn't move next door to me? I noticed this morning my new neighbor has a name plate reading "Chun". :D
Posted by: Pan Chun
Watch out...we're EVERYWHERE! ;) :)
quote:
Originally posted by JYoung
you'll excuse me if I don't believe it until I see it... ;)
Here's the description for next week's show (note the director's name):quote:
30. Dead Stop
Desperately in need of repairs, the Enterprise stops at an unknown space station. The inhabitants of this station are happy to do the work and seem to ask little in return, however they may not be as generous as they claim.
b: 09-Oct-02 pc: 40358-032 w: Mike Sussman & Phyllis Strong d: Roxann Dawson
Posted by: TivoFan
This episode was so incredibly boring. If my wife wasn't a die hard trekkie I wouldn't bother ever watching Enterprise anymore.
Posted by: martinp13
I think you read that quote a bit wrong....
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Continuity at a Dead Stop
Desperately in need of repairs, the Enterprise script stops at an unknown space station. The inhabitants of this station are happy to do the re-editing work and seem to ask little in return, however they may not be as generous with continuity as they claim.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was quite boring too... and now I think Malcolm is a idiotic stick-in-the-mud. I tend to avoid workaholic introverts with no social skills (as do most people)... no wonder he has no friends. :(
I haven't bothered to look it up, but is this Roxann's first episode as director? I thought she did a Voyager ep or two, but I could be wrong.
Posted by: Pan Chun
Roxann Dawson's Director Resume from IMDb:
"Enterprise" (2001) TV Series (episode 1.07 "Andorian Incident, The") (episode 1.22 "Vox Sola") (episode 2.05 "Dead Stop") (episode 2.10)
"Angel" (1999/I) TV Series (one episode season 4)
"Charmed" (1998) TV Series
"Any Day Now" (1998) TV Series
"Star Trek: Voyager" (1995) TV Series (episode 6.06 "Riddles") (episode 7.17 "Workforce, Part II")
Posted by: Frylock
Clearly the key to enjoying the show is to put continuity aside. If you do, the show becomes a lot more enjoyable. It was bound to happen that they would screw with continuity if they kept doing prequel series...
Posted by: chris1
How many TOS episodes featured Romulans? I count three of them:
Balance of Terror (115)
The Deadly Years (212)
The Enterprise Incident (302)
I don’t think that’s enough to cover all the details about Romulans. Many of the details that some critics are citing were actually developed in novels or fan fiction. In the Star Trek universe, only movies and series episodes are considered canon while novels and fan fiction are considered to have taken place in an alternate timeline. As for B&B diverging from the original series, personally I think there is nothing wrong with that. Would you have preferred that they kept the original TOS look of the Klingons in the movies and TNG? I wonder if there were trekkie fanatics complaining about the different look when the first movie came out. There probably were. Maybe some of the posters here are among them. :eek:
Posted by: Frylock
I think chris1 has the right idea. It's like how people complain in Episode 1 of SW how Darth Maul had a dual lightsaber, but no one has since. It's entertainment, and not reality. I think it is important to keep a rough timeline of events, but beyond that, just go with it. Otherwise you'll just watch it to trash it, and what sense does that make?
Posted by: Pan Chun
That would be okay if it were up to the task of being well written, well acted, compelling story telling. But they aren't even doing THAT adequately.
If they wanted to play in the Star Trek sandbox, fine...play by the Star Trek rules. If they want to cast aside what the people who BUILT the sandbox feel is important ("the rules"), then they really OUGHT to go build their OWN sandbox...and start a show that has no rules to fit into.
But wait...Berman and Braga have never done that...they've never written an original show that wasn't in the Trek universe. They are one-trick ponies...you'd think they'd at least do the ONE TRICK they CAN do better than they have been. :(
Posted by: chris1
I have to agree that the acting in Trek is not very good. Scott Bakula pales in comparison to Patrick Stewart. The actress who plays T'Pol isn't too bad though. She was good in Carbon Creek. Trip is OK. I would like to see him in more of a comedy relief role. He played his part well in the episode where he got pregnant. I find Archer. Hoshi, and Meriwether to be very dry. B&B should kill them off and replace them with better actors. They should also make the crew more international just like the crew of the TOS Enterprise. The Earth is, after all, living under a one-world government which is why the TOS crew had a Scott (Scotty), a Kenyan (Uhura), an Asian American (Sulu, born in SF, said in ST4), and a Russian (Chekov) which was a very brave statement considering America was in the midst of a war with Soviet-backed Vietnam.
Posted by: avaloncourt
quote:
Originally posted by tonyoci
You didn't even mention the "lets hold these doors in the right direction and get blown away by a bomb that just destroyed three decks and get to the hanger without a scratch" thing.
That's exactly what I was thinking and I want to know where mean old Mr. Inertia went. He says OK and they spin around really fast to take the blast. Sure looked to me like they should have kept on going. Must have been the airless brakes.
And why the heck didn't Hoshi's top get blown off in that explosion?!
Posted by: Worf
Hey, it's part of the Star Trek Physics(tm) model they use!
Conservation of (angular) momentum be damned...
Of course, I find it interesting that the suit just sealed up... in the 24th century, they didn't have such luxury anymore. (Nor apparently, does the fact that present-day astronauts just go when they need to already - NASA covered that base ages ago!).
I guess the later the time goes, the more primitive the technology gets.
Posted by: avaloncourt
quote:
Originally posted by Worf
[B]Hey, it's part of the Star Trek Physics(tm) model they use!
(Nor apparently, does the fact that present-day astronauts just go when they need to already - NASA covered that base ages ago!).
Depends were outlawed by the Urinary Accord. They were filling up the land fills.
Posted by: mattdrury
quote:
Originally posted by tonyoci
You didn't even mention the "lets hold these doors in the right direction and get blown away by a bomb that just destroyed three decks and get to the hanger without a scratch" thing.
Thank you. Normally I let Star Trek discrepancies wash over me, but this one just didn't seem at all reasonable. Must've been some good piloting on the Enterprise's part, to scoop 'em up so?
Posted by: trojanrabbit
quote:
Originally posted by Worf
Of course, I find it interesting that the suit just sealed up... in the 24th century, they didn't have such luxury anymore.
I thought of that too. Amazing that mine's leg went right through Malcom's suit and leg (so you could see the blood 'n guts), but the suit miraculously sealed itself. Same with the injection the Captain gave him.
Maybe the lining of the suits are made of mashed potatoes. :D
With enough alcohol in my system, I can easily suspend belief.
Posted by: JerryLBell
quote:
Originally posted by chris1 Would you have preferred that they kept the original TOS look of the Klingons in the movies and TNG? I wonder if there were trekkie fanatics complaining about the different look when the first movie came out.
I loved how Worf handled the change in Klingon physiology in the DS9 episode that revisited the TOS "Trouble With Tribbles" episode. He just glared at his mates and said something like, "It's a long story and I don't want to talk about it!"
Posted by: kazymyr
quote:
Originally posted by avaloncourt
Depends were outlawed by the Urinary Accord. They were filling up the land fills.
Or they could use the method from Apollo 13 and create constellation Urion. :)
Posted by: Pan Chun
quote:
Originally posted by chris1
As for B&B diverging from the original series, personally I think there is nothing wrong with that. Would you have preferred that they kept the original TOS look of the Klingons in the movies and TNG? I wonder if there were trekkie fanatics complaining about the different look when the first movie came out. There probably were. Maybe some of the posters here are among them. :eek:
Don't be ridiculous. Roddenberry made it ABUNDANTLY CLEAR at the time that, when HE authorized the redesign of the Klingon makeup, it was because he had ALWAYS intended them to be as visually elaborate...they simply did NOT have the budget for it in 1966-69.
B&B had ZERO to do with that change...in fact Berman didn't come on board until more than 8 years later. But the creator of the Klingons not only authorized it but instigated it, so I just don't think it's a good comparison to someone ELSE making unnecessary changes simply because they happen to CURRENTLY hold the keys to the franchise.
It was his baby. I have no problem with GR "tweaking" his own concept. When Berman and Braga do it, it comes off more like PICKING THE BONES clean of substance and leaving behind only gristle and marrow. Sure, they keep the skeleton. But the MEAT has been disposed of. NOT good. :(
Posted by: Mars Rocket
I haven't given up yet, but I'm getting close. The Star Trek universe has been filled with ridiculous crap before (viz the fire extinguishers that are all over the ship in ST V), but since it's always been a character-based show I let it slide.
Enterprise bugs me on two points:
1. They keep making stupid physics mistakes for the sake of the plot, as if they're daring us to know more science than your average 5th grader.
2. The characters are neither consistent nor interesting.
That second point is what will probably kill it for me once and for all.
Posted by: dengel
They should show more of T'pol... then I'd be a happy viewer.
d.
Posted by: DaveLessnau
quote:
Originally posted by dengel
They should show more of T'pol... then I'd be a happy viewer.
No offense, but that's probably why we get such poor shows. The producers figure that if they flash a bit of flesh around, 50% of the population loses higher brain functions and they can slip stuff by.
Posted by: kazymyr
They could maximize the profit by splitting their audience; make 2 series, "Enterprise - PG" and "Enterprise - After Dark". :D
Posted by: hfwarner3
quote:
Originally posted by kazymyr
They could maximize the profit by splitting their audience; make 2 series, "Enterprise - PG" and "Enterprise - After Dark". :D
How the heck do you explain *THAT* PPV purchase to the wife?
Posted by: martinp13
quote:
Originally posted by kazymyr
"Enterprise - After Dark"
You just explain that the "after dark" is the part of the series after a sun went supernova. Or some other illogical Trekism. :)
My major problem with the continuity trashing is that I don't mind suspending my disbelief, but I don't like to ship it off for a week in Tibet. :)
Posted by: Celusil
Chris1
I would indeed have preferred the original Klingon and yes I did complain about the lack of continuity.from the series to the movies.
The fact that they had more money to spend on the sets and the makeup went to there heads and the changes (while possibly more interesting if taken on there own) completely ignored the previous history of the series.
At least the continuity from STNG and their movies was better. Although all this time traveling idiocy is enough to make me puke
C
Posted by: hfwarner3
Hey, for the next show, they could have the crew of the first test Time Ship Enterprise go back in time to the year 10,000 BC and the ship could malfunction and they could be stuck on the planet. And the hot babe science officier could build communicators out of coconuts and there could be a monolith thing that the cavemen dance around and there could be a whiney ensign who would keep complaining about the prime directive and the Q could show up and laugh at them but refuse to help and then some Romulans could come and spy on them from a cloaked shuttle and invisible drop tri-cobalt mines on them from orbit and it would have to do something that would make an excuse for the hot chick science babe to get naked or something. Yeah. That would be kewl.
Posted by: Pan Chun
Sorry...I'll be watching Firefly at that time (thanks, TiVo!)...but better luck next Trek series! ;)
Posted by: Otto
quote:
Originally posted by trojanrabbit
Maybe the lining of the suits are made of mashed potatoes. :D
Oh for crying out loud...
The mashed potatoes bit was:
a) plausible
b) realistic
c) obvious, and
d) unoriginal.
Reasoning:
a) it made sense that they'd seal the hull with whatever the hell was at hand.
b) it would have worked. Do your own math, or look up the math I've done in this forum at least twice already. Normal breathing air pressure just isn't all that large.
c) obvious to anyone who had read a goodly amount of sci-fi books, because
d) i've read this exact temporary solution involving a pinhole breach in outer space in at least one sci-fi book/story, possibly two (although I can't recall which books/stories i read it in). Although I can recall a Heinlein story where a guy used his butt cheek to temporarily seal a breach the size of his fist. :p
Go call someone with a clue, try NASA. They'll tell you the same thing. If you're going to bash the show, fine, no problem. But at least try and do it right. I mean, it only hurts your credibility as a show basher / trek fan / knowledgable space person when you bash the show improperly. There's plenty of places they did screw up to point out instead of pointing out the ones they got right on the money.
;)
Regarding the miracle suit, wasn't there a shot of the leg covered in frozen blood or sealant or something, while he was still pinned down? I recall seeing frost there.
Posted by: Otto
BTW, re: angular momentum: didn't those suits have thrusters on the back? I could have swore there was a hissing sound as Malcolm turned.
Posted by: Pan Chun
Wow...amazing what the ENT "true believers" will SWEAR is "True Science" to support their favorite show.
Kinda sad in a way...but have at it, Ent TB's!
Posted by: Dweller
Every week I find myself closer to something I never thought possible.
I am starting to hate Star Trek. (well to be fair - Enterprise)
I was born and raised on Star Trek TOS (literally.. some of my earliest memorys are Kirk and Spock on TV sitting with Dad on the couch) I have liked every incarnation of star trek to hit the screen. But I think I am finally being pushed over the edge :(
I am not a Scott Bakula fan, and felt from the start he was the wrong choice for a Star Trek Captain. But he is only the begining of what I dont like about Enterprise. I know some of you like him but I find his acting lacking. I get no sense of true emotion from him. Just a feeling of.... blah.
I will not rehash the obvious of what I find wrong with the series with you guys, just wanted it said. B&B have killed off a many years fan of the franchise.
Posted by: RGM1138
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Well, that speculation I can CONFIRM as being inaccurate...
The premise of the next episode has them seeking repairs at an alien space station. So for at least 1 episode, they WILL be crippled by events from the previous one.
Hmmm, I was wondering where they were going to get that gaping hole repaired. Seeing as how there is no Federation yet, and precious few, (if any), Earth bases out that far, since the big E is the first warp 5 capable ship.
Plus, we know how the Vulcans of that time don't want the Earth riff-raff hanging out at one of their bases. :)
Bob
Posted by: Mars Rocket
Late last night, as I was trying to fall asleep, I thought of a few more things about "Minefield" that bugged me:
1. Why does Hoshi pronounce "Romulan" wrong the first time she says it to T'Pol? Isn't she listening to their transmission and trying to translate it? Even if she didn't know what the word meant, you'd think pronouncing it correctly would be a priority to a translator.
2. The Enterprise is merrily driving along toward the planet and they hit a mine. So they stop. They use their thingamajig on a long stick to illuminate space and see all the cloaked mines out there. At this point, isn't the prudent thing to do simply to back up and go away? So why does Mr. "I'm going to fly this baby manually using the worst-looking human interface any of you have ever seen" take something like 10 minutes to thread his way through the minefield? How the heck did they get that far into it and only manage to hit *1* mine? In the beginning I figured they were at the edge of the minefield, but apparently they were in the middle of it.
3. How come many people were hurt by the mine that hit them, but nobody was killed? I mean, what's the likelihood that you could rip away a sizable chunk of the ship, including several decks, and not kill anybody? Are there really sections of the ship that are so empty that nobody is in them *at all*? If so, why did all those people get hurt? Aren't there supposed to be like 90 people on board?
4. I'm glad they didn't show the E scooping up two people floating in space; there's no way they could have made that look anything less than ridiculous.
Posted by: Pan Chun
1. They're dumb. Not just the characters, but the writers and producers. So they assume WE are dumb as well. That's the only adequate explanation for that little travesty that I can think of.
2. Okay, I don't think the mines were 100% stationary. For one thing, they were magnetic and cloaked, so they were also probably linked to a degree. (Or SHOULD have been.) Once ONE locked on, a (Tholian) WEB of mines ought to have surrounded them to make any such simple reversal of course ineffectual. (Nah, I'm guessing here...nothing worse than a lame "Treksplanation". ;) )
3. Despite the crew's utter stupidity and their multiple mis-steps over the past year, not ONE SINGLE CREWMEMBER has died yet. NOT ONE! :eek: The mind boggles. Only thing that I can think of is that perhaps that was a significant section of crew quarters and the crew was up and about and ON DUTY at the time <shrug>. Next episode Spoiler Alert! (highlight to read)
a crewmember dies. But it's one of the lead 7...and since they'll be docked at an ultra-super-duper-magical-mystery REPAIR STATION, it's not much of a stretch to guess they'll REPAIR HIM, too.
4. Lots of ridiculosity anymore...a shame those two will probably die from radiation exposure! Or at least they WOULD if they really did what they showed! ;)
Posted by: avaloncourt
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Rocket
1. Why does Hoshi pronounce "Romulan" wrong the first time she says it to T'Pol? Isn't she listening to their transmission and trying to translate it? Even if she didn't know what the word meant, you'd think pronouncing it correctly would be a priority to a translator.
Well, I can say from personal experience that people aren't generally stupid but incredibly lazy. I have a long German last name. It really isn't difficult (only three syllables but I have heard people either say "Wow, I can't pronounce that!" or blurt out some bizarre pronunciation that indicates that they never even looked at it. It's not as if it's a pronunciation as some names which contain letter or letter combinations that don't sound anything like they're spelled out phonetically.
My favorites are the telemarketers who get themselves on my bad side to begin with by saying a name that isn't even remotely close. I verbally beat one up on the phone once when they said, "Is Mr. XXXXXXXXX there?" (Stating something that contained letters my name doesn't and not even remotely sounding like mine.)
I just said, "Well, there's nobody here by that name but if you buy Hooked on Phonics and get a f-ing clue how to speak better than a first grader then maybe that person will be here next time. Otherwise, don't bother calling here again."
So, it isn't surprising that their apparent mindset of if it's not Smith, Jones or Spencer then we couldn't possibly pronounce it correctly. It's just plain laziness.
Posted by: stormsweeper
Still, I'm sure the Romulans would have pronounced it correctly, and she was working off an audio feed.
Posted by: avaloncourt
You would think wouldn't you?
Posted by: Pan Chun
Well, the actual PURPOSE of that little exchange was to show that T'Pol and the Vulcans are aware of the existence of the Romulans.
They are treading on thin ice if they show us that the Vulcans know the Rommies are their long-lost cousins. :mad:
Posted by: Mars Rocket
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Well, the actual PURPOSE of that little exchange was to show that T'Pol and the Vulcans are aware of the existence of the Romulans.
And they couldn't have accomplished that without the stupid mis-pronunciation because....
Posted by: Pan Chun
quote:
Originally posted by Mars Rocket
And they couldn't have acomplished that without the stupid mis-pronunucation because....
See answer #1 above. ;)
Posted by: Pan Chun
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
...Only thing that I can think of is that perhaps that was a significant section of crew quarters and the crew was up and about and ON DUTY at the time <shrug>.
Found some vidcaps from the episode:
http://trexx.250x.com/s2e03/e203016.jpg
http://trexx.250x.com/s2e03/e203017.jpg
That's pretty significant for ZERO deaths.
Posted by: BLeonard
I'm a big fan of the Star Trek franchise and continue to watch Enterprise because it seems like the right thing to do. I must admit though that I'm finding most of these episodes pretty boring. The previous episode where the "story" is told about Vulcan's first exposure to humans in the past was good though. I wish they would do more of these type plot lines. One of my favorite Voyagers was when they went back to "Ancient" earth. I believe it was a two parter.
I find myself unable to watch the old original Star Trek series though as it seems really ridiculous in comparison to any of the other shows.
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by chris1
I have to agree that the acting in Trek is not very good. Scott Bakula pales in comparison to Patrick Stewart. ...
Well, that's not really very fair, a lot of actors pale in comparison to Patrick Stewart. He's a great classic Shakespearean actor.
Just to add a couple of my own opinions on the show...
The characters are mainly annoying. Malcolm has a total lack of personality, Tripp is annoying, and Dr. Flox is kind of bland and a bit annoying too. I don't mind Archer because I think it's a bit interesting that his character seems to be a Captain in title only... he's not as military as the other captains have been in the other shows, so I kinda like that.
The plots are wordy, boring, and short on any kind of action. This past episode was a classic example. There they are, in the middle of a huge minefield, and I didn't feel any kind of suspense at all. I understand that the ship won't get destroyed (it's gotta be back next week), or that main cast members won't get killed, but they just had a couple of decks blown away, and all they had were a few casualties and no deaths?!? When it first showed that part of the ship blowing up, I rewound it and was looking for a body or two spiraling into space! But of course, nobody happened to be in that part of the ship. Jeez! Don't tell me that the red-shirts didn't get cursed until later in the timeline! TOS used to sacrifice a red-shirt almost every other episode. They could at least have chosen a class/profession in this series that suffer the same fate.
I've said it before, and I know it sounds like I'm being political and self-serving, but I hate the fact that we're now into the 5th ST series, covering three separate generations in the ST universe, and I still have yet to see a single gay person. Even if you're not gonna have a regular cast member, it wouldn't hurt believability to have two people in the background in mess hall that if you look closely, it was obvious they were on a date or something. Or instead of Tripp assuming that the other guys are into girls like he is, he asks them first.
It's like B&B are so into just the ST universe, that they're not even aware of what's being done on other shows. Music is just like it's always been, directing is just like it's always been. Plotlines are just like they've always been.
Dammit! I started watching that show expecting steak, and instead I get Spam!
Posted by: Otto
quote:
Originally posted by bobcarn
I've said it before, and I know it sounds like I'm being political and self-serving, but I hate the fact that we're now into the 5th ST series, covering three separate generations in the ST universe, and I still have yet to see a single gay person.
No, it doesn't sound like you're being political and self-serving. You *are* being political and self-serving. :p
In all my years of life, having met people from all current generations, of all walks of life, in all sorts of places, of all the many thousands of people I've met, I've only met one person whom I know is gay. That's hardly a majority.
Frankly, sex just doesn't come up that often in the real world, and trying to shoehorn it into a TV show seems both forced and stupid.
And anyway, you're ignoring the TNG show that had the planet without gender. ;)
Posted by: Pan Chun
Hmm...and I was CONVINCED we were seeing an uncomfortable "morning after" scene when Archer and Reed were having breakfast...! ;)
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by Otto
No, it doesn't sound like you're being political and self-serving. You *are* being political and self-serving. :p
In all my years of life, having met people from all current generations, of all walks of life, in all sorts of places, of all the many thousands of people I've met, I've only met one person whom I know is gay. That's hardly a majority.
Frankly, sex just doesn't come up that often in the real world, and trying to shoehorn it into a TV show seems both forced and stupid.
And anyway, you're ignoring the TNG show that had the planet without gender. ;)
Not having a gender is something entirely different. And as for the thousands of people you've met where you've only known one to be gay, well... open your eyes. It's exactly like you said. There's only one that you knew to be gay. A gay person is much more aware of how many other gays are present in society. We have that "radar" thing going on (don't knock it, it works).
Frankly, I don't really want a gay person as one of the regulars on the show. Seeing as how they managed to make all the other characters so incredibly boring or annoying, I'm happy they're not attempting to write a gay character (they can't even write a decent straight one!). But I still contend that over the length of all of those series, having a total exclusion of gay people is one of their largest oversights. Especially since these shows take place in the future. At those points in time, sexual orientation shouldn't even be an issue. If there was ever a script that dealt with a character's sexual orientation, it would be immediately flawed in principal because there shouldn't be an issue worth writing about. But that doesn't mean that a whole class of people should be intentionally excluded and that future society should be portrayed as being entirely straight.
I guess as time goes on, I care less about it. The Star Trek universe is becoming so incredibly bland and boring, I'm not sure even a flaming drag queen character would be able to add some life to it. I'm really starting to consider only the original series to be true Trek, and care less and less about this ridiculous universe that they're developing.
Posted by: DavidTigerFan
There was a gay guy in some of the fan ficiton I think. I remember reading it in the bookstore, oddly written. Not that theres anything wrong with that.
-DTF
Posted by: Rob Helmerichs
Hell, in the fanfic don't they have a name for the genre of stories in which Kirk and Spock are gay?
Posted by: Pan Chun
It's called "slash ( / ) fiction"...but it's not JUST for gay stories. It's for relationships between ANY 2 or more characters...as in Kirk/Janeway or Porthos/Spot or Odo/Neelix, etc. :eek:
Posted by: Bryanmc
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Porthos/Spot
Slash fiction is pretty far out there to begin with, but this one takes the cake! :eek:
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
It's called "slash ( / ) fiction"...but it's not JUST for gay stories. It's for relationships between ANY 2 or more characters...as in Kirk/Janeway or Porthos/Spot or Odo/Neelix, etc. :eek:
ooooookay!
Ever get the feeling that some people have waaaay too much time on their hands? :)
Posted by: Bryanmc
quote:
Originally posted by bobcarn
ooooookay!
Ever get the feeling that some people have waaaay too much time on their hands? :)
Don't get Lori started.
She has the power to destroy your appreciation of a show with a single link! :eek:
Posted by: stormsweeper
quote:
Originally posted by Bryanmc
Don't get Lori started.
She has the power to destroy your appreciation of a show with a single link! :eek:
http://www.brunching.com/enterpriseslash.html
Posted by: ahartman
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
3. Despite the crew's utter stupidity and their multiple mis-steps over the past year, not ONE SINGLE CREWMEMBER has died yet. NOT ONE! :eek:
I have to see if you posted in that long GI Joe thread a couple of months ago... ;). Star Trek & GI Joe - the only two places in all of existance where it's safe to be a bad guy - you can't die!
I have to believe that with the first foray into deep space, we would've lost crewmen to even simple mechanical failures. I watched Voyager thru the end and I still am mad at myself and I watched the finale for the sole reason to prove to myself that turd of a show was finally over.
I'm getting close to dumping Enterprise, too. Thank God for TiVo - I can FF thru that annoying theme song.
Posted by: ahartman
quote:
Originally posted by stormsweeper
http://www.brunching.com/enterpriseslash.html
Dare I ask if 'brunching' is some codeword for some twisted sexual thing? :eek: :confused: Nah.
Move along. Nothing to see here.
Posted by: mattdrury
quote:
Originally posted by Pan Chun
Porthos/Spot
Please. No. I didn't have any need whatsoever to know that. :)
Posted by: Pan Chun
quote:
Originally posted by ahartman
I have to see if you posted in that long GI Joe thread a couple of months ago... ;). Star Trek & GI Joe - the only two places in all of existance where it's safe to be a bad guy - you can't die!
Nope, wasn't there...but should The A-Team be in that pantheon as well? :)
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by stormsweeper
http://www.brunching.com/enterpriseslash.html
OMG stormsweeper! I almost bust a gut with that one! LOL! I'm still laughing!
quote:
Archer stopped himself. It would do no good to hide his feelings. He had been longing for this intriguingly weaselly man for nearly three and a half days now,
ROFLMAO!!!!
Posted by: Otto
quote:
Originally posted by bobcarn
Not having a gender is something entirely different. And as for the thousands of people you've met where you've only known one to be gay, well... open your eyes. It's exactly like you said. There's only one that you knew to be gay. A gay person is much more aware of how many other gays are present in society. We have that "radar" thing going on (don't knock it, it works).
Frankly, I don't really want a gay person as one of the regulars on the show. Seeing as how they managed to make all the other characters so incredibly boring or annoying, I'm happy they're not attempting to write a gay character (they can't even write a decent straight one!). But I still contend that over the length of all of those series, having a total exclusion of gay people is one of their largest oversights. Especially since these shows take place in the future. At those points in time, sexual orientation shouldn't even be an issue. If there was ever a script that dealt with a character's sexual orientation, it would be immediately flawed in principal because there shouldn't be an issue worth writing about. But that doesn't mean that a whole class of people should be intentionally excluded and that future society should be portrayed as being entirely straight.
I guess as time goes on, I care less about it. The Star Trek universe is becoming so incredibly bland and boring, I'm not sure even a flaming drag queen character would be able to add some life to it. I'm really starting to consider only the original series to be true Trek, and care less and less about this ridiculous universe that they're developing.
I think you missed the point. I didn't say I knew only one gay person, I said I only knew one of those people to be gay. Several could have been gay, I don't know. It's not a subject that comes up a lot in real life, why would it be a subject that comes up once a season (or whatever) on the show?
I mean, how do you work into a character that he's gay unless you bring it up as a topic? Unless you make him flaming or something, and that would detract from the show rather than add to it, IMO. Do you walk up to everyone you know and let them know you're gay right away? Do you even bring up the subject when it's not a topic that would matter? How exactly do you work that sort of thing into the show? I don't see it. They barely touch on any straight sex.. Other than Riker hitting on chicks and making the occassional innuendo, I don't recall much of any sex on ST. Well, okay, TOS has Kirk bonking every green woman with hot eyes across the galaxy, but I discount TOS in this regard. Prove to me that Jordy wasn't bi. ;)
The only other examples of sex in ST isn't in the plot, it's in the camera shots. :p
Posted by: DavidTigerFan
Geordie fell in love with a female hologram....
-DTF
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by Otto
I mean, how do you work into a character that he's gay unless you bring it up as a topic? Unless you make him flaming or something, and that would detract from the show rather than add to it, IMO. Do you walk up to everyone you know and let them know you're gay right away? Do you even bring up the subject when it's not a topic that would matter? How exactly do you work that sort of thing into the show? I don't see it. They barely touch on any straight sex.. Other than Riker hitting on chicks and making the occassional innuendo, I don't recall much of any sex on ST. Well, okay, TOS has Kirk bonking every green woman with hot eyes across the galaxy, but I discount TOS in this regard. Prove to me that Jordy wasn't bi. ;)
The only other examples of sex in ST isn't in the plot, it's in the camera shots. :p
Well.... I never said I wanted a gay plot thread or gay topic. I said it's insulting that there seems to be an intentional lack of gay people, and I stand by it. There's not even casual references to the fact that gay people even exist (which is highly unusual, considering that almost every TV show I've ever seen has made at least a minor reference about gays). Even though heterosexuality is never a topic or plot thread, it's abundant in the show. Examples:
1) Opening show. Tripp telling Travis about some great alien women he's met (did he mention three breasts?). Travis salivating like a horny teenager.
2) Malcom's birthday. Discovering he had this thing for this woman in a bar.
3) Tripp and Malcom going out to pick up hot chicks in a bar.
4) Female crewmember getting a crush on Flox.
5) Emotional Vulcan having a thing for T'Pol.
6) Hoshi going out on dates with alien during rec time on planet.
7) Archer going out on dates with alien woman on same rec planet.
The problem (once again) is that B&B have just created a totally bland, sterile, and uninteresting universe. They just don't know how to do anything outside of their narrow little view of what Star Trek is. Here's some totally easy concessions that could have been made to even slightly acknowledge that in the future, sexual orientation is acknowledged.
In (2) above, when they were interviewing Malcom's parents, they could have asked "Did he have a girlfriend, or boyfriend, that we could get in contact with?". Remember, they didn't know anything about him. It would be a very valid question.
In (6) above, the alien dude could have asked Hoshi "Does your culture engage in recreational activities with members of the opposite gender?" Hoshi: "Casually or intimately?", Alien: "Either", Hoshi: "For most of our population, intimacy is with members of the opposite gender."
In (3) above, the two "girls" who picked up Malcom and Tripp could have first asked "Are you two together, or would you like company?"
I never cared before until this show, when I suddenly realized that I'd been watching Star Trek for most of my life and have never ever even heard a reference about anything other than straight orientations. Even other TV shows that don't have gay characters sooner or later make a reference to gay people. But like I said, B&B have made the Star Trek universe so incredibly sterile, it's freaking boring! And it's not just sterile because of lack of sexual diversity, but lack of really any kind of diversity! Sure the crewmembers are different races or species, but they all act the freakin' same way! The only variation I ever saw was Chakotay practicing some of his Indian traditions and religion on Voyager. Even the original series had references to religion. They managed to totally remove religion from human beings, which I don't see as being believable, especially considering that this show really doesn't take place that much further in the future.
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by DavidTigerFan
Geordie fell in love with a female hologram....
-DTF
In Voyager, Harry Kim was totally cursed when it came to falling in love with women. Every time, it wound up being a hologram, or a criminal, or a shape-changing bung beetle or something. :D
Posted by: Bryanmc
Well Bob, it is the future.
Maybe they've "fixed" that gay gene by then. ;)
Kidding! Kidding!
<ducks and runs>
I do like your line about the 2 women asking Trip and Malcom if they are together or want company. That could be done with great humor and get your point across.
Posted by: bobcarn
quote:
Originally posted by Bryanmc
Well Bob, it is the future.
Maybe they've "fixed" that gay gene by then. ;)
Kidding! Kidding!
<ducks and runs>
I do like your line about the 2 women asking Trip and Malcom if they are together or want company. That could be done with great humor and get your point across.
LOL! It's been discussed in various trek boards before that they fixed that gene by then. I also tend to think that before fixing it, they managed to figure out how gaydar works, incorporated it into their sensors, and manage to avoid contact with anyone who scores a hit. :)
The one thing I'm really happy about is that Malcom is definitely not gay! It would just be awful! The gay gene would be striving to give him a personality, and the boring gene would be striving to take it away. Like matter and antimatter, he would have self-destructed in a huge explosion once he hit puberty!
Posted by: DavidTigerFan
quote:
In Voyager, Harry Kim was totally cursed when it came to falling in love with women. Every time, it wound up being a hologram, or a criminal, or a shape-changing bung beetle or something.
Alas, poor harry, doomed to remain an Ensign and never get chicks. (Live ones anyway)
quote:
The one thing I'm really happy about is that Malcom is definitely not gay! It would just be awful! The gay gene would be striving to give him a personality, and the boring gene would be striving to take it away. Like matter and antimatter, he would have self-destructed in a huge explosion once he hit puberty!
LOL! I don't think I have laughed that hard in ages! Thanks!
-DTF
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2009,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2009
- Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser
Modified by Adam J. de Jaray