Star Trek: Enterprise

[Aerilon]

The show ran for four seasons, this was mostly because it didn't get enough views throughout the planet. Now whether this was because those who are interested in Trek aren't as many as were, or whether it was because the storyline was based in the past I don't know, but I continue to get frustrated by the amount of people that say Enterprise was a crap show.

It wasn't.

We got a lovely perspective of not just the Vulcan's, but the Andorians too. Something that we would not have had without Enterprise, thus, we'd know even less about them. Yes we knew a fair bit about the Vulcan's, as there have been one on two of the four shows (prior to Enterprise), but Andorians we knew very little about. The way Andorians were portrayed in Enterprise gives them a much better background that we had for them before. Same goes for the Vulcan's.

I'd also like to point out inconsistencies.. No show is without them, and Enterprise is no exception to that. However, people complain quite a bit about the amount of races that we saw in Enterprise, that we've never actually seen again. I have complained myself before, but now I look on it differently. Is this fact all that different from other shows?

We saw the Tholians in TOS. We did not see them again until ENT. We have only ever seen Andorians in TOS / TMP, and again, have never seen them again. People complain a fair bit about us not having ever seen or heard of the Xindi, Suliban or Denobulan. However, how many other species have been seen throughout the Trek series, that we've never seen again.

Countless species in all the shows, we have come across once, and never again. Multiple alien species from various prison colonies (such as the Klingon one in the Undiscovered Country) have never seen the light of day since their single appearance, yet Enterprise gets criticised for this, where others do not.

I have also heard the argument that a pre-TOS ship shouldn't have Photon Torpedoes.. Why not? Where was it mentioned that Torpedoes were new on TOS? To my knowledge, they were already being used on the Constitution Class, they just appeared different due to the FX used at that time.

Is it simply because Enterprise was a step backwards opposed to a step forward that people decided not to like it? If so, then whilst I can understand that reason (everyone wants to see what happened after Nemesis), seeing a little of 'The Before' was enlightening and well written if I may say so personally.

I'll admit that I wasn't too keen on a past storyline, but we got to see everything in a new light, and we got to see Starfleet and Humanity before the Federation. Enterprise, whilst different, worked for me.

Please share your thoughts...

[gopher65]

As I've said before, as much as I loved Star Trek (having viewed it all my life from age 3.9 onward), I think that I may have been getting burned out by this time. As time went on I would remember the better episodes from past series while forgetting the giant number of bad episodes that filled the spaces between the few goods ones. Because there have been so many episodes of Trek, there were a lot of good episodes in total across all the series.

What this meant in practise is that I had unreasonably high expectations of how good Enterprise had to be in order to be a decent show. Episodes that were, in retrospect, decent or fair I viewed as horrible, and episodes that were great I viewed as barely making par. For me this meant that Enterprise compared badly with the other series, and thus, at the time, I felt it was garbage in the first 2 seasons. Seasons 3 and 4 were better for me. Looking back I think they may have been the best overall seasons of any Trek series. (With the exception of that terrible series finale. It may have been acceptable as a standalone episode, provided that Trip didn't die, but it was not a good way to end the series. The series regulars barely had any airtime!)

Because of this I've found Enterprise to get better with time. It is way better in repeats than it ever was while on the air. Funny that.

[DigiFluid]

I have also heard the argument that a pre-TOS ship shouldn't have Photon Torpedoes.. Why not? Where was it mentioned that Torpedoes were new on TOS? To my knowledge, they were already being used on the Constitution Class, they just appeared different due to the FX used at that time.

I don't feel like bickering on the entire subject so I'll just nitpick this.

Yes, it was mentioned that photon torpedos were (comparatively) new to the TOS-era. 'Balance of Terror' clearly stated that at the time of the human/Romulan War, the conflict was fought with "primitive nuclear weapons" which were the best at the time, as well as clearly stating that viewscreens hadn't been invented yet. Furthermore, this TOS episode established that cloaking devices were an astonishing new technology as it struck an unprecedented fear chord in the bridge officers of the Enterprise. Three major past-tenets established by TOS that Enterprise flagrantly ignored.

Furthermore, I think it's exactly that sort of thinking that made enterprise such a lousy show--a lack of fact-checking. A group of writers sitting around a table saying "hey let's do this", "are we allowed to do that?", "I'm not sure, get someone to check it," and then no-one bothers to.

Blerg.

[gopher65]

TOS was written in the 60's. They as a society had a decided lack of imagination on how the future would be 40 years down the road. Half the technology seen on TOS has already been surpassed today (course, some is either impossible or a looooong way off).

So you can't really expect a show like enterprise to be held to 60s era thinking can you? Or 60s era makeup? That's like asking them to use 60s era broadcast resolution to increase the authenticity. Or maybe they should have made the show in black and white to REALLY make it look like it was made before TOS.

So comeon, that's a silly argument. The people who made TOS made the show thinking that nukes were an effective weapon in space combat. They aren't: they are *almost* completely useless outside of an atmosphere, but they didn't know that at the time (a mistake that they also made in Enterprise I might add, as well as BSG). Should Enterprise have also made sure that the women on their ships couldn't be captains (Kirk clearly states that women are still held back in their ability to progress to command ranks in the 23rd century. What a lack of imagination on the part of the writers). That's the same darned thing.

If you can't look past the fact that makeup, technology, and social conventions change over time then you are shallow enough that you should be watching nothing but reality TV. The fact is that it would have been impossible to completely go by the continuity set up in TOS (such as there was, much of it was self-contradictory) without making a show that would have been ridiculous by today's standards. If they'd written women as being subjugated on Enterprise like they were in TOS my jaw would have hit the floor.

[DigiFluid]

Well, if they're going to be stupid enough to make a prequel to a classic 60s television show, they should've been prepared to make the sacrifices necessary to make it right rather than HAY GUYS THISLL BE KEWL LAWL

[peragrin]

My personal favorite screw up of all of Enterprise is *drum roll*

A ship of 80 people only has 2-4(four bays but only two pods are ever shown) 7-people shuttle pods. Seven because that is the most I can ever remember fitting in there. So they can evacuate between 14 and 28 people in case of an emergency without using the lifepods. Less than 1/3 the crew. Also none of the pods had warp drive. Star fleet had the ability to go to warp 3 in a smallish vehicle(see the prototype for the NX class) It wouldn't be fast but it would be a start. For a race without effective transporters this is a HUGE Oversight.

overall Enterprise was okay. Seasons 3-4 especially 4 were good. I loved the 3-4 episode overlapping mini arcs. The Finale was just plain sad.

[./freelancer]

I've said this before and I'll say it again; I really liked Enterprise as a series, but didn't really like it as Trek. Viewed as a standalone series it was great, but it really didn't feel like a Trek series.

[Lieutenant Colonel Davis]

TOS was written in the 60's. They as a society had a decided lack of imagination on how the future would be 40 years down the road. Half the technology seen on TOS has already been surpassed today (course, some is either impossible or a looooong way off).

It's not as far off as you would think.

[Missster.Freeman]

It's not as far off as you would think.

I'm thinking brain transplants that leave no visible scars - or a single hair out of place - might be a little further off than originally predicted...

[docballen]

Okay. I've said most of this before, but I'm willing to repeat it.

I've been re-watching Enterprise on Monday nights on Sci-Fi. I watched as much of it as my schedule would allow on original run (Saturday nights at midnight... oh boy...) and I call myself a Star Trek fan...

... but there are some aspects of Enterprise that suck.

First of all, that opening montage. In all the other Star Trek series they show you the ship or the station in great detail-- almost as if they are saying, "Look at how beautiful our ship is. We're proud of her." ON Enterprise you get the supposed history of Human spaceflight and a quickie shot of NX-01 at ther very end. If they're not proud of their ship then why should I bother watching this??? I kept waiting for the episode with Amelia Earhardt or Chuck Yeager or Neil Armstrong... (yes I have seen Voyager's "The 37's"...) because they get more screen time than NX-01 does.

There was a stand-up comedian named Franklin Ajaye who used to talk about something he called a "Star Trek Series". The example he used went something like; "They've destroyed several of the most beautiful works of art on the planet Earth; the Mona Lisa, the Cistine Chapel, the Statue of Liberty, and Goo Poo's Statue of Colonel Green". It's a list where they give you several things the audience already knows and then adds a "futuristic" item or two. Well that's what they do in the opening montage-- they show us things we know about and then add one or two conjectural ships, and that's supposed to be taken seriously. Not by me.

When they were originally talking about their ideas for Enterprise they mentioned that the Humans were going to be suspicious of the Vulcans. The discussions made it sound like the Humans were going to be racist and need to learn to get along with the Vulcans. Instead they made the Vulcans the villains of Enterprise-- spying on Andor and by holding the Humans back. In other Star Trek the Vulcans were mysterious and honorable-- in Enterprise they were not. I definitely didn't like that change.

I also didn't like they way that Vulcans who mind-meld were portrayed as perverts. According to Enterprise, that makes Spock, Sarek and Tuvok all socially unacceptable misfits. The Vulcan masters were willing to let mind-melders die of a disease rather than treat them. That is a radical change from TOS and the movies, where a high-priestess puts Spock's katra back into his body using a marathon mind meld.

These are some of the bigger issues I have with Enterprise-- I have issues with individual episodes, but I'm not going to list them here. (The final episode is a big offender...) When tptb originally made "Enterprise" they didn't call it Star Trek and they said they didn't care if the other series fans liked it, they were playing to more mainstream viewers (whom they tried to appease with the sexy decon chamber scenes, and the T'Pol and Trip romance, for example.) I almost felt like a traitor for watching Enterprise.

[./freelancer]

Okay. I've said most of this before, but I'm willing to repeat it.

I've been re-watching Enterprise on Monday nights on Sci-Fi. I watched as much of it as my schedule would allow on original run (Saturday nights at midnight... oh boy...) and I call myself a Star Trek fan...

... but there are some aspects of Enterprise that suck.

First of all, that opening montage. In all the other Star Trek series they show you the ship or the station in great detail-- almost as if they are saying, "Look at how beautiful our ship is. We're proud of her." ON Enterprise you get the supposed history of Human spaceflight and a quickie shot of NX-01 at ther very end. If they're not proud of their ship then why should I bother watching this??? I kept waiting for the episode with Amelia Earhardt or Chuck Yeager or Neil Armstrong... (yes I have seen Voyager's "The 37's"...) because they get more screen time than NX-01 does.

I disagree. The point of the Enterprise opening montage (as I see it) is to show the major advancements we've made, and show that we've just made another big one. I think it sets the premise for the series in a very good way. I don't really like the other openings where the just show off the ship (yay, you're great, we get it, big deal, we'll see a lot of the ship anyway).

There was a stand-up comedian named Franklin Ajaye who used to talk about something he called a "Star Trek Series". The example he used went something like; "They've destroyed several of the most beautiful works of art on the planet Earth; the Mona Lisa, the Cistine Chapel, the Statue of Liberty, and Goo Poo's Statue of Colonel Green". It's a list where they give you several things the audience already knows and then adds a "futuristic" item or two. Well that's what they do in the opening montage-- they show us things we know about and then add one or two conjectural ships, and that's supposed to be taken seriously. Not by me.

If you don't take things like that seriously, why take any sci-fi series seriously? Of course they have to add their own things to the history of their universe, nothing bad about that.

When they were originally talking about their ideas for Enterprise they mentioned that the Humans were going to be suspicious of the Vulcans. The discussions made it sound like the Humans were going to be racist and need to learn to get along with the Vulcans. Instead they made the Vulcans the villains of Enterprise-- spying on Andor and by holding the Humans back. In other Star Trek the Vulcans were mysterious and honorable-- in Enterprise they were not. I definitely didn't like that change.

I also didn't like they way that Vulcans who mind-meld were portrayed as perverts. According to Enterprise, that makes Spock, Sarek and Tuvok all socially unacceptable misfits. The Vulcan masters were willing to let mind-melders die of a disease rather than treat them. That is a radical change from TOS and the movies, where a high-priestess puts Spock's katra back into his body using a marathon mind meld.

People (as a whole) change. Just 50 years ago a lot of humans (a lot more than now) were racists. Why can't you accept the the Vulcans have also changed?

[AGateFan]

I think I got past the first year (and that was hard) I dropped off sometime during the second year and the stupid storyarch that I think started in that season... oh wait, it was the alien in the nazi suit. I didnt turn in to see how that cliffhanger ended, though I think I missed a lot of shows in there someplace.

I have lots of problems with the show. If you are going to make a prequel you've pretty much locked yourself into the canon of the universe and you should have technology that is not quite as "cool" as the later seasons. However the TPTB of Enterprise were not willing to live within the restrictions that came with a prequel which means they should never have made one.

And on a personal side note, lets make the background for our captain. Can we make him kinda cool like Picard (fencing), Sisco (baseball), Janeway (fancy racketball), maybe have him be a fan of basketball or hockey, or Tennis or oldschool football (since the actor has done a few football movies if you need a pic)....no they make him a fan of waterpolo. I'm sure some people think that waterpolo is cool (those that know it exist, maybe by seeing it in the Olympics)....but I dont know any of them and I certainly don't. I know people that think Lacross is cool and just plane swimming, iceskating, even Curling (curling rocks) but water-freaking-polo? To me it was the first signs of TPTB saying "see we are going to be different" but it was a WTF I had difficulty getting past, even if he did have a cool dog (though letting it on the ship, let alone alien planets lacks any kind of logic.... I mean if it was a military working dog that would be one thing.....)

Meh, didnt like the first ep, liked few in between that I saw... I did like Trip...so it goes without saying, I didnt like the last ep either.

[docballen]

I disagree. The point of the Enterprise opening montage (as I see it) is to show the major advancements we've made,

And some fake ones, thrown in to look credible

and show that we've just made another big one. I think it sets the premise for the series in a very good way. I don't really like the other openings where the just show off the ship (yay, you're great, we get it, big deal, we'll see a lot of the ship anyway).

I think we're going to have to agree to differ here. I love the ships, I love the way they started the other four series. I appreciate the fact that they were trying to do something different. It just got cancelled early, so obviously that idea didn't work.

If you don't take things like that seriously, why take any sci-fi series seriously? Of course they have to add their own things to the history of their universe, nothing bad about that.

The way they did it was formulaic-- it fit a distinct pattern. Franklin Ajaye wasn't paying tribute, he was being unkind. And the audience ate it up. I don't mind them adding to the history of the universe-- I just don't like it when they do something they've already been criticised for.

People (as a whole) change. Just 50 years ago a lot of humans (a lot more than now) were racists. Why can't you accept the the Vulcans have also changed?

Wow, that's a good question. I guess it has to do with the fact that I grew up admiring Spock-- he's not my favorite, mind you-- and then to hear that his people are not what we were told throughout four series worth of stories and episodes. That they are not noble and honorable but prejudiced and sneaky and working against us (Earth forces, sorry) possibly because the writers couldn't think of something better to do.

Earth people are known for being adaptive. The Vulcans are not. I think they were trying to explain why Spock was the only Vulcan in Star Fleet.

Anyway, don't take what I'm saying personally. I'm one of the few people I know who likes the opening music. (My friends don't care about the opening montage but hate that opening music. Sigh.)

[./freelancer]

And some fake ones, thrown in to look credible

Yes. It's the future. As far as I'm concerned, those advancements are no more fake than Deep Space 9 or Bajor, which are also supposed to look credible.

I think we're going to have to agree to differ here. I love the ships, I love the way they started the other four series. I appreciate the fact that they were trying to do something different. It just got cancelled early, so obviously that idea didn't work.

A lot of good series get cancelled. That doesn't make them less good. Yes, the first season wasn't that good, but season 3 or 4 were very good. And I think you'll find that a lot of people agree with me.

The way they did it was formulaic-- it fit a distinct pattern. Franklin Ajaye wasn't paying tribute, he was being unkind. And the audience ate it up. I don't mind them adding to the history of the universe-- I just don't like it when they do something they've already been criticised for.

I don't know who this Franklin Ajaye guy is, and frankly I don't care. You can't expect them to ditch an idea just because some people criticize them for it.

Wow, that's a good question. I guess it has to do with the fact that I grew up admiring Spock-- he's not my favorite, mind you-- and then to hear that his people are not what we were told throughout four series worth of stories and episodes. That they are not noble and honorable but prejudiced and sneaky and working against us (Earth forces, sorry) possibly because the writers couldn't think of something better to do.

Earth people are known for being adaptive. The Vulcans are not. I think they were trying to explain why Spock was the only Vulcan in Star Fleet.

I can't really argue against your opinion

Anyway, don't take what I'm saying personally. I'm one of the few people I know who likes the opening music. (My friends don't care about the opening montage but hate that opening music. Sigh.)

Nothing personal, I love a good argument. And I also love the opening music.

[Goauld System Lord]

I personally think that Star Trek: Enterprise was underrated and deserved so much more. It really came into its own by the fourth season. Had Enterprise been more like season 4 from the get-go then I think it would of lasted longer.

PS~ Wouldn't it be cool if T'Pol and/or Phlox made cameo appearances in the new Star Trek movie?? T'Pol would still be around I think by the time Kirk & Co. started their five-year mission!