# What is 'Enterprise' missing?



## Silver Moon (Feb 22, 2003)

I mentioned this in a post on last week's Enterprise episode thread, and have been thinking about it since then.   The show has always seemed to be missing something, but I can't quite place my finger on what.   And I'm not talking about any technology mumbo jumbo either, I'm thinking more along the lines of the cast and/or stories.   Any thoughts?


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Feb 22, 2003)

They should be building alliences for the Federation, not alienating everyone they come accross. The Andorian episode is what I would like to see more of.


----------



## Piratecat (Feb 22, 2003)

Hot Borg-on-Vulcan action?


----------



## Tsyr (Feb 22, 2003)

For me, my problem with Enterprise is the cast. I can't bring myself to care about them. Even voyager there were a few characters I rather liked. Nobody on enterprise is *bad* exactly... But not *good* either.


----------



## Silver Moon (Feb 22, 2003)

Piratecat said:
			
		

> *Hot Borg-on-Vulcan action? *




Gee, it would be difficult to have both T'Pol and Seven-of-Nine in the same scene, as they re-use the same costume for both of them.

Back to the original question.  I'm thinking that perhaps they missed the mark not have a somewhat contrary older cast member for Archer to play off of, like the Sam/Al relationship back in Quantum leap.


----------



## Chun-tzu (Feb 22, 2003)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> *
> Gee, it would be difficult to have both T'Pol and Seven-of-Nine in the same scene, as they re-use the same costume for both of them.
> *




Um, one costume between the two of them is not a problem for me.  

Seriously, Enterprise is lacking spark, creativity. They spend far too much time rehashing old ideas from previous Star Trek episodes. How ironic that a show about exploration is far too timid about heading into uncharted territory.

If I were in charge, I'd drop the one-episode=one-story format, and do more multi-episode storylines. I'd explore the show's themes much more aggressively, advancing the show's history in almost every storyline, so it feels like things are happening. Let's see some of that history being made NOW, not just hollow allusions that something important will happen sometime in the future. I might even adopt a more Buffy-esque approach to casting, where the show's cast evolves every year.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 22, 2003)

Can't agree on the cast.  I like them.  They have some personality.  But since that is a personal preference I won't dwell on it.    Some individual episodes have been lacking a bit but the show overall is much more entertaining to me than Voyager.  If you look at the last half of the first season and the episodes that are coming out now, there is really nothing missing.  The stories have been interesting and there has been some very good character building.

The first halves of each season have not been as good as the second halves, so far.  I have mentioned in other threads that the main arc they seem to have going (Temporal Cold War) has been handled well and not overused.  I found it to be entertaining and it's growing on me.  Not the best story ever but you have to give these things time (Trek moves slowly with their plots compared to other shows).

As for the contact with alien species, they aren't going to get along with everyone.  Their only ally (Vulcans) aren't exactly friends with everyone and their relative technology level isn't all that impressive.  At this point in the series they aren't trying to form a federation, they are just trying to see what is out there and meet other lifeforms.  And that has been represented well.

I know this all sounds rather positive but I do not love everything Star Trek.  I strongly disliked Voyager and that show along with the crummy and generally sub-par Next Gen movies nearly had me disreguard anything Trek out of hand.  But Enterprise has shown me that the franchise still has some life and I have enjoyed it.  It's not the best Trek series but it has been, on the whole, entertaining.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 22, 2003)

Chun-tzu said:
			
		

> *If I were in charge, I'd drop the one-episode=one-story format, and do more multi-episode storylines. I'd explore the show's themes much more aggressively, advancing the show's history in almost every storyline, so it feels like things are happening. Let's see some of that history being made NOW, not just hollow allusions that something important will happen sometime in the future. I might even adopt a more Buffy-esque approach to casting, where the show's cast evolves every year. *



With the one exception of DS9, Trek has been episodic.  While I wouldn't mind more mini-arcs that string along many weeks (I've mentioned a similar feeling elsewhere) the producers haven't expressed any interest in doing so.  I actually like the episodic method, when done right.  They just have to keep the story moving, like in the last 3 episodes and not let it drag.  As long as the individual eps are entertaining as they have shown they can be, there is no need for dramatic change.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 22, 2003)

As has been said above, ENT is just lacking some 'Oomph!', some spark, some energy.

Personally I think the best Star Trek show currently on TV is Stargate SG-1. It evokes similar feelings for me as TNG used to do.

If they're trying to get back some of those exploration-wonder-feelings from TOS and TNG back to Trek, they should watch more Stargate.


----------



## jonesy (Feb 22, 2003)

A continuous plot (tighter and better than what DS9 had).


----------



## Hand of Evil (Feb 22, 2003)

Fresh and interesting stories.  Come on, we know the Fed is going to be made, we know some of the history but what do we get, mostly cookie cut stories that we have seem before or really don't chanange us.  Take Farscape or even B5, gritty stories lots of gray and stories that make you concerned about your place or what you would do.  

Star Trek is a brand name and needs to become hungry and aggressive in their stories.


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 22, 2003)

jonesy said:
			
		

> *
> A continuous plot (tighter and better than what DS9 had). *



Heh. If _ENT_ is half as good as _DS9_ in that regard above, then it would have been ten times better than what I'm watching now.

Braga just have to follow continuity with regards to the established _Star Trek_ timeline, leading up to the formation of the Federation. I just hope he does the Earth-Romulan War arc just as well as _DS9_ did with the Dominion War arc (which should occur in Season 4).


----------



## Hand of Evil (Feb 23, 2003)

Oh, it is also missing a good villian race!  They have bad guys but they change from week to week.  They need a good foe race!


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 23, 2003)

doesn't even have to be a whole race, just a recurring villain (other than Silik) that has nuttin' to do with the TCW.

I mean, what would DS9 have been without Dukat? Or Weyoun?

Still pretty damn good, but not AS GOOD!

Oh yes, this is me being wise 'n stuff!


----------



## Darius101 (Feb 23, 2003)

*What is it missing?*

I would say that the newest sereis is good but it is missing that Roddenberry touch. His vision of a good future...
The original vision has become cloudy as of late. 

It is also missing a number of elements that enterprise occasionaly get's almost right, as has been mentioned here. 

I agree with you about making it more episodic as opposed to standalone. B5 did a wonderful job at that. DS9 did as well. Voyager's version of episodic TV fell very flat in my opinion but that was due more to bad writing than it was a fault of the cast. 

Just my 2cp, 
Darius


----------



## Polydamas (Feb 23, 2003)

Hmmm.  I have a theory....it's about heroes.   I can't think of any of the Enterprise crew that really inspires me.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 23, 2003)

Taken in context, they are all heroes.  Every member of the crew.  The risk their lives to expand humanity's horizons and understanding of the universe.  Yeah, it's just a show but that was part of the original Trek vision, IMO.  If you don't think any of them act like heroes of the acts they have done so far don't impress, so be it but that doesn't define a hero.


----------



## uv23 (Feb 23, 2003)

I don't thinks its necessarily missing anything. I think the problem is that its another clean cut, uninspired Trek series. Its time for Star Trek to end. Either that, or come up with a vastly different idea. Enterprise was a mistake. They should have thought along the lines of a show based around a klingon or romulan crew or something sufficiently different to make it unique.  Or freebooters in the vein of Firefly without all of the western cowboy crap. Sure, it takes place in the past, but not once have I thought to myself "hmm this feels really different from TNG/DS9/Voyager."


----------



## Hand of Evil (Feb 23, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Taken in context, they are all heroes.  Every member of the crew.  The risk their lives to expand humanity's horizons and understanding of the universe.  Yeah, it's just a show but that was part of the original Trek vision, IMO.  If you don't think any of them act like heroes of the acts they have done so far don't impress, so be it but that doesn't define a hero. *




THANK YOU!  It is forgotten by so many that people what a hero really is.  I think ENT does show that each member of the crew is an exployer, pushing understanding and kowledge in dangerous enviroment.


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 23, 2003)

Well, they may be heroes by other definition or deeds, but I don't have any attachment to any one of the _ENT_ characters the way I have attachments to at least one character in each _Trek_ series.

(FYI, my attachment to the Asian Harry Kim of _VOYAGER_ is one of pity, simply because he can't get a girl to go steady with him ... not even Seven of Nine.)

I just have no emotional attachment or liking toward any one of the _ENT_ character, not even Captain Archer, played by Scott Bakula who once starred in my favorite time-travelling TV series (the only TV series that features temporal dynamics that I can tolerate).

Look, maybe it's still too early to tell. After all, it took me quite a while for the little ship _USS Defiant_ on _DS9_ to grow on me. Initially, I could not stand for the design, but like the A-10 Warthogs, I can see how well it performs.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 23, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Look, maybe it's still too early to tell. After all, it took me quite a while for the little ship USS Defiant on DS9 to grow on me. Initially, I could not stand for the design, but like the A-10 Warthogs, I can see how well it performs. *



While not the main point of your post, I think this is fair.  I can't say yet if I like ENT more or less than any of the other shows so far.  I loved TNG & DS9 while I loathed VOY.  The first 2 seasons of TNG & DS9 weren't exactly all that strong if you recall.  Especially DS9!  The final 4 seasons were awesome but the first 3 were rather weak and resembled ENT now:  Some good, some bad.  And as for the meta-plots of both series (TCW vs. Emissary) I actually prefer the TCW.

ENT needs some consistancy.  If they follow suit with last season than the rest of the eps from here on out should be good.  They just seem to save the best for last and flounder at the start of the season.

But all that said, it's way too early for me to decide if this show will hold up to other good Trek series (VOY is exempt because it stunk, IMO ).  It's still very watchable and until it ceases to entertain, I'll be there every week.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 23, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Look, maybe it's still too early to tell. After all, it took me quite a while for the little ship USS Defiant on DS9 to grow on me. Initially, I could not stand for the design, but like the A-10 Warthogs, I can see how well it performs. *




IIRC, they introduced the _Defiant_ to the show because early ratings were lacking and they felt they may have made a mistake by "immobilizing" the show and setting it on a space _station_ rather than a space_ship_.  Is this not the case?

As to the "Heroes" debate, they say that "Time loves a hero" and sometimes it is hard to define what has been heroic until you can look at the circumstances retrospectively.  At that point, the person's flaws (that had made them interesting characters, in the moment) can be set aside so that the hero's deeds can rise above the person's otherwise common existence.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 23, 2003)

Hand of Evil said:
			
		

> *THANK YOU!  It is forgotten by so many that people what a hero really is.  I think ENT does show that each member of the crew is an exployer, pushing understanding and kowledge in dangerous enviroment. *



I'm glad we agree.  It's best to keep shows like Trek in context.  TOS was aired at a time where space travel was something new and exciting.  It captured the exploration aspect of humanity and gave it a positive spin.  It was idealic and full of optimism.  If you put ENT in the same context, it is easier to enjoy.  I like the submarine-style of the ship, it makes things feel not so foreign, like it could almost happen.  I like the fact that they get their butts handed to them on a weekly basis, while still getting a chance to shine in their own way.

If none of that does it for you (the people who don't like the show's style/direction/feel, etc.) then how would you handle it?  It's not enough to just say:  Make it more like DS9 or any of the other series.  What kind of plots would you introduce, what actors would you have chosen and what storyline would not only work within the timeframe, but make sense for Star Trek as a franchise?  Keeping in mind that not every episode will contain a historical event, what can the crew do on an episode by episode basis that would be entertaining?  I think they have started to go in the right direction (we saw how Red Alert started, they are fleshing out the Andorians and Vulcans).  What else can they do?

Note:  This is in the spirit of the thread, meant to continue a rational conversation about the show, not to slam people who aren't satisfied with it.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 23, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *IIRC, they introduced the Defiant to the show because early ratings were lacking and they felt they may have made a mistake by "immobilizing" the show and setting it on a space station rather than a spaceship.  Is this not the case?*



Sounds about right.  It's the same reason why they brought Worf on: to boost ratings.



			
				Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *As to the "Heroes" debate, they say that "Time loves a hero" and sometimes it is hard to define what has been heroic until you can look at the circumstances retrospectively.  At that point, the person's flaws (that had made them interesting characters, in the moment) can be set aside so that the hero's deeds can rise above the person's otherwise common existence. *



Agreed.  It's still to early to judge the events that have conspired on the show so far.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 23, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Sounds about right.  It's the same reason why they brought Worf on: to boost ratings.*




Hmmm...  I'd almost forgotten about that aspect, and that of Miles and Kaiko O'Brien.


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 23, 2003)

Perhaps they did do so, but I never thought they were immobile because the main stage happened to be a stationary space station. They have those runabout shuttles.

Then again, the viewer's first impression about _Star Trek_ is about travelling through space. For me, it is a different interpretation: the human adventures.

And probably that's what I want to see in _ENT._ This is Earth's first deep space exploration ... albeit with a Warp 5 engine.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 23, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Perhaps they did do so, but I never thought they were immobile because the main stage happened to be a stationary space station. They have those runabout shuttles.
> 
> Then again, the viewer's first impression about Star Trek is about travelling through space. For me, it is a different interpretation: the human adventures.
> 
> And probably that's what I want to see in ENT. This is Earth's first deep space exploration ... albeit with a Warp 5 engine. *




Yeah, I think (IIRC) that was one of the selling points when they pitched the series _DS9_.  They were making it not about space travel and exploration, but focusing on one particular location (the station and it's nearby surroundings.)

As to what the _Enterprise_ should do, they are limited by their technology (as far as where they can go over the course of a seven year series) and limited by the history that has already been written (any break in canon obviously rubs people the wrong way.)  So where to go within those limitations and what to focus on?

Here's a link to a "Federation Galaxy Map" that might help some folks select some options.  There's a lot more that is written canon from novels that I have no knowledge of, so I am not sure what sort of facts and timelines may be untouchable as to who is first contacted, when, in what order, etc.  I can only speak to what I know from the various television shows and movies.


----------



## WayneLigon (Feb 23, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *
> ... and limited by the history that has already been written (any break in canon obviously rubs people the wrong way.)  So where to go within those limitations and what to focus on?... *




The canon, I think, is one of the biggest drags on Trek right now because of all the rotating writers they've had. At some points in TNG I was wondering if they made new writers even read the show bible. Some times, I think the best thing for Trek would be to toss everything except for the very basics and start over.

I think the _biggest_ drag on Trek is the handlers and upper management at Paramount, who have to be some of the most craven greedy weasels I've ever heard about.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 24, 2003)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> *The canon, I think, is one of the biggest drags on Trek right now because of all the rotating writers they've had. At some points in TNG I was wondering if they made new writers even read the show bible. Some times, I think the best thing for Trek would be to toss everything except for the very basics and start over.*



Can't agree, there.  Any writer that comes on to the show doesn't have to know everything about the history, all they need is an overview.  It's up the to editors and the producers to catch the continuity gaffs and modify them so they fit (which can be hard, but it doesn't have to be).  There is much about the Trek universe and history that hasn't been explored or fleshed out.  People above mentioned the show being about the characters on the show and their adventures rather than the universe as a whole.  I agree with this.  Yes, there are events that have already happened that have somewhat shaped what this show is restricted to.  But that does not completely limit what the writers can do.  I hardly recall anything in any of the previous series mentioning the specifics how the Federation was formed.  There is alot of breathing room there!

The people who make the show have already proven to me that they can make excellent episodes.  At this point I can count them on one hand.  All they need to do is have some consistancy.

And as for canon, I don't mind a liberty here and there as long as it isn't a huge change.  History books never tell the whole story anyways...  

:: edited for spelling and grammar ::


----------



## Hand of Evil (Feb 24, 2003)

My issues with ST:TNG was the shear number of shows that were the same basic theme, 22 shows a season, you would get 5 time, 5 holo, 5 mind shows leaving only 7 shows of something else.   

ENT so far has been playing it safe, going down the path most travelled BUT it is still being devoloped.  Maybe it will grow.  

A show that has was taking the path less travelled that changed to the path most travelled has been Adromada (sp) which I think has gone downhill.  It has a few good shows but many are weak.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 24, 2003)

I ask again.  What would you do?  What would you have them do?  If something is missing, what would you add?  Where should they go?  Which parts of the galaxy should they explore?  Who should they contact and why?  If they should be doing something new, what is the new thing they should be doing?



			
				Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *As to what the Enterprise should do, they are limited by their technology (as far as where they can go over the course of a seven year series) and limited by the history that has already been written (any break in canon obviously rubs people the wrong way.)  So where to go within those limitations and what to focus on?
> 
> Here's a link to a "Federation Galaxy Map" that might help some folks select some options.  There's a lot more that is written canon from novels that I have no knowledge of, so I am not sure what sort of facts and timelines may be untouchable as to who is first contacted, when, in what order, etc.  I can only speak to what I know from the various television shows and movies. *


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 24, 2003)

If you watched "Stigma" then you'll know that's the kind of episode I like. I also like revisiting the old _TOS_ races and perhaps learn more about them. And like _TOS,_ start to realize their other human civilization out there, and provide the Preserver theory.

(Yes, I know that the _TOS_ had limited budget then so they couldn't feature more aliens in makeup, but it has become part of _Trek_ lore.)


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 24, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *If you watched "Stigma" then you'll know that's the kind of episode I like.*




One of the best _Enterprise_ episodes, IMO.  I have a feeling that they will use it for one of their sub-arcs, revisiting the issue when they start to introduce more Vulcans (and perhaps the planet Vulcan) to the series.  I'm guessing that the one way that they can keep the old guard fans happy and still use that issue is to reveal that while there is this stigma it is that way because of a ruling minority.  Wouldn't it be a nice twist if there were literally only a few Vulcans who couldn't do it, they are in charge, and they've perpetuated such a "feeling of guilt" that the majority of Vulcans simply can't bring themselves to admit they can meld?  They'd also have to admit to feeling guilty all these years if they did, wouldn't they?  It'd explain how these long lived Vulcans can go from a society that abhors melding to one that uses it fairly openly and frequently in such a short time span.  (I like that idea so much I'm going to ask people to take note that I have suggested it will come to pass in the series at some point.  )



			
				Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *I also like revisiting the old TOS races and perhaps learn more about them.*




Yup.  That's number one on my list and also explaining how we are building up to forming a federation as we meet each of them.



			
				Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *And like TOS, start to realize their other human civilization out there, and provide the Preserver theory.*




Are we talking about the whole planet/genetic seeding idea?  The reason we are only a few steps removed from so many other humanoid races?  Or do you mean to say that we should be finding full-blooded actual humans out there some where?



			
				Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *(Yes, I know that the TOS had limited budget then so they couldn't feature more aliens in makeup, but it has become part of Trek lore.) *




Bring on the Gorn!   We certainly have the technology to create all sorts of alien races now with little to no effort.  I wouldn't mind them taking a few of the odd ball ones from the cartoon show (where anything goes...or went) and tinkering with them in a live action way.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Feb 24, 2003)

What I would do to make it better...

Klingons - I am talking about the TOS ones.  Raiders, clans hunting the space lanes.  Sure it is not PC but show why Kirk and most everyone else in TOS saw them as savages.  Show them performing acts that happen in 3rd world countries.

Prime Directive - Show what happens when someone causes problems, it does not have to be the Enterprise but Harry Mudd.  

Harry Mudd - Trader to the Stars.  Space is opening up have them falling behind the Enterprise setting up trade routes.  

At this time they have not addressed reactions to their actions.  I think they could work around with this some.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 24, 2003)

Lets stop focusing of the stories they're telling and more on how they're tellin' 'em.

They are all alone out there in space. No backup. Nuttin' at all.
From watching ENT, I would not be able to tell.

They are closer to us than the TOS/TNG people. 
Really? They don't act like it.

Etc.

.

I don't mind if the dilemmas they face are not original as long as how they 
face those dilemmas is different. No technobabble solutions. Human solutions.

I feel that ENT is abandoning it's premise to give us more TNG like stories, the same thing VOY did and I don't want to see ENT go the way of VOY.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 24, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *Lets stop focusing of the stories they're telling and more on how they're tellin' 'em.
> 
> They are all alone out there in space. No backup. Nuttin' at all.
> From watching ENT, I would not be able to tell.
> ...



Trip is very "modern earth" as is Archer.  They dig things like movies and college water polo matches.  Ok, the polo is a little of a stretch.  

And as for the no backup thing, they don't really have any.  They can call the Vulcans for some help but only rarely do they respond and when they do it takes some time for them to arrive.




			
				Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *I don't mind if the dilemmas they face are not original as long as how they face those dilemmas is different. No technobabble solutions. Human solutions.
> 
> I feel that ENT is abandoning it's premise to give us more TNG like stories, the same thing VOY did and I don't want to see ENT go the way of VOY. *



I think that the technobabble for Enterprise has actually been pretty low in comparison (as it should be).  There have only been a few eps where the tech has been the answer.  And those particular episodes I agree aren't the best ones.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 24, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Trip is very "modern earth" as is Archer.  They dig things like movies and college water polo matches.  Ok, the polo is a little of a stretch.
> 
> [...snip...]
> 
> And as for the no backup thing, they don't really have any.  They can call the Vulcans for some help but only rarely do they respond and when they do it takes some time for them to arrive. *



The thing is that while we are told these things, they are not shown properly. I never get the feeling that they are all alone and are more like us, I'm just told so.

That's what makes good TV writing. This is after all a visual medium.


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 24, 2003)

Oh, and one more thing: continuity, continuity, continuity.

For example, the past episode, "Future Tense," featured a warp-speed chase scene between _Enterprise_ and a bunch of Suliban ships. Just to keep everyone to speed, we all know that Warp speed means you are going faster than the speed of light, right?

So how is it possible that before Kirks' time, _NX-01 Enterprise_ has the capability of firing beam weapon at warp speed? I mean that's what the photon torpedoes are for?

Look, I can try and forgive small continuity errors, but I cannot ignore something as blatant as that.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 24, 2003)

Isn't the speed just relative anyway?  If 2 ships are going at about the same "warp" speed shouldn't they be able to interact with each other.... uh.  Wait, I shoudn't even get into this because I know nothing of physics and even less about Trek physics.  Forget it.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 24, 2003)

I don't really see that as a big continuity thing myself.

The only continuity thing that has really bugged me on ENT was the Rommie cloak thingy.

My problems with ENT is that it's just rather... dull. It lacks 'Oomph!'.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 24, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *The thing is that while we are told these things, they are not shown properly. I never get the feeling that they are all alone and are more like us, I'm just told so.
> 
> That's what makes good TV writing. This is after all a visual medium. *



Hmmm, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I think the baseball caps, the other 2 things I mentioned, the dog and the submarine look and feel of the ship's interior are few of the ways they show what we are discussing.  there are more, I'm sure, but I can't think of them right now.


----------



## JacktheRabbit (Feb 24, 2003)

*Quick Question*

Obviously this Enterprise is a far cry from the ships that shall later carry its name. 

This Enterprise is the galaxies whipping boy. So has the Enterprise suceeded in defeating ANYONE in direct space combat yet? Or has everyone pretty well slapped them around with ease?


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 24, 2003)

Hmmm, they gave the Suliban a good whuppin, but only with help from the future Daniels.  Otherwise I'd say they have been slapped around pretty good by everyone else...

I don't know if this would mess with continuity, but I think that because the ship lacks sheilding it can't stay in a fight that long.  They can do a decent amount of damage with their phase cannons and torpedoes but a few hits and they are out of the fight.  The polorized shield plating isn't doing a whole lot for them.  

EDIT:  As for the continuity, when did Starfleet finally have the ability to give a ship sheilding like the stuff in TOS and beyond?


----------



## myrdden (Feb 24, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *There is much about the Trek universe and history that hasn't been explored or fleshed out.  People above mentioned the show being about the characters on the show and their adventures rather than the universe as a whole.  I agree with this.  Yes, there are events that have already happened that have somewhat shaped what this show is restricted to.  But that does not completely limit what the writers can do.  I hardly recall anything in any of the previous series mentioning the specifics how the Federation was formed.  There is alot of breathing room there!
> 
> The people who make the show have already proven to me that they can make excellent episodes.  At this point I can count them on one hand.  All they need to do is have some consistancy.
> *




This is EXACTLY what I have been feeling!  I am hopeful it will get better as TNG and DS9 picked it up quite a bit with the third season.

I too feel that ST canon isn't a problem.  Yes there will be a war with the Romulans and yes the Federation will be formed.  But we have little or no information (on screen info anyways) on how these events came to be.  There are tons of things that can be explored since this is the beginning of the rest of the saga.  

As John C. stated, consistency is key with a succesful franchise.  Right now they seem to be all over the place.

Myrdden


----------



## myrdden (Feb 24, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *I ask again.  What would you do?  What would you have them do?  If something is missing, what would you add?  Where should they go?  Which parts of the galaxy should they explore?  Who should they contact and why?  If they should be doing something new, what is the new thing they should be doing?
> 
> *




I wouldn't mind seeing the Orions in a few episodes.  Haven't heard much about them and the TOS made them sound like pretty devious maffia types.

I would like to see more episodes that build towards the formation of the Federation, like the Andorian episode a week or two ago.  ST sometimes moves way too slowly in developing series arcs - part of the downside of the episodic genre I suppose.

One thing I think the show has done reasonably well, and would like continued, is the 'deus ex machina' of advanced technology.  Unreliable transporters; no tractor beam; limited shields; no inverted tachyons/obscure particle; no temporal anomalies (no wait...they have had that...) and so forth.  The show really needs to demonstrate that early space exploration was challenging and required resourceful people.  With a substantial reduction in technology, I would think this should be relatively easy.  For me, the show has been pretty decent on this point.  Except for the universal translator, poor Hoshi doesn't seem to be doing much lately.

I would like to see more imaginative episodes.  Many of them seem derivative from previous series.  While some may say that's the problem with such an old franchise, I don't necessarily see it that way.  I don't think this series is tired.  ENT represents a whole new way of looking at the ST universe - naely from the beginning.

I add more later.

Myrdden


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 24, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *I don't really see that as a big continuity thing myself.*



But I do. Something like that is like saying the cell phone should have been invented before wireless radio. Or firearms & bullets comes before bows & arrows.


----------



## Sagan Darkside (Feb 24, 2003)

It needs Rick Berman out and Ira Behr in.

OR

It needs to be left alone for a decade and let a new team come in and do something with the realm of ST.

SD


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Feb 24, 2003)

I like Enterprise quite a bit. It is lacking something, though. What I think it lacks is any sense of anything truly epic, something truly larger-than-life taht challenges the heroes. The Temporal Cold War has the potential, but I'm kind of tired of Trek dealing with time travel so much. When I think of epic stories in Trek, I think of the old series, with Kirk going up against Apollo, or duking it out with Khan, or discovering giant amoebas, or racing to head off a doomsday device that seems unstoppable, or battling their own evil counterparts. Yeah, I know stuff along these lines was dealt with in later series, but they somehow seemed small when dealt with in Next Gen or some of the other series. There is very little sense that they're truly exploring - even in Enterprise, when they mention they're studying this or that phenomenon (comets, etc.), it just seems like they give quick lip service to it and then jump into the current plot involving wheeling and dealing with another human-with-a-funny-nose race of aliens. Enterprise has, thanfully, moved away from all that somewhat, but it has yet to break with all the Trek baggage it needs to shed so it can seem like they're covering new ground. B5 had its war with the Shadows, the enigmatic Vorlons, Lorien, the First Ones, etc. Old Trek had Khan, Harry Mudd, the Squire of Trelane, the Andromedan aliens, and a hint of the Cthulhu mythos. I'd love to see some of that kind of stuff in Enterprise.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

Sagan Darkside said:
			
		

> *It needs Rick Berman out and Ira Behr in.*



Berman ain't the problem, he's just the money man of the franchise. Trek was doing fine for years while 
he was running it. Later seasons of TNG, all of DS9 (and yes, I missed the Bajoran politics in later years).

It's Braga. He's a fine writer, but sucks as a producer.



			
				ColonelHardisson said:
			
		

> *I like Enterprise quite a bit. It is lacking something, though. What I think it lacks is any sense of anything truly epic, something truly larger-than-life taht challenges the heroes. The Temporal Cold War has the potential, but I'm kind of tired of Trek dealing with time travel so much. When I think of epic stories in Trek, I think of the old series, with Kirk going up against Apollo, or duking it out with Khan, or discovering giant amoebas, or racing to head off a doomsday device that seems unstoppable, or battling their own evil counterparts. Yeah, I know stuff along these lines was dealt with in later series, but they somehow seemed small when dealt with in Next Gen or some of the other series. There is very little sense that they're truly exploring - even in Enterprise, when they mention they're studying this or that phenomenon (comets, etc.), it just seems like they give quick lip service to it and then jump into the current plot involving wheeling and dealing with another human-with-a-funny-nose race of aliens. Enterprise has, thanfully, moved away from all that somewhat, but it has yet to break with all the Trek baggage it needs to shed so it can seem like they're covering new ground. B5 had its war with the Shadows, the enigmatic Vorlons, Lorien, the First Ones, etc. Old Trek had Khan, Harry Mudd, the Squire of Trelane, the Andromedan aliens, and a hint of the Cthulhu mythos. I'd love to see some of that kind of stuff in Enterprise. *



Like I said: 'Oomph!'.


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 25, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *Berman ain't the problem, he's just the money man of the franchise. Trek was doing fine for years while
> he was running it. Later seasons of TNG, all of DS9 (and yes, I missed the Bajoran politics in later years).
> 
> It's Braga. He's a fine writer, but sucks as a producer.
> ...



I would have believed and agreed to the statement above had it being made prior to _VOYAGER_ sixth season opener and _DEEP SPACE NINE_ series finale episode.

But after having read the four-part interview of Ron D. Moore from _Cinescape,_ my feelings for Berman has changed.

According to Mr. Moore, after the _DS9_ series run has ended, he was invited by his then-friend Brannon Braga to join the _VOYAGER_ writing staff. He agreed.

But just before _VOYAGER_ sixth season begins to air, he quit, citing a hostile working environment that foster oppression and low morale under an iron-fisted leadership of tyrant in the form of an executive producer. Ron D. Moore brought his complaint to Rick Berman, but Berman defended Braga. And when Braga caught wind of the meeting, that ended the friendship. Ron couldn't tolerate the working environment and left.

His only contribution to _VOYAGER_? He co-wrote the story for the B'Elanna/Klingon-themed "Barge of the Dead" episode. It is one of a handful of _VOY_ episodes that I DO like.

Then again, I may be biased since I'm a Fan of All Things Klingon.

While I'm grateful for Berman during his early management of the franchise after succeeding Roddenberry, somehow along the way he took the franchise in a different direction and became lost, no longer seeing what made _Star Trek_ great in the first place.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

I've read that interview as well and I agree that the worst problem with 
B&B is that Berman actually both likes and trusts Braga (I hear (read) that 
he's quite a charismatic guy).

Braga took too much control over the series, which could've been good if this 
was a less episodic show, but episodic shows like Trek flourish best under loose 
chains which you a much wider range of stories (like the X-Files, another very 
episodic show).

I'd remove them both, the franchise needs fresh blood on all fronts, but 
I also think Braga is a much bigger problem than Berman.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 25, 2003)

Blah-de-blah-de-blah-blah-blah

And the death of every decent ST thread is heralded by the usual mantra...


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 25, 2003)

* sigh *

Oh well.  It was bound to happen...


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *Blah-de-blah-de-blah-blah-blah
> 
> And the death of every decent ST thread is heralded by the usual mantra... *



Well... this is a thread about what's wrong with ENT.

I take it that the episode threads go this way as well? Since I don't read them I can't say. (I take it you're talking about B&B bashing).


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Hmmm, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I think the baseball caps, the other 2 things I mentioned, the dog and the submarine look and feel of the ship's interior are few of the ways they show what we are discussing.  there are more, I'm sure, but I can't think of them right now.   *



I can see that you kinda misunderstood my post a bit(understandably) but this is 
exactly what I'm talking about. They are _telling_ us that they are closer to us, 
instead of actually writing the characters like more realistic people. How they 
act and talk they feel like TNG era characters, not 21st century ones, no matter 
the clothes they wear.

That said, I must say that I love the inner design of the Enterprise.


----------



## Darius101 (Feb 25, 2003)

As Far as I know it was never mentioned when the first shields were made and placed on board ship. 
Perhaps they will show that when the Romulan war story line starts in season 3 and 4 ?

I agree that they could use a little more 20th century grounding rather than 23rd or 24th century lingo. 

just my 2cp for the day, 
Darius


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 25, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *I can see that you kinda misunderstood my post a bit(understandably) but this is exactly what I'm talking about. They are telling us that they are closer to us, instead of actually writing the characters like more realistic people. How they
> act and talk they feel like TNG era characters, not 21st century ones, no matter the clothes they wear.
> 
> That said, I must say that I love the inner design of the Enterprise. *



Honestly, I didn't see any other way to view your post.  You said you wanted to be shown because TV is a mostly visual medium.  All the examples I gave were visual ones.  As as far as "talking" and "feeling" like us, they aren't, so they shouldn't be expected to act like they are from our time.  They are closer People did things differently even 20 years ago.  And for the realism, the show is grounded in humanity.  If that's what you see then there is nothing I can say or show you otherwise.  If they feel like TNG characters, that should be expected somewhat as it is still Star Trek.  Nothing to be done about that.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 25, 2003)

Darius101 said:
			
		

> *As Far as I know it was never mentioned when the first shields were made and placed on board ship.
> Perhaps they will show that when the Romulan war story line starts in season 3 and 4 ?*



Has there been any confirmation that this will happen or even be shown?  It would be cool...  



			
				Darius101 said:
			
		

> *I agree that they could use a little more 20th century grounding rather than 23rd or 24th century lingo. *



Why?  The show is set in the 22nd century, if I recall...


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

Yes, like I said (or implied) it was a poorly worded post.

I just feel like I'm being told that the show is founded in humanity, when I just 
can't see it. TOS and DS9 got it right, TNG partially (still my fav Trek), but VOY never 
did and neither seems ENT.

We were told that the characters of ENT would be more like 20th century people than
their TNG counterparts when the show started, but they just don't feel like it.

I still enjoy ENT, I just feel so annoyed when I see so much potentional for 
greatness unused. The same feeling I had with VOY (first three seasons at least, then 
it just strayed too far off the path). Currently I rate it with shows like Frasier or ER, when
it could so easily be there up on top with shows like Buffy, Farscape, 24 and Alias.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 25, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *Yes, like I said (or implied) it was a poorly worded post.*



All good.  


			
				Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *I just feel like I'm being told that the show is founded in humanity, when I just can't see it. TOS and DS9 got it right, TNG partially (still my fav Trek), but VOY never did and neither seems ENT.
> 
> We were told that the characters of ENT would be more like 20th century people than their TNG counterparts when the show started, but they just don't feel like it.*



I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I think the ENT characters feel much closer to our era than any other previous Trek.  Especially the Trip character.



			
				Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *I still enjoy ENT, I just feel so annoyed when I see so much potentional for greatness unused. The same feeling I had with VOY (first three seasons at least, then it just strayed too far off the path). Currently I rate it with shows like Frasier or ER, when it could so easily be there up on top with shows like Buffy, Farscape, 24 and Alias. *



Trek as a franchise has been bumbling around on its hind parts for years.  The movies have been average at best and VOY was poor.  I almost gave up completely on them.  Right until the point where they signed Bakula to play the captain.  That got me interested again.  I didn't really dig the premise of the show but it grew on me.

And now that we are 1.5 season in, I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised that I'm still watching Star Trek.  ENT hasn't been entertaining every single week, but the show is still finding its legs as did all the other good series (except TOS).  There were many piss-poor eps in the first 2 years or TNG & DS9 so it's to be expected.  The final 4 seasons being the strongest (using S3 as a springboard) has been an unintentional mainstay of Trek.  The way things look it seems like the same (hopefully!) will happen with ENT.  I see much potential.

As for it being as good as other shows on TV, it has a ways to go.  Shows like Alias and Farscape take risks and are very fast paced compared to Trek.  Also, they are non-episodic and you really need to follow along week to week to enjoy it fully.  ENT isn't set up that way so the overall story hurts.  But as long as they to produce quality single eps (consistantly), then I'm happy.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

Anyway, I don't think there's much more to say between us. We agree on some and disagree on others and that's that.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 25, 2003)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> *Anyway, I don't think there's much more to say between us. We agree on some and disagree on others and that's that.  *



Works for me.  

Here's to hoping the show continues to improve and doesn't pull a Voyager.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Feb 25, 2003)

That's my fear.


----------



## Darius101 (Feb 25, 2003)

> Has there been any confirmation that this will happen or even be shown? It would be cool...




It was said in interviews at the begining. It was said at the end of the last season in interviews and friends that work in the prop industry (That I talk to regularly) have said that they were told to come up with interesting retro type designs for romulan props for consideration of that story arc. The consistancy is that the Romulans were never seen until Kirk's time and Kirk as the first to see one. They did a good job on this piece of Trek history. 
They have an Idea in mind yes. They have a direction, that in the next two seasons (if they do what they say) will be very interesting. 
They realize that they have had some weak scripts and the big boys watch certain fan messageboards. (not sure about this one though). They want to know what to do right. They are trying to keep the franchise alive and when the franchise started to wane they didn't really understand why so they began to ask the fans what they wanted. They just didn't do it directly. 
I just recently read some interview with the writer of "Nemisis" and he stated that he knew the fans wanted to see Sela and Spock but he felt he couldn't do them the proper honor so he didn't write them in. Interesting yes? 

Now about them being more grounded in 20th century. I think they are doing a pretty good job and I enjoy the show. I do not think they need time travel stories. I liked the last one though. I liked the one where Archer was stranded in the 31st Century. But I think they need to make it more "Military like" than what it is now. The old series was like a Navy in space. This is more like D&D in space to me. Too casual in some ways. Part of it is that Roddenberry and crew had all been products of WW2 and Korea and Vietnam was going on. It is great to have a sense of family but this is still an exploritory arm of a military machine. 

I guess now that I think about it a little more, the show is a reflection of the times. People are more rude and less tolerant of things and that is refelcted in peoples entertainment. I am not saying all people so please do not assume I am. Look at the other shows on the air. This having to be politically correct all the time just grates on me. People have less mannors nowadays and this is also refelcted in T.V. entertainment.  
Geez that sounds like a rant ...sorry about that ....time for me to stop i guess. 

A good idea of how I think the crew would be more military like is to read "The Mote in God's Eye" By Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. "The Gripping Hand" is the sequal.  After reading it you will have a better understanding of what I mean. 
Talk to ya later, 
Darius


----------



## myrdden (Feb 25, 2003)

Darius101 said:
			
		

> * But I think they need to make it more "Military like" than what it is now. The old series was like a Navy in space. This is more like D&D in space to me. Too casual in some ways. Part of it is that Roddenberry and crew had all been products of WW2 and Korea and Vietnam was going on. It is great to have a sense of family but this is still an exploritory arm of a military machine.
> *




That's not a bad observation.  I think one of the reasons ENT feels a bit off is that the atmosphere of the show is more like the later series than TOS.  I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more discipline on the ship.  Make Archer more like Kirk and less like Picard or Janeway!

Myrdden


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 26, 2003)

I think what throws some folks is Archer and Trip's friendship (not to mention his friendship with Hoshi).  Archer has many friends in his crew from Earth (because Starfleet asumably wasn't that big at the time) which wasn't the case on TOS.  Each of the newer series has had some kind of established friend coupling in the main crew (Picard/Crusher & Sisko/Dax come to mind).  From what I recall, Kirk didn't really have any friends at the beginning.  He developed friendships with Bones and Spock, but that was over the course of the series' run.

Plus, Archer isn't a cowboy type like Kirk was.  Kirk was very shoot from the hip and fire-first-ask-questions-later; the consumate cowboy and fighter.  Picard was very diplomatic but inside he was a fighter.  Sisko was a fighter who forced into the role of a diplomat.  And Janeway was just a wuss .  Archer has been described as a boy-scout type.  While that may be partially true, I like to think of him as a diplomat who is forced to be a fighter.

I think we'll see more of Archer's mettle as the series continues and he hardens up a bit more.


----------



## Darius101 (Feb 26, 2003)

Aye that we will laddy ...that we will.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 26, 2003)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> *I mentioned this in a post on last week's Enterprise episode thread, and have been thinking about it since then.   The show has always seemed to be missing something, but I can't quite place my finger on what.   And I'm not talking about any technology mumbo jumbo either, I'm thinking more along the lines of the cast and/or stories.   Any thoughts? *




But it is the tech.  And it isn't something new, it is something old.  They don't have safety belts.  They don't have airbags.  They don't have enough handrails at ops stations on the bridge.  They don't have enough padding built into their work suits, like in the knees and elbows.  They don't have helmets handy to put on their heads when they get into a tactical situation.  They don't have eye gear readily available for those same situations.

And why do they have glassware?  Bottles? etc on a ship like that?  I can maybe understand why it might be on instrument panels, but even then you'd think they'd have replaced it with something the hell else considering how dangerous it can be when it shatters.

I do not care if it shows up in later series in their chronology or if basic common sense safety precautions have been ignored for those same later series.  If they want this series to seem more real and pertinent to our own times then let's get with the program and buckle the hell up!


----------



## Darius101 (Feb 26, 2003)

*An interview*

http://www.startrek.com/news/news.asp?ID=127677 

This is an interview With B&B about a direction they would like to take. 

It is interesting to say the least.
Darius


----------



## Sagan Darkside (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: An interview*



			
				Darius101 said:
			
		

> *It is interesting to say the least.
> *




These guys kind of remind me of the people who ran the XFL.

Hopefully their new direction will turn out better.

SD


----------



## myrdden (Feb 26, 2003)

*Re: Re: What is 'Enterprise' missing?*



			
				Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *I do not care if it shows up in later series in their chronology or if basic common sense safety precautions have been ignored for those same later series.  If they want this series to seem more real and pertinent to our own times then let's get with the program and buckle the hell up! *




That is one of the reasons it feels more like the later series than TOS (although they didn't have seatbelts either!) to me.  I agree with what you have posted - the tech level needs to be more evolved from the present.  It needs to be recognizable yet feel advanced.  It sure is a challenge, but then that's the price for creating an ambitious series like Star Trek.

For fans of the show, its not ONLY good storylines that is necessary.  Part of the fun is seeing the special effects and technology portrayed in a realistic or plausible manner.  I own a couple of the technical manuals simply because it is fun to speculate and think about the technology of the show.  One of the draws of this show for me was the anticipation of seeing pre-TOS technology and watch how things developed.  So far - I haven't been satisfied on this point.

Myrdden


----------



## theT0rmented (Feb 26, 2003)

*About the shields*

I could be wrong, but I remember reading a novel, 7 or 8 years ago, about a young James T. Kirk. He was the one who invented "deflector" shields. The book was written by William Shatner, IIRC, so it's to take with a grain of salt (I personally don't like William Shatner; but that's for another thread).

Like I said, that was a long time ago, so my memory may be off, but I remember feeling "ya, right..." when I read that part of the book, like Shatner pushing his own character...


----------



## jonesy (Feb 26, 2003)

Now I know! It's so simple: Enterprise is missing pies. Lots and lots of pies.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 26, 2003)

jonesy said:
			
		

> *Now I know! It's so simple: Enterprise is missing pies. Lots and lots of pies.  *




There have been a number of Pecan Pie references already.  So there!


----------



## Gizzard (Feb 27, 2003)

> These guys kind of remind me of the people who ran the XFL.




Lol.  I've caught very few episodes of Enterprise, but whenever I do, it seems someones rubbing the scantily-clad Vulcan babe with gel in the de-contamination room.  

Not that theres anything wrong with that; but its not SciFi.  It might be SciFi seen through the lens of the XFL though.  ;-)


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 27, 2003)

Gizzard said:
			
		

> *I've caught very few episodes of Enterprise, but whenever I do, it seems someones rubbing the scantily-clad Vulcan babe with gel in the de-contamination room.
> 
> Not that theres anything wrong with that; but its not SciFi.*




Depends on the gel...


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 27, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *Depends on the gel...  *



And the Vulcan.  *shudders*


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 27, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *And the Vulcan.  *shudders*
> 
> *




_The needs of the one_...


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 27, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *The needs of the one...  *



... outgel or outrub the needs of the many.  *kaff*

I smell a spinoff.


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 27, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *... outgel or outrub the needs of the many.  *kaff*
> 
> I smell a spinoff. *




In the episode when they placed both Hoshi _and_ T'Pol in decon with Malcolm, I thought they might have been pushing their luck...but I forgave them.


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 27, 2003)

I thought they have crossed the line when poor Porthos had to have a threesome with Hoshi and Archer.   

But I digress, it was the episode in which Porthos contracted something that nearly killed him, and Archer had to sacrifice his dignity for performing an apology ritual.


----------



## myrdden (Feb 27, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *
> 
> In the episode when they placed both Hoshi and T'Pol in decon with Malcolm, I thought they might have been pushing their luck...but I forgave them. *




A gentle soul you are.  

Myrdden


----------



## Mark CMG (Feb 27, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *A gentle soul you are.
> 
> Myrdden *




I try to keep open-minded when the quest for ratings also gives me immediate benefits.


----------



## Gizzard (Feb 27, 2003)

> I try to keep open-minded when the quest for ratings also gives me immediate benefits.




As much as I like to see women with prosthetic ears lathering each other with futuristic gels, its somehow not what Trek is about to me.  (Although I admit we saw Kirk lathering his share of women or woman-like aliens.  I cant explain the dichotomy in my reaction here.)  

I wonder if this tangent relates back to the original question: "What is Enterprise missing?"  The XFL comment struck a nerve; its as if the current Trek producers are purposely aiming low and not bothering to be subtle about it.  I mean 7-of-9 may have been brought on as eye-candy, but they at least bothered to write interesting stories about her.  The gel-shower is nothing but a sloppy tribute to soft-core porn.  

I think that the suggestion of the spinoff is the best one here: UPN can spin off "Vulcan Girls Gone Wild" while focussing a bit more on "Enterprise".  ;-)


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 27, 2003)

Gizzard said:
			
		

> * As much as I like to see women with prosthetic ears lathering each other with futuristic gels, its somehow not what Trek is about to me.  (Although I admit we saw Kirk lathering his share of women or woman-like aliens.  I cant explain the dichotomy in my reaction here.)*



Well, that is good because that's not what Enterprise is about, even though we just made a few jokes about it.  

I continue to say give it some time.  They have a good cast in place and if this Romulan War happens, the show can only improve.


----------



## Orius (Feb 27, 2003)

*Star Trek canon*



			
				Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *
> 
> 
> Here's a link to a "Federation Galaxy Map" that might help some folks select some options.  There's a lot more that is written canon from novels that I have no knowledge of, so I am not sure what sort of facts and timelines may be untouchable as to who is first contacted, when, in what order, etc.  I can only speak to what I know from the various television shows and movies. *




That's an interesting map, but some of it's out of date.  For example, it lists first contact with the Klingons as 2218 and first contact with the Romulans as 2150, which are both wrong.  In any case, I don't know how "official" it can be considered.

As for overall canon in the Star Trek universe, only stuff presented in the live action TV shows and movies are considered canonical.  The animated series and all the various _Trek_ novels are not.  Some of the official reference books are considered canonical as well, such as the _Star Trek Encyclopedia_, since almost all of the data is taken from canonical sources.  The Next Generation technical manual and Klingon dictionary are also considered canonical, I believe.


----------



## Orius (Feb 27, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *If you watched "Stigma" then you'll know that's the kind of episode I like. I also like revisiting the old TOS races and perhaps learn more about them. And like TOS, start to realize their other human civilization out there, and provide the Preserver theory.
> 
> (Yes, I know that the TOS had limited budget then so they couldn't feature more aliens in makeup, but it has become part of Trek lore.) *




Well, the biggest problem with "Stigma" was the whole "melders are a minority" bit which seems to contradict everything we've seen about Vulcans so far.

But I agree with your point in general.  It'd like to see the classic races shown more and explored more.  That was one of the strong points of DS9; that many of the prominent races in the show were explored and fleshed out.  There's a lot here for Enterprise to work with.  We could see even more Vulcan background fleshed out; it's been done somewhat already, but it seems to be fairly important to the background of the Trek universe.  There could be more appearances by the Andorians.  He's a pretty important Federation race, yet we know very little about them.  Same with a lot of classic Trek races like Tellarites, Tholians, and so on.  It's also good to see them mix some stuff from 24th century Trek in as well, like the Nausicaan episode from last season.


----------



## Sagan Darkside (Feb 27, 2003)

Gizzard said:
			
		

> *
> The XFL comment struck a nerve; its as if the current Trek producers are purposely aiming low and not bothering to be subtle about it *




That is sort of what I meant when I made the comparison to the XFL.

As the ratings for the XFL dropped- the ppl behind it did not realize that the people still watching were people who loved football (like myself) and were irritated with the sensational bs, but still wanted to watch football.

So- they made it more sensational. Which is what their existing audiance did not want, and it killed their interest.

I fear Star Trek is going down the same route. The ratings/sales are dropping off- and they are alienating the die hard star trek fans.. who are the only people watching/buying.

I may be wrong- and for the show's sake, I hope I am. 

Of course, that does not mean I am going to start watching again.

They lost me when it was quite clear that T'pol is 37ddof9 part 2.

SD


----------



## Orius (Feb 27, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Hmmm, they gave the Suliban a good whuppin, but only with help from the future Daniels.  Otherwise I'd say they have been slapped around pretty good by everyone else...
> 
> I don't know if this would mess with continuity, but I think that because the ship lacks sheilding it can't stay in a fight that long.  They can do a decent amount of damage with their phase cannons and torpedoes but a few hits and they are out of the fight.  The polorized shield plating isn't doing a whole lot for them.
> 
> EDIT:  As for the continuity, when did Starfleet finally have the ability to give a ship sheilding like the stuff in TOS and beyond? *




I think the fact that they _aren't_ a match for everyone out there is part of the point.  The Vulcans had their reasons for wanting to keep human from going into deep space too soon.  Remember the episode form last season when they were harrassed by those aliens and they finally got the phasers err, I mean _phase cannons_  on line?  Archer realized that maybe the Vulcans really _did_ have a good reason to keep humanity from deep space.

I would imagine that the get energy shields when the Federation is finally formed.  I think the Vulcans probably have them at this point, and I think technology sharing would be one of the major purposes of the Federation.


----------



## Orius (Feb 27, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I wouldn't mind seeing the Orions in a few episodes.  Haven't heard much about them and the TOS made them sound like pretty devious maffia types.*




The Orions would be interesting to see again.  Trek hasn't had any scantilly-clad green women for quite a while...   I get the impression the the Orions were kind of like space pirates in TOS, and eventually "evolved" into a major crime organization in the 24th century.



> *
> One thing I think the show has done reasonably well, and would like continued, is the 'deus ex machina' of advanced technology.  Unreliable transporters; no tractor beam; limited shields; no inverted tachyons/obscure particle; no temporal anomalies (no wait...they have had that...) and so forth.  The show really needs to demonstrate that early space exploration was challenging and required resourceful people.  With a substantial reduction in technology, I would think this should be relatively easy.  For me, the show has been pretty decent on this point.  Except for the universal translator, poor Hoshi doesn't seem to be doing much lately.*




Agreed; the technobabble of _TNG_ and _Voyager_ could be a real drag at times.  _DS9_ had its share of technobabble as well, but they a lot more different types of stories that didn't require it, so it wasn't as glaring.

I also see it as a type of exploration; Enterprise is using mostly human technology; though with perhaps with a little bit of help from the Vulcans.  Now they're going out and they're seeing what else is possible with technology that they don't have, but 23rd or 24th century humans might take for granted: tractor beams, holodecks, replicators, etc.


----------



## Orius (Feb 27, 2003)

Darius101 said:
			
		

> *
> They realize that they have had some weak scripts and the big boys watch certain fan messageboards. (not sure about this one though). They want to know what to do right. They are trying to keep the franchise alive and when the franchise started to wane they didn't really understand why so they began to ask the fans what they wanted. They just didn't do it directly. *




I doubt they read this one.  This is a relatively small group discussing Star Trek here.  The official boards on Star Trek.com probably get read, though.  How much criticism is foud there is an open question.  I don't read them, so I don't know, but I would imagine that the bashing of Braga and other disliked elements of Trek is fairly light.

OTOH, on boards where Braga is weekly bashed by irate fans are probably completely ignored.



> *
> I just recently read some interview with the writer of "Nemisis" and he stated that he knew the fans wanted to see Sela and Spock but he felt he couldn't do them the proper honor so he didn't write them in. Interesting yes?*




Ha!  More like Nimoy wanted too much money to do the movie. 

Or maybe not; this was seen as TNG's crew final film featuring just them, so maybe they wanted to leave Nimoy out of it.



> *
> But I think they need to make it more "Military like" than what it is now. The old series was like a Navy in space. This is more like D&D in space to me. Too casual in some ways. Part of it is that Roddenberry and crew had all been products of WW2 and Korea and Vietnam was going on. It is great to have a sense of family but this is still an exploritory arm of a military machine. *




Well, the way I understand it, Roddenberry himself felt that Starfleet was not a military ogranization.  So any of the non-military feel goes back to him.  It would seem that Berman is adhering to Roddenberry's vision at least in this matter.


----------



## myrdden (Feb 27, 2003)

Orius said:
			
		

> *
> The official boards on Star Trek.com probably get read, though.  How much criticism is foud there is an open question.  I don't read them, so I don't know, but I would imagine that the bashing of Braga and other disliked elements of Trek is fairly light.
> 
> *




From the brief glances I have given the boards at Star Trek.com, the dissastifaction with ENT is about the same as here.

Myrdden


----------



## Orius (Feb 27, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *
> 
> From the brief glances I have given the boards at Star Trek.com, the dissastifaction with ENT is about the same as here.
> 
> Myrdden *




Ah, well then there's hope.


----------



## myrdden (Feb 27, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *They have a good cast in place and if this Romulan War happens, the show can only improve. *




I am curious how/when or if this will proceed.  If they keep some resemblance to established ST timelines, the Romulan War should be in the next couple of seasons or so.  If that is true, Earth had better start cranking out the starships as the Enterprise can only do so much!

Myrdden


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 27, 2003)

Speaking of which, you would think to see all of the other Earth's starfleet ships (less than Warp 5) travelling around still close to the Terran System. Then again, _NX-01_ have ventured farther than the others.

I'm beginning to wonder how many sister ships does the _Enterprise_ have (e.g., NX-02, NX-03)?


----------



## Darius101 (Feb 27, 2003)

Nice points Orius. 


They do not look at this board but they do look at "other" boards. I know this for a fact as Mike Moore from HMS is known on a board I frequent. His Nick was Propmonkey and he has changed it in the last few months. Also Gene and Majel's son Eugene "Rod" Roddenberry also frequents a board or two. I have talked with him on the phone and he has said that B&B are interested in what the fans are saying. They like to frequent the many boards to see what the buzz is about things they try. They do not fully understand why the franchise is floundering like it is. 
They were very surprised by the low box office take on Nemisis. My first reaction was look at what else was out at the time. 
Myrrden you are correct on the fact that many many fans of Trek are very dissatisfied with the new show. That is reflected in the ratings from week to week. 


> Ha! More like Nimoy wanted too much money to do the movie.
> 
> Or maybe not; this was seen as TNG's crew final film featuring just them, so maybe they wanted to leave Nimoy out of it.



They never even approached him or Denise to reprise roles as they were never even written into the original script for the movie. Brent spiner wrote the rough idea for this last film. They called another writter to help write it. 
Onward and upward:
The map you had pointed to uses a number of published sources for their information and that is where you get the discrepencies that were pointed out. One of the sources appears to be the Star Trek Concordence. Another Source is clearly the Spaceflight Chronology that came out in 1981 (maybe 1980). 
The Star Trek Encyclopedia is or was written by the staff of Next Gen with the idea being of putting into print all the information from the shows that they could use now and in the future. Some of it is off a little if you look at the old series..but it is a great book for reference.   This appears to be what they are using to try to have some consistancy and why the old timers like me notice such big differences with the cannon of the old series...it is irratating. 

About Roddenberry's vision for the future....Tolerence, Peace, Racial and sexual equality for all are all a part of it. He had great hope for the Human race. This is part of the original appeal of the show. To find out more I would read the making of book published in the 60's before you say they didn't feel Starfleet was military. The book is by Stephen Whittfiled and was republished in the 1990's. There are also a number of other books about the genisis and vision of Trek you can read. 

The Orions were pirates and slave traders in the old series much like they have portrayed the Ferengi as in a recent Enterprise episode. I also get the feeling that they are more Mafioso types in the 24th -25th Century. Rememember Enterprise is in the 22nd cenury according to their pilot episode. we should at least hear about the other ships like the Horizon (A piece of the Action) which made it to deepspace 100yrs before the Enterprise in the old series. 
Watch the episode "The Menagerie" Or "The Cage" and see how they changed the cannon to irritate us old timers. 

Oh and Yes the Vulcans already have shields. That was shown once and Archer was so mad he asked T'Poll what else the Vulcans were hiding from us Humans. 

WOW this is a much longer post than I intended...
Enjoy, 
Darius 

 Prop Replica board that Viacom Frequents: 
ASAP Dewback Wing


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 27, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Speaking of which, you would think to see all of the other Earth's starfleet ships (less than Warp 5) travelling around still close to the Terran System. Then again, NX-01 have ventured farther than the others.
> 
> I'm beginning to wonder how many sister ships does the Enterprise have (e.g., NX-02, NX-03)? *



One could speculate that since the current mission is going fairly well (all things considered) that other ships are being constructed.  I'm interested to see what the first true warship will look like.  That is if they make one...


----------



## Ranger REG (Feb 27, 2003)

Darius101 said:
			
		

> *
> They were very surprised by the low box office take on Nemisis. My first reaction was look at what else was out at the time.*



To be brutally honest, I still can't see how they can be surprised of the competition last December. They knew full well about _The Lord of the Rings_ second film. They knew full well about the _Harry Potter_ second film. They already knew about the James Bond film, _Die Another Day._

They knew. They're just banking on the _Trek_ fans to watch it anyway, what with all the hype of hiring John Logan, known for scribing the Academy Award-winning epic film, _Gladiator._ They thought that to write a film about the Romulan, whose culture paralleled the Roman, they brought the big gun.

I missed Nicholas Meyer.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 27, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *
> To be brutally honest, I still can't see how they can be surprised of the competition last December. They knew full well about The Lord of the Rings second film. They knew full well about the Harry Potter second film. They already knew about the James Bond film, Die Another Day.
> 
> They knew. They're just banking on the Trek fans to watch it anyway, what with all the hype of hiring John Logan, known for scribing the Academy Award-winning epic film, Gladiator. They thought that to write a film about the Romulan, whose culture paralleled the Roman, they brought the big gun.
> ...



Meyer was great.  I loved all the info that he gave on the Wrath of Khan DVD.  Honestly, my favorite Trek film was The Undiscovered Country (with II coming in right behind it).  Meyer did both of the best Trek films to date.  If Paramount would give him some control over the next film it could bring Trek movies back to their former glory.  And maybe then we could get a meaningful Picard storyline told outside of the TV show....


----------



## myrdden (Feb 28, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *One could speculate that since the current mission is going fairly well (all things considered) that other ships are being constructed.  I'm interested to see what the first true warship will look like.  That is if they make one... *




There was a side comment in an episode at the end of last year (or maybe the beginning of this year) that because  Enterprise was performing well, Starfleet had begun planning the construction of two more NX class vessels.  It was a really brief comment.

Myrdden


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 28, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *
> 
> There was a side comment in an episode at the end of last year (or maybe the beginning of this year) that because  Enterprise was performing well, Starfleet had begun planning the construction of two more NX class vessels.  It was a really brief comment.
> 
> Myrdden *



Cool.  Must have been lodged in my subconsious...


----------



## myrdden (Feb 28, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *Cool.  Must have been lodged in my subconsious...   *




The power of the mind...

Myrdden


----------



## Mark CMG (Mar 1, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *The power of the mind...
> 
> Myrdden *




_*Ahem*..._  You do know how we feel about _melding_ these days, don't you...?


----------



## myrdden (Mar 2, 2003)

Mark CMG said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Ahem...  You do know how we feel about melding these days, don't you...?
> *




Sorry...stuck in TOS paradigm...

Which would be called a "temporal/inverted-tacyon/subspace anamoly" by today's lingo.

 

Myrdden


----------



## John Crichton (Mar 2, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *Sorry...stuck in TOS paradigm...
> 
> Which would be called a "temporal/inverted-tacyon/subspace anamoly" by today's lingo.*





What did you just call me?!


----------



## Ranger REG (Mar 2, 2003)

Hmm. Translation: You're a retro, anal-retentive, clueless half-breed.

Now THAT would upset any Vulcan.


----------



## John Crichton (Mar 2, 2003)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Hmm. Translation: You're a retro, anal-retentive, clueless half-breed.
> 
> Now THAT would upset any Vulcan.   *



Who you callin' a half-breed?!


----------



## myrdden (Mar 3, 2003)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> *
> 
> What did you just call me?!   *




Huh?  Call you?  I didn't call you anything.

I was talking about the paradigm.

Sorry.

Myrdden


----------



## John Crichton (Mar 3, 2003)

myrdden said:
			
		

> *Huh?  Call you?  I didn't call you anything.
> 
> I was talking about the paradigm.
> 
> Sorry.*



All good!  Twas a joke post.


----------



## myrdden (Mar 3, 2003)

Understood.  

Anonymous posting over a messageboard can really suck out all the valuable nuances of communication.  That, and the fact, one really doesn't KNOW the people their corresponding with makes it easy to offend people unintentionally.

Oh well...at least we have smilies! 

Myrdden


----------



## Ranger REG (Mar 3, 2003)

Gawd, I miss those Vulcan sense of humor.


----------



## S'mon (Mar 27, 2003)

One thing needs changing about Enterprise is that the ship has easy, constant real-time communication with Earth, so there's no sense of isolation.  They even get to talk to their families live!  This generally wasn't the case in TOS, set 100 years later.  Much too much of ENT tech is up to or even ahead of TOS tech.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Mar 27, 2003)

I was thinking recently about this again, and low and behold the thread pops back up. Since the show seems to enjoy borrowing concepts the concept I would like to see borrowed more is from Andromeda (The show has grown on me). The thing that makes that show different from other shows is something that they have dirrectly refered to as "one man's will to reshape the universe". I can't think of another show off the top of my head that focuses on this as a possitive thing, it is always the bad guy who is normally doing this and therefore needs to be stopped. 

While Enterprise should and cannot become Andromeda, I would like to see Archer pick up a little of this and start to have some concept of what he is doing out there. Even if it is not starting the Federation exactly, he should be at least dreaming that there could be something more for humans and aliens and working on toward that end. Instead he seems perfectly content bouncing from place to place with no goal and no worries (other than will I be fired) whenever he makes major diplomatic mistakes.


----------

