_Enterprise_ and the HTF's naysayers... (1 Viewer)

[Randy Tennison]

To quote William Shatner:
"It's just a tv show!"
As I said in another thread, everyone is dogging Enterprise because we all know how it will end. We've seen the future. There's very little new discovery for us.
So, the show keeps being called "old hat" or "recycled Star Trek stuff". Well, what else can they do. They can't radically depart from the universe and future which has already been created. They have to stay true to the formula.
So what can we hope for? Myself, I hope for a good ensemble cast that we can care about. For a long time, I didn't like DS9 because I didn't like a lot of the characters. They didn't like each other. Finally, they came to trust each other more, and were more of a "family", and that is when the show got interesting. I hope the same works with Enterprize.
Also, we can hope to get some back story into TOS. I find it fun to experience some of the things that made TOS so good. Klingons, vulcans, our relationships, the technology, etc. I also expect, at some time, for us to see a very young Spock, maybe as a child (although a little kitchey, it would be fun.)
So, I guess my point is watch the show for what it is, not what you dream it would be. I have enjoyed the first 5 episodes. I am enjoying seeing the relationships build, and seeing how they got to where they are / were / will be.
It far from sucks.
------------------
Randy Tennison
Kansas City, MO
Home theater photos located at
http://home.kc.rr.com/thetennisons/
[Edited last by Randy Tennison on November 02, 2001 at 01:22 PM]

 

[Joseph Young]

I have enjoyed every ST installment, but by the time Voyager entered it's third season it began to resemble a tupperware casserole left in the fridge for too long.
Star Trek has always been about the characters for me. Although TNGs first season was plodding and rough, the scripts did make an attempt to delve into each character from the get-go (even if it meant cheesy plots).
The show can and will improve. Berman and Braga are really behind this show, but the scripts need some fresh perspective in order to breath life into the franchise. The show has so much potential and it's discouraging to see the scripts so perilously close to mimicking Voyager's stale formula:
1) Begin the episode with a slow, meandering, trivial exchange between crew members, introduce a 'hook' right before the opening credits.
3) Dance circles around the plot until the last five minutes of the episode.
3) Deus Ex Machina. Press the reset button. Next!
The episodes of Enterprise that I have watched (all but two) feel like Voyager episodes to me. Although the 'andorian incident' was a step in the right direction.
Joseph

 

[Nelson Au]

I don't know what to say, except I'm a dedicated Trek fan since the original series. I like Enterprise a lot, and The Andorian Incident was a very strong entry.
I was curious, how do you guys find the time to watch so much TV!
Anyway, I make time to be home to watch only one show, Enterprise. It may not say Star Trek in the title, but we know it's pre-Star Trek going on Star Trek.
Nelson

 

[Bryan]

Being a huge ST fan since the very begining (sure I was young, being 38 now) but/and I must say that I like the show. And if it's any indication, this show will only get better than most in the acting regard. TNG and DS9 both got way better as far as acting and plot/storyline over time. VOY got better then went somewhat downhill. I also am a huge fan of B5 and Farscape (just so you know).
I must be one of the big "suckers" then when it comes to Enterprise. Two episodes ago, the sound was messed up in the first 15 minutes of the show. I didn't know it at the time that it didn't go all the way through the show since I had recorded it (I hate comercials). Anyway, I couldn't bring myself to turn it off. My wife wouldn't let me either. We would rather have watched a bad sounding Enterprise all the way through rather than no Enterprise at all.
I like it. I think it has a ways to go, though. Jeffery Combs in the Andorian Incident (something like that) was great. I've always liked him in the ST shows. Did you know Roxanne Dawson (B'elana) directed it? Lavar Burton will also be directing some episodes.
Anyway, I could go on. I just wanted another positive vote for the series here. Granted, there are some things that get on my nerves. T'pol should not be so negative when at the end of the premire she threw her lot in with this crew. But I can understand her having all these other Vulcans breathing down her neck. Next episode ought to clear some of that out.
Spoiler:"Breaking The Ice," scheduled for Nov. 7 has Trip learning that T'Pol is transmitting secret messages to a Vulcan ship, which has been shadowing Enterprise for weeks. Meanwhile, Archer must attempt a dangerous rescue to recover two crewman stranded on a rapidly disintegrating comet.
The theme is also frustrating, but I'll live with it and learn the words better. And as far as too muuch other TV out there to watch... Ha! I can't stand it. Most of it is crud. So I watch a few things on TV, watch much DVD and play computer games when not being a father/husband and handyman.
I better stop now.
[Edited last by Bryan on November 02, 2001 at 05:24 PM]

 

[Dan Paolozza]

Mr. Seaver,
The history lesson was well put and cohesive; it had a tone of counterpoint to my post (correct me if I misread it), yet, I don't see how it applied to anything in my post.
I agree with everything you said. It makes perfect sense.
Your last line, "if Enterprise fails, if could be the end," highlights what I, and what I think most in the "give it a chance" column are saying. For now, we're on the optimistic side of the "if."
Of course it will be the end if it fails. If all things transpire according to speculations of mediocrity or worse, then yes, it may spell the end of the franchise.
All this may be true: what I'm saying, is that given the weakness of the past series', which I think were in some ways weaker than Enterprise, this series has a chance to be just as popular and rewarding as the others. There is nothing definitive about this series that highlights it as the doom of Star Trek that the other shows didn't have also.
The real line of argument I consider addresses my issues, is the answer to the question: "If you sat through the past series (whichever ones), gave them the time to round out into the great shows they turned out to be, why lose your patience with Enterprise 4 episodes in?"
The only credible reasons I've heard are yours, along the lines that people are sick of it, and demand something truly original or they'll just pick up reruns. But what I read mostly around here is something to the effect of: "TNG and DS9 were wicked awesome, blah blah blah, they were the only gigs in town blah blah...now my expectations are way higher and I demand a wicked awesome product right out of the gate."
Ok, people have every right to crank up the expections. But bland feelings and comments towards the show quickly take on the tone of "This show sucks, clearly always will, and I won't waste my time anymore."
Well, ok then. So let's say Enterprise exceeds TNG or DS9 in quality by mid 2nd season. In the meantime, it is at worst some decent-quality retread of the other series. But in the "consistent Trek fan" forum, how can anyone say this show blows and isn't worth waiting to see if it gets better? If this show was so undenaibly sub-par (in Trek terms), I'd be the first to say "Well, this doesn't look good." I've never seen more than 5 episodes of Voyager per season because it truly was sub-par. But I don't think Enterprise is quite that bad; moreover, I think it's just as good or just as bad as TNG was in the beginning.
The risk factors for Paramount and such are irrelevant to my argument. Why would a TNG fan, who waited that show out and began to love it (ditto on DS9) not give this show a chance?
Again, other than principled Trekkies who insist on an upping of the ante, I haven't heard a decent reason.
As to the "this show is the death of the Franchise," line, well, there's as many positive "what if" scenarios as negative. And I'll put money on the positive given what we've seen so far.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Why would a TNG fan, who waited that show out and began to love it (ditto on DS9) not give this show a chance?

(1) Because, as I was trying to point out, it's not 1987 any more. Television, and science fiction on television specifically, and even more specifically Star Trek on television, has changed greatly since then. There are more other options for our viewing time than there were when TNG came out, so a new show has to be good right off the bat now, lest it be lost in the swarm of "Farscape"s, "Buffy"s, "Smallville"s and "Andromeda"e that hit their stride and earned our loyalty early.
(2) TNG was to a certain extent starting from scratch - Roddenberry was ten years out of practice and he was working with a new batch of writers and producers once he drove D.C. Fontana and David Gerrold away. "Enterprise", like "Voyager" and DS9, is staffed by people who should already be up to speed on what makes good (or at least popular) Star Trek. Now, I look at the first five post-pilot episodes after "Emissary" for DS9 and I see "Past Prologue" (great), "A Man Alone" (solid-plus), "Babel" (pretty decent), "Captive Pursuit" (which I am inexplicably fond of), and "Q-Less" (an admitted stunt to pull in the TNG audience). Sure, we're two weeks away from "The Passenger" - when people flame Robert Wolfe on message boards, he tends to respond with "how can you not include 'moron who wrote "The Passenger"' in there?" - so there's precedent that a new Trek series with experienced Trek guys (Michael Piller, Peter Allan Fields, Robert Wolfe) can be pretty dang good right off the bat. And DS9 just got better once the writers really learned the cast's strengths.
(Which, come to think of it, was sort of an unfair advantage DS9 had. I mean, the writers had some idea what Colm Meaney, Avery Brooks, Rene Auberjonois, Marc Alaimo and Armin Shimmerman were capable of, whereas "Voyager" had to recast its lead. Still, I seem to recall B&B being reported as looking for people "happy to be working" for "Enterprise", so I guess you get what you pay for)
(3) Why should I extend "Enterprise" a courtesty which I generally don't extend to other shows? As I said before, nobody's saying that "Emerill" just needs more time to find its groove. Heck, "Citizen Baines" found its groove within about one episode and after next week it's gone.
Fortunately, "Enterprise"'s stiffest competition for me is "Ed", which I bailed on after this season's premiere. But, again, if it were on Tuesday at 9pm, against "Smallville", "24", "Frasier" and "NYPD Blue", could you really argue that I should give it a chance?
(4) Berman and Braga. They've been credited as writers on each episode, and their best work is at least five years behind them ("First Contact"). They made TNG's last year or two disappointing and "Voyager" a disaster. They have, to put it kindly, not earned my trust despite how much I liked "Broken Bow" (which they had practically a year to work on while Kenneth Biller supervised the last season of "Voyager").

 

[Dan Paolozza]

Ok, much better
Reason (1), can't argue with, from "outside the ST box." But inside the box - if you were a ST fan, and thought TNG got better, and DS9, then I can't see this reason factoring in (in otherwords, I would assume this is an excuse to exercise some kind of bitterness or spite). Why? Because I maintain that Enterprise is just as good/bad as those shows, and if you're a ST fan, that has to count for something, and Enterprise isn't so bad as to cancel the fan-factor out. As I've said, if you're generally not a fan, then yeah, I'm not going to argue this point - all shows being treated equal, Enterprise may not look any better than a couple other options. Reason (3) is basically tied to this one and number two as well.
Reason (2). Ok, so you shouldn't give it a chance because you demand a higher quality product out of the gate. Giving you DS9 was better than "E" and "TNG" out of the gate, this is reasonable. But it isn't a strong reason to bail on the series and then speculate its mother franchise's death.
Reason (4) - you have no faith in B&B. Track record leads us this way, ST fan or not. But again, I'm brought back to wondering why this would motivate someone to bail and decry the death of a franchise.
And now that we're getting more focused, maybe I should point out a few things, which I hope echo other optimists.
On the basis that there is more good about Enterprise than bad - at the very least, more good potential than bad. As a fan, I can't imagine bailing on the series yet, because it's been a decent (if standard) Trek installment. Again, inside the box, this show has potential like the others did. And although they *could* have done a better job, I don't think they did a bad job. As a fan of Star Trek who would appreciate some more good Trek, I'm willing to give a series that shows some signs of hope a shot.
I guess if you've just "had it" with anything less than kick-ass ST, I haven't much to say. But if I were in that same position, I wouldn't claim the death of the franchise. Which really is a separate problem I have with the naysayers, apart from wondering why some Trek fans don't want to give this show a chance.
And Seaver - I've been pretty free and direct with my commentary (a lot of "you's" and such), on the assumption that you actually like the show and are playing devil's advocate on a lot of things (from positive comments you've made). I hope you're not taking anything personally.

 

[Jeff]

I used to be a big trek fan and once even went to conventions. I think I was to around 10 of them.
Anyway, I was really looking forward to Enterprise but I've already stopped watching it. It's very unusual for me to not watch every episode of a Star Trek series but I've missed the last two and I don't care.
I really wish people would not bring up the fact that it took three seasons for TNG to take off. This is the fourth Star Trek series after TOS and by now the writing should be bang on in the first season!!!
The problem is that Bragga and Berman are the only ones writing this show and these guys are too burnt out from 10+ years of Star Trek. It clearly shows in just the second episode of the series. They are already recycling plots from past shows.
I say if the show gets to season 2, get rid of these guys and replace them with Ira Stven Behr and have outside writers as well.
Jeff
[Edited last by Jeff on November 03, 2001 at 03:51 AM]

 

[Jason Seaver]

And Seaver - I've been pretty free and direct with my commentary (a lot of "you's" and such), on the assumption that you actually like the show and are playing devil's advocate on a lot of things (from positive comments you've made).

To a certain extent, yeah, I am. But I do really think that if "Enterprise" takes a turn for the worse, and starts to drive people away, it could kill Star Trek. Paramount no longer has a backup plan in case "Enterprise" is a disaster (unless, of course, they hire me to do that "Jake Sisko, Reporter" series ), and the fandom is already testy after the unjustly-maligned Insurrection and the deservedly-maligned "Voyager". Heck, certain fans who start threads but don't respond because they know I'm right, even if they'll never admit it, suggested Trek needs to be shut down, at least temporarily, before "Enterprise".
Realistically, I don't know what it would take for Paramount to really kill "Enterprise" or Star Trek. Clearly, as long as the cast is young and inexpensive, Trek will be profitable as long as they can maintain "Voyager"-level ratings. But it will - and has - become increasingly irrelevent to people looking for quality science fiction.
As to how I feel about "Enterprise", I'd put it alongside "Thieves": Both are slick, well-produced if not necessarily well-written, and generally somewhat entertaining while I'm watching. Right now, I'd also miss them for approximately ten seconds if they disappeared. And, damn it, I want to like Star Trek more than that; there's been so much good done under its umbrella that I'd hate to see "Unexpected" or "The Andorian Incident" be the new standard of what I can expect. I don't want to stop caring about Star Trek the same way I've basically stopped caring about "Buffy", but how can I help it if B&B keep serving up the same bland recycled unresonant mediocrity?
I'm a fan of Star Trek, but I'm also a fan of other things, and why should I let "Enterprise" distract me from them just because it's Star Trek?

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

TOS used scripts from renowned sci-fi writers of the time. What happened to that? Why don't they deo that with today's ST shows?
Frankly, I find the crew, especially the captain, to be intensely boring, and I don't need to watch this show to see retreads of older shows. I've got TOS on Sci-Fi and TNG on TNN, forgetting other non-ST products such as Farscape or even Lexx.
I don't see the B&B team taking any risks or trying to push any boundaries. Therefore, to this point, Enterprise doesn't offer anything the earlier shows didn't do better.
Perhaps if there was a stand-out character such as a Worf, Picard, Kirk, etc., that could balance (or at the least cover up) these faults but I have found nobody on that crew that I give two cents about.
------------------
Todd.
"Ah, mercury, sweetest of the transitional metals..."
- Sealab 2021

 

[Jack Briggs]

"it began to resemble a tupperware casserole left in the fridge for too..."

Funny!
I've been away for a couple of days, and was pleasantly surprised to return and see such a good discussion taking place. Good points, all.
As for the more heavily populated playing field for SF on television: I'm not compelled by it; just because something's called "SF" doesn't make me want to tune in. But for many, this may be an issue.
Would I be attracted to Enterprise if it didn't bear the Star Trek brand name? Well, that's what got my attention in the first place--and this, coming from someone who has long advocated here that Paramount should give the franchise a rest.
All these excellent posts aside, I believe Enterprise has an excellent chance of succeeding. It has already managed to be the television equivalent of a breath mint--having wiped the acrid taste of Voyager out of my mouth resolutely.
Again, Berman/Braga notwithstanding, I say give this series a chance. It has already endeavored to bring something approaching true SF to the small screen.
------------------

 

[Jason Seaver]

As for the more heavily populated playing field for SF on television: I'm not compelled by it; just because something's called "SF" doesn't make me want to tune in. But for many, this may be an issue.

Still, the likes of "Farscape" and "Andromeda" deserve a look. Both have former Trek people behind the scenes, and generally feature more imagination in an hour than B&B-Trek does in a month. Robert Wolfe, especially, knows his stuff.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Off topic, but do you like the current incarnation of The Outer Limits?
------------------

 

[Norm]

Off topic, but do you like the current incarnation of The Outer Limits?

Some Episodes I like & some I hate.
------------------

Link Removed
Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation

 

[Michael Allred]

Official Enterprise discussion thread below;
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/...ML/001541.html
Is it just me or are there way too many threads relating to a single topic? Can't we keep our comments in 1 thread?