ENTERPRISE renewed (all discussion here please!) (2 Viewers)

[Glenn Overholt]

Jason, as I am sure you know, if an Enterprise thread starts on a positive note all is well untill someone comes in and says - Oh, another sucky episode!

There are only two ways to handle that - one is to ignore it, but then another one pops up that is just as bad.

If you defend it, the retort will be even more severe. In the meantime, the discussion that you were having is taking a back seat now. Of course, after the defense is made you just get a reply that continues to put the show in a poor light.

As for the blade - In old time doctoring, often a wound was opened up a little bit more in order to make sure that all of it gets cleaned up, but a Bowie Knife could easily open the wound up for another six inches, at the least.

Every week, the same people get on and say that it sucks again! Ok, we heard you. We heard you last week, and the week before that. Why would anyone keep on doing that unless they had a few screws loose? Ok, no - it is just thread crapping. It serves no other purpose than to discourage others from posting.

Gee, you've won. No, I will not state what I'm thinking right now, but I think you already know that. Is everybody happy now?

If you want to state your displeasure at the show, the negative comments would be much better directed if you sent them to the studio, or at the least put them in the studio feedback thread.

I think the best solution would be to have a running thread in the studio feedback section, where any and everyone that wants to can post their comments directly to the studio.

Leave the tv section for the show's discussion.

Glenn

 

[TheLongshot]

It isn't thread crapping if I've seen the show and can comment on it. Before the show airs, anything goes.

Maybe the solution here is to not have a show thread until the show airs. That way, no one can say anything about a show until they had the opportunity.

Jason

 

[Mark C.]

To me, TNG didn't reach its stride until season 3. I'm hoping Enterprise finds its stride this year. I'm still pulling for the show. After all, it is only television and there's nothing much better on.

 

[Will_B]

Not true. We want to discuss the show, not have a discussion about the existence of the show. Big difference. One that requires actually watching the show, for a start.

Discussion about the characters, about the episodes, about the direction and cinematography of the eps, the conceptual direction of the series, how the arcs are progressing, how the characters are developing, comments and constructive criticism galore... the whole range of discussion every other show enjoys on HTF, sans the bashers (or as some called them, snobs) who seem only to be interested in sharing how they don't watch the show, and how they want the show to be cancelled, and how fans of the show are wrong or foolish to like it.

 

[Nelson Au]

I invite you to the new Star Trek Enterprise thread. This one is my attempt to do that other one spoken about here. All are invited. Admins, I hope it's okay.

Rob, I've prepared a short summary of how Zero Hour was resolved.

 

[Moe Maishlish]

No... unfortunately there are times when you just can't dispute taste.

This is all pretty much a moot point now anyway, so we're just arguing in circles. I expect that Jack will put the new format into place once the new season starts, and everyone can be happy.

Moe.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Moe, that quote about the Bowie Knife was from me, and I cracked up when he misquoted it. That was after I had to calm myself down because I never stated that I was an 'avid fan'.

But yes, I am. Way past avid, though. I enjoy watching spaceships and their crews get themselves into messes every week. (Something that Stargate and Atlantis don't do). If the series gets cancelled, would it be the end of Star Trek FOREVER?

That's not what I want. I want them to keep on 'trekking' until we're doing it for real, and then we can watch it - for real - on the 6 o'clock news.

How much TV do you guys watch every week? Is this show getting in the way of something else that you want to see or do? You just have to watch it though, but always get letdown because you've seen this plot before, or they should have done this or that to the plot to make it better. I can think of hundreds of TV shows that I have seen where I come up with an idea that would have made the show a little better.

Look at 'American Dreams' and their misplacement of songs in shows? They are making these mistakes deliberately? Are they that stupid? Oh wait, that's a good show - I can't pick on that one.

And how many really great new series start up every year, only to get cancelled? What, you thought it was a good show? Then why did it get cancelled? Oh, no one was watching it. Look at 'Wonderfalls' and 'Firefly'. Yes, really good shows. That's why they got cancelled, isn't it? Maybe the negative 'Enterprise' viewers are the same ones that really hated 'Firefly' and 'Wonderfalls'.

But we can't do anything to make this show any better. This whole HTF community is in the minority anyway, so who is thinking correctly now? Please start a crap post in the Studio Feedback section, and see how long it lasts. You can yell and scream until hell freezes over, but in the end, they won't be listening to you, so why should we? Why rain on our parade?

Glenn

 

[Frank Anderson]

Well said Glenn

[url=https://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/7/7d/images_smiley_spidey.gif] [/url]

 

[Mike Broadman]

Not according to the ratings.

 

[Jack Briggs]

According to the Nielsen ratings released yesterday for shows airing last week, Enterprise's 9 p.m. show came in dead last, and the 8 p.m. show was just two notches above it. Sure, they were reruns. But a healthy show doesn't end up in the cellar.

I would love to see Star Trek reach for the stars again. But, for now, people are tired of it -- even good writing cannot save the franchise for now. As Ronald D. Moore has said, people have to want to see Star Trek again. A big time out (and I mean quite a few years) and some fresh talent are what is needed (sorry, Jason Seaver).

The sales of the DVD sets sort of reflect where people in general stand. TOS and TNG flew off the shelves; DS9 held steady but not spectacularly; and Voyager isn't going anywhere.

It was Rick Berman who, just months before the launch of Voyager, wondered aloud if they were "going to the well one time too many."

They were. But they could have salvaged the situation by using the show's pretext to try something new yet faithful to the Star Trek backstory. Instead, we started witnessing all that rehashing of Trek cliches. They were in the Delta Quadrant, so there were no regular Trek aliens to encounter. So, no Klingons? Well, let's give 'em Kazons! They're a warrior race, too, see?

Meanwhile, we encountered entire "new" species who spoke perfect English and sported different ripples on their foreheads.

Well, that got old quickly.

Enterprise, not a good idea to begin with, seemed to attempt at first to bring new life -- new boldly-going stuff -- into a series that returned to Trek's roots. For half a season there, it looked like it was going to work -- and the ratings reflected that.

But Berman and Braga, being Berman and Braga, fell back on the cliches and crutches. Before you knew it, we were once again subjected to cookie-cutter stories that could have fit in any of the spinoff series with some name and character changes. Same ol' same ol'. And the ratings are relecting that.

And that, my friends, is where I am coming from in this whole thing.

Somebody here posted in a long-ago thread that, for him, he is pretending that the Star Trek of Voyager and Enterprise "has never happened." He is limiting his understanding of the Trek universe to the first three series.

So am I.

You know, it's like The Beatles in a way. They knew when to quit. They went out in a blaze of glory. We forever remember them, as a result, as those young guys from Liverpool who changed the world -- nobody remembers them as doddering old guys.

Star Trek should have, for its own good and its own legacy, have closed shop when DS9 wrapped and concentrated on putting out good feature films every two or three years.

Now, we are remembering the failures more than the blazing successes. I don't think we'll ever again see the likes of a "City on the Edge of Forever," "The Inner Light," and "The Visitor."

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

Well that's interesting. I had not read that but can't say that I am not surprised. There aren't many Voyager episodes I would watch again.
I did buy all of the other series though.

I wonder if Enterprise will fare much better up against Sci Fis lineup on Fridays.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Moe Maislish wrote (post #255):


Quote:



I seem to recall several episodes of each & every trek incarnation delving into alternate forms of narrative, and engaging in cross-genre storylines. I also seem to recall that several of these episodes were quite well received by the fans.





One thing I can never be accused of is voting with the majority for the sake of doing so. When I think of genre mishmash in Star Trek I think, for instance, of "Specter of the Gun", "A Piece of the Action", "A Fist Full of Datas", "Fair Haven", "Spirit Folk", "North Star". I don't know what their "popularity quotient" was---and I sure as hell don't care---, but none of them strikes me as either typical or particularly good Trek (although I do like the tacky-looking pap(i)er-mâché-heads-on-sticks Melkotians).


Quote:



If you think the wine I'm drinking is crap (and you have arrived to that conclusing by either tasting it, or judging it by the label), while I happen to like it, then we are effectively, disagreeing on the same wine. . . . .

That you believe that previous Trek is in any way better is to compare this bottle of wine to another that you consider more worthy (or perhaps more enjoyable?) to drink.





Do both experiencers partake of the same wines, say, each other's favorites? (Reading labels doesn't count as "partaking" of anything---except labels.)

One theme that I've seen popping up in these kinds of discussions is that some younger Trek observers state that the older series is "cheesy-looking" or "campy" or some such, and then go on to state they "couldn't get into it"--- some of these people say the same thing about TNG, as well---, which lays the suspicion near that they haven't watched ("tasted") much of it, even as they declare how great they find Voyager or Enterprise by comparison.

Likes and dislikes change with the wind. It's having describable and coherent criteria for one's evaluations that gives them heft and may win respect even from those with opposing views. I don't think wine connoiseurs are respected and looked-to for guidance just for their likes or dislikes.

In any event, the analogy leaves a sour taste in my mouth.


Quote:



Actually, I'm describing how the "anti" side of the argument has conducted, and continues to conduct itself: "We hate it. So, there!".





Actually, we don't. Those of us who persistently comment on it usually do so in detail, giving criteria for our views, not just that we don't like it, as Jason Seaver already so effectively pointed out, in detail.



Quote:



Actually, you're quoting someone else, not me. That I (obviously) completely agree with the quote is, however, true.





Actually, I know exactly whom I'm quoting at any given time. (And I don't get them wrong.) Contrary to the stated beliefs of some people around here, I don't use color coding for mere "decoration". Pay attention. It has a rational function.



Quote:



No, in previous instances, those particular people didn't actually read what I've been arguing about, and are attempting to miscast me as a "Rabid Enterprise Fan" instead. It gets tedious to repeat it over and over, so I'll just re-quote myself: . . . .





Me too.

(post #247):


Quote:



. . . . the irony of your making this hullabaloo threads about a show that supposedly only "mildly" entertains you is too telling to be accidental, all denials notwithstanding





And, actually, "irony" is too charitable a term for it . . . .



Quote:



Quite a bit of static is heard for every episode about exactly the same things - Berman & Braga suck, Enterprise Sucks, etc. etc. etc. Quite the Hulabaloo I tells ya!





[CLICK]"That could've been better, but I liked it!"[/RESET (for following week)]

Actually, at this point I seriously doubt changing "teams" is going to improve the show, especially given the quotes of Mr. Coto. Upper management (the executives & their marketeers), as it has shown with the movie series, is utterly fixed on such a narrow band of story content as "commercially viable"---such as Law & Order: Federation Night Court, or whatever you had in mind---, that I believe that Star Trek the "franchise" is locked into a death spiral; only it won't go out with a bang. It will be with a whimper, instead. I honestly think this series was renewed only for them to be able to put together a syndication package and "round out the story" for dvd sets. It ain't gonna make a "ratings comeback" on UPN on Friday nights.


Mikel_Cooperman wrote (post #248):


Quote:



Unfortunately the people who like Enterprise (which is fine) dont want to hear an opinion that differs from there's.






Will_B wrote (post #253):


Quote:



Not true. We want to discuss the show, not have a discussion about the existence of the show. Big difference. . . . .






Quote:



Discussion about the characters, . . .





Shallow and bland and/or unbelievable (i.e., T'Pol), given the context.


Quote:



. . . about the episodes, . . . .





Unoriginal, epigonal---okay, "copy-cat", in plain English!---, relying on old crutches (like the Borg or the Ferengi), and(/or?) uninspiring.



Quote:



. . . about the direction and cinematography of the eps, . . . .





Sometimes some very good technical stuff, but good technics doesn't save badly written material and ill-conceived "imagings". Making some of them fast-paced (like "Regeneration" and "Azati Prime") won't cover up for these weaknesses. And where's the science in the fiction? Oh, yeah, another bomb or deathray. Flash Gordon stuff (1930s!!!).


Quote:



. . . about . . . the conceptual direction of the series, how the arcs are progressing. . . .





B&B make it up as they go along, and it's still "by the numbers", as Jack Briggs has repeatedly pointed out (including for those episodes he obviously has watched).



Quote:



. . . about . . . . how the characters are developing, . . . .





Haven't you heard? They aren't. Will it be Archer (and?/)or Tripp that T'Pol has "bedroom eyes" for this week? Tune in for next week's show: "Deep Space Rubdown".


Quote:



. . . the whole range of discussion every other show enjoys on HTF, sans the bashers (or as some called them, snobs) . . .





And there's the rub! The "happy-talk" warriors' meeting club this isn't.


Quote:



. . . who seem only to be interested in sharing how they don't watch the show, . . . .





Now, honestly, would I initiate weekly threads for a show I didn't watch??? I've seen 'em all (except one!) at least twice! Yes, I'm such a "masochist" I even watch old Voyager episodes from time to time, just so I'll remember what they're about. Most of them I still can't stand, but it's the "connoiseur’s" task to "taste" the bad as well as the good (Utile cum dulci!).


Quote:



. . . . how they want the show to be cancelled, . . .





Not so much want, as expect!


Quote:



. . . . and how fans of the show are wrong or foolish to like it.





Personally, I'm amazed anyone can be enthusiastic about this show, its characters, or its stories. And I never see any cogent arguments from the proponents as to why they are. Say you don't have to explain yourself or analyze your "feelings" about the show if you want, but that's the essence of an intelligent discussion. All of these things have been said over and over with plenty of specificity and detail for the episodes under discussion. So, do you really want to have one or not? It seems not, from where I sit.

And maybe---just maybe!---the vast majority of HTFers who used to participate in these threads have been driven off, not by the "negativity" and scorn of us "naysayers", but because they no longer watch the show or care enough about it to say anything. As has been said before (over and over and over and over again), the ratings of the show seem to say it all. Too many of you just aren't listening, 'cause you don't seem to want to hear.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Jason Seaver wrote (post #224):


On this point, it is useful to recall the end of "Mirror, Mirror". Captain Kirk tries to argue the "logic" of the alternate Spock's secretly/covertly leading the rebellion against the empire from within. In the course of the conversation, alternate Spock is forced to concede that "logic dictates" that the empire will fall, and Kirk challenges him to take the side of logic and press for reforms. So, from the point of view of Star Trek history, there is contra-indication that Vulcan dedication to "logic"would automatically keep them to the status quo

 

[Bill Williams]

It's been officially confirmed on TrekWeb.com that writers Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens have come on board as the new story editors for ENTERPRISE's fourth season. For the report, go to:

http://www.trekweb.com

 

[Jason Seaver]

Damn. That's really good news. You know how I said that it was OK that we weren't seeing the founding of the Federation, because I wouldn't trust Berman & Braga with that responsibility? Gar & Judy are on the list of people I would.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

They see to know the backstory of Tos and Trek Pretty well Ghostwriting those Shatnerverse books. Watch Enterprise is going to get good and it'll get cancelled. I believe Paramount just wants to get to the magic 100 episode mark.

 

[Daniel Kikin]

Wow, that's great news, this could also mean that the Shatner deal has a better chance of happening too. Just thinking back to books like the DS9 Millenium Trilogy, Memory Prime, and Federation, I can't wait to see what they come up with for Enterprise.

 

[Shane D]

go out to startrek.com and click enterprise section, there are 2 or 3 articles on the new season about going digital, and some other stuff, and they give spoilers about what the end of season 3 was all about

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/vie...icle/6259.html

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/vie...icle/6165.html

first one has a spoiler alert after the title on the page

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

This is the best news I have heard in a long time I just hope their hands arent tied. I enjoyed all the books they wrote for Shatner except Federation. Hopefully their ideas will be excepted.
Now if they could get Peter David too then I would start watching on a regular basis.

I have to say I am missing the good debates already in here
Ashame we cant have constructive, I like, I dislike discussions.

 

[Nelson Au]

Mikel-

You still can have constructive like or dislike discussions. This is big news, it would be great to discuss this. Just go here.