-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

STAR TREK: ENTERPRISE 4/21/'04 "Damage"


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
55 replies to this topic

#1 of 56 Rex Bachmann

Rex Bachmann

    Screenwriter

  • 1,975 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 2001
  • Real Name:Rex Bachmann

Posted April 14 2004 - 08:11 AM

episode title: "Damage"
episode number: #71
original airdate: April 21, 2004
director: James L. Conway
writer: Phyllis Strong
synopsis: "The Xindi have dealt Enterprise a critical and deadly blow, leaving the crew in serious need of help. Meanwhile, divisions between the Xindi Council become more apparent and Archer is trapped on a Xindi-Aquatic ship."

(Will our heroes escape and recover? Whaddayou think?!?)

In anticipation of next week's continuance of tonight's repeat of "Azati Prime", I'm posting this now for all the Trek addicts who need their weekly fix (even if it's all too often a "bad trip").

"Delenda est . . . . "

 


#2 of 56 Chris

Chris

    Lead Actor

  • 6,790 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 1997

Posted April 14 2004 - 09:11 AM

Quote:
Will our heroes escape and recover? Whaddayou think?!?

They will all die. Then, Q will revive them, meet with them, give them a test and advice, and remove himself from their memories before he leaves.

(and for that suggestion, B&B may have to hunt me down for destroying future script possibilites)
My Current DVD-Profiler


"I've been Ostrafied!" - Christopher, Sopranos 5/6/07

#3 of 56 danak

danak

    Second Unit

  • 334 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 25 2002

Posted April 14 2004 - 09:51 AM

'Damage' is showing at 8pm. Wasn't Enterprise supposed to move to 9pm in March?

Dana

#4 of 56 Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Lead Actor

  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted April 14 2004 - 10:13 AM

It did. Then Game Over and The Mullets went over like a lead balloon, Enterprise expanded to fill both hours, and now it's moving back.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#5 of 56 Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,146 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted April 15 2004 - 03:46 AM

Saw the Azati Prime repeat last night. Afterwards, there was a preview to Damage. There wasn't much given away, except
a shot of what looked like a dead Archer
.

I'm sure the trailer is available on startrek.com.

#6 of 56 Jack Briggs

Jack Briggs

    Executive Producer

  • 16,725 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 1999

Posted April 15 2004 - 04:11 AM

In case anybody's interested, for the past three weeks the Enterprise "double feature" reruns have been clocking in at the bottom five in the Nielsens. In fact, last week, it was the bottom-rated show, and the one two notches above the cellar. Surely this is not lost on the powers-that-be at Paramount.

#7 of 56 Dave Miller

Dave Miller

    Supporting Actor

  • 853 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 1999

Posted April 15 2004 - 04:47 AM

Quote:
Surely this is not lost on the powers-that-be at Paramount.


Well then it is their own fault. Not sure who at Paramount thought it would be a good idea to plan a four week break of reruns of a show that was struggling in the first place.

Peace,

DM
"We all end up dead, the question is how and why."

#8 of 56 Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,146 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted April 15 2004 - 05:10 AM

Are ratings figures for shows that are not first run epsidoes considered differently then those for first run? In others words, do the ratings for repeats count less?

I would think that the ratings for the final 6 episodes of the season are the ones that they'll look at. All assuming that it's not too late and Mr. Leslie Mooves and Paramount can or has worked a deal to keep the show on for a 4th year.

#9 of 56 Jack Briggs

Jack Briggs

    Executive Producer

  • 16,725 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 1999

Posted April 15 2004 - 05:15 AM

Well, yes, you're correct to note that ratings for reruns "don't count as much." But a healthy show doesn't wind up in the cellar ever. Even new episodes of this series habitually rank out in the Neilsens' bottom ten. Not good.

#10 of 56 Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Lead Actor

  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted April 15 2004 - 05:23 AM

Quote:
Not sure who at Paramount thought it would be a good idea to plan a four week break of reruns of a show that was struggling in the first place.
24 episodes (down from 26), 35 weeks from the beginning of October to the end of May (and didn't Enterprise start in September?); given that the new episodes tend to be clustered, a month of reruns at some point is inevitable.

Of course, being more serial this year likely hasn't helped rerun performance. But it's not like everything else hasn't been a rerun for the past month, either.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#11 of 56 Dave Miller

Dave Miller

    Supporting Actor

  • 853 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 1999

Posted April 15 2004 - 05:42 AM

Quote:
a month of reruns at some point is inevitable.


I understand your math, but didn't we already have a month worth of reruns in Nov/Dec? Maybe sprinkling it out is less noticable rather than this big block all at once.

Peace,

DM
"We all end up dead, the question is how and why."

#12 of 56 Anthony Hom

Anthony Hom

    Supporting Actor

  • 893 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted April 16 2004 - 04:26 AM

They better not compare the last SIX. One of those was Proving Ground, and despite how some feel about that episode, it was the worst rated one this season, one of the lowest in all of Enterprise, lowest viewers and lowest share combined.
Remember to look at this link to see how well the show is:

http://www.ece.ucdav.../entratings.htm

#13 of 56 phil-w

phil-w

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 195 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 23 2000

Posted April 18 2004 - 05:04 AM

Titan TV has the new episode "The Forgotten" listed for the 21st??

#14 of 56 Adrian D

Adrian D

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 66 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2001

Posted April 21 2004 - 04:12 AM

Is anyone gonna watch tonight? I'm convinced that some people watch it just so they can bitch about it (of course, some bitching is justified).
As usual, I will. I guess I'll just hope for the best.

#15 of 56 Mikel_Cooperman

Mikel_Cooperman

    Producer

  • 4,184 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 2001

Posted April 21 2004 - 04:21 AM

Keep hoping Adrian.

#16 of 56 Will_B

Will_B

    Producer

  • 4,733 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 06 2001

Posted April 21 2004 - 01:12 PM

Was that the actress who played the tv-version of the Borg Queen? Definately had that vibe.
"Scientists are saying the future is going to be far more futuristic than they originally predicted." -Krysta Now

#17 of 56 Dewitte

Dewitte

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 173 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2002

Posted April 21 2004 - 02:29 PM

Quote:
Was that the actress who played the tv-version of the Borg Queen? Definately had that vibe.

The TV version of the Borg Queen was played by Susanna Thompson (until Alice Krige reprised the role in "Endgame"). Josette di Carlo played the role I think you're talking about (just avoiding a little spoilerage until it's safe).

As for the episode, parts of it were great but the main story suffered greatly from a forced plot. I'm sure most of you were able to think of some alternatives to Archer's decision.

De
Retroactive Continuity - Yet another source of nuttiness on the Web!

#18 of 56 Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,146 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted April 21 2004 - 02:35 PM

Will_B, Not sure what show you're referring to regarding the TV Borg actress, but her name is Susanna Thompson.

I'm watching tonight, just 26 minutes away. Looking forward to see how this plays out.

#19 of 56 Greg_S_H

Greg_S_H

    Executive Producer

  • 14,836 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 2001
  • Real Name:Greg
  • LocationNorth Texas

Posted April 21 2004 - 02:42 PM

Quote:
I'm watching tonight, just 26 minutes away. Looking forward to see how this plays out.

Don't look at my post. Minor spoilers, but spoilers!

Probably too late. Figured it had already run everywhere. Posted Image

But, as for the "Borg Queen":

You'll know once you watch, but he's referring to the interdimensional androgyne. She also had a Founder feel. I guess "creepy bald female" is a Star Trek archetype. Wait. The female Founder wasn't bald. Still. . . .

My original post:

The only thing I didn't like was the cavalier use of the transporter. They have never wanted to use it and have rarely used it, and now they're beaming all over the place? It was a necessity (actually, it would have been cool to see them dock with the other ship and force their way on, Vader-style), but there should have been some throwaway dialog expressing concerns. Maybe there was and I missed it.

Also, if the transporters were working, why didn't T'Pol just beam her drugs from the cutoff cargo bay? I can forgive her, since she wasn't thinking straight.

#20 of 56 Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,146 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted April 21 2004 - 04:52 PM

Good to see Casey Biggs back in the Trek world as the alien Captain.

Interesting idea to show how far Archer will go to justify getting what he needs to complete his mission. And at least they play out the scenerio, successfully or not, of the ethical arguments. I hope they make amends to that Captain.

On the use of the transporters, I figure they are in a desperate situation and it called for extreme measures, so why not.

The explaination of T'Pol's addiction now makes sense as an after effect of her experience on the Vulcan ship, Seleya. And it explains why she jumped Tucker. I guess she still likes him.Posted Image

The androgyne did give off the Founder kind of vibe! She must have been the "She" that was referred to back earlier in the season. A lot of exposition going on tonight.

I suspect that there will be those who will not buy how easily Degra and the others are beginning to see truth to Archer's story. The Androgne alien certainly sold Degra.

A fun show I'd say. Though I have a problem that Archer did what he did to meet his goal. I suppose it's somewhat similar to what Sisko did to convince the Romulans to join the war against the Dominion. But I think this action puts Archer closer to the Captain of the Equinox. He did some questionable things to get his crew back home. But for Archer, he is trying to save his home world and species, not making his life more convenient.


Back to TV Programming



Forum Nav Content I Follow