And as for last night's _Enterprise_... (1 Viewer)

[Rex Bachmann]

Joseph Bolus wrote:

("Frammis on the jimjam . . . .")

Archer in the series finale (shaking his groggy head): "It . . . it was only a . . . a dream!"

(GAG! HACK! PUKE!)

 

[David Forbes]

Why are you people still watching this show? I stopped watching last December or so and haven't watched since. It's a horrible, horrible show. Watching it and then griping only gives it ratings that help Berman/Braga maintain their control. Saying "Well, it's Trek so I gotta watch, even if it stinks" isn't an excuse. If it's bad, it's bad. And this show is right up there with Voyager in the crapola department (another show I stopped watching after season four, I think).

 

[Frank Anderson]

Can't you people go and rag on the X-Files for a while?
I can only hope this will turn out like TNG. How many here did not like season one of TNG? Lets hope season two has some changes. But I won't hold my breath as long as B&B are in charge.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I'm glad that Hoshi got her some in the 1st episode.

Who was the attractive lady in her 30's that scratched Archer and put him under?

 

[Bill Catherall]

a "UNIVERSAL" language!

It's called a Universal Translator. All of them but Hoshi had one with them. Hoshi didn't want to use one so she could actually use her language skills.

 

[Mike Broadman]

Oh, come on, this episode was just a light piece of character fluff, as is customary before the Big Season Finale. It had the irony of the two guys looking for action and getting none, but Hoshi looking for "culture" and getting action. It also leaves the blonde woman running around as a possible future story line.

Brilliant? No, but it wasn't meant to be. It reminds me more of the TNG ep after Locutus, showing a few of the characters taking some down time. They need to pace this stuff, it can't be all Suliban all the time.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Maybe so, Mike, but the "hell-with-you" attitude of B&B is wearing our patience. Voyager was the first Trek incarnation where I simply gave up. This new series started promisingly--but with serious flaws. It seemed more positioned in line with the TNG era than the pre-Kirk era.

Brannon Braga, prior to the making of First Contact, talked in the press about having "stumbled across" this, to him, "obscure" character in the Trek backstory by name of Cochrane. This is the mindset now in co-charge of the franchise.

After making a half-hearted effort at painting a pre-Federation portrait of the Star Trek universe, B&B swiftly settled into the business-as-usual routine of churning out cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all standard-issue Trek dreck.

Now, we face six more years of this mess.

Jason Seaver disagrees with me on this, but I resurrect an old point of contention of mine: After the debacle that was Voyager, Paramount should have let the franchise rest. That is, at least do the tenth feature film but place a moratorium on any further television series for at least four or five years. The creative batteries needed, at minimum, time to recharge. I think, though, those "creative" batteries need replacing.

B&B are cynicism personified. If they don't care about the franchise, why should I?

 

[Mike Broadman]

Brannon Braga, prior to the making of First Contact, talked in the press about having "stumbled across" this, to him, "obscure" character in the Trek backstory by name of Cochrane. This is the mindset now in co-charge of the franchise.

So? Cochrane was an obscure character. Only the most hardcore Trekkies would know that who he was.

I agree that a break would have been a good idea, though.

By the way, did anyone hear Joleen Blaylokc (sp?) on Howard Stern this morning? She did a real good job of handling Stern's typically stupid interview style.

 

[DaveF]

I can only hope this will turn out like TNG. How many here did not like season one of TNG? Lets hope season two has some changes.

TNG started weak, then grew into a fantastic show. Likewise DS9. However, Voyager started strong but never grew after that. (I enjoyed Voyager, but was frustrated that it never grew past its beginning). Enterprise has started strong...but history suggests it may not go anywhere.
I agree with Jack: Star Trek should have been shelved for a few years, and give us (the fans) a breather, and the show some time for creative growth.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I'm not a dog person, but I sure enjoy it when Porthros gets some screen time. What a cute pup.
(When I devote more props to a dog on Enterprise, this show's got major problems...)

 

[Jeff Brooks]

Did I miss the episode where they were supposed to encounter the Botany Bay? That sounded interesting.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Jason Seaver disagrees with me on this, but I resurrect an old point of contention of mine: After the debacle that was Voyager, Paramount should have let the franchise rest. That is, at least do the tenth feature film but place a moratorium on any further television series for at least four or five years. The creative batteries needed, at minimum, time to recharge. I think, though, those "creative" batteries need replacing.

It's an easy claim to make, since it's essentially unprovable. I don't believe, though, that "Enterprise" is underwhelming because "Star Trek" needs a rest. Rather, it's underwhelming because Rick Berman & Brannon Braga have somehow attached themselves to the franchise like remoras and put the absolute minimum effort necessary into making good science fiction.

"Star Trek" television has been in continuing production for about 15 years now. That's a long time, but it's not quite unparallelled. "Law & Order", for instance, is about ten years old and is currently producing three times as much television per year as Trek, but few claim that that franchise is flaming out. What Dick Wolf and company have done, though, is make sure that the franchise remains fresh, by turning it over to new people both in front of and behind the camera.

Berman & Braga have been doing this for at least ten years apiece. And DS9 aside, they have basically given the show a cosmetic overhaul every few years, going from TNG to "Voyager" to "Enterprise". This may actually be less effective than other shows' incremental cast changes, since it allows everything to get very set in its ways very quickly.

Berman and Braga have taken great pains to keep Trek static. Sure, there's the septennial finding of a new, cheap cast, but the only other major personnel change on these shows has been swapping Jennifer Lein for Jeri Ryan. And that's just in front of the camera; behind the camera, they've always promoted from within - any new writer/producers have always been brought in at a subordinate level, only promoted when and if they become part of the machine.

I've always maintained that Trek would be better served by being good than by being gone. In today's pop-culture landscape, the effect of a layoff is too unpredictable.

I'm sort of amused by Jack's claim that Paramount should "let the franchise rest", though - it seems to me that the franchise has been resting. Would they not perhaps be better off giving the franchise a sharp kick in the ass, handing it over to new people with big ideas who don't have the luxury of knowing the series will run for seven years and then be replaced by something similar, and in fact will find their positions just as precarious as those of everyone else working in television? Sure, this could lead to disaster, but what's going on now generally only leads to mediocrity.

 

[Bill Catherall]

I like Porthos too. What kind of a dog is he and how big do they get? He hasn't seemed to grow much over the months they've been out. I'd like to get one just like him someday. He's like a perpetual puppy.
Edit: I just looked it up...he's a beagle. That's funny, he doesn't look at all like Snoopy.

 

[Jack Briggs]

...it seems to me that the franchise has been resting.

Funny line!

As for the solution: perhaps both--give the series a rest, and reboot it a few years down the line with a fresh crew behind the cameras and in the back offices.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Jack Briggs wrote:

Quote:

Not that it's important, but I think it was clearly established several times in the episode that the dog's name is "Porthos", not Porthros. So, is your usage of the latter intentional, and, if so, am I missing the joke? (The latter sounds too much like "porkroast" to me when I sound it out.)

 

[Jason Seaver]

As for the solution: perhaps both--give the series a rest, and reboot it a few years down the line with a fresh crew behind the cameras and in the back offices.

Or, Paramount could just fire Rick Berman and Brannon Braga now, bring in Thania St. John, Jane Espenson, John MacNamara and/or (fill in name here) as the new Executive Producers, and tell them to assemble their own staff and that the only cast member who can't be written out is Bakula (hey, that's a big contract to eat).

Maybe "Enterprise" flames out as a result - then they can go with "give the franchise a rest" as plan B. To be totally honest, they should have done this between "Voyager" or "Enterprise" (or at least put Ron Moore in charge of developing Series V as had been planned), but isn't "doing something desperate" better than giving up?

 

[Bill Catherall]

Where are these devices [universal translators], and why can't I ever see them? Also, I thought the damned thing was not supposed to be "perfected" yet (i.e., until the time of TOS), and that's why they recruited Hoshi in the first place.

In an early episode when they first began to use them, Archer was wearing his on his wrist. He was in disguise and talking to a female alien when it went out on him and he couldn't understand her anymore. Not wanting to give himself away, he gave her a long kiss to distract her while he reached over and fixed it. I'm not sure where they are wearing them now. Either they found a skillfull place to hide them or the writers have just gotten lazy. I know most people will pick the "lazy" option, but where were the universal tranlators on all the other Star Trek series? In the communicators? But they often lost their communicators with no interuptions to translations.
As for Hoshi, she makes adjustments and calibrates the universal translator. It wasn't working yet at the time she was recruited. I get the impression that she's the one that actually got it working and keeps it working. Also, they have come across some aliens that had a language too difficult for the universal translator to work. One in particular didn't even have speach as we know it. Hoshi has been important in maintaining communications during these moments. So, even with the universal tranlator in place they still need her on board.
As for using the convenience of communication among alien races to point out the flaws of this show...it's always been a very questionable point for even our beloved TOS, or TNG. A few of the first episodes addressed this issue, but we can't have every episode feature the communication difficulties that would be there. It would get too boring (ok, more boring for you complainers ).

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Jason Seaver wrote:

They just "re-upped" Berman for five more years (at Paramount, in general, not just as Star Trek executive producer). They're not going to fire 'im. Mediocrity is fine with them.

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

I think the series has really missed a goldmine because they seem more intent to rewrite the history of the original series than to use it to their advantage.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Remember the more "refined" universal translator as seen in "Arena"? Really compact and trim, that one--must've been really convenient when battling the Gorn.

Berman is to Star Trek what "boy bands" are to music.