StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I only watched a few episodes of the first series before channel 4 went crazy & kept on moving it around.

The last episode I watched was the one with a Vulcan temple that turned out to be a spy base of some kind.

I don’t mean to be funny but the series didn’t seem that bad & at least didn’t have any holodeck episodes (I will scream if a holodeck kills another innocent person).

What exactly is wrong with ‘Enterprise’, did it get worse after the ones I watched?

It is the same rehased crap of Voyager, Tng, and DS9. Also two letters B&B. They have turned tek from something intersting to total crap.

The Janitor wrote:I only watched a few episodes of the first series before channel 4 went crazy & kept on moving it around.

The last episode I watched was the one with a Vulcan temple that turned out to be a spy base of some kind.

I don’t mean to be funny but the series didn’t seem that bad & at least didn’t have any holodeck episodes (I will scream if a holodeck kills another innocent person).

What exactly is wrong with ‘Enterprise’, did it get worse after the ones I watched?

Um, there was a holodeck in either the third of fourth episode. Of course it was an alien holodeck, and the aliens gave the technology to the Klingons.

Anyway, Enterprise is a mockery of the Star Trek Legacy. In addition to being rehashed crap, they are openly trying to rewrite history.

- The ship is named Enterprise when it has long been established that Kirks ship was the first Starfleet vessel to have that name.
- The ship design is an obviouse rip-off of the 24th century Akira-Class.
- Klingons appearing 100 years before they are supposed too.
- First Contact with the Klingons was supposed to lead to war, yet didnt.
- Romulans with Cloaking Devices.
- The Ferengi make an appearance!
- Vulcans who dont act like Vulcans.
- The ship has a transporter.
- "Phase Pistols" and "Phase Cannons" when they are supposed to be armed with lasers.
- Magically disappearing/reappearing "Phase Cannons."
- Four days to the Klingon Homeworld at Warp 5.

Not to mention the bad science...I mean REALLY bad science...
- Aliens who dont know what water is...
- Repairing micro fractures in the hull with mashed potatoes.
- The crew is impressed at how large a nebula is, when the nebula is only a few hundred million kilometers wide...

I think the Vulcans do act like Vulcans (sort of like unemotional Frenchmen).

The Ferengi appearing was dumb.

Whats the problem with the transporter being on the ship?

Was a firm date ever give for Klingon first contact?

I don't believe it led to war it was just rather bad and led to a cold war of sorts (which in Enterprise it didn't).

The Romulans having cloaks was wrong.

The other stuff is rather minor however.

There just seems to be a total lack of continuity with the original series. Perfect example: the uniforms. You would think that they would be closer to the ones in TOS, but they seem to be more like the TNG style. B&B are trying to rewrite Star Trek in their own image.

It's worse than just the continunity problems. This show is just bad. It's badly written, visually blah, poorly directed ("No no no! Build UP the suspense!"), and while I like Scott Bakula, he and Joline Blalock have the acting ability of this chunk of styrofoam sitting on my desk, which doesn't make any sense at all because he was good in Quantum Leap.

Bakula is not a shit alchemist, he is given shit , has to work with it, and in the end, guess what , its still shit, only now it looks like Devils Tower or something.......

Where to begin!

Here's a site that gives a complete rundown:

http://www.firsttvdrama.com/enterprise/index.php3

I would be able to forgive the problems with continuity if I found the show to be as interesting once you accept those errors as the previous Trek series. The main problem with Enterprise, for me, has always been the characters. They are weak, and have little personality at best. At worst, they are inconsistent and change DRAMATICALLY from episode to episode, so it is difficult to care about any of them.

My Dad never watched B5 until I bought him the DVD for season 1, and he was ALWAYS a ST fan (from their first show). One of the things that he told me when comparing the two series, from what he's seen so far, is that Commander Sinclair is GLARINGLY the weakest B5 character, and Captain Archer has MUCH less personality than he does. That is a serious problem for any television show.

Since The Janitor brought this question up, I'll let him try to answer a question:

What's Captain Archer's personality? Describe him.

What about Doctor Phlox?

Hoshi?

T'Pol?

Malcolm?

Go down the list. The inability of the actors, directors, and writers to deliver consistent characters that remain true to their personalities, or (better still) develop throughout the series has ultimately destroyed the quality of Trek. There are no longer any moral messages or ethical questions in the episodes, because the characters are not interesting enough to bring different points of view to the ship. There's nothing in it that makes me question what it means to be human. There's nothing in it that forces me to ask myself where I should try to draw the line between emotional and logical responses. There's no character in it who is interesting enough to bring me back to the TV every week to see what happens to he/she/it next.

The plots are, IMO, weaker than the ones for their other series as a whole, but even those would benefit substantially if there were interesting characters to pull me through them, and if the characters were substantially improved then there would be a much larger array of plots that the writers could choose from.

Additionally, the episodes themselves are poorly edited. They generally spend too much time on every individual scene--including many that do not advance the plot of the episode at all, and the character development of one week becomes worthless the next week when they forget what's happened to them and begin anew. Thus, there is no consistent draw to bring the audience into the series, and the show's weaknesses become increasingly glaring and more obvious the longer the series goes on.

TheDarkling wrote:The other stuff is rather minor however.

You may consider them minor but I find them to be indicative of the sloppy and hap hazardous approach that B&B have taken toward this series. How hard would it be for B&B to hire a continuity/technical consultant to read through the scripts before they are filmed and point out all the continuity errors and make changes? I’m willing to bet you that anyone on this board could do at least a half way competent job at that. Star Trek Fans have always been very continuity conscience, and to throw away decades of established continuity so that they can tell lame stories is an insult to the fans. That’s the difference between a good writer and these two hacks. A good writer can take established continuity and still tell a good story. B&B arent even capable of doing that.

The Janitor wrote:I only watched a few episodes of the first series before channel 4 went crazy & kept on moving it around.

The last episode I watched was the one with a Vulcan temple that turned out to be a spy base of some kind.

I don’t mean to be funny but the series didn’t seem that bad & at least didn’t have any holodeck episodes (I will scream if a holodeck kills another innocent person).

What exactly is wrong with ‘Enterprise’, did it get worse after the ones I watched?

The characters are like zombies and dolls, sterlized, just as the enviroment on the set are. The background actors are just walking around doing nothing but looking busy. At least in B5 the background actors feeled intergrated a part of the station and even had a line of saying but the people on Enterprise just feel wrong, boring. They just keep walking doing nothing of importance, they haven't said a single word in any episode from what I know of.

Rick Berman even insulted us fans by making statements; saying we are not ready for Enterprise, explaining away why they are loosing ratings. But I guess he was right, no one can really be ready for such a horrible peice of shit show.

Hopefully even you, Janitor will one day see the light.

Macross wrote:

TheDarkling wrote:The other stuff is rather minor however.

You may consider them minor but I find them to be indicative of the sloppy and hap hazardous approach that B&B have taken toward this series. How hard would it be for B&B to hire a continuity/technical consultant to read through the scripts before they are filmed and point out all the continuity errors and make changes? I’m willing to bet you that anyone on this board could do at least a half way competent job at that. Star Trek Fans have always been very continuity conscience, and to throw away decades of established continuity so that they can tell lame stories is an insult to the fans. That’s the difference between a good writer and these two hacks. A good writer can take established continuity and still tell a good story. B&B arent even capable of doing that.

You must understand that their small 'brains' B&B have is rotting away. They are zombies who keeps writing bad episodes, they don't have the skills to write good and decent episodes.

To me Enterprise didn't seem that bad when compared with most ST they all follow the same repetitive patterns of a holodeck episode, an unusual low tech alien race episode, a mysterious intrigue episode (turns out to be the Romulans), a good if scientifically flawed episode (self replicating mines!) & then a season finale.

I remember watching the first few episodes of DS9 & Voyager & ending up wanting to drill into my own teeth to distract me from what I was watching (in the end I just changed the channel) & yet no Trek fan vehemently hates those series.
Why didn’t ST fans hurl abuse & outrage at the ludicrous nature of DS9?

Star Trek has been systematically destroyed for well over a decade & it is surprising to me that the final straw was Enterprise. For me the final straw had to be Sisko cutting potatoes in the middle of an intergalactic war & that was years ago.

If I was an ST fan I’d start buying the Babylon 5 season DVD’s & watch how a proper SF series should go like.

The Janitor wrote:To me Enterprise didn't seem that bad when compared with most ST they all follow the same repetitive patterns of a holodeck episode, an unusual low tech alien race episode, a mysterious intrigue episode (turns out to be the Romulans), a good if scientifically flawed episode (self replicating mines!) & then a season finale.

I remember watching the first few episodes of DS9 & Voyager & ending up wanting to drill into my own teeth to distract me from what I was watching (in the end I just changed the channel) & yet no Trek fan vehemently hates those series.
Why didn’t ST fans hurl abuse & outrage at the ludicrous nature of DS9?

Star Trek has been systematically destroyed for well over a decade & it is surprising to me that the final straw was Enterprise. For me the final straw had to be Sisko cutting potatoes in the middle of an intergalactic war & that was years ago.

If I was an ST fan I’d start buying the Babylon 5 season DVD’s & watch how a proper SF series should go like.

It's not like people were running around singing hymns of praise to Voyager. What's happened is we were promised something better for this series, and we've clearly been lied to.

The Janitor wrote: I remember watching the first few episodes of DS9 & Voyager & ending up wanting to drill into my own teeth to distract me from what I was watching (in the end I just changed the channel) & yet no Trek fan vehemently hates those series.
Why didn’t ST fans hurl abuse & outrage at the ludicrous nature of DS9?

Go to any Trek board and you will find lots of people who hate Voyager and Deep Space Nine. In fact I would say that there is almost a "Trekkie Civil War" among the fans over these two shows. Of course, the level of hostility has greatly diminished since Voyager went off the air.

The big differance between DS9 and Voyager is that DS9 improved as the seasons went on, while Voyager progressivly got worse.

What's wrong with Enterprise can be summed up in few words: it's crap that doesn't take itself seriously enough to be considered entertainment for anyone smarter than a teenager.

Enlightenment wrote:What's wrong with Enterprise can be summed up in few words: it's crap that doesn't take itself seriously enough to be considered entertainment for anyone smarter than a teenager.

i'm a teenager and i defanatly don't consider "Enterprise" entertainment

Well, where is ST going to go. They have exausted almost all story ideas. What can they do that is deffiently original?

Admiral Johnason wrote:Well, where is ST going to go. They have exausted almost all story ideas. What can they do that is deffiently original?

end the franchise for once instead of continuing to butcher it the way B&B do?????

Admiral Johnason wrote:Well, where is ST going to go. They have exausted almost all story ideas. What can they do that is deffiently original?

I think the answer is simple, fire B&B and hire new writers. Bring in fresh people with fresh ideas. B&B are far to formulaic when it comes to creating stories.

I think the answer is simple, fire B&B and hire new writers. Bring in fresh people with fresh ideas. B&B are far to formulaic when it comes to creating stories

That's what they gotta do. Hmm, I wonder if JMS is looking for work these days? If anyone can pull ST's ass out of the rut it is in, it is JMS.

Oh God, please let Steven Speilburg and George Lucas come and save Star Trek. Then people would came and see the Second Coming of Trek.

first let the thing rest for 7 10 years

I will not wait for seven centuries. Even God will be tired of the reruns.

This show is so bad even Graham Kennedy hates it.