Fun Star Trek: Enterprise

[Gavin]

Just finished season 1 (having tried 3 times before to get into this series, starting when the first season video cassettes were released). I'm determined to make it all the way through this time, but I'm still struggling with it. It just doesn't feel like Star Trek. Which, I know is kind of the point of the series, but there doesn't seem to have been much effort put into thinking about how the show could lead to Star Trek. Even little things like everyone knowing about the Vulcan 7 year mating cycle, which didn't appear to be public knowledge in the original series.

Plus the crew doesn't really work for me. Jonathan Archer seems to follow the philosophy of "if the Vulcans disapprove and common sense says don't do it - then I should totally do it." Which is really frustrating because I'm a big fan of Scott Bakula, and he seems the sort of person who should have made a good captain. T'Pol must be the worst Vulcan ever, letting her emotions show all the time. The rest of the crew don't seem to have really found any interesting roles either.

 

[Hux]

The first two seasons are just regurgitated TNG scripts and some of the most boring Trek episodes ever seen.

 

[Doctor Omega]

 

[Gavin]

Season 2 Episode 2 - Carbon Creek

What a weird episode. Vulcans living in 1960's USA. Seems like it should be the premise of a sitcom.

 

[Hux]

I actually quite liked that one.

I couldn't shake the female lead just being T'Pol though. Would've preferred a guest actress.

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

Jonathan Archer seems to follow the philosophy of "if the Vulcans disapprove and common sense says don't do it - then I should totally do it." Which is really frustrating because I'm a big fan of Scott Bakula, and he seems the sort of person who should have made a good captain.

I think what the writers wanted to do with Archer was a character development, where he starts out with a bias toward the Vulcans for their treatment of his father, and gradually have him learn to be more accepting of them, through his work with T'Pol. And to show that the all-accepting utopia of the future was still a work in progress. However, the writers didn't handle it at all well.

T'Pol must be the worst Vulcan ever, letting her emotions show all the time. The rest of the crew don't seem to have really found any interesting roles either.

That, and Nimoy and Lenard were the best Vulcans ever. They could emote, and show emotion without doing so. T'Pol just speaks in monotone all the time to show that she doesn't have emotions, and it doesn't work.

 

[Gavin]

I think what the writers wanted to do with Archer was a character development, where he starts out with a bias toward the Vulcans for their treatment of his father, and gradually have him learn to be more accepting of them, through his work with T'Pol.

That's what I was thinking at the beginning. However by about halfway through the first season the writers seem to have got into a rut with all the characters and forgotten about further development.

 

[Gavin]

I couldn't shake the female lead just being T'Pol though.

I don't understand the problem. Don't everyone's grandparents look exactly like them?

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

That's what I was thinking at the beginning. However by about halfway through the first season the writers seem to have got into a rut with all the characters and forgotten about further development.

I still think that, as I posted in another thread, that Archer is a captain that seemed to fit the time of the series. They weren't the Federation yet, or even Starfleet. He plays a naval captain, basically, in a time where, other than Vulcans, we haven't really had to deal with other worldly personalities, nor the threats from such aliens. He's quite honestly a fish out of water in these situations. And we see that he has a preconception of the Vulcans, formed - and justified in his head - by how his father's work was always pushed back by the Vulcans. The writers tried - and failed - to properly explain that their interference wasn't malevolent, nor was it to hold humanity back, but to keep them from jumping too far ahead too quickly. They had seen such advancements in their own society, and how such advancements can cause a society to go awry.

But yes, the writers just gave up on any sort of personal growth, and just kept up with the "Humans Good, Vulcans Bad" ideology, which caused more drama than was needed.

Season 2 Episode 2 - Carbon Creek

What a weird episode. Vulcans living in 1960's USA. Seems like it should be the premise of a sitcom.

Oh, what could have been. Might I suggest:
-My Favorite Vulcan
-Leave It To Spock
-My Three Vulcans
-The Vulcan Bunch
-Sarek Knows Best
-I Love T'Pol
-I Dream Of T;Pau
-The Vulcan Beverly Hillbillies

It seems wrong to riff on these without @ant-mac helping me out.

 

[Gavin]

I still think that, as I posted in another thread, that Archer is a captain that seemed to fit the time of the series.

I agree. I can see that, not only about Archer, but about the entire series. It was an attempt to show, pre-Federation times and how humans developed into the society we see in TOS. And conceptually I think it's a great idea. It's just that the writing never seems to be able to make it seem like there's a natural development to Star Trek society.

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

It's just that the writing never seems to be able to make it seem like there's a natural development to Star Trek society.

That is the series' greatest sin. You get glimpses here and there, but no, you never get that hopeful vision of the "perfect" society that Roddenberry envisioned. I say "perfect" because, as we know, even Kirk had his prejudices.

If you get to the fourth season, if I'm not mistaken, there's a really great arc where Archer and T'Pol go to Vulcan to search for the kata of Surak, the father of Vulcan discipline of logic. T'Pol explains that for centuries, there has been fighting about the true meaning of Surak's teaching, and the arc is a nice allegory for modern fights about religion and the "true message" there within.

 

[Gavin]

I quite enjoyed Minefield and Dead Stop and then A Night in Sickbay just beat me over the head with the series' flaws once more. Archer takes his dog on a diplomatic mission to a race he knows is easily offended, lets the dog urinate on a sacred site and then gets all pissy when he's asked to apologise?

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

I'm starting to question what it was about this series I liked so much.

I think much of what I liked was the character interaction. It was a blend of what had come from TOS and TNG. Archer and Trip had the Kirk/Bones relationship, and it felt like they eventually wanted T'Pol to be the Spock in that equation, but the writing staff never quite grasped how to bring that about. Yes, Spock brought in the logical aspect, and could sit and insult human irrationality and emotion, but he was never over-the-top with it. T'Pol just comes off as a bitch at times. I also rather liked Dr. Phlox.

One thing I would have liked to have seen more of was the MACOs. That was something I always thought would be an aspect of Starfleet, and when they introduced them, I immediately dug the idea. I liked how they used them in Star Trek Beyond as well.

 

[Gavin]

Query - Minefield introduces the Romulans, complete with a penetrable cloaking field, and we've seen the Enterprise encounter other cloaked vessels. But in TOS Balance of Terror, the cloaking device of the Romulans is presented as something new that hadn't been encountered before. And certainly it's presented as something that wasn't around in the Romulan War (pre TOS and post Enterprise?). So if the Romulans had cloaking technology in the earlier era why wouldn't they have used it in the war. And why would a cloaked Romulan ship be considered a new threat in TOS era? Am I missing something or is it just a lack of continuity by the writers.

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

I believe it's a combination of lack of continuity and the excuse of a slightly new timeline (like introducing the Borg because of First Contact). In Balance of Terror, no one on the Enterprise even knew what the Romulans looked like, and they mention in that episode that at the time of the Romulan War, they didn't have the technology to visually communicate between ships, which has been retconned.

 

[Hux]

Kirk knew bugger-all about Pon Farr but Enterprise makes it clear that everyone kinda knows. Then again, that makes more sense. The idea that we worked side-by-side with the Vulcan for over a century but never noticed their seven year meltdown is a bit dopey.

 

[Gavin]

Kirk knew bugger-all about Pon Farr but Enterprise makes it clear that everyone kinda knows. Then again, that makes more sense. The idea that we worked side-by-side with the Vulcan for over a century but never noticed their seven year meltdown is a bit dopey.

Actually I thought it much more appropriate that the Vulcans would keep something like that hidden. Its the sort of thing that would be a source of shame to them - loss of emotional control - and not something publicly proclaimed.

And it's not like humans and Vulcans were working together on the same ship for a long time. In fact, before Enterprise it was generally assumed that Spock was the first Vulcan to serve on a human ship. Even though that proved to be not the case it doesn't seem likely that more than a couple Vulcans served on humans ships so it wouldn't have been hard for the Vulcans to simply ensure that anyone approaching pon farr was simply assigned back to Vulcan at that time. Also remember that, for most Vulcans pon farr wouldn't have been a big deal. Marriages were arranged and all that would be needed was for some "alone time" with their spouse. The only reason it was an issue for Spock was that he hadn't got married and was away from Vulcan at the time it occurred.

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

In fact, before Enterprise it was generally assumed that Spock was the first Vulcan to serve on a human ship. Even though that proved to be not the case it doesn't seem likely that more than a couple Vulcans served on humans ships so it wouldn't have been hard for the Vulcans to simply ensure that anyone approaching pon farr was simply assigned back to Vulcan at that time

I think it was more the fact that Spock was the first Vulcan to actually become a member of Starfleet, whereas any other Vulcans serving aboard ships were allowed more leeway, and could, indeed, be reassigned to Vulcan should that need arise.

 

[Gavin]

Season 2 espisode 14 "Stigma"

A fairly heavy handed AIDS allegory - or at least that's how I saw it. I think I'm starting to figure out what my main issue is with this show. I just don't care about any of the characters. Even with Voyager, which was fairly poorly written, I had an attachment to the characters which made me want to see how their stories ended. But with this show I honestly don't find any of them remotely interesting.

Still determined to see the show through to the end just for the sake of completeness though.

 

[chainsaw_metal1]

Season 2 espisode 14 "Stigma"

A fairly heavy handed AIDS allegory - or at least that's how I saw it.

From what I had gathered, Viacom insisted that all of its shows do an AIDS episode. Since it was assumed that AIDS would have been eliminated by this time, they went with inventing a disease passed along via mind meld. I have issues with how mind melding is looked down upon in this series, when it seems that it's such a common place thing in later Trek.

But with this show I honestly don't find any of them remotely interesting.

I find them interesting. Except for Hoshi and Mayweather. Hoshi is attractive, that's about it.

I am currently watching the season 4 three episode arc on Vulcan, which has some really great things going on, but it really needed to be executed better. Which seems to be the common theme in this series.