86 replies to this topic 1 votes

[theyarecomingforyou]

brianshapiro, on 09 December 2012 - 17:59, said:

I think people get too caught up into this false dilemma of 'rebooting' the franchise versus keeping every little bit of continuity and retconning everything that doesn't make sense. Just because you don't decide to reboot things doesn't mean you can't just 'forget' some things that were always badly developed (like the Warp 10 episode of Voyager)

Yes, but you can't just keep rewriting history and expect fans to tolerate it. Creating an alternative continuity allows for a much greater freedom in terms of canon and it means you can end up with interesting new plots, like making the prime continuity the mirror universe of the reboot.

[Scorbing]

nik louch, on 09 December 2012 - 17:54, said:

Two things I will add to this conversation. If you are watching them now - I assume at a rate of more than 1 per week? In which case it may be less tooth-achingly dull. Getting to the good episodes quicker will help negate the feeling of "This is going nowhere". Because until then, it became dull and predictable with but a few exceptions.

And secondly, the final episode made a mockery of the entire thing. "Oh it was all a holo-simulation"... Sod right off!

I think the last episode, "These Are The Voyages", was really unnecessary. It was an OK episode, but unnecessary. The episode before that one would have been a much better ending to the series. There was no need to kill Trip.

[Dot Matrix]

You're not going to have a new "Trek" series for a while. The format has kinda died out. Trek suffered from the "planet of the week" syndrome, and would need reformatted to do well with today's audience. The "solve all our problems with tech invented on the spot" format needs to go away too.

[Scorbing]

Dot Matrix, on 09 December 2012 - 18:51, said:

You're not going to have a new "Trek" series for a while. The format has kinda died out. Trek suffered from the "planet of the week" syndrome, and would need reformatted to do well with today's audience. The "solve all our problems with tech invented on the spot" format needs to go away too.

I agree. I don't think JJ Abrahams will begin a "new" series anytime soon. I think they are going to squeeze as much as they can from this "new" crew and then, maybe, in a few years from now we might see a new trek series. You have to remember, creating a Trek series is not cheap. We are talking millions of dollars per episode, most of it going to visual effects. Paramount lost quite a bit of money on Enterprise when it was on TV and that almost sank the Trek franchise (thank God for JJ Abrahams for coming along at the right time to save it), so we shall see what else is in store for Trek in the TV future.

[Darrian]

nik louch, on 09 December 2012 - 17:54, said:

And secondly, the final episode made a mockery of the entire thing. "Oh it was all a holo-simulation"... Sod right off!

I loved the final episode. It did not imply that the entire thing was a holo simulation, it was pretty clear that the events of that singular episode were a holo simulation, and also that it was a "historically accurate" one, allowing Riker to study the events of the "past" to make a decision in his "present." The whole thing was just a way to get Riker on the show for a minute and tie Enterprise more firmly to the rest of the continuity. I thought it was a pretty good episode, myself.

Edit: Except for killing Trip; that was bull****. At least it takes place quite a while after the episode before it, at the end of their mission, so if they ever do have an Enterprise movie it can fit nicely in the gap there.

[qdave]

I liked star trek enterprise but i blame its failure on producers.

[THE_OBSERVER]

Darrian, on 09 December 2012 - 19:11, said:

I loved the final episode. It did not imply that the entire thing was a holo simulation, it was pretty clear that the events of that singular episode were a holo simulation, and also that it was a "historically accurate" one, allowing Riker to study the events of the "past" to make a decision in his "present." The whole thing was just a way to get Riker on the show for a minute and tie Enterprise more firmly to the rest of the continuity. I thought it was a pretty good episode, myself.

Edit: Except for killing Trip; that was bull****. At least it takes place quite a while after the episode before it, at the end of their mission, so if they ever do have an Enterprise movie it can fit nicely in the gap there.

i think though out all the seasons they always meantion "chef".

[Scorbing]

qdave, on 09 December 2012 - 19:12, said:

I liked star trek enterprise but i blame its failure on producers.

Now you know why Paramount fired Rick Berman.

[Darrian]

THE_OBSERVER, on 09 December 2012 - 19:54, said:

i think though out all the seasons they always meantion "chef".

That's because there is a chef. In the holodeck Riker took on the role of Chef as he observed the crew of Enterprise, effectively replacing that person, and since it was a simulation the crew didn't realize he was an imposter. I really shouldn't have to explain how the holodeck "works," though. Did you not watch TNG, DS9 or Voyager?

[Darrian]

Darrian, on 09 December 2012 - 20:27, said:

That's because there is a chef. In the holodeck Riker took on the role of Chef as he observed the crew of Enterprise, effectively replacing that person, and since it was a simulation the crew didn't behave as if he were an imposter. I really shouldn't have to explain how the holodeck "works," though. Did you not watch TNG, DS9 or Voyager?

[Joshie]

TheLegendOfMart, on 09 December 2012 - 09:59, said:

I don't know why people hate on time travel so much, it was one of the most compelling parts of the show, two or more factions from different time periods in the future, fighting to change the course of the future to their own benefit. I'm pretty sure I read that the 'future man' who was giving Suliban orders was meant to be revealed as a Romulan trying to instigate the Earth/Romulan war.

The problem is, Star Trek screwed itself with its obsessive overuse of time travel as a plot device. There was always a kind of pride in Star Trek's effort to be a projection of where science really could eventually take us, but time travel has never been anything more than fantasy. It isn't compatible with any understanding of the universe today. The only thing that comes close is the multiverse fantasy, which isn't even technically time travel, and is itself just an extension of the hard-on people get when they hear the word 'infinite'.

Time travel isn't something you just build a random plot off of.

[Dot Matrix]

Joshie, on 10 December 2012 - 20:24, said:

The problem is, Star Trek screwed itself with its obsessive overuse of time travel as a plot device. There was always a kind of pride in Star Trek's effort to be a projection of where science really could eventually take us, but time travel has never been anything more than fantasy. It isn't compatible with any understanding of the universe today. The only thing that comes close is the multiverse fantasy, which isn't even technically time travel, and is itself just an extension of the hard-on people get when they hear the word 'infinite'.

Time travel isn't something you just build a random plot off of.

Another cliche Trek needs to get rid of. Those Trek producers loved that reset button, especially Voyager staff.

[brianshapiro]

Joshie, on 10 December 2012 - 20:24, said:

The problem is, Star Trek screwed itself with its obsessive overuse of time travel as a plot device. There was always a kind of pride in Star Trek's effort to be a projection of where science really could eventually take us, but time travel has never been anything more than fantasy. It isn't compatible with any understanding of the universe today. The only thing that comes close is the multiverse fantasy, which isn't even technically time travel, and is itself just an extension of the hard-on people get when they hear the word 'infinite'.

Time travel isn't something you just build a random plot off of.

Star Trek has also had supernatural kind of things like Q, creatures that live in the vacuum of space, plus speculative parascientific concepts which have very little real science behind them, like psychicsm, telepathy etc.

The problem with time travel plots from my point of view is that its easy from any bad writer to come up with a 'profound' sounding time travel plot , just create an anomaly here, and a paradox here. Profound! Really clever time travel plots are rare.

[.Neo]

• Terrible, terrible acting.
  
• All charicters were incredibly 2D, lacking any depth whatsoever.
  
• Jonathan Archer was just a plain obnoxious know it all.
  
• The entire crew were like a bunch of kindergarten kids looking up to their captain who had to teach them the most basic of life lessons.
  
• Huge holes in the plot. Per example: When Earth came under attack of the main Xindi weapon (end of season 3) there wasn't a single armed Earth, or otherwise, vessel in orbit. No orbital weapon platforms. No surface-based weapons. Nothing. Earth was reduced to being a sitting duck. Are we really supposed to believe Earth was just waiting a year long to be destroyed without undertaking any action whatsoever on the home front? Instead of arming the planet to the teeth Starfleet decided to literally bet all their money on a single NX-class ship. Yet when Enterprise returned home (proper timeline) there were suddenly dozens of vessels (Earth, Vulcan, etc.) waiting for them in Earth orbit. Where the hell were all those ships when Enterprise tried to destroy the Xindi weapon?? That REALLY annoyed me and there's just no way whatsoever to justify it.

Overall the show was just lame.

[Routerbad]

I really enjoyed the series, but I think the sulabon and the temporal war arc really hurt it.