I'm not a big Enterprise fan, but I'm also not
a hater. Actually re-watching it right now via my DVDs.
It's my only good condition DVD set since it's not well worn, but I still own them! So brownie points for that.
The other day though, I did develop a theory as to one perhaps subtle or subconscious reason so many fans turned away from the show?
What if it's all the subtle alterations to Trek lore?
What do I mean? Well, think about it. Shuttle pod instead of shuttle craft. No red alert / tactical alert instead. No photon torpedoes / eventually photonic
torpedoes. Enterprise instead of the
Enterprise. Phase pistols instead of phasers.
All those subtle little things designed to show the evolution of them, the predecessor to what we knew, intended to show the earlier stage of things... could those minor trivial details have been a key to putting some people off?
To some it could have been a sort of OCD thing. To others, an annoying nit-picky issue. others still totally unaware it was effecting them negatively. Some may even have felt as if B&B where trying to re-create Trek in their own image or something.
I dunno. It's a bit of a trivial/silly theory, and it's certainly well moot at this juncture, but I thought it an interesting proposition.
Nope I don't think that subtle differences in names was the issue. S3 and S4 are generally considered the best, so we have to ask why is this? Was it down to new writers, changes behind the scenes? A comibination of things.
S4 was in many respects about universe building showing us how things came to be in the later shows, i.e it was finally in many of the fans eyes living up to the prequel concept.
Sure S1-2 had some good episodes, just as S3-4 had some weaker episodes. But a portion of the fanbase was dissapointed with VOY and whilst they were giving ENT a chance for some of them ithere was little difference. Poor characterisation, re-hased storylines. Or simply put more of the same.
Now of course you can't please everyone.