Hello. You won't remember me. Last time I was here I didn't stay long, but I thought I'd stick my oar in and mutter something about the show.
I've been watching season 4 recently and have been both pleasantly reminded of just how much I enjoyed it (season 4) the first time, and just how tragic it was that the show should be cut off in its late-blooming prime, and in such a disappointing way (TNG homage).
I think the whole show was a political football from day one, with the first two seasons governed strictly by the Big Hollywood Tick Box Book of Tropes That Sell in which you will find, among other things, that a slinky sewn-up catsuit on a curvy female cast member resting somewhere between items 1 and 5 on the first page.
I also think matters weren't helped by the age of the franchise. Too many vested interests. Compare to the BSG reboot which took place so long after the original show that it was, for all intents and purposes, a completely new project with all new staff, cast, crew and producers, and the freedom to do what they needed to be successful. Had a similar break been possible between the TNG era shows and Enterprise, perhaps a similar outcome would have resulted. (Season 4 as season 1, etc.)
But is the passage of time the only way to achieve such a thing? Could not a sufficient 'break' be achieved by other means? Perhaps by outsourcing Enterprise to another company and creative staff? One in which B&B, and whoever else might be considered to blame for Enterprise's failures, had nothing but an advisory role, at most, with some power of veto to permit them to act as guardians of the overall franchise and, if considered appropriate, Roddenberry's creative legacy.
Essentially, write and produce Enterprise behind a firewall to keep the sticky fingers of the existing vested interests and other 'stakeholders' off it. Could this have worked?
Well, whether or not, it's all 20:20 hindsight. But I do wonder if it might have applicability for the future...
Ugh... I just reminded myself what the future holds, and it's name is Abrams.
Anyone think there's any credibility to the suggestion, which is apparently accredited to Jolene Blalock, that part of the reason for Enterprise's cancellation was to facilitate the creation of the Abramsverse?
Okay, time to climb back into my closet.