Season 4: Just how much of it can be called Fanwank?

They got a ride with the Vulcans.

 

I liked season 4.

I don't know if they wanked me though.

 

Does helping humans to invent light-year-range transporters sound like something the Vulcans would do?

At the end of the episode, the Sarajevo isn't a known Vulcan design, and Archer says that it "will be returning Emory and Danica to Earth." Are they ready for a years-long trip?

 

Ent writers were assailed by fans when they dared present any navigational routes, alien races, tech, (omg!) time and distances between star systems and planets, etc that had never been seen or at least hinted at in TOS. Ent was supposed to be a prequal after all.

Then when the writers gave us origins and references to stuff we had seen in TOS, they were assailed by other fans for presenting "fanwank" or "continuity porn".

As fans, we didn't, and still don't know what the hell it is we want. J.J. Abrams has my undying respect (and gratitude) for being willing to step into this quagmire.

 

^

 

^Works for me. Or how about this quote from SG-1

"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."

 

Yeah, that's what Trek fans say they want too -- generally followed by a very large "BUT..... step one inch outside of "canon" and we don't care how interesting the characters, sharp the dialogue, and real the sense of danger, we're gonna hate it".

 

I've gone into every bit of new Trek with a will to love it.

And you know it's like being handed your smushed up goo covered baby.. I'VE LOVED IT WITH ALL MY HEART. I've a will to love it. If I ever don't love it it might be time to die.

 

Yea, it took me years and distance, but, my recent rewatch of Voyager and Enterprise, was much more enjoyable then watching of it in first run, when I hd my preconceived notions. TNG, I saw most (if not all) of it in first run, and my recent rewatch wasn't quite as enjoyable (though there were some episodes I did really enjoy).

Speaking of Babies, looks like Katherine finally remembered the Borg Baby, eh

 

I admit that I grokked this the first time around. Compared to the first season that gave us the most unlikable protagonist I would ever see until I watched Secret Life of the American Teenage and season two which gave up episodes about T'Pol's Ponn Farr and motherfuckin' Porthos, then hell yeah season four's an improvement. Coto and company also started to not completely ignore Mayweather and Sato, so kudos for that.

But after a second viewing? Meh. It was one of Trek's most consistently decent seasons, but there wasn't a single break-out episode in the bunch.

This analogy I got from another site pretty much says it best:

 

I was disappointed by season four. There was certainly some good stuff - I enjoyed Home, the Vulcan arc, the Babel One/United arc, Observer Effect, In a Mirror Darkly, and the Demons/Terra Prime arc.

A lot of story momentum was ruined by crappy concluding episodes. It happened with the Augment arc, though to fair I never felt particularly invested in that one. The worst one, I thought, was The Aenar. All of the interesting storylines ended in United, yet they carry on looking for this albino Andorian? Affliction had a boring conclusion (don't even mention Klingon wrinkles), and IaMD went on an episode too long (even if it was to help he budget).

Storm Front was dull, as was Daedalus. Bound was terrible, and TATV always has its own thread for the amount of problems it as.

The episodes that are left that I like, are all basically fanwank. I think it comes across as this because it all came a bit too late, and also because they did too much of it. Ideally, these kinds of episodes should have been dribbled throughout the show's run, in order to continually build towards something.

It was better than seasons one and two put together though.

 

I still think the most fanwanky episodes would have been spread out more if Coto and company had known they were getting a fifth season. Since they were pretty certain that Season Four would be the last, though, I don't mind that they crammed so much in.

But in an ideal world ENT would have been closer to Season Four in style from the very beginning.

 

The plots in Season 4 weren't the best, but at least they were plots...something we hadn't seen in the past three season. I give Manny Coto a lot of credit for that.

 

I've not seen the Klingon Forehead Arc, but the show hogtied itself putting a bumpy Klingon in "Broken Bow" in the first place. If they'd started with smoothies, there would have been no need to explain STTMP Klingons, and it could have been left at DS9's "We do not discuss it with outsiders." It wasn't an issue in Voyager. It could have just been an unexplained mystery which didn't really need to be solved.

It was just another problem I had with the series, which tried to put too much emphasis on 24th century conventions.

 

The Klingon arc wasn't presented because of a "need" to explain anything. They were presented as another in a series of season 4 stories which dealt with the origins of many things Trek fans take for granted about the Trekverse. Ent was a prequel after all. I thought most aspects of the arc were great and the presentation of the forehead pretty well thought out and plausible.

But, I forget. You are likely among the fans who identify prequel stuff as "fanwank" and therefore, unwanted, right?

 

ENT didn't need to explain the forehead inconsistency. In truth it was DS9 that turned it into an issue by calling attention to it in "Trials and Tribble-ations." When the Klingons' look changed starting with TMP, Roddenberry wanted people to just assume they'd always looked like that, even during the TOS years. The ENT writers decided that there could be an interesting story in there and they decided to run with it. Personally, I rather enjoyed the Klingon Forehead Arc, I thought it was a pretty clever way to explain it.

Speaking of "Trials and Tribble-ations," I think it would have been better if they'd just put Michael Dorn in TOS-style Klingon makeup while the Defiant was in the 23rd century, and had none of the crew notice any difference.

 

Wrong. I can wank as well as anyone. Several years ago I did an animated Kirk meets Seven of Nine parody using episode voice clips and with authentic music and sound effects, with an added fake "next week" preview of Kirk vs. the Borg (which was more exciting than my main story).

That would have been a nice touch.

 

Then why in your original post were you complaining about Ent's need to "explain STTMP Klingons", which you apparentely felt led the show into some "fanwank" (Klingon arc episodes)? Did I misunderstand you?

 

I didn't even mention whether I thought it was wanky, you pinned that on me. My position was it didn't really need to be explained why the foreheads changed. I was surprised bumpy Klingons were in Broken Bow. I used the term Klingon Forehead Arc because I have not seen those episodes, do not automatically know their titles, and it was the quickest way to refer to them.

Maybe I can afford to get the series collection next month, so I'll be more qualified to speak on the one series I've seen the least of.

Edit: Though it's now at $163 new at Amazon, higher than when I looked last week, so maybe not.

 

Wow, that would've been pretty funny...

Agreed, but I totally disagree that ENT should have revived the outdated Klingon look, unless it were to really go whole hog and deliberately make everything, from sets to effects, look as old-fashioned as TOS. (Which reminds me, I still think I had a pretty good idea in arguing that the SW prequels should've been in b&w...) Otherwise, I would've been fine with no explanation for the change, and definitely think ENT made the right call in keeping the standard Klingon look.