Has Enterprise ever messed up the continuity?

Discussion in 'Enterprise' started by Garren, Aug 9, 2014.

  1. Garren

    Garren Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2014
    I remember when Enterprise first started, I watched the first few episodes before walking away. I want to go back to it after I complete Voyager.

    I always wondered though, as a prequel series, did Enterprise ever mess with the continuity of the show as we knew it during TNG or TOS? Were there any obvious continuity errors or plot holes?

    I'm just curious about that. The Star Trek continuity is vast and I could easily see mistakes happening.
     
  2. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    See the videos in my sig for the biggest ones. Although I don't think any in ENT match Voyager's idea of warp speed versus TOS' (also among the clips in my vids)
     
  3. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk The Real Me Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    Down in the tube station at midnight
    No more or less than any of the other shows. The era ENT was set in was pretty much untouched by the other shows.
     
  4. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, MO, USA
    I don't think ENT messed up continuity as much as it added things to continuity that was never referenced in later eras.
     
  5. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Hear, hear. Every Trek series has reinterpreted elements of the continuity or introduced errors. TOS itself had a fairly wobbly continuity, since it was inventing so much as it went. TWOK contains some huge continuity errors vis-a-vis "Space Seed" and the rest of TOS. TNG was originally intended by Roddenberry as a soft reboot ignoring a lot of TOS continuity, although its other producers ended up tying it in more closely. And so on. The only way it's possible to treat Trek as a consistent reality at all is by glossing over or reconciling the many inconsistencies that have accumulated over the decades.

    So yeah, like any new series in any ongoing franchise, ENT introduced some tweaks and reinterpretations and mistakes. But nothing that's any harder to reconcile that the inconsistencies among (and within) the previous series and movies. A lot of the things that fans initially decried as continuity errors were just divergences from conventional fan belief rather than any actual canon.
     
  6. Garren

    Garren Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2014
    Those videos were great, I watched them all. The bit about the Warp speed was fantastic and I wondered about that when watching that particular Voyager episode.
     
  7. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    Thanks! :)

    I have a couple more Enterprise clips on my HD ready for part 4 (like Sisko's "first Enterprise" comment in DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" referring to Kirk's ship, not Archer's), if I ever get around to it.
     
  8. Count

    Count Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2007
    Location:
    Andromeda Galaxy
    Really the only times I can see where enterprise messed with continuity in any serious way (by serious i mean the most severe infractions, not severe as in destroyed the universe) was in two instances.

    first, the romulans having cloaking devices in the 22nd when they weren't supposed to have been first encountered by humans until the 23rd century (romulans had no cloak before Balance of Terror according to that episode).

    the second time was in season 3 when the enterprise redefined warp coils from being the gigantic supermagnetic rings in the nacelles into a smaller portable device, much like the borg transwarp coil in Dark Frontier.

    But they weren't major really, the first one you can handwave as whatever you like as it didnt really ruin BoT or anything afterwards, the 2nd issue was bigger but you can just chock that up to anachronistic terms for the tech or something, or just pretend it was some other device with an outdated name.
     
  9. Mr. Laser Beam

    Mr. Laser Beam Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    The visitor's bullpen
    I'm prepared to accept the explanation that the novels came up with: the "Minefield" cloak was unproven tech that malfunctioned constantly (notice how the ship keeps cloaking and uncloaking at random moments) and drew so much power that it destroyed the ship. So they abandoned it, basically.
     
  10. Melakon

    Melakon Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2012
    Location:
    Melakon's grave
    I was watching an episode the other day and noticed the doorbell for crew quarters or Archer's ready room was a 24th century door chime, not a Kirk-era door buzzer.
     
  11. Mr. Laser Beam

    Mr. Laser Beam Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    The visitor's bullpen
    Oh, the humanity. :guffaw:
     
  12. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    That doesn't fix the issue, which is that Spock thought cloaking devices were a theoretical technology in 2266. That the Romulan cloaks worked at all (and their minefield cloaks worked perfectly) violates that - not to mention the Xyrillians and Suliban having cloaking technology which was known to humans in the 2150's.

    Really, Spock's dialogue in "Balance of Terror" was to inform the audience at home (long before it became a standard scifi trope) that there is some scientific theory behind the seeming magic of invisible spaceships.
     
  13. SPCTRE

    SPCTRE Badass Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Location:
    Kiel
    Can't wait! :techman:
     
  14. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    That's not a problem. Cloaks have been penetrated and reinvented multiple times in the franchise -- e.g. in TUC Spock figured out how to track a cloaked ship by its exhaust, but by TNG that method no longer worked. It's just common sense that there'd be a constant arms race between stealth and detection, that there's not just one cloaking technology but multiple separate ones based on different principles. It's easy enough to surmise that the cloaking tech seen in the 22nd century was just some kind of holographic camouflage that Starfleet was able to penetrate and that fell out of use, and that the cloak in "Balance of Terror" was a new breakthrough in "true" invisibility of a type that had been deemed impractical.


    That's no worse than "Dead Stop" redefining "warp plasma" as some kind of fuel that could be stored in drums, rather than the superhot post-annihilation particle stream flowing from the reactor to the warp coils. And no worse than a lot of the sloppy technobabble in Voyager before it. And at least in this case it can be justified by production necessities, in that it would've been too expensive to show them removing a massive structure from the other ship's engines and installing it in Enterprise's nacelle, so they had to make it an affordably small handheld unit.



    Invisibility was a standard science fiction trope since at least 1897, thanks to H.G. Wells. (Actually the first story about a person being made invisible by science was probably Edward Page Mitchell's "The Crystal Man" from 1881.) And there had been previous movies and shows about invisibility, such as 1957's The Invisible Boy, co-starring Robby the Robot. The '50s TV series Rocky Jones, Space Ranger had a "cold light" device that rendered things invisible, and there were several 1940s movie serials that featured invisibility belts, rays, potions, and so forth, including the 1949 Batman and Robin serial. After all, invisibility is an easy special effect to achieve, so it was always a staple of sci-fi film and TV. Audiences at home would've been well aware of it by 1966.
     
  15. Enterprise1701

    Enterprise1701 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Location:
    Sol III, Sector 001, 2016 C.E.
    I too accept the ENT novels' clarification about Romulan cloaks although I think ENT's producers shouldn't have used cloaking devices freely if they were perfectly aware of previous Star Trek.

    That being said, I consider Spock's statements in "Balance of Terror" to mean that currently practical invisiblity was thought to be theoretical. After all, somewhat functional invisibility exists in real life, and I would think that if Star Trek covers World War III in detail, realistic invisibility would be utilized.

    http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jul/19/vanishing-point-five-ways-to-become-invisible
     
  16. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Except most viewers wouldn't know or care that it contradicted a single line of dialogue in a single decades-old episode, and storytellers shouldn't be restricted by slavish adherence to past continuity. I mean, heck, if no Trek production had ever been allowed to contradict a niggling detail from an earlier one, then Spock would be a Vulcanian with a distant human ancestor, the Enterprise would be an Earth ship operated by UESPA, the engines would be powered by lithium crystals, etc.

    Still, while they were perfectly within their rights to choose to disregrard that minor detail, I'd kind of prefer it if they hadn't in this case. I feel cloaks are overused generally in Trek, and it would've helped ENT feel more distinct from the later shows if it hadn't used cloaks.
     
  17. Red Omega

    Red Omega Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2014
    Thanks for adding to the discussion Chris! Love your thoughts here.
     
  18. Saul

    Saul Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    東京
    I think what stings about continuity errors in this show was the fact that people felt the entire show didn't look like a prequel to what came before. I think that opinion is changing now but back when it started 'Enterprise' was a show that wasn't seen as living up to it's own standards.
     
  19. Red Omega

    Red Omega Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2014
    It is very hard for "Enterprise" to win. Do you design forward from present day? or do you design back from TOS? Well, if you do the latter, which is what a lot of hard core fans wanted, you wind up looking like Flash Gordon!

    I have no issues with the design of "Enterprise". I think, especially when Manny Coto came on board in Season 4, they did it right.
     
  20. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    It's silly to expect the future to be designed to look like the 1960s. TOS didn't look that way because it was their ideal preferred vision of the future, but because it was the closest approximation they could manage with the available budget and technology. That's why they were so quick to upgrade the look when Phase II/TMP came along. If Roddenberry had lived longer and been given the chance to redo 23rd-century Trek, or do a 22nd-century prequel, with a present-day budget and technology, there's no question that he would've updated and modernized the look.

    I loved the look of ENT, the beautiful detail and realism of it. I love the touches like the cooling fans on the bridge consoles and the handholds all over the rooms and corridors, a subtle reminder that the gravity plating isn't entirely reliable. It feels like a believable extrapolation into the future. And I think the technology of TOS, if you overlook the '60s-vintage bulbs and switches, actually looks more advanced in some ways, because it doesn't have those realistic details like cooling fans and thus implies a technological level farther removed from our understanding.