OK let me explain. I watched Broken Bow and switched off. I'd loved growing up with TNG, DS9 and VOY. I disowned Enterprise because I felt it was a step backwards. We wpuldn't get to many bits from the trek I knew. That was the thinking of teenage me. In the eyars to pass, especially with Season 4 connecting more to the Star Trek I know, I grew to accept Enterprise more and more. I do like it's aesthetic also. Interestingly enough it wasn't until I saw New Voyages that I went back and watched The Original Series. Did anyone else have to do the same thing?
Enterprise earned a 5-7 Season as much as and of the spin-offs. It was the shitty network they were on that sealed their fate.
I didn't like it when I originally watched it. At that point all of seen was TOS. I decided to watch trek in order of release instead of chronological order because of that. After watching TNG DS9 and Voyager, I tried it again and found I really liked it, which I find wierd, since it seems to be the most welcoming series to newcomers outside of Tos
I liked Enterprise after I saw Broken Bow first aired.It reminded of why I liked Tos so much it was because of the characters. I liked Trip and T'Pol and Phlox. And the reast of the Enterprise crew.
Not blown away by seasons one and two, disliked season three (although I appreciated they were trying to move away from the tired episodic format), utterly hated the temporal cold war and loved season four...
With the pilot, I remember being disappointed, actually, because I'd hoped it would've been more like Apollo 13, or Mission to Mars, or some NASA show like that. Instead it was pretty much what STAR TREK had always been, except for calling starship weapons corny names and shit like that. But once I got past that, it wasn't bad. Season 3 is when I thought -ENTERPRISE- really hit its stride and I was quite loving it ... very good stuff, Season 3. And then Season 4 came along ... These Are The Voyages was the only real highlight, for me. The rest of the season seemed to be on some kind of a template, where episodes were never that great, but never that bad, either. Definitely the weakest season, but by then, I was already hooked on ENT and was ready for more ... so much more!
I loved "Broken Bow", but was turned off by the rest of seasons one and two, bar "Regeneration" and one or two others. Season 3 got me loving the show.
Holy shit, yes. I thought the pilot was ok but everything felt a bit off and then the decon scene happened. I think I watched a couple of other Season 1 episodes but was unimpressed and stopped watching. One day I found Jammer's Reviews and his review of "Damage" made me come back check out some other episodes. Like all the other Treks I think the show is good but flawed.
I have to say it's grown on me over the years. In its first airing, I think Enterprise was suffering from the curse of unmet expectations. B&B sold us on the idea that Enterprise was going to be different -- so different, in fact, that it didn't even need Star Trek in the title. But the differences were extremely superficial. Polarized hull plating was the same as raised shields -- right down to the percentage countdown, after which the next hit would doom the ship. Phase pistols and cannons were simple phasers; they didn't even bother to change the special effects from other series. And don't get me started on the Akiraprise. But that's just the treknology. As for stories and characters, the show seemed very much like a redressed TNG. We even saw the Ferengi, Borg, and Risa too. Plots and ideas were minimally adjusted. And while we saw a bit of the cool stuff that make prequels so exciting -- like Archer's growing relationship with Shran, for example -- overall the show followed the same formula that we were told was tired and unworkable and needed to change. (And, frankly, for some guys who complained mightily about the restrictions of Star Trek, I found it a bit offensive that they were so unimaginative when they had the chance to create something new that would appeal to us as fans.) Fast Forward a decade or so, and I find myself rewatching the show. And to be honest, I'm quite enjoying it. But that's because I turned it on with the expectation of watching Star Trek. I wasn't expecting something different. I knew what I was turning on, and was pleased with the product. The adventures of Captain Archer and his crew are just another chapter in a series of stories that I've known and loved since childhood. And, seen in that light, the show is great; even wonderful. I just started the second season, and everything about it seems perfect. The characters found their footing, I'm enjoying the dynamic between Archer and T'Pol. Trip is always a pleasure to watch. There are a lot about Enterprise to enjoy once you get over the idea that it was ever supposed to be different.
I think Enterprise did suffer greatly from being last in line. People were still chapped by Voyager's finale and two of the TNG films being critical failures. If the Star Trek series were the Brady Bunch kids, Enterprise was Cousin Oliver. I agree that they should've stepped up and actually did something new with Trek if they were so constrained by it. But for what it is, it's not the worst thing to come out of UPN's wretched existence.
I don't know if they complained about the restrictions of Star Trek so much as the ones UPN put on them (at least that's what's in the Blu Ray interviews). Because UPN didn't really want a prequel, we have them to thank for the Temporal Cold War. And to be fair, the network did push ENT right away after Voyager ended. Braga said he wanted to wait but the network wouldn't let him do it. That's probably why B&B lost their creative mojo and they knew it. Otherwise, they wouldn't have stepped aside for Manny Coto.
If be inclined to agree if they hadn't been moaning about it since TNG -- about needing more conflict, flawed characters, concerns about canon, etc. Enterprise (sans Star Trek) was supposed to untie their hands (no pun intended).
I liked ENT from the pilot on myself (and I'm primarily an old TOS era fan myself - saw the original run of 'Star Trek's third season on NBC at age 6 and was hooked from then on.) Interesting thing though: Your reaction to 'Broken Bow' was EXACTLY my reaction to TNG's pilot episode "Encounter At Farpoint" in 1987; and the only reason I stuck with and eventually came to accept and like TNG for what it was (despite GR's near complete rectonning on LARGE aspects of the Star Trek universe at the time) was because it was the first live-action/filmed Star Trek on TV in 18 years at that point. So it's interesting for me to read the reaction of someone who grew up with TNG as "their Star Trek" reacting to a later Star Trek series in a totally different Star Trek era (22nd century as compared to 24th.)
I was not aware of this. I was little during TNG's run so I didn't follow interviews back then. I'm not sure if crying wolf is the right word but Braga does have a history of doing that when it comes to tied hands. For now, let's assume Braga was exaggerating or lying on the Blu Rays. With UPN badly mismanaging time slots (ex: preemption for sports games) and some very inaccurate commercials, it's possible that they meddled in some pretty dumb ways. One of their ideas was to use a boy band of the week. If I remember correctly, DS9 supposedly checked the boxes of more conflict and flawed characters. I'm not sure why they needed ENT for that (though these things were entirely appropriate for pre-Federation times).
...HA!!! That amused! To me, it wouldn't have been any different than watching Trip in the engine room, handing out assignments to actual, Real Life astronauts (!!!), who had lines, even. NASA wouldn't let movies or TV shows use their official emblem, now, it's like the US government's putting its official stamp on a STAR TREK series. It's a little jarring to me, actually ...