^ Yeah, studio politics played a big role as well. UPN was a lousy network. Perhaps it was inevitable that ENT, or any Trek show, would have suffered no matter the ratings or concept.
Robbed of Seasons 5-7
- Thread starter AdmiralBruno
- Start date
I've wondered, at times, what ENTERPRISE would've been like, had Rick Berman not been in the cockpit. It was time for breaking free, for new and exciting experimentation in STAR TREK, for the legacy of it, if nothing more. STAR TREK: The Next Generation should've been the start of something, rather than a template for other spinoffs to follow, if, indeed, spinoffs had to keep getting cranked out. DS9 had so much potential to be wildly different, in its format, and yet ... brought in Worf and a mini-starship and now everything's secure in familiar territory, again. VOYAGER had an interesting premise, only for it to end up becoming abandoned, in favour of keeping within STAR TREK's Comfort Zone. None of this should've happened! All of these spinoffs should've been more like a tossed salad, instead of a smooth mixture, with standout personalities, all of their own. ENTERPRISE was an opportunity to correct that. I love the show, myself, but I'm also intrigued by the possibilities that could've existed. A STAR TREK as radically different from the rest as STAR WARS: The Phantom Menace was from A New Hope ...
Well, there's a pitfall in that, as the Star Wars prequels kinda sucked for the most part!
@2takesfrakes
I don't think DS9 quite deserves all that. If anything, it shows how talented their staff was in working around the "template. " I've no doubt Worf was added as a ratings boost, but they use that addition to its full advantage without taking away from what DS9 was.
But otherwise, I agreewith the sentiment.
I don't think DS9 quite deserves all that. If anything, it shows how talented their staff was in working around the "template. " I've no doubt Worf was added as a ratings boost, but they use that addition to its full advantage without taking away from what DS9 was.
But otherwise, I agreewith the sentiment.
I don't mean to badmouth Deep Space Nine - after all, The Next Generation was a very tough act to follow. Gene Roddenberry had really outdone himself with TNG! Then, of course, he up and dies, having had no say - at all - in the development of this new series. Clearly some obstacles to overcome, there. GR had said it, many times, that STAR TREK would go on, without him, and that it would reach new heights, eventually ... which, of course it did, thanks to JJ Abrams. And GR said he was never jealous over that, or felt threatened by it, in any way. I just wish that Michael Dorn had borrowed a page out of GR's book, regarding the Worf character.
Having him guest star would've been just perfect ... but having him basically taking over the show was a mistake, in my view. When Brent Spiner ended up on ENTERPRISE, in fact, I was kind of like ... "uh-oh! What's THIS going to be about? Are we going to see his face each and every week, from now on?" At least when Jonathan Frakes showed up for his crossover episodes, throughout the franchise, it was clear he wasn't going to stick around. For one thing, he had his new craft as a director, obviously and took to it like a fish to water. But when you see a STAR TREK actor on, whom you know is mostly there, simply because his career won't let him move on ... I'm sorry, but it does take some of the enjoyment out of seeing them, especially when it's, like ... ALL the time.
Having him guest star would've been just perfect ... but having him basically taking over the show was a mistake, in my view. When Brent Spiner ended up on ENTERPRISE, in fact, I was kind of like ... "uh-oh! What's THIS going to be about? Are we going to see his face each and every week, from now on?" At least when Jonathan Frakes showed up for his crossover episodes, throughout the franchise, it was clear he wasn't going to stick around. For one thing, he had his new craft as a director, obviously and took to it like a fish to water. But when you see a STAR TREK actor on, whom you know is mostly there, simply because his career won't let him move on ... I'm sorry, but it does take some of the enjoyment out of seeing them, especially when it's, like ... ALL the time.
Last edited:
Now there's something to think about.
A CW influenced Star Trek Enterprise
Maybe younger cast members and pop songs to close out episodes
You joke, but Paramount was actually pushing a "band of the week" idea for Enterprise...Rick Berman put his foot down on that, which says everything there is to say on how shitty an idea this was.
I agree with you Willow. Currently reading the relaunch books. A bit slow some of them but there are some potential there for episodes of season 5-7. If only.......
To the original question, while it does suck that Enterprise got canceled just when it was gelling, I can't say we were robbed. The series should've been better from jump. I mean the first couple seasons had some really boring episodes and the character-work, even during the much better later seasons, wasn't all that great. I like Scott Bakula but his Archer always came off as constipated. I didn't find him an inspiring leader so all the times they said he was great or important it felt more like telling than showing.
Also some of the other characters were also poorly developed or not fully realized, but the plots from the later seasons kept me watching. I largely skipped the first two seasons, but that Season 2 finale got me intrigued and when Season 4 got going with all of the innovative mini-arcs I was liking the show better than Voyager, which had been my previous Trek bete noire. I just wish Manny Coto had been there from Season 1, heck during the development of the show's Bible. I think we would have gotten a much better show that might have made it season 7.
Outside of that, Enterprise had the misfortune of premiering during a golden age of television drama and it looked stodgy beside shows like Alias, 24, Battlestar Galactica, and even some of failed sci-fi shows like Threshold and Invasion.
Also some of the other characters were also poorly developed or not fully realized, but the plots from the later seasons kept me watching. I largely skipped the first two seasons, but that Season 2 finale got me intrigued and when Season 4 got going with all of the innovative mini-arcs I was liking the show better than Voyager, which had been my previous Trek bete noire. I just wish Manny Coto had been there from Season 1, heck during the development of the show's Bible. I think we would have gotten a much better show that might have made it season 7.
Outside of that, Enterprise had the misfortune of premiering during a golden age of television drama and it looked stodgy beside shows like Alias, 24, Battlestar Galactica, and even some of failed sci-fi shows like Threshold and Invasion.
Starfleet Academy. I like it. Tom Welling as a young Robert April or George Kirk for example. Though seriously, CW is doing well with genre programming and The 100 (which I haven't watched) seems to be doing well. So maybe a younger skewing Trek show wouldn't be a bad thing. I mean the franchise needs younger fans.
I really didn't care for Archer in season one for this reason. He really came off as a petulant child and his childlike grudge against T'Pol for existing wore thin. Eventually, I sought out Quantum Leap and saw what SB was capable of, and it's a damn shame he got saddled with such a shifty character.
Ironically, back in the days when the Tucker love was off the scale here, some of the most vocal advocates of offing Archer in favor of Tucker being captain came from Bakula fans who came into this show because they were QL fans.
Ain't humans neat?
We certainly needed his passion, for sure.
I was one of the Coto fangirls at the time because it felt like we fans weren't being dismissed or ignored...but good as those stories are in their own right, season four is where a TV show should be forging along with its own identity. I wished they'd ever addressed the aftermath of the Xindi War besides the one episode of Home. Instead it was all TOS all the time, with the horrendous Chinese counterfeit TNG episode capping off the series (and the whole of Trek for the foreseeable future).
I'm reminded of a review by a poster named @Samuel T. Cogley , where he mentioned this. He made mention of how a few other shows had ended their seasons in 2003 (the end of ENT's second season) and how their fandoms were talking and speculation on the effects of such plots. As one example, on Smallville--one of our direct competitors--Clark Kent's physiology was somehow responsible for his adoptive mother's miscarriage. Shows like Alias of course had their own big game changers.
And what did we have to speculate on? The new colors of T'Pol's catsuit.
:/
Anna,
It's funny that you mention the QL fans because I was one of them. I mean when I heard that Bakula got the nod to be captain on Enterprise I was cool with it because I enjoyed him as Beckett on QL. So I was really disappointed to see how poorly Archer was depicted and how constrained and uncomfortable Bakula often looked in the role early on. I think that the original idea of Jackson Archer they should've just went with. (Bit of a side note, for the more Indiana Jones/cowboy Jackson Archer conception of the character, I think Dennis Quaid would've been awesome).
Bakula wasn't so bad in the pilot, when it felt like the Jackson idea held some sway. I was okay with him being a smart mouthed jerk, even being a boor with a bias against Vulcans. However either the producers or the studio didn't go all in on that and give him an arc that would've really bore fruit when Archer held Surak's katra. Because they soft pedaled that, Archer holding Surak's spirit and how that experience might change him and mature him wasn't really explored.
I also think the show or studio didn't want Archer being a bigot or being seen that way so they often had his prejudices against the Vulcans justified by making the Vulcans often in the wrong and I thought that was not the right way to go and actually sent a more negative message than having Archer start out as a person with a grudge-some of it unfounded-and he learns and grows throughout the series.
I do think the writers handled Trip much better and I would've been fine if Trip or that character had been the captain. (Recalling when Trip took over during the Vulcan-Andorian conflict in Season 4. I would've liked to have seen more of that). Because Trip did to on that journey-though they pulled back on allowing him to fully go vengeful against the Xindi-but nonetheless, he also had some issues with the Vulcans and grew due to his relationship with T'Pol. I feel that in many ways Enterprise was Trip's series. He got a lot of the best material and character growth, though sometimes it was as haphazard as it was for the other cast members. Despite my not liking the series finale, it did feel fitting that it would be Trip that died because he's the character the show invested the most in and who's death would have the biggest impact.
I think I get what you're saying about Season 4, but I just really liked that season because the show was finally delivering on its promise of being a prequel to the original series. That being said, if they had done a better job of spacing out those homages and linkages throughout the shows run instead of packing them all in during the final season in a desperate attempt to regain viewers or to stanch the bleeding then maybe it would have felt more organic to Enterprise. But be that as it may I enjoyed Season 4 a lot more because of those linkages.
Before Enterprise had so much to play with and rarely knew what to do with it.
And I agree with you that Enterprise often wasn't compelling enough, until it was too late. It rested on its laurels, assuming perhaps that Trek fandom would remain and that its numbers were good enough even for UPN, but even that didn't work. There wasn't much gripping or water cooler moments with Trek, compared to say Battlestar Galactica even. Trek being a cash cow, being the franchise player for UPN, the skittishness of the suits likely hurt the show in a mortal way because the characters weren't allowed to be flawed enough and the stakes weren't as hard hitting or visceral to appeal to early 21st audiences.
And regarding UPN, which at the time was network that doing shows to appeal to diverse audiences, Enterprise looked out of sync; more diversity among the Enterprise cast might have helped somewhat, even despite the weak writing. Right off the back, having a Latino/a captain for example would've been some good press that the show needed.
It's funny that you mention the QL fans because I was one of them. I mean when I heard that Bakula got the nod to be captain on Enterprise I was cool with it because I enjoyed him as Beckett on QL. So I was really disappointed to see how poorly Archer was depicted and how constrained and uncomfortable Bakula often looked in the role early on. I think that the original idea of Jackson Archer they should've just went with. (Bit of a side note, for the more Indiana Jones/cowboy Jackson Archer conception of the character, I think Dennis Quaid would've been awesome).
Bakula wasn't so bad in the pilot, when it felt like the Jackson idea held some sway. I was okay with him being a smart mouthed jerk, even being a boor with a bias against Vulcans. However either the producers or the studio didn't go all in on that and give him an arc that would've really bore fruit when Archer held Surak's katra. Because they soft pedaled that, Archer holding Surak's spirit and how that experience might change him and mature him wasn't really explored.
I also think the show or studio didn't want Archer being a bigot or being seen that way so they often had his prejudices against the Vulcans justified by making the Vulcans often in the wrong and I thought that was not the right way to go and actually sent a more negative message than having Archer start out as a person with a grudge-some of it unfounded-and he learns and grows throughout the series.
I do think the writers handled Trip much better and I would've been fine if Trip or that character had been the captain. (Recalling when Trip took over during the Vulcan-Andorian conflict in Season 4. I would've liked to have seen more of that). Because Trip did to on that journey-though they pulled back on allowing him to fully go vengeful against the Xindi-but nonetheless, he also had some issues with the Vulcans and grew due to his relationship with T'Pol. I feel that in many ways Enterprise was Trip's series. He got a lot of the best material and character growth, though sometimes it was as haphazard as it was for the other cast members. Despite my not liking the series finale, it did feel fitting that it would be Trip that died because he's the character the show invested the most in and who's death would have the biggest impact.
I think I get what you're saying about Season 4, but I just really liked that season because the show was finally delivering on its promise of being a prequel to the original series. That being said, if they had done a better job of spacing out those homages and linkages throughout the shows run instead of packing them all in during the final season in a desperate attempt to regain viewers or to stanch the bleeding then maybe it would have felt more organic to Enterprise. But be that as it may I enjoyed Season 4 a lot more because of those linkages.
Before Enterprise had so much to play with and rarely knew what to do with it.
And I agree with you that Enterprise often wasn't compelling enough, until it was too late. It rested on its laurels, assuming perhaps that Trek fandom would remain and that its numbers were good enough even for UPN, but even that didn't work. There wasn't much gripping or water cooler moments with Trek, compared to say Battlestar Galactica even. Trek being a cash cow, being the franchise player for UPN, the skittishness of the suits likely hurt the show in a mortal way because the characters weren't allowed to be flawed enough and the stakes weren't as hard hitting or visceral to appeal to early 21st audiences.
And regarding UPN, which at the time was network that doing shows to appeal to diverse audiences, Enterprise looked out of sync; more diversity among the Enterprise cast might have helped somewhat, even despite the weak writing. Right off the back, having a Latino/a captain for example would've been some good press that the show needed.
Last edited:
At the time it would not have worked to have a more "serious" show there. It's only recently that the CW has "matured". I've seen all seasons of The 100 and I quite enjoy it. It's much darker than you might expect from a channel skewed to a younger audience.
I never really liked Archer, although he became more tolerable as the seasons progressed. In fact I've never quite cared for most of the Trek captains, with the exception of Kirk and Sisko.
My main complaint isn't that he's so inexperienced, something that would be expected given his background and the time period, but that he's so inept, lacking in common sense and seldom seems to learn from his mistakes. It's often blind luck that helps him, and the crew. And yet he gets to be hero-worshipped by the crew, whose advice he often doesn't take and who he often yells to. Saying one's great does not make one great. But the writers keep having him do stupid heroic deeds. Back in the days we called that Super!Archer.
I've never seen Quantum Leap so I can't really judge Bakula the actor.
The reason they did what they did in season four is that finally a great Trek fan, Manny Coto, was in charge and he could do more or less what he wanted. And he probably saw the writing on the wall and decided to pack the season with all that prequellian stuff because it was now or never. Ideally yes, it would have been better to space the stories out over the show's run, but given how Bermaga ran things, and what the studio mandated, that was, alas, never in the cards.
@Kevin Thomas Riley , I highly recommend watch Bakula in any non-Enterprise role. He got a shit deal with this show.
In the ten years since we were regular posters here together, I've actually served in the American Navy. For all my problems with the clusterfuck that our military leadership has, there's no way that a guy who was such an open bigot and so reckless to ignore good advice and put his crew in needless danger as Archer did would be relieved of command in quick fashion....assuming he'd manage to keep a career in the military that long. I had the misfortune of having leadership that was at odds with each other, and it's not fun, least of all when people would override others in front of junior enlisted.
Military knowledge has made the early seasons of this show pretty difficult to watch.
In the ten years since we were regular posters here together, I've actually served in the American Navy. For all my problems with the clusterfuck that our military leadership has, there's no way that a guy who was such an open bigot and so reckless to ignore good advice and put his crew in needless danger as Archer did would be relieved of command in quick fashion....assuming he'd manage to keep a career in the military that long. I had the misfortune of having leadership that was at odds with each other, and it's not fun, least of all when people would override others in front of junior enlisted.
Military knowledge has made the early seasons of this show pretty difficult to watch.
Just gotta remember, though: Starfleet isn't 'the military' It's Starfleet.
I know, but it's still irritating.
In fact, I'd think Starfleet would be even less tolerant of Archer than our own military would be.
I don't know what you think about archer from season 3+4 as a leader and I can't comment as I have neither any military experience or remember season's 3+4 that well as it has been a while since I saw them. But as for season 1 and to a certain extent season 2 I always truly believed that there were better people on earth that could have commanded Enterprise for it's first mission but for starfleet to pull a PR exercise with having Jonathan Archer as CO.
I must admit ... Jonathan Archer's selection as commander does smack of politics, rather than practicality.
Groomed from childhood he was by the crazed rants of his mentally unstable father that the Vulcan's should not be trusted. As a child, barrelling through the Warp 5 complex, Johnny played tag in the hallways with the interns and engineers babysitting him.
That ship was made for him.
That ship was made for him.
Last edited:
... Oh, the Dear!!!
Similar threads
