If Enterprise was the first spinoff
- Thread starter suarezguy
- Start date
Close. Corby killed her and himself. It is on several streaming services if you care to revisit it.
Bragga's choice in how he depicted the Vulcan's on Enterprise was a major reason I stopped watching halfway through season 2, If memory serves. and Jolene Blalock was the absolute worst actor ever hired to be a regular character on Star Trek. So a Roddenberry version of Enterprise could only have been an improvement.
Based on Season 1 of TNG a 1980's version of Enterprise would be ultra boring. Archer pontificating how advance humans are from their 21st century ancestors, the Vulcans would be benevolent guides, T'Pol would be a love instructor, Trip would be her student, Phlox three wives and husbands would be part of the crew, Hoshi would be the navigator with Mayweather saying 'Hailing frequencies open' and Reed would play a Frenchman with a British accent.
I liked the version of the ENT Vulcans, go back a 100 years and people would consider the British a bunch of arrogant assholes dues to their empire. A lot can happen in 100 years.
I liked the version of the ENT Vulcans, go back a 100 years and people would consider the British a bunch of arrogant assholes dues to their empire. A lot can happen in 100 years.
Yeah T'Pau, Stonn, Sarek and T'Pring were paragons of Vulcan virtue. And Spock was a saint.
You fallaciously exaggerate. T'Pau was very cordial. Stonn and T'Pring were looking to protect their love. Sarek was stoic. Ent Vulcans came across much more militaristic and conspiratorial. Very different in demeanor.
If Enterprise was the first spinoff, it would have likely been one season and done. The show just didn't fit with TOS. It was poorly conceived and didn't jibe well with canon.
TNG was much more careful with that.
I think if Enterprise was the first spinoff, we might have seen a show about the true Enterprise, maybe in the Captain April era, like Diane Carey's books. It would have made more sense. It would be familiar, but not too familiar.
TNG was much more careful with that.
I think if Enterprise was the first spinoff, we might have seen a show about the true Enterprise, maybe in the Captain April era, like Diane Carey's books. It would have made more sense. It would be familiar, but not too familiar.
And why not its 100 years in their past, very few real life nation states carry the same cultural attitude they had 100 years ago. 100 years ago in some places women did not have the vote, could not own property, needed a man to get a loan or mortgage, had to leave work when they got married. People like me were being lynched after church on Sundays.
And the folks running things were still part of the human race.
I have a same argument and still could not get any anti argument:
As we know from season 4 and novels, Vulcan society challenged with so many radical changes. Why would all these have no impact on them? It is pointless.
Achh another issue about Vulcan TOS: there is no accurate "the Vulcan" at TOS, not even Spock is always Spock. Nimoy the Magnificent, himself was very angry and disappointed how writer and producers dealt with Spock figure, wrote many letters to avoid the inconsistency and unfortunately, is not always taken seriously. Some of these briefs can be find at "I am not Spock and "I am Spock" . So, why this inconsistently Vulcan prototype is unchangeable like as a holly book, even with 100 years difference? I really do not understand. Who decided this? Is it something about being canon-belt Trekkie?
One last word here:
So far I understand you are talking about a show which you didn't completely watch and it was for 16 years. 16 years! Why so sharp statements? For example for me, who watch the show more than four times, Ms Blalock is best Vulcan actor. (Nimoy is out of competition, so first Cardassianer Marc Alaimo or first Denobulaner John Billingsley). Her acting is very believable, has no tend to overacting or being wooden. She can reflect all her emotions a kind of a subtle way, from desire to horror with her eyes and lips. She is perfect at "Similitude", "Damage", "Demons", "Terra Prime", "Breaking the Ice".. I find the ENT Vulcans never A-holes, they are very reasonable, mature and not always (unjustified) suspicious against humankind.
I do not mean everyone who watched the show must have same impressions as me. Please not to be offended but, would not be fair to show and discussants here first watch the show?
The time period ENT was set in was fine, although I might have liked it better if the same general concepts were set sixty odd years sooner.
And if we're going to pull from the novels of someone named Diane, then Diane Duane please. Her grasp of Star Trek was without equal, as was her universe building.
If premiered in the late 1980's it wouldn't have to jibe with the three 24th century series just TOS and the first four TOS movies. No problems there.
What canon problems did you having in mind?
And it would not have been created/conceived by Rick Berman and Brannon Braga, the creators would have been Gerrold, Fontana, Justman and Roddenberry.
They were engaged in a military confrontation with another interstellar power.
So far I understand you are talking about a show which you didn't completely watch and it was for 16 years. 16 years! Why so sharp statements? … I do not mean everyone who watched the show must have same impressions as me. Please not to be offended but, would not be fair to show and discussants here first watch the show?
I appreciate and respect the fact we have different outlooks on this, but let me say that giving a TV series a year and a half to impress is FAR more than fair - in fact I would submit it is unreasonable, irrational, to say it isn't. Star Trek: Enterprise was, in my opinion, a loathsome mess and Ms. Blalock's awful acting was one of the reasons I gave up on it. I will say I checked up on it a time or two in season 3, but I saw no improvement. Clearly the worst of all Star Trek's to date. Hell, even the fifth season of Babylon 5 was better.
Some folks love bleu cheese. Some folks hate bleu cheese. I hate bleu cheese. Star Trek: Enterprise = Bleu Cheese. TOS=Filet Mignon. DS9=Fine wine … you get the picture.
Some folks love bleu cheese. Some folks hate bleu cheese. I hate bleu cheese. Star Trek: Enterprise = Bleu Cheese. TOS=Filet Mignon. DS9=Fine wine … you get the picture.
No, we are not talking about taste.
If you only say I hate ENT, I would say "it says nothing to me about ENT, but you" nevertheless, you are not saying only this. You are talking about your lovely Vulcans from TOS and VOY. Well, I understand where you stand, if you do not change yourself and your meaning at last 16 years, why should Vulcans change at 100 years? I would say it is only 2500 years as Heraclitus said "Panta chōrei kai ouden menei kai dis es ton auton potamon ouk an embaies" . Or much more better Bilge Khagan said only 1400 years before "Time is only for god, mankind will not live forever"
You are talking about Roddenberry and you find DS9 fine wine? Darkest, most brutal and religious/mystic franchise ..and Roddenberry? Really? What do you think, what kind of DS9 version of Roddenberry will be an improvement? You find ENT which is about hope, learning from own mistakes, being mature, taking responsibility, believing diplomacy and peace, is loathsome mess, still accept Roddenberry as relevant instance but find DS9 a fine wine? How contradictory is it?
I like DS9, but to be honest, it is less Roddenberry-conform ST. You find Ms Blalocks acting awful but two franchises wonderful which are famous with having two most overacting lead actors? Ok, that is taste issue. Under this new light, I can understand your position.
I noticed that you are trying to articulating with in relative terms now, but fall again same motive and name the ENT worst ST. It is not fact, it is your opinion, as my opinion it is the best franchise (TOS is out of competition). Both are opinions, not facts. To give a qualified commentary or expertise, first step is always to know about subject matter, no matter what is the topic. And no, nein, njet 16 years old uncompleted information is not enough to a rational and reasonable judgement. Additionally, hate is very very strong word for my vocabulary .It cannot be a healthy basis for any discussion. In my opinon who defined himself as hater, is already disqualified himself for every productive conversation which is the main reason, why I am here
I have to say sorry to all who read the thread, until now, I could not carry on too much for the main topic.
What about Knight Rider, whose executive producer is also Battlestar Galactica's ? Very widely audition is guaranteed. Allegory would be the dissolution of Soviets, then the rivals would be Klingons.
Instead Bush-Jr look-alike we had a young Reagan look-alike. 
Folks, since I don't see anyone changing their opinions anytime soon, I suggest you agree to disagree and celebrate these diverse viewpoints in good Vulcan fashion.
And maybe get back on topic?
And maybe get back on topic?
Similar threads
