Bad world building of Enterprise

We get a fully formed and realised Starfleet with a clear purpose and the same ethos and ideals as we see in the 23rd and 24th centuries, despite basically just being created and only having a few ships at their disposal. There's no learning curve. Enterprise is a super ship that forms the Federation all by itself within the space of a few years. The political situation of the Alpha Quadrant at this time isn't really established, despite the fact the tyrannical Klingon and Romulan empires would have been the major powers during this era. We never get a sense what their influence is.

A primitive Starfleet with limited capabilities reacts to the Klingons just like they did in the 24th century. You might imagine discovering the existence of a huge interstellar empire controlled by an aggressive alien species who could easily invade Earth would lead to a massive ship building effort to defend Earth and its interests. Better writing could have shown the Klingon Empire to be a dangerous bullying galactic super power that motivates Starfleet to create alliances (that eventually becomes the Federation) in order to counter this threat. Instead it was over a Romulan drone.

So basically it was a good concept that was badly executed, let down by bad writing, bland miscast characters and dreadful world building.

 

And one that is only four days away.

 

But why would the Klingons and the Romulans be major powers in that so-called era??? How in the world would their territories be so close when Starfleet's so-called primitive tech should make it a lifetime for their NX series to make it to their particular existence??? They -- humans, and even Vulcans* -- shouldn't even know who they are; we should've seen Enterprise and the races we know be on the same playing field, growing to become the mega powers we know. What we should've gotten was an imaginary society or societies who were the major powers who were about to fall. Something to form the UFP or something humans can learn from and not to repeat those mistakes again. The annoying thing about ENT was it's whole intent was to say to the audience everything TOS did on Star Trek, Archer and crew did it first! The same f^cking thing is going on in that piece of sh*t show called Discovery. I mean, Jesus, these non-imaginitive writers can't figure out they have a whole canvas to paint all over on, but all they can do is rewrite stuff which were done better and sh*t all over it just to make Michael Burnham and company to look better. What a f^cking waste?

Why is Starfleet even calling their space an Alpha Quadrant??? They shouldn't have gotten that far to divide the Milky Way Galaxy??? I wouldn't have minded every season finale NX-01 encounter a Klingon or whatever but it would have to be clear starfleet doesn't know who they are, and Klingons and other known races should be completely different from what we know but present hints at what they will become, but the goal posts were set closer on those lazy shows.

*In that so-called era Vulcans were called Vulcanians but thanks to the lazy form of retconning they were called Vulcans all along and pissing on the great work done on TOS. Why??? Because those hollow minds in Hollywood think they're smarter than the pioneers who created Star Trek and they simply think their sh*t don't stink.

 

Well Earth was supposed to fight a major war with Romulans around this time (with repercussions lasting into the 24th century), although in far more primitive ships and using atomic weapons than seen in ENT. In fact Romulans were using cloaking technology and Earth was familiar with such technology a century before TOS, despite TOS appearing to suggest it was an entirely new technology in Balance of Terror.

Not sure when Klingons were supposed to have been first encountered before it was established in ENT, although it was probably later than the era ENT is set in and certainly not in a cornfield in Oklahoma.

Agree with a lot of your points!

 

No! Earth from TOS universe had a major conflict with the Romulans in the early portions of Kirk's era in the 22nd Century (watch "Tomorrow is Yesterday", and "Space Seed" for proof of his timeline and not those bullsh*t retcon books and the praises of no facts from some members on this forum). Lt. Stiles specifically states he served and knew colleagues who fought in this war, so the conflict was within reach from Kirk's era and wasn't that long ago. What your talking about is a horrible concoction from ignorant producers and writers who conjured something up retroactively. It all depends what you believe in, I believe what was told in Balance of Terror is the truth, for me there's no in fact of anything coming from those f^cking no talented hacks from ENT and DISCO, so I don't give a sh*t what those people try to shove into Trek lore. The reason why is because none of the things they're shoveling made any sense, and never will, but I'd read many naive fans on this forum desperately trying to make sense of this level of bullsh*t.

Take this as you like, I don't believe ENT is a prequel to TOS, and neither is DISCO. There are too many "mine" "mine" changes from the brasses in Hollywood which conflicts with what I know from TOS. TOS is true and the rest can go to hell.

 

Ehhhmm... Calm down people. I have too many critics about bad writing of ENT, but I do not get your points. Your meanings are your meanings, well but they are not facts.

I won't pay any cents for NBC/Paramount while they keep their unrespectful attitude towards fans, so I didn't watch Discovery and you are at the wrong forum, if you want to talk about it. Only similarity between both shows is they are prequels to TOS. Discovery takes place a century after ENT and a decade before TOS. If you want to compare DIS/STD/DISCO (whatever the people call it) compare with TOS, comparing it with ENT makes less sense.

A prequel means backstory, what has happened before the original story, so to say origins of the narrative. That is what ENT did, that was the reason why the show existed. How they can tell their story without being first? They didn't /couldn't get the same solutions which we knew from TOS or TNG and it is only logical. The crew or captain were not idealized Federation citizens, UFP didn't exist, they couldn't count on with almighty Starfleet, even they didn't have their Prime Directive. Furthermore, they were much naive and unprepared than they should be. Well, they did too many mistakes, they learned from them and we get the some clarifications about the ST universe. What's your point?

All the societies (Human, Vulcan, Andorian, Klingon, Romulan..) that we saw at the ENT are mostly taking challenges with their own demons. Klingons was not exception and there is no reason to think about they dominate somewhere in the Galaxy. On the contrary, we heard about there was a time that Klingon society was not a warrior society that we know and there are still living witnesses of this time (see Judgement). As we know from world history, a hundred years is a very long time for a civilization. Think about European Countries, archenemies for almost 2000 years in every combination have longest peace era after WWII and consider each other (at least still most of them) as best allies. How many French and German guys believe it for hundred years before? So why should we believe that Klingon, Vulcan, Human societies should be stay frozen? I think, it is one of the brilliant aspects of ENT to show the dynamics of those civilizations.

If you refer the Balance of Terror you should remember this quotes:

SPOCK: Referring to the map on your screens, you will note beyond the moving position of our vessel, a line of Earth outpost stations. Constructed on asteroids, they monitor the Neutral Zone established by treaty after the Earth-Romulan conflict a century ago
..
STILES: We know Outpost four has been attacked, sir, so if we intercept Romulans now
KIRK: After a whole century, what will a Romulan ship look like, Mister Stiles? I doubt they'll radio and identify themselves.
STILES: You'll know, sir. They're painted like a giant bird-of-prey.
KIRK: I had no idea that history was your specialty.
STILES: Family history. There was a Captain Stiles was in the space service then. Two Commanders and several junior officers. All lost in that war, sir.
KIRK: Their war, Mister Stiles. Not yours. Don't forget it.

Do you mean Spock and Kirk are wrong and telling bullshit, but you know better? Is there any other TOS than I quoted here? Please clarify it to me what I could not understand as a naive fan and not native speaker from these lines? I want to know, why do you sure, main conflict is at the time of TOS, show me your quotes, lines, facts. When Stilles talking about his lost colleagues? Please, enlighten me!
And one other thing, writing "f^cking" or "bullsh*t" does not make your language better, please try to keep netiquette.
Thank you!

 

From purely a creative standpoint and storytelling possibilities it may have been better to have a Star Trek with different sort of dynamics at play where there is no Federation and Earth has to contend with a despotic interstellar empire being the biggest power in known galaxy. Klingons are shown as being on the same level as Vulcans and Adorians in terms of power and influence despite in series set after ENT being a major antagonist of the giant interstellar alliance of the Federation.

There's also the fact that just 100 years from first contact and Earth taking its first steps into exploring the stars, the protagonists have 24th century enlightened views about alien life and at ease with it all, despite it being shown in TOS that humans are still very prejudicial about extraterrestrials. ENT even has an alien doctor.

 

Well, everyone has their own imagination, also the writers/producers. Art was/is never free from economical aspects, if you can a TV-show as an art product. Maybe for a TV show most important aspect is the commercial one. That's why I can understand why TPTB choose Discovery's direction, they need more larger fan basis. If the decision made correctly, we will see. For ENT, with all my critic I would say, it was OK. At ENT Klingons were never major antagonist and not the "the thread that binds us". Sorry, but fight against an all evil, omnipotent enemy is soo cold turkey, done million times before and DS9 did it very excellent. Why ENT should make it again?

Do you sure, did you watch the ENT? It was even issue of pilot episode. One of the main critics about ENT was crews especially Archer's xenophobic attitude against T'Pol. How many times he ignored her suggestions and didn't trust enough after she already showed her loyalty in many occasions? Even very shy and insecure Hoshi was aggressive and skeptical to her. T'Pol's isolation was always a discussion matter. Maybe Trip's behavior at the third season shouldn't call so easily as xenophobia. Nevertheless, only watching Broken Bow, Home, Demons and Terra Prime would be make this critic obsolete.

 

By episode 2 it was pretty clear the strategy behind Enterprise was to tell more stories in the TNG/VOY format (complete with the same technology and abilities), with the hook being that these with the "first" time for everything, even when the stories themselves were retreads.

It was disappointing they didn't depict a true prequel with functionally less advanced technology, or update their shooting and storytelling styles for 2001 like Discovery did for 2017. The sexism was frustrating and outdated for it's era, as was the decision to shitcan their original plan for Malcolm to be gay.

But, taken as it is rather than what many of us hoped it would be, it's more entertaining than not.

 

Agreed, but I never found a verification, that Malcolm would be a gay. I only read that Keating said, he played Malcolm as a gay person. They didn't use the chance at the third season with Maco Major Hayes, they could be a great couple.

 

Absolutely. I agree. I think it's regrettable that they tried giving him an acute case of the not-gays, as Red Letter Media would put it, i.e. they went out of their way to make him look straight. A little ambiguity would have been nice, but it is what it is. He was, as I see it, still a good character with a lot of suppressed issues.

 

Yep. Long range and short range sensor had the same ability as those seen in TNG set series, complete with the ability to isolate individual bio signs. The same TNG technobabble phrases. "Hull plating" which works the same as shields. A working transporter. Phasers and torpedoes (despite Worf saying phasers didn't exist in the 22nd century). The bridge layout was identical to TOS/TNG. The design of the NX-01 looked like it lay in between TOS and TNG than preceding TOS, which is a creative failure.

Writers would have been forced to have been more imaginative if they lowered the technology level available. It's a shame a new creative team with new ideas wasn't brought on board to work on ENT.

 

Agreed. When it started I hoped it would become a show that would tell us about how the Federation came into being. About species distrusting one another, but forced to work together, reluctantly at first, against a common threat (Romulans), and gradually discovering that such an alliance actually can work, and perhaps would be worth continuing after the current crisis is resolved. All this perhaps against the background of humanity working out its last societal issues before they become the paradise we see in the 24th century. But all that would have been a bit hard to pull off if an exploration ship is supposed to be the primary settting.

We didn't get (much of) that, but what we got was good enough on its own terms.

 

Show me the meaning of being lonely, because I want it that way to spice up your life, which is tearing up my heart!

 

Well, why not being open minded? (Ok, trolling aside, look at The Orville or actually benchmark of TV-series GoT. They both using power of music. As I read the books, I never thought Rains of Castamere can be a so catchy song. Even DS9 made it with " old fashion music style" . If they proceed it with good ideas, why not? On the other hand, I still don't get why the people hate "Faith of the Heart" . It probably wouldn't accepted enthusiastically by audience. Usual problem of avant la lettre phenomenons )

I think, I said this once but I want to repeat it here: ENT was not oversexed. If we compare it with other ST-shows, definitely not. Poor Archer got how many girl friends? Even old, bald (and for me sexy as a washing machine) Picard has regularly sexy, young lovers. Another for me physically unattractive captain, Sisko could have sex with Jadzia and Kira (plus his wife) in one (MU) episode. Kirk has a girl in every planet, plus yeoman of the week. Riker, Troi, Crusher have countless lovers, even we see Crusher at masturbating. TnT's sex scenes took some.. seconds? Quark had more lovers than Reed, Mayweather and Sato together. If we compare with the competition shows which had less sex/erotic? The OC? Six Feet Under? The Wire? Battle Star Galactica? Lost? .. Come on guys, it is just unfair. I wish they had more courage..

That would be great, there are also very epic stories about becoming a team from Seven Samurai to Breakfast Club which are fabulous. I wish we could have it. It is a very legitimate, reasonable critic, like the other one with time travel and I am with you.

Still, I do not get the critics like:

Well, bridge layout/inner design of ENT based on modern nuclear u-boots/ships/offshore platforms , so TOS and TNG, not the other way. (They should also show hitting heads at the bulkheads )

I assume phasers, hull platings, sensors issues discussed more than once. I would only say the weapon at the picture produced at 1572. If someone says this is a new futuristic designer riffle, how many people could say it is ca. half millennium (!) years old? Whatsoever it is a deadly weapon and it kills, bill of material includes same names with still existing parts and good enough for its own purpose.Unfortunately, it has not Bluetooth tethering or app for the statistics.

 

As far as the people of Earth being to far advanced, I don't think so. Sisko talking to Julian in the episode Past Tense, set in 2024, that Earth as he would know it was at least a century away. Well Enterprise is 130 years after this episode.

Look at the ship construction of Enterprise NX-01 and compare it to Enterprise 1701. One was made in the 1960's and one in the early 2000's, so they look different on TV. Easy to argue the 1701 was much more advanced.

If the Romulans or Klingons were so much stronger then Earth, there likely would not have been room for the Federation to develop and grow to be an equal to them. Also remember at least until 2153/2154 Earth was basically under the umbrella protection of the Vulcans as was stated on Enterprise.

 

It matters not at the moment the absolute dates when various Star Trek shows happened. What matters in this discussion is the relative dates of events.

According to "Balance of Terror":

Spock clearly says that the war with the Romulans was "a century" earlier, though how precise that century was is uncertain. Spock also says that the war was fought "By our standards today, with primitive atomic weapons and in primitive space vessels" clearly stating that there had been much technological progress taking many decades since the Romulan War was fought.

Kirk also says that the Romulan War was "a whole century" earlier. Lt. Stiles doesn't say that he served in the Romulan War or knew people who served in that war personally, he says that Several members of his family served in the Romulan War and were killed and that has been remembered as family history in his family.

So the absolute dates of the Romulan War and of "Balance of Terror" are not established in TOS, but the relative dates are indicated. Maybe the Romulan War happens in 1899 and "Balance of Terror" happens in 1999, or maybe the Romulan War happens in 2899 and "Balance of Terror" happens in 2995, or maybe the Romulan War happens in 3590 and "Balance of Terror" happens in 3699. But it is clear that "Balance of Terror" happens approximately one century after the Romulan War.

I note that Earth and the Romulans had the use of sub-space radio by the end of the Romulan War since the treaty was negotiated via sub-space radio. And that was about a century before TOS.

In "A Piece of the Action":

So the Horizon apparently visited Sigma Iota about a century earlier, but before Earth had subspace radio. So the voyage of the Horizon was apparently at approximately the same time as the Romulan War, but sometime before Earth acquired subspace radio and thus sometime before the end of the Romulan War.

Since Enterprise happens a few years before the Romulan War, one might suppose that the voyage of the Horizon happened in the few years between Enterprise and the end of the Romulan War.

In "Strange New World" the third episode of the first season of Enterprise:

So subspace radio is already in use in the first season of Enterprise and if the first life pod in the story had subspace radio, for at least 63 years before then. And subspace radio is used in many other episodes of Enterprise.

So Enterprise should be sometime after the Horizon left on its voyage that reached Sigma Iota, a voyage where the Horizon reached a position a hundred light years beyond the position of whoever received its radio signal about Sigma Iota.

In "Two Days and Two Nights", on the planet Risa:

But Archer is very wrong. Sometime before subspace radio was introduced and thus before Enterprise, an Earth ship, the Horizon, reached a point so distant from Earth that even a century of expansion later, the nearest Earth outpost or ship was 100 light years closer to Earth than the point reached by the Earth ship Horizon.

Now that is a major contradiction between Enterprise and TOS!

 

I like Enterprise, but like most prequels, it is mostly guilty of lazy world-building. Depending on audience knowledge of the world in many stories.