• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Do you like ENT or not,why?

By the same token, one can argue that from the minute TOS first depicted time travel subsequent episodes were no longer set in the same timeline.

For that matter, especially given some of the S1 'settling in' inconsistencies, one could argue that many installments of Star Trek take place in their own timeline independent of all other installments, even if many of the installments appear to take place in very similar timelines. And the only reason I say 'many' is because there was the odd duck such as "Parallels" where Our Heroes made a point of discussing quantum signatures and such.

Quite true. And not just TOS. One of the first TNG episodes dealt with the Enterprise-D’s destruction and Picard from the future coming back to the past to try to change that. Heck, I’m still miffed that old Admiral Janeway basically erased the future of the prime timeline for completely and utterly selfish reasons ;)
 
I liked everything except for the planet were if you don't enter orbit correctly everyone on the surface burns to death.

You just don't land on that planet lol
 
I'm watching "Exile" and had the weirdest feeling, in that not only have I not seen this before, I don't even remember this episode existing. It's kinda cool.
 
I really like the idea of the Temporal Cold War, but I agree it wasn't terribly well executed and was often confusing (didn't Daniels have a line where the Xindi attack never happened in history? That never came up again). I think it's been said it was going to be a focus if they got renewed for Season 5, but alas...
Yes, you're correct. There was a moment in "Star Trek: Enterprise" where Daniels, the temporal agent, mentioned that the Xindi attack on Earth was not supposed to happen in the timeline. This added an extra layer of complexity to the Temporal Cold War storyline. However, this aspect was not explored further or resolved within the series.

The Temporal Cold War was known for introducing various temporal anomalies, alternate timelines, and shifting realities, and the narrative complexity sometimes made it challenging for viewers to follow the overarching storyline. The lack of resolution regarding the Xindi attack's supposed absence in the original timeline is one of the loose ends that left fans with unanswered questions when the series concluded.
 
Yes, you're correct. There was a moment in "Star Trek: Enterprise" where Daniels, the temporal agent, mentioned that the Xindi attack on Earth was not supposed to happen in the timeline. This added an extra layer of complexity to the Temporal Cold War storyline. However, this aspect was not explored further or resolved within the series.

I always took that as Daniels' original timeline NOT being the (I guess would be) Prime Timeline. The Xindi attack on Earth happens in the Prime Timeline. A timeline where it did not happen is not the Prime Timeline that we follow.

I think people overthink this too much. It WAS resolved. All of the timey wimey stuff that wasn't supposed to happen... did, and is part of the timeline we know. We don't know about those other ones.
 
It's been a long road, you might say, getting from the day I wrote a review of the premiere episode of "Enterprise" for this very BBS, to here. To give you an idea of just how vast that distance is, allow me first to cite a few paragraphs from that first Trek BBS review, September 27, 2001:

First things first: How did the episode leave me feeling? Like I'd really gone someplace. Like Trek movies II, IV, and VI left me feeling. I'd been on a wild ride that ended too soon. Clearly the mission of this show was not to break new ground, but to recapture an old feeling that has been missing from Trek stories since the original cast left the screen.

...

Easily, "Broken Bow" is the most well considered, complete, evenly executed, and well acted of any of Star Trek's six official pilots (if you consider TOS had two). The most common problem among Trek pilots has been their failure to nail down their entire character ensembles. Even Spock himself underwent radical changes. Picard didn't make the most compelling introduction, and Sisko wasn't (at first) anybody I really cared to spend time with, especially if I was going to be stuck on a space station that didn't go anyplace.

...

Up to now, only Shatner and Kate Mulgrew had their characters nailed down from Episode One. Add Scott Bakula to that list. At long, long last, a human commands our lead starship. By that, I mean someone with ambition, apprehension, preconceptions, misconceptions, and faith. Capt. Archer is indeed his own character--he's not a mosaic or composite of eight or nine other Trek characters, nor is he Sam Becket warmed over. And he isn't, to borrow a phrase, just another face in a retro-suit. You could tell a funny story to this guy, and he'd listen to you. And if he asked you to do something, even if that something was perhaps dumb, you'd do it without resenting him. Bakula is absolutely believable as a captain, and as a go-between for the astronauts of old and the 23rd century adventurers...of old.

And then... In response to Trek BBS regular Vektor's urgent request for a solution to what had so rapidly become The Enterprise Dilemma, from January 10, 2003:

I love the basic premise of a story that outlines multiple historical outcomes, and uses
time travel to illustrate how a few actions and a few people can tilt the balance
between prosperity and poverty. I hope, someday, someone does a show about this. When
they do, I hope the characters they create for telling this story will be compelling,
interesting, innovative role models that our children will want to emulate in their own
imaginations and adventures.

The most serious problem with Enterprise as a story--more serious than its development
refusing to coincide with hundreds of existing hours of pre-existing Trek--is that its
characters--all of them--have become uninteresting. Their range of emotions, of
applied intellect, of goal-seeking, of personal philosophy, and of behavior have been
developed into such a narrow bandwidth that they have all become inhuman. Nobody on
this ship presently acts like a person you'd want to spend five minutes with if you met
him or her on the street. This isn't entirely the fault of the actors--in frequent
cases, they truly have nothing to work with, and Scott Bakula especially appears to be
struggling to make something happen from nothing. And as if the writing team were
subconsciously crying for help, they actually craft episodes with titles that explain
their condition ("Dead Stop," "Detained," "Crash Landing," "A Night in Sickbay"), along
with plotlines that actually focus on the fact that their characters have become
uninteresting (e.g., the long, almost endless search for Reed's favorite food).

To me, tackling the dullness problem is more critical than tackling the continuity
problem, although continuity is a serious problem. Vektor's approach to resolving both
issues, however, would require the current incarnation of the cast to suddenly become
interesting enough for us viewers to want to be led through their long journey to
restore the timeline--interesting enough that we would no longer want or need for them
to be replaced or restored with characters from a different timeline. In short, for
our current cast to become equipped with the character tools they need for the feat of
replacing themselves with better characters, they would have to become better
characters
and, in so doing, make moot the entire purpose of the plotline.

The fact that the current Enterprise characters are uninteresting, and that characters
from generally uninteresting and even wretchedly bad shows (Jordan Cavanaugh in
"Crossing Jordan," Vice Principal Guber from "Boston Public," to name a few) are far
more interesting, is inexcusable. I would think the first step to solving this problem
(replacing the producers) is long overdue... But once
that's done, whatever team is in place will have a very difficult mess to clean up.

Here's what I can say two decades later: Most every moment on-screen of "Strange New Worlds" stands as a tribute and as a memorial to what Enterprise could and should have been, and had every conceivable capacity to have actually done. With astonishingly few exceptions, every scene of SNW with every regular character gives us something to like about that person. Everyone in SNW is a whole person, or conveys the emotions and attitude of people I'd actually like to get to know better. This includes the characters whose life stories are effectively continued by the earlier series (Pike, Spock, Chapel, Uhura). In the case of Uhura and Chapel, the writers developed them into far more complete, interesting, tangible characters than we ever saw on the small screen or the big screen. Nothing against Nichelle Nichols at all, whatsoever, but Celia Rose Gooding embodies a woman I adore, and even appreciate more when Nichelle portrays her.

There is no reason Enterprise could not have been Strange New Worlds in its execution and delivery of good stories and great characters -- zero. I used to blame UPN for dulling down the scale and depth of Enterprise, but now I realize, had any Enterprise script had been as good as the least good episode of Strange New Worlds (whatever that is), they would have shut up and let it ride.

DF "It's a Short Road Getting From Good to Great" Scott
 
It’s a shame too, because there was absolutely nothing wrong with Admiral Janeway’s timeline (other than Tuvok being nuts and Chakotay and Seven being dead…one can determine for themselves just how bad those things are…)

As I've said before, I think it would have been poetic justice if the new timeline turned out to be worse than the old one, Voyager getting home earlier and such notwithstanding.

Honestly, "Endgame" would have been more palatable to me if Janeway had harbored regrets over a planet of total strangers whom Our Heroes had accidentally introduced a pathogen to, or something along those lines than the circumstances we were presented with.
 
That was the inherent problem with “Endgame.” There was really nothing about the future timeline that was inherently bad other than what personally affected Admiral Janeway. It made her look like a selfish bitch to try to change the timeline just to keep Chakotay and Seven alive and together. And thanks to ST: Picard, we see that they didn’t even stay together and Seven instead became some silly vigilante.
 
I think the continued existence of the original Borg Collective is a pretty big downside to the alternate 2404. Obviously the Borg crisis of 2401 sucked, but apparently it led to the final dissolution of the original Collective; I'd say that's better for the entire galaxy.
 
We don’t know anything about the Borg in 2404 of Admiral Janeway’s original timeline. For all we know they were also defeated in that reality, or had become less of a threat. Just the fact that Starfleet, the Federation, the Klingons etc. all still exist in that timeline and seem to be doing fine is at least an indication that the Borg threat hadn’t been an overarching one for decades.
 
We don’t know anything about the Borg in 2404 of Admiral Janeway’s original timeline. For all we know they were also defeated in that reality, or had become less of a threat.

We know that the Borg were still out there in that version of 2404, since there was a course taught about them at Starfleet Academy which referred to them in the present tense.

Just the fact that Starfleet, the Federation, the Klingons etc. all still exist in that timeline and seem to be doing fine is at least an indication that the Borg threat hadn’t been an overarching one for decades.

That's like saying the fact there hadn't been contact with the Borg for decades before the 2360s must mean the Borg weren't a threat.

Pure nonsense. It just means the Borg weren't making the assimilation of the Federation a priority. It doesn't mean that assimilating the Federation isn't still on the Collective's to-do list, and it certainly doesn't mean the Collective wasn't assimilating other civilizations in the Delta Quadrant.

Sorry, but the evidence is pretty clear that the original Borg Collective was still active in the alternate 2404. The final destruction of the original Borg Collective in the Prime 2401 is definitely a better situation for the entire Milky Way Galaxy.
 
We know that the Borg were still out there in that version of 2404, since there was a course taught about them at Starfleet Academy which referred to them in the present tense.



That's like saying the fact there hadn't been contact with the Borg for decades before the 2360s must mean the Borg weren't a threat.

Pure nonsense. It just means the Borg weren't making the assimilation of the Federation a priority. It doesn't mean that assimilating the Federation isn't still on the Collective's to-do list, and it certainly doesn't mean the Collective wasn't assimilating other civilizations in the Delta Quadrant.

Sorry, but the evidence is pretty clear that the original Borg Collective was still active in the alternate 2404. The final destruction of the original Borg Collective in the Prime 2401 is definitely a better situation for the entire Milky Way Galaxy.

If you say so. The alternate 2404 looked just fine to me. Nobody seemed to be all that worried about an imminent Borg attack.
 
Sounds Swedish.

But back to the question, yes, I like ENT. Not to the degree I like TOS, TAS, TNG, LD, PRO, and VOY. But about the same as I like DS9, DSC and PIC.
 
That was the inherent problem with “Endgame.” There was really nothing about the future timeline that was inherently bad other than what personally affected Admiral Janeway. It made her look like a selfish bitch to try to change the timeline just to keep Chakotay and Seven alive and together. And thanks to ST: Picard, we see that they didn’t even stay together and Seven instead became some silly vigilante.
Thought was an accurate description of the GOAT.
 
I hated ENT.
I thought Archer was written like a buffoon.

And the sets were awful. The bridge set looks like garbage. Blinking lights and fake button taped everywhere. How is it that the ENT bridge looks worse than TNG's bridge which debuted more than a decade before it? The ENT bridge is just barely above the TOS bridge in terms of quality. I just get this overwhelming sense of rage every time I see that same fake number pad glued on another set wall.
 
ENT is the only Trek show I've truly given up on. My patience wore thin with the storytelling and uneven character development. I changed the channel when they trotted out the Nazis From Outer Spaaaaaaaaace and never looked back. To this day, I haven't felt the least bit inclined to go back and watch the remaining episodes.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top