The joy is gone...

[Ward Fowler]

I
No I'm just wondering why you're comparing one scene in a single ENT episode to three full TOS episodes. Seems like comparing a stripe on a tiger to a pride of lions. Just not apt comparison. TOS was sexed up too. Notice in the pilots the women wear slacks like the men but in the regular series they're in miniskirts and stockings. The show deliberately pushed the boundaries of network censorship by showing as much female skin as possible . Ever notice that female Kelvans showed a lot more flesh than the males. Or what about Andrea the Android? Her costume was a bandoleer and hip huggers while Brown wore a jumpsuit and Ruk wore a robe. We probably saw as much of Andrea's backside as we did T'Pols. Or how about that slow lingering shot of the Dolman going from her feet to her head when she transports to the Enterprise? Sex and Sexual attraction figured in several TOS episodes, it was almost a running theme. And if GR thought he could getaway with a "decon scene" in TOS you can be assured he would have popped it in an episode ASAP ( and handled the auditions personally)

As for Dumbing it down. I'm not seeing it.

Since posting the quote you are referring to I have made several posts in this thread detailing specifically the differences I see between TOS and ENT and how much and to what extent they used sexuality. Feel free to read them.

 

[Ward Fowler]

My biggest problem with "Enterprise" was all the gunfights.

I thought I was watching goddamned "Gunsmoke" half the fucking time.

Joe, liked Miss Kitty

Thanks. Now I'm imagining Doc rubbing decon gel all over a half-naked Festus.

 

[number6]

My biggest problem with "Enterprise" was all the gunfights.

I thought I was watching goddamned "Gunsmoke" half the fucking time.

Joe, liked Miss Kitty

Thanks. Now I'm imagining Doc rubbing decon gel all over a half-naked Festus.

And that's a problem because.....

 

[Nerys Myk]

Since posting the quote you are referring to I have made several posts in this thread detailing specifically the differences I see between TOS and ENT and how much and to what extent they used sexuality. Feel free to read them.

I read them and they in part shaped my response.

 

[Ward Fowler]

My biggest problem with "Enterprise" was all the gunfights.

I thought I was watching goddamned "Gunsmoke" half the fucking time.

Joe, liked Miss Kitty

Thanks. Now I'm imagining Doc rubbing decon gel all over a half-naked Festus.

And that's a problem because.....

It's the stuff nightmares are made of. Come to think of it, if Showtime remade Gunsmoke that's probably just the type of thing we'd see. Except instead of decon gel it would be liniment.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I read them and they in part shaped my response.

I don't think you read them closely enough. I admit that TOS used sexual situations, but I don't think they were as prevalent or crass as those in ENT. As far as the show being dumbed down, in my opinion it certainly was compared to TOS and a couple of the other spin-offs. I didn't find it nearly as intelligent or thoughtful as the original series. It's all a matter of taste. Not everyone will agree.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I don't think you read them closely enough. I admit that TOS used sexual situations, but I don't think they were as prevalent or crass as those in ENT. As far as the show being dumbed down, in my opinion it certainly was compared to TOS and a couple of the other spin-offs. I didn't find it nearly as intelligent or thoughtful as the original series. It's all a matter of taste. Not everyone will agree.

I would disagree. As I said, Sex and Sexuality were at the forefront of many TOS episodes. The costumes for the actresses were designed to titillate, and provide some eye candy for males 13 to 70+. Episodes like Mudd's Women, Elaan of Troyus, Wink of An Eye, Private Little War, (to name but a few) all had elements of Sex and Sexuality in them. Often in the form of undulating half naked women.

You say its dumbed down, but in what ways? Thematically? It didnt touch upon tough issues? The stories? The dialog? The relationships? You mentioned sex and soap opera in a previous post. Thats pretty much the core elements of most dramas and comedies on TV these days. Be it ER, Lost, Desperate Housewives or Scrubs. They are all "Soaps" to one degree or another. It's a trend that started in the Eighties with Dallas and Hill Street Blues. It's an ingrained part of television in the modern world.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I would disagree. As I said, Sex and Sexuality were at the forefront of many TOS episodes. The costumes for the actresses were designed to titillate, and provide some eye candy for males 13 to 70+. Episodes like Mudd's Women, Elaan of Troyus, Wink of An Eye, Private Little War, (to name but a few) all had elements of Sex and Sexuality in them. Often in the form of undulating half naked women.

You say its dumbed down, but in what ways? Thematically? It didnt touch upon tough issues? The stories? The dialog? The relationships? You mentioned sex and soap opera in a previous post. Thats pretty much the core elements of most dramas and comedies on TV these days. Be it ER, Lost, Desperate Housewives or Scrubs. They are all "Soaps" to one degree or another. It's a trend that started in the Eighties with Dallas and Hill Street Blues. It's an ingrained part of television in the modern world.

As I've explained in my previous posts, I think it is a matter of degree. For me, the themes and stories from ENT weren't nearly as sophisticated or relevent as TOS. As I stated in an earlier post, it probably comes down to the fact that art is a product of its time. Of course the original sexually titillated, there are very few shows that didn't or don't. Again, its the matter of degree and the way it's handled. The writers and producers seemed to look for any and every excuse to get the crew's clothes off and/or put them in sexual situations. For me it was handled in a very base way when compared to any of the other series. I think it cheapened the show and made me feel like I was watching scenes meant for a middle-schooler. To be fair, a few of the stories on ENT touched upon important issues. In fact the best episodes in the series did that. However, I felt that their track record was uneven to say the least. Sometimes the message was a little too "on the nose" and I felt as if I were being talked down to intellectually if I was being talked to in that way at all. You mentioned that soap opera-like stories are a modern convention. That's true, but that doesn't mean its appropriate for Star Trek. I don't feel that it is. However, if writers are going to take that approach to storytelling, then they could at least do it in a manner that reflects the high quality the genre has sometimes shown in the past. For instance, you mentioned Hill Street Blues. I would have been thrilled if ENT would have exhibited half the thoughtfulness or intelligence of that show. Instead, for me, it was more in the vein of Falcon Crest or Dynasty. DS9 was very much a soap opera in a lot of ways. Do you feel the writers and producers of ENT made as good of a show? Do you think the writers of ENT wrote characters as well as the writers on DS9? The characters on ENT were bland and ill-defined when compared to previous spin-offs. they weren't even internally consistent. When it wasn't convenient for T'Pol to be vulcan anymore, they made up some b.s. excuse so that she could flash her ass and and start humpin'. Why? I think it goes back to chasing demographics. For TOS sexual tillaltion was a means to an end. For ENT it was the end unto itself. Needless to say, ENT wasn't my cup of tea. I doubt you'll find many people that will tell you that it was on the same level as or surpassed TOS in quality, thoughtfulness, character or intelligence. But then again, it's only a tv show.

 

[number6]

I would disagree. As I said, Sex and Sexuality were at the forefront of many TOS episodes. The costumes for the actresses were designed to titillate, and provide some eye candy for males 13 to 70+. Episodes like Mudd's Women, Elaan of Troyus, Wink of An Eye, Private Little War, (to name but a few) all had elements of Sex and Sexuality in them. Often in the form of undulating half naked women.

You say its dumbed down, but in what ways? Thematically? It didnt touch upon tough issues? The stories? The dialog? The relationships? You mentioned sex and soap opera in a previous post. Thats pretty much the core elements of most dramas and comedies on TV these days. Be it ER, Lost, Desperate Housewives or Scrubs. They are all "Soaps" to one degree or another. It's a trend that started in the Eighties with Dallas and Hill Street Blues. It's an ingrained part of television in the modern world.

I totally agree that there was a great deal of sex and sexuality in TOS. The difference in sex in TOS and ENT is, in my opinion, directly related to the era in which each series was filmed. It's easy to look at something through 40 years of hindsight and weigh its maturity with a modern eye. The truth is that GR wanted to give the show as much sex appeal as the sixties would allow. you can see how dated that mentality was because the same attitude was applied to TNG in its embryonic years and it has definitely not aged well as a result.

Once you factor that into ENT, what's left is the story content, which at times was lacking of fresh ideas, but I don't really find it lacking in intellect to the original show. I did find it lacking in higher concept stories, but that was intentional. The producers made a conscious decision to focus on character pieces. I don't equate that with "dumbing it down." I felt the character on ENT immediately had the depth that the TOS characters never really had until the movies. Then again, that wasn't necessarily the focus of TOS, and the style of writing was more heavy handed.
To imply that the writers of TOS didn't get lazy would be dishonest. There were complaints by the cast from the middle of the second season that the writers were starting to rehash the same stories and this only got worse in the third season. In contrast ENT had a shaky second season and really started to gain momentum in the last two years.

Hey..It's just my opinion. YMMV.

 

[Warped9]

I'd say characterization in TOS was a storytelling device to further the story: good characters reflecting aspects of the story you want to convey. In ENT characterization was an often an end unto itself because whatever ENT's characters were saying or doing wasn't interesting enough. ENT's characters were often focused on themselves as opposed to serving the story.

The merit of any given work can often be subjective. A show like Friends for example can be widely hailed and popular and yet I've never found anything whatsoever of value in the show. I consider it shallow, simplistic and paint-by-number and not one damned bit funny. You can argue until you're blue in the face about a work's merits and you're very unlikely to convince a dissenter otherwise.

We all bring an unwritten list of values and expectations to experiencing entertainment. If we don't perceive any of those things in the work then it just won't hold us and no degree of argument will convince us otherwise.

 

[number6]

I'd say characterization in TOS was a storytelling device to further the story: good characters reflecting aspects of the story you want to convey. In ENT characterization was an often an end unto itself because whatever ENT's characters were saying or doing wasn't interesting enough. ENT's characters were often focused on themselves as opposed to serving the story.

We really didn't know much about TOS's characters. They were painted in broad strokes and, yes, I would agree that what characterizations they were given were there to serve the story. I don't agree about this not being true of ENT. I found that the characters certainly did serve the stories. Ultimately when someone had a real decision or choice to make it served to further the story and we learn more about the character along the way. I think your bias toward all that came after 1979 seriously colors your opinion and that you have never given any of the modern shows any serious consideration as a result. Even when you started a thread in the ENT forum about how you were going to "give it a chance" and actually watch the show, you brought your bias right along with you and your assessment of the series always heavily weighed on a preconception you were never prepared to seriously set aside.

 

[Warped9]

^^ That may well be, but as I said in the rest of my earlier post it came down that I just didn't see that in ENT. I thought the characters could be conceptually interesting (like Hoshi) but in execution I found them to be bland and uninteresting. I found them very lacking in credibility to the point that I just didn't give a damn. And if you aren't engaged by the characters then you don't care what happens to them.

And all that's on top of the whole series' setting which I found very lacking in credibility and consistency. Others will obviously disagree, but I just didn't see those things there.

 

[Noname Given]

I fail to see what you're comparison is. Themes of several episodes vs one scene in a single episode?? Doesn't quite balance out.

If you think there was only one decon rub down scene on ENT then you need to watch again, and let's not forget the hot vulcan meditation rub down sessions. I used that as an example because I believe it represents the overall idea behind the show which seemed to be "Sex it up, Dumb it down." I guess that could be considered a theme.

While I'm a TOS fan first and foremost - may I remind you of:

And The Children Shall Lead or Spectre of the Gun or Catspaw.

Want 'gratuitous titilation'? Mudd's Women; Mirror Mirror; The Menagerie/The Cage.

If you're going to try to claim TOS was NEVER pandering to the male audience or using 'sex' to grab/hold viewers as well; then I would like to know what show called 'Star Trek' you were actually watching as it must not have been the one originally broadcast on NBC from 1966-1969.

 

[Nerys Myk]

As I've explained in my previous posts, I think it is a matter of degree. For me, the themes and stories from ENT weren't nearly as sophisticated or relevent as TOS. As I stated in an earlier post, it probably comes down to the fact that art is a product of its time. Of course the original sexually titillated, there are very few shows that didn't or don't. Again, its the matter of degree and the way it's handled. The writers and producers seemed to look for any and every excuse to get the crew's clothes off and/or put them in sexual situations. For me it was handled in a very base way when compared to any of the other series. I think it cheapened the show and made me feel like I was watching scenes meant for a middle-schooler. To be fair, a few of the stories on ENT touched upon important issues. In fact the best episodes in the series did that. However, I felt that their track record was uneven to say the least. Sometimes the message was a little too "on the nose" and I felt as if I were being talked down to intellectually if I was being talked to in that way at all. You mentioned that soap opera-like stories are a modern convention. That's true, but that doesn't mean its appropriate for Star Trek. I don't feel that it is. However, if writers are going to take that approach to storytelling, then they could at least do it in a manner that reflects the high quality the genre has sometimes shown in the past. For instance, you mentioned Hill Street Blues. I would have been thrilled if ENT would have exhibited half the thoughtfulness or intelligence of that show. Instead, for me, it was more in the vein of Falcon Crest or Dynasty. DS9 was very much a soap opera in a lot of ways. Do you feel the writers and producers of ENT made as good of a show? Do you think the writers of ENT wrote characters as well as the writers on DS9? The characters on ENT were bland and ill-defined when compared to previous spin-offs. they weren't even internally consistent. When it wasn't convenient for T'Pol to be vulcan anymore, they made up some b.s. excuse so that she could flash her ass and and start humpin'. Why? I think it goes back to chasing demographics. For TOS sexual tillaltion was a means to an end. For ENT it was the end unto itself. Needless to say, ENT wasn't my cup of tea. I doubt you'll find many people that will tell you that it was on the same level as or surpassed TOS in quality, thoughtfulness, character or intelligence. But then again, it's only a tv show.

I'm a big TOs fan, its my favorite series, but its use of sexuality was pretty base and blatant. The disparity in the costume choices for most of the male and female characters was quite intentional. They served no purpose other than to expose as much female flesh as possible. And as 1960s TV goes, only Laugh-In came close to the exposing that much flesh. (and most of that was Goldie Hawn) Though I guess the fans of male flesh could always wait for Kirk's shirt to be ripped or discarded. There is a great screen cap used in a caption contest recently of Kirk sauntering through the corridors, boots in hand and his shirt draped over his shoulders, his naked torso gleaming. It didnt really further the plot, but I'm sure someone got a kick out of it. I know those of us in the Caption Contest had fun with it.

TOS was no stranger to heavy handed, on the nose morality lessons. Even the the 1960s we could hear the anvil being moved into position and just waited for it to be dropped. On occasion TOS did rise above the usual pat endings. "City On the Edge of Forever" has one the best endings in episodic television. Shatner's delivery of that final line was perfect. Anyone who claims he's a bad actor need to watch that scene.

I think Star Trek can work in any type of storytelling format. And it has. Its been successful in the episodic and serial TV formats, as an animated half hour, in books and on the big screen. While TOS didn't use the serial format, it was no stranger to "Soap Opera" elements. They just paired it down to a single episode rather than spreading it out over the length of the series. I love TOS to death, but it was never on the level of Hill Street Blues, but I still like it more that Hill Steet Blues.

DS9 is my number two favorite Trek (hence the screen name) but I have to say I like the ENT characters a little bit more. Not sure why. They seem more relatable perhaps. It dont think T'pol ever stopped being a Vulcan. She was on a journey that explored what it meant to be a Vulcan and to examine that she had to step away. There were a few missteps along the way to be sure. I found her journey to be in keeping with what we know of Vulcans.

NO incarnation of Trek will ever equal or surpass TOS in my eyes. Not even DS9. There is something about TOS and it's characters that touch me in away that the other shows didn't. But I'm a first generation fan. I watched it in glorious black and white, first run using rabbit ears. Call it nostalgia if you like, but none of the spin offs come close. DS9 as I said is second, but it is a distant second. Then ENT, followed by TNG. Finally that other show.

 

[doubleohfive]

As some older posters here might remember, I was very annoyed when Kes was kicked out of Star Trek Voyager

This has to be the understatement of the millennium.

 

[Ward Fowler]

If you're going to try to claim TOS was NEVER pandering to the male audience or using 'sex' to grab/hold viewers as well; then I would like to know what show called 'Star Trek' you were actually watching as it must not have been the one originally broadcast on NBC from 1966-1969.

I NEVER said anything of the sort. In several of my posts I said REPEATEDLY that TOS also used sexual titillation. It was the manner and the extent that I thought was the difference between TOS and ENT. Please don't put words in my mouth, especially when several times I said the exact opposite.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I'm a big TOs fan, its my favorite series, but its use of sexuality was pretty base and blatant. The disparity in the costume choices for most of the male and female characters was quite intentional. They served no purpose other than to expose as much female flesh as possible. And as 1960s TV goes, only Laugh-In came close to the exposing that much flesh. (and most of that was Goldie Hawn) Though I guess the fans of male flesh could always wait for Kirk's shirt to be ripped or discarded. There is a great screen cap used in a caption contest recently of Kirk sauntering through the corridors, boots in hand and his shirt draped over his shoulders, his naked torso gleaming. It didnt really further the plot, but I'm sure someone got a kick out of it. I know those of us in the Caption Contest had fun with it.

TOS was no stranger to heavy handed, on the nose morality lessons. Even the the 1960s we could hear the anvil being moved into position and just waited for it to be dropped. On occasion TOS did rise above the usual pat endings. "City On the Edge of Forever" has one the best endings in episodic television. Shatner's delivery of that final line was perfect. Anyone who claims he's a bad actor need to watch that scene.

I think Star Trek can work in any type of storytelling format. And it has. Its been successful in the episodic and serial TV formats, as an animated half hour, in books and on the big screen. While TOS didn't use the serial format, it was no stranger to "Soap Opera" elements. They just paired it down to a single episode rather than spreading it out over the length of the series. I love TOS to death, but it was never on the level of Hill Street Blues, but I still like it more that Hill Steet Blues.

DS9 is my number two favorite Trek (hence the screen name) but I have to say I like the ENT characters a little bit more. Not sure why. They seem more relatable perhaps. It dont think T'pol ever stopped being a Vulcan. She was on a journey that explored what it meant to be a Vulcan and to examine that she had to step away. There were a few missteps along the way to be sure. I found her journey to be in keeping with what we know of Vulcans.

NO incarnation of Trek will ever equal or surpass TOS in my eyes. Not even DS9. There is something about TOS and it's characters that touch me in away that the other shows didn't. But I'm a first generation fan. I watched it in glorious black and white, first run using rabbit ears. Call it nostalgia if you like, but none of the spin offs come close. DS9 as I said is second, but it is a distant second. Then ENT, followed by TNG. Finally that other show.

I pointed out before that I thought TOS used sexuality. I just thought they handled it in a better manner and made less use of it over all. As I said before I think TOS used it as a means to an end rather than a means unto itself like ENT did.
The reason I compared ENT to Hill Street Blues is that you mentioned that as an example of serialized drama. TOS certainly wasn't that, so I don't think the comparison is valid.
We do agree on a few things. TOS is my favorite Trek and like you I don't think any will surpass it. DS9 is also my second favorite. As far as the nameless show you put in last place, I'm with you all the way.

 

[Vance]

Let me put it this way...

In TOS, the sexiness and appeal of women were celebrated. They were made to be beautiful, complete with soft lighting, elegant (usually) outfits, etc. Sexual encounters were treated with romance (most of the time) and some degree of delicacy.

In ENT, the women were generally slutty skanks. Sexuality was thrown in your face with cheap titilation (many decon scenes, complete with obvious erections) to the point of character destruction (T'Pol) in order to get on-screen action going, complete with sexual addiction of a Vulcan, for cryin' out loud, just to turn on the audience.

It's not that the shows did or did not have sexually-themed material, it's how they treated it.

 

[Michael]

(many decon scenes, complete with obvious erections)

That's not true. What episodes exactly?

 

[Mr. Fergy]

Warped9, my interest in Trek has waxed and wained for me over the years, too. Walk away. Forget Star Trek for a while. It sounds like it would do you good.

Star Trek isn't going anywhere. People do, though. If you want it again in the future, Star Trek will be waiting for you.

I couldn't agree more!

BTW; What do you think of Stargate:SG-1?