Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009... (SPOILERS)

[Overgeeked]

I'm rewatching Season 4 of Enterprise, not everyone's favorite show, I'm sure, but I'm noticing something wonderful: compared to the writing of Trek 2009, Enterprise is spectacular.

I'm not talking about the temporal cold war or that, just the fourth season. The Vulcan stuff, the Andorian and Tellarite co-op in the Babel arc. The Reeves-Stevens and other writers who worked on that season put out some great stuff. Far fewer plot holes in the entire season than the two hours of Trek 2009.

It's got all the adventure of TOS, some of the moralizing of TNG, none of the religion of DS9, but the politics (in places), and the sense of wonder of Voyager. Pulp adventure space opera in best sense.

Damn shame that was canceled.

 

[Mach5]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

I'm re watching Season 4 of Enterprise, not everyone's favorite show, I'm sure, but I'm noticing something wonderful: compared to the writing of Trek 2009, Enterprise is spectacular.

Hmmmm, that's a first... Writing on "Enterprise" is generally considered poor. Actually, I think ENT would have been much off better with someone like Orci & Kurtzman on board. These two can write characters like the best of them. The same can not be said for the people in ENT's writing staff. In four years we've never really gotten access to Captain Archers head, psyche, feelings... We've barely gotten to know Malcolm & Hoshi (not to mention that helmsmen, what's his name...), and even the characters who we've gotten to know the best - Trip, T'Pol (and to some extent Phlox), continuously kept getting violated by terrible and non-imaginative writing.

Damn shame that was canceled.

What do you mean? Nah, just kidding.

 

[ChristopherPike]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Hmmmm, that's a first... Writing on "Enterprise" is generally considered poor. Actually, I think ENT would have been much off better with someone like Orci & Kurtzman on board. These two can write characters like the best of them. The same can not be said for the people in ENT's writing staff. In four years we've never really gotten access to Captain Archers head, psyche, feelings... We've barely gotten to know Malcolm & Hoshi (not to mention that helmsmen, what's his name...), and even the characters who we've gotten to know the best - Trip, T'Pol (and to some extent Phlox), continuously kept getting violated by terrible and non-imaginative writing.

Actually no. All Orci & Kurtzman can do is crib characters which already exist and are pretty poor at fleshing out new ones. Nero was every bad guy I've ever seen in a Hollywood blockbuster and can't compare to the dimensionality of Degra or Dollum. Watching Season 3 in particular, I think we got pretty good access to Archer's psyche. A man pushed beyond breaking point, using whatever means justified his mission. I had no sense Pine's Kirk could ever be morally questionable, besides failing to leave some Green chick his Nokia phone number... But I guess this is the way it goes. The new Star Trek is more popular without having to commit to anything beyond having a good night out. As a television series, the following weeks would soon struggle to live up to the good will afforded to a dazzling new toy.

 

[Mach5]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Actually no. All Orci & Kurtzman can do is crib characters which already exist and are pretty poor at fleshing out new ones.

Not true. I've only seen 6 or 7 episodes of Fringe so far, and I already consider characters interesting. In fact, the Walter Bishop character became superior to any ENT character (except for Trip) after just a couple of episodes (largely because of John Noble too, of course).
BTW, even Shia Lebeuff's character in "Transformers" was witty and well written in general, not to mention John Torturro.

Back on Trek (C) now. Pine's Kirk is everything but a copy of Shatner's, and yet, he made me care about him instantly. In fact, his Kirk became superior to Archer after no more than 10 minutes on screen. The guy is insanely charismatic for a newcomer!

Nero was every bad guy I've ever seen in a Hollywood blockbuster and can't compare to the dimensionality of Degra or Dollum. Watching Season 3 in particular, I think we got pretty good access to Archer's psyche. A man pushed beyond breaking point, using whatever means justified his mission. I had no sense Pine's Kirk could ever be morally questionable, besides failing to leave some Green chick his Nokia phone number...

Give it time, this was only the first film. Many more will come (hopefully), and we'll have the chance to see the many faces of James T. Kirk, im sure of that.

 

[Count Zero]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Also, having a Trek Captain do morally questionable things and acknowledging them and showing the consequences of those actions on the Captain as was done in season 3 and 4 of ENT was a first for Trek, I think, at least in this magnitude.
So, I wouldn't expect it to crop up in any new Trek incarnation, especially not in a film aimed to revitalise Trek, reintroduce the TOS characters and set up a new universe, with its short running time.

 

[Michael]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

I really don't think we can or should compare a season of a television series with a feature film. Two very different things, actually.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Hmmmm, that's a first... Writing on "Enterprise" is generally considered poor.

I've never run across a wholesale conclusion such as that. Personally, I think many episodes were beautifully written. Even in eps that were not top-notch, there was good dialogue, or nice character layering, or clever subtext.

I think the show had a lot of potential--the standout episodes illustrate what it was capable of--but it wasn't fully realized. And then, of course, it was cut off at the knees.

In four years we've never really gotten access to Captain Archers head, psyche, feelings...

I remember a great many episodes that delved into what made Archer tick, from "Broken Bow" onward. Off the top of my head... "Dear Doctor," "Desert Crossing," "A Night in Sickbay," "First Flight," "The Expanse." Pretty much all of Season 3, but especially "Anomaly," "Similitude," "Damage." Season 4 focused on the development of supporting characters, but I'll add "Home," "Observer Effect," "Babel One," "United."

We've barely gotten to know Malcolm & Hoshi...

Malcolm had "Shuttlepod One," "Minefield," "Affliction/Divergence"...

Hoshi didn't have too many episodes that revolved around her, 'tis true. But "Vanishing Point" revealed a lot about her because her mind spun the entire story. And there were lovely little moments that told me more about her...rising to the occasion in "Fight or Flight," practicing insults with Archer in "Babel One," hunting down info on Malcolm in "Secret Enemy," chatting with Phlox in "Affliction," being tested when she was in command in "Terra Prime."

Even Travis had "Horizon," "Demons/Terra Prime," "The Breach."

...Trip, T'Pol (and to some extent Phlox), continuously kept getting violated by terrible and non-imaginative writing.

"Continuously"..."terrible and non-imaginative"...I wouldn't say so. Even if one didn't care for the T/T arc as a whole, there were great scenes between them in a number of episodes, from "Broken Bow" and "Breaking the Ice" to "Harbinger," "The Forgotten," "The Augments," and "Terra Prime." And Phlox had "Dear Doctor," "A Night in Sickbay," "Doctor's Orders," "Similitude," "Terra Prime," the Feezal episode (name escapes me), "The Breach," and a zillion different little moments that were revealing of his character. Billingsley had a knack for doing something wonderful for his character with just about every scene he was in, I thought.

I really don't think we can or should compare a season of a television series with a feature film. Two very different things, actually.

This, I agree with.

 

[Overgeeked]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

They are very different beasts (I've written both). But my point is that given the constraints of writing for television (a few weeks to months to write a one hour script) versus the film (a few years for a two hour script), that there are far more plot holes in the film when compared to an entire TV season boggles the mind.

 

[Mach5]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

In four years we've never really gotten access to Captain Archers head, psyche, feelings...

I remember a great many episodes that delved into what made Archer tick, from "Broken Bow" onward. Off the top of my head... "Dear Doctor," "Desert Crossing," "A Night in Sickbay," "First Flight," "The Expanse." Pretty much all of Season 3, but especially "Anomaly," "Similitude," "Damage." Season 4 focused on the development of supporting characters, but I'll add "Home," "Observer Effect," "Babel One," "United."

"Broken Bow" was OK, it portrayed Archer as a nice guy with a pair of brass... We saw that he had some daddy issues, but that's about it. I won't comment on "Dear Doctor" and "ANIS" (I loathe these), and "Desert Crossing" showed that he cared about Trip, but generally, that episode was boring and forgettable. Most of Xindi arc was about Archer being conflicted (does the end justify the means and all that stuff). But when I said "head, psyche, feelings," I didn't mean morality conflicts, ethics, ambition... I meant stuff like Picard being in love with his best friend's widow while being a father figure to their son, Sisko trying to move on after losing his wife and becoming a single dad, raising his son, watching him grow, advising him on girls and dating, understanding him for what he was, not what he wanted him to be... Being a friend to Dax, the awkwardness of having your best buddy return to you in a form of a beautiful woman... All this while having to run the strategically most important outpost in the quadrant.

Imagine if it were Sisko and Kira instead of Archer and T'pol during the Vulcan arc. Don't you think Sisko would have offered a friendly hand to Kira if she were in a T'Pol's situation? Heavy mother issues, a forced marriage, all recent developments, and we didn't even hear Archer say: "Are you okay, do you need to talk, I'm here if you need me..." Hell, the woman was on a verge of a breakdown, and he didn't even seem to notice. Same with Trip when he left for Columbia. His best friend was obviously a wreck, and he let him go without even a "What the f*** is wrong with you?"

Remember Kirk's and Bones' birthday talk in TWOK? That was friendship and caring. And that was good writing (IMO). Enterprise lacked those kind of moments.

...Trip, T'Pol (and to some extent Phlox), continuously kept getting violated by terrible and non-imaginative writing.

"Continuously"..."terrible and non-imaginative"...I wouldn't say so. Even if one didn't care for the T/T arc as a whole, there were great scenes between them in a number of episodes,

Bits and pieces, nothing more (with the exception of "Breaking the Ice" and "Home"). I caught DS9's 6x20 - "His way" the other day on TV. The entire episode about Odo resolving his feelings for Kira. A 100% romantic, character driven episode. And while I never liked Kira/Odo, a applaud Ira Behr and Hans Beimler for having imagination and guts and pulling off something like that. Compare ENT's and DS9's character development, and you'll see what I meant by "unimaginative." DS9 had 7 seasons, okay... Compare ENT to Farscape and then you should really see my point.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Enterprise lacked those kind of moments.

Bits and pieces, nothing more

Compare ENT's and DS9's character development, and you'll see what I meant by "unimaginative."

In your opinion. I saw things differently.

 

[startrekwatcher]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

It really isn't fair to compare a tv series to a 2 hour film but I will say that if you look at some of the trilogies on ENT which are essentially a three act film anyway that they are far superior and satisfying compared to XI.

For instance, the final 3 season three episodes demonstrate how you can do a solid action film that has visual effects, exciting space battles, a fast pace yet also have a compelling story that includes quieter moments of reflection such as the Hoshi/Archer scene in "Zero Hour" or the Trip/Degra scene in "The Council" or the Reed/T'Pol scene in "The Council". It also took the time to provide interesting adversaries with plausible motivations where we can understand why they are doing what they are. I'd give this 3.5 stars out of 4.

And the Vulcan trilogy in season four shows how you can do an effective prequel storyline that doesn't just namedrop, which XI did, but actually effectively utilizes previously established elements--T'Pau, Sarek, katra, seh'let, IDIC, Romulans etc--to actually service an interesting epic story. I'd give this 3.5 stars as well compared to XI of 2.5

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

For instance, the final 3 season three episodes demonstrate how you can do a solid action film that has visual effects, exciting space battles, a fast pace yet also have a compelling story that includes quieter moments of reflection...

...and all without having to spend any time introducing the lead and supporting characters, or the antagonists, and presenting them in such a way that the viewer roots for the good guys and wants them to succeed against the bad guys.

Because that was done over many, many previous episodes of Enterprise.

If someone walks off the street and plops down in a movie theater seat to watch (pick your movie), a certain amount of time and energy and creative panache (hopefully) is typically taken to introduce the main characters--who they are, personality, job, motivations, perhaps some backstory that explains why they act the way they do--before diving into the goal-villain-obstacle part. Same deal for Trek XI, which the filmmakers wanted to work for viewers who had never laid eyes on Star Trek.

Enterprise had 98 hours, and still wasn't even finished. A movie has about 2 hours to connect with a viewer and tell a complete and compelling story. Both forms need to follow proper and effective story structure, but the aims of the two forms is different.

 

[Overgeeked]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Again... all I'm comparing is the time available to write the script coupled with how long the script is compared to the number of plot holes. Nothing else.

Film: years to write, 2 hour script, riddled with holes.
Season 4: weeks to months to write 1 ep, 1 hour script, few if any holes.

Not the whole series. Not the pacing, or character development. Just the pole holes per minutes on screen vs the time allotted to write the script

 

[pookha]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

yeah if someone believes kurtzman and orci cant create characters they need to watch fringe.
walter especially is one of the most fascinating characters. and now with the realization of what he did in the past thing just got a lot more interesting.

i liked enterprise , i like the new movie.

i do think enterprise suffered a lot becuase in between some really good episodes they had some really bad ones.
and some of the weakest ones were at the start of each season.
it is one reason why i think the show does better in syndication when you have a chance to see several episodes close together.
the worse ones seem to fade in the background and the better ones stand out more.

as for pine's kirk not having to face the morality of his decisions. well the same can be said of shatners kirk for most of the series.
we never did go back and see the results of most of his decision on forcing different cultures to start progressing forward again.

in some ways city is a smack up the side of the head waking up point for the character.

 

[startrekwatcher]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

I don't want to drag this off course too much and I don't want to talk specifics to avoid spoilers for those that haven't seen Fringe but I did want to comment that for me Fringe doesn't demonstrate that Orci and Kurtzman are good character writers.

The show for me didn't take off and the characters didn't come alive or interest me until they stepped back from writing duties. The second half of the season rekindled my interest just as the first half seriously had me considering abandoning the show. Jeff Pinkner, Akiva Goldsman, Bryan Burk, JR Orci, Julia Cho, and David H Goodman are the ones that deserve the credit.

Back to XI--the characters received decent enough characterizations but I wouldn't exactly call it great. And the two writers didn't create these characters Roddenberry did they just used what was there. It is interesting that the one character they did create Nero was far, far, far from great.

 

[pookha]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

one thing to keep in mind.
both fringe and the star trek script were affected by the writers strike.
star trek was in the unusual position of having to film the script as if when most films still may be tinkered with through filming.

and a lot of the nero backstory just didnt make it to film.

 

[startrekwatcher]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

and a lot of the nero backstory just didnt make it to film.

Which is a problem with the film. I don't read nor should I have to comics or other supplemental materials. If it is relevant it should be in the film--not on the cuttin room floor or someplace else.

That would be like never learning in any real depth why the Xindi or the Sphere Builders wanted to destroy Earth. It would make enjoying the rest of the story that these events rest on less interesting because the motivation isn't believable.

 

[miriel68]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Which is a problem with the film. I don't read nor should I have to comics or other supplemental materials. If it is relevant it should be in the film--not on the cuttin room floor or someplace else.

I agree. I enjoyed the movie, but I felt the villain (Nero) was one of the weakest elements. I don't care for him, I'm not interested in him, he tells me nothing. He is just a device to keep good guys busy. I don't like to be forced to read some background stories to be able to know who he is and I shouldn't be forced to do it.
I found Enterprise's villains far more exciting: not only Xindi, but also Augments, for example.

 

[Mach5]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

Nero is definitely "Star Trek's" biggest flaw, he could have been great had his motivations been properly explained. But I don't agree about the Augments and the Xindi. The Xindi were so dumb that they actually tested their prototype on the actual target (Earth) thus warning humans.
The augments were too much like Khan, unoriginal, though Arik Soong was cool.
IMO the best villains on ENT were the Romulans (the mystery factor) and Terra Prime (the "domestic" enemy).

 

[Overgeeked]

Re: Cross-post: Enterprise vs Trek 2009...

one thing to keep in mind.
both fringe and the star trek script were affected by the writers strike.
star trek was in the unusual position of having to film the script as if when most films still may be tinkered with through filming.

and a lot of the nero backstory just didnt make it to film.

The script was finished when the writer's strike hit. They were in production at the time. They couldn't change the script on set. The doesn't explain why things that should have been in the script were not. If the script was well written before shooting started (as it should have been), the writer's strike wouldn't have been an issue.

I just can't imagine that a pair of "professional" screenwriters would take 2+ years to write a script, have dozens of meetings about the story with all kinds of stakeholders, only to come to the set and suddenly realize that it was riddled with plot holes, then say "oh, well, there's a writer's strike."