Anyone else annoyed at the dumbed down writing in ENT?

[groo667]

Enterprise seems pretty dumbed down for a star trek series. Voyager was also dumbed down but they hid it better. It's sort of like hicks in space. dumbing it down in general would be acceptable but its weird (for example) that enterprises main engineer would struggle with math problems like train leaves at x time going y speed z distance away from another train leaving at b time...(1x16 shuttlepod one).

Most of my posts are nit picky but these little things bother me.

 

[JiNX-01]

Enterprise seems pretty dumbed down for a star trek series. Voyager was also dumbed down but they hid it better. It's sort of like hicks in space. dumbing it down in general would be acceptable but its weird (for example) that enterprises main engineer would struggle with math problems like train leaves at x time going y speed z distance away from another train leaving at b time...(1x16 shuttlepod one).

Most of my posts are nit picky but these little things bother me.

Bermaga's efforts to make Trip the "comedy relief" was taken much to far when they repeatedly portrayed him as a pan-frahed catfish and pee-Kahn! pie eating hick.
Connor got a script that had Trip repeatedly losing an engineering dept. pool on how far the ship would travel each day. He went to the producers and asked them "Do you want Trip to be smart?" Of course they said, yes. He asked if they wanted him to be a leader? Again, yes. Then he asked them who was going to follow a commander who couldn't calculate how far the ship could travel at a specific warp speed in a day.
They conceded he was right and the script was changed.
He still got stuck with the comedy relief crap until the end of S2. Then they apparently decided a grieving brother shouldn't also be a joke. THANK GOD.

 

[commodore64]

Yes, I thought some of the writing was dumbed down - many of the plots, for example.

I disagree with posters above on Trip's treatment. I thought they made him plenty smart. Braga's point, in TATV, was that Trip was a natural smart guy rather than just relying on books. And I thought back Trip was funny, he was a cooler character; the dumbed down writing -- faux angst of season 4 -- made him out to be stupid. That was an example of dumbing down of writing that made characters suffer, and what I didn't like.

 

[lovetrek74]

Hi, I'm new here. I became disenchanted with Enterprise about half-way through the first season. Didn't seem like the terrorist thing was Trek to me. So, in that sense, it did seem dumbed down--and at a very fundamental level.

I was left thinking the Great Bird would not have approved. ;-)

Is it worth giving it another chance? The first season sits half-unwatched on my bookshelf.

 

[Nebusj]

Is it worth giving it another chance? The first season sits half-unwatched on my bookshelf.

Most things are worth giving another chance, given the time and the interest in the community of people who do like it. I don't think the first season presents the show at its strongest -- the third season, for my money, does that -- but if it's what you have, it's what you have. (Borrowing from a library or a video store is probably the more cost-effective way to sample, though.)

 

[lovetrek74]

Thank you Nesbuj (hope I spelled that correctly).

I may just go ahead and get Season Three. I'm a bit hungry for trek I haven't watched (which is plenty, actually. I am only well-versed in TOS and TNG).

Cheers,

LT74

 

[Michael]

I was left thinking the Great Bird would not have approved.

Seriously, do you really care? I mean, Roddenberry might very well not have approved of the latter part of TNG. Hell, he even disapproved on some of the best Trek movies!

Oh, and by the way: Welcome to the board!

 

[Captain X]

I don't think all that highly of GR, personally. Yeah, he had some great ideas, but he also had plenty of sucky ones (just watch the first couple of seasons of TNG ). Kind of like B&B that way actually, so I wouldn't put him up on too high of a pedestal.

 

[lovetrek74]

Thank you for the welcome!

Actually, I do kind of care. I think the balance of evidence that I have seen suggests he had the most finely-tuned judgment when it came to what trek's intent and purpose was (aside from entertaining).

As for "personally": I have not met him "personally" but maybe you mean that the rumors, or other information and psuedo-information, that you have heard about his life, outside of his professional activities, have turned you off to him. If so, that is your business. I have neither heard nor read anything that really puts me off. It's surely beside the point as long as there are no capital crimes lurking somewhere. ;-)

It is, to (re-)coin a term, "illogical" to blame him for everything you didn't like in seasons one and two of TOS. This is logically equivalent to giving him full credit for everything that appeared.

I like his sensibilities to the extent that I have been able to discern that which is *his* and that which is *someone elses*.

And, finally, opinion is going to be divided about the trek movies. Everyone has their favorite.

Trek on!

LT74

 

[lovetrek74]

My apologies, you said "TNG" not "TOS".

Yeah, season one of TNG sucked. I don't even own it. I like season two, however....

 

[Michael]

^ I can't speak for Captain X, but I think you misinterpreted the "personally" part in his post, too.

 

[crouteru]

I've recently been watching Enterprise from the beginning, and yes, the episodes do seem to suffer from that OK-but-very-standard-fare problem that plagued Voyager through most of it's run. I'm happy to say though that the third and fourth seasons feel much more original and fresh in comparison to the first two.

 

[HRHTheKING]

DS9 was very sophisticated IMO.

When that show ended and I was left with just VOY and then ENT, it was a massive let-down.

The difference in quality was immense. The highs of DS9 and the lows of VOY/ENT

 

[kalysto]

I actually agree with both JiNX and commodore64, regarding Trip's character anyway. I did enjoy his boyish charm and touch of humour in the early seasons, but the idea of the whole engineering betting thing is lame to say the least. I never found him dumb, a little stereotyped, but I'm Australian, and can't really say I know too much about regional stereotypical behaviours in the US. Was he really so over the top?

There was actually a good quote in the Trip thread...can do laid-back that doesn’t make you think “brain-dead.”. That really was Trip for me. Imagine Trip's script in the hands of a less charismatic actor? Would have been so so so much worse!

 

[ChristopherPike]

Perhaps we're all mistaking dumbed down with down-to-earth and modern? I preferred the technobabble taking a back-seat, in favour of a shift in focus to character interaction... regardless of whether anyone liked this crew or not. With Voyager, technology was the answer to everything. Janeway would give the order for buttons to be pressed usually preceeded by some nonsense jargon and then we cut to the scene where everyone gets a pat on the back. Archer and his crew had to rely on their wits more. Because that often ended in the worst case scenario like sending in the MACOs and action flick style beatings, brute force came out on top. I can appreciate that appears less intelligent than other Star Trek series. It's all a matter of taste. Constantly having the entire TNG crew in conference, while there were Romulans/Klingons chomping at the bit on the viewscreen, always annoyed the hell out of me too!

I liked Enterprise precisely because it didn't put on airs and graces and in the final analysis wasn't all that sophisticated.

 

[HRHTheKING]

I don't think ENT was down to Earth.

The "contemporary style in the future" gimmick that Berman may have believed he crafted for ENT never happened IMO.

I think Firefly was more down to Earth than ENT. Realistic dialogue and character interactions.

 

[KayArr]

In all the forums that I've participated in about tv shows, I've never once argued that something was dumbed down. All you are really saying is that fans of the show are dumb and you are intelligent--that's why the fans enjoy and you don't. I loved Enterprise--it's my favorite Trek, and I've been watching Trek since TOS was in reruns in the 70s, like a lot of people here. I loved the ship, the uniforms, the characters, everything--I thought it was a very appropriate prequel. I liked the different-style Vulcans, I liked the idea behind Hoshi's character, and I liked the interaction between the characters. I hated the TCW, and I wasn't happy about the way the current characters moved to the background to bring in Brent Spiner and MU episodes in season 4. It's really all about taste and what you enjoy. You can state that you don't enjoy the premise of a show without implying that anyone who likes it is stupid. DS9 is not to my taste, I didn't like the Israel/Palestine feel. On the other hand Enterprise is to my taste--I like the character interaction. That doesn't make me smarter or better than DS9 fans--or stupider and less sophisticated, either! I loved Firefly, too, and the first two seasons of New BSG. It's really all about what you find entertaining or thought provoking or both--to each his own. But hey, I guess we need to argue to have forums. I just wish folks would lay off "dumbed down."

 

[SFRabid]

... I never found him dumb, a little stereotyped, but I'm Australian, and can't really say I know too much about regional stereotypical behaviours in the US. Was he really so over the top?

There was actually a good quote in the Trip thread...can do laid-back that doesn’t make you think “brain-dead.”. That really was Trip for me. Imagine Trip's script in the hands of a less charismatic actor? Would have been so so so much worse!

Being from the south I have to say the writers were taking it a bit far in the first two seasons. I never thought of the show being dumbed down, just the writers. When I first heard the line about Trip not being good with the "two trains traveling" problem I remember thinking "how stupid can these writers be?"


The following is NOT directed at the original poster.
But, all of the ST shows have flaws. Focusing on them does nothing but ruin the entertainment value. In my opinion people should either watch or don't watch. Enough already of this "you are stupid if you watch this show" attitude. People who come here and critciize ENT fans for being ENT fans are and insist on arguing about how bad the show is compared to TOS or DS9 are really just showing deficiencies in their own personalities.

 

[Captain X]

^ I can't speak for Captain X, but I think you misinterpreted the "personally" part in his post, too.

Yeah he did. I was referring to my own personal opinion of the man, not that I knew him personally. Naturally being critical of GR tends to make me something of a target of criticism myself, because so many Star Trek fans tend to practically deify him because they believe that he could do no wrong.

 

[commodore64]

The two trains traveling problem is meant to show -- see Trip is just like you. In fact, his "everyman" quality is why people liked him, I think. I'm from the South -- I grew up in Florida and Texas. I never was offended by the portrayal of Southerners, only bothered by Trip's Florida panhandle accent. No one from there sounds like that. Just like I wasn't bothered by Dr. McCoy's "I'm just a simple, country doctor" routine or "I'm just a Southern gentleman, mint-julip, sipping luddite" routine. We knew he was more. (Trip was also the McCoy character.)

LoveTrek - welcome to the forum. Season 3 - overall - is pretty good. The Forge from season 4 is not to be missed. I agree with your disappointment in Voyager; I too was unhappy with it. Enterprise did have elements of Voyager, which I think ultimately spelled the demise of the show and poor ratings. But there are gems, where the writers tapped into the *real* TOS (like The Forge) not just a bunch of references to stuff with poor execution. They also took chances like Azati Prime/Damage and Twilight!