Exactly right, which was my point.
Bakula; a downer?
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
That's considered online, too. I remember "Welsey, die, die, die" newsgroups. Whedon seems to have done okay. Hell, there's "Barney, die, die, die" newsgroups and some children seem to love the big, purple dinosaur. No surprise people who love Barney, don't hang out at the die, die, die newsgroups.
I've been to three different online resources for Star Trek, and two out of three loved Archer. (This one out of three.) So am I to suppose everyone loves Archer? No. Nor should everyone here assume "everyone hates Archer."
Here's another example, I know a lot of people who think Tucker was a terrible engineer, especially compared to LaForge and "Save the Day" Scotty. Do I assume, since the majority of people I know feel that way, that everyone has that same opinion? It would be foolish to do so. I haven't done a Gallup Poll on Enterprise.
There is no universal truth, except: there is no universal truth.
Last edited:
Well if you're referring to life in general, then I'll have to vehemently disagree.
In fact, we'll also have to disagree about some Trek issues too, because from what I've seen, the hard core online Trek fans view Archer as their least favorite Trek captain, and the hard core online ENT fans dislike TaTV, and love Trip (as an engineer, I don't know, but they love the character).
So here's another "universal truth" I've found among the ENT online fandom; "Twilight" is a beloved ENT episode. So, let me hear again now how there are "no universal truths".
I'm listening.
There are philosophies that indicate there is only perception and ones that indicate there are truths. Obviously, you know my feelings: there are only perceptions.
You mentioned TATV -- it was voted as one of the best Archer episodes. So, someone somewhere must've liked it. Most people I know, other than those here, think it was okay. In fact, only here do I find bitterness (more than dislike) about it. And I think it tends to feed on each other. What was once, WTF? (which came out before the episode -- thinks that make you go hmmm), turned into: I HATE TATV!!!!!
Trip. You know, I think he's just fine. If I'd never come here, I would've liked him more. The guy at the convention didn't think much of "the engineer." And when we explained that people loved him (despite a smaller room devoted to Connor with fewer fans showing up), he acted confused.
I say again, there has never been an Enterprise Gallup Poll. When there is, and people everywhere are asked their opinions, I'll accept a majority of thought. Until then, I refuse -- mostly because I believe in humanity too much -- to think the BBS is it. That's just frightening.
At least we agree on something.
You mentioned TATV -- it was voted as one of the best Archer episodes. So, someone somewhere must've liked it. Most people I know, other than those here, think it was okay. In fact, only here do I find bitterness (more than dislike) about it. And I think it tends to feed on each other. What was once, WTF? (which came out before the episode -- thinks that make you go hmmm), turned into: I HATE TATV!!!!!
Trip. You know, I think he's just fine. If I'd never come here, I would've liked him more. The guy at the convention didn't think much of "the engineer." And when we explained that people loved him (despite a smaller room devoted to Connor with fewer fans showing up), he acted confused.
I say again, there has never been an Enterprise Gallup Poll. When there is, and people everywhere are asked their opinions, I'll accept a majority of thought. Until then, I refuse -- mostly because I believe in humanity too much -- to think the BBS is it. That's just frightening.
At least we agree on something.
And they say that the best tap dancing is on "So You Think You Can Dance".
Oh, no disagreement here. Bitterness about the show abounds among ENT fans for all sorts of different reasons.
Commie, I don't know from "this guy" you met at the con, or the "smaller room" for Connor, but in my travails around the 'net I've found that "Trip" was and is, apparently, universally loved.
Yes we do, and might I reiterate the part of my post you snipped:"Twilight" is a beloved ENT episode.
At least we agree on something.
We apparently also agree on this particular "universal truth", no?
Not the one I currently reside in.
I think if it asploded for that, the universe has bigger issues. (Nope.
)Yup. Uhm, I agree there is no universal truth.We apparently also agree on this particular "universal truth", no?
I think your world asploded.
I must admit when I heard that Scott Bakula was going to play Archer I thought 
But he did a grand job. I thoroughly enjoyed the series.
But he did a grand job. I thoroughly enjoyed the series.
Yup. Uhm, I agree there is no universal truth.
There is certainly "no universal truth" as far as personal likings/disliking go: as some people pointed out on this thread, there are fans who love Trip they are other who don't care for him particularly, some who like Twilight some who don't.
But doesn't mean there are no objective facts about the show one could agree to or have a rational discussion about?
I do hope not! For example, isn't it possible to like TOS and admit its production values are extremely poor? Or not being a fan or Archer character and yet admit Scott Bakula is doing a very fine job as far as we judge acting skills. Or on the contrary: to be a fan of Archer and see that in some episodes script is not consistent with the character he is supposed to be? Or TATV - since there was talk about it. One can like it or not, but there are some flaws in the episodes - Trip's death is arranged in very unconvincing way for example - we can surely all agree with?
I think facts are things that cannot be dismissed, right? Archer is a male. Reed is the tactical officer. Porthos is a Beagle.But doesn't mean there are no objective facts about the show one could agree to or have a rational discussion about?
Archer made bad decisions is up to interpretation, thus opinion. Opinions are awesome and the reason we're here, but they are not facts.
In other words, you should continue providing opinions, but despite what we all consider facts (really opinions), few of us will agree on everything. That's the great thing about opinions.
I think that's opinion. The production values for TOS in the 1960s was pretty decent. I think looking back, we may not think they're as good. But they've done some re-mastering which makes the production values for parts of TOS amazing ... better than even TNG (in my opinion).
A fact would be: TOS was made in the 60s. Spock was the first officer. Kirk was the captain.
I think this is all opinion. I guess what I was objecting to, is people saying: I know the definitive way everyone (or majority) feels about Archer, Trip, TATV, etc. Everyone can have opinions, but no one speaks for everyone.
All agree? Doubtful. Me personally? Maybe, but I just don't care. Trip isn't my favorite character on ENT, nor does he make my Star Trek top 10 favorite characters, probably not top 20 either. I think the character was "fine," and the actor who portrayed him was "fine." Amazing? Kept me watching? Best performance on ENT? No.Or TATV - since there was talk about it. One can like it or not, but there are some flaws in the episodes - Trip's death is arranged in very unconvincing way for example - we can surely all agree with?
Archer is my second favorite Star Trek character (he's complicated, flawed and complex) which I like. He's right after Mr. Spock and probably before Data and Picard. I thought John Billingsley was the best actor from ENT. My favorite episode is the Forge from ENT. I don't have a "type" for favorite characters; other favorite sci-fi characters include Avon (Blake's 7), Jayne (Firefly), Zhaan (Farscape - sorry, Angie), Mulder (X-Files) and Han Solo (Star Wars). Sometimes I wonder if things get rather cookie cutter around here. "She doesn't like Trip, she must like main characters only, she only likes male characters, she must just be a Scott Bakula fan ...." None of that is true.
Last edited:
What miriel may mean--let me know if I understand you correctly, miriel--is that, if we can set aside our personal, subjective (i.e., emotionally driven) likes and dislikes about the characters and portrayals, there is a way to look at these shows and episodes more objectively, and analyze their structural strengths and weaknesses. Was a character well motivated to take a certain action, or did that action seem inconsistent with the character as previously established? Was a pivotal scene set up well and credibly, or did it come off lame and contrived? ...That kind of thing.But doesn't mean there are no objective facts about the show one could agree to or have a rational discussion about?
Of course, even trained story analysts might have different takes on the effectiveness of a story...but probably less so than fans who luuurve or haaaate a character or show or episode.
Yes, that's exactly what I mean
, I'm so glad you understand me! While being a fan of some TV shows - Entrprise is surely one of them - I do love analysing them also as work of fiction, just as you said: it doubles the fun I have with the film, and if I can discuss it with someone - and I mean exactly this "discuss", not just express opinions - I always enjoy it immensely. And that's right that even experts not always agree on their analysis, but IMO there is a possiblity to establish and agree on some objective things.
Commodore: of course, we can choose to give an extremely strict definition to what a "fact" is (like Archer is a male etc.), but such a point of view leaves us indeed no other option than a total relativity. Going back to my opinion about TOS, for example - I do consider the show in relation to its place in the history of s-f and its historical merits (and I do enjoy watching it). However, comparing TOS special effects to those of Space1999 season 1, for example (there are only 5 years of difference between them), I cannot help noticing the gap of technical quality between them. And yet another example from Enterprise: much as I enjoy "Andorian incident" (one of my favourite of the first season), I'm still able to see some holes in the plot - and I don't think it's only a matter of "opinion" that there are some - it is a "fact" due to some faults of the script.
Iny any case, the point I would like to make is that trying to discuss the show as a piece of fiction doesn't take anything from the fun of enjoying it - quite the contrary, IMO
I agree with this.
I don't know if there are "facts" about the holes in Andorian Incident (although sounds like an intriguing thread and something fun to discuss).
Totally off track, but ... I loved Space 1999, but I don't think the production values are really better than TOS even in the five or six years difference. But that's my opinion.
Carry on!
I think there can be balance on boards---Farscape boards have little controversy about the show or characters. I have been on fan boards since '94 and this is one of the few to effectively rid itself of dissenting views by driving away people.This is to me sad because you need lots of viewpoints to have a good discussion. My last ban came from saying I didn't like the last novel in a thread which asked "Did you like...". Saying you liked TATV meant you hated Trip which I think stunned some new to the show and board people! Like commie I didn't have a negative opinion about Trip until this board. I did like Archer and was shocked that he was hated here but not other places as much except by cross over members many of whom tried to stir the hate on other boards with little success which seems to back the opinions commie and I heard at the Vegas con.When meeting with scifi fans one usually discuss various shows and to be honest even people who weren't more than occassional viewers of Ent say they liked Archer but didn't like the stories or were just tired of the trek formula.
I wasn't a big fan of "Twilight" either, so I think the universe is safe. As for Bakula, he's a great actor - just not in this role. The writing isn't there and as a result Bakula's performance is all over the place. Archer had his moments but I wouldn't want to serve under him.
As for Bakula, he's a great actor - just not in this role. The writing isn't there and as a result Bakula's performance is all over the place. Archer had his moments but I wouldn't want to serve under him.
I don't know if there are "facts" about the holes in Andorian Incident (although sounds like an intriguing thread and something fun to discuss).
Well, one very obvious thing: why haven't they just beamed up the landing party to Enterprise? The answer is obvious: because they would have ruined a hostage episode. Every time you have to content yourself with such an explanation, it means there is a flaw in the script. Some plausible motive should have been provided. But, as you said, it would be discussion for a separate thead.
I would love to discuss S1999 versus TOS production values: may be we will find some nice Base Alpha to do that
I wasn't a big fan of "Twilight" either, so I think the universe is safe.
Excellent statement!
Much of the blame for issues with Enterprise should fall on the writers and not on the individual actors such as Bakula
RobertScorpio
Pariah
I wasn't a big fan of "Twilight" either, so I think the universe is safe.
Excellent statement!
Much of the blame for issues with Enterprise should fall on the writers and not on the individual actors such as Bakula
I think you could make the same statement about the other shows as well. Janeway had the same issue it seems as well when it came to really pinning down her character with good writing.
Rob
Scorpio
I don't know if there are "facts" about the holes in Andorian Incident (although sounds like an intriguing thread and something fun to discuss).
Well, one very obvious thing: why haven't they just beamed up the landing party to Enterprise? The answer is obvious: because they would have ruined a hostage episode. ....
Not so obvious when you consider that in a real situation that would result in the hostages being killed. There are plenty of plot holes through Trek and every other TV series, but there are also plenty of people trying to create problems that are not there.
Trek is one of the few TV events that people who get off on hating it are more vocal than people who love it.
Similar threads
