News Billingsley: Why Star Trek: Enterprise Failed

A new news article has been published at TrekToday:

During last week’s Galaxy Con Live event, as reported by TrekMovie, John Billingsley explained why Star Trek: Enterprise didn’t live up to...

Continue reading...

 

I agree with Billingsley. I think he pretty much nailed the major issues with the series. I've been looking at it again from time to time, and while I thought the first season was very weak originally and the characters were drab, they are faring much better the second time around, so I don't fault the writing as much as I once did.

I definitely see studio pressure being a problem and I have to say too that the old dreaded B&B creative fatigue had to be there as well.

It was time for a shakeup, some fresh blood. I wish Manny Coto had been the showrunner from jump. ENT felt stodgy and standing still compared to many of the other genre shows of that period. It really wasn't must see television in the way 24 or new BSG were.

Looking back, it was a solid show, with very good production values, and felt more faithful to the Trek aesthetic than CBS All Access Trek, but that wasn't enough.

The Suliban weren't bad villains but definitely could've been developed more. That said, I wish the Romulan presence had been there from the pilot to give old Trek fans the anticipation of the looming Earth-Romulan War. I also think Terra Prime could've, should've been a bigger problem in the series, and introduced much earlier. Paxton could've been a recurring villain, a dark mirror to Archer in a way.

 

I think the studio execs kept pushing for something that was more status quo (when compared to previous Trek shows) and that hurt the series. Manny Coto made the show what it should have been from the start. I believe that, had that been done from the outset, the show would have lasted 7 years.

I do enjoy Enterprise but things could have been better.

 

I enjoyed Enerprise as well, there was a period in season 2 where I was getting less interested, there were a couple of very weak episodes in a row. I am happy I stuck with it because the show went on to become one of my favourites. For me the show has a lot of rewatch value.

I would have been interested to see the proposd first season which would have taken place on Earth. That could have really set it apart from the rest of the franchise.

 

Phlox sure likes the f-bomb

 

Nothing wrong with that!

 

I just can't imagine Dr Phlox swearing like a pirate

 

Get these m***********g Regulan Bloodworms out of my m***********g sickbay!

Have to agree with his sentiments. The show had loads of potential, if they'd taken even just another six months or year to recharge, hire Manny Coto and more writers to inject new life into the project, then they could've hit the ground running. Taking more risks would've also helped the show stand out.

Like Voyager, it's a show that missed the mark more often than not, especially early on, but when they got it right it was very enjoyable (though I still can't stand Bakula's Archer).

 

I think it was just a lack of imagination by guys who'd run out of steam. Someone else with a clear vision could have made a good go of it. Probably not on UPN but maybe.

 

I'm watching ENT now for the first time. I'm on season three and the Xindi arc is pretty dark. Darker than anything else done in trek up till that time. An entire season on one storyline is pretty bold for ST. I'm enjoying it but I have to wonder if it was a little too much for your typical trek fan of the time. No idea, just speculating.

 

He has such a friendly voice. Best bed-side manner of all Trek docs, except Crusher.

 

Already been done, sort of.

 

Even going back to TNG...how staid,sedate and just safe it all is.
A couple of hundred of hours of produced Trek later and Ent was just stale.

Lack of ambition or lack of courage I dunno.

 

Not sure I agree with your exception - Dr Phlox wins it for me every time.

 

I spoilered the rant because it is too much.

Spoiler

I'm watching Enterprise currently (for the first time) and it's driving me up the wall. I'm willing to give it a pass for including certain anachronistic technology/bad guys/etc because I do have the slightest inkling of what producers are.

But the characters are constantly saying and doing stupid things. There's one conversation that goes something like,

Bridge Crew 1: "Should we hail [aliens on new planet]?"

Bridge Crew 2 (Hoshi, I think): "Hail who? There's dozens of cities down there."

Bridge Crew 3 (Archer, pretty sure): "Hold one, we don't know if they're using high freq carrier waves or smoke signals down there!"

A later example: I've just gotten to the part where they find the Syrannites. I know Archer doesn't know the DNA evidence was fake, but he already got told to his face by the Vulcan ambassador that blaming the Syrannites is bullshit AND as he leaves the Enterprise, he tells Trip "whatever the Vulcans tell you, believe the opposite."

So I expected that when he reached the Syrrannites, he intended to ask for their side of the story. Nope! He just angrily accuses them of mass murder...because the Vulcan High Command told him they did it. Which he knows is likely a lie. I guess he hit his head really hard at some point off-camera.

I'm sorry, I'm just so frustrated with the show right now.

Love Phlox though. I found him extremely creepy at first, but he grew on me.

 

I agree a lot with what you said here Bry, but I got to admit that Archer has grown on me, as has Bakula's performance. If the fates had been kind and I had been showrunner of Enterprise then I would've gone with another character to captain the Enterprise. (Jimmy Smits, Benjamin Bratt, Esai Morales, Dennis Quaid, and even Neal McDonough I've all imagined in the captain's chair, and sometimes Trip). However, I do think Bakula brought more of a command presence than I originally thought. It's just his character wasn't well-developed and it's hard to buy that he's the guy who should be commanding the first Warp 5 starship. They should've done more than to have him be a daddy's boy with a chip on his shoulder.

If anything, maybe have it where instead of Henry Archer, or only Henry, Archer too was stymied by the Vulcans time and again. Make it even more personally affecting to him. There's too much lack of backstory IMO for him. Granted, that could be said of any Trek captain, though not Trek lead, because Burnham's backstory has been fleshed out better than just about any of the Trek leads.

While we might not have gotten tons of backstory for most Trek leads, it still feels to me like there was some thought there and I don't get that sense for Archer. And the backstory I'm most thinking about his Starfleet history. They missed out on doing more with that. They brought in Hernandez too late. She could've been a recurring character from Season 1, but that would've gotten in the way of the Archer-T'Pol teases I suppose.

 

I've not rewatched for a while, so my perspective could shift though I find that doubtful.

Some excellent choices there who could've brought a little more stage presence and/or likeability to the character.

It's the nepotism element that really doesn't work for me, other than having a famous father and being a pilot he really doesn't seem to have any sort of experience that demonstrate why he should be given the command, his diplomacy skill is sketchy (he has a major beef against Earth's closest ally) and his tactical skills seem almost non-existent (they may have wanted to go in peace, but had to know that others might not take kindly to another race poking around).

Hernandez as a romantic foil for Archer would've been a nice addition from the start, hell they could've had it they were married once but separated though there were still sparks between them. Personally, I never found any sort of chemistry between Archer and T'Pol and I'm so glad they dropped it in favour of T'Pol/Trip (definitely more going on there).

 

That nepotism thing didn't help. I wasn't a VOY watcher like that but whenever I learned that Janeway had an admiral father it never felt to me like he had any hand in her becoming captain. She owned the role in a way that Archer-especially how I felt about him back in the day didn't. Back then, Bakula came off constricted and looked constipated all the time. I'm more charitable to him now, but like you said, the showrunners/writers didn't do him much favors by not giving the character the background to make him seem like the most qualified person. It's just he had a famous dad and he was friends with Admiral Forrest.

I like your thinking about Archer and Hernandez perhaps being married. That would've been nice, and different, and cut out the unneeded sexual tension with T'Pol anyway. Trek hasn't had a good track record trying to hook up their captains with members of their crews. I didn't really get romantic chemistry between T'Pol and Archer too, though I do think they did a decent job developing their friendship. Though I wish we had gotten a moment where Archer definitely realizes that some of his views about Vulcans were biased and that there's much to learn from them. The show totally wasted Archer hosting Surak's katra to transform the character into a wiser, more Trekkian captain. They didn't even do much with Archer's genes being spliced with Klingon DNA outside of a joke. Been nice if it had had a lingering after effect. Because by the end of the series' run Archer had possessed the soul of a revered Vulcan leader and had his genes mixed with Klingons. Was he even fully human after that? In a way he was a walking symbol of the Federation to come and more could've been done with that.

I really enjoyed Michael Jan Friedman's Starfleet: Year One story and I wish ENT's writers had taken some inspiration from that. And had a similar conflict between a more militaristic view versus a scientific one.

 

Janeway definitely felt as though she'd earned the rank and position.

They could've made him the Boomer (since it was wasted on Mayweather), born and raised in space, so he's got plenty of light-years under his belt and a freer/looser notion of how to get things done--so he could have a more swashbuckling charm to him (something a young Jim Kirk might've looked up at and aspired too decades later).

More focus on the growth of the friendship and his growing to trust Vulcans would've been a far better route to take their story, going from butting heads and disagreeing over how to approach situations, then on to a grudging respect before finally trusting and liking one another. Far more mileage in that rather than Archer just being horny.

A great idea that could've been explored in the 5th season, with all that's happened to him, is he still considered human and what fall out that might have for the ship/Starfleet--could've been a great way to keep Terra Prime in the background as a thorn in their side.

I LOVE Year One!!! A grander scale, jumping across several ships and locations, with a wider array of characters, exploring the beginning of the Federation would've been my pitch for the show.