Continuity between series helped Enterprise fail?
- Thread starter Neutral Zone
- Start date
Another plus about Enterprise is something none of the other Series did, the NX-01 was seriously scarred for several episodes in a row, throughout most of S3 actually, the ship got progressively more beat up. It was like how "Year of Hell" could've been handled in Voyager, if they had chosen to make that a season, rather than a 2 part episode.
Could that have been a reaction to the critisim levelled at VOY for how the ship looked brand new virtually every week?
As for other shows not doing, the Defaint was docked at a starbase which helped reapir ships during the Dominion war. TNG, the Enterprise put into a starbase for repairs.
Whilst the same could have been said of VOY, the situtation was slighlty different. with DSN and TNG they would have had access to replacement parts without resources being an issue. As well as a full team of engineers dedicated to repairing damage. In VOY they alledgedly had resource issues and a limited number of crew.
As for other shows not doing, the Defaint was docked at a starbase which helped reapir ships during the Dominion war. TNG, the Enterprise put into a starbase for repairs.
Whilst the same could have been said of VOY, the situtation was slighlty different. with DSN and TNG they would have had access to replacement parts without resources being an issue. As well as a full team of engineers dedicated to repairing damage. In VOY they alledgedly had resource issues and a limited number of crew.
Over on the VOY board, they say that it wasn't feasible to battle-damage the actual ship model being photographed. Once all ships went digital, that was no longer an issue. An unsatisfying excuse, perhaps, but better than nothing, I guess...
I don't see why it wouldn't be feasible to battle-damage the filming model, too. I mean, it's not like they were ever using the Intrepid-class model to represent any ship besides Voyager anyway. So why not go ahead and make the ship look progressively worse for the wear every season? It's more dramatic, it's more believable because the crew wouldn't have access to a starbase, and it adds character.
Well, because A) the crew would do their best to repair major damage, and B) one never knows when they might run into a friendly species that helps them fix up real nice. So a linear progression of increasing damage actually would make a bit less sense than the magical/difficult but rarely-mentioned between-episode repairs we have to assume often occurred.
Because if you can fix your ship, you do. Maximum readiness means maximum safety. If that means a few days or weeks of lost time, tough beans.
Because if you can fix your ship, you do. Maximum readiness means maximum safety. If that means a few days or weeks of lost time, tough beans.
No, it doesn't make less sense unless the writers decide to make the Voyager crew capable of repairs without help from a port, or unless the writers decide to write in friendly ports.
There's also the problem of why an alien port would have the necessary parts or compatible technology as to make Voyager look like she just came from Utopia Planitia. In fact, the more time Voyager spends at alien ports, the more she should visibly look like she's had alien technology added to her -- she should start looking like she's not purely Starfleet.
It's more believable if they write it so that the crew just isn't able to repair enough to keep the ship from starting to look bad, and so that alien ports just aren't able to give her a fresh-from-Spacedock look.
^Agreed Sci, from watching the show it appeared races got closer and closer to UFP tech levels the closer they were to the UFP. We also know from the other shows esp. TNG that the Federation uses certain technology that even the other major AQ/BQ don't have. (even if that's in hull materials)
No one is saying the ship should look damaged every week, but over the course of episodes we would see the ship looking better. Once it went fully CGI this was acheivable.
If I had to think of a reason as to why they didn't go down this route. It was down to the episodic nature of show. Were it could be re-run out of sequence, allowed for casual viewers to drop in and view the show etc..
It's bad TV it's treating viewers as morons, your average viewer is realtively intelligent. They realise they might have missed an episode, thats why we have things such as 'previously on' or 'last time' where you bring the viewer up to date with what has happend. Even the fictional ST universe has rules, VOY started to push those rules to breaking point. I.e towards the point were the suspension of disbelief is broken.
If you say that you have limited resources, you better live upto that or show/explain how you got around it.
If you say that you have x number of torpedeos with no means of replacing them, then you better show/explain how you got around it.
It doesn't take much to do so
Captains Log stardate 51345.2, We have just spend two weeks with the Ansari, who helped us repair our recent damage as well as bring or torpedeo compliment back to full.
a few seconds of dialogue, and one of the critisims about the ship looking brand new and having torpedeos is resolved.
No one is saying the ship should look damaged every week, but over the course of episodes we would see the ship looking better. Once it went fully CGI this was acheivable.
If I had to think of a reason as to why they didn't go down this route. It was down to the episodic nature of show. Were it could be re-run out of sequence, allowed for casual viewers to drop in and view the show etc..
It's bad TV it's treating viewers as morons, your average viewer is realtively intelligent. They realise they might have missed an episode, thats why we have things such as 'previously on' or 'last time' where you bring the viewer up to date with what has happend. Even the fictional ST universe has rules, VOY started to push those rules to breaking point. I.e towards the point were the suspension of disbelief is broken.
If you say that you have limited resources, you better live upto that or show/explain how you got around it.
If you say that you have x number of torpedeos with no means of replacing them, then you better show/explain how you got around it.
It doesn't take much to do so
Captains Log stardate 51345.2, We have just spend two weeks with the Ansari, who helped us repair our recent damage as well as bring or torpedeo compliment back to full.
a few seconds of dialogue, and one of the critisims about the ship looking brand new and having torpedeos is resolved.
Frankly I liked Enterprise a lot. I've watched every episode of every series mutiple times, including TOS prior to syndication. I've seen every movie several times. I find complaints about ENT to be silly. If you want to complain about failure, look at TOS....only 3 years. Never the less it was a great show.
I wanted to like Enterprise. It had a lot of thing going for it. But it had a lot going against it too. I could never buy into Scott Bakula. Something so Hawkeye Pierce about him. I wanted to slap Hoshi. There was just something about her. And I despised Dr. Phlox. But I liked the other characters and actors. I was also disappointed the series didn’t have more of a TOS feel to it. Try listening to the show. Close your eyes and listen. There was nothing really to distinguish it from TNG, Voyager, or DS9. It’s like all those Scooby Doo rip-offs in the 70s. Before you knew it there were dozens of shows with the same format, from the same producers – mystery solving meddling kids and their pet. Star Trek was flooded with Berman and Bragga on both the little screen and the big screen. Personally, I had enough. That’s also why I welcomed the 2009 movie. We finally had something fresh in Trek.
The reason ENT failed is because the audience got sick of seeing dusted off VOY scripts which were originally dusted off TNG scripts every week.
The continuity "goofs" with the Ferengi and Borg are only goofs if you assume Starfleet has some comprehensive and reliable way of cataloging all possible information about the alien species they encounter and then quickly retrieving and cross-referencing that information later on, even centuries later.
In other words, they're goofs if you assume Starfleet's mission is exploration and they have the first frakking clue what they're doing. If not, then sure, they can encounter alien species and not record anything for future use. I'd say they're tourists, not explorers, but even tourists take pictures.
The name is obviously derived from Earth lingo anyway - "farengi" means foreigner in Persian - so whatever the Ferengi actually call themselves, it's something else. Just like with the Romulans, it's a bad UT translation.
That information might mean the difference between life and death for an away team encountering a possibly new, possibly known species. It should be an absolute priority if they care about their people's safety at all.
And there's no reason to believe the Earth-Romulan War wiped out all Starfleet's databases including all their backups. What nonsense.
There should be no "limbo" for Starfleet's databases. I typed "Ferengi" into Google and found out that it's derived from Persian (not Hindi as I incorrectly remembered) in approximately three seconds. If I can do that sitting at home in the 21st C, Starfleet can immediately ID Ferengi in the 24th.
The continuity "goofs" with the Ferengi and Borg are only goofs if you assume Starfleet has some comprehensive and reliable way of cataloging all possible information about the alien species they encounter and then quickly retrieving and cross-referencing that information later on, even centuries later.
In other words, they're goofs if you assume Starfleet's mission is exploration and they have the first frakking clue what they're doing. If not, then sure, they can encounter alien species and not record anything for future use. I'd say they're tourists, not explorers, but even tourists take pictures.
So the only information they record is the name of the species? Not what they look like? Not what they smell like? No DNA traces from skin flaking off? (Ewww, but maybe they can have the servo droids pick those up.) Some explorers!
The name is obviously derived from Earth lingo anyway - "farengi" means foreigner in Persian - so whatever the Ferengi actually call themselves, it's something else. Just like with the Romulans, it's a bad UT translation.
Sure, if you assume Starfleet is utterly and completely incompetent, there's no way to retrieve this information in the 24th C. They can fly across the galaxy, but they can't give their people a tricorder with the full databate of all previous information gathered on all Starfleet missions, including facial recognition, and DNA and odor sensors, and a bunch of other stuff I can't even think of right now?
That information might mean the difference between life and death for an away team encountering a possibly new, possibly known species. It should be an absolute priority if they care about their people's safety at all.
And there's no reason to believe the Earth-Romulan War wiped out all Starfleet's databases including all their backups. What nonsense.
There should be no "limbo" for Starfleet's databases. I typed "Ferengi" into Google and found out that it's derived from Persian (not Hindi as I incorrectly remembered) in approximately three seconds. If I can do that sitting at home in the 21st C, Starfleet can immediately ID Ferengi in the 24th.
Last edited:
A entire season long arc of the creation of the Federation? Subcommittees, speeches, power brokering, back room arm twisting. Perhaps the season closer could consist of forty-five straight minute of people signing important documents?
Oh baby, there's some sexy television.
I would think something more along the lines of the HBO miniseries John Adams, m'self.
Someday if Star Trek is on Showtime, we might see that.
But I'd have been happy if the Birth of the Federation was told from the perspective of the USS Enterprise fighting the Earth-Romulan war, with the Vulcans as their only allies at first, and inbetween fights they can scramble to build other alliances with Andorians and Tellerites et al.
TNG's first two seasons were worse than anything ENT ever did. But it got a pass because there was a lot less competition for the audience then. People didn't have 500 channels all screaming for their attention, and the internet certainly wasn't what it is today.
No show (unless it's some reality drivel that is aimed at an idiotic audience) can afford to pull that lame shit anymore - which is a good thing, really. But it does make networks more likely to just greenlight the reality drivel for idiots. Easier way to make a buck.
That information necessarily survives a devastating war plus two centuries is indeed complete nonsense.
By the way, would you mind to send me a copy of the Seattle Times from the 18th Nov 1825? Or is the respective public library "utterly and completely incompetent"?
That quality and audience, ratings or whatever have something to do with each other is a fallacy you repeat ad infinitum.
I've never seen so many crybabies. People getting their diapers in a wad cause it just not the same. boohoo
Getting a little snippy in here, isn't it?
Let's ease off duelling accusations of "nonsense" and give the eyeroll smilies a rest. (I'm looking at you, horatio and Temis.) It's a TV show, okay?
Let's ease off duelling accusations of "nonsense" and give the eyeroll smilies a rest. (I'm looking at you, horatio and Temis.) It's a TV show, okay?
ImCaptKirk, welcome to the forum, and please swing by the FAQ and have another look at our rules about trolling. Refraining from making fun of your fellow posters would help keep the atmosphere here so much friendlier. Thanks.
Similar threads
