• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Do you like ENT or not,why?

I like certain elements of it, but I've posted all over in other threads all the ways I felt the show betrayed its own premise right from the pilot episode.

Loved the Andorian stuff, and Shran.

I do go back and cherry pick various episodes to rewatch on a fairly regular basis.
 
It seems to me that the Vulcans were working on the principles of the Prime Directive: you don't "give" things to cultures until they can produce things at the same technological level.
It wasn't just a case of not giving things to Humans (although Archer bitched about that), it was the holding Humans back from advancing, using their influence to slow things down for the Vulcans own reasons.
they were writing Archer and Trip in a way intended to engender audience sympathy rather than audience disdain
Or, the writers were showing Archer's ongoing dislike of T'Pol, and the fact that he didn't want her on his ship and would question every instant of her possible making a mistake.
 
And what did T'Pol do that warranted such dislike from Archer, other than existing? He (and Trip) were clearly shown to be racist, and the audience was supposed to sympathize with them. It didn't matter if the Vulcans were dicks or not, or holding things back from them or not. The point is that we were supposed to empathize with people who racially discriminated against another people. Was that the intent of the writers? I'm not sure. Possibly, possibly not. But there's no denying that this was the result.
 
I agree that it came off as though we're supposed to empathize with Archer and Trip. I hope the writers were aware of how they were making them look and that their bigotry was intended to come off as a flaw, not a virtue. I would also hope all if not most of the audience was able to see it for what it was regardless of the writers' intentions, but I don't know whether that's the case either.

Could be worth a poll?
 
I loved T’Pol from the jump. Now, I came in late so hardly an unbiased opinion but she’s the best. She’s trying so hard to keep the foolhardy humans from running headlong to their deaths. I thought Archer and Trip came across like ignorant rubes. Ignorant rubes with good intentions and full of wonder and a spirit of adventure but ignorant rubes nonetheless.
 
Sure, Archer started out in "Broken Bow" (even the prologue with li'l Jonny) resentful of Vulcans, including T'Pol, because he blamed them for holding back his dad, and humanity. (Which they did - Soval told Forrest that.) BUT by the end of the episode, Archer had saved T'Pol's life, let her remain acting Captain, apologized to her for his preconceived notions regarding her, and asked her to stay on board as Science Officer. By "Shadows of P'Jem" he fights tooth and nail to keep T'Pol on Enterprise. By "Fusion" he literally fights Tolaris in order to get him tossed off the ship, to keep T'Pol safe - and he's totally pissed that T'Pol won't press charges and get justice. By that last scene in "Fusion," and his concern for her, and his guilt for putting T'Pol and Tolaris together, I see no animosity against her anymore. By "Acquisition" their partnership has progressed to the point where she teases him when he's cuffed and she has the key. By "Shockwave II" after T'Pol's speech convinces the VHC not to recall Enterprise, Archer wants to show his gratitude so much he wakes her to tell her she "put it over the top."

No, it didn't happen immediately, it took half a season. But his struggle to widen his horizons regarding T'Pol was the same metaphor for the struggle of humans vs Vulcans, and Tucker vs T'Pol, as they learned and grew.

After "Shockwave II" Archer and T'Pol were, to my view, committed shipmates and friends. In "The Expanse" he's concerned when she decides to resign the VHC to stay with ENT. At the end of "Impulse" he refuses to leave her behind. And Archer's huge distrust of Vulcans-- actually, the VHC-- lingered even after he accepted T'Pol, and it ended up being totally true - the spy station on P'Jem, plotting for war against Andoria, V'Las's duplicity, the sacking of Soval - and the VHC's terrible treatment of T'Pol herself.

Sure, the showrunners wanted us to sympathize with Archer and Tucker (they were the leads, etc)... but in-universe, the setup seems to be because they were human, and the Vulcans were alien. Archer's friendship with T'Pol, and Phlox too for that matter, was about their value as shipmates, then as people. The whole point of science fiction is to look at humanity, with all its flaws and limitations, and hopefully see humans accept, even embrace, those who are different. ENT did that all the way to the end, with Paxton's xenophobia.
 
The cast was better than the writing, especially in the early seasons. Overall I liked Enterprise, but it didn't come together as well as the other Berman-era shows. Even the Xindi arc isn't comparable to the Dominion War or to what Voyager did with the Borg and Species 8472. How many fans want to see what the Xindi are up to in the Picard era, or far future Discovery era? Enterprise's best episodes were the ones that referenced other shows, like "In a Mirror, Darkly," "Cold Station 12," "The Augments," and "Regeneration." In a way that's kind of sad, but at least Enterprise did have a few truly great episodes.
 
I’m just curious, but how would you react if you felt like the Vulcans, who you thought would help humanity, holds humanity back and does everything to foil progress until the Kir’Shara is discovered. I probably would be pissed off as well.

I wouldn't threaten to knock them on their asses and basically act like an overly emotional child every time one of them entered the room. It was just a dumb way to deal with the situation that made it look like perhaps the Vulcans were right.
 
So I'm late to the party and haven't been here for a long time (personal stuff), but I wanted to chime in at this opportune moment to reiterate how much I have always loved Enterprise.

... And I still think Khan is a dumbass. No, I am never letting this go.
 
And what did T'Pol do that warranted such dislike from Archer, other than existing?

That was it in a nutshell- she was Vulcan, and Archer had it in for the Vulcans. He was definitely bigoted against them at the beginning of the show, but he had definitely come around by the end of it.

The less said the better about the blundering way the NX-01 just warped off into nowhere and began attempting to contact species and hand out Earth's address at every turn. The lack of procedural.... procedures on display was frankly unbelievable to the point of being story-breaking. It's like they were totally winging it. In fact, they were totally winging it. And it cost them dearly before it was all over.
 
So I'm late to the party and haven't been here for a long time (personal stuff), but I wanted to chime in at this opportune moment to reiterate how much I have always loved Enterprise.

... And I still think Khan is a dumbass. No, I am never letting this go.
Howdy stranger- nice to see you again!
 
I bleed Enterprise.

Look at my veins. LOOK AT MY VEINS!!!!

AND HEAR THE SONG OF MY PEOPLE!!!!

Its been a long road....
 
I agree that it came off as though we're supposed to empathize with Archer and Trip. I hope the writers were aware of how they were making them look and that their bigotry was intended to come off as a flaw, not a virtue. I would also hope all if not most of the audience was able to see it for what it was regardless of the writers' intentions, but I don't know whether that's the case either.

Could be worth a poll?
Part of the reason I didn't like Enterprise was because the writers/showrunners deliberately wrote the male humans as gee shucks/dumb/ clueless/classless rubes. And T'Pol was written to have a stick up her butt, and she was rude as well, but in this case it seems as if to emphasize that she was better than the Starfleet officers. It was just immature writing all around. An early example of the Mary Sueism that we see in extreme form in STD and Lower Decks. I saw the original Star Trek (TOS) starting when I was ten in 1966. You don't make yourself look better by denigrating, in any way, other people. You lower yourself. In TOS, prejudice and one up manship was generally a character flaw, and one that resulted in character growth or lesson learned (apart from McCoy ragging on Spock but Kirk generally intervened, he didn't condone it). In STD, Picard, Lower Decks, etc., and all this supposedly modern better trek, this kind of disrespect and abuse is regarded as perfectly fine even lauded. It is insulting to the audience, to the actors and to the franchise.
 
Yes I like the show I've been watching season 3 again and liked it after not seeing the show for a long time. You get to see the characters grow through their trials and were interesting characters. I just wish the show hadn't been canceled and we d gotten 7 seasons like the other shows did. When it comes to Picard Season 1 I didn't like how poor Picard was getting yelled at by some of the female characters acting like jerks and talked down to him like he was dumb and not as smart as they were. I didn't like the tv writers did that to Picard's character.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top