I've always approached the decon scene from the opposite perspective - that it's a sexual scene trying to be asexual. I thought the totally unrelated dialogue, given in this matter-of-fact manner while doing this seeming sexual thing, was hilarious. It was as if they were saying, we're grownups here and we've gotten past the "oooh, boobies!!!" stage. (When clearly the audience hadn't.) Everything having to do with the human body isn't sexual, and even when it is, so what? That juxtaposition cracked me up.While I agree with the sentiment, the problem is that the de-con scene in the pilot was completely asexual while trying to be sexual. It was two sexually attractive people in their undies rubbing gel all over each other while having a sober conversation about politics and the psychology of a third party. It was ridiculous.It was an integral part of ENT from the start, so I have no idea what you mean when you say they added it.
Maybe you're referring to T'Pol's scene with Trip? If so, I think it was high time modern Trek became less prudish. Sexuality is a normal part of life and therefore should be a part of drama, too.
If they were trying to sexualise Trek then they'd get no complaint from me, but they were just just throwing T&A into a regular exposition scene and the whole thing was pathetic.
I thought the juxtaposition of sensual gel-rubbing and intimate touching, with an argument about ship's business, was very effective. And I would think the writers knew full well that viewers would be reacting in a big way to the glistening half-naked bodies, in contrast to Trip and T'Pol, who were ignoring them completely. Worked for me.I've always approached the decon scene from the opposite perspective - that it's a sexual scene trying to be asexual. I thought the totally unrelated dialogue, given in this matter-of-fact manner while doing this seeming sexual thing, was hilarious.
I'm not an ENT basher, I liked the show in some ways, but I do feel the decon scene deserves all the ridicule it gets. The fact is that it is in the pilot episode, this is part of the first impression we get of this show and it is just plain bad. Broken Bow isn't a bad pilot episode for the most part, but I really wish that my first impression of this show hadn't included such a ham-fisted attempt at sexing things up.The decon scene gets far more bashing than it deserves. ENT bashers point to it as though the whole series was full of these scenes but it was only shown once.
"You can't substitute tits and ass for good storytelling," she says bluntly. "You can have both, but you can't substitute one for the other, because the audience is not stupid. You can't just throw in frivolous, uncharacteristic... well, bull and think it's gonna help the ratings!"
Another example of Jolene biting the hand that feeds her. Perhaps that's one of the reasons she can't get a decent gig these days... Actually, she hasn't had a decent gig since Enterprise, to be fair.I was looking up Jolene quotes about her character and came upon one that sums up how I feel:
"You can't substitute tits and ass for good storytelling," she says bluntly. "You can have both, but you can't substitute one for the other, because the audience is not stupid. You can't just throw in frivolous, uncharacteristic... well, bull and think it's gonna help the ratings!"
OK Mach5, no one rips Jolene in front of me!! You should know better.Another example of Jolene biting the hand that feeds her. Perhaps that's one of the reasons she can't get a decent gig these days... Actually, she hasn't had a decent gig since Enterprise, to be fair.I was looking up Jolene quotes about her character and came upon one that sums up how I feel:
"You can't substitute tits and ass for good storytelling," she says bluntly. "You can have both, but you can't substitute one for the other, because the audience is not stupid. You can't just throw in frivolous, uncharacteristic... well, bull and think it's gonna help the ratings!"
But lets face it, the only reason anyone ever hires Jolene is the T&A factor, I mean, its not like she can actually act...
I actually do agree. I mean having sexuality on the show is one thing, having two people who are attracted ending up in bed together would work out as sexing it up and being emotional at the same time (character development) but the way ENT did it was just flesh for the sake of showing flesh and not real sexuality in terms of character or atmosphere.
Say, if Archer and Hernandez had ended up having sex it would've worked because of the atmosphere, the tone, the characters involved and still could be used as "sex sells" moment. But having a bunch of people who had just met sitting around half-naked rubbing gel on each other and not acting like it was arousing is just...false.
I think she was hired, maybe I'm naive, because of her acting ability and her looks. I assume it's why everyone on Ent was hired; Ent was a good-acting cast and good-looking cast.Another example of Jolene biting the hand that feeds her. Perhaps that's one of the reasons she can't get a decent gig these days... Actually, she hasn't had a decent gig since Enterprise, to be fair.
But lets face it, the only reason anyone ever hires Jolene is the T&A factor, I mean, its not like she can actually act...
There's a difference between someone rubbing gel onto a child's body, for example, and someone rubbing gel into an adult body where the camera focuses on all the naughty bits (you know the ones), with a blue filter and soft music playing. The director/writer/producer knew they were teasing the audience; that was their purpose.There is no way to completely rub gel all over yourself and not miss a bit, your scalp for one is pretty hard to completely cover.
Don't take this the wrong way, I certainly mean no offense, but yes, that sounds pretty naive to me. The only place I saw Jolene before ENT was "Jason & the Argonauts" where she played Medea, and there was absolutely nothing about her performance that was above mediocre. In fact she was only memorable for her amazing looks and badly faked accent. But for some reason, I was delighted to hear that she got hired to play a Vulcan. She had that arrogant stone-cold demeanor that made her almost perfect for the part.I think she was hired, maybe I'm naive, because of her acting ability and her looks. I assume it's why everyone on Ent was hired; Ent was a good-acting cast and good-looking cast.
Sure, Its okay to tell good stories, but not at the expense of T&A!Biting the hand that feeds her -- why is raising her objections to T&A bad? Instead, she indicates it's more important to tell good stories. I mean, isn't that something we can all agree with? (Again, maybe I'm naive.)
Yes, and I guess she got that boob job at age 17 to get noticed for her acting skillsShe's not happy with her "exposure" on Enterprise yet she releases all those revealing pictures?![]()
She's not happy with her "exposure" on Enterprise yet she releases all those revealing pictures?![]()
But as commodore64 says, the scene was clearly filmed in an attempt to cause arousal in the audience. If the idea was that these two were revolted by one another then the camera would have focused on their faces and the looks of disgust in their eyes, instead we get shots of Trip sliding his finger under T'Pol's underwear. Add a blue light and erect nipples and what you get is an out of place very-soft-core porn scene.I think the point itrying to be made is that they weren't aroused. Humans (Trip and Archer in particular) on the show tended to resent Vulcans for standing in the way of Earth's progress and Vulcans (including T'Pol) see humans as overly emotional toddlers. Putting them in a situation where they have to be vulnearable to each other and make physical contact is more likely to lead to resentment than arousal. The show is honest to what happens in the real world when you have to deal with someone in very awkward circumstances (especially in a military/professional environment) even when said person might be very attractive in other circumstances. Add in the prior statements about the show trying to depict more "evolved" sensibilities, and the scene works.
I don't necessarily agree with that. It was certainly no more very-soft-core porn or out of place than anything else we see on Network TV today. If you mean the story could have been told just as as effectively without the De-Con scene or with the scene filmed differently, then you you right. However, there was nothing wrong with the way it was done. I think it could have been equally effective "sexed up" or not. IMO "sexed up" is more interesting.Add a blue light and erect nipples and what you get is an out of place very-soft-core porn scene.
I think that's the argument. I think TPTB for Ent thought it would bring in more people so used it too often sometimes in lieu of a really good story or some really good dialogue that helped develop characters.If you mean the story could have been told just as as effectively without the De-Con scene or that scene filmed differently, then you you right.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.