Enterprise or Voyager?

^ You're spot on when it comes to the first 2 seasons of ENT. But I think that the show underwent a big change at the start of season 3, visually, in pacing and in storylines, and became more like what a 2000s Trek show should be like.

 

And besides, I don't think many here realize just how near-impossible it would've been to make such a different Trek show like that back when Paramount was in full cash-cow mode. The only reason S4 was allowed as much freedom was because there was a changeover in UPN management that didn't care about the show anymore and backed off.

So comparisons to NuBSG and Farscape (neither of which are cash-cows) aren't as simple as people think.

 

Well no, it's perfectly reasonable to compare Enterprise to those shows, since ultimately, the end product is what matters. What's not reasonable is to blame the creative staff for all of the show's shortcomings.

 

I didn't say it was unreasonable, it's just not as simple as "This sucks!" and "This is good!".

 

i choose voyager. i didn't even have to think about it really

 

It's interesting to think that way, because one would argue that Enterprise got much better in season 4 because it would eventually get canceled.

And I've come to terms with Enterprise ending early simply because it could have been 3 more seasons of Braga-style shit about dreams and children and bizarre illusionary crap.

A smattering of awesome 2 and 3 part episodes delivering the TOS prequel we were promised was not too little too late... thanks to S4.

One season of great Star Trek > 4 seasons of mediocre, shuttles crashing at the beginning, bumpy forehead alien of the week, captain gets kidnapped and beaten, preachy Bajorans, save the day with engineering or astrophysics technobabble.

I rewatched the Andorian trilogy from Enterprise last week and I couldn't f*cking believe how well done it was. I'd take those three episodes over any season of Voyager (except maybe seasons 4 and 5 when cool shit was semi-consistent).

 

How was season 4 different to that of the other seasons? The reason behind the "arcs" was a financial one, not a creative one. It much cheaper to built sets and hire actors for three episodes instead of just one. I for one was never convinced that season 4 was so much better than than the previous seasons.

I don't get the cashcow comment. Comparisons are valid. Farscape and BSG managed to do more with a smaller budget than Enterprise. What Farscape and BSG did have and ENT didn't was a creative staff with a vision for the show.

 

I too never saw S4 as being much better than the rest of the series. I think that simply not seeing B&B's names anymore created a sort of placebo effect on the audience.

What Farscape and BSG had that ENT and VOY didn't was an incredibly controlling network, nor the stigma of being a cashcow (cashcows are not allowed to deviate from prior established formulas and be pioneer shows). Paramount themselves never would have allowed ENT to be visually that different from other Modern Trek shows.

It was only when their cashcow formulas finally collapsed with ENT's cancellation that Paramount went "Aw Sh*t, it finally happened. Oh well, go hire a guy, leave him alone and give him REAL money to work with and see what happens."

Trek works better when it's not a flagship show and allowed its freedom. Good production values and budgets don't mean jack when the higher-ups will never allow the creative staff to do their jobs.

 

Enterprise is better, but I hate it more.

It defaces TOS.

 

Enterprise.

 

Enterprise is obviously the better of the two. None of the characters are that interesting (with the exception of the EMH) but Enterprise had some good episodes.

 

Doesn't every series post-TOS do that?

 

TOS was hardly consistent with itself, you could say TOS defaced TOS.

 

After some consideration, I have to say I like Enterprise just a bit more than Voyager. ENT wins out just on Season 4 alone (although I also liked Season 3), and would be much farther ahead, except for TATV, which just gut punches it right at the finish line.

 

Quoted for truth. It makes me facepalm every time some TOS fan complains that the other shows weren't "true to TOS" because of some minutiae that TOS itself probably didn't handle consistently.

 

The last two, maybe, but certainly not the first two.

 

As I read the beginning of this thread I thought to myself this is not going to end well....LOL I see I was correct!

Personally I find this thread insulting as a Voyager fan, NOTHING is better than Voyager IMO, and sure the same could be said about Enterprise fan!

This poll is a little how do you say... trolling........

 

On that, at least, we are in agreement.

I think you have it all backwards. Star Trek has a built-in audience. If anything, it would allow the production staff to be more creative and deviate from an established formula. DS9 did it, and Paramount never meddled during its entire 7 year run. It was Berman and Braga's idea to scrap Star Trek from the title when the made ENT. if anything, that should've made TPTB anxious. They let it happen. New shows like Farscape and BSG are and have been subject to network control. BSG had to change it's theme tune for season 1, and SyFy urged the writers for more episodic stand alone stories in season 3.

You make it sound like Trek XI was some kind of indie movie. You can bet that with a budget of 150 million, TPTB at Paramount were closely following the production's progress. Again the difference is that Abrams and Co had a clear vision for the movie, and contrary to Berman and Braga, are talented writers. The studio didn't meddle, because they could see their product was in good hands.

 

How so?

You mean on Voyager, or ENT or both? ENT had a lot of interesting characters. A shame they didn't do anything with them.

Voyager had a lot of great episodes. As a series its quality wasn't very consistent but during it's 7 year run it did produce some classic Trek episodes.

 

By the time TNG ended, their major mainstream following had gone down. There wasn't as much dedication to the spinoffs as to TNG.

DS9 was syndicated and not at the whim of a network, nor was it a flagship show being marketed a lot. It was on Paramount's fringe as far as they were concerned. THAT was what gave it freedom. VOY was never going to get that level of freedom.

They also scrapped Braga's entire idea for the series at the conceptual stage, which was to have it be planetbound for a while and explore what the past was really like. They also made them use iconic trek tech, and not have the sets or anything deviate too much from iconic Trek designs, and made them use Trek regular aliens like Klingons. Letting them keep their title really isn't anything.

Again, that really isn't anything. They didn't tamper with those shows on the conceptual level, not like VOY and ENT were.

Yes, but the management had also changed to a more hands off-approach and they already had the results of their massive interference blow up in their faces before. They would've still not have screwed with NuTrek as much as they had the other UPN shows.