We mostly had that with Archer (Captain/Explorer), T'Pol (Restrictive Vulcan, but, against your wishes First Officer), and Lt. Reed (Military/Warrior high up in the Chain of Command). Reed was constantly pushing Archer to be Military minded.
It's brainstormin' Time! Cool stuff the show coulda, shoulda done
- Thread starter Gaith
- Start date
As long as there was a good reason for that. Considering how dangerous the cosmos is, the Vulcans have no excuse for stopping humanity from exploring in order to assess the dangers and make alliances that might prevent conflict. The alternative would be, if the Vulcans could guarantee Earth's security with their own firepower, and clearly the Vulcans have never been depicted as being a military superpower that could do that. They just needed to get out of humanity's way.
What scientist in their right mind would think that exploration supercedes security? How are they going to explore after the Xindi have wiped out the planet? This just smacks of the kind of trumped up conflict for the sake of conflict that I hate to see in any show.
The way to handle Starfleet's identity is to accept that it has no real analogue today. Even by the 22nd C, it's a weird combo of science and military. In the 24th C, it was more science than in the 23rd. Working backwards, that implies even more of a military component in the 22nd C, but still different from any military we know today.
Starfleet should have been written so that it fits organically within that continuum, implying continuous growth throughout the centuries. The way it was written in ENT didn't seem much different than the 24th C style, which makes no sense. Why would it yo-yo like that?
I can certainly agree with that. The military has an ironclad motivation: Star Trek has always depicted the galaxy as being a dangerous place full of aggressive, advanced species.
So what arguments can the Vulcans or scientists bring to counter the overwhelming need to first establish security in Earth's very bad neighborhood?
The Vulcans motivation is easy to see. Only being four days away, whatever hell the humans may bring down on themselves could quickly ensnare Vulcan as well.
The explorers could make the point that Earth couldn't hold their own against an aggressor species in their current technological state. The argument could simply be in the belief that there are extinct species out there that were far more advanced and finding those worlds may help Earth begin to secure a technological advantage. Of course, they'd have ulterior motives as well. Legends of planet that holds the fountain of youth hidden in a nebula, for example.
Lots of different directions you could take it, but none that would be as dull as those first two seasons were.
IMO, the Vulcans refusing to give Humans more advanced warp technology was something ENT got right. In a real sense, it was a policy that was a precursor to the Prime Directive (to allow a race to develop and stand on its own). I think there was a lot of grumbling by Humans--including a young Johnny Archer--that the Vulcans were holding Humans back, but it was really a case of letting Humans get to Warp Five by themselves.
I believe the only things the Vulcans can be faulted for is having a condescending attitude towards Humans and still not thinking they were ready by 2151. But in the end, it was Earth that abided to recommendations from the Vulcans until the Broken Bow Incident.
I believe the only things the Vulcans can be faulted for is having a condescending attitude towards Humans and still not thinking they were ready by 2151. But in the end, it was Earth that abided to recommendations from the Vulcans until the Broken Bow Incident.
Continuity.
That one word alone would have made this series so much better.
And no, no Q episodes. That's the same kind of thinking that produced terrible episodes like Aquistion and Regeneration.
Take away the evil Vulcan syndrome too. You can have Archer be a racist without changing the race as if to validate said racism. It would have been a delightful character arc for Archer to get over that on his own.
As much as I like T'Pol's body, get her out of that freaking catsuit that sets women's rights back 200 years. And no decontamination oil/massage chambers either.
I like the idea of Mayweather being a grizzled old NCO kind of character. Maybe then he would get some lines that weren't related to "Hey i've been in space in cargo ships."
No temporal cold war, no time travel, just space exploration. Voyager had already beaten the time travel episode horse dead.
That one word alone would have made this series so much better.
And no, no Q episodes. That's the same kind of thinking that produced terrible episodes like Aquistion and Regeneration.
Take away the evil Vulcan syndrome too. You can have Archer be a racist without changing the race as if to validate said racism. It would have been a delightful character arc for Archer to get over that on his own.
As much as I like T'Pol's body, get her out of that freaking catsuit that sets women's rights back 200 years. And no decontamination oil/massage chambers either.
I like the idea of Mayweather being a grizzled old NCO kind of character. Maybe then he would get some lines that weren't related to "Hey i've been in space in cargo ships."
No temporal cold war, no time travel, just space exploration. Voyager had already beaten the time travel episode horse dead.
Continuity doesn't make a bit of difference when the show was as dull as it was. Especially to mainstream audiences. You're putting the cart before the horse.
The Vulcans were portrayed consistently with TOS and other Trek. They were always dicks.
Eh? Like Spock, Sarek, or Tuvok?
They were occasionally portrayed as overly rigid and inflexible yes, perhaps a bit too tied to tradition, but the ENT portrayal of the Vulcans is pretty different than their portrayal in previous Trek.
Eh? Like Spock, Sarek, or Tuvok?
They were occasionally portrayed as overly rigid and inflexible yes, perhaps a bit too tied to tradition, but the ENT portrayal of the Vulcans is pretty different than their portrayal in previous Trek.
You mean the Spock who had a superiority complex and denigrated those on occasion who weren't Vulcan?
Sarek? The man who essentially disowned his son for eighteen years over a career choice?
It's been a long time since I've seen Tuvok.
What about T'Pau? Who was rather rude towards humans.
T'Pring? Who was banging someone other than her husband and was willing to pit two friends in a fight to the death so she could keep doing it.
Valeris? Traitor, who gave key evidence to the Klingons which lead to her commander being given a life sentence.
The Vulcan who was trying to get the psionic ray gun in TNG?
Captain Solok from DS9? Constantly trying to prove Vulcans were better than Humans.
The preponderance of evidence prior to ENT suggests Vulcans are dicks.
Eh? Like Spock, Sarek, or Tuvok?
They were occasionally portrayed as overly rigid and inflexible yes, perhaps a bit too tied to tradition, but the ENT portrayal of the Vulcans is pretty different than their portrayal in previous Trek.
You mean the Spock who had a superiority complex and denigrated those on occasion who weren't Vulcan?
Sarek? The man who essentially disowned his son for eighteen years over a career choice?
It's been a long time since I've seen Tuvok.
What about T'Pau? Who was rather rude towards humans.
T'Pring? Who was banging someone other than her husband and was willing to pit two friends in a fight to the death so she could keep doing it.
Valeris? Traitor, who gave key evidence to the Klingons which lead to her commander being given a life sentence.
The Vulcan who was trying to get the psionic ray gun in TNG?
Captain Solok from DS9? Constantly trying to prove Vulcans were better than Humans.
The preponderance of evidence prior to ENT suggests Vulcans are dicks.
Wow, you could teach Archer something in hating Vulcans.
Wow, you could teach Archer something in hating Vulcans.
Actually, I love Vulcans. I just never bought into the idea that Enterprise got them wrong. The evidence doesn't support it.
They're dicks.
You say this like Trek had continuity before Enterprise came along. It had a nice illusion of continuity, with all the manuals glossing over the gaps, but an illusion's all it was.
TOS had blinking coloured squares for control panels, and paper pictures representing display screens around the perimeter of the bridge. The Gorn was a guy in a bad rubber suit. Now, if the Enterprise was actually an advanced futuristic spaceship and the Gorn was really a fearsome lizard monster, then why would any other little tidbits and details from the show be more any more concrete? Those little discontinuities suddenly lose all meaning.
If you're pointing out stuff like that you're missing the entire point of the franchise. It's ridiculous to point out 60's control pannels and costumes as a continuity error to say the least.
I'm talking about rather obvious errors in the script because they don't bother looking what's happened in other episodes or series. Like TOS's "Balance of Terror" where everyone is surprised by the Romulans using cloaking devices. Yet the Romulans use them several times in Enterprise's "Minefield."
Effects are going to change with the times. That's just how it is. Failure to proofread a script or just not giving a damn is a completely different thing.
These aren't mistakes, they're simple rewrites of minor points to serve the current story. Who cares about one or two lines Spock said in 1966 compared to all the cloaking device episodes in Enterprise? Should they be somehow better than the lines from "The Alternative Factor" which said antimatter was capable of destroying an entire universe, which was later ignored when it later became common starship fuel? Or is all of Voyager wrong and invalid because, according to "That Which Survives" the Classic Enterprise could have made Voyager's 70,000 light-year journey in ONE year at warp 8.4?
The little things don't matter compared to the big picture.
The little things don't matter compared to the big picture.
Even ignoring the speed given in "That which survives", VOY's speed didn't even match with speeds given in shows like TNG "Where No One Has Gone Before" for example.
It's called Plot Speed.
Yes perhaps sometimes you have to ignore a line, other times you don't ignore it. Unfortunalty the fan base has become somewhat fractured over the years and certain elements matter more that others to certain people.
It's called Plot Speed.
Yes perhaps sometimes you have to ignore a line, other times you don't ignore it. Unfortunalty the fan base has become somewhat fractured over the years and certain elements matter more that others to certain people.
Wow, you could teach Archer something in hating Vulcans.
Actually, I love Vulcans. I just never bought into the idea that Enterprise got them wrong. The evidence doesn't support it.
They're dicks.
If anything, ENT made them more interesting.
Technobabble by it's very nature isn't going to be wholy consistent. I'm talking plot and character points. Like T'Pol saying Vulcans don't eat food with their hands... then she's eating popcorn next season.. with her hands. Or making a plot point of you can't beam through shields... then doing it next season.
The whole point of T'pol eating the popcorn with her hands was to show she's loosening up and assimilating into the crew!
Mainstream audiences simply don't care about this type of minutiae. Any new series is going to have to capture mainstream viewers who want to be entertained.
Face it, if there is a new Trek series, you'll be doing what us geeks have been doing for thirty and forty years; make it work in your head.
God we've had James T. Kirk vs. James R. Kirk, Spock rebuking humans for emotion while sitting there smiling, Lt. Commander Spock wearing Commander's braids, Spock saying he had a human ancestor yet it ended up being his mother, etc...
If they give me solidly entertaining stories, I'll do the mental gymnastics to make them fit.
Mainstream audiences simply don't care about this type of minutiae. Any new series is going to have to capture mainstream viewers who want to be entertained.
Face it, if there is a new Trek series, you'll be doing what us geeks have been doing for thirty and forty years; make it work in your head.
God we've had James T. Kirk vs. James R. Kirk, Spock rebuking humans for emotion while sitting there smiling, Lt. Commander Spock wearing Commander's braids, Spock saying he had a human ancestor yet it ended up being his mother, etc...
If they give me solidly entertaining stories, I'll do the mental gymnastics to make them fit.
Of course.. that's what Enterprise was doing. Appealing to the mainstream audiences. That strategy sure worked well for them. Season 6 was their crowning highlight.
Enterprise was dull, that is why it was cancelled. It put people to sleep. My god, one episodes teaser was Phlox writing a letter, that minute or two is suppose to hook the viewer. They debuted with 13 million viewers and left averaging less than two million.
Enterprise was timid and was too self-important. Continuity had nothing to do with it. Then let's not forget how creatively bankrupt the series was. We had just come off of eighteen years of constant Klingon presence and there's a Klingon in the first episode and the fourth and a couple more down the line in the first year (hell, they even had a relative of Duras). Then we had the Ferengi and the Borg and the Romulans and Risa. Then we had several episodes that reused plots from the other series.
Being dull and creatively bankrupt are not ways to capture a mainstream audience.