Like TOS

[commodore64]

Sure seems like pretty much every decision made was to team up the gang to be like TOS: Archer as Kirk (including his Super!Archer stunts), T'Pol as Spock (at least the first two seasons) and Trip as Bones (complete with laid back personality, Southern accent and the "I'm an old friend" status with Archer, a la Kirk).

Just like in TOS, I primarily liked episodes with the two main characters (Archer and T'Pol/Kirk and Spock), but hated ones that featured the third character (like Trip/McCoy). For example, Dawn is an already used concept, but it was kinda "meh." Precious Cargo stinks. I even like the dynamic that feels like old TOS, with the two main characters (Archer and T'Pol/Kirk and Spock) gelling and being friends, risking their lives for each other, etc.

Did you guys think it was like TOS (and not just the "LOOK I'M TOS, REALLY!" fourth season)? What elements did you think were like TOS? What worked/didn't?

 

[Captain59]

Archer and T'Pol really learned from each other, and you saw them both grow because of that during the four years the show was on the air. The same was true between Kirk and Spock. I think Enterprise did that better than any of the four later series.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

I am one who enjoyed the Big Three dynamic of TOS--Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. I thought the interaction of the three disparate personalities was well done. The give-and-take and good-natured friction between Spock and McCoy (sometimes not so good-natured) provided terrific drama and humor and gave a lot of energy to the show. And structurally, those two characters played well with and against each other and Kirk. They were wonderful advisors and friends for him.

The Spock-McCoy dynamic was the best part of TOS for me. Some of my favorite scenes were between those two. Scenes from The Immunity Syndrome, The Empath, Bread and Circuses, and The Tholian Web leap immediately to mind.

All that being said, I am also a big fan of the Big Three dynamic in Enterprise, though it was capitalized on less often. (If only we'd had more Captain's Mess scenes... ) I think the show would have been missing something if Trip were not in the mix. He possessed the "longtime best friend" vibe that Spock had, plus served as Archer's "emotional" friend, while T'Pol provided an entirely different, but no less vital, kind of friendship.

I also thought the Archer/Trip friendship was an important part of the series, just as Trip was important. And, if I were to use the OP's analogy...if I liked Spock/McCoy best in TOS, then... But I liked all the characters, and the interaction between them. It was a great crew. Soval and Shran too! I wanted to see more. I still miss 'em.

One thing TOS didn't have was the captain getting used to a new officer on his senior staff. I liked watching Archer and T'Pol learn to make friends and trust each other--especially Archer struggling with his lingering prejudice against Vulcans. The stuff in Shadows of P'Jem and Stigma where he's fighting to keep her on Enterprise, the scene at the end of Shockwave II ("You put it over the top"), are great stuff for me.

The issue of dealing with officers who are also close friends--the conflicts and impossible decisions that can arise--was dealt with in both shows, in their own ways. I'm thinking of The Immunity Syndrome again for TOS ("Which of my friends do I condemn to death?"), and Cogenitor for Enterprise, with that devastating ending that (for me) was so well-done.

And I'm glad the captain on the first Enterprise had his dog. I adored Porthos.

 

[shatastrophic]

imitated but not duplicated

 

[commodore64]

Impossible to duplicate.

HR, see - I was never a huge fan of Spock/McCoy friendship. Galileo 7 is an example of why I never cared for that friendship -- I saw McCoy as pestering Spock for something that was inherent to who Spock was. In that episode, McCoy continues to berate Spock for doing what's logical rather than providing just a point of view for Spock to do something with. It was the same way in Tholian Web. Spock can't change who he is ... and shouldn't. Same really in all the episodes.

I liked the Kirk/Spock friendship because I always felt like Kirk never wanted to change Spock, but he accepted him for exactly who he was -- and relished it. The relishing it -- because Kirk asked for his opinion often -- impressed me. Kirk embodied IDIC.

I started watching TOS when I was about 6 or 7, so Kirk's openness and willingness to befriend an alien (and accept him for his logic and non-emotion) really stood out.

Other things like TOS:
* Bad hair
* Bad accents
* Lovable characters
* Hit or miss writing
* Stories that are great holding up
* Gone before their time was up

 

[Trekwatcher]

I see your point but all of the shows have similarities to TOS, which I assume are intentional. I always felt TNG had a lot of overt TOS similarties as well with Riker being Kirk-like, Data being Spock, Pulaski being McCoy, etc...

 

[commodore64]

Good point. I think Data and Spock are very much alike, but I'm sure I see a lot of other similarities. (?) Keep going. Other ideas?

 

[pookha]

bones didnt want to change spock but rather to acknowledge that he was indeed part human. something by the way that jim did too many times during the series.

and as the series and the movies went on we do see spock become more comfortable with that aspect of himself.
that it didnt mean giving up being vulcan but rather more whole.

if you follow the novelization of the motion picture it was the lose of both jim and bones and the conflict that arose between the two which drove spock back to vulcan.

i do think one way enterprise and star trek were similar is that the people were not perfect.
they bickered at times. (the corbomite manauver is a great example of this)
but one thing that kirk did often and archer should have done was used the words i am sorry , thank you.

 

[Captain59]

Good point about the perfection part. One thing I didn't like about TNG, DS9, and VOY was I felt a sense of stiffness about them...like they were too proper...and maybe that was because they were being porytayed as more civil and closer to perfection than TOS. I never thought of that before. I'm thinking right now about how Janeway kind of talks down the officers from Kirk's era to Tuvok in "Flashback." She wasn't insulting them, but she certainly was saying the people of her time had advanced much since Kirk's time. So perhaps a lot of the imperfections from TOS were intentionally straightened out in TOS, and also intentionally brought back to a higher degree in Enterprise?

Very interesting.

pookha said:
but one thing that kirk did often and archer should have done was used the words i am sorry , thank you.

Actually, the last thing Archer said to Phlox was, "thank you, Doctor." However, that was a holographic representation of things that may or may not have happened, so perhaps Archer really said, "oh, just shut up and go sit down with your three bitches."

 

[RandyS]

HopefulRomantic said:
And I'm glad the captain on the first Enterprise had his dog. I adored Porthos.

Porthos WAS smarter than Trip, wasn't he?

 

[THE_FETT]

commodore64 said:
Just like in TOS, I primarily liked episodes with the two main characters (Archer and T'Pol/Kirk and Spock), but hated ones that featured the third character (like Trip/McCoy).

Wtf? What's wrong with McCoy? Without McCoy, there's no Spock. Without Spock there's no Kirk. Without Kirk, there's no McCoy. I can't believe someone doesn't like McCoy. It's insanity!

 

[TurkTrekker]

They certainly tried to capture that dynamic. I give them credit for understanding a large part of Star Trek's appeal. IMO, though they sort of had a good dynamic between Archer and Trip, they failed to reproduce the feeling of comradery in the core cast of characters.

Then there that very TNG / Voyagery / gimmicky feeling character, Phlox.

The beagle was a nice touch.

 

[SFRabid]

TOS was criticized early on for the strongly recycled Spoc character. The Data Spoc correlation was over the top. Smarter than everyone, stronger than everyone, no emotion. The only thing new about Data was questioning his rights as a living being.

 

[SFRabid]

I think early on they expected Archer to be the new Kirk in Enterprise. His romantic scenes faded as Trip took over the role of ladies man. It is funny that SFN still runs commercials playing Archer as the one who always gets the ladies.

 

[KayArr]

I always thought that Harry Potter was TOS--Harry is Kirk, Hermione is Spock, and Ron is McCoy. No one on the mugglenet boards would discuss it though--in fact the mods deleted my threads and said no one was interested. I wondered if any of them had ever heard of Star Trek...

I agree that the Enterprise 3 were more like the TOS 3 than anything in the other three, and I loved it. Enterprise and TOS are my two favorites--I refuse to choose between them because both are of their time. TNG is in 2nd place--it was once in first, but not after Enterprise. I still love TNG, but the Enterprise characters were just so much more like real people with all their foibles.

Here's a question that I tried to ask about about Harry Potter, but as I stated, no one wanted to talk about it: is the whole logical Spock/emotional McCoy/Action-oriented Kirk who weighs advice from both any kind of a classic literature trope? Does it come from classic literature at all? It's such an interesting dynamic. I once made a haiku that could apply to trek:
Ronald feels
Hermione thinks
Harry acts

McCoy feels
Spock thinks logically
James Kirk acts

So does anyone know--can this whole "three parts of a person" (logic, emotion, action) split into 3 characters be found in any classic literature. Let's hope that Star Trek fans can do more with this then Harry Potter fans could...

 

[pookha]

i think the three musketeers were faith , feeling , logic.

 

[KayArr]

Hey, that's cool! Kind of like...Faith of the Heart...o.k., sorry, but I liked the theme song, so sue me!

Thanks for the info, I'm eager to see if anyone knows of any others.

 

[commodore64]

THE_FETT said:

commodore64 said:
Just like in TOS, I primarily liked episodes with the two main characters (Archer and T'Pol/Kirk and Spock), but hated ones that featured the third character (like Trip/McCoy).

Wtf? What's wrong with McCoy? Without McCoy, there's no Spock. Without Spock there's no Kirk. Without Kirk, there's no McCoy. I can't believe someone doesn't like McCoy. It's insanity!

Without Spock, there is no Kirk. Without Kirk, there is no Spock. Without McCoy, there's no doctor. At least, that's how I see it.

I also think the movies - just like the show - capture two main characters (Kirk and Spock) and a guy who's third wheel, but important (McCoy).

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

^^ Seems to me that the plot of STIII (and by extension, the ending of STII) would fall apart without McCoy. I thought it was a wonderful touch, structurally speaking, for Spock to transfer his katra into McCoy; to give it to another character wouldn't have had the same punch for me.

TOS was structured around the triumvirate. And even before the triumvirate, when Spock and Number One were two different characters, there was the (intrepid, heroic) captain and the (crusty, compassionate) doctor: Pike and Boyce.

 

[bluedana]

So does anyone know--can this whole "three parts of a person" (logic, emotion, action) split into 3 characters be found in any classic literature. Let's hope that Star Trek fans can do more with this then Harry Potter fans could...

I'd have to think about the literature piece (although the 3 Musketeers is a good example to start), but I recall my high school psychology teacher using the TOS triumverate to illustrate the superego, ego, and id. That has stuck with me.

Both trios work for me, because a good captain needs to weigh both the rational and the emotional to make decisions. Ultimately, though, I don't want ENT to be TOS redux. The gradual disconnecting and re-connecting of the characters in S3 and S4 made it seem more realistic and mature as a storyline.