• 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!

Oblique Enterprise Reference? (Spoilers?)

ex nihilo

ex nihilo

Captain
Captain
Feelings about Enterprise as a show aside, please consider the following:

It has been mentioned a few times by folks who had the opportunity to attend the preview scenes from the new movie that Scotty is exiled on an ice world for having vaporized an Admiral's beagle in a transporter experiment.

Now, why would they go so far as to mention the breed of dog in dialogue? The only thing I can think of is the writers were trying to sprinkle in an oblique reference to and jab at Archer in this bit (hell, his dog was disintegrated by the transporter). We know of only one officer in Treklore to have had a beagle and, according to Enterprise, Archer was present at the launch of the Grey Lady. Granted, Porthos would not still be alive, but many people who are dog lovers tend to be breed lovers as well so in "reality" this is not too much of a stretch.

What do you think (not that anyone could make a real judgment call before seeing the film)?

OK, I'll get back on my meds and shut up.
 
It seems as if this is indeed an Enterprise reference, but it seems unreasonable that Archer would be alive during this time frame. Something tells me it's a line in the movie that will not be explained/explored any further, so we'll be left wondering.
 
I could stand one more along the lines of:

PIKE: I heard that Adm. Archer was your boyhood hero.

KIRK: That friggin' goof? I don't think so!
 
Yea, I'm a little surprised that they would even mention it. Theres a hundred other more logical references they could have made. This Admiral would have had to have been a later relative of Captain Archer and The dog would have to be Porthos the the tenth. :) So I guess it was more of an in-joke really!
 
According to material prepared for "Enterprise," Jonathan Archer lived to see the launch of the NCC-1701. Note that this isn't "canon" - it flashed illegibly on a monitor screen somewhere in "A Mirror, Darkly."

The dog would certainly have to be a dog other than Porthos, though.

There was a report during the filming that took place on location at a university indicating that there would be at least one other visual reference to "Enterprise," which is cool if true.
 
Starship Polaris said:
According to material prepared for "Enterprise," Jonathan Archer lived to see the launch of the NCC-1701. Note that this isn't "canon" - it flashed illegibly on a monitor screen somewhere in "A Mirror, Darkly."

The dog would certainly have to be a dog other than Porthos, though.

There was a report during the filming that took place on location at a university indicating that there would be at least one other visual reference to "Enterprise," which is cool if true.
Click to expand...

10,000 quatloos says it's Count Bakula in aged make-up.
 
Dorothy_Zbornak said:
Starship Polaris said:
According to material prepared for "Enterprise," Jonathan Archer lived to see the launch of the NCC-1701. Note that this isn't "canon" - it flashed illegibly on a monitor screen somewhere in "A Mirror, Darkly."

The dog would certainly have to be a dog other than Porthos, though.

There was a report during the filming that took place on location at a university indicating that there would be at least one other visual reference to "Enterprise," which is cool if true.
Click to expand...

10,000 quatloos says it's Count Bakula in aged make-up.
Click to expand...

Sadly(?), no. It was a painting of the NX-01 hanging on a wall.
 
Dorothy_Zbornak said:
Starship Polaris said:
According to material prepared for "Enterprise," Jonathan Archer lived to see the launch of the NCC-1701. Note that this isn't "canon" - it flashed illegibly on a monitor screen somewhere in "A Mirror, Darkly."

The dog would certainly have to be a dog other than Porthos, though.

There was a report during the filming that took place on location at a university indicating that there would be at least one other visual reference to "Enterprise," which is cool if true.
Click to expand...

10,000 quatloos says it's Count Bakula in aged make-up.
Click to expand...

Ok wait. So you're telling me it's possible the Abrams may be (kind of/sort of) honoring canon with Enterprise BUT quite possibly/probably will be deviating from TOS, the mother of all Trek?

Is it just me, or does anyone else find that rather . . . bizarre? :wtf: :confused:
 
gh4chiefs said:
Ok wait. So you're telling me it's possible the Abrams may be (kind of/sort of) honoring canon with Enterprise BUT quite possibly/probably will be deviating from TOS, the mother of all Trek?
Click to expand...

Nothing of the kind. How does mentioning Archer's beagle show a degree of respect for "Enterprise" canon that including Spock's father and human mother does not? In other words, are you suggesting that including any elements from non-TOS Trek is showing a greater preference for those shows than including lots but not all elements from TOS?

I think that way of thinking about it would be...bizarre, as you say.
 
I think it's bizarre that they are going out of their way to throw in a line about "Admiral Archer" to apparently match up with some "non-onscreen" canon from a spinoff show that wasn't very popular, but yet it doesn't appear they're taking that much care with the original.

Especially when that non-popular spinoff show is the show that everybody says killed Trek.

Absolutely baffling to me.
 
Hell, ninety-five percent of everything in this movie is from the original. It's the details that people are fussing over.

There's nothing bizarre about the occasional references to other "Star Trek."
 
It's bizzare when they are honoring "off-screen" canon for Enterprise but not for Star Trek, the actual source for this movie. That's the point I'm making.
 
But they are honoring TOS canon. It's canon that Kirk was the captain of the Enterprise. It's canon that he was preceded by Pike. It's canon that he cheated on the Kobyashi Maru test. It's canon that Uhura was a communications and linquistics expert and officer.

The movie is full of canonical details from TOS, from one end to the other - and you're calling it "bizarre" that it contains one or two references to another Trek show?

If it makes you feel better, Archer was supposedly the Federation President at the time of Enterprise's launch, rather than an admiral. So you can say that they fiddled with "Enterprise" details the same way they rearranged TOS stuff. :lol:
 
How are they not honoring TOS? They are finally giving us the backstories of the TOS heroes, in a surprising but by no means inconsistent, irreverent but by no means disrespectful manner.

Sure, they are messing up a single thing relating to TOS: that the Romulans remained hidden until "Balance of Terror". But that's a given, since the Romulans we will see here are going to be rogues traveling through time. So far, there don't seem to be any "unnecessary" or unexplained changes to established TOS facts.

Timo Saloniemi
 
gh4chiefs said:
Especially when that non-popular spinoff show is the show that everybody says killed Trek.
Click to expand...

Not even close to everybody is saying that. Anyone that is saying that seems to have missed a vital piece of information... Star Trek is clearly not dead.
 
You're not sucking me into a canon debate. We all know things are going to be changing, and that's okay. You don't agree with me on the Enterprise reference. Fine. But don't sit there and try to tell me that they're honoring all the "off-screen" canon stuff with TOS because we all know they're not. C'mon now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top