Rescuing Enterprise

Discussion in 'Star Trek: Enterprise' started by Whizkid, Oct 11, 2022.

  1. J C

    J C Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2022
    I don’t understand the dislike of ENT, it’s one of my top favorite series. It totally rules and I only accept it was canceled because of the separation of CBS and Paramount.
     
    RedAlert likes this.
  2. cooleddie74

    cooleddie74 Arguably The Best Poster Named cooleddie Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Location:
    The Warped Sector of the Demented Quadrant
    It's currently my fifth all-time favorite Trek series out of eleven total, twelve if we include Short Treks as a series. I've always liked or downright loved it for all its numerous structural flaws as a show.
     
    J C likes this.
  3. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    Agreed. Being on a fledgling network did not help, but the competition did more to Enterprise than anything else. After being disappointed by Voyager I moved on to Stargate SG-1, Farscape, and the Invisible Man. I usually was taping maybe 3 episodes a week with school, so my time was given to less and less with TV, since I was the only one in my house who liked science fiction. So, ENT got one episode to hook me and the whole Klingon in the cornfield sucked.

    Since then, I have revisited an episode here and there, but nothing hooks me. The fact that it lasted like it did, and now has some sort of following still blows my mind. It certainly didn't when it first broadcasted.
     
  4. FederationHistorian

    FederationHistorian Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2020
    Location:
    Toronto aka The Centre of the Universe
    In DS9, Worf's more in his comfort zone and the show plays to his strengths. In TNG, he's the one who is used to display how dangerous an enemy is when no nameless redshirts are around.

    Seven was always more interesting than Kes, imo. But that means that the writing failed Kes, not that Kes was not an interesting character in her own right.

    I sure there’s more to that story, since Enterprise deals with space colonialism and the prejudices that spring from it in the years leading up to the Federation. Seeing Archer and Shran a few decades removed from that, while having to deal with a world that is heading to the ideal of TOS and disapproving of the space colonialism, xenophobia, racism, etc that occurred during ENT would be an interesting watch to see if they can adapt to the changes or not. Especially if Archer starts going to bat for Vulcan the same way he did for T'Pol and sees them as better allies for Earth than Andorians. If only some of the people at CBS realized that a follow-up would be worth it. But when even the Kelvin Universe is getting shelved when its characters are more popular than those in ENT...:shrug:.

    And what does that look like for Enterprise to you? Especially if characters aren’t killed off or new characters become a part of the main cast. With S1 they were finding their footing, so the episodes were hit or miss. S2 was basically the season where the crew makes a bunch of mistakes related to first and second contacts, as well as delved into the origins of Archer, T’Pol, Trip, Reed, Mayweather, Hoshi, Phlox and the NX Program – basically anyone and anything except Porthos - and it was a mostly dull season despite fulfilling the premise of the show. S3 was darkest season of Star Trek produced at the time, and the first half of the season is regarded as mostly filler; the episode with the religious aliens was basically being a remake of “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” and remaking better episodes that had already happened within Trek was a serious problem for ENT at this stage. Even the season consider its best – S4 – had a weak start with the first four episodes and had a couple of weak standalone episodes. The show was surrounded with weakness and weak episodes.

    Basically, being a visual reboot when the aesthetics of TOS were expected. ENT respected TOS aesthetic with IAMD, whereas DIS pretty much threw out the rule book and did not care that they were rewriting what had been established as canon.

    For example, even though it’s a nitpick, the uniforms for the USS Enterprise from Pike’s time to WNMHGB should have been lime-gold, khaki-beige and blue. Not gold, red & blue as they went with in DIS S2. From there, its the touchscreen panels to holocommunication a century early, etc.

    And GOT had 73 episodes and, final season aside, it well regarded during its run. ENT had 25 more episodes than GOT. It did okay for itself.
     
  5. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    I...it would have to be handled more deftly than any writers currently working for Trek to do. Archer's attitude towards Vulcans was terrible, but the way Andorians treated Vulcans and vice versa was even worse. Having Shran on there would basically be saying "oh, you know what? All those times we tried to kill you? Just kidding!"
    Why should they? ENT did the same thing with the Klingons. Why should canon be treated as sacred?
     
  6. FederationHistorian

    FederationHistorian Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2020
    Location:
    Toronto aka The Centre of the Universe
    Yes, they would need much better writers and editors then they currently have. But it could be done, particularly with an Archer-Shran-T’Pau dynamic. That’s a fresh big 3 dynamic that could work for an ENT sequel.

    It's all about consistency. ENT was resolving something said on DS9 in regards to how Klingons looked ion TOS. Its debatable if those episodes were ever needed in hindsight, since empires are diverse by default, but that how they resolved it. DIS didn't really need to stir anything up.
     
  7. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    The inherent problem with ENT as far as the Klingons were concerned, is that they actually didn't need to be in the show AT ALL. The premise was supposedly about events leading to the formation of the Federation, presumably after the Earth-Romulan War. Technically, the Klingons, being enemies of the Federation, should have come along much later. Instead, the producers decided to make the FIRST FRIGGING EPISODE about them. And make them look like TMP/TSFS/TNG Klingons to boot, along with their ships (in which they now have Birds of Prey for no apparent reason.) We'd already seen Klingons ad nauseum in TNG, DS9, and VOY, and yet this was what they continued to choose to show us, because they couldn't keep to their own premise or do something original. And the idea to have two entire episodes devoted to explaining why TOS Klingons look the way they do (precisely because of the decision to show TNG-type Klingons in the 22nd century from the get-go) was completely unnecessary and was ignored anyway by DSC.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2022
  8. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    Maybe. Maybe not. The Andorians left much to be desired in ENT and I don't see Shran helping that dynamic, when the crew dynamic was already off kilter at times, or ignoring other crewmembers entirely.
    I wasn't referring to that episode, though that didn't help matters either. And DSC didn't stir anything up that didn't already exist. It tried to do what should have been done from forever-diversify an empire. But, even with that, the ENT explanation provides all the rationale needed.

    This right here is why "rescuing ENT" is a fool's errand. They really couldn't stick with the original premise or come up with something entirely original, so they had to throw so many different Trek tropes at it to try and make up for the lack of willingness to stick with their premise. Instead, Klingons, random TNG style encounters of the week, and time travel somehow set the tone.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2022
  9. FederationHistorian

    FederationHistorian Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2020
    Location:
    Toronto aka The Centre of the Universe
    Is that the problem? At minimum, the Klingons should have been saved for a single appearance in the later seasons i.e. S5-7 – talking to Romulans negotiating the release of some centurions in rechange for allowing the Klingons to keep and reverse engineer their Bird-of-Prey, thus explaining how the Klingons came to have their own version of it - or even the series finale in a flash forward to the future where a descendant of someone from Archer’s crew is onboard the Federation ship that’s destroyed by the Klingons during first contact.

    But even with their appearance in the series premiere, Klaang could have died on the operating table – either because the Vulcans prevent the surgery, or the Suliban successfully slip past security and kills him - and the Vulcans return his body to Qo’noS themselves, adding to Archer’s frustration with the Vulcan High Command. And then Archer never runs into the Klingons again, because the High Command through T’Pol find ways to prevent it. Leading Archer to rely on Reed and his skills as a spy to secretly monitor T’Pol.

    As it stands now, the best way to salvage the idea that first contact with the Klingon Empire was disastrous is to say that the Klingons engineered the war between United Earth and the Romulan Star Empire, as paybabck for everything from Klaang to the Klingon Augment virus and everything in between. Which would not have happened if Archer followed Vulcan diplomatic protocols to begin with.

    Well, presumably an ENT sequel it would be dealing with Archer in a different stage in his life - Admiral Archer, Ambassador Archer and/or President Archer. But his time as the first captain would still be important as it set the stage for everything going on, from diplomatic relations with other species to Earth's elevated standing among the interstellar community to established Starfleet protocols.

    And Shran and T'Pau would work in that dynamic, with Shran frequently questioning T'Pau's refusal to be seated on the Federation Council and unapologetic about what the Andorians did during the Andorian-Vulcan conflict or Andoria being more loyal than Vulcan. And T'Pau being a 180 on T'Pol - not just in having no experience with the Ministry of Security/Vulcan Diplomatic Service, or Starfleet science officer, or being a casual drug user and regularly inhales smokeleaf (as seen used by Raffi in PIC) in her free time. She's also nowhere as diplomatic with Shran like T'Pol would be. She's even the love interest for Archer (or Reed) that T'Pol was not (and friendzone's Trip if he's around at all). T'Pau even lacking experience with starcharts would be a reason for Archer to rely on Mayweather far more often. And T'Pau lacking experiences with languages would be a reason to involve Hoshi far more often.

    And for the ignored crewmembers, giving each ignored character a two part arc would resolve that. Since that's what should have happened to begin with on ENT.

    Nothing is stopping CBS from going back to the original premise, since there's still 100 years between ENT and DIS. Other than the excuse that ENT was not popular back then and thus nothing from the ENT era could ever become popular now. They're dithering at this point. If PIC can be a sequel series to TNG and do things that weren't done during TNG, I don't see why ENT could not get the same treatment with a sequel series, with 3 season of their own to boot.
     
  10. Delta Vega

    Delta Vega Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2011
    Location:
    The Great Barrier
    Got to page two of this and gave up
    FFS, what's the point of an Enterprise sub forum if every fucking thread leads to ENT bashing by most of the participants?
    It wasn't renewed for Season 5, or beyond, but don't tell me that Enterprise didn't have great stories in comparison to other Trek series'
    I've said before on here, Enterprise had good shows and not so good shows, the same as every incarnation of Trek, but I enjoyed watching every Enterprise show, not something I can say for other incarnations, especially TNG which I hated with a passion and still do.
    It takes all types, it takes all types of different people with different tastes to appreciate a show or not, but ffs if you don't like the fucking show, why continually come back to it's host forum and start debates about how supposedly shit it was, or sorry, maybe that wasn't the intention of the thread starter, but that's the way it usually ends up.
    There was nothing wrong with Enterprise, seasons three and four were great seasons, up there with the best Trek ever.
     
  11. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    You are correct. This thread has basically devolved into people saying that ENT has no chance of ever being resurrected by CBS/Paramount, and one guy writing long diatribes about how they will. Nobody is getting anywhere here, and nothing is ever going to happen. And I apologize for being part of it.
     
    Richard S. Ta likes this.
  12. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    As soon as someone demonstrates to CBS that it will make money then by all means it will happen.
     
  13. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    And possibly not even then. It’s not about making money; it’s about what the showrunner who is hired by CBS wants to do. Did Mike McMahon come up with the idea for Lower Decks because he thought it would reap massive profits?
     
  14. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    Not massive profits but convinced CBS that it was worth spending money on because it would make money.

    It still has to make money.
     
  15. FederationHistorian

    FederationHistorian Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2020
    Location:
    Toronto aka The Centre of the Universe
    The point of the thread was to discuss how to rescue Enterprise. It just devolved into the usually debates, because there are strong feelings about ENT on both sides. Even trying to be neutral can cause strong feelings to emerge. So apologies that it has gone down this route again.

    As for whether ENT could ever make money now, IDK. The main difference between the campaign in the '70s and the campaign in the '00 is that the '70s was about a single show and support ballooning to the point that there ended up being conventions 10 years after TOS first aired and a space shuttle was named after the USS Enterprise on TOS. Whereas with the '00s, it was about proving that the franchise itself remained viable, and not ENT specifically, though the campaign to save the show did raise enough money to make a tv movie. At minimum, the Save Enterprise campaign for a tv movie led to the blockbuster release of ST'09. So good for the franchise, and technically good for Enterprise too since it showed that the show did not bury the franchise altogether, but Enterprise itself never got its due.

    As for how to do that for Enterprise, I personally did send a screenplay recently to Paramount a few weeks ago – where ENT characters have cameo appearances - and its been filed with the WGA-E too. I don’t know if I’ll ever get a reply from the studio though, but efforts have been made.
     
    Delta Vega likes this.
  16. HopefulRomantic

    HopefulRomantic Mom's little girl Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Location:
    petting my cats
    Looking back, the OP asked for possible reasons for the question "Why did ENT fail?" But the thread title is incongruously "Rescuing Enterprise," which seems to be a different topic entirely.

    So you've seen some members offering answers to the OP's question, while others have focused on the thread title and theorized how ENT could be brought back. Alas, threads like these, with strong opinions on each side, usually become a repetition feedback loop when everyone has spoken their piece, but some may not care to "agree to disagree" and leave it at that.

    If you think I mean you, you're probably right. Consider this a caution to all concerned. Last-word-itis is not really productive to a substantive and fruitful exchange of differing views. Just sayin.

    Delta Vega, you have contributed new thoughts to the discussion, yay! We have a few appreciation threads that celebrate various aspects of Enterprise. By all means start another, if you can come up with a thread topic that hasn't been covered lately. We who love the show can always use more ENT appreciation. :)
     
  17. Delta Vega

    Delta Vega Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2011
    Location:
    The Great Barrier
    Boo!Romantic, I apologise to you as moderator for getting a bit worked up. And anyone else on the thread who thinks I was being disrespectful. I know that sometimes we are sharing a debate with screen writers, script writers, even film makers on the forum, who all love Star Trek. I'm just a fan, just a layman, so forgive me if some of you think I'm deriding your as yet unseen or unfilmed scripts and stories.
    I just simply do not see the need for the narrative to become a bash Enterprise theme, there's too many already.
    I hope everyone can see where I'm coming from.
    As for starting a new thread that hasn't already been covered...........
    That's a different challenge.
     
  18. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    In the end that's all that can be done.

    It's not a matter of bashing Enterprise, though I apologize if it comes across that way. It's a matter, for me, of the pragmatic mindset of how can Enterprise come back, and why should it. I appreciate the intensity of the fan love for the show, and I personally think the aesthetics have some of the best in the franchise. But, I'm a pragmatist when it comes to entertainment-tell me how this can make money and why it should come back because that's how CBS/Paramout/Viacom are going to treat it.

    That probably sounds unloving from a fan perspective but that's where I am.

    But, I still love "Faith of the Heart."
     
    Richard S. Ta and Delta Vega like this.
  19. StewMc

    StewMc Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 20, 2001
    Location:
    Caldos IV
    You’ve mentioned this multiple times in this thread and it’s kind of the backbone to your argument, but there’s one problem: Discovery never aired on CBS, at least not beyond its first episode, which was aired as a tease with the hope viewers would check out the rest on CBS All Access. It was a streaming show from the start.

    I have a vague recollection that the first season might have ended up in CBS eventually, but it was long after it was released on streaming.

    So I’m not sure how the ratings could be bad when it didn’t air in the first place?
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2022
  20. fireproof78

    fireproof78 Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2014
    Location:
    Journeying onwards
    This, of course, is the danger of attempting the fool's errand of comparing ratings from ENT in the broadcast era, to DSC in the streaming era. The markets are quite different, largely because they are not dependent on selling advertising, or at least not selling as much advertising as in the past.

    So, the data points do not line up properly to get close to the same comparison points. Enterprise was on broadcast TV and was designed to be on broadcast TV, and was driven by known metrics, i.e., viewer count, that all broadcast TV had to compete with. Discovery is out in the brave new world of streaming, which actually doesn't have a middleman in terms of advertisers, and the requirement for a large enough viewing audience to justify its existence.

    Discovery has nothing to do with Star Trek on being on TV. The market took care of that by moving content producers to preferring a streaming platform over a broadcast platform.