Root of all the ENT bashing/hating?

[CaptainHawk1]

I think ENT fans need to toughen up a little but, myself. The tendency is to paint everyone who criticizes the show as a basher and it's simply not the case. ENT gushers sound exactly like VOY gushers during the late 1990's.

The show had 2 mediocre first seasons, a decent third season and a great fourth season but by then it was too late (Not that it would have mattered because it was doomed to an early death because it was on UPN anyway).

The writing was lousy and quite frankly the format of the show was out of date. Trek has been dead since about 1996 the problem is that no one bothered to tell B&B.

Mind you this is all simplistic and I could go on at length at the problems with ENT but it's all been said before.

Personally, I like ENT because I like all Trek. Did it have it's problems, yes, but were those problems big enough to keep me from watching every week and buying all 4 seasons on DVD on the dates of their release... nah.

-Shawn

 

[Anna Yolei]

CaptainHawk1 said:
I think ENT fans need to toughen up a little but, myself. The tendency is to paint everyone who criticizes the show as a basher and it's simply not the case. ENT gushers sound exactly like VOY gushers during the late 1990's.

You're new to this forum, aren't you?

ROFLCOPTERS. If you think this is "hypersensitive," I'm glad you weren't here two years ago.

 

[number6]

Hell I didn't know ENT and VOY sucked until I came to this forum.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Number6 said:
Hell I didn't know ENT and VOY sucked until I came to this forum.

Yup, me too. This forum is the Apple. We're Adam. So who does that make Eve and the Snake? Or the exile form Eden, and the lump boys have in their throat or the pain of child birth... And the angel with the big flaming sword denying the return to ed... This metaphor has been engaged to broadly.

I could watch the Prisoner three times a year till I die in thirty years and be as entertained from now till doomsday comfortably.

 

[angie]

Number6 said:
Hell I didn't know ENT and VOY sucked until I came to this forum.

me either!! I also didn't know Archer(the reason I watched) was the worst Captain!

 

[CaptainHawk1]

Anna Yolei said:

CaptainHawk1 said:
I think ENT fans need to toughen up a little but, myself. The tendency is to paint everyone who criticizes the show as a basher and it's simply not the case. ENT gushers sound exactly like VOY gushers during the late 1990's.

You're new to this forum, aren't you?

ROFLCOPTERS. If you think this is "hypersensitive," I'm glad you weren't here two years ago.

Nope, not new. Been posting on the BBS since 1999 and in tis forum on and off since ENT debuted. I'm well aware of how hypersensitive they are, I just really haven't commented on it until now.

-Shawn

 

[3D Master]

Nerys Myk said:
Why not? TOS turned "Devil In the Dark" into a moralty play. It wasnt a hunt the monster story. It was the "monster" is misunderstood and more like us than you thought. Heck most TOS episodes were morality plays. It what made TOS "Star Trek".

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs again:

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!

If you don't understand the differences then, then...

Well, let's just say I under- Oh, fug...

The episode "The Devil in the dark", is ALL about the devil in the dark, and the concept of "appearances can be deceiving" - there's no other way to do it. Oh, sure, you can think of another monster that's not a monster, but you still get the same story and the same episode and the same concepts.

A "don't hunt" story line, can be placed anywhere, and anytime, on the Enterprise itself, on a space station, on Earth! YOU DO NOT WASTE THE AWESOME SF CONCEPT OF A ROGUE PLANET ON A "DON'T HUNT" STORY LINE!!!!

 

[Nerys Myk]

3D Master said:

Nerys Myk said:
Why not? TOS turned "Devil In the Dark" into a moralty play. It wasnt a hunt the monster story. It was the "monster" is misunderstood and more like us than you thought. Heck most TOS episodes were morality plays. It what made TOS "Star Trek".

:sighs:

:sighs:

:sighs again:

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!

If you don't understand the differences then, then...

Well, let's just say I under- Oh, fug...

The episode "The Devil in the dark", is ALL about the devil in the dark, and the concept of "appearances can be deceiving" - there's no other way to do it. Oh, sure, you can think of another monster that's not a monster, but you still get the same story and the same episode and the same concepts.

A "don't hunt" story line, can be placed anywhere, and anytime, on the Enterprise itself, on a space station, on Earth! YOU DO NOT WASTE THE AWESOME SF CONCEPT OF A ROGUE PLANET ON A "DON'T HUNT" STORY LINE!!!!

Why not? Star Trek isn't about "Awesome SF Concepts". It's always been light on the science and heavy on the fiction. Science, Space, technology are just the back drop. The important parts are humanity, morality and choices one makes. Thats STAR TREK. Settings just aren't that important unless it informs the story.

So Trek writers go right ahead and "waste" any or all "SF Concepts" on what ever stories strike your fancy. Just make sure the stories are good!

You may now return to your sighing and shouting stage direction silliness.

 

[3D Master]

Nerys Myk said:
Why not? Star Trek isn't about "Awesome SF Concepts". It's always been light on the science and heavy on the fiction. Science, Space, technology are just the back drop. The important parts are humanity, morality and choices one makes. Thats STAR TREK. Settings just aren't that important unless it informs the story.

So Trek writers go right ahead and "waste" any or all "SF Concepts" on what ever stories strike your fancy. Just make sure the stories are good!

You may now return to your sighing and shouting stage direction silliness.

STAR TREK IS ABOUT AWESOME SF CONCEPTS!!!

If it wasn't, it wouldn't be as big as it is today!

Trust me, if "The Doomsday Machine" and similar episodes turned into a story about "don't put people in retirement homes", we wouldn't be sitting here talking about a fifth Star Trek series. There wouldn't have been any movies, there wouldn't even have been an animated series.

Star Trek is awesome SF - it's the cornerstone of Star Trek, it's what made Star Trek great - that you can do just about any kind of SF story.

This ridiculous concept that Star Trek is supposed be nothing but moralistic pandering and speeches, is one thing that helped reduce Star Trek to juvenile crap.

 

[pookha]

A ship that seemed to work just as fine as it's 24th century counterparts.

A ship whose navigation never failed.

A ship that was not claustrophobic.

i am not sure we are watching the same show

 

[indranee]

3D Master said:

Nerys Myk said:
Why not? Star Trek isn't about "Awesome SF Concepts". It's always been light on the science and heavy on the fiction. Science, Space, technology are just the back drop. The important parts are humanity, morality and choices one makes. Thats STAR TREK. Settings just aren't that important unless it informs the story.

So Trek writers go right ahead and "waste" any or all "SF Concepts" on what ever stories strike your fancy. Just make sure the stories are good!

You may now return to your sighing and shouting stage direction silliness.

STAR TREK IS ABOUT AWESOME SF CONCEPTS!!!

If it wasn't, it wouldn't be as big as it is today!

Trust me, if "The Doomsday Machine" and similar episodes turned into a story about "don't put people in retirement homes", we wouldn't be sitting here talking about a fifth Star Trek series. There wouldn't have been any movies, there wouldn't even have been an animated series.

Star Trek is awesome SF - it's the cornerstone of Star Trek, it's what made Star Trek great - that you can do just about any kind of SF story.

This ridiculous concept that Star Trek is supposed be nothing but moralistic pandering and speeches, is one thing that helped reduce Star Trek to juvenile crap.

ITA with 3D Master. there, in a nutshell, you have just why TOS survived to spawn a franchise. ENT lacked that essential element. then again, nothing much is original anymore.

 

[number6]

Very little of TOS was about "awesome SF concepts."

The reason TOS has endured is because of it's exploration of humanity.

All of the spinoff series enjoyed their brightest moments when they followed this concept.

 

[indranee]

it depends on what you mean by "awesome SF concepts". do you mean space battles? not really. do you mean "transporters?" maybe. do you mean all the stuff we saw in eps like The Empath, City..., Amok Time etc etc? sure.

SF concepts CAN include the idea of an exploration of "humanity". SF as an idea or a concept is not exclusive of digging deep into inner space. TOS did all of that. and did it in an entertaining, enduring manner. that is what I agree with.

 

[gblews]

Number6 said:
Very little of TOS was about "awesome SF concepts."

The reason TOS has endured is because of it's exploration of humanity.

Agree. Besides that, there have been countless TV shows that have spewed "awsome SF concepts" out of their butts, but were quickly cancelled and most importantly, forgotten. Obviously, a show needs to be about more than just "awsome SF" in order to hold viewer's attention.

 

[Nerys Myk]

3D Master said:

Nerys Myk said:
Why not? Star Trek isn't about "Awesome SF Concepts". It's always been light on the science and heavy on the fiction. Science, Space, technology are just the back drop. The important parts are humanity, morality and choices one makes. Thats STAR TREK. Settings just aren't that important unless it informs the story.

So Trek writers go right ahead and "waste" any or all "SF Concepts" on what ever stories strike your fancy. Just make sure the stories are good!

You may now return to your sighing and shouting stage direction silliness.

STAR TREK IS ABOUT AWESOME SF CONCEPTS!!!

If it wasn't, it wouldn't be as big as it is today!

Trust me, if "The Doomsday Machine" and similar episodes turned into a story about "don't put people in retirement homes", we wouldn't be sitting here talking about a fifth Star Trek series. There wouldn't have been any movies, there wouldn't even have been an animated series.

Star Trek is awesome SF - it's the cornerstone of Star Trek, it's what made Star Trek great - that you can do just about any kind of SF story.

This ridiculous concept that Star Trek is supposed be nothing but moralistic pandering and speeches, is one thing that helped reduce Star Trek to juvenile crap.

We must not be watching the same show. Doomsday Machine was about obsession, not about a giant planet killer. The giant planet killer was just there to give Decker something to obsess about. The focus of the show was on Decker's madness and Kirk being trapped on a doomed ship. The planet killer is barely touched up on as a "Awsome SF Concept" or anything else. It exists to put our heroes in peril and not much more. The episode is built around madnes, obsession and sacrifice not on the awesomeness or science behind a planet killing machine.

Star Trek got big because of the humanity of it characters and the universal themes it explored. It touched peoples hearts and occasionaly stimulated their brains. And if you want a "retirement home" story I recomend The Deadly Years

 

[poundpuppy29]

I think it is the characters that draws people in not just the sci-fi stuff. Thats why I liked ENT it was the characters.

 

[number6]

^That's what I liked about ENT and DS9.

 

[LiChiu]

I agree that it is the characters. In all of the series they had great characters that are easy to become interested in.

 

[Ketracel]

I am one of those die hard ST fans who HATED Ent. I don't even want to think about it. I wish it would just disappear and everyone would just forget about the whole mess.

For the record, I didn't watch more than a few episodes here and there. Enough to get to know the characters and the series. And enough to know it had no acting talent, no writing talent, nothing. No redeeming qualities.

So no, I wasn't one of those who religiously watched it to rip it apart. I have better things to do with my time. And it only took me a few episodes to learn to hate it. Just like it only took a few episodes of DS9 for me to fall in love with the show.

I happened to see probably the worst series attempt in a long time. I usually don't waste time on TV but since this was ST I gave it a shot. I saw purile attempts like the T'Pol naked neural pressure scenes.

There was so much wrong with Ent that one doesn't know where to begin. I suppose there will be fans. Everything has fans. Even Paris Hilton and Jackass have fans I suppose.

 

[3D Master]

Nerys Myk said:

3D Master said:

Nerys Myk said:
Why not? Star Trek isn't about "Awesome SF Concepts". It's always been light on the science and heavy on the fiction. Science, Space, technology are just the back drop. The important parts are humanity, morality and choices one makes. Thats STAR TREK. Settings just aren't that important unless it informs the story.

So Trek writers go right ahead and "waste" any or all "SF Concepts" on what ever stories strike your fancy. Just make sure the stories are good!

You may now return to your sighing and shouting stage direction silliness.

STAR TREK IS ABOUT AWESOME SF CONCEPTS!!!

If it wasn't, it wouldn't be as big as it is today!

Trust me, if "The Doomsday Machine" and similar episodes turned into a story about "don't put people in retirement homes", we wouldn't be sitting here talking about a fifth Star Trek series. There wouldn't have been any movies, there wouldn't even have been an animated series.

Star Trek is awesome SF - it's the cornerstone of Star Trek, it's what made Star Trek great - that you can do just about any kind of SF story.

This ridiculous concept that Star Trek is supposed be nothing but moralistic pandering and speeches, is one thing that helped reduce Star Trek to juvenile crap.

We must not be watching the same show. Doomsday Machine was about obsession, not about a giant planet killer. The giant planet killer was just there to give Decker something to obsess about. The focus of the show was on Decker's madness and Kirk being trapped on a doomed ship. The planet killer is barely touched up on as a "Awsome SF Concept" or anything else. It exists to put our heroes in peril and not much more. The episode is built around madnes, obsession and sacrifice not on the awesomeness or science behind a planet killing machine.

Star Trek got big because of the humanity of it characters and the universal themes it explored. It touched peoples hearts and occasionaly stimulated their brains. And if you want a "retirement home" story I recomend The Deadly Years

No, that's what's called good drama, not a morality tale. Even then, the human side was ABOUT that Planet Killer. The Planet Killer is the essential part of this story, you can't do it without the Planet Killer.

Rogue Planet in contrast, was a "don't hunt" storyline that could be placed anywhere at anytime, and the SF concept of the Rogue Planet was squandered away. Whatever piece of humanity that you wish to explore - and this is drama, not a morality tale - should be intricately linked with that Rogue Planet, and that Rogue Planet should have been explored, and used to its fullest extent. Not, waste it on a morality tale that could be placed anywhere anywhen.