Seriously, don't get the hate for ST: ENT
- Thread starter Photon
- Start date
I always loved Enterprise, right from the start. Like has happened with Voyager, as time has gone by people have gained an appreciation for it, particularly when they compare it too that abomination called Discovery
I tend to think that's its just the trend of hating the new thing. When TNG started, it was hated by TOS fans. DS9 and Voyager got somewhat less of this following closely upon TNG, but then Enterprise tried to change up some things and got roasted for it to the point of people stating that they thought Star Trek needed a "rest" until a new creative team took over. A new creative team took over and now Discover, Picard, Lower Decks, and to a lesser extent SNW take heat for trying to do things differently. The same trend seems to happen to Star Wars as well where every new film or show isn't as good as someone's memory of the prior ones.
Are there flaws with Enterprise? Certainly (I'm looking at you, decon scenes), but I think it took more than its share of heat for trying to mix things up a bit. I, for one, enjoyed the show.
Are there flaws with Enterprise? Certainly (I'm looking at you, decon scenes), but I think it took more than its share of heat for trying to mix things up a bit. I, for one, enjoyed the show.
I hear this, but I also wonder how much of this was Berman the "bad guy" and how much was that Voyager was basically the only show on UPN and therefore, the studio tried to push Voyager in directions that writers didn't want to go. I can't help but wonder if Berman got stuck in the "bearer of bad news" role as stuff rolled down hill from Paramount.
I remember Harlan Ellison commenting that Star Trek had become the 'McDonalds of Sci-Fi TV'. There's a lot of truth in that, Ent was supposed to be different, but ended up being more of the same. It also pissed off fans with continuity blunders, all of which seem trivial compared to the **** show that is DSC.
I've come to really like the show, but it has taken me a long road, getting from there to here. At the time, I thought it was pants, but by comparison to the new stuff, its a work of genius.
I've come to really like the show, but it has taken me a long road, getting from there to here. At the time, I thought it was pants, but by comparison to the new stuff, its a work of genius.
Very possible. A lot of the more daring proposals were the ones that Berman supposedly vetoed. It makes sense that a studio exec with one eye on his profit margin might be similarly conservative.
With even less interesting characters.
Remember the source though. According to Inside Star Trek, Bob Justman and Herb Solow indicate that while most writers had about 3 weeks to complete a script, it took Harlan Ellison over 3 months for just the first draft! After the first draft of City, one of the two (Justman, I believe) had Ellison essentially locked in Justman's office for another 3 months to finish his script. It was after 6 months and an essentially unfilmable script that other writers edited Ellison's work to make it filmable on a 1960s budget. Ellison was famously pissed about being rewritten even though he had been given way more time and opportunities than most other writers to complete his script. There may be some truth to the idea that Star Trek cannot take *big* or fundamental chances since it is a series (and now franchise), but I tend to take 90% of Harlan Ellison's rantings as sour grapes.
Agree with all the above. Fans that are new to the franchise won't understand this because they weren't watching back when TNG, DS9 and Voyager were on the air along with the movies that came out every few years. So they are watching these shows from a more fresh perspective.
By the end of Voyager it was painfully obvious that the franchise needed a break. The powers that be never embraced the potential of Voyager's premise so what made anyone think it would be different in Enterprise? By the end of season one I had given up all hope on Enterprise because it was just more of the same stories and situations, only more boring. They should have let a year or two go by before doing another series and they should have brought new people in charge with a new writing staff. By the early 2000s there was a lot more options on T.V than there had been before, so the same old TNG style formula wasn't going to cut it anymore. And no amount of bare skin or skin tight uniforms was going to change that.
I'm glad more people enjoy Voyager and Enterprise now, but for me they were shows that had great premises that were destroyed by creators whose time had clearly passed them by.
Last edited:
I guess, in the end, you have to appreciate them for what they were, and try not to think about what they could have/should have been.
I can tell you why people don't like it. I was one of those people. Still am actually.
Many of the actors were really bad. The writing was boring and convoluted. A lot of it was nonsensical. Bakula makes for a good single father, but not so much a captain. Lazy cost saving 3 parter episodes.
Many of the actors were really bad. The writing was boring and convoluted. A lot of it was nonsensical. Bakula makes for a good single father, but not so much a captain. Lazy cost saving 3 parter episodes.
The first two seasons are pretty awful, especially season 2.
Season 3-4 are some of the best in the franchise.
Overall, I'd rank the show pretty low when compared to other series, but I still like it.
Season 3-4 are some of the best in the franchise.
Overall, I'd rank the show pretty low when compared to other series, but I still like it.
I'm watching Enterprise for the very first time, and have just finished watching "Carbon Creek", the second episode of season two. No idea how I will like the remainder of the series, although there are no lack of opinions pro and con that I've seen on the board. There are good episodes and less good ones, but I can't recall any that I hated. Some I liked quite a bit. And I think I'm in love with T'Pol.
I wonder if some of the criticism of this series comes from an expectation from some fans that since it was the very first prequel series in Star Trek, it should concentrate on that particular arc - setting the stage for TOS and being meticulous about canon. In both those aspects perhaps it didn't fulfill some people's expectations. But considered as it's own thing (and I've never been one for trying to connect the various series together into one coherent, internally consistent whole), I'm liking it just fine.
I wonder if some of the criticism of this series comes from an expectation from some fans that since it was the very first prequel series in Star Trek, it should concentrate on that particular arc - setting the stage for TOS and being meticulous about canon. In both those aspects perhaps it didn't fulfill some people's expectations. But considered as it's own thing (and I've never been one for trying to connect the various series together into one coherent, internally consistent whole), I'm liking it just fine.
Sour grapes was kind of Ellison's thing. Plus lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits.
This. It is why Deep Space Nine was so popular. I mean, The Next Generation was a rerun of TOS, but setting was new and Patrick Stewart is an excellent actor, so it was fine. Deep Space Nine was something completely new. But afterwards? Voyager had potential, but it never really managed to live up to its Battlestar Galactica in Star Trek premise: beyond the first few episodes, we never actually got any sense of ship having shortages, or having to scavenge, improvise... everything a starship so far from any support logically should have been doing. The Year of Hell or Enterprise's Damage and following episodes is literally what the entirety of Voyager should have been. Instead, we got The Next Generation... but in Delta Quadrant. And the Enterprise itself mostly also just recycled stuff seen previously, and by the time it started finding its legs, it was simply too late.
I think, by the time Enterprise aired, we have had yeas of Star Trek. It was getting long in the tooth and didn't do anything revolutionary to move the franchise forward. It also got far away from the premise of the story about the Federation. This might had to do with what else what popular on TV at the same time it aired.
If folks would have watched Enterprise without having watched TNG, DS9, and VOY, it would probably have gotten more love.
If folks would have watched Enterprise without having watched TNG, DS9, and VOY, it would probably have gotten more love.
I felt like Voyager did a mid series restart with the introduction of 7 of 9. If you start watching the show from her introduction forward, it comes across a whole different. Now, if the show had gone the way of Stargate Universe with a space show with limited resources, it would have gotten really depressing fast. And this is why I think that show failed. The typical Stargate humor went away, and we got another BSG like show. You have to stay close enough to the expectations for the franchise. I expect Stargate to have humor. I expect Star Trek to challenge societal norms and come across more seriously.
There are two things I have not quite fully grasped as far as statements go and they are both in this post. One, that limited resources automatically means things get depressing really fast. Well, not necessarily, which is the major reason why I wanted to see Voyager, or Star Trek in general, try it. It is a fertile ground for conflict, to be sure, but also for exploring the nature of human relationships. To me, if resources are strained you have the opportunity to play up the strengths of the characters in response to the crisis. Hell, even MASH succeeded at that, with the situation feeling quite dire, but the characters responding both with humor, compassion and support of one another.
Secondarily, I don't understand the expectation to always come across as very serious. Certainly not even Voyager did that, even under some dire circumstances. Star Trek challenges societal norms? Sometimes. Sometimes it reflects the times in which it was made (i.e. TOS feeling very 60s, VOY very 90s).
Voyager tried a bit of conflict between Seven and the crew and it kind of worked. But, it didn't need to bring in Seven to do so. Conflict was baked in. And, to tie it back to topic, Enterprise also had opportunities to explore similar themes.
Similar threads
