Stupid reviews, incorrect info, dumb rumors over the years...

[Timewalker]

Is anyone old enough to remember the rumours that were circulating about Star Trek VI back in the day... with a new cast playing the beloved characters.

I'm old enough. I remember feeling outraged, because the studio line was that the TOS cast was "too old" to be believable in a Star Trek movie. I thought that was an appalling and insulting thing to say -- it's not like there aren't lots of other actors/actresses in the same age group managing quite nicely in movie/TV careers, thankyouverymuch.

I do wish we could have had a movie featuring Sulu and the Excelsior, though. The little tastes we got in ST VI and the Voyager episode about Tuvok were great, but I WANT MORE!

My ST club once reported a rumour for ST IV, reinforcing the (real) circulating stories that time travel would be involved - in which were assured by a supposed security guard at Paramount - that he had seen a new version of the Guardian of Forever (of TOS) under construction at the studio.

I never read the rumor about the Guardian of Forever being involved, but that would have been cool.

My favorite was an article in "The Best of Trek" that appeared just before TNG actually began to air. They seemed to be mostly regurgitating rumors and news from whatever other sources were available. Some of it dead on, other parts not so much. The clincher for me, though, was the writer stating that Picard must be Deltan because he was bald.

The thing to remember about The Best of Trek is that the articles in those books were originally published in the original Trek fanzine. The quality of the articles ranged from painfully fannish speculation based on nothing more than "it would be cool if..." ideas to university-quality dissertations and every possible degree of competence inbetween. I don't recall offhand the article about Picard, but it does seem obvious that the writer wasn't familiar with Patrick Stewart's other roles. But it's also obvious to me that the writer wasn't that familiar with Deltans, either -- it's only Deltan women who are bald -- Deltan males do have hair!

Anyone rememebr when T'Pol was gonna be T'Pau?

I recall that, and thought it would be rather interesting. I don't know what to make of the "T'Pau the freedom fighter" we ended up seeing. Actually, I prefer to ignore the entire Enterprise series, since it basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon and most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

 

[Kryton]

My ST club once reported a rumour for ST IV, reinforcing the (real) circulating stories that time travel would be involved - in which were assured by a supposed security guard at Paramount - that he had seen a new version of the Guardian of Forever (of TOS) under construction at the studio.

I never read the rumor about the Guardian of Forever being involved, but that would have been cool.

Um, assuming the whales were able to squeeze THROUGH the Guardian, THEN what? Flopping around on an arid, rocky planet's surface? Beam 'em up? To what? Did they fill up a tank on the BoP before even arriving, or what?

With the story they went with, the Guardian could never have worked!

 

[SeerSGB]

Memory's rusty, but I think it was TV guide for both of these: Warlord - The Osiris Chronicles and Andromeda both being reported as 'Trek shows chronicling the fall of the Federation after losing the Dominion War.

 

[Timewalker]

My ST club once reported a rumour for ST IV, reinforcing the (real) circulating stories that time travel would be involved - in which were assured by a supposed security guard at Paramount - that he had seen a new version of the Guardian of Forever (of TOS) under construction at the studio.

I never read the rumor about the Guardian of Forever being involved, but that would have been cool.

Um, assuming the whales were able to squeeze THROUGH the Guardian, THEN what? Flopping around on an arid, rocky planet's surface? Beam 'em up? To what? Did they fill up a tank on the BoP before even arriving, or what?

With the story they went with, the Guardian could never have worked!

I don't disagree with your assessment, but I just really enjoy Guardian of Forever stories.

 

[The Realist]

There's a doozy of a mistake in Time's very negative review of Star Trek: The Motion Picture:

It turns out that the villainous UFO is not manned. This is very peculiar, since in the film's opening sequence it is full of weirdos. By the time the Enterprise closes in on it, the creatures have all disappeared, victims not of the story line but of what appears to be a shortage of either money or time. In a very fast shuffle, the film suddenly announces that the villain is not merely a Death Star, but "a great, living machine."

Clearly, the reviewer (Richard Schickel, I believe it was) thought the Klingons in the opening sequence of the film were actually aboard V'ger. I think some critics are so disoriented by (or disinterested in) science fiction they miss the most basic plot information and visual cues. It's all there: establishing shot of the V'ger cloud, establishing shot of the Klingons, revolving pan to establish the Klingons in relation to V'ger, pull-in on the lead Klingon ship, cut to interior of Klingon ship where we find the "weirdos." Basic filmic language. I doubt the reviewer would have been confused by a similar series of shots involving cars or buildings in a movie with a familiar contemporary setting, but because it's sci-fi and spaceships he's like, "Huuhhhh?"

 

[Timewalker]

There's a doozy of a mistake in Time's very negative review of Star Trek: The Motion Picture:

It turns out that the villainous UFO is not manned. This is very peculiar, since in the film's opening sequence it is full of weirdos. By the time the Enterprise closes in on it, the creatures have all disappeared, victims not of the story line but of what appears to be a shortage of either money or time. In a very fast shuffle, the film suddenly announces that the villain is not merely a Death Star, but "a great, living machine."

Clearly, the reviewer (Richard Schickel, I believe it was) thought the Klingons in the opening sequence of the film were actually aboard V'ger. I think some critics are so disoriented by (or disinterested in) science fiction they miss the most basic plot information and visual cues. It's all there: establishing shot of the V'ger cloud, establishing shot of the Klingons, revolving pan to establish the Klingons in relation to V'ger, pull-in on the lead Klingon ship, cut to interior of Klingon ship where we find the "weirdos." Basic filmic language. I doubt the reviewer would have been confused by a similar series of shots involving cars or buildings in a movie with a familiar contemporary setting, but because it's sci-fi and spaceships he's like, "Huuhhhh?"

What an unprofessional review that was.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Enterprise...basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon and most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

No.

 

[Michael]

Enterprise...basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon and most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

No.

Agreed. No.

 

[Timewalker]

Enterprise...basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon and most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

No.

Enterprise...basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon and most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

No.

Agreed. No.

No... what? To which part(s) of my post do you refer? The mere existence of the series is in violation of the canon events set down several decades before.

As to my saying

most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

that is my personal opinion.

So, to what are you responding?

 

[Michael]

Enterprise [...] basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon ...

No.

... and most of the stories were either ridiculous ...

No.

... or boring ...

No.

... (or both).

No.

 

[archeryguy1701]

Actually, I prefer to ignore the entire Enterprise series, since it basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon and most of the stories were either ridiculous or boring (or both).

Which canon did it ignore specifically. And, to get rid of the obvious ones that might get called out (and the only ones I'm aware of that cause issues with some) are the Ferengi (the entire crew was passed out when they were boarded), the Borg (they had no bodies to examine), and if I remember my TOS time periods correctly, the meeting of the Klingons. So, what other major mess ups are there that ruined the series?

 

[Mysterion]

[ The mere existence of the series is in violation of the canon events set down several decades before.

Okay. How do you figure that?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Enterprise [...] basically ignored about 99.9% of Roddenberry-sanctioned canon ...

No.

... and most of the stories were either ridiculous ...

No.

... or boring ...

No.

... (or both).

No.

Absolutely Right(TM).

The part of the original post where "personal opinion" begins is with the assertion that Enterprise substantially violates canon. That and everything which follows is opinion and nothing more.

 

[Timewalker]

Canon includes the Animated Series. According to both The Making of Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry and the Animated Series episode "The Counter-Clock Incident", the first Enterprise Captain is ROBERT APRIL. There is NO mention of anybody named Jonathan Archer, and no mention of any character who could be Jonathan Archer.

There are numerous events happening in the course of Enterprise that should have been referenced (reverse-referenced?) in TOS. They weren't. So they should not have been included in Enterprise.

For example... VULCAN terrorists? Please. Time wars? Granted, that is the sort of thing that would likely be classified... but who more than Kirk would have been clued in about something like the Temporal Cold War, given how often he himself messed around with time?

I don't even like the characterization they did of Zefram Cochrane in First Contact. It certainly doesn't mesh with what we learned about Cochrane in the TOS series "Metamorphosis" when Kirk found Cochrane and the Companion. Yet Enterprise favors the movie version of Cochrane over the TOS version.

I realize that the 1960s episodes could not possibly have referenced a TV show not produced until 30+ years later. But the later show should have done a better job of respecting TOS' rich history, both on-screen and off and not introduced stuff that so blatantly contradicts what was established, whether event-wise or character-wise (as in Vulcan terrorists).

Other than this, I suppose we will have to agree to disagree, unless you can convince me I'm wrong.

 

[Mysterion]

Canon includes the Animated Series. According to both The Making of Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry and the Animated Series episode "The Counter-Clock Incident", the first Enterprise Captain is ROBERT APRIL. There is NO mention of anybody named Jonathan Archer, and no mention of any character who could be Jonathan Archer.

Robert April is the first Captain of the Constitution class USS Enterprise NCC-1701. This has no bearing whatsoever on there being an earlier NX class Enteprise commanded by Capt. Archer.

The other things you list might not have appealed to you, but have no real conflict with the canon of the other series.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Canon includes the Animated Series. According to both The Making of Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry and the Animated Series episode "The Counter-Clock Incident", the first Enterprise Captain is ROBERT APRIL. There is NO mention of anybody named Jonathan Archer, and no mention of any character who could be Jonathan Archer.

Different Enterprise. Robert April was supposed to be Captain of the NCC-1701, not the NX-01.

There are numerous events happening in the course of Enterprise that should have been referenced (reverse-referenced?) in TOS. They weren't. So they should not have been included in Enterprise.

The fact that something wasn't mentioned doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just thinking of a random example, did the original series mention the Great Fire of Rome? Does that mean it didn't happen?

I don't even like the characterization they did of Zefram Cochrane in First Contact. It certainly doesn't mesh with what we learned about Cochrane in the TOS series "Metamorphosis" when Kirk found Cochrane and the Companion. Yet Enterprise favors the movie version of Cochrane over the TOS version.

Zephram Cochrane went to space to die. I can certainly see that fitting with the character in first contact who struggled with his fame all his life. When he found the Companion, he changed, since he found someone who loved him. Did the writer of Metamorphosis intend that? I doubt that. But it doesn't mean the stories are incompatible. Besides, Enterprise follows the Original Series with Cochrane's age and with his disapearance (even if the age seems to be implausible for First Contact).

I realize that the 1960s episodes could not possibly have referenced a TV show not produced until 30+ years later. But the later show should have done a better job of respecting TOS' rich history, both on-screen and off and not introduced stuff that so blatantly contradicts what was established, whether event-wise or character-wise (as in Vulcan terrorists).

First off, which Vulcan terrorists? The only Vulcan terrorist I can think of was the one working for the Maquis in DS9. Second off, I don't see much of anything that blatantly contradicts the original series (especially not 99.9%).

 

[Kryton]

Canon includes the Animated Series.

Since when, according to CBS/Paramount?

 

[archeryguy1701]

There are numerous events happening in the course of Enterprise that should have been referenced (reverse-referenced?) in TOS. They weren't. So they should not have been included in Enterprise.

The fact that something wasn't mentioned doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just thinking of a random example, did the original series mention the Great Fire of Rome? Does that mean it didn't happen?

Or, to use a more Star Trekesque example: there are countless incidents in TOS that were mentioned in TNG-VOY, but probably should have been. Did that mean that none of that happened either, were the later series ignoring/ contradicting past canon?

I realize that the 1960s episodes could not possibly have referenced a TV show not produced until 30+ years later. But the later show should have done a better job of respecting TOS' rich history, both on-screen and off and not introduced stuff that so blatantly contradicts what was established, whether event-wise or character-wise (as in Vulcan terrorists).

First off, which Vulcan terrorists? The only Vulcan terrorist I can think of was the one working for the Maquis in DS9. Second off, I don't see much of anything that blatantly contradicts the original series (especially not 99.9%).

He may have been referring to the ENT season 4 trilogy where the Vulcan government was corrupted, they were hunting down a secretive and secluded group of Vulcans, and they sent one of their men to bomb the Starfleet Embassy. However, just because Vulcans have never been depicted as participating in organized violence doesn't mean it's unlikely. Keep in mind ,Timewalker, that Vulcans have emotions, they just suppress them, and that they used to be a violent culture. They're not a perfect, idealistic race. They've got issues and crazies too.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Canon includes the Animated Series.

Since when, according to CBS/Paramount?

Enterprise actually made a couple of elements from TAS canon.

 

[Kryton]

Well so does "Yesteryear" gel to a degree. But by and large, as a whole? Don't think so.