The Misanthope's guide to Enterprise...
- Thread starter Sadistro
- Start date
Canceled due to ratings soon after the two characters were put together.
Commodore64. It is my belief that the Trip and t-Pol characters were never actually put together it was only implied in the last two episodes. Certainly not long enoough for that to have any effect on the ratings.
Besides I believe that the series was scheduled for the Ax some time befoe TnT became an implied couple.
Had this taken place in Harbinger instead of that crappy morning after scene. I feel that the romance wuld have had a positive efect on the ratings.
but then I am a romantic in spite of all avialble evidence to the to the contrary in my personal life.
Besides I believe that the series was scheduled for the Ax some time befoe TnT became an implied couple.
Had this taken place in Harbinger instead of that crappy morning after scene. I feel that the romance wuld have had a positive efect on the ratings.
but then I am a romantic in spite of all avialble evidence to the to the contrary in my personal life.
Moonlighting was canceled when the characters were placed together. Sorry I wasn't clear.
I think the morning after scene was one of the better ones in Harbinger. It seems more Vulcan-like to ignore/deny feelings. What seemed drug-induced, and was T'Pol seducing Trip. It seems the intent for writers was to indicate that T'Pol *was* acting abnormally. I got it for sure.
I think being a romantic in real life is one of the most wonderful things that could possibly happen to a person. I believe romantics are idealists who seek to correct the wrongs in the world. Keep at that Penguin, even if I vehemently disagree with your Enterprise romantic couple pairing.
I think the morning after scene was one of the better ones in Harbinger. It seems more Vulcan-like to ignore/deny feelings. What seemed drug-induced, and was T'Pol seducing Trip. It seems the intent for writers was to indicate that T'Pol *was* acting abnormally. I got it for sure.
I think being a romantic in real life is one of the most wonderful things that could possibly happen to a person. I believe romantics are idealists who seek to correct the wrongs in the world. Keep at that Penguin, even if I vehemently disagree with your Enterprise romantic couple pairing.
Last edited:
Well, I consider myself something of a romantic (which makes me sound like one of those people who claim they are 'deep', but never are...), but that doesn't really help me appreciate screen romance, because most of it is so very awful. As you rightly say, practically all of the ongoing romances in Star Trek (and most shows) are very badly written and appallingly developed, when the writers can work up the enthusiasm (or have been given enough lashes of the whip) to write for them at all.
And I also agree that most romance is better left in the imagination and in the 'will they/won't they' stage. Basically, the less the writers do with your favourite romances, the less they can screw it up and send it in the all the directions you don't want it to go.
Odo and Kira were mentioned as one of the better examples and to a certain extent, I agree. It certainly didn't hurt that the writers of all the seasons consistently engaged with Odo. Most of the writers liked him for one reason or another. He had super powers, he was an outsider, he had excellent comedic potential in his sparring with Quark, he had unrequited love issues, 'family' issues, he was great at fighting, Auberjonois was a great actor... something for everyone basically.
Kira is a much loved character too (by most of the writers, although I found Nana Visitor to be a rather uninispiring actress to be perfectly honest). She was probably helped along by the fact that the Kira character is an unusually rich and interesting one for Star Trek women and the fact that basically none of the writers could think of anything to do with Dax.
Michael Piller really got the ball rolling on them with the superb 'Necessary Evil', but it was Rene Echevarria who really did all the heavy lifting with regard to their romance. He clearly loved Odo as a character (along with Dax and Jake Sisko) and along with Ira Behr, writes some of the most memorable evolutions of their romance.
Behr was extremely busy juggling series plotlines and indulging in his passion for Ferengi episodes however, so he was very lucky that this was one of those rare romances stories that actually interested one of his writing staff.
So you have Behr doing episodes like 'Heart of Stone', 'My Way' and 'What you leave Behind' which really push things along. And you have Echevarria doing episodes that bring out the depth of the emotions and was responsible for developing the romance (episodes like 'Crossfire' and 'Chimera').
Chimera whilst I'm on the subject and to pick up on something Commodore said, was one of the more interesting of the homosexually themed episodes. J G Hertzler is magnificent as Laas and the show offers many interesting viewpoints, whilst not losing sight of the need to tell a specific story about Odo's difficulty in being himself around Kira.
So anyway, it works better than most romances because it has two aggressive advocates on the main writing staff (i.e people who aren't being forced to write for it). I still wouldn't say that it was amazing, but beggars cannot be choosers on this subject!
But never mind ongoing romances - what about the 'one episode romances'?! Just how terrible are they? In all the Trek series, an endless litany of truly mind shatteringly dull and lifeless one episode romances... episodes that you *know* are going to be awful, but you watch it anyway, just in case...
And you can tell that the vast majority of the time, it is either fan fiction of a kind (when the writers are someone you've never heard of before) or that the writer has been told 'write a romance for character X this week' (when it's a main writer).
In all the excruciating line-up of clunkers this has produced, very, very few stand up to repeat viewing. 'Lessons' (in TNG) was one of the only ones that actually hooked me in. Having someone close to Picard's age, with a decent actress, good use of previous episodes in the music angle, well written... But it's a rare gem among the chaff (and interestingly for our discussion, co-written by a man and a women - Jean-Louise Matthias and Ronald Wilkerson).
Going back to Trip and T'Pol... well, you said it. They show no real interest in each other at all in the first two seasons and then suddenly they love each other. The fact is, that both characters spend *considerably* more time with Archer than with each other in the first two seasons (and in S3, T'Pol and Archer are together so much, we hardly even seem to see Trip most of the time!)
Their romance is further hurt by the fact that only Manny Coto seems to have any enthusiasm at all for the storyline. Chris Black for example, pays it lip service at best (the scenes which show them together in anything but a work related capacity last about 3 minutes in all his episodes).
Their romance is just so 'bolt out of the blue' (which I guarantee you, will have be mentioned in the writing room, to link up with the Xindi weapon hitting Earth where Lizzy was etc). A bad bolt out of the blue versus a good bolt out of the blue...
But the first two seasons made it very clear that the focus was very much on Archer and T'Pol (in the familiar will they/won't they, dragging their heels kind of way). But surely the final nail has to be that their romance is conceived in the most appallingly contrived manner.
The neuro pressure sessions are so intimate that it's logical (aha) to assume that a great many people would become attracted to one another doing that, given time. The intimacy of the act among people who will never usually have much cause to touch the people around them at all (unless you make a habit of touching people at your workplace...), coupled with the loneliness of being single, especially in such a self contained environment, would ensure that it would only be the most superficial and artificial of attractions.
On a more personal note, I was dismayed at the whole storyline, simply because it took Trip out of the interestingly dark direction he had been heading in 'The Expanse' and immediatly lightens him again in 'The Xindi'. The nightmare of the weapon killing Lizzy and him being zoned from lack of sleep is great... but then the neuro pressure line comes along and he's comedy frustrated, hapless and innocent Trip again.
Clearly they had decided that they couldn't have both Trip and Archer pursuing such a dark and desperate path and Trip got the short straw. Amd like I said, so much of the season is consumed with Archer and his growing mania to see the mission through, that we barely see many of the other characters. Travis was always underused, but he's practically invisible in S3!
But honestly, take out the little neuro pressure inserts and of course there's 'Similitude', but what else does Trip really do in the first half of the season at least? He's gone from being one of the most visible characters to becoming in danger of losing screen time to Reed! Hands up who saw that one coming?
I think with regard to when you should write romances, that is a tricky one. A lot of the time, it might not be your call anyway - Braga mentions that the studio were pressuring them in S3 and romance is usually something they call for.
Assuming no undue interference from on high though, it's really one of those times that you need 'the magic'. Either two characters hit it off on screen AND enough of the writers like the idea of it to really engage with it AND the fans like it too... or it isn't going to work. And given that the merging of those 3 things is incredibly unlikely, it's best to steer clear (but as I said, studios will often clamour for it anyway).
Romance sells well to female audiences is the prevailing (and accurate enough to work off) theory. Romance in a show which targets men... seems like a bad idea therefore. I am not adverse to romance on principal, but the chances of it being good are so abysmally low.
Just look at the TV shows and the films of any particular time and try and think of any romances that you really thought were well done; that really did it for you. I've seen plenty of TV and film and I can't name many at all. I remember thinking the Doug Ross/Carol Hathaway romance in early ER was quite absorbing - before Clooney swanned off to Hollwood and started making 'Me and my celebrity friends 11, 12, 13 etc.'
And I'd have given good money to see 'The West Wing's' Toby Ziegler and CJ Cregg get together, as they are two of my favourite characters ever.
Returning to the idea of Studio pressure though... This is another topic that is often the cause of much woe for fans. The way that JMS was able to get the studio off his back and do things his way was a major contributor to why Babylon 5 was and is one of the very best shows made in recent memory.
Of particular relevance to 'Enterprise' is the effect that it had on an already tired and disappointed Braga. Writers leave traces of how they are feeling in the episodes they write - they can't help it; it just happens. Archer and Trip's conversation in 'The Expanse' echoes the way that Braga was feeling about his job at the time.
'It seemed like the greatest job in the world...'
He'd come into a new show at the helm, had tons of ideas and a freer hand to make the kind of show he wanted to make (because the timeline allowed a bit more flexibility in how humans acted, no Federation, show could be darker etc etc).
But two seasons in, it was clearly weighing down on him. Ratings were low, fans were calling for his head for a whole host of misdemeanours (many of them extremely unfair in my opinion). For whatever reasons, the show had not performed and it must have seemed to the writers like they were doomed to toil in obscurity (especially as you can tell from Braga in the commentary for 'Broken Bow' and his interviews that he is honestly and genuinely proud of the show they made).
And the pressure to change things in S3 is the final straw. Just watch the interview with him in the S3 set. You can hear the irriatation and frustration in his voice, that they were forced to do S3 as they were. He seems to cheer up when he asserts that given such dictats, he feels they were able to do it in a mostly satisfactory way to him.
But the fact remains that S3 sees a much more subdued Braga than earlier Seasons. A mere 3 episodes written (season opener, finale and one of his comfort zone time travel episodes) and not many more where he supplies the story. And at the end, he hands over showrunner status and contributes only one more episode full stop.
Now many probably think this a good thing - S4 is after all, highly regarded it seems. But I think his loss was devastating, because the soul of the show went with him. Manny Coto's S4 is in many ways a good series. I just didn't know what the name of the series was, because it sure as hell didn't seem like 'Enterprise' anymore.
(Incidentally, I have just finished watching 'Harbinger' - I intend to put up a series of mini-reviews on how I felt about all the S3 episodes). Basically, I think it's intermittely great, but still with several unfortunate flaws (like what on earth Andre Bormanis and LeVar Burton thought they were up to, when they were writing and directing 'Extinction'?)
So until it's that time again... I need a volunteer from the audience...
And I also agree that most romance is better left in the imagination and in the 'will they/won't they' stage. Basically, the less the writers do with your favourite romances, the less they can screw it up and send it in the all the directions you don't want it to go.
Odo and Kira were mentioned as one of the better examples and to a certain extent, I agree. It certainly didn't hurt that the writers of all the seasons consistently engaged with Odo. Most of the writers liked him for one reason or another. He had super powers, he was an outsider, he had excellent comedic potential in his sparring with Quark, he had unrequited love issues, 'family' issues, he was great at fighting, Auberjonois was a great actor... something for everyone basically.
Kira is a much loved character too (by most of the writers, although I found Nana Visitor to be a rather uninispiring actress to be perfectly honest). She was probably helped along by the fact that the Kira character is an unusually rich and interesting one for Star Trek women and the fact that basically none of the writers could think of anything to do with Dax.
Michael Piller really got the ball rolling on them with the superb 'Necessary Evil', but it was Rene Echevarria who really did all the heavy lifting with regard to their romance. He clearly loved Odo as a character (along with Dax and Jake Sisko) and along with Ira Behr, writes some of the most memorable evolutions of their romance.
Behr was extremely busy juggling series plotlines and indulging in his passion for Ferengi episodes however, so he was very lucky that this was one of those rare romances stories that actually interested one of his writing staff.
So you have Behr doing episodes like 'Heart of Stone', 'My Way' and 'What you leave Behind' which really push things along. And you have Echevarria doing episodes that bring out the depth of the emotions and was responsible for developing the romance (episodes like 'Crossfire' and 'Chimera').
Chimera whilst I'm on the subject and to pick up on something Commodore said, was one of the more interesting of the homosexually themed episodes. J G Hertzler is magnificent as Laas and the show offers many interesting viewpoints, whilst not losing sight of the need to tell a specific story about Odo's difficulty in being himself around Kira.
So anyway, it works better than most romances because it has two aggressive advocates on the main writing staff (i.e people who aren't being forced to write for it). I still wouldn't say that it was amazing, but beggars cannot be choosers on this subject!
But never mind ongoing romances - what about the 'one episode romances'?! Just how terrible are they? In all the Trek series, an endless litany of truly mind shatteringly dull and lifeless one episode romances... episodes that you *know* are going to be awful, but you watch it anyway, just in case...
And you can tell that the vast majority of the time, it is either fan fiction of a kind (when the writers are someone you've never heard of before) or that the writer has been told 'write a romance for character X this week' (when it's a main writer).
In all the excruciating line-up of clunkers this has produced, very, very few stand up to repeat viewing. 'Lessons' (in TNG) was one of the only ones that actually hooked me in. Having someone close to Picard's age, with a decent actress, good use of previous episodes in the music angle, well written... But it's a rare gem among the chaff (and interestingly for our discussion, co-written by a man and a women - Jean-Louise Matthias and Ronald Wilkerson).
Going back to Trip and T'Pol... well, you said it. They show no real interest in each other at all in the first two seasons and then suddenly they love each other. The fact is, that both characters spend *considerably* more time with Archer than with each other in the first two seasons (and in S3, T'Pol and Archer are together so much, we hardly even seem to see Trip most of the time!)
Their romance is further hurt by the fact that only Manny Coto seems to have any enthusiasm at all for the storyline. Chris Black for example, pays it lip service at best (the scenes which show them together in anything but a work related capacity last about 3 minutes in all his episodes).
Their romance is just so 'bolt out of the blue' (which I guarantee you, will have be mentioned in the writing room, to link up with the Xindi weapon hitting Earth where Lizzy was etc). A bad bolt out of the blue versus a good bolt out of the blue...
But the first two seasons made it very clear that the focus was very much on Archer and T'Pol (in the familiar will they/won't they, dragging their heels kind of way). But surely the final nail has to be that their romance is conceived in the most appallingly contrived manner.
The neuro pressure sessions are so intimate that it's logical (aha) to assume that a great many people would become attracted to one another doing that, given time. The intimacy of the act among people who will never usually have much cause to touch the people around them at all (unless you make a habit of touching people at your workplace...), coupled with the loneliness of being single, especially in such a self contained environment, would ensure that it would only be the most superficial and artificial of attractions.
On a more personal note, I was dismayed at the whole storyline, simply because it took Trip out of the interestingly dark direction he had been heading in 'The Expanse' and immediatly lightens him again in 'The Xindi'. The nightmare of the weapon killing Lizzy and him being zoned from lack of sleep is great... but then the neuro pressure line comes along and he's comedy frustrated, hapless and innocent Trip again.
Clearly they had decided that they couldn't have both Trip and Archer pursuing such a dark and desperate path and Trip got the short straw. Amd like I said, so much of the season is consumed with Archer and his growing mania to see the mission through, that we barely see many of the other characters. Travis was always underused, but he's practically invisible in S3!
But honestly, take out the little neuro pressure inserts and of course there's 'Similitude', but what else does Trip really do in the first half of the season at least? He's gone from being one of the most visible characters to becoming in danger of losing screen time to Reed! Hands up who saw that one coming?
I think with regard to when you should write romances, that is a tricky one. A lot of the time, it might not be your call anyway - Braga mentions that the studio were pressuring them in S3 and romance is usually something they call for.
Assuming no undue interference from on high though, it's really one of those times that you need 'the magic'. Either two characters hit it off on screen AND enough of the writers like the idea of it to really engage with it AND the fans like it too... or it isn't going to work. And given that the merging of those 3 things is incredibly unlikely, it's best to steer clear (but as I said, studios will often clamour for it anyway).
Romance sells well to female audiences is the prevailing (and accurate enough to work off) theory. Romance in a show which targets men... seems like a bad idea therefore. I am not adverse to romance on principal, but the chances of it being good are so abysmally low.
Just look at the TV shows and the films of any particular time and try and think of any romances that you really thought were well done; that really did it for you. I've seen plenty of TV and film and I can't name many at all. I remember thinking the Doug Ross/Carol Hathaway romance in early ER was quite absorbing - before Clooney swanned off to Hollwood and started making 'Me and my celebrity friends 11, 12, 13 etc.'
And I'd have given good money to see 'The West Wing's' Toby Ziegler and CJ Cregg get together, as they are two of my favourite characters ever.
Returning to the idea of Studio pressure though... This is another topic that is often the cause of much woe for fans. The way that JMS was able to get the studio off his back and do things his way was a major contributor to why Babylon 5 was and is one of the very best shows made in recent memory.
Of particular relevance to 'Enterprise' is the effect that it had on an already tired and disappointed Braga. Writers leave traces of how they are feeling in the episodes they write - they can't help it; it just happens. Archer and Trip's conversation in 'The Expanse' echoes the way that Braga was feeling about his job at the time.
'It seemed like the greatest job in the world...'
He'd come into a new show at the helm, had tons of ideas and a freer hand to make the kind of show he wanted to make (because the timeline allowed a bit more flexibility in how humans acted, no Federation, show could be darker etc etc).
But two seasons in, it was clearly weighing down on him. Ratings were low, fans were calling for his head for a whole host of misdemeanours (many of them extremely unfair in my opinion). For whatever reasons, the show had not performed and it must have seemed to the writers like they were doomed to toil in obscurity (especially as you can tell from Braga in the commentary for 'Broken Bow' and his interviews that he is honestly and genuinely proud of the show they made).
And the pressure to change things in S3 is the final straw. Just watch the interview with him in the S3 set. You can hear the irriatation and frustration in his voice, that they were forced to do S3 as they were. He seems to cheer up when he asserts that given such dictats, he feels they were able to do it in a mostly satisfactory way to him.
But the fact remains that S3 sees a much more subdued Braga than earlier Seasons. A mere 3 episodes written (season opener, finale and one of his comfort zone time travel episodes) and not many more where he supplies the story. And at the end, he hands over showrunner status and contributes only one more episode full stop.
Now many probably think this a good thing - S4 is after all, highly regarded it seems. But I think his loss was devastating, because the soul of the show went with him. Manny Coto's S4 is in many ways a good series. I just didn't know what the name of the series was, because it sure as hell didn't seem like 'Enterprise' anymore.
(Incidentally, I have just finished watching 'Harbinger' - I intend to put up a series of mini-reviews on how I felt about all the S3 episodes). Basically, I think it's intermittely great, but still with several unfortunate flaws (like what on earth Andre Bormanis and LeVar Burton thought they were up to, when they were writing and directing 'Extinction'?)
So until it's that time again... I need a volunteer from the audience...
Sidistro. In season 11 and 2 it was deliberart on the part of the wriers to have Archer and T-Pol together all of the time to ensure that t he viewers accepted that T-Pol is first officer. She tags along with Archer all of the time even to scenes where the T-Pol character is not needed. Trip is deliberately left out. His character is dimished purposly to allow the Archer T-Pol Captain first Officer duo.
Still trip and t-Pol achieve a certain level of friendship in the first two seasons.
I was never comfortable with T-Pol being first officer and thought it was just B and B effort to complete their theft of TOS. Spock bieng the Vucan first Officer and Science Officer. Too coincidental not to be deliberate.
Many things in Enterprise were "Out of the blue" so it is not surprising that Trip and T-Pol could develope a romance in Season three. Not much of a romance though other than the seduction scene in Harbinger. It was iffy at best for the rest of season three.
Note than in E2 T-Pol denies any romatic feelings towards Trip and says that just because they had a sexual relationship there is no justificatin for Trip wanting a personal relationship. Later when The young T-Pol meets the older T-Pol She says that her heart doesn't know what it wants. The old t-Pol says that it will.
INteresting that the writers have the old T-Pol claim that the two t-Pol's lives were the same until the Generational Enterprise was thrown back in time. this meant that both the old T-Pol and the young T-Pol had seduced Trip at the same time in the same circumstances but the old T-Pol never mentions that or even seems to be aware of it. big hole in the episode as far as I am concerned.
Frankly the roomance was handled badly (I believe) is because there was toomuch infighting about it.) Some wanted it furthered and others wanted it buried so it was left hanging until manny coto came along and tried to do something with it but apparently was blocked by Berman and Bragga.
Romance throughout history has had its place in story, books, films and TV because it offers Hope. Hope for a better world and hope that life continues no matter what. Hope that differences can be overcome through Love.
That is the romantic in me now. I see Love and Romance in that light. Hope.
Still trip and t-Pol achieve a certain level of friendship in the first two seasons.
I was never comfortable with T-Pol being first officer and thought it was just B and B effort to complete their theft of TOS. Spock bieng the Vucan first Officer and Science Officer. Too coincidental not to be deliberate.
Many things in Enterprise were "Out of the blue" so it is not surprising that Trip and T-Pol could develope a romance in Season three. Not much of a romance though other than the seduction scene in Harbinger. It was iffy at best for the rest of season three.
Note than in E2 T-Pol denies any romatic feelings towards Trip and says that just because they had a sexual relationship there is no justificatin for Trip wanting a personal relationship. Later when The young T-Pol meets the older T-Pol She says that her heart doesn't know what it wants. The old t-Pol says that it will.
INteresting that the writers have the old T-Pol claim that the two t-Pol's lives were the same until the Generational Enterprise was thrown back in time. this meant that both the old T-Pol and the young T-Pol had seduced Trip at the same time in the same circumstances but the old T-Pol never mentions that or even seems to be aware of it. big hole in the episode as far as I am concerned.
Frankly the roomance was handled badly (I believe) is because there was toomuch infighting about it.) Some wanted it furthered and others wanted it buried so it was left hanging until manny coto came along and tried to do something with it but apparently was blocked by Berman and Bragga.
Romance throughout history has had its place in story, books, films and TV because it offers Hope. Hope for a better world and hope that life continues no matter what. Hope that differences can be overcome through Love.
That is the romantic in me now. I see Love and Romance in that light. Hope.
Yeah, but didn't JMS have to fire the first head -- the guy who played Sinclair? I think everyone is pressured by the studio.
And speaking of studio pressure ... Moonves I'm sure told the writers of Enterprise to "sexy it up" around season 3. (Absurd.) I wonder how much of the written relationship was about that?
I agree with you in general about season 3. It'll be interesting to read your review. In many ways, I think season 3 is superior to all the seasons. The characters have a clear mission, clear obstacles, suffer devastating losses and then triumph over them. Season 4 is fun for it's TOS feel, but it's unfortunate they didn't continue some of the character development from season 3.
Season 2 in particular did a good job of showing that Archer is now listening to T'Pol more than Trip. I think Enterprise tried to show not only could Archer overcome his prejudice against Vulcans, but one would become one of his best friends. (I believe that was one of the major premises and why Braga killed Trip.)
And speaking of studio pressure ... Moonves I'm sure told the writers of Enterprise to "sexy it up" around season 3. (Absurd.) I wonder how much of the written relationship was about that?
I agree with you in general about season 3. It'll be interesting to read your review. In many ways, I think season 3 is superior to all the seasons. The characters have a clear mission, clear obstacles, suffer devastating losses and then triumph over them. Season 4 is fun for it's TOS feel, but it's unfortunate they didn't continue some of the character development from season 3.
Season 2 in particular did a good job of showing that Archer is now listening to T'Pol more than Trip. I think Enterprise tried to show not only could Archer overcome his prejudice against Vulcans, but one would become one of his best friends. (I believe that was one of the major premises and why Braga killed Trip.)
I realize that this is a double posting. However I wanted to answer Commodore64's last post in additon to Sadistro's
Commodore, you summed it up with your statement "Even though I vehemetly oppose you enterrise romantic pariings."
Thank yu for your honesty.
I base my opposition to the Archer /T-Pol parings on Canon: Erika saying that she is married to Starfleet as Archer is and Archer not disagreeng with her and Archer ending his relationship with Erika because he was promoted and outranked her. Archer outranked t-pol so he woulld not have started an affair or alowed t-Pol to try to initate an Affair.
In additon the Trip and t-Pol paring had a great deal of chemistry in it. Might have been due to the chemistry of the Actors. Archer and T=Pol never had the same Chemistry. Actualy not any chemistry.
Since the romance was handled so badly I have grown to the idea of no romance at all would have been better than one handled so shoddily.
Still, I believe that you and I can agree on other aspects of the series as long as we leave t-Pol's love life out of it.
Commodore, you summed it up with your statement "Even though I vehemetly oppose you enterrise romantic pariings."
Thank yu for your honesty.
I base my opposition to the Archer /T-Pol parings on Canon: Erika saying that she is married to Starfleet as Archer is and Archer not disagreeng with her and Archer ending his relationship with Erika because he was promoted and outranked her. Archer outranked t-pol so he woulld not have started an affair or alowed t-Pol to try to initate an Affair.
In additon the Trip and t-Pol paring had a great deal of chemistry in it. Might have been due to the chemistry of the Actors. Archer and T=Pol never had the same Chemistry. Actualy not any chemistry.
Since the romance was handled so badly I have grown to the idea of no romance at all would have been better than one handled so shoddily.
Still, I believe that you and I can agree on other aspects of the series as long as we leave t-Pol's love life out of it.
i believe he killed trip because he was his favorite character. he was his "baby".
killing trip was for him to say goodbye to the trek universe, an analogy to say "my creativity is dead for star trek, i moving on to other else"
at the beginning of the show, he wanted recreate the TOS trio (kirk, spock, scotty) with archer, t'pol, trip.
killing trip was for him to say goodbye to the trek universe, an analogy to say "my creativity is dead for star trek, i moving on to other else"
at the beginning of the show, he wanted recreate the TOS trio (kirk, spock, scotty) with archer, t'pol, trip.
Y'know, this Archer/T'Pol vs. Trip/T'Pol, "my" couple-"your" couple stuff isn't really on topic...it would be better to keep this thread focused on analysis, if possible.
You make me laugh.
I heartily agree there. My favorite stage of TV romance is usually the "falling in love" or UST (unresolved sexual tension) stage. Unfortunately, many shows, by accident or design, keep the target couple apart for far longer than is credible, often dissipating that lovely tension to the point that the romance loses its spark.
JAG, anyone? X-Files?That being said, Doug and Carol on E.R.--well done. I hung with 'em the whole way. I even stuck with the show for Season 6 to find out "if they," because I needed my happy ending.
Thank you for deconstructing that for me.
You're making me laugh again.
Okay, "This Side of Paradise" wasn't so bad. Perhaps it was the performances of Nimoy and Jill Ireland, but I liked it. But put that next to "For the World is Hollow..." I'm a huge McCoy fan, but...
I agree that the Trip/T'Pol romance suffered for lack of setup and nurturing. I think you can make any romance work if you lay the proper groundwork and make it credible. But as you say, there was a lot working against this one. Sci fi show with New Direction!, no setup, only one writer paying any attention.
Looking forward to those.
This has been a fascinating analysis so far.
Oh boy, crap density in this post is so huge that I have great difficulties in quoting this particular section - how to find it in this nonsense mumbling. Only some delluted basement boy can say that Braga's absence is big loss. I bet that you have Braga poster in your basement room, just in front of your bed, so you can....
(oh, you know what I mean )
Well, this was certainly uncalled for. You have a warning for trolling, Miroslav. Comments to PM.Oh boy, crap density in this post is so huge that I have great difficulties in quoting this particular section - how to find it in this nonsense mumbling. Only some delluted basement boy can say that Braga's absence is big loss. I bet that you have Braga poster in your basement room, just in front of your bed, so you can....
This isn't trolling. This is open and sencere opinion about facts that some of you people are unable to accept. And, I know, truth hurts.
So, now you can show me your mighty stick again, beacuse you clearly haven't any valid arguments to oposse me.
So, now you can show me your mighty stick again, beacuse you clearly haven't any valid arguments to oposse me.
"Mighty stick"...? My, but we're feeling our oats today, aren't we?This isn't trolling. This is open and sencere opinion about facts that some of you people are unable to accept. And, I know, truth hurts.
So, now you can show me your mighty stick again, beacuse you clearly haven't any valid arguments to oposse me.
Re-read the rules of this board, Miroslav. You're in violation of several of them. If you don't climb down off your high horse and start behaving in a civil manner, you're headed for a little vacation. Stop disrupting this thread.
I think it's fair to say that Enterprise is not well remembered by history. Publicy reviled by Trek fans and ignored by pretty much everyone else, it's taken me a long time to get round to watching this.
However, I did hold out some hope for the series, mainly due to the fact that I am a much bigger fan of Brannon Braga's work than most people seem to be. His innate pessimism and skill at producing horror, despair, but also innocence and longing are exactly the kinds of things I look for.
The thing is, his style and Star Trek's style are rarely a happy marriage. Star Trek prides itself on being about optimism and that just isn't him. His stories invariably deal with life's disappointments, the hammering down of the soul in the face of reality.
And give him credit that he knows this - watch his interviews and he is fairly candid that whilst he is mindful of what Trek fans want and what qualities the Trek franchise possesses, he often felt constrained at working within those limits.
There are two ways you can look at this. I think fans of the franchise can (and do) legitimately ask why such a writer was allowed to not only work on the shows, but attain such a lofty position? The other way to look at it (one taken by his fellows writers), is that he is someone of grand vision, unafraid to go to any place he feels a good story or a good idea lies.
But again, his mindset is often fundamentally opposed to what most Trek fans would like to see. Because he focuses so heavily on misery, horror and disappointment. He approves of Good, serious and innocent people, and despises 'flash', cocky characters as people unworthy of cheering for.
And so with that in mind, he arrives to helm Enterprise...
And you get pretty much what you should have expected. Those who have seen Voyager's fifth season (the only season Braga truly feels he got his message across in), particularly should. It's basically a dry run for Enterprise.
With cramped, drab environments, a tiny ready room complete with annoying squeak and a crew that could not really be described as exciting, this was a much more sober and 'what it would really be like' vision.
It's designed to confound, because the idea across the season is to peel away the optimism and sense of adventure and deliver disappointment upon disappointment to the crew, but particularly to Archer. To have his dream sullied, that it 'wasn't supposed to be like this'.
I think it's a great idea and completely in keeping with my own view of the world. It may sound misanthropic and indeed is in many ways. But it does give it far more edge and is a very refreshing antidote to what is at times, a very unrealistic vision of the future.
Now, reading that, I wouldn't be surprised if people were ready to ship me out to the same platform at sea with Braga that they are aiming torpedos at. I would say only that such an attitude does not imply any malice to Star Trek as a franchise, just that some of us need a little more explanation and a little more acceptance of how things really are, how people and life really is, in order to fully enjoy Star Trek.
And I support most of Braga's ideas. I particularly wish the studio had allowed him to omit the Transporter as he wanted to. Making him put it in, forced him to come up with the 'People are scared to use it' excuse. Because the idea was to get away from all that technology. How much time is lost in TNG and VOY episodes, explaining why they can't transport, tractor beam, disable people's escaping ships etc etc?
One area I am sceptical about however is the Vulcans. I like the race and they had been used very little really, up to this point (Tuvok is a very underused character in VOY). But Braga's style depends on deep emotion, rage, fear, despair, longing etc. He's never been much for the Vulcans and has rarely ever written about them.
So it came as little surprise that the Vulcans in Enterprise did show a suspicious level of emotional outburst and just went to show that Braga finds them an unworkable race for the stories and mindsets that he understands and wants to talk about. I can appreciate why fans were outraged and I think he (and the other writers) didn't do enough with this new interpretation to justify the change.
Because that's it, isn't it? One of the principal problems with Enterprise is that many bold risks and new directions were attempted, but with often very unsatisfactory results. And I would have to say that Season One unfortunately has a very poor ratio of good to bad episodes. I loved the atmosphere, the despair that crept into Archer at the hostility and grim reality what was really out there, but still, the actual episodes...
The series often suffers from being 'worthy' rather than exciting. The events make sense to me, the reactions to what is happening were very satisfying (i.e they didn't just keep insanely upbeat views in the face of constant aggression and manipulation), but the lack of anything truly wondrous and uplifting means it all gets a bit much.
The small scale and lack of true visual excitement is a real downer. Supposedly amazing sights like the holodeck in 'Unexpected' and Daniels' time file projector thing etc fail utterly to inspire a true sense of awe and majesty. Without fantastic sights to balance out the misery (think 'Where No-one has gone before' for example), the series takes on a very unappealing, dour look.
And what of the characters? Well again, they show what Braga wants to see, pretty much. Good, decent people in space, enduring life’s eternal quest to beat them down. Again, ‘worthy’ is the word, rather than exciting. All the characters fit and have a reason for being there, but execution was lacking in many cases.
I think the biggest successes are Archer and Trip. Their friendship and the ‘hero and his loyal right hand man’ thing works about as well as any seen in Star Trek before. Archer is a great captain, one of my favourites, simply because his reactions and attitudes are so believable and relatable.
His despair over how other species constantly either attack them or are fitting them up for something, takes a visible and very rewarding (for the viewer) toll on the character. And I think it’s a real shame that this is all but abandoned in the supposedly best 4th season. The scenes from ‘Hidden Enemy’ and ‘The Expanse’ where Archer gives vent to his frustrations are simply excellent.
So too at times is his relationship with the Vulcans in the early going. I don’t like how it pans out later (particularly with all that Kir Shara nonsense), but I love how he views the Vulcans with a mixture of admiration and anger. On the one hand, he feels they were responsible for denying his father his dreams and have held Humanity back. But on the other, he feels like he has something to prove to such an old, respected species, that he is always seeking the approval of the people who have always represented the ultimate authority figures.
And this comes out nicely in ‘The Andorian Incident’, where having exposed them for using the monastery for military means, he doesn’t sneer triumphantly – he’s disgusted. That people who always seemed above such things could stoop to such levels, it appals him, and is another significant blow to his dream.
Trip also distinguishes himself as someone the writers have engaged with. His combination of regular everyman and someone who is pure of spirit and whose optimism and desire to see right done is undimmed in the face of all but the gravest of encounters, is something Braga often likes to examine (Data, Harry Kim etc).
So long as some characters are taking a realistic view, it’s always nice to have such dreamers. Misanthropic writers like Braga and Chris Carter (from the X-Files) are not opposed to hope; they simply can’t find much of it in modern life and society. But through characters like Kim, Fox Mulder, Trip etc, they show that whatever they may believe and report of society, they do wish it was better.
The other characters however are less successful. As a Brit myself, I find elements of Reed to be very good, giving some classic British scepticism and pessimism in the face of all this American optimismBut too often, he is played as a rather oddball, ludicrously ‘stiff and proper’ character.
The writing for British characters on American TV is frequently cringe-worthy for Brits to watch. Reed’s ‘we are not like that!’ factor is mild in comparison to some shows (Reed is at least somewhat identifiable), but he’s still no classic. He also seems to be a utterly awful shot with the phase pistol, missing constantly unless the enemies are right on top of him!
Phlox is alright I guess. John Billingsley is one of the best actors on the series, and an alien doctor was the next logical choice after humans, holograms, augments etc. I would have preferred a Vulcan doctor however. I particularly would have liked to have seen an edgier, darker doctor (i.e that Vulcans do not have compassion and would have no problem making ethically questionable decisions to save the ship etc).
As it is, Phlox is... like I said, alright. He is sometimes a kind of mentor, but rarely gets much to do. His biggest connection seems to be with Hoshi, but that’s more a case of two underused characters together really...
T’Pol is... another woman in a catsuit (which people blame Braga for, but is far more likely to be Rick Berman). Watch Braga’s episodes (in all the series) and you’ll see that he is far from being an exploitative writer and is in fact vehemently opposed to ‘hunks and babes’ as eye candy etc. He’s more of a ‘Frankenstein’s monster’ outcast kind of writer.
If it seems like I’m avoiding talking about T’Pol... well you got me. I find her a massively dull character and the writers seem little more interested in her than I am. As the ‘babe’ of the show, she is included in many stories, but I never got the feeling that there was as much heart behind the stories as those written for Seven of Nine (whom the Voyager writers did genuinely like as a character, not to mention Jeri Ryan was an excellent actress).
Even in episodes where she is the focus, the writers often can’t resist looking to Archer or Trip because she just doesn’t cut it as a character really. Blalock is also a rather uninspiring actress. T’Pol joins a long list of poorly written Star Trek females for whom the writers simply cannot engage.
Which leaves the ‘blink and you’ll miss them’ Travis and Hoshi. I have a soft spot for both characters (especially Hoshi, who Braga at least likes, even if none of the other writers can think of anything for her to do). Indeed the most significant thing about Hoshi was that they seemed to be testing the waters early on for a relationship between her and T’Pol, which would certainly have been a bold step.
You can always tell this by the way, because TV series only rarely have scenes with two women speaking. The thinking is that men (who make up much of the target audience) are not really interested in hearing what women have to say (i.e they treat them as eye candy), so women are usually always put together with men in scenes. When they are together, they are usually identified as married, of very different ages, mother and daughter etc. When they aren’t, it often means the makers are implying a possible relationship.
As we know however, nothing came of this and after appearing together and working on their (professional) relationship quite a bit in S1 and 2, they are rarely seen together at all later on.
The fact that this possibility is one of the most interesting things I can say about Hoshi is very telling. Only Braga seems to have any idea how to use her and he has his hands full juggling all the other characters and plots. ‘Vanishing Point’ has many problems, but its idea of Hoshi feeling like someone people overlook and then literally fading from view is great.
In general though, she falls in the ‘you’re not very funny, you can’t fight (until S4 and even then she gets beaten easily), you don’t like stuff that young men like, we don’t know what to do with you’ category... like most Star Trek women.
And Travis... flies the ship.
So, to sum up then, I like the tone and the general idea of the show, but it simply isn’t all that much fun to watch. A serious tone and bleak approach can be very rewarding when done correctly (Millennium, Homicide: Life on the Streets etc), but Enterprise S1 is simply dull for much of the time, with very few truly great (or even good) episodes.
But here’s my picks of the best:
SEASON ONE – THE A LIST:
Broken Bow pt 1.
Silent Enemy.
Shockwave pt 1.
And the not so best, but alright...
THE B LIST:
Fight or Flight (the ending is just silly though).
Strange New World.
The Andorian Incident.
Fortunate Son (again, the ending is very poor).
Fallen Hero.
Two Days and Two Nights (if only for the ‘To Sickbay!’ moment).
I was really reaching to include some of those episodes, but as I say, I enjoyed the season more than just the sum of the actual episodes. It wasn’t great, but it was still along the lines of the kind of thing I enjoy and agree with.
i thought i would just repost this to let people see again some of the themes of discucsion.
the below is from a sci fi interview with braga during the early part of season 2..
he addressed this again in a later interview that the idea was to show the progression of vulcans into the more familar (though not always factual) concept of vulcans.
in the later interview though we find out that the studio made him back off from using the vulcans so much.
and didnt really relent until later.
actually in many of his stories the characters do overcome much of that.
from frame of mind to shuttle pod one.
plus he is capable of just some rip roaring fun stuff.. fistful of datas for one.
The point I would make about people overcoming life's disappointments etc is that a lot of the time, Braga is constrained by the need for an ending that will allow the characters to be their normal selves next week. He does try and bend this whenever he can though, because as we've discussed, he hopes for happy endings, rather than actually believing in them all that much.
With regard to the Vulcans... I think his portrayal of them is one of the less impressive directions he takes. Vulcans have never been a good fit for him, because he relies on emotion (usually negative emotion) so heavily that they have nothing to offer him as a writer. Changing them so they do was a poor decision in my opinion, credible reasoning for it or not.
And don't get me wrong - I love the Vulcans, but given all the interesting things that could be done with them, hardly any writers on any of the Trek shows have engaged with the race. They are barely in TNG and DS9 at all and Tu'Vok is a severely underused character in Voyager (a shame because Tim Russ is excellent in the role).
Just to cover the JMS/Sinclair thing - he wasn't pressured on that as far as I remember. He just decided that the show needed a more vibrant lead. Another shame as I really liked Sinclair, but he gets a wonderful send off in S3 so all's well really...
I have just finished watching S3 and will start my episode reviews... tomorrow probably; give myself time to digest what I've seen and all that.
To consider romance again, I think it's reasonably on-topic. We are simply discussing all the various issues that come up in the seasons, so most things are fair game as far as I'm concerned.
Hell, even I'm fair game according to Miroslav. Apparently I forgot to mention I was getting married to Brannon Braga or something... I'd offer to call him out but best to err on the side of caution. His lack of tact might be made up for in unusually well developed musclature. My episode reviews might come unstuck if he were to snap me in half like a piece of second hand balsa wood... I'll content myself with the moral high ground.
Anyway, to return to Planet Relevant, I continue to think that Archer and T'Pol would make much more sense, if for no other reason than the writers clearly prefer it! Just look at all the scenes they have together and even during S3, the writers seem to take every opportunity to offer the potential for romance between them.
Her 'I don't want you to die!' outburst and inability to even be around others when it seems he will die in 'Azati Prime' is an obvious example, but the fact that all the Trip and T'Pol scenes are so short and generally come to nothing speaks just as much.
In 'E2' the story would have had much more resonance if Archer and T'Pol had fathered Lorien. Then it would have been Father versus Son in the battle of the captains. And you can see Sussman clearly wanted it that way - future T'Pol and Trip have no scenes but she meets with Archer and her past self.
Let's not forget also, that Trip died early on in their version of history. It's basically Sussman saying 'They were together, but they didn't live happily ever after, so there!' And poor old Trip, despite being Lorien's father barely features in the episode; he certainly doesn't get through to his son, given that the latter shoots him!
And again, you might think 'Home' is a great Trip and T'Pol episode, but I'd say 'Beware of Sussmans bearing gifts' - it is the episode where the relationship pretty much ends after all.
All the writers will have had their own pet romances in their mind. Not wanting to write romance doesn't mean people don't form opinions on what people's relations are with who. Phyllis Strong only writes two episodes in this season (and no more after that), but it's clear she wanted to see Travis and Hoshi get together for example.
Anyway, time's getting on today, so I thought I'd leave you with a little game. This game is called 'T'Pol - help or hindrance?'
A mean spirited game? Not at all - I may not like T'Pol all that much, but I always hoped she would grow and do more. Watching Season 3 however, there were a great many episodes where she was simply a liability or was not portrayed in a particularly favourable light.
One of my bones of contention about the character is that she so rarely seems to contribute much, especially in her capacity as science officer. Most of the time she seems to be there only to be a Scullyesque character, offering incorrect answers and hypotheses that Archer then ignores (correctly as it almost always turns out).
Whenever she is given the Captain's chair, things always seem to go disastrously also. Trip laments how poor a captain she is in 'Twilight' (Sussman strikes again with a scathing jab...), she is completely overwhelmed in 'Azati Prime' (yes, they were overnumbered, but the Enterprise takes a truly miserable beating and she seems to just sit by and let it happen without trying anything).
But then, she's taking drugs we discover! (That's another black mark there then...) And on the mission to the Vulcan Ship, she is sent into a near psychotic state and a danger to the crew (that'll cost her points too, jeff...)
I'm not saying she never contributes in any episodes, but her achievements are often brushed under the carpet, passing by so innoculously that you miss them altogether.
When Archer saves the day with his many and varied skills, you know about it. When Trip does some engineering jiggery pokery that gets them out of a jam, we get lots of big shots of him heroically battling with the controls etc.
Even during the final mission... what does she do? Travis flies the ship through the dangerous trans-spatial whatnot, Reed battles Xindi soldiers and ships, Hoshi struggles through the pain to give Archer the info to deactivate the weapon, Trip uses the beam (making use of T'Pol's station and equipment to do so, I might add!) and of course Archer is busily blowing up the Xindi Death Star...
Meanwhile, T'Pol sits in the captain's chair and... asks for status updates. Remember that Archer basically never sits in that chair - there's always somewhere more productive for him to be... 'captaining about'. In fact, one of T'Pol's favourite actions in several episodes seems to be 'getting up out of the Captain's chair to show how serious the situation is'.
So anyway, with no studio pressure on me, I'll take my leave for now.
All together now, nice and loud...
"Oh, I've got faaaith in the heaaaarrrrt..."
With regard to the Vulcans... I think his portrayal of them is one of the less impressive directions he takes. Vulcans have never been a good fit for him, because he relies on emotion (usually negative emotion) so heavily that they have nothing to offer him as a writer. Changing them so they do was a poor decision in my opinion, credible reasoning for it or not.
And don't get me wrong - I love the Vulcans, but given all the interesting things that could be done with them, hardly any writers on any of the Trek shows have engaged with the race. They are barely in TNG and DS9 at all and Tu'Vok is a severely underused character in Voyager (a shame because Tim Russ is excellent in the role).
Just to cover the JMS/Sinclair thing - he wasn't pressured on that as far as I remember. He just decided that the show needed a more vibrant lead. Another shame as I really liked Sinclair, but he gets a wonderful send off in S3 so all's well really...
I have just finished watching S3 and will start my episode reviews... tomorrow probably; give myself time to digest what I've seen and all that.
To consider romance again, I think it's reasonably on-topic. We are simply discussing all the various issues that come up in the seasons, so most things are fair game as far as I'm concerned.
Hell, even I'm fair game according to Miroslav. Apparently I forgot to mention I was getting married to Brannon Braga or something... I'd offer to call him out but best to err on the side of caution. His lack of tact might be made up for in unusually well developed musclature. My episode reviews might come unstuck if he were to snap me in half like a piece of second hand balsa wood... I'll content myself with the moral high ground.
Anyway, to return to Planet Relevant, I continue to think that Archer and T'Pol would make much more sense, if for no other reason than the writers clearly prefer it! Just look at all the scenes they have together and even during S3, the writers seem to take every opportunity to offer the potential for romance between them.
Her 'I don't want you to die!' outburst and inability to even be around others when it seems he will die in 'Azati Prime' is an obvious example, but the fact that all the Trip and T'Pol scenes are so short and generally come to nothing speaks just as much.
In 'E2' the story would have had much more resonance if Archer and T'Pol had fathered Lorien. Then it would have been Father versus Son in the battle of the captains. And you can see Sussman clearly wanted it that way - future T'Pol and Trip have no scenes but she meets with Archer and her past self.
Let's not forget also, that Trip died early on in their version of history. It's basically Sussman saying 'They were together, but they didn't live happily ever after, so there!' And poor old Trip, despite being Lorien's father barely features in the episode; he certainly doesn't get through to his son, given that the latter shoots him!
And again, you might think 'Home' is a great Trip and T'Pol episode, but I'd say 'Beware of Sussmans bearing gifts' - it is the episode where the relationship pretty much ends after all.
All the writers will have had their own pet romances in their mind. Not wanting to write romance doesn't mean people don't form opinions on what people's relations are with who. Phyllis Strong only writes two episodes in this season (and no more after that), but it's clear she wanted to see Travis and Hoshi get together for example.
Anyway, time's getting on today, so I thought I'd leave you with a little game. This game is called 'T'Pol - help or hindrance?'
A mean spirited game? Not at all - I may not like T'Pol all that much, but I always hoped she would grow and do more. Watching Season 3 however, there were a great many episodes where she was simply a liability or was not portrayed in a particularly favourable light.
One of my bones of contention about the character is that she so rarely seems to contribute much, especially in her capacity as science officer. Most of the time she seems to be there only to be a Scullyesque character, offering incorrect answers and hypotheses that Archer then ignores (correctly as it almost always turns out).
Whenever she is given the Captain's chair, things always seem to go disastrously also. Trip laments how poor a captain she is in 'Twilight' (Sussman strikes again with a scathing jab...), she is completely overwhelmed in 'Azati Prime' (yes, they were overnumbered, but the Enterprise takes a truly miserable beating and she seems to just sit by and let it happen without trying anything).
But then, she's taking drugs we discover! (That's another black mark there then...) And on the mission to the Vulcan Ship, she is sent into a near psychotic state and a danger to the crew (that'll cost her points too, jeff...)
I'm not saying she never contributes in any episodes, but her achievements are often brushed under the carpet, passing by so innoculously that you miss them altogether.
When Archer saves the day with his many and varied skills, you know about it. When Trip does some engineering jiggery pokery that gets them out of a jam, we get lots of big shots of him heroically battling with the controls etc.
Even during the final mission... what does she do? Travis flies the ship through the dangerous trans-spatial whatnot, Reed battles Xindi soldiers and ships, Hoshi struggles through the pain to give Archer the info to deactivate the weapon, Trip uses the beam (making use of T'Pol's station and equipment to do so, I might add!) and of course Archer is busily blowing up the Xindi Death Star...
Meanwhile, T'Pol sits in the captain's chair and... asks for status updates. Remember that Archer basically never sits in that chair - there's always somewhere more productive for him to be... 'captaining about'. In fact, one of T'Pol's favourite actions in several episodes seems to be 'getting up out of the Captain's chair to show how serious the situation is'.
So anyway, with no studio pressure on me, I'll take my leave for now.
All together now, nice and loud...
"Oh, I've got faaaith in the heaaaarrrrt..."
Last edited:
"Mighty stick"...? My, but we're feeling our oats today, aren't we?This isn't trolling. This is open and sencere opinion about facts that some of you people are unable to accept. And, I know, truth hurts.
So, now you can show me your mighty stick again, beacuse you clearly haven't any valid arguments to oposse me.
Re-read the rules of this board, Miroslav. You're in violation of several of them. If you don't climb down off your high horse and start behaving in a civil manner, you're headed for a little vacation. Stop disrupting this thread.
As I said "mighty stick is in action again". OK, I will bow down before you beacuse I now see the true power and the greatness of the Ori.
Hallowed are the Ori!
Romance--of course, that's fine to discuss. I was referring to the "us vs. them" talk between fans of the Trip/T'Pol pairing, and the Archer/T'Pol pairing. We'd prefer not to have that derail the discussion.
Yes. If you feel someone is violating the board rules, hit the Notify Moderator button, rather than starting a brawl, please.
Gotta say, I thought the way Enterprise portrayed the Vulcans as a "work in progress," a supposedly enlightened race that, to some extent, was still vulnerable to the same self-interest and back-stabbing and subversiveness as a "lesser" race such as humanity, was really compelling for me. The idea that some Vulcans could justify the most heinous behavior by logicking it away...I could buy it. (Perhaps because I've seen humans do it.) There was an interesting dynamic between the humans and Vulcans in this series, a different kind of conflict--the idealism and determination and chip-on-the-shoulder stubbornness of the humans vs. the insistent (and perhaps insecure?) superiority of the Vulcans.
Interesting. There was a decision before the beginning of S3 to pair up Trip and T'Pol, and there are these great scenes between Archer and T'Pol. I had no problem with it, since I chose to interpret the Archer/T'Pol interaction as great friendship scenes, a la Kirk and Spock, especially on the heels of "Similitude," which to me, changed T'Pol's view of Trip. I agree that the Trip/T'Pol relationship wasn't nurtured in Season 3; it's a shame "Similitude" wasn't followed up and built on, with some kind of momentum leading through the rest of the season.
Anyhow. If one interprets the Archer/T'Pol scenes in Season 3 in a romantic way, it's as if the writing staff is shooting itself in the foot, undermining the Trip/T'Pol connection that the writers signaled themselves with "The Xindi."
So what's with the conflicting signals? Was there some kind of power struggle going on in the writing room? Coto in one corner writing Trip/T'Pol stuff, Sussman in another corner writing Archer/T'Pol, and neither one talking/listening to the other? (An oversimplification for the purposes of illustration.) I'm wondering whether, if there had been a single objective that everyone had been working toward, the message could have been clearer.
Yes, it's romantic, but more in a tragic-romance kind of way.
Oh, I'm sure it was nothing sexual...
It really never ceases to amaze me how different people see different things in completely different ways. Ah, IDIC and all that...
BTW didn't Sussman use to post on these boards? Because I'm pretty sure someone mentioned that he discussed "Home" in depth here once...
And about that "Beware of Sussman bearing gifts" business? Well, if Mike really did have some kind of hidden agenda thing going on, I believe that we the fans have a right to know! I'm intrigued here!
Last edited:
Man, my sentence got snipped and I got reamed for it -- my post was "keep being a romantic, Penguin." My sentence was more -- "we may not agree on romance, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be a romantic. Romantics are cool." Uhm, even the band. The moral of this story is -- please never take my sentences out of context. What's the old adage, "No good turn goes unpunished?" Well, I didn't get punished (nastygrams, warnings, etc.), just a written finger shaking. I mean, I thought my romantic views are well known?
T'Pol in my opinion is treated as a piece of eye candy, rather than a character.
You know, I would've liked it better had T'Pol continued providing advice to Archer, in a superior way. In season 3, T'Pol gets lost, I believe, because she's no longer the sage advisor. Instead, Archer relies really on no one's wisdom -- which we find is a blessing and curse. I believe that's the reason she starts dabbling in drugs. (Although we really never find out and that gets swept under the carpet.) I mean, if she learned anything in Impulse, it would've been that when she doesn't meditate, her emotions get out of whack and not that she would have to take additional drugs for that to be the case. That never made any sense to me.
The other failing of the writers is -- show vs. tell. We hear about how great Trip and Archer are because in my opinion unless we didn't we'd forget. I mean, *I* like flawed characters who have to prove themselves, but as I read comments around here -- not everyone does. T'Pol saves the day plenty, and I think if people were to think about her accomplishments, we'd realize how important she is. Archer, on the other hand, has the Temporal Cold War people telling us how important he is. And Trip? Personally, I don't think he saved the day enough with cool engineering tricks. The one thing I really loved about Scotty is he was -- above all things -- an engineer. He loved the engines and could get Enterprise out of any situation. I never really felt that way about Trip. Instead, I felt his objective was to be a fun, lovable character that was good at engineering and not necessarily a wizard.
Also, Sadistro, I took the triad (Archer, T'Pol and Trip) as almost a triangle. T'Pol offered opions based on logic, Trip offered opinions based on emotion and Archer made a decision based on both logic and emotion. Sometimes, the right decision was purely logical and sometimes the right decision was purely emotional. Most often, it was a combination of the two. In season 3, Archer stops listening to advice and comes into his own as a guy who "comes up with an option not offered." Sometimes, this attitude lead to some bad moves, too -- like when he went to blow up the weapon in Azati Prime. Whether he likes it or not, I think he needs others' for their viewpoints and is best when listening to a combinaiton of T'Pol and Trip.
And Sadistro, although I would really love to believe the writer preferred Archer/T'Pol, I'm not sure that's the case. I purely think they believed the two were friends and wrote lovely scenes based on it. I also believe they didn't want romance and weren't sure what to do with Trip/T'Pol to make it believable and interesting. (Which kinda goes back to the writers have trouble with romance discussion.)
No, unfortunately the network forced the actor that played Sinclair out. And I feel the exact same way you do about it -- I liked Sinclair, liked his replacement (Sheridan) and loved the send off given to Sinclair.
You know, I really think the issue is most of the writers have a problem writing women characters. Hoshi gets the same lame treatment. She sits in a corner and cowers during important battles pretty much into the end (except when Reeves-Stevens is writing her, where she suddenly has a personality and can kick ass).
T'Pol in my opinion is treated as a piece of eye candy, rather than a character.
You know, I would've liked it better had T'Pol continued providing advice to Archer, in a superior way. In season 3, T'Pol gets lost, I believe, because she's no longer the sage advisor. Instead, Archer relies really on no one's wisdom -- which we find is a blessing and curse. I believe that's the reason she starts dabbling in drugs. (Although we really never find out and that gets swept under the carpet.) I mean, if she learned anything in Impulse, it would've been that when she doesn't meditate, her emotions get out of whack and not that she would have to take additional drugs for that to be the case. That never made any sense to me.
The other failing of the writers is -- show vs. tell. We hear about how great Trip and Archer are because in my opinion unless we didn't we'd forget. I mean, *I* like flawed characters who have to prove themselves, but as I read comments around here -- not everyone does. T'Pol saves the day plenty, and I think if people were to think about her accomplishments, we'd realize how important she is. Archer, on the other hand, has the Temporal Cold War people telling us how important he is. And Trip? Personally, I don't think he saved the day enough with cool engineering tricks. The one thing I really loved about Scotty is he was -- above all things -- an engineer. He loved the engines and could get Enterprise out of any situation. I never really felt that way about Trip. Instead, I felt his objective was to be a fun, lovable character that was good at engineering and not necessarily a wizard.
Also, Sadistro, I took the triad (Archer, T'Pol and Trip) as almost a triangle. T'Pol offered opions based on logic, Trip offered opinions based on emotion and Archer made a decision based on both logic and emotion. Sometimes, the right decision was purely logical and sometimes the right decision was purely emotional. Most often, it was a combination of the two. In season 3, Archer stops listening to advice and comes into his own as a guy who "comes up with an option not offered." Sometimes, this attitude lead to some bad moves, too -- like when he went to blow up the weapon in Azati Prime. Whether he likes it or not, I think he needs others' for their viewpoints and is best when listening to a combinaiton of T'Pol and Trip.
And Sadistro, although I would really love to believe the writer preferred Archer/T'Pol, I'm not sure that's the case. I purely think they believed the two were friends and wrote lovely scenes based on it. I also believe they didn't want romance and weren't sure what to do with Trip/T'Pol to make it believable and interesting. (Which kinda goes back to the writers have trouble with romance discussion.)
Similar threads
