• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Misanthope's guide to Enterprise...

It's the best thing for Humanity - but not for everyone else!
True, but doing the best thing for Humanity takes precedents.
Had Archer known for a fact, or with considerable degree of certainty, that saving Humanity would cause great harm to someone else, the dilemma would have been serous.

There is one more thing. Archer already knew (thanks to Daniels) how important Earth is for the future of the Alpha Quadrant, being the founding member of the federation and all. Therefore, he knew that the destruction of Earth was never supposed to happen
in the right timeline (though according to Orci and CO, there's no such thing as 'the right timeline').

For all Archer knew, the annihilation of humanity could have had terrible consequences for the quadrant (one less threat to Romulan and Klingon expansion, Borg threat etc.).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Remember that it isn't that I am opposed to them doing this. I just don't like the fact that they don't acknowledge that they are about to play God in a very real sense with reality and everyone in it.

Think about all the potential for diasater that could happen (the whole business in the Expanse with the Xindi is one such occurence), and the fact that most races would not take kindly to one race selfishly meddling like this.

We needed to hear a proper defence of why they should be allowed to do this, to someone of reasonable enough authority to okay it or at least offer some counter arguments.

Soval is my choice. He would definately have some very strong words to say on the subject. He would argue that humanity being wiped out is in no way an excuse to try and tamper with reality and the fates of billions and billions of lives.

It isn't as if the Xindi have gone on to be warmongering despots. They aren't attacking everyone in sight, but have confined themselves to attacking humanity.

Soval is intelligent, has (I would say) unimpeachable integrity, but under his harsh exterior has proven himself to be a man who will do the right thing if it can be justified to him somehow.

This would also be truer to Archer's awkward relationship with the Vulcans (that he has real problems with them, but still assigns much respect and authority to them).

Throw something like that into the mix and then we could have started talking 5 out of 5.

Anyway, I'll have a bit of a breather and then get started on 'North Star'. An interesting area of the show coming up in my opinion with themes of 'A lifetime of hatred and/or despair, but a glimmer of hope'.

And the first episode of the season by David Goodman. An underrated writer in my opinion, who was somewhat hamstrung by an awful first episode (S2's 'Precious Cargo').
 
It's not often that a show gets docked a star because it's so good that you know it could have been better. And "Twilight" is an episode that really could have benefited from that extra 7 minutes that 60's shows had.

I really enjoyed "Twilight" a lot, but I've never put it at the very top of my "best of" list...the problem might have been that I simply wanted more. There were several scenes that cut away right when they were hitting their stride. So I'd agree that its potential for greatness is its strength, and also its frustration.

That being said, I do think there was a great deal to draw the viewer in emotionally. Maybe I was filling in a lot of blanks, but I got a lot out of the character interaction. It was fascinating to see how differently some characters (Trip is a good example) evolved in this tragic alternate future.

The lack of debate over the consequences of curing Archer and erasing the timeline...that didn't bother me. Perhaps it was because I remembered what Daniels said at the outset about the Xindi: this future wasn't supposed to happen. Maybe it's because I was onboard with the idea that one man could be capable of changing the future for the better, or because Phlox's goal had not been to reset time, but to cure his friend. And I think Phlox said there was no way to know whether the cure would actually reset everything, that it was essentially a crap shoot. (Perhaps that was Sussman's way of skipping over the debate.)

Whatever. But now that you point it out, I agree that it would have been great to work the question of whether it would be the "right" course to cure Archer and (hopefully) reset time. Trek is known for setting up an impossible dilemma where someone has to make a choice, when there is no clear "right" or "wrong" choice. And the heart of the story is the debate over which choice to make. I can see now that this story would have been elevated by such a debate.

It might have been interesting for Archer to be the one who hesitated over whether to be cured; after all, he has always downplayed his importance in the Grand Scheme Of Things. I hadn't thought of Soval as the "pragmatic" voice, but he would certainly be an objective viewpoint. And I love the idea that Soval and Archer might agree about something. :) Phlox might be morally torn in both directions; perhaps he'd be the one who spells out the choices. T'Pol could (ironically) represent the one who believes utterly in the "logic" of curing Archer and resetting everything, because of her belief in Archer's ability to change the future (and perhaps her guilt). Vulcans on this show have shown quite a talent for pretzeling logic to suit their own interests.

Ooh, the possibilities.

You mentioned several other Trek episodes that handled this dilemma more thoroughly. I'm not as familiar with them, but I thought of DS9's "Children of Time," in which Sisko and Co. had to decide whether to reverse an accident to save Kira, thereby causing an alternate timeline, and several generations of their descendents, to wink out of existence. Sisko agonized over what to do, while Kira didn't even need to think about it; meanwhile, the descendents plotted sabotage to make sure their timeline could not be erased (the fervent believers in their own rightness). Our heroes ultimately decided they didn't have the right to change the future--but it got changed by the most fervent believer of all, the "older" Odo, who had been haunted for centuries by what might have been. For me, it was tragic and powerful, a story with no easy resolution, because all the different arguments had been presented and debated.

Very thought-provoking and enlightening thoughts on this episode. Thanks for taking the time, Sadistro.
 
‘Children of Time’ is a classic example of how much better the results are, when a writer turns around and says ‘Look, I’m going to write about *these* characters and I care not what people think about that!’

Rene Echevarria had an awful lot of hit and miss episodes to his name, over his time on Star Trek. He never settled on any particular characters in TNG (he writes for just about every major cast member and major supporting character) and the results were mixed to say the least.

But in DS9 he found a small group of characters he genuinely liked (Jake Sisko, Jadzia and Ezri Dax, Odo) and when he wrote for those characters, he usually always hit the spots perfectly.

With regard to your comments on ‘Twilight’, I do think (and said as much in my review), that you could make a case for what they are doing, based on what Daniels’ told them and the whole Temporal Cold War angle. It’s the fact they don’t feel the need to have this conversation with anyone.

We are talking about altering reality and time. Just because someone else has done it once, doesn’t make it right for you to go and do it. That kind of reasoning led to the Temporal Cold War in the first place!

However you want to spin it, they are planning to make a move that will affect literally everyone who exists, everywhere! They have no idea if it will work or what consequences may ensue. By doing this with no regard for those consequences, they are no better than anyone else in the Cold War.

As for the character interaction, well you really do have to fill in the blanks yourself. The crew for me are little more than stereotypes in this episode. Jaded and embittered after years of painful conflict, they are angry and paranoid, striking out at people etc.

A good enough idea, but the episode makes no effort to try and get you to see it from their point of view. They are simply shown as misguided and broken people, who have lost their way (whereas T’Pol and Phlox have ‘seen the light’).

It all feeds into the one sided argument nature of the story, which grated on me a bit. But I am not blind to the fact that in 45 minutes, you can’t have everything you might want. We’re usually so spoiled by Sussman’s ‘I’ve covered every possible angle that people could complain about – for half the episiode at least’ approach, that it’s tough to lose even some of that.

Because whilst it may be a wise move in producing more balanced, properly paced episodes; it does clip a little of what makes his style uniquely his. You always have to be careful when refining your craft, that you don’t iron out your streak of genius.

And Sussman seems to think so too. Episodes like ‘Home’ and ‘E2’ are more typical of his style, with abrupt endings and loose ends that don’t appear to have been tied. But they do include loads of great character moments and a stubborn ‘I will have my say on this, no matter how long it takes!’ attitude that sees him craft certain scenes to absolute perfection.

And there’s no shame in not writing a 5 out of 5 episode, because it is a very tough thing to do. And Sussman is very clearly not the kind of guy who is happy accepting more praise that he thinks something is due. (But equally, he speaks up if he feels something is unfairly maligned).

Ultimately, the boy done good with this episode. It’s the first 4 out of 5 of the season (and thus, Pookha’s prediction has come to pass!)

Madam, a pleasure as always.
 
Actually, there was one more thing; something that is quite embarassing really. Some of you have been praising what I’ve been doing here and it’s always difficult to know what to say about something like that.

I’m grateful that people are enjoying it, and I don’t want people to think that I’m just shrugging off their kind words. But neither do I want to come across all big headed and… you see the problem.

Basically, I’m doing this because I connected with the show and wanted to give something back. If people get anything out of it or see something in a new light, that’s great and all I could ever ask.

Any praise however, is better directed towards the cast and crew of Enterprise, who produced a much better and more involved show than most critics and viewers gave them credit for.

So, thanks to everyone; it was appeciated, even if I didn’t say it, okay? And it’s not like I’m the only one who’s said interesting things about the show on this thread by any means.

So place your bets now for who’ll be playing Mach, Commodore and Hopeful, Pookha etc when we sell the film rights to the thread :D

Seriously… Ta.
 
So place your bets now for who’ll be playing Mach, Commodore and Hopeful, Pookha etc when we sell the film rights to the thread :D
10 bucks on Denzel Washington for the role of *me,*
$5 on Estelle Harris for Commie64, and Doris Roberts for HopefulR.
:D:D
:D:D
 
Nah, I look more like a younger, taller (but probably not as cute) Sally Fields -- chubby cheeks, Gidget pigtails and all. In person I'm very cheery and optimistic. (I get accused often about being an "idealist.") I guess this place or perhaps just certain topics manage to bring out the cynic in me.

I'm sure HR is lovelier (and younger) than Doris Roberts. I haven't met her, but she seems like a Kate Blanchett type.
 
Nah, I look more like a younger, taller (but probably not as cute) Sally Fields -- chubby cheeks, Gidget pigtails and all. In person I'm very cheery and optimistic. (I get accused often about being an "idealist.") I guess this place or perhaps just certain topics manage to bring out the cynic in me.

I'm sure HR is lovelier (and younger) than Doris Roberts. I haven't met her, but she seems like a Kate Blanchett type.
Weird, my initial choice for HR was Blanchett (think "Indiana Jones IV") :lol:
 
Basically, I’m doing this because I connected with the show and wanted to give something back. If people get anything out of it or see something in a new light, that’s great and all I could ever ask.
I appreciate it because you've clearly taken time and care to share your thoughts. Plus, you have solid knowledge of story structure and objective analysis, and you have a good handle on the writers.

One can watch as a viewer or as an analyst (or both) and come away with different impressions. I viewed Enterprise the first time through simply as a viewer, though the analyst in me appreciated things here and there (or threw things, in some cases). I have since deconstructed some storylines and scenes to see what makes them tick, but you have pointed out all sorts of things that I didn't catch, regarding theme and the nuances of effective storytelling. That's what makes this thread so much fun for me. I love looking at something from a different perspective, or taking a closer look, and discovering new things.

Any praise however, is better directed towards the cast and crew of Enterprise, who produced a much better and more involved show than most critics and viewers gave them credit for.
If I ever have the good fortune to meet any of them, I will do just that. :)

So place your bets now for who’ll be playing Mach, Commodore and Hopeful, Pookha etc when we sell the film rights to the thread
For pookha...Jean Smart? Annie Potts?

Nah, I look more like a younger, taller (but probably not as cute) Sally Fields -- chubby cheeks, Gidget pigtails and all.
Somehow, I didn't think you looked like Estelle Harris. ;)

I'm sure HR is lovelier (and younger) than Doris Roberts. I haven't met her, but she seems like a Kate Blanchett type.
Thank you, commie. :) Alas, I don't have Kate's cheekbones. :lol: As for who I'd want to play me...Jane Seymour all the way, baby.

How about you, Sadistro?
 
Alan Rickman all the way for me :D

Just a quick drive by to hang out with my Hollywood pals! I'm working on 'North Star' now; an episode which I greatly enjoyed, but it seems few others did.

Anything that mixes Westerns and Peter Pan can't be all that bad though, can it?
 
Well I didn't participate in this thread but if anyone had to play me in a movie it should be Simon Helberg (Howard Wolowitz from the Big Bang Theory)
 
It's the best thing for Humanity - but not for everyone else! The point is that they act without any recourse to considering the consequences. That is a shockingly irresponisble abuse of the timeline, for which they offer no justification.

They don't even see anything wrong with doing it - that's my problem with all this. Yes, we might use such power if we got it, but we are not heroes in a program that will influence those who watch it, are we?

well as later episodes will reveal it was the best thing for an awful lot of people on an awful lot of planets.
the expanse was well expanding.
it was not only going to wipe out all native life within the expanse itself but it was a threat to a very large section of space.

what it also interesting is something we never learn for sure but can easily put forth a theory.
with enterprise being damaged the way she was there was no way she got all the way back to earth right behind the weapon unless she had help.
notice it is only the reptellians still leading the attack on the survivors.

it may be that a lot of what will later happened .. happended but they were just a little too late.

that they convinced some of the xindi that the spheres and the sphere builders were a threat.
so much so they gave enterprise a life back.

there also could have been an outbreak of a civil war.\
perhaps why for a number of years the survivors were not discovered.

i like north star.
but a lot of complaints were it just didnt fit in with the third season and the xindi story line.

if it had been second season i think it would have stood out as one of the best.
 
If I could reshuffle the show around, I'd throw "North Star" into the second season, too. Fun ep, but it felt out of place in Season Three.
 
I third this opinion,i liked it but i can't see them wasting time on this planet when they have earth to save.
 
I third this opinion,i liked it but i can't see them wasting time on this planet when they have earth to save.

I agree with you and Skywalker. Fun episode. A bit silly. I think they intended it to be a nice break from all the action-oriented seriousness, but still a bit silly. Also, it bothered me that Archer would stay up late constantly, put a prisoner in a decompression chamber and yet help girls all over the galaxy. Seemed very un-Archeresque.

I do like the scene of Reed shooting T'Pol and finally the characters using a phase pistol like a laser gun. Other than that, meh.
 
I'll be covering some of this in my review obviously but here's a few quick thoughts on what's been said so far:

'North Star' is a vital episode for S3, because it serves as a warning. The conflict between the humans of the planet and the Skagarin mirrors the human and Xindi conflict.

The idea that Goodman is trying to get across is that such hatred is no way to live. You'll just end up stunting your growth as a society as you put all your energy into nurturing your contempt for the other and insisting that 'They started it!'

It also gives the crew a chance to bring a message of hope in the midst of all their warring and espionage. It's an episode that reaffirms the kind of people that humans are and can be.

One of the reasons I like David Goodman is that he is a 'Call a Spade a Spade' kind of writer. He exhibits a certain intolerance towards pretence and stepping around delicate subjects.

To him, there are things that need to be said and things that need to be done. And the sooner people just grow up and starts knuckling down to what they have to do, the better it will be for everyone.

He shows this in his criticism of legal obfuscations in 'Judgement', Trip's insistence that the princess in 'Precious Cargo' cut out the high and mighty act and Bettany's scornful comments to Sherrif Mac in 'North Star' (i.e that trial or no trial, the Skag would still be killed and still wouldn't have had a chance, no matter how you dress it up).

He reminds me of when Bob Geldof was rallying support for his Live Aid idea. He came on TV in what was supposed to be a controlled environment and just got fed up with all the tip-toeing around the subject.

'People are dying right now - give me your money! I don't care how it sounds!'

Goodman's opinion are that everyone just needs to belt up and stop being so selfish, childish etc. Grown ups who should know better are still playing stupid games with each other, whereas youths are frequently just anarchic and childishly egocentric (the Princess, the new breed of Klingons who care only for war at the expense of their society, etc).

He also does a good job on this in 'The Forgotten', contrasting the need to clear the air over the atrocities Degra has been party to, with the need for Trip to grow up and get past it, because there's more on the line than just how he feels.

So in his criticisms of The Wild West and the retreat from reality that the Peter Pan story expressed, I think Goodman was onto a winner with 'North Star'. It may not be the best episode of S3, but some of that isn't really Goodman's fault as I'll explain shortly.

Plus I enjoyed spotting all the Pan references (the feather in Bennings' cap, the hook he uses in the stables to try and kill Archer, the huge and prominent shadow on the wall when he visits Betthany, the Skagarin ship twisted around with roots so it resembles the Lost Boys' Tree Hide-out etc).
 
hmm that is the first time i have seen the pan comparision.

i still dont know how true it holds out ..i mean how does the sheriff fit in
;)

but i know a little about the to me bad changes that were made to the script .. not by goodman.
goodman and others on the writing staff have posted here in the past and this is one thing that got mentioned.

one of the worst things that happened in this forum was when goodman came in here and posted and was attacked in a very nasty way for it.

really to me north star is one of the most tos like episodes of the series.
 
Hi Ho! It's been a while, so I thought I'd return in style, riding in on a magnificent hor...aarggh!

(Master Magician but woeful horseman, Sadistro is thrown flying by his horse and conducts this review flat on his back, attended by paramedics.)

EPISODE 09 – ‘NORTH STAR’

So, 'North Star' then. Whilst obviously a side story from the Xindi arc, this is nonetheless an important episode, because it helps to build up character and atmosphere for the season’s setting. Stories about pursuing the Xindi and those that deal intimately with our heroes are vital of course, but the atmosphere of the season required a steady stream of examples of just how awful a place The Expanse really is.

What makes the Delphic Expanse work is that it manages to be a miserable, hellish realm, whilst still being just believable enough that it has credibility as a real place in the Trek Universe. As the season progresses, the distortion waves periodically lift to show broken, dying civilisations, lost in hopeless paranoia, hatred and despair.

From the xenophobia and extermination programs in ‘Extinction’, the fanatical religious zealotry in ‘Chosen Realm’, the banishment of those deemed to be different in ‘Exile’ and the terrible exploitation and sheer wretchedness of existence at the mining colony in ‘The Xindi’, The Expanse is a classic ‘Vale of Tears’; filled with suffering and sadness.

‘North Star’ shows us that a grim fate awaits even humanity if they do not pay serious attention to their motives and character as a race, whilst here. As of ‘The Shipment’, the crew now have a promising lead on the Xindi weapon and it has become a question of when, not if, they will track it down. But what will they do when they find it?

If they allow themselves to give in to the easy ‘Us versus Them’ mentality that Reed and Hayes were sporting in the aforementioned episode, then it is likely they will end up like the citizens of North Star’s planet. They will join the inhabitants of The Expanse in their limbo-like existence, focusing on hatred and to coin a well known line from literature ‘Abandoning every hope’.

To show this, Goodman and Straiton create a harsh, drained world that suggests the inhabitants have been spiritually scoured. There is no life or colour to existence on this planet; no progress or hope for the future. All their energies are taken up with nurturing their hatred and sense of righteous persecution, because they simply have nothing else.

This is a planet that never grew up, therefore (hence the Pan references). The humans were abducted and taken from their planet (and so in effect orphaned), and the Skagerin are prevented from ever achieving true development as people. So in a sense, the planet’s inhabitants are all children, still playing at Cowboys and Indians, centuries after their arrival.

This obviously mirrors the Human and Xindi conflict, calling to attention how childish it is really. The arguments over who threw the first punch and who is in the right in the conflict, is just an extension of the arguments kids have over who’ll be the ‘heroic cowboy’ and who will be stuck playing ‘the injun’ (with all the simplifications that labelling one as good and the other bad brings).

David Goodman always includes strong warnings in his episodes that whilst it’s okay to have fun, people eventually need to grow up and take responsibility; see things as they really are.

The Wild West for instance, with its famous and popular imagery, was once championed as an example of freedom and macho values (John Wayne even going so far as to suggest his films should be shown in schools, so boys could see how to be ‘real’ men). The Western has since fallen out of favour in modern times however, as the values it extolled now clash with modern views of what is acceptable.

In a similar vein, the tale of Peter Pan may be enjoyable ‘Youthful innocence against corrupt adults’ fare, but such ‘Goodies against Baddies’ stuff is the kind of simplification that can lead people to construct dangerously unrealistic views of life (Nazi Germany being a good real world example of this).

As the Nazis would sing ‘Gott mitt ung’ (God is with Us), Goodman shows us through the insolent wild child and very Pan-like character of Bennings, that so long as you think you’re doing the right thing, you can justify the most atrocious acts. The opening scene for example is a mockery of Pan, where Bennings helps someone to fly – by hanging him.

But to stay true to this idea of not oversimplifying things, Goodman refuses to make it quite as easy as our heroes beating the mean old deputies/pirates etc. The humans have suffered greatly at the hands of the Skagarin and Bennings is a product of the hatred they have been brought up to depend on.

He and his ilk believe they are fighting the good fight, as you can see in the genuine anger in their faces when they try to goad Draysik. It’s also worth noting that Bennings (perhaps unconsciously) tries to justify his acts. He gives the Skagarin in the intro a chance for final words, offers Draysik the gun to make it seem he had a fair chance and doesn’t overstep his bounds when he arrests Archer and Bethany.

He’s certainly no saint and as impartial outsiders, we can recognise most of this as self delusion; the desire not to see yourself as evil or in the wrong. Yet it’s hard to deny the conviction in his voice when he resigns and his accusations towards Mack. He’s acting the only way he’s ever known to be right. And Archer does try to reach out later, because just pigeon holing him as evil is a mistake.

And Sherriff Macready too is a difficult figure to characterise as clearly in the wrong. Although ultimately responsible for allowing the various abuses to go on, it’s clear he is far from being fine with it. But he struggles to reconcile his distaste for the inhumane acts with what (in his view) has to be done. So he has to rely on self deceptions like a good wash and shave ‘to make you feel civilised’.

Goodman is therefore saying that the planet’s inhabitants are all Lost Boys to a certain extent.

Where such strong convictions are held, Goodman suggests the only reasonable way forward is for responsible adults to step in and show that whatever happened in the past, a life spent hating and persecuting is no way to live. There has to be (and indeed is) a better way. Thus Archer and co are needed to bring a message of hope in the midst of their mission of destruction.

The way in which the Wild West imagery is used is very clever. Because whenever you see people in the big hats, coats etc, especially in non period shows (i.e time travel, alternate dimension stuff), you automatically think this is just an excuse for the cast to play dress up and for the writer/director to tick off from a checklist of their favourite wild west stereotypes.

And although the harsh visuals and the rather sinister scene in the bar show there is definitely more edge to this episode than that, the first half of this episode is designed to show how dangerous it can be to buy into this kind of fantasy.

Because at first we get the shots of Archer in his extremely big hat, T’Pol with her standard ear covering attire, Trip being played for laughs again with the horse and his knowledge of westerns etc.

But look at where it gets them. By convincing themselves they need to wear the clothes, blend in, not disturb people etc, Archer and his crew end up making the situation very difficult indeed.

Because of their messing about, however well intentioned it was, Trip ends up giving a gun to a perfect stranger (representing the compromises they have to make to keep after the Xindi); Bethany is arrested when Archer is followed and is then shot because of Archer’s bungled jailbreak.

It’s like they are playing by the rules of the planet’s deadly Cowboys and Indians game. This is similar to how they and the Xindi are acting; treating each other like villains in some fantasy tale of good versus evil. But as is the case in this episode, it stops being a game when real guns are involved.

And this is the realisation that Archer comes to when Bethany is shot. As T’Pol is upbraiding him for using the transporter in front of people, he comes to see how absurdly they have been acting. She was hurt and dying – of course he used the Transporter! He wasn’t going to let the fact that it was ‘against the rules of the game’ stop him.

And therefore, he dispenses with the outfits and the pretence, resolving to do what he should have done in the first place (something that Macready later points out, too). They need to get down there and tell people what’s really going on. Hand wringing about how it could affect their development is ignoring the fact that they clearly aren’t developing – they need hope and they need it now.

Some may have been alarmed at Goodman’s extremely forthright way of doing things. Flying the shuttlecraft directly into town and emerging with an obviously alien woman and a full squad of heavily armed Marines etc is hardly the most subtle approach, after all.

But the way to look at it is that it’s time for the games to stop. A serious, adult presence is something this planet has been lacking, due to the orphaned nature of the populace etc. The people need hope and they need the truth, but they also need to see an authoritative presence if they are going to listen (as Bethany does with the Skagarin children for example).

We have to keep this idea of the planet being in need of a true parental figure in mind therefore. And it’s something Goodman often deals with. Children will get out of line (be it spoiled princesses, Klingon youths or vengeful humans), and parental figures need to show themselves to be worthy of respect.

It feeds into the idea that if you’re going to wear the badge, you have to do the job. No looking the other way and pretending it isn’t your problem, nor coming up with excuses not to act. Sherriff Macready has been doing that for years, even though you can see that he knows he is allowing grave injustice.

Yes, the Skagarin are hardly blameless as a race, but systematic racial persecution; legalised murder and brutality is just plain wrong and shrivels the soul and the heart. In this respect and particularly in his conversation with Betthany and Archer, Macready resembles a more humane Captain Hook figure. (Hook did speak with civility to Wendy Darling and occasionally conceded he was wrong and acting in ‘bad form.’)

And he does seem to acknowledge that their situation is far from perfect, as he apologises for what happened to the Skagarin who was hanged and his distaste when Bennings suggests they wipe the ‘Skags’ out. He knows Bennings is right that many would volunteer to help with that – he just isn’t proud of that fact, like his deputy is.

But he has convinced himself that he needs to overlook any objections he may have. This also recalls Hook in a way, who would use the excuse ‘I am a Gentleman, but also a pirate!’ to get around anything particularly awkward. And of course, Archer is making several such compromises to his views as he pursues the Xindi across the Expanse.

Like the rest of the inhabitants, Macready has lost his way therefore. So it is up to Archer and the crew to show that a life spent in endless hatred on this wretched world is not all there is. And in so doing, he affirms the spirit of the evolving human race, bringing a message of hope and meeting problems, instead of avoiding them. It also serves as a lesson to them of course, that they must not allow this to happen to them and the Xindi.

Goodman therefore believes in doing what needs to be done, regardless of how it looks or what stupid objections people may come up with. As I mentioned before however, such a heavy handed approach can see him steer into some questionable territory at times.

Seeing Archer shooting people when they are down, the crew using high tech weapons with sniper functions on Bennings’ men etc seems a little distasteful at first. It doesn’t seem very ‘fair’. But then that’s precisely what Goodman is going for – this isn’t a game. Heroic or not, you minimise risks to your people by taking what advantages you have.

Probably the best example of this is when Reed shoots T’Pol. It’s a provocative image to put up, where a hero is shooting a friend and any scene where a woman is shot is going to raise some eyebrows. But again, Goodman would argue that such talk is nonsense – lives are on the line and Reed takes the best and safest course of action to resolve it.

The hollow and misguided nature of this kind of ‘fairness’ and macho honour etc; is exploded early in the episode when Bennings offers the gun to Draysik. They were just looking for an excuse to kill him and wanted the cushion of feeling they were justified, with the farcical suggestion that he would have had a fair chance.

Goodman is keen to show that the old tricks where the heroes fight with fairness and openness and perform daring escapes on wagons etc are just fantasies that have little basis in reality. When Archer and Bethany try the classic jail break and ride out of town, it ends in disaster. Because such a gung-ho attitude will only get people killed, he warns

Post was a bit long, so i split it into 2 again. Right this way, right this way...
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top