The One Thing You Could Change, ENTERPRISE Edition...
- Thread starter Farscape One
- Start date
I thought it was kind of obvious, don't kill a character for no reason, especially in the final episode.
So, here's a thought......
Keep the TCW, but make the show about the TCW. Or drop it. Either one. I really love the idea of the TCW. But Enterprise just often forgot it was doing it, made an episode about it, than forgot it again. That doesn't work. So either make the show ABOUT that subject, or just drop it all together.
I know that dropping it has been mentioned before, but here's a vote for a TCW Enterprise show.
Keep the TCW, but make the show about the TCW. Or drop it. Either one. I really love the idea of the TCW. But Enterprise just often forgot it was doing it, made an episode about it, than forgot it again. That doesn't work. So either make the show ABOUT that subject, or just drop it all together.
I know that dropping it has been mentioned before, but here's a vote for a TCW Enterprise show.
I would be for the TCW if it actually mattered to the larger context of the show. But, how did the TCW actually impact the show?
Personally, I have always liked SF Debris idle thoughts about "TATV" about involving the TCW and basically the NX-01 being lost to history in order to save their timeline.
V
Vale
Guest
No, I get that. I am just trying to look at the broader context of the show and say "Ok, where does the TCW fit in to this prequel idea? How does it impact the movements of the show?"That's what I just said..... They could have made Enterprise about the TCW.....
It's weird how meddling the execs became around this time. They wanted a Star Trek show to follow Voyager, to the extent of telling Berman that if he didn't make it they'd find someone who would, but then the idea of having a prequel show just seems to have mentally spun them out and then a weird game of self-sabotage begins.
I'm sure I remember reading the Akira Class (as is in the 23rd(4th?) Century) was what they wanted for a ship. They had this weird notion about people not tuning in if some arbitrary quota of 'futuristic' wasn't met. I would have loved to have seen a 'ring' Enterprise or the sphere-fronted one we've seen in (possibly non-canonical, but whatever) sources before.
The TCW was thrown at Berman and Braga by execs, or so the legend goes. The Powers That Be couldn't get behind the idea of a prequel for some reasons (maybe lingering TOS fear from TNG?). But it's insane... because they thought Star Trek fans wouldn't be interested in the future history of the Federation and Starfleet's first steps out of the Solar System... so we have the TCW which they considered to be 'futuristic'.
So...
If I could change one thing... it would be that Enterprise was allowed the same amount of creative freedom as it's forebears had. No Silly Suits suggesting boybands or suggesting Bakula be fired. People who don't know what a ships' hull is should not be having 'ideas' over frappuccino's for a show that they barely understand and don't care about anyway.
If I could change two things, I'd replace Brannon Braga with Ronald D. Moore from the start. He would have taken the show on a deep-dive into pre-TOS history I think. It would have been a totally different show. Same cast, otherwise, go to town Mr Moore.
I'm sure I remember reading the Akira Class (as is in the 23rd(4th?) Century) was what they wanted for a ship. They had this weird notion about people not tuning in if some arbitrary quota of 'futuristic' wasn't met. I would have loved to have seen a 'ring' Enterprise or the sphere-fronted one we've seen in (possibly non-canonical, but whatever) sources before.
The TCW was thrown at Berman and Braga by execs, or so the legend goes. The Powers That Be couldn't get behind the idea of a prequel for some reasons (maybe lingering TOS fear from TNG?). But it's insane... because they thought Star Trek fans wouldn't be interested in the future history of the Federation and Starfleet's first steps out of the Solar System... so we have the TCW which they considered to be 'futuristic'.
So...
If I could change one thing... it would be that Enterprise was allowed the same amount of creative freedom as it's forebears had. No Silly Suits suggesting boybands or suggesting Bakula be fired. People who don't know what a ships' hull is should not be having 'ideas' over frappuccino's for a show that they barely understand and don't care about anyway.
If I could change two things, I'd replace Brannon Braga with Ronald D. Moore from the start. He would have taken the show on a deep-dive into pre-TOS history I think. It would have been a totally different show. Same cast, otherwise, go to town Mr Moore.
No, the studio had a point there, and may have been right. Not the firing part, but that Bakula leave the main cast after season 3.
A series has never explored the fallout of a ship losing its captain and having to adapt to a new one. Enterprise would have been the perfect series to explore that situation, since it would be the first time it happens in-universe as well. A season with Gardner or Hernandez or Ramirez or whoever as the new captain. If the fans like the new captain, the captain stays, and if not, replace the captain by saying he/she transferred to command one of the other NX class ships, and promote T’Pol to captain.
And its not like they had to kill Archer off. He could have been stuck in the Temporal Cold War setting as depicting in the final moments of “Zero Hour”, which would then work as an explanation of how Archer becomes Future Guy.
Then there could have had a two-part episode every season with Bakula in a reoccurring role, until the show ended. And it could have opened up visits to various points in Trek history as well, like Archer dropped off on the Ent-B, or dropping in on the Voyager crew after they returned to Earth, or meeting Spock in the Lost Era/post-Dominion War era, while seeing the descendants of the NX-01 living their lives.
Bakula has starred in three different TV series that were relatively successful. You don't do that if you're not well liked.
However, killing off (or otherwise eliminating) the captain would have been a bold move for the series. Having no character be safe... can you imagine that?
I know. I don't get it at all and as far as the cast were concerned he was the beating heart of the set. He shook hands with everyone, everyday and had a great relationship with the whole cast. If nothing else, they would have suffered for losing him.
There's no conceivable scenario I can think of where cutting Bakula out would have made the show better. Bakula was not the problem. None of the cast were.
V
Vale
Guest
Bakula seems to be popular with Star Trek cast members beyond just Enterprise too:
Patrick Stewart tweeted this image a few years ago – apparently it's the aftermath of a dinner party in his apartment. Bakula and Brent Spiner are doing the dishes while Michael Dorn helps himself to leftovers in the background!
V
Vale
Guest
Babylon 5 did, and SeaQuest DSV started to before its abrupt cancellation. Of particular note was an episode where the previous ship's captain guest starred as an antagonist – not a full "I'm evil now" heel-face turn, just opposed to the mission SeaQuest had been sent on on moral grounds.
Honestly, I would have paused the show's production so it wasn't so close to VOY. I think Berman had a similar thought, and the execs apparent answer was to try and mix it up a little with a variety of ideas, including the name "Enterprise" instead of Star Trek: Enterprise.
Letting the idea sit and stew a bit and then go forward strikes me as more reasonable.
Bakula is far, far from ‘awful’.
Similar threads
