Was 4 years a little short for this series run?

[MacLeod]

The length of a shows run isn't as important as the quality of that run. Sometimes shows go on too long and quality can suffer as a result.

The problem with ENT is that despite a contining decline in audiance figures throught the previous Trek shows (for a vareity of reasons). They simply more or less kept doing the same stories they had been doing as if the result would be different (i.e viewers not turning off). By the time they did actually do something different S3 and actually really commit to a prequel show S4 it was too late.

 

[Delaware123]

Now that I've seen Discovery, I can officially say "yes", I wish we had more of Enterprise.

 

[Amalak]

Any chances of an Archer reference on a future episode of Discovery ?

 

[F. King Daniel]

Any chances of an Archer reference on a future episode of Discovery ?

It's inevitable. They're only 3 episodes in and they've already mentioned "phase canons"

 

[somebuddyX]

4 seasons was plenty. Plenty of other sci-fi shows have been lucky to get even a full season. The only reason this one lasted so long was the Trek name recognition.

 

[LJones41]

I have to agree.

 

[Prax]

Enterprise was a good show, and a worthy Star Trek series. I don't think it was ever billed as a "prequel to TOS." The concept was a sequel to First Contact, an origins story of Starfleet, and a prequel to all the other series.

I think the series peaked in terms of acting and storytelling in season 3. The show has some real cred, too. It was nominated for a few Hugo awards. Enterprise suffered from studio interference, a HUGE writers purge in season 1(which takes time to recover from) and ultimately, UPN just couldn't afford it, even though it was their highest rated drama, including Buffy.

As for those prequel elements, they are there from the get go. The ongoing stuff with Vulcans and Andorians begins in season 1. The show is more serialized than previous series from season 1. I didn't care for the Suliban stuff, and I never cared for timecop Daniels, but even the TCW produced at least one 5 star episode, "Future Tense."

Yes, it's really sad it didn't get 1-3 more years. I think the writing team of season 4 would have grown and grown more competent, but as is, there are still a hundred episodes to enjoy(minus a few weird ones, like any show). I'm thankful for that.

 

[WARLOCK1965]

Something I wondered about ENT. It was cancelled at 98 episodes. At 100 though, a show hits syndication. I wonder why no one at Paramount tried to shop ENT around to another station? Scifi, CBS or some other station.

Because Paramount and CBS have become greedy and wish only to make money from the fans of any of the shows which is disrespectful to the fans. And by keeping the show below the syndication level they can pay royalties to the stars of the shows that done that way it is a reason why a season run is now 13 weeks and not 26 weeks

 

[Prax]

Could you re-word that?

 

[Klaa2]

Enterprise was cancelled so by default 4 years was too short because it never finished its story.

It was much too short. Maybe, one day, it will be resumed.

 

[Anders]

Seven seasons would have been sweet. I do think they made some mistakes though, which meant that they never got the success that the concept, the characters and the actors deserved. I think they should have had a more serialized background story from the start, and they should have struggled more with the technology. Sometimes the show seemed more advanced than TOS. Also the whole timetravel story was awful.

 

[LunaGrace]

Any chances of an Archer reference on a future episode of Discovery ?

It would make sense, especially going into a new war. It's a shame that it takes place to far in the future for an older Archer to actually make an on-screen appearance.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

It would make sense, especially going into a new war. It's a shame that it takes place to far in the future for an older Archer to actually make an on-screen appearance.

That's probably true, according to IAMD, Archer died about ten years before the events of DSC. T'Pol or Soval would be more "logical" candiates for a crossover cameo (it's not unlikely that Soval was Sarek's mentor in diplomacy).

 

[F. King Daniel]

Unless they ignore an illegible (or even unused?) screengraphic and go with the idea from Star Trek that Archer was an Admiral teaching at the academy in 2258 who had a prize beagle.

 

[JamesRye]

"was-4-years-a-little-short-for-this-series-run"

No. That's the short answer, I think they gave this show every chance at success, but that the producers squandered it. Long answer below:

Season 1 was OK in my opinion, and then it ended with a spectacular and game-changing cliff hangar. Which the writers then threw away with a tried and tested reset switch (the same as Year of Hell). Season 2 was full of predictable Trek tropes, with maybe one classic episode (Carbon Creek). But it's clear that the show just wasn't working, I was so excited for Scott Bakula to be on Star Trek as I adored Quantum Leap. For whatever reason, he was stiff and awkward as Archer and his line delivery always felt stilted.

Then season 3 rolled around and clearly someone decided to throw the dice and up the action quotient, this was a good thing as Enterprise did action quite well. The problem was that it just wasn't compelling or fun TV. The decon scenes in that show are some of the most cringe inducing in all of Star Trek and the Season three arc saw Enterprise shed viewers at an alarming rate.Then came the Nazi episode and I felt sure that we wouldn't get a 4th season. That the writers would think 'space Nazi's' would be the way to go is simply crazy and shows they'd run out of ideas.

Season 4 came along and pandered to the fans with call-backs to TOS and they also got Jolene to strip off in an attempt to get people to watch. This only served to alienate what was left of the general audience who didn't/couldn't appreciate the call backs. Even season 4 felt awkward and we had episodes like "Daedalus" - a weird combination of The Visitor and Jetrel that made you feel like you'd seen the episode already. Star Trek had become the McDonalds of TV - you knew what you were getting and that, at best, it'd be OK. At worst, you'd get some of that famous pink slime. Most people had become foodies though and were singing the praises of BSG, a show that was inventive and fresh.

Enterprise really just copied so much from others and never felt like it's own thing. Here's my evidence:
Daedalus - see above.
Dawn - It's just a copy of "Enemy Mine" - an under rated little film from the 80's.
Chosen Realm - It's just a copy of Let that be your last battlefield
Oasis - a copy of shadowplay
North Star - Very similar to the 37's
Acquisition: Did we need to see the Ferengi?
Regeneration: One of the best episodes! But again, did Enterprise need to be doing this?

 

[XCV330]

I wasn't watching a lot of television when Enterprise came on. I watched the first few episodes and by the time I got Nova Terra I was done with it. Several years ago rewatched it all on Netflix and I realized if I had stuck it out a couple of years, it did indeed get much much better, as others had said. I think it was cut short only because it was hitting its stride just as it got canceled. But you pay for your mistakes and Enterprise made quite a few those first two years. So did TNG, but it had little competition, and so it became iconic, with everyone remember mostly the later seasons, whereas Enterprise did not get that luxury, nor the freedom of first run syndication.

Early on its clear the showrunners did not know what to do with it, nor the network. They only had a grasp of a few characters. The sexing-it-up-thing was embarrassingly obvious. Put on your own damn dcon gel. Scheduling was bad. It was on a network most people did not even know about. Leaving star trek out of the name was just a very very poor idea. The song.. well I don't mind it (my kids love it. This is their Trek show), but Faith of the Heart might have been best on the pilot and then moved on to something more stirring for the remainder of the series. Then they uptempo'd it, it was almost a middle finger to the audience "yeah, we know you don't like it. So we.... sped up the rhythm guitar!"

So I guess, me being long-winded me, I am trying to say, 4 years was too short, but I think by the time they had sorted out most of their issues, Enterprise was doomed already.

 

[Blamo]

To be honest it was a little too long. Like with Voyager it was a show with an excellent premise that they didn't even come close to following through on. I believe the showrunners even said they weren't interested in getting into the politics behind the formation of the Federation or the Romulan War.

If there was ever talk about rebooting a Trek show, Voyager and Enterprise would be right up there. They could have been fantastic.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

I didn't think particularly well of the show. I thought is was dull, chasing past trek instead of just being it's own good show.

I thought 4 years was too long to be frank.

 

[USS Excelsior]

And we never got to see a mirror universe follow up episode.

 

[USS Firefly]

The had all the chance and blew it with two bad/ mediocre seasons.
I just finished Firefly, THAT's a show that was way too short.