If you have a problem with a staff member, take it up with the board administration. Do NOT bring it into this forum.
When did Trek become a 'family' show?
- Thread starter Control Voice
- Start date
I've just been punished for telling someone to use common sense! That's right! Telling someone to use common sense is purportedly a term of abuse now! Now, I don't have the slightest idea how to contact the board administration so if you could take that matter to them, it would be very kind of you. As a matter of fact, I think I don't have any messaging privileges yet.
Thank you for your comprehension.
Yes, you do. You can send a private message or you can email T'Bonz.
T’Bonz can be reached at tbonzromulus@gmail.com. T’Bonz is the administrator of the Trek BBS.
If you bring it up again in this forum, you will receive an infraction for spamming.
I found it. It 'is' Supplemental #014: Richard Arnold. And the reference to the above begins at or around 34:44 on the Mission Log 'site' podcast. I don't know about these things but I would suppose it to be close to that same numbered point if it is downloaded?
Well, thank you. I've never heard of anyone but myself thinking this. And it is not that there is a sexual content because that is a non-issue for me personally. It is that they are such blatant no context sexual gratuity scenes filmed with such loving care cinematography that they are embarrassing to me too.
Thanks. I wanted to have once it fit in conversation to say something about this before I died.
Just once.Done & dusted.
Last edited:
No, the first casualty was Crewman Fuller in "Anomaly," the second episode of season 3.
Crewman Novakovich was originally supposed to die in the transporter accident he endured in the third episode of the series, "Strange New World." But the producers didn't want to repeat the previous shows' pattern of trivializing death by having someone die in act 2 and then end the episode with the characters laughing and cheerful, so they added a line saying that Novakovich had survived his injuries. After that, they didn't want to kill off a member of the crew until they were able to give it the emotional weight and impact it deserved.
For all the (often deserved) criticism ENT gets, this is one thing it did far better than any other Trek series: approaching death with suitable maturity and seriousness. They didn't kill off crewmembers as a cheap plot device, and the deaths that did happen in seasons 3 and 4 had real meaning and consequences to the characters.
Yes, I remember now, we don't actually see him die. He's already dead on a bed in sickbay when learn of his demise.
I guess if crewman Novakovich had died this early in the series in a transporter accident , the consequences should have been that people would have been even more suspicious of the transporter than they already were.
But on the other hand, the lack of any good guy deaths at all in Enterprise's first two seasons (or rather prior to the Xindi attack) was bordering on ridiculous. Particularly, in Minefield when a Romulan mine detonates causing significant damage to the ship and even blows a chunk of its saucer away and no one dies. Or then in Future Tense where we see a Vulcan ship attacked and critically damaged by Thoilans to the point that the ship ends up adrift with its warp nacelle ring blown off its axis, but then we have a line at the end establishing no one on that ship was killed.
It's one thing to not trivialize death, but it's quite another to unrealistically avoid in situations where there is a large degree of destruction.
It's also funny that this earliest version of the enterprise didn't have exploding consoles on the bridge. I guess they are an added feature for the more evolved ships... I mean, it takes keen engineering skills to put exploding plasma conduits behind every critical console of the bridge, doesn't it?
A fair point, but I think that's preferable to treating death as a trivial, quickly-forgotten plot device. Maybe they waited longer than they should to find the right time for it, but I'm glad they approached it with deliberation.
Anyway, both those episodes were in season 2, and pretty much everything was on hold in season 2. There was a nice, subtle arc running throughout season 1 as Archer and the crew felt their way forward and gradually established themselves as a significant presence in space, and of course there were strong arcs running through seasons 3 and 4... but season 2 just sort of meandered without any clear direction or progress. So I'd say the delay in confronting the crew-death issue was just part and parcel of the larger problems with season 2.
Although they kinda made up for it at the end of the season, since the death of Trip's sister (and 7 million others) had a lasting impact on the characters for the rest of the series.
"Cavemen" is a loaded term that I think is misleading you. The Novans didn't live underground because they were primitive or stupid, but because it wasn't safe to live aboveground.
Besides, this isn't a thread for random complaints about Enterprise episodes. So where is that even coming from?
Besides, this isn't a thread for random complaints about Enterprise episodes. So where is that even coming from?
I opened the wrong thread. There's one about things you don't get...
That's an interesting approach. We don't want to trivialize death so we just don't have any of it at all.
It was the first warp capable human mission, they should have lost someone now and again but reacted to it seriously by heroically.
It was the first warp capable human mission, they should have lost someone now and again but reacted to it seriously by heroically.
I am not sure why people dying enhances the quality of a story.
It doesn't, in and of itself. But people unfailingly surviving a situation where they are in mortal danger wears down the believability.
And that ended decisively in season 3, so clearly they fixed the problem. There's no shame in making a mistake as long as you learn from it.
That's a good argument - ENT managed to avoid the disposable "redshirts" we all joke about. A good thing, on balance.
Re the decon scenes, some were indeed embarrassing, but it worked when they didn't play up the sex angle. I even quite enjoy the ep where Phlox is trapped in decon with T'Pol while she's going through pon farr, because it's about the characters rather than being a T'n'A break.
I imagine US Navy ships are able to visit the oceans and ports of the world with very little loss of life. Do we need more deaths in Trek because drama?
Similar threads
