Why does ENT bring out such strong opinions?

[commodore64]

I've been on the internets for a long time and have seem some interesting discussions, including the old Usenet days with B5. I participate in local blogs over politics. I've loved Star Trek and have enjoyed all the good, bad and ugly it has brought.

And yet I feel like ENT brings out some of the strongest opinions I've ever seen. For example, no one would ever say: [insert mayor here] is the dumbest man of all time. I mean, really, you'd have to -- quoting Tropic Thunder -- go full on retard to be the dumbest in history. TOS never has debates, at least to my knowledge, that suggest anyone take Kirk's place. People may really like a local idea, but never claim they can't sleep at night without dreaming about it.

Why do you think ENT brings out such strong opinions?

 

[SFRabid]

In the internet and blog age I think people feel more empowered and are more demanding. If everything is not EXACTLY as they want it they seem to take it personal. I've seen the same trend with music software. People get angry if their ideas are not the same as the company that makes the product.

I admit when Enterprise came out I was adamant about my dislike. The decon scenes, neuropressure, bad writing in episodes like ANIS, reuse of ideas. But when I look back at TOS it had a lot of bad stories, stolen ideas and Kirk with his shirt off every other episode. TNG had bad writing, reused a lot of stories, and they started to use Riker as the sex symbol but that seemed to fade away pretty fast.

I guess standards are higher now and for a while we had more to choose from. But those days are gone. Atlantis is leaving. Dr. Who is getting repetitive. Good riddance to BSG and depression. Give me some more flawed Enterprise.

 

[Trippy]

I think, IMO anyway, that some of the criticism knee-jerk reaction has something to do with the prequel idea in the first place. I relate this to the long-suffering, teeth-gnashing of the Star Wars fans and the prequel movies that get torn asunder on message boards and staff rooms (mine in particular) everywhere! Take something beloved (Star Trek and the sequels that followed chronologically) then put it all aside and do a prequel. The very idea freaked Trekkies out! (look what's happening about the new Trek movie...like wow! )

 

[The Sneeze Police]

The internet sometimes gives people the sense that they can say anything with minimal consequence. In many cases it is a relatively anonymous way to communicate, and it allows people to be less civil than they normally would be in a face to face converstion. My husband also thinks that talk radio & afternoon talk shows may contribute to the overall increase of incivility here in the States. I am a civil servant, and just in the last year or two I have had an increasing number of people use profanity on the phone with me...things I would have never dreamed of hearing 10 years ago (and yes I am an unfailingly polite on the phone.)

I have a feeling that if TNG had first aired concurrently with the widespread use of the internet, there would be stronger and more deeply entrenched bitterness over it not being exactly like TOS (or too diferent from TOS or whatever). While ENT is my second favorite series, expectations were stacked against it. It's first two seasons compare favorably (and honestly better) to TNG's first two in my book.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

I think strong opinions were here long before Enterprise. I found a thread in the SF&F forum a few months ago...fascinating reading.

Why does fandom sometimes get so defensive about shows, nitpicking, etc?

I also agree that the anonymity of the Internet has given a small portion of folks an excuse to express their opinions while dispensing with civility or common courtesy, and an ability to "hit and run" without fear of reprisal. As a result, such opinions can seem all the more "strong," i.e., rude, petty, infantile, mean-spirited, personally insulting, etc.

It's quite a different thing when you're standing face-to-face with a person, looking him in the eye, and obliged to act (one would hope) with decorum as you offer your opinion on a topic, and listen respectfully as he offers an equally civilized response. Ah, the days of yore.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Yes, the prequel thing is probably a cause of the opinionation. Whenever you create a prequel, you already have immense expectations in place. Doubly so when you're making a Star Trek series, long the juggernaught of space opera on TV. Nothing the writers, actors, producers did would have done anything to effect this strong fan feeling of bloodlust. Because among a lot of people, there's this feeling of betrayal. For me, not so much. Enterprise was B&B's last go at making money off of Star Trek, and is pretty damned decent for a rush job. It could have been a lot worse. Like, Andromeda worse.

 

[Captain X]

From my own perspective, I just react to what I see, and I have a fairly narrow spectrum of like vs. dislike, which is to say I tend to either extremely dislike it, extremely like it, feel indifferently, and maybe another notch or two in between. I can express myself just as strongly in real life as I do online, the only difference is that I tend not to be as persistent face-to-face because I usually have better things to do than argue about Star Trek or any other show for that matter. Online, posts are usually hours apart, and frankly if I'm online arguing about something, I have nothing else better to do.

 

[Red Ranger]

Peeps:

I tend to agree with the two main opinions offered in this thread on why ENT engenders such criticism.

First, it's the prequel idea. Most fans weren't too keen on it to begin with, and it failed to live up to even those low expectations.

Second, the anonymity of the Internet is the kind of environment where vicious personal attacks thrive.

My own opinion? In addition to the two reasons above, I also think the characters were generally uninteresting. I said in a recent thread that if Archer were the experienced Boomer type that Mayweather was supposed to be, that would've made him a stronger character.

The whole "I hate Vulcans 'cause they stopped my daddy's dream" was kind of silly, I thought. Imagine if Archer had already been to some of the regions they were visiting and now, eager to explore more, he would've been as much the teacher on extraterrestrial beings on the ship as T'Pol was.

Also, maybe another alien character in the main cast might've helped a bit, someone even more alien than Phlox. Poor Mayweather was even more uninteresting than Wesley Crusher or Harry Kim, bless his heart.

Red Ranger

 

[angie]

I think maybe the timing of the show---people had high hopes or low expectations.I was coming off a show I feel far superior which has a mellow fandom(Farscape) so was shocked the character I liked was so maligned! There was also less tolerance here of discussion which leads to escalation of strife IMO.

 

[JiNX-01]

Enterprise was the first post-TOS series that made me love Trek again. I had watched all of the other shows, never missed an episode... yet I never felt the passion for those characters that I have for the crew of the NX-01.

So naturally, I wanted this show to succeed. I wanted the stories to be amazing because I wanted others to love it as I do (and ratings keep shows alive, after all). And when the bashers came in ....

I believed when the show ended that it would follow the same route as TOS -- and become more popular and respected in the "afterlife" than it was in its first run. So I'm not surprised to see people who watched and left and new fans are turning up here to praise the show almost on a daily basis.

 

[commodore64]

Angie, the weird thing is I've seen Dr. Who posts and people seem to remain civil. Same with other series, even BSG. I mean, I really couldn't stand Donna, the most recent companion of Dr. Who, but I never sought out the board to punish her or the actress. Some of it, is just personal preference. I can understand why some people like her; I just don't.

Maybe the remarks above about civility and extremism are true. Maybe its that people really care *that* much about ENT even three years after its demise. I wonder if some is bitter dregs b/c we were short-changed on seasons. This is terrible, but I feel like "Voyager got seven seasons and we didn't?!"

I have a feeling that if TNG had first aired concurrently with the widespread use of the internet, there would be stronger and more deeply entrenched bitterness over it not being exactly like TOS (or too diferent from TOS or whatever). While ENT is my second favorite series, expectations were stacked against it. It's first two seasons compare favorably (and honestly better) to TNG's first two in my book.

ENT is my second favorite series, too. I remember the Wesley usenet [die.die.die] sites. And though still not a huge Wesley fan, I gotta admit that was a bit much. I don't think he should've been on the ship as a helmsman. I don't fault the actor, who was really a standout in Stand By Me, especially for a guy of such a young age ... back then.

And yet ... years later, Wheaton is welcomed with open arms by fans, even by those who claimed "he couldn't act" and more. I was happy to see him at a convention and something about his presence gave me warm fuzzies.

In fact, I kinda feel the same folks who bemoan Archer. They seem to have gone out of their way to see Bakula this past time and even paid what they deemed was an outrageous amounts of money to get his autograph. Odd that.

Maybe we're just whiners?

 

[trj]

Angie, the weird thing is I've seen Dr. Who posts and people seem to remain civil. Same with other series, even BSG. I mean, I really couldn't stand Donna, the most recent companion of Dr. Who, but I never sought out the board to punish her or the actress. Some of it, is just personal preference. I can understand why some people like her; I just don't.

Maybe the remarks above about civility and extremism are true. Maybe its that people really care *that* much about ENT even three years after its demise. I wonder if some is bitter dregs b/c we were short-changed on seasons. This is terrible, but I feel like "Voyager got seven seasons and we didn't?!"

I have a feeling that if TNG had first aired concurrently with the widespread use of the internet, there would be stronger and more deeply entrenched bitterness over it not being exactly like TOS (or too diferent from TOS or whatever). While ENT is my second favorite series, expectations were stacked against it. It's first two seasons compare favorably (and honestly better) to TNG's first two in my book.

ENT is my second favorite series, too. I remember the Wesley usenet [die.die.die] sites. And though still not a huge Wesley fan, I gotta admit that was a bit much. I don't think he should've been on the ship as a helmsman. I don't fault the actor, who was really a standout in Stand By Me, especially for a guy of such a young age ... back then.

And yet ... years later, Wheaton is welcomed with open arms by fans, even by those who claimed "he couldn't act" and more. I was happy to see him at a convention and something about his presence gave me warm fuzzies.

In fact, I kinda feel the same folks who bemoan Archer. They seem to have gone out of their way to see Bakula this past time and even paid what they deemed was an outrageous amounts of money to get his autograph. Odd that.

Maybe we're just whiners?

not really odd,most people can separate the actor from the charactor.everything i have heard about bakula is that he's a class act.that don't mean i have to like archer.

 

[commodore64]

I agree. I think he's a class act, too.

I heard Robert Picardo is a class act, but really disliked Voyager, so have no desire to see him. For that matter the dude who played Neelix seems pretty cool, but I really didn't like Neelix (not to mention Voyager) and have no desire to see him. Nor do I care how much people would have to pay to see him, because I just don't care. Nor would I go into the Voyager forum to tell people how much I hated their show or Neelix ... because I don't care.

Here's another example -- I think Trip was fine, not great, but fine. I haven't seen the actor at a convention (except over breakfast, purely by coincidence), nor will I unless he's sharing the stage with Bakula, Blalock or Billingsley. I don't care how much people pay or don't pay to see him. I also don't care what he's up to these days, although hope he's doing well and manages to enjoy himself and his career. I also don't feel the need to pick apart every performance I didn't like, every silly decision I thought Trip made, talk about how he's my least favorite Enterprise character ad nauseum or claim he's the "worst actor of Enterprise." Worst actor? I think all the actors of ENT were decent -- possibly the strongest cast on Star Trek. And least favorite character? Sure, but I thought they were all pretty good. Least favorite just means -- don't like as much.

I'm just saying it seems pretty black and white here rather than multiple shades of gray. It's weird, and I think it's unique. And I'm really not sure what causes it, hence the topic.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

VOY brought out some pretty strong opinions, too. I think Trekkies are just an opinionated bunch.

 

[TEH BABA]

Shipping is sin.

 

[Nimthim]

Could be the characters feel more accessible - not as remote and disconnected as many other Trek characters - and provoke stronger reactions of all kinds. Although, I don't have a clue why that translates into expressing those reactions so forcefully.

 

[Nebusj]

Why do you think ENT brings out such strong opinions?

Among other things, there were a lot of hopes riding on it, given the decline in Trek's fortunes. Nobody watched Deep Space Nine, and even fewer people watched Voyager, and nothing happened in Insurrection, and even the Truly Faithful were getting mighty skeptical about carrying on with this whole oddly-dressed-people-talking-about-polaron-beams stuff. There was a not unjustified feeling that if they didn't get Enterprise right --- and by right I mean exciting and fresh and demanding attention --- the Trek franchise could be in for a long, cold winter.

A lot of the casual fans had already given up on Trek for having too many droning stories, too many time travel stories that don't make sense, and too much wandering around without exciting stuff happening while French horns drift nowhere near a melody. And then the first season of Enterprise came up and gave us ... well, did anyone really, sincerely, believe the Temporal Cold War was ever going to go anywhere? So you had a lot of high hopes pretty well dashed by the time we got around to stuff happening.

Aggravating things is, yes, the fan folklore problem; there were various scraps of information about the 22nd Century and a fair bit of folklore built up to what the early days of spaceflight would be like. For the most part, Enterprise pitched all the folklore overboard and skipped the indisputably interesting thing known about its setting. You can get away with throwing overboard what the audience expected, but if you don't have something cooler than the expectations had been, the audience is going to be (fairly) upset.

Some of this was just bad public relations by the Powers That Were. For example, they could have at least squelched grumbling that we never heard of this Archer guy before (by my eyes, a silly complaint) by pointing out that there's a whole planet named for him, in the Trek canon, all the way back in Next Generation, and why don't you want to hear about stuff you never heard of before?

But once enough of the audience is convinced that the folks making the show aren't doing very well and don't much care, the audience is going to mutiny. Once you've mutinied, when are you supposed to stop?

 

[BillJ]

It was guilty of TV's worst offense... it was bland.

Not necessarily good or bad... just there.

 

[Captain X]

It just tended to stand out more for me as far as having bad story elements and things that made me cringe.

 

[C.E. Evans]

IMO, a lot of people had a preconceived notion of what Star Trek was like in the 22nd-Century, and ENT just wasn't it for them at all. When you have people who lived and breathed Star Trek minutae for years (if not decades), having to overlook certain things--mostly from TOS--was a hard (if not impossible) pill to swallow.

The most often held complaint, though, was "great premise, interesting characters, wasted potential."