Ships Crew
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ENTERPRISE1701D

  1. I'm sorry my friend it was because of all the reasons you've listed


    (1) Low ratings - when the core fan base you depend upon stop watching and it stops attracting new viewers - who is watching it ?


    (2) 2D Characters - lets be honest I've seen more humanity in a plank of wood than in most of the characters on ENT (except Trip he was OK)


    (3) Storylines - were there any original story lines in it other than the terrible carbon copies of issues already covered in the other ST series ?


    Now I did watch until the end hoping it would get better but it never did


    I hope that answers a few questions you had

  2. I know they've been out a while for you guys in the US but here in the UK I finally got to watch Star Trek TOS-Rem and it looks quite good. The graphics are better, when the characters speak its a bit flat but otherwise enjoyable to watch

  3. Personally speaking for me listening to fans was never an issue - if they had done a show which was especially for the millions of Star Trek fans rather than chase after people who never watched Star Trek of science fiction then in all probability it would never have been cancelled and we would still be watching it today.


    Instead what we got was a show that was not watched by its fan-base and avoided by the other viewers it was after.


    The result was that viewing figures went into freefall - if it started with 12 million viewers why did the figures not remain about the same at the end of season 4 ?


    Why did they drop to around 3.5 million by the end ?


    If these figures were plotted onto a graph showing viewing figures at the beginning and end of each season - then they must have known the graph would point downwards - why was something not done earlier - say at the end of season 2 ?


    If all of this was known by the likes of Braga, Berman and Paramount then what was done to fix all of this ?


    I doubt if anyone will ever answer these questions as both B & B have disappeared and are not even willing to visit conventions knowing what the fan response will be to them

  4. I am surprised - someone who liked that decon thing - imagine families allowed young children to watch ST because of its wholesome family values - and seeing that taking place - my god what a disaster.


    As regards the theme tune - YUK - what a stupid song.


    The actors did ok considering that the scripts were rubbish and the character profiles 2-D planks of wood with no humanity at all - making them dull and boring in the extreme. Look of you want to make a show like ENT everything from the top downwards must appeal to all - Archer never ever appealled to anyone and as such he was not the best character on the show - the point of the show was how he and his crew dealt with any problems they encountered but instead the best character was Shran - a character who was not a part of Starfleet and hence had more appeal than the Archer Character - the problem was he was also a peripheral character and they tried making more and more plots involving him.


    Actually I hated the uniforms they should have looked more like the TOS uniforms and less like the TNG ones.


    If you are going to do a soap opera in space then you have to do it better - no large numbers of two/three parrt shows - by the end there were nothing but these - a sign that the ideas had run dry and they were trying to make up the quota of 26 episodes for a season.


    Overall it could have been done better - but they forgot the fallacy of pre-quels - everything will be alright in the end - there is no sense of mystery and hence no point watching.


    I'm sorry but I want my kids to watch ST but I wont show them ENT for all the reasons you've listed - you cant show 2 characters smothering each other in gel - this is the paramount channel not the playboy channel - how would it look - god what a disgrace !!!!


    That was the thing they forgot that ST is a family franchise not a nerd with a computer franchise - we want to watch ST together and some of the things we saw in ENT were too adult in nature and too complex for kids.


    When you look at the time slot it was initially given you can tell the channels expected a solid family show instead they got a perverts version of trek not what we expected at all and hence not something they would watch at all or allow their children to watch.

  5. I don't know how many of herein has noticed, but there's been a Time War in the series of Doctor Who that resulted in virtual extinction of the Time Lords and their planet save for him (The Doctor...).


    According to Wikipedia, it seems that his wiping out ten million Dalek warships during the war led to this demise..



    But the thing is this was not a recurring theme in the show - whereas in ENT it was and left many confused by the whole thing

  6. I voted for Archer - he was never comfortable with command - you want your captains in ST to have the diplomatic skills of Picard, the action man traits of Kirk and the overall ease of Sisko - but given the mission he was facing - a whole bunch of first contacts - it never quite worked out.


    This idea itself was tried in Voyager and generally speaking Voyager had mixed reviews both here and in ST.com, however, it seems Berman and Braga were only any good when character development has been done by some one else capable of actually writing believable characters who were human not 2-D card board cut-outs.


    No attention was paid to the various first contact scenarios that could have presented themselves, but instead we got a dumbing down of the whole show - with a clear emphasis to chase mainstream viewers who after the first episode had figured out it was the new star trek show and did not watch and as for the dedicated ST fans they switched off in their droves as it was considered a lame version of ST and did not deserve the ST name.


    You got to remember this man (Archer) was integral in forming the Federation - and I just could not see him doing it - Picard maybe in his situation - but definitely not Archer - there were no or few diplomacy episodes as possibly it was felt that the mainstream viewer would get confused and turn off - so scripts were kept purposely soft - not what we wanted at all. The sad fact is that the lame scripts and poor characters appealed to no one and everyone began switching off.

  7. How is this a cold war?


    Thats easy the weather's gotten decidedly dodgy in the future hence.


    Also nobody has answered my question 4 - How did future-starfleet know that there had been temporal changes ?

    They must have some form of temporal shielding similar to the alternate Voyager in Year of Hell.


    A B&B solution to everything as Scotty would say "I cannae re-write the laws of physics" well in this case B&B did just that because it suited them - Einstein was probably rolling in his grave after having heard of this pile of crap

  8. What I liked:

    1 The fabulously rendered Enterprise D model. Never have we seen that ship manouever like it did in complete CGI

    2 The backgound meterorites past the windows on the Enterprise D


    » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
    What I didnt like:

    1 The fact that Troi and Riker DOMINATED the episode

    2 The fact that Riker had so much time to spend on holodeck recreations to solve a sinmple problem


    Ie It made a BRILLIANT final episode to the francise buit NOT to the series


    Wow you really are shallow - you were bought off by a pile of microchips as opposed to having a decent storyline and good characters - very George Lucas and Star Wars like - that may work on the big screen but not on a weekly basis in TV-land

  9. Well it is funny - imagine them really saying that about each other - Jolene Blalock is particularly critical - perhaps there is some simmering resentment there (LOL) - maybe they said in the article what was already known but I did like it when B & B were compared to a couple of retards - one could sense organisations representing these people being offended everywhere - after all what an insult being compared to Berman and Braga.

  10. Strangely speaking I actually posed this question in www.startrek.com's message board on Enterprise and I just didn't understand the whole concept of it. In most respects it did look as if it was thrown in at the last minute with no clear/adequate explanation of what the war was about -


    (1) Who are the good guys and who are the bad guys ?


    (2) How do we know Daniel is a good guy ?


    (3) who was the other future guy ?


    (4) If temporal changes took place how did future-Starfleet know they had taken place ?


    In many ways it left more questions than it answered and generally left many fans confused and switching channels to another programme such as Stargate SG-1 which had an easier to understand premise

  11. From TrekWeb.com:


    Regarding the show's cancellation, Bakula said "I would say simply that we've been on the wrong network for four years. That hardly ever happens, honestly. If you're on the wrong network you don't make it out of the first year. But because of a lot of history and positioning and, if you will, corporate synergy, we managed to stay alive for four years. That's good news, ultimately. We did manage to squeeze four years out of being at the wrong place. no one could have ever predicted the amount of upset within Viacom in the last four years, in terms of personnel changing and philosophies changing. There's just no way you could have predicted that all the people at Paramount who supported the show, who supported the franchise, would be gone, that all the people at UPN would have turned over a couple of times. We were trying to ride through all of that stuff. Timing is everything especially in television. We're a victim of that and at the same time, we got 98 hours of television out of it."


    "There were elements in the pilot of a guy who was basically inexperienced and raw and a little bit of a loose cannon that I liked a lot," Bakula said about the 'Captain Archer' character "Then we got into an area for a while where he was awestruck. That worked and it had value, and I felt that near the end of Season Three and during this season we got into a maturing and a hardening and a toughening up of this guy."


    "He was kind of unpredictable. I just would have liked to have had a little bit more of that. I'd like to have seen him more relaxed sometimes, maybe a little happier that he was out there in space exploring the universe, with no attachments to anything that was going on on Earth, going from one planet to the next. That didn't quite happen. We were very attached to the events of our world."



    I tend to partially agree with him. UPN was not a good place for Enterprise to be. It should have went to NBC or another station that had a wider range of viewers. You guys know I've been preaching about how I don't have UPN and never could see it at all during it's run. If I don't have UPN, there's a lot that don't. Like I said, I think that ratings would have been higher if it were on a channel more people had.



    I hate to say it but Archer was never comfortable with command - one gets the feeling that he would have struggled with a shuttlepod let alone a starship. I think blame the network thing has had a great deal of mileage in ST in general but in ENT's case basically it was rubbish - wooden characters, weak/confusing plotlines, lacking freshness - a key failing of any prequel - you know the result it will be alright in the end