Why I like Vulcans on "Enterprise"
http://forum.trek-rpg.net/showthread...1825#post51825
Why I like Vulcans on "Enterprise"
http://forum.trek-rpg.net/showthread...1825#post51825
Really? How about some TOS quotes?Quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
To my knowledge the Vulcans didn't start to get to be bigotted, mean spirited, rascist, condescending jerks until B&B took over, as evidenced by the Vulcan Captain in "Take me out to the Holodeck."
Spock- "A dazzling display of logic."
Kirk- "Didn't think I had it in me, did you Spock?"
Spock- "No sir."
Spock (to McCoy)- "It would be most interesting to impress your memory engrams on a computer, Doctor. The resulting torrential flood of illogic would be most entertaining."
Spock- "The fact that my internal arrangement differs from yours, Doctor, pleases me no end."
Kirk- "At times, you seem almost human."
Spock- "I hardly believe that insults are within your prerogative as my commanding officer."
And that's just the tip of the iceberg...
I never claimed you had. I was merely pointing out the similarity of the complaints fans in general are making now to those made by the same group 15 years ago. The resurfacing of pretty much the same complaints rather contradicts the idea that Star Trek "Did good by the fans" until Enterprise, don't you think?Quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
2)I never said any of those things.
In fact, I have heard similar complaints about all four new series when they premiered. With some (TNG, DS9), it eventually died down and went away. For others (Voy), it continues to this day.
{Edit:}The only real complaint about Enterprise I've found I can agree with is the didain for the idea that "Vulcans have forgotten the old ways" of Mind Melds and such as mentioned in one episode.
Posted by Doug Burke:
Isn't Spock half-Human and Half-Vulcan? Well then he wouldn't act Vulcanish all the time.Quote:
Kirk- "At times, you seem almost human."
Spock- "I hardly believe that insults are within your prerogative as my commanding officer."
IMO, if I were a Vulcan and someone called me a human, I'd take it as an insult. Hell making reference to someone by calling him the name of another species would be taken as an insult if the specie isn't chosen properly. How would Kirk have liked to be called as brutal as a Klingon?
Since Vulcans subscribe to the Teachings of Surak and therefore Logic they can take almost any position. One could say that Braga is just taking advantage of this. The Vulcans are superior, they know it, the humans pretend their not, why not make it evident to them?
I agree with Dan Stack's interpretation of the ENT Vulcans. I don't like the show, but I've stopped pulling my hair out on how it isn't trek.
All I do know is sit back, watch it and make fun of it. I know enjoy it in a different way.:D
Doug: Granted, Spock did bash the other humans of the crew on the head with this alleged superiority of logic and of Vulans' POV. But you have to admitt that the very tone of the quotes you gave us is quite different from what we often hear in Enterprise. Somehow, I can't but get the feeling that Spock is either: 1- Much better at humor than we give him credit for, or 2- Stating something that seems so obvious to him that he means no real harm in saying it. In Enterprise, most Vulcans sound mean. They do not only consider themselves superior, they make it quite obvious that they despise other cultures (as if they had some doubts about their superiority). That's quite different (well, in my book at least).
In a way, why not? For a parallel, it reminds me of the way we've always seen Dwarves and Elves. There are most Elves and Dwarves (WFRP ones for instances), and there is Legolas and Gimli. There's Enterprise's Vulcans and Humans, and there is Spock and Kirk/Bones.
Well, I just hope we see the Archer/T'Pol relationship develop along those lines ... I don't know, don't you think it's been a bit shallow up until now? I for one would consider some (attempt at) friendship as seen in TOS quite refreshing in the middle of all this "Vulcan meanness" :).
... Hey that was almost on topic, I'm getting better! :D
I happen to like my Sci-Fi in a format that at least tries to remember what it has done in previous stories. Just because McCoy said something about Vulcan being conquered isn't that high on my list of priorities - after all, your average eight-year old kid in Britain nowadays thinks Winston Churchill fought Napoleon, so I'm sure a country doctor can get some facts wrong occasionally. But if a previous storyline establishes a historical event that is pivotal in terms of series mythology, then I expect an episode set quite close to that period to have some mention of it. Would you be happy seeing an episode set in 1948 that didn't at least mention WWII? The events of that conflict are still getting referred to today! The Eugenics Wars are along the same lines in Trek history.
Still, I do have to say, people that feel the same way I do have an alternative - don't watch the freakin' show in the first place, then it can't piss you off... That's the option I'll be exercising.
That's exactly my point. They have been elitist and condescending a lot longer than 'Enterprise' has been around.Quote:
Originally posted by Lt.Khrys Antos
Posted by Doug Burke:
Since Vulcans subscribe to the Teachings of Surak and therefore Logic they can take almost any position. One could say that Braga is just taking advantage of this. The Vulcans are superior, they know it, the humans pretend their not, why not make it evident to them?
As do I. :)Quote:
I agree with Dan Stack's interpretation of the ENT Vulcans.
An attitude I wish more people would subscribe to. :DQuote:
All I do know is sit back, watch it and make fun of it. I know enjoy it in a different way.:D
I'd be more willing to go for option # 1, myself.Quote:
Originally posted by Calcoran
Doug: Granted, Spock did bash the other humans of the crew on the head with this alleged superiority of logic and of Vulans' POV. But you have to admitt that the very tone of the quotes you gave us is quite different from what we often hear in Enterprise. Somehow, I can't but get the feeling that Spock is either: 1- Much better at humor than we give him credit for, or 2- Stating something that seems so obvious to him that he means no real harm in saying it.
I agree that they are more antagonistic. But then even fifty years ago, Americans were just as antagonistic toward the Soviet Union and others that we now are quite civil with on a regular basis. Just puts more weight on the "people can change in a century" theory. :)Quote:
In Enterprise, most Vulcans sound mean. They do not only consider themselves superior, they make it quite obvious that they despise other cultures (as if they had some doubts about their superiority). That's quite different (well, in my book at least).
Good analogy! I hadn't even thought of that angle. Another good corrolary would be Kingons and humans compared to Worf and the Enterprise or DS9 crews.Quote:
In a way, why not? For a parallel, it reminds me of the way we've always seen Dwarves and Elves. There are most Elves and Dwarves (WFRP ones for instances), and there is Legolas and Gimli. There's Enterprise's Vulcans and Humans, and there is Spock and Kirk/Bones.
Hell, that was more on topic than some of the posts I've made... :)Quote:
... Hey that was almost on topic, I'm getting better! :D
Quote:
Originally posted by Doug Burke
Really? How about some TOS quotes?
Spock- "A dazzling display of logic."
Kirk- "Didn't think I had it in me, did you Spock?"
Spock- "No sir."
Spock (to McCoy)- "It would be most interesting to impress your memory engrams on a computer, Doctor. The resulting torrential flood of illogic would be most entertaining."
Spock- "The fact that my internal arrangement differs from yours, Doctor, pleases me no end."
Kirk- "At times, you seem almost human."
Spock- "I hardly believe that insults are within your prerogative as my commanding officer."
And that's just the tip of the iceberg...
Uhhh, it was always my opinion that the above comments were meant as jabs between comrades-in-arms, not meant as mean spirited insults. Sure Spock considered himself above the norm when compared to humans, he was more logical, more intelligent, stronger, faster and he new it. But he didn't lord himself over all other beings as the Vulcans do in Enterprise. Their out look towards other races in Enterprise just doesn't seem...Logical to me.
My point was that I have had that argument thrown at me before, I just wanted to say how I felt at the time, and I was very positive toward it. Everyone in my group was.Quote:
Originally posted by Doug Burke
I never claimed you had. I was merely pointing out the similarity of the complaints fans in general are making now to those made by the same group 15 years ago. The resurfacing of pretty much the same complaints rather contradicts the idea that Star Trek "Did good by the fans" until Enterprise, don't you think?
.
I have to say that B&B aren't my favorite people because of their handling of certain issues within the Star Trek universe.
With the Eugenics Wars, I subscribe to the belief that the ppl of the Star Trek 1990s didn't call the warfare in Asia and the Middle East by that name. Each one was probably "tagged" in similar to the way we're doing it now: "the Middle East conflict," the "war in Chechnya." Who's to say what conflicts of this era will be called in 100 years? The 100 Years' War didn't get that name until much later. ;) That said, I would have preferred to hear about an overseas war that the US may or may not have been involved in...it just would have added to the background of the story.
I will admit that I love Enterprise. To me, it's Star Trek. Even with that, the appearance of the Klingons annoys me, as does the Ferengi. Now, "Broken Arrow" and the Ferengi ep were both very good (the Klingon ship in distress one wasn't as such, but it was okay), but I would have preferred to leave the two races out of it.
The Andorians are right on target, and you have to give the writers and B&B some credit for that. The Vulcans...yeah, they're being a little too haughty and jerky, but Dan's explanation of it fits the "evolution" of Vulcans in Trekology perfectly.
My two copper coins. :)
Well, I'll just say that it doesn't surprise me too much. Not the first time in the history of Trek that Vulcans have done something illogical.Quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
Their out look towards other races in Enterprise just doesn't seem...Logical to me.
And I was the same way at the time. But a large majority of Star Trek fans expressed those sentiments, until they got used to the show. I just find it humorous that the same complaints are used today. :)Quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
My point was that I have had that argument thrown at me before, I just wanted to say how I felt at the time, and I was very positive toward it. Everyone in my group was.
How can I relax and enjoy a show that has so far been unable to impress me? It did for a while in the beginning, even though I have been skeptical of bringing Klingon and Ferengi this early in the timeline. But as with VOYAGER I watched it every Wednesday night, not out of leisure but out of some sick fetish to self-flagellate my eyes and myself while still holding on to the hope of all hopes that the night's episode will impress me.Quote:
Originally posted by erhershman
And above all, sit back, relax, and enjoy what I consider to be the best Trek show since TNG. I am a huge fan of Enterprise, and I would watch it even if I was the only person in the world who did. [That's how I feel sometimes anyway...:rolleyes: ]
Heck, I find myself changing channel and enjoy watching the other show The Job starring Denis Leary ... and I hate this guy (based on his past annoying performances which he brought to the show).
In the end, I greatly appreciate being The West Wing fan more and more (which in my local area, airs at the same time as ENTERPRISE).
Note to B&B: Advance the timeline to the start of the Earth-Romulan War already.
IF you call someone names long enough, they are bound to respond. While I have a preyyt low opinion of Brannon Braga, I can certainly see why he's sick of people calling him an idiot. He's been trying for, like, 5 years? to address it reasonably, and is met with relentless Braga-bashing.Quote:
Originally posted by Kronok
Having a point is one thing. Resorting to name-calling? Think about it? That is EXACTLY what he has done. If some fans attacked him verbally, fine. Address that, but do it without 3rd grade tactics. In every debate, the first one to really annoy the other usually wins. He has lost it.
If I were in charge of anything, I would understand that one of my first duties is PR.
He has forgotten this simple rule and, I predict, it will be his downfall.
I'm sure he knows his duties include PR, but I'm also sure that he considers the fans he referred to as "canon pornographers" as a lost cause, and I admire that he isn't trying to court absolutely everyone.
And I entirely get his point about the Ferengi. I think they shouldn't have gone there, but nobody ever called them "Ferengi", and only a few people saw them, so they could remain mysterious for a few hundred years.
I like Enterprise fine as SF, but I think it must be regarded as non-canon for Trek. I've seen a persuasive argument that Broken Bow establishes an alternate timeline, one in which our first contact with the Klingons was both earlier and friendlier than the one Kirk and Picard read about in history class.
As for Brannon Braga, he wrote some of my favorite episodes of TNG. However, I never liked his work as Executive producer on Voyager (which was damaged goods when he got it), and I do find remarkable his tendancy to say stupid things in public.
Anybody who thinks continuity isn't important in Star Trek clearly doesn't understand the fan-base.
Amen.Quote:
Originally posted by Fesarius
So, sure, they get hammered for continuity -- but they might get away with more lapses if quality of the series were higher.
YMMV.
(And not just to the quoted part.)
Not where I'm from. :)Quote:
Originally posted by Sho-sa Kurita
You just read my mind...plus you can say it in 'polite' company :p
But "polite" company also abjures the use of "hung up" (as in traffic) or any other comment with sexual connotations, denotations, or overtures.
No, that just proves that WE are not living Trek History.Quote:
Originally posted by First of Two
What history of Trek?
Didn't each new episode that mentioned "such-and-so happened 200 years ago" 'change Trek history?'
Doesn't the fact that there's no evidence of any "Eugenics Wars" and no "Voyager 6" (and so "Leningrad" anymore) 'change Trek history?'
I personally think there should not have been a Space Shuttle named Enterprise in the Star Trek universe, since it was named Enterprise largely due to a movement of Trek fans, and we have no evidence of a show called Star Trek existing in the 60s in the Trek Universe.
In fact, I think the greatest honor we can pay Gene is to say that if Gene hadn't created Trek, we would have had the Eugenics Wars and the Bell Riots and the rest of the world-goes-to-hell-at-the-end-of-the-20th-Century stuff. Trek changed it all.
I'm with you on your first point, but if what was happening 200 years ago is somewhat vague, establishing what happened isn't "changing" so much as "defining". The point is that an effort should be made to not contradict things that have already been established.
And, while trying to maintian continuity with the huge body of Trek stuff already aired while writing new stories set in Trek's past is a very tough row to hoe, well..... I'm not the one who told them to do a series set then. Do it right (or at least try) or don't do it at all.
Sorry, but I can't resist.
The Captain is responsible for everything that happens on his ship. "I was asleep when the Third Mate ran the ship aground," just doesn't cut it. "The sonar man assured me our path was clear for surfacing," doesn't cut it either.Quote:
Originally posted by erhershman
WARNING... LONG RANT... MAY CAUSE EYESTRAIN.
People who have done nothing but criticize Enterprise since it came on don't seem to realize that B&B are NOT responsible for every single thing that happens on the show.
If you don't want to get blamed for everything that goes wrong, then Executive Producer is not a job you want. Even if you never saw it, never read that script, every frame of every episode is your responsiblity, and if it's wrong it is your fault.
So, if you can't check everything yourself, make sure that the people who check it are people you trust, since it's your neck if they screw up.
And after all, if the way I am isn't the best possable way to be, then why would I want to be this way?Quote:
Originally posted by erhershman
And as for the guy in Take Me Out to etc. on DS9, there are bound to be exceptions to the norm, even in an enlightened culture like the Vulcans. After all, if you didn't have people who thought they were better than everybody else, how would there be a Vulcan Isolationist Movement? Their basic philosophy is that everyone else is inferior to Vulcans, so Vulcans should have no contact with them.
I certainly agree that there would be egotistical Vulcans. In fact, I think for a Vulcan to be an egotist is almost .... logical. ;)
It did seem to be a recurring theme that Spock had feelings of inferiority (among other Vulcans) due to his human heritage.Quote:
Originally posted by Lt.Khrys Antos
Posted by Doug Burke:
Isn't Spock half-Human and Half-Vulcan? Well then he wouldn't act Vulcanish all the time.
See my above post about feelings of superiority.
And remember that the story arc of TOS and the movies was, in large part, about Spock feeling somehow "less" than a Vulcan, coming to see the value (_Equal_ value) of the emotional/intuitve approach taken by Kirk, and finally embracing his human aspect and coming to terms with his humanity after his death. "Tell Mother that I feel fine."
If the person so calling him were a Klingon, he'd likely take it as it was intended: a compliment. Except of course that Kirk hated the Klingons and would never like to be compared to one.Quote:
IMO, if I were a Vulcan and someone called me a human, I'd take it as an insult. Hell making reference to someone by calling him the name of another species would be taken as an insult if the specie isn't chosen properly. How would Kirk have liked to be called as brutal as a Klingon?
But Riker would take it as a compliment.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Then I suggest he stops acting like one. And calling the fans names certainly isn't following that advice, is it?Quote:
Originally posted by spyone
I can certainly see why he's sick of people calling him an idiot.
Thanks for agreeing with me Phantom!!! :D
Spyone probably said it best (My choice of words was not so eloquent)-
“If you don't want to get blamed for everything that goes wrong, then Executive Producer is not a job you want.”
In a nutshell, he is the PR man. Some of you write about him being fed up with name-calling as an excuse for his actions. Fine. If he was low on the totem pole, he has the write to complain and whine. Once you become the head of anything, you take sh@t.
That’s why you make the big bucks man.
I work at a job were I am basically 2nd in command. I will never move up. My boss’s job pays more and deals with crap and damage control 24/7.
Not worth it.
In my opinion, B&B do not understand their job qualifications.
Wait... if I understood correctly what Dan reported, "continuity pornographer" means more or less someone who is obsessed with continuity, right ? (if one meaning of pornography is "horrid or sensational material", then a pornographer is someone who loves or exploits such material, and continuity pornographer means it applied to continuity). Please correct me if I'm wrong.
So... where is the insult in there ? It's a rather colourful designation, I agree, but is it really name-calling ? It is not as if he said that these guys like to sexually stimulate themselves over ST continuity (could be said in much less words, but more shockingly... :D), or something like that.
Well... my feelings anyway :)
Hmm, "continuity pornographer"...
I know a writer who calls it something much more explicit, but in the same vein.
My position is simply that Braga and Berman are actually doing a fairly decent job at a position they cannot possibly be seen to succeed in. If they change too much to suit what they see is needed, they upset the "Roddenberry is god" crowd. Not changing enough will draw accusations of lack of originality from the thinking fans and the critics. It's a very fine line to walk, and IMHO they're just about succeeding.
However, coming out with phrases like this is not going to help him. I can understand his anger (amongst other things, I've seen Joe Stracsynski's response to similar complaints over Babylon 5's fifth season - not to mention the D&D 3E debate), but maybe he needs some Vulcan emotional control training.
Continuity does seem to be a difficult concept for someone raised on episodic tv to deal with, and Trek has about a hundred times as many pitfalls as any other series to deal with. It also has some of the most fundamentalist fans I've seen outside of Dr Who, who are going to jump at every mistake. I did think Braga's original announcement that continuity was irrelevant was a mistake - but then why did they make so much effort over Shadows of P'Jem?
Ok, I'm rambling (lack of sleep will do that to you ;) ), but hopefully you can see my pov...
I fail to see the insult. And whether anyone wants to agree or not, fair criticism is one thing. Some of the stuff that has been said about the guy and his work is either plain stupid nit-picking or far far beyond either criticism or decency, and these are the people that comment is aimed at. And he is not required to put up with that simply because he has the job. Why is he not due the same decency that we would expect people to give us? I sure as Hell wouldn't take it sitting down.
I felt he was pretty well restrained. But then I guess some people think it's OK for Braga to sit and take it, but not for the fans. How dare he stick up for himself. How terrible. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally posted by qerlin
The 'pornographer' thing was silly. As for the rest of it? He's flat-out right -- the fans have been over the top in their criticism of the new show, which doesn't stink anywhere near as badly as most claim.
B&B rightly took heat for an attrocious show, Voyager, but there were plenty who liked it. So if they were giving the audience what they wanted, the criticism of B&B -- which gets much more personal than his responses (see a lot of the posts on this BBS for examples; I'm guilty too).
I have to go with you on this, Qerlin. . .the criticisms of Enterprise were really over the top, as were the criticisms directed at those who critiqued the critics. . . (I should know).
Personally (and I'm bracing myself for the flames soon to come), I've never seen why some get so bent out of shape when "canon" is tampered with. . . nonthing says the storylines have to be ironclad....
66 Post and counting and all over Braga :rolleyes:
I think I'm really asking for it... but here it goes again, and I'll try to be polite....
Remember TNG's first season? How it sucked major a**? Well that was ST according to Gene Roddenberry. TNG became watchable when Roddenberry eased his grip on the show and allowed the witers more freedom. And many writers felt that he, hum, had an hard time writing a good story. To quote a an early TNG writer : "he couldn't find a good story even if it were tatooed on his d**k".
Now, I agree that Berman and co (that includes Braga) have churned out horrible stuff from time to time (some Voyager eps, the death of Kirk, etc), but they were responsible for some of Trek's greatest moments : the later TNG seasons, the DS9 Dominion War story arc (Trek at its best IMHO), First Contact, etc.
As for continuity, I think people go nuts. And A LOT of people (more than we think) mix-up proper canon with stuff that isn't, like the novels, RPG material, etc. I think you can categorize continuity in 2 ways : the major stuff and the small details. The major stuff refers to things that have been well-established and where fans would be rightfully angry if it were screwed up. I'm talking issues like making Kirk's birthday in 2260, showing the Gorn as 3-legged nymphettes, saying that Laforge has never been blind, making Picard british ;), etc. The other category is for the stuff of minimal importance and that can always be explained anyways, like the ridge/no-ridge Klingon thing, the existence of another vessel named Enterprise that we didn't know of, etc.
Those who worry about things like that need a girlfriend :D (-"but Doktor, didn't you argue to death about in another thread about the hull strength of the Constitution vs the Galaxy?" -"yes, but I have a gf!"
Oh and also, I don't see what the big fuss about Enterprise Vulcans is about. To me they seem, well, like Vulcans.
Objection. Having just finished the first boxed set DVDs, I have to say S1 had a lot of good ideas, unfortunately held back by ridiculously low production values. It does NOT suck anything! (major or minor)Quote:
Originally posted by Doktor Evil
Remember TNG's first season? How it sucked major a**?
But if you can accept Kirk walking around in ship invented by interior architects on LSD you should be able to look beyond even the Edo. (I know it's hard. Even I can't watch Justice without shuddering at least once.)
S1 even had some story seeds which were never followed up on by the 'saviours' (????) of TNG. What about the parasites? Armus? Angel One? The friggin' ROMULANS? What was that line all about?
"We. Are. Back." - The Neutral Zone
Back to do what exactly? Talk about great set-up with almost no payoff.
B&B have their drawbacks and their strengths. But I'll never forgive them for phoning in seven years of Voyager. You could just tell that TPTB just didn't give a sh*t about Janeway and her crew. Come season 5 neither did any of them.
But Braga has indeed written some of the most fun eps during TNG's run.
So far ENT looks promising. I have no problem giving B&B a chance of surprising me with meaty stories (as opposed to the trek-history fluff we get to watch now).
on-topic: I think Braga's right. 'Continuity pornographers' really do take themselves WAY too seriously. Being a fan really doesn't mean anything. No matter how much merchandising crap you buy or how much useless information you fill your head with. You're not writing the show. And you're still free not to watch it.
I think fans like to kid themselves that they are in some way valuable to Trek. The only thing that's valuable to Trek is the money people spent on it. Let us not forget that TV shows are a business first.
If we're lucky (and with TOS, TNG and at times DS9 we have been lucky), it comes close to being an art form. It manages to tell stories of relevance.
But it's still a business. It's an easy way to waste an hour per week. It's a TV show. WTH do you expect?
Joe, a fan of good stories (i.e. Trek-tales of yore)
And you can join me in ranting about how Picard refused to do the one thing the Prime Directive allows (just beam Wesley out), and instead did something it forbids (try to change their culture).Quote:
Originally posted by Joe Dizzy
But if you can accept Kirk walking around in ship invented by interior architects on LSD you should be able to look beyond even the Edo. (I know it's hard. Even I can't watch Justice without shuddering at least once.)
The main difference, as I can see it, is that B&B have said that they don't think continuity is important, so they aren't really trying for it, which a lot of the fan-base (like me) hears as "We don't give a damn about what YOU like, we're doing this the easy way."
At least in TNG you got the impression that people cared about the fans.
Just one quesstion,
How can you have a continuing story line without continuity????
Using gaming as an example one of the first rules most GM sections state is "make notes so you can keep everything straight" ie so you can have "c-o-n-t-i-n-u-i-t-y" in your game.
I believe writer's guides state the same thing.
But hey, who am I to question the Great Gods B&B? They know better.
The only serious continuity violations Enterprise has committed are based on fan dogma, not canon. And Enterprise's internam continuity has been pretty solid so far.
But yeah, let's just crucify them 'cause we don't like how they contradict Joe Blogg's original fanfic Trek timeline, or my dreamed up image of what the Andorians are like, or the explicit statement in novel number 105 that the Vulcans are always nice and cuddly. Oh and let's just prove Braga's point while we're at it. :rolleyes:
Clearly, I'm in the middle here. While I feel people should cut Braga some slack, I surely don't agree with the statement above.Quote:
Originally posted by Capt Daniel Hunter
The only serious continuity violations Enterprise has committed are based on fan dogma, not canon. And Enterprise's internam continuity has been pretty solid so far.
I didn't have to look far to find a point where Enterprise violates canon.
The first contact with the Klingons was described by Picard as "disasterous" and leading to nearly a century of hostilities.
The contact shown in "Broken Bow" was certainly not "disasterous," and looked favorable to me.
So, whether you dispute the dates or not, the nature of the contact with the Klingons violates canon.
Unless, of course, Enterprise establishes an alternate time-line. After all, if there were no time-travelling Bad Guys From The Future (BGFTF), there would have been no warning to carry to the Klingon homeworld, so there would have been no Klingon ship near Earth and no BGFTF minions for it to be running from, so it would not have crashed in Oklahoma, so.....
Yeah, and how many throwaway lines were contradicted by the earlier shows? And not just under B&B. And while you may not consider that first contact 'disastrous' the Klingons are hardly fans of Archer and co after it. Secondly, the 'first contact, may refer to the contact with Klingons over a period of time, not just the initial 'first' contact. Perhaps we should wait and see how it all pans out before we start the name calling. I disagree that it is a major canon violation, since it is open to interpretation. Not to mention, history often looks back on things with a different perspective.
Could they have done it differently? yes (I wouldn't have used the Klingons at all) but does that excuse some of the attitudes we see? No.
How do we know that the first contact that Archer had wasn't disastrous? Time may reveal it to have been a major gaffe on the part of Archer. In September 1938, Neville Chamberlain was highly regarded for obtaining "peace in our time" with Nazi Germany. One year later, Britain was at war with Germany. If they, France, and the USA had spent the 30's dealing with Hitler then the horrors of WWII would have been lessened considerably.
Nicely put Dan, that was the point I was trying to make :)
First I would like to say that I don't consider myself a rabid ST fan...Rabid SG-1 fan, maybe....Rabid B5 fan definitly. So I view myself as a moderate here.Quote:
Originally posted by Capt Daniel Hunter
But yeah, let's just crucify them 'cause we don't like how they contradict Joe Blogg's original fanfic Trek timeline, or my dreamed up image of what the Andorians are like, or the explicit statement in novel number 105 that the Vulcans are always nice and cuddly. Oh and let's just prove Braga's point while we're at it. :rolleyes:
The reason why I crucify B&B is because I think they are doing a terrible job all round...Yeah, yeah they saved the franchise, they are gods,blah blah blah. They have created they own universe and because they know they are not capable of running a show on their own merits they have to ride the coat tails of a true storyteller. Then they take the name off and say they are trying to separate their vision from Roddenberry's, and what type of stories have they told...Klingons...Nausicaans....Frengei! Oh yeah guys way imaginative, doing a great job of separation there. And the only creature they have truly created, those guys who can make themselves flatter then a flap jack, are so ridiculously silly it's not funny.
Everything about Enterprise is painful:
-The Theme
-the continuity, and they haven't been keeping to their own continuity either.
-the ship, thought this is the closest thing to something I like.
-the crew has no synergy, and I couldn't care less what happens to them.
-the stories are at best a rehash of previous ideas, at worst just terrible.
-the cast themselves are passable. I will give the show that.
-the KY Jelly scenes that are their just to bring in ratings.
-the way they are running the established races.
That is why I crucify B&B, not just because they are blowing off 30 years of established "history", but because they are hacks. And awful whiney ones at that who can't even respond to critisim with a modicum of maturity.
Fair enough, but remember that is only your opinion. yes others may share it, but there are plenty who do not.
If you don't like it don't watch it. And if you don't like or watch it, why waste time complaining about it? I never understood why the people who forced themselves to watch all of Voyager, and did nothing but complain every single week. Now I'm not saying that's you, but it is, in my opinion, that simple. Use your prerogaotive to change the channel. And if you already have, then great. Why waste energy complaining about it? *shrug*
To deal with your specific points, firstly I sttrongly disagreee tha tthe cast has no synergy. That may be your opinion but it is not one I, or many others share.
Sorry, but I still disagree about the continuity. it is nowhere near as bad as the CPs claim.
Sotiries a rehash? In some ways, yes, but it's hard to be original after so many episodes (which is why I thought they should rest Trek for a couple years at least) but I don't feel they've done that bad a job so far. Some of those episodes have been pretty good, IMHO. Certainly not all, but not bad for a first season.
KY jelly... Urm .. . well no contest. But it's a bit of fun, no different in intent than all the scantily clad women in TOS.
Established races? Sorry, I have no problem with they way they're portraying them.
Each to their own. But if you hate it so much, just let it go and focus your energy on something worthwhile. Life's too short. :D
As for B&B being whiney, well I suggest you take a good long look at the fans Braga was talking about. They are the epitomy of whiney. I might not agree with a lot of Braga's past antics, but I do not blame him a whit for having that attitude tpwards such people.
And on that note, I'm going to bow out before this gets violent :)