Romulans (and Remans) return to Enterprise

[TFVanguard]

For your information, according to the reports of the episodes in question, Archer and company do not find out what the Romulans look like. As others have pointed out, maybe you should watch it before passing judgement.

How about the quality of the show should improve to enjoyable levels before I'm obligated to watch it? I said, simply, that the continuity here doesn't make sense, there's nothing yet given by anyone to refute it - and, honestly, ENT's track record has been poor in this regard.

If you've read six books by an author, and didn't like any of them, would you be quick to buy the seventh one because you expect that, somehow this time, things would magically be different?

[Capt Daniel Hunter]

Then perhaps you might be happier using your energy on something other than complaining about a show you don't like and don't watch. It is, after all, just a TV show.

Dress it up however you like, but you can't make an honest critque of something if you don't watch it. You're not obligated to watch anything, but if you're going to make make sweeping statements about the current state of the show, you might actually want to watch it first.

[TFVanguard]

I have watched several episodes of the show, and the episode's descriptions of bringing in the Romulans and Remans as a 'face-to-face' encounter (which was the original report), would be a continuity breach, nae? Hence my original comment.

Certainly I'm not the only one to come to this conclusion... that doesn't mean that this Enterprise episode will suck, but it sounds like it won't mesh with TOS at all... which, as I had also mentioned, it no longer officially has to.

[Space_Cadet]

Originally posted by TFVanguard
I have watched several episodes of the show, and the episode's descriptions of bringing in the Romulans and Remans as a 'face-to-face' encounter (which was the original report), would be a continuity breach, nae? Hence my original comment.

Where does it say that there's a 'face to face' encounter in that article????

Originally posted by TFVanguard
Certainly I'm not the only one to come to this conclusion... that doesn't mean that this Enterprise episode will suck, but it sounds like it won't mesh with TOS at all... which, as I had also mentioned, it no longer officially has to.

Like i said before, how about watching that particular episode before passing judgement. And so what if it violates "canon", just sit back, watch, have a coke, and smile.

[Capt Daniel Hunter]

Nice hip replacement. Not so sure about the fake bottle though.

[Capt Daniel Hunter]

Originally posted by TFVanguard

<SNIP> it sounds like it won't mesh with TOS at all... which, as I had also mentioned, it no longer officially has to.

Well I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree. Everything I read suggests they are trying very hard to fit this in with continuity. Including, possibly, resolving that stupid screw up with the cloaking devices in Minefield.

[REG]

Hmmm.

There are good things and bad things about continuity. The appearance of the Reman (thanks -- and I used that word loosely -- to the film Nemesis) would be in the "bad things" category.

I don't mind the appearance of the unnamed and unseen Romulans if they pertain to the looming Earth-Romulan War. Personally, I just cannot stand the sight of Remans. It should never have existed in Trek lore (specifically Romulan history) and continuity. Unfortunately, we're stuck with them.

As for Manny Coto, so far he has done good (mind you, I've only recently finished watching this season's second episode on tape ... I only taped the good shows so I can review them). Personally, he shouldn't tease and flirt too much with the "Unseens" (TNG and contemporary Trek races), even though we know this is a prequel series.

I'm wary of this episode production, but let's see what he will do.

[TFVanguard]

Originally posted by Space_Cadet
Where does it say that there's a 'face to face' encounter in that article????

As I said, the original report I saw said that, but it has since been 'recanted' a bit. If it's a case that only the audience sees who the Romulans are, that's okay because it's no surprise to us.

Unfortunately, it was also pretty clear that the main characters learn of a Romulan / Vulcan connection. If that's the case - then - it's going to be a big pill to swallow to explain it away, like I said.

[Dan Gurden]

Originally posted by TFVanguard

I am partially with you TFV, but only based on my experience of season 1. I have missed the vast majority of 2, 3 and 4. And neither do I miss it, nor in fact do I find anything to complain about. I hear more good than bad recently, but to be honest much of the damage was already done for me... I expect that I will eventually catch them in reruns, but am in no great hurry.

That said, I am mostly in agreement with Cap't Hunter on this issue. If you dont watch the show (and you are not obligated to watch it, there are tonnes of other films and shows to watch instead, or even an off-button? Last time I checked the Paramount/WOTC continuity police do not come around and force people to rewrite their opinions... not yet), I digress... If you do not actually choose to watch the show you need-not complain about it.

It really winds up the people that DO watch the show, and some of them even enjoy it. (I remember that seemingly minority viewpoint back from when I was watching and enjoying Voyager). In the end if you start by complaining and then go on to state you dont watch it ends up diminishing your arguement. Both now and in the future.

Surely our time would be better spent elsewhere? Dealing with othet TV shows or reality rather than a fictional future? And at the end of the day, if you do watch, and disagree, feel free to ignore it all? But don't expect other people to choose your vision as the one true vision of trek, such a path has not existed for the last 30-odd years, so there is little reason that it should start now?

[TFVanguard]

That said, I am mostly in agreement with Cap't Hunter on this issue. If you dont watch the show (and you are not obligated to watch it, there are tonnes of other films and shows to watch instead, or even an off-button?

Well, the point is that there is only one entity really controlling the Star Trek franchise, and it's really running it into the ground. Sure, I can watch other shows, but if I want new Star Trek, then I'm going to have to deal with what's given - and it's not good enough in my view. A night of 'Kid's Next Door' just isn't going to replace what 'could have been' with Trek.

The fact that the PTB still don't seem to have any respect for that which has come before isn't exactly encouraging me, either. I keep hoping that one day they'll wake up... But, honestly, if they want to make 'generic science-fiction show #23', then they should stop putting the 'Trek' label on it.

Now, that said, I don't think my very small complaint about continuity was akin to saying Berman was raping someone's dog or something. I just found it odd that an honest complaint about how the franchise, as a whole, has been handled which has left me with disinterest (exemplified by early reports of this episode), was so quickly dismissed as being 'wrong'.

Yet those who DO see this as an ongoing problem have to contend with being attacked for it, and told to 'either like Enteprise and everything coming out for Trek or you shouldn't be a Trek fan anymore'.

Again, not exactly encouraging.

[Capt Daniel Hunter]

*Sigh* I was done with this argument, and was more than happy to just leave at agree to disagree. But this just cries out for a response.

Let's be honest here, people objected to you overreacting and making overly dramatic prejudgements based on faulty information.

If it makes you happier to think of yourself as unfairly put upon, and the rest of us as mindless Bermanites who never have any criticisms, feel free.

Doesn't make it true though.

At no time did anyone even suggest you need to like everything with the Trek name on it, or that you aren't a Trek fan if you don't. I really couldn't care less whether you like the show or not. But if you're going to make inaccurate statements on a public BBS people are going to correct you whether you like it or not. I've had criticisms of the show myself, but I'm not so blinkered to prejudge something I haven't seen. Or to ignore the fact that the show IS improving. Or indeed, to waste my time complaining about the darn thing.

All anyone did here, was point out that your information was inaccurate. Most people would say "oh OK," move on, and not get all pissy about it. Be a big enough man to admit it, intsead of trying to make yourself out to be some sort of martyr for the Chruch of Roddeberry.

If this episode stomps all over continuity, I'd be annoyed as well. But let's be honest, there are plenty of viable and interesting ways they could get around this without violating canon. And the story at hand sounds pretty interesting to me so far. Regardless, I'll judge it once I've seen it, not on the basis of inaccurate reports.

[REG]

Originally posted by TFVanguard

Now, that said, I don't think my very small complaint about continuity was akin to saying Berman was raping someone's dog or something. I just found it odd that an honest complaint about how the franchise, as a whole, has been handled which has left me with disinterest (exemplified by early reports of this episode), was so quickly dismissed as being 'wrong'.

Yet those who DO see this as an ongoing problem have to contend with being attacked for it, and told to 'either like Enteprise and everything coming out for Trek or you shouldn't be a Trek fan anymore'.

Again, not exactly encouraging.

And I thought I was harsh when it comes to Brannon Braga.