Is "Enterprise" ......Star Trek?

[AllenS]

Originally posted by Korga
Oh man if you want Trouble I'll give it to ya....

Second... Allen forgive my spelling on the word CANON I being
a simpleton as you have made me out to be seems to
have no education. And like you havent ever made a
spelling error ...I mean far be it for me to think that the
allmighty Allen has never made a mistake

I

lol I wish that were true I am sorry I went off on you about that. It isn't just you, I see that being done all over and even on some web pages...that combined with your rather inflammatory views on Enterprise just kind of ticked me off. I apologize.

Allen

[AllenS]

It is my understanding from the things I've read that TOS never really was what Roddenberry wanted it to be, because of the compromises one had to make to keep a show on the air in Television of the mid sixties; you had to have action, which usually meant fights of some kind; you had to have a strong male lead, which is why Kirk comes off like a tomcat sometimes and there is no 'ensemble' cast. The "utopia that takes care of everyone and so we don't need things like money and everyone works to better themselves and not out of neccessity" bit would NOT have gone over well in the era of the Cold War. So, TOS was different. And it was TOS that caught the imagination of the fans.
As has become increasingly clear, TOS was not just Roddenberry's baby; Gene Coon had a lot to do with it's look and feel, as did Bob Justman, D.C. Fontana and many others. Yes, Roddenberry came up with the idea, and had a lot to do with the tone...but he was not Star Trek's sole creator, at least the Trek we all saw.

Then, TNG...and Roddenberry's vision can finally be done as he wanted it to be done. Less violence, more "gee, look what's out there". The crew are not allowed to have conflicts with each other because humans don't do that anymore". (This did get violated a few times, but as a general rule, it happened). The Federation has become a virtual utopia...and the record shows that the first two seasons of the show, when Roddenberry was actively involved, were it's least successful. Please understand, I am not slamming on Roddenberry! I just feel that the reason the show took off after he began to back away from it due to his unfortunate illness was it began to be entertaining again. There began to be more action, the stories got somewhat more interesting. "The Best of Both Worlds 1 and 2" rightfully deserve to be considered as the greatest Trek episodes of all time; they were great!

People talk a lot about how Roddenberry's vision is what Trek should be. I respectfully disagree. One reason I like Enterprise is that it does have some of that TOS feel; the characters seem more like real people to me. Hoshi and T'Pol can argue...Tripp can tell off Archer...they act like real people, like Kirk, McCoy and Spock did. I don't expect the shows to totally emulate TOS; that would be bad, and we do need to see advancement and change. But it has to be an entertaining show. I do want to see some action, not just exposition on how advanced humanity has become.

Compared to the above, so-called "continuity errors" don't bother me. And I still think they will all be explained as the series goes on. I don't think they are mistakes. I think they are deliberate curves being thrown at us by the Temporal Cold War storyline.
A lot of people here seem to have this "this isn't right" feeling..well I believe that's the whole point!

Allen

[tonyg]

AllenS,

And a lot of stuff that get attributed to Gene was actually due to the input of others-the sotry editor J. Black and producer Bob Justman in particular.

Bob Justman said that prioty one was to get the show on the air and keep it on the air.

[Dan Stack]

I tend to agree with Allen on the "Roddenberry's vision" thing. It could be that I'm too flawed a human, but I don't buy it. And I don't usually enjoy it on the tv screen either.

Season 1 of TNG had its excellent moments, but it had some true groaners... "Back in the 20th century, people feared dying." Personally, I find Roddenberry's raw vision of the future terrifying, the inhabitants just seem to lack soul or passion to me.

I think Star Trek is at its best with the right collaborators. Roddenberry had a vision, but I find his best work to be when that vision was tempered by Bob Justman.

Similarly, my favorite seasons of DS9 were season 4 through 6, with writers and/or producers Ronald D. Moore, Ira Stephen Behr, and Robert Hewitt Wolfe making a DS9 something unique. Wolfe left after season 6 and while I still enjoyed the show, I think that his loss took away a lot of what I liked best about DS9. Similarly, I enjoyed Wolfe's work on early Andromeda (kinda stopped watching early season 2) but felt it didn't compare with what he did on DS9.

Or take Lennon and McCartney.

[tonyg]

Some of Rodderberry's personality flaws also crept in to TREK.

For isntance, Roddenberry hated personal confrontations and arguments, avoiding them like the plague. This led to many tough situation for him (being invloved with both Nichell Nichols and Maget Barret during the series for one).

That's one of the reason why TNG had humans "evolve" away from arguing.

And no conflict between the major characters is a major stumbling block for writers trying to add drama to the series. It took 3 seasons for the writers to figure out a loophole for this in TNG. THat also why a lot of TREK episodes revolve around superior, enlighted humans showing the "backwards" aliens how to be nice to each other.

[erhershman]

QUESTION: Why is it that the only people (and by that I mean Star Trek fans) who I hear complain about Enterprise are on internet message boards? All my Trekkie friends and I love Enterprise, and shrug off the few, in our book relatively minor, canon violations for the sake of the fact that the show is EXCELLENT. Granted, there are some things we'd like to change about it... T'Pol's uniform is a bit of a distraction, for instance , but otherwise it's great.

If you ask me, the reason the only people I hear complain about ENT are on the Internet is because only people who hate the show feel the need to force their opinion on other people by shouting it all around the world- and no, that comment is not aimed at anyone in particular on these boards... just the whole Enterprise bashing crowds who need to stop psycho-analyzing every single ENT episode for canon violations and just WATCH THE SHOW.

Rant over.

[AllenS]

Originally posted by erhershman
QUESTION: Why is it that the only people (and by that I mean Star Trek fans) who I hear complain about Enterprise are on internet message boards?

My experience is that a good number (by no means all, or even most) of the people who post about anything on the Internet consider themselves "intelligentsia" because they know how to use a computer. This therefore gives them the right to criticize things they don't know about, or otherwise be overly critical and picky. There's nothing wrong with critical thinking, of course, but I do not believe the population of the Internet, or at least the vocal minority, should be considered a representative sample of anything. If I were Decipher, or any other company, I would be wary of basing any marketing decisions on what is likely only a small percentage of my potential customers, and a fringe group at that.

Now there are some very nice and reasonable people on the net too...like many of the folks here. But they aren't given to abusive rants, so they don't draw as much attention.

Allen

[Dan Stack]

To quote the source of all wisdom, the Simpsons...

Comic Book Guy: "Last night's 'Itchy & Scratchy' was, without a doubt, the worst episode ever. Rest assured that I was on the Internet within minutes, registering my disgust throughout the world." ... "As a loyal viewer, I feel they owe me."

Bart: "What? They've given you thousands of hours of entertainment for free. What could they possibly owe you? If anything, you owe them."

Comic Book Guy: "Worst episode ever."

[Modem]

Hey Korg, don’t back down; you were just getting’ good
Seriously people, I know this guy in RL and well…we share nearly the same view on this ‘Akiraprise-mess’ (I’d use other words, but self-censoring prevents it). The reason why Korg put this into CODA is because of the ‘timeline’ in PG…boy two years flew by (as per assurances [paraphrasing] “Dec won’t do anything with Ent for at least two years…”). This should have been left out (what happens if Ent gets cancelled […if there is a God…] before the end of next year? What if Par suddenly announces “it’s NOT continuity”?)

The ‘Phase Pistol’/Laser thing: it’s much like the problem I have with ‘the ship’ (that’s coming up). We saw Pike with the laser, we saw his crew with lasers, and in discussion of the footage we heard (roughly), “back then they used lasers”…how hard a concept was this to grasp? Lasers should have been first then slowly (and I mean slooooowly) Phase-weapons could be discussed…but NOT shown (some things just make more sense left ‘as was’; weapons-tech is one). Oh, my rationing for Phase-weapons in this show is similar to REG's explanation for the Akriaprise: they couldn’t think up anything better for the time period, and decided “screw continuity”…and thus, the Phase-pistol was born.

“Akriaprise”: my, that’s a nice new ship…and that’s the problem. See, let me ask you all something: which came first; Lamborghini Countach or the Ford Model T?
That’s my point, by making this ship thusly, they’ve really messed things up; Kirk’s ship looks so archaic now…even in the ‘movie era’.

Here’s how they reeeally dropped the ball: the ship should have been a Daedalus-class type vessel, or even a Grissom-class type (hey check the numbering on the one in ST II…three digits, she’s gotta' be old), but now…well see the closing comment on ‘Phase-pistols’

Uniforms: Okay, so we go from: ‘pips’, to ‘stripes’, to ‘symbols’, to ‘pips’…don’t think so. No military/organization TMK ever (and I mean eeeeeever) went in this kind of circle. Nope, it chunks.

‘Holotech’: WTF…we’ve just crawled off this rock we call Earth, and already we’re dazzled by the first piece of tech we find, instead of focusing on ‘staying alive’? I know, I know, “but Modem, they’re ‘Explorers’.” Lewis and Clark would have something to say about that I’d wager. And beside that, even if they did get the HT, what are the odds that it’d compatible with their systems (“we just installed it…and it blew out all our circuits”). Again, chunkage…

and final thought: if ‘Enterprise’ is so good, why did Sternbach leave? Hey ‘quit’ or ‘got fired’, the bottom line is; Rick ain’t there no-more. And my best guess is it’s over ‘Ent’ (RS probably disagreed with ‘the vision’ and either quit or was fired…Par’s loss, I assure you). AIA it: spews, blows, chunks, and swallows…if it had any more features, it’d be a kitchen appliance .

So, as somebody said “…you don’t have to watch it”; and I’m not going to…

[qerlin]

You know, modem...if you like Voyager I'll have to laugh my ass off at you.

[KNIGHT]

Ok, here's the low down.

There has never been a Star Trek series that has cared about canon and/or continuity. Ever. TOS had continuity errors as well. The fact of the matter is Gene R. was responsible for a lot of theme. TOS' continuity errors present a problem for writers of future series. Another obsticle to continuity is real world tech. Gene's vision of ST could never have been fully realized in 60's because their tech was archaic. In fact they had to invent ways to pull off what they did. Also, as our tech advances, ST producers have to alter the tech shown in the series so that it seems a little more possible.

Star Trek is and has always been a playground for the imaginations of the writers. Gene used it as a tool to reflect his utopian vision of the future. He also used it as a tool to address social and political issues of the day. That is one of the coolest parts about the show.

There were and are certain guide lines that are used by the writers, but none of them are set in stone. Never have been and never will be. Live with it.

KNIGHT

P.S. The only reason that Enterprise NX-01 looks so much more cooler and advanced than TOS Enterprise is the fact it is a CG model. If it were created with 60's tech, it would look really inferior. Also if it were created with 60's tech, no one would watch it. TOS is really corney by today's standards.

P.S.S. Enterprise NX-01 does not have a class. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Archer's reference to Enterprise being an NX class vessel is exactly the same as if I said the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise CVN-65 is a CVN class vessel, or if I said that the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 is a NCC class vessel. His reference is to the type of vessel it is, not what subclass it is (CVN-65's subclass is Enterprise, NCC-1701's subclass was Constitution (widly accepted), NCC-1701-D's subclass was Galaxy, and NCC-1701-E's subclass is Soverign). Now do you understand?

[Dan Stack]

Everyone feel better now... Good?

Oddly, I like Enterprise. I suspect that in some people's eyes that makes me slightly above moss growing on a tree in intelligence, but that's ok.

I guess I'm weird. I don't have a problem with the existence of phase pistols. After all, if characters in the 24th century decided they feared dying after all (the first season of TNG harped over and over again how primitive 20th century humans feared dying), then I can forgive the satanic twins Berman and Braga (who I often worry about breaking into my house and stealing my baby) ignoring the existence of hand lasers in a failed mid-60's pilot. But if it makes you feel better, maybe hand lasers were more powerful than phase pistols though less versatile. Or maybe the guns they carried had multiple settings - stun and laser - after all the heat setting of a phaser seems a lot like a laser.

The Akira-prise. Y'know, every day I see these funky PT-Crusier cars, throwbacks to the 50's in design. After that time machine is finished at UConn, should I borrow it and go back in time and tell all those people back in time they are driving non-canon cars? Yes, they designed it to resemble the Akira. They though it looked cool so used it as a baseline. You can disagree with that decision, but it really doesn't take all that much effort. Though to be honest, Matt Jefferies, designer of the original Enterprise, though a ship was more advanced by keeping everything inside the hull. So by that standard, Archer's ship is more primitive than Kirk's.

Vulcans. I love the Vulcans of Enterprise so much that I made my own thread for it. http://forum.trek-rpg.net/showthread...&threadid=3947

The uniforms... I really think you're reaching here. But again, it doesn't take all that much effort to think of a reason. Maybe pips are a human thing, stripes are Alpha Beta Duranian thingie... So the TOS uniforms were inspired by the tailors of Alpha Beta Durania but they fell out of favor when they made pajama uniforms in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, causing Starfleet to use human tailors forever more.


But this is all nit-picking. I really don't think any of what anyone here has said, myself included, is a valid reason to like or dislike the show. Do the stories appeal to you? Do you enjoy the acting? Is it a fun hour of television? If not, then you shouldn't watch it. And there's nothing wrong with that. I rarely watched "Voyager" and hate "Will and Grace" and can't even stand "Fear Factor's" commcericals. But others seem to watch those shows. Different tastes and all that.

[AllenS]

Originally posted by Dan Stack

But this is all nit-picking. I really don't think any of what anyone here has said, myself included, is a valid reason to like or dislike the show. Do the stories appeal to you? Do you enjoy the acting? Is it a fun hour of television? If not, then you shouldn't watch it. And there's nothing wrong with that. I rarely watched "Voyager" and hate "Will and Grace" and can't even stand "Fear Factor's" commcericals. But others seem to watch those shows. Different tastes and all that.

Korga's original point, as I waded through all the diatribes to find it, was that he was angered that the DecTrek team had decided to include Enterprise in the game's timeline, because supposedly this makes it tough on Star Trek gamemasters who want to ignore the series. His friend reiterated this point AND made a slur in the direction of Decipher for supposedly violating their "promise" not to do anything with Enterprise for two years.

What these gentlemen are NOT taking into account is that this is a LICENSED property. Licensed properties exist in part to promote the subject of the license. If the Licensor says "We want you to incorporate our new series into your game", well, you do it. I don't know if this was the case or not; Enterprise may simply have been incorporated because it is a legitimate part of the overall Star Trek timeline now, and many MORE customers would be pleased to receive such information.

I got a news flash for you Enterprise-haters. If Voyager could run for the full seven years (and I actually do not mind Voyager as much as some do, with the exception of one character), then Enterprise certainly will. Get used to the idea.

Allen

[NobAkimoto]

The only problem I see with Star Trek as a whole lately is the fact that the show is practically guarunteed for a seven year run.

This seems to make the writers a little complacent, and gives them a tendency to recycle plot-lines that worked, rather than going for something bolder.(And no, rub-down scenes in underwear don't count as "bolder.")

I was first rather intrigued by the series, but as time has passed I've become a little upset at how they can't seem to stay away from the so-called "24th century plot-vises" like holograms.

While they've been doing a good job of curtailing the use of transporters, and for the most part, other technologies, it seems like in a pinch they always fall back on old plotlines and characters with just altered make up, but the same personality("Oasis", "Terra Nova", "Rogue Planet")

On the otherhand the 22nd century enviroment makes possible stories like "Fortunate Son" which is something that I'd like to see more of.

The characters are relatively well established, but it seems like Archer's a little on the weak side so far(Tucker, Reed, T'pol, and Sato all seem to be developing stronger than he is...Maybe they had Archer and Mayweather trapped in "Detained" so they can give those two characters a shot in the arm in terms of development...)

Ship design, I don't have a problem with, since those who think the NX-01 is more "advanced" than Jefferies' original Enterprise don't really know what they're talking about.

The only real question is how long can they stay off crutches? If "Oasis" and "Acquisition" are signs of the future then I don't like the chances of Enterprise making itself it's own "niche" in Trek, on the other hand episodes like "Fortunate Son", "Fusion" might be a good glimpse.

As for "Trek" the closest I think it's ever gotten to it's true image was with "Darmok."(And to a lesser extent, Bashir's dealings with Section 31, and choosing the right thing to do.)

Gene's image might not have been perfect(But I wonder what's with the excessive character assassination of him lately. It's like with historical figures and turning on them visciously. He's only human, the truth's inbetween), but the base message is a sound one. Overcoming differences and finding the similarities, as well as always doing what's "right" even if it doesn't seem the best course of action(and certainly not the easiest) at the time.

[Dan Stack]

Let me interject as the Moderator who moved this thread, independent of my feelings for Enterprise.

The original post detailed how the originator felt the series wasn't canon and was upset it appeared in a RPG book.

As Moderator, I knew what direction the thread was going to head in.

Fact of the matter is Viacom considers the series to be part of Star Trek. A visit to http://www.startrek.com would confirm that. This is a Star Trek roleplaying game. I would have taken the same action if someone were upset that Voyager was included in the book or TOS Season 3 for that matter.

Game designers do not have the luxury of changing a licensed property to fit their tastes.

I'm not certain why a game player would even care. It's your game. You bought it, do what you want. I know that at my game table we've had about... hmmm... zero debates as to what is "canon", whether it be Star Trek, Star Wars, Toon, Call of Cthulhu, 1930s Pulp Heroes, or D&D. Do what you have to do to have fun. But don't expect the game books to reflect your personal opinions of the television shows. Paramount considers all the shows as part of the Star Trek universe, like them or hate them (except for maybe the animated series and if they thought a game sourcebook on the animated series would make $$$ then it would be out as soon as possible.) The game license is for the Star Trek universe as a whole.

Really, can you imagine the reaction at the Viacom Licensing Department if the Player's Guide p. 213 said the following?

Roleplaying During the NX-01 Era

It is apparent that Berman and Braga don't care about canon. The television series "Enterprise" is poorly researched and it just simply does not fit in with the timeline. Don't expect your narrator to allow you to play a game in this horrible era. And for God's sake, whatever you do, do not watch that show.

I think the license would be punted back to Wizards of the Coast at the first opportunity.