Berman on ENT changes

[Sho-sa Kurita]

Originally posted by T'lara
Come on this was a lame duck and ill concieved idea...blah, blah, blah...Rick Berman and Brannon Braga.

Gene Roddenberry is spinning in his grave!

C'mon, tell us how you really fell.

[Sho-sa Kurita]

Originally posted by Trinity Zeldis
What I would do if I was rich.

Buy Star Trek from Paramount...Sue B&B for implying that I am an idiot.

No, really. How do you really feel?

[Kirok]

Well, as for me, as annoyed as I have been by ENT, I have found the past 6-or-so new episodes to be pretty good. I'm not sure, but I think the show's getting better! I really hope this a trend and not a fluke, because I WANT to enjoy ENT.

One of the things I would like to see change, and this will sound odd maybe, is for Archer to get more emotional. I think it's a combination of Bakula's strengths and the writing. I find Archer dull and lunkheadish when he acts like Picard, when he holds back what he really thinks or really wants to do I get restless and annoyed, because I like him when he really lets go and gets angry or whatever. I think if they cast Bakula to be a more "Kirk-like" captain, they should let him do that. He's perfect for it.

Has anyone else had this reaction?

[T'lara]

Originally posted by Trinity Zeldis
What I would do if I was rich.

Buy Star Trek from Paramount.
Ask Majel et al. to come back and make it a dream once more.
Denounce Anti-prise.
Have the powers that be at Paramount go on teh air with a formal apology to all Trek fans everywhere.
Sue B&B for implying that I am an idiot.

Great idea. I never heard of Anti-prise pun I love and using that idea.
With the powers that be of Paramount I assume you also mean including in that B&B.
I was thinking. Could we have B&B declared terrorists? I mean look at what they have done to Star Trek. To me that is a terrorist act.

Also did B&B call you an idiot?

[Cochrane]

T'Pol is a Romulan spy. All the Enterprise Vulcans are really Romulans.

[Balok]

Originally posted by Cochrane
T'Pol is a Romulan spy. All the Enterprise Vulcans are really Romulans.

The fact that they <em>act</em> like Romulans is hardly conclusive proof...

But I can see the headline on the cover of <em>Planetary Enquirer</em> now...

<strong><font color="lightgreen">Massive Conspiracy Unearthed! Human First Contact Actually With Romulans!</font></strong>

[Lowly Uhlan]

It's been said before on this thread that other Trek shows(except VOY)have hit their stride in season 3.Very true.A new conflict with earth threatening aliens that ties into the TCW backed up with some character development sounds good to me.I would really like it to be the Romulans but that is probably not the case.Archer acting like an Enterprise captain and not a guy that gets beat up by aliens every other week would be the way to go.

ENT is a good action-adventure show.Not thought-provoking Trek but much better than VOY.I'm sticking to my guns-ENT is worthy of the Star Trek franchise.My only concern is that the new alien threat doesn't hit the level of lameness that the Kazon or Vidiians did.Voyager was the real low point of Star Trek.

[Trinity Zeldis]

Lowly Uhlan, must I point out, that just because a medium of story telling has similar names and themes as another medium does not make it the same thing?

Star Trek: Enterprise is to Star Trek (all save VOY) as the movie Queen of the Damned is to the Anne Rice novels.

Star Trek: Enterprise is to Star Trek (all save VOY) as Macross II is to Macross.

Star Trek: Enterprise is to Star Trek (all save VOY) as Dune the movie (either version) is to Dune the book.

Must I continue?

[Kirok]

Originally posted by Trinity Zeldis

Star Trek: Enterprise is to Star Trek (all save VOY) as the movie Queen of the Damned is to the Anne Rice novels.

Star Trek: Enterprise is to Star Trek (all save VOY) as Macross II is to Macross.

Star Trek: Enterprise is to Star Trek (all save VOY) as Dune the movie (either version) is to Dune the book.

What gets me is they don't even call it "Star Trek: Enterprise" - it's just "Enterprise", as far as I can tell in an attempt to disassociate itself from whatever it is they think people associate with ST. Notice how prominent the words "Star Trek" are on a lot of the merchandise, though...I guess they know which side their bread is buttered on.

[Cochrane]

If you had heard in 1987 about a new series called simply The Next Generation, you wouldn't have known it was Star Trek. Same with DS9 and Voyager. Enterprise you could at least guess.

[T'lara]

Originally posted by Lowly Uhlan
It's been said before on this thread that other Trek shows(except VOY)have hit their stride in season 3.Very true.A new conflict with earth threatening aliens that ties into the TCW backed up with some character development sounds good to me.I would really like it to be the Romulans but that is probably not the case.Archer acting like an Enterprise captain and not a guy that gets beat up by aliens every other week would be the way to go.

ENT is a good action-adventure show.Not thought-provoking Trek but much better than VOY.I'm sticking to my guns-ENT is worthy of the Star Trek franchise.My only concern is that the new alien threat doesn't hit the level of lameness that the Kazon or Vidiians did.Voyager was the real low point of Star Trek.

How can you have these issues with the show as badly as you list and say it is a good series?
I know it is nice to have a have a good Trek series but let's not make it out what it is not. There has not been a good Trek series since DS9.
The day the most honorable and logical race in Sci Fi history starts lying and cheating like Romulans there is an issue.
It is Anti-Prise live with it.

[Sho-sa Kurita]

the most honorable and logical race in Sci Fi history

Logical, yes. Honorable - your putting your own spin on them there. Actually, honorable practices frequently go directy against logic.

-- Daniel

[T'lara]

Originally posted by Sho-sa Kurita
Logical, yes. Honorable - your putting your own spin on them there. Actually, honorable practices frequently go directy against logic.

-- Daniel

Hmmmm really? I never thought "Enterprise Incident" from TOS for example besides many other Star Trek Episodes from TOS, TNG, DS9 before accusing me of putting my own spin on it. This was also why Sarek was the greatest Ambassodor in Federation History.
In all those series they have said Vulcans do not lie. Sorry pal no dice.

Until Anti-Prise Vulcans did not lie. Sorry pal, I am not the only one. There many facts backing me up.
Bermen and Braga perverted the Vulcans with Anti-Prise and that is a fact.

[Greg Davis]

Originally posted by T'lara
Until Anti-Prise Vulcans did not lie. Sorry pal, I am not the only one. There many facts backing me up.
Bermen and Braga perverted the Vulcans with Anti-Prise and that is a fact.

Ok, I'm going to chime in here, as I've been following this for some time.

Vulcans have lied since TOS. Sure, Spock didn't come right out and say, "Jim, I'm lying", but he 'omitted', 'embellished' and partook in any number of synonmys that all, in the end, can be seen as equaling lying. As for other Vulcans, how many did we really see, until Voyager (which many fans rate as low, or nearly as low, as Enterprise, which is, after all, the shows name, like it or not).

Sure, Vulcans don't often lie, but to say that they never lie seems to be a bit of a stretch. I don't recall there being any evidence that Vulcans have some sort of genetic disposition towards honesty, so, barring that, it seems to be a behavior choice, and not an encoded sense of honesty. I really think that, in the case of Vulcans and their reputation for honesty, it would come from a reputation that the race had built (probably from mostly being honest, and probably being able to bluff well, since having a 'poker face', as it were, could be considered showing emotion), but that's just my guess.



Greg

[Phantom]

It has been mentioned in Trek history that Vulcans do not lie. However, I think it is something the Vulcans might have cultivated as mentioned above if a Vulcan can find a logical reason he/she is more then capable of obfuscation.