Well, according to UPN, it's now Trek...

[Hugh Casey]

As of tomorrow, Enterprise will officially become Star Trek: Enterprise.

In a memo sent today from UPN to its affiliates via its general manager and sales manager, Diane Kuri, Director of Communications and Operations, wrote, "We are pleased to announce that beginning Wednesday, Sept. 24, 2003, the official title for 'Enterprise' will become 'Star Trek: Enterprise.'"

"By formally changing the show's title, we will be able to further capitalize on and form a stronger connection to the famous and highly successful 'Star Trek' franchise," the note added.

UPN had already changed the show's name for marketing and publicity purposes.

The memo did not state whether the show's credits would be changed to reflect the change in title. StarTrek.com still lists the show as just Enterprise.

[prophetsteve]

The memo did not state whether the show's credits would be changed to reflect the change in title. StarTrek.com still lists the show as just Enterprise.

I was surprised that the credits hadn't been changed in the new season.

I figure this will spark another debate on whether Enterprise is Trek or not amongst the fan community at large.

Personally it should have been ST: E from the start - and this despite my past issues with the series.

[Rayaru]

Agreed. Should have been done at the beginning.

[Trinity Zeldis]

Ummm....No?

In order for it to be Trek, it has to follow certain rules. Putting aside the continuity issues for just a brief moment, let us begin with the elements.

Oh, but the elements are there.

No they aren't.

And since they aren't, I can't prove it. After all, you can't prove a negative (which is a statement impossible to prove).

But in case you suggest a few, let us start with Humanitas Uber Alles. Every sci fi series will have that. Even if humanity is considered a slave race, it is still a story of humanity's struggle against (fill in the blank). This is not an element of Star Trek, merely of science fiction.

Hmmmm. How about competent individuals? Let me count the number of them in Anti-prise......The dog....T'Pol.... Dr. Phlox.....um....okay. But unless this is Red Dwarf, it ain't gonna work with just three characters. Oh wait, Red Dwarf had four for the first and second season and had stories of a different sort.

Maybe we should stick with IDIC. Good choice. Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. Hmmmm. They have a dog as a member of the crew. Does that count? Hardly. So a ship full of humans and a Vulcan advisor are going out and about. Oh, Phlox. Two aliens on a ship full of humans. Yeah. That's diverse.

Just three of the "Elements of Trek" are already gone. Stripped of any meaning. How many elements of Trek are there? According to LUG, there are 4 primary and 5 secondary. We have gotten rid of 2 of the primaries and one of the secondaries. If I really gave a damn about pointing out the glaringly obvious, then I would continue. Rest assured, however, that at least fifty percent of the criteria to make something Trek is not there.

Okay, societies change. So the elements could change. That would leave continuity. Oh. Wait. They don't even have that.

Fifty percent of the elements missing. No continuity with any of the Trek timelines. That's like saying that Venus and Earth are the same planet simply because they orbit the same star and have similar sizes (Paramount and a budget). I'm sorry if the truth hurts, but you really should realize that Anti-prise is as much Trek as Battlestar Galactica is Star Wars.

[REG]

Berman & Braga can slap on the trademarked label for commercial purpose, but longtime fans already know: it ain't Trek.

[C5]

Originally posted by Trinity Zeldis
But unless this is Red Dwarf, it ain't gonna work with just three characters.

Riiiiiight....

[Greg Davis]

Originally posted by REG


Berman & Braga can slap on the trademarked label for commercial purpose, but longtime fans already know: it ain't Trek.

Wow REG...and here I was thinking that I was a 'long time' fan, which is odd, because it sure seems like Trek to me. I guess I'm not a 'long time' fan after all...maybe my fan-sense has been removed as a result of the Temporal Cold War?

But, then again, maybe that's what happens when I get lumped into a group like 'long time fans'.

You know, just because Enterprise (which, the last time I checked, is the show's name, not 'Antiprise', which seems to be one of the more common ways of degrading the show) isn't the sort of Trek that a fan, or a particular group of fans might like, that doesn't mean that it isn't Trek (my opinion, of course).

I, for one, welcome the addition of 'Star Trek' to the title. Like others, I think that it should have been done from the beginning, but, as I see it, it's better late than never.

On an ending note, I'll be expecting to see some not-so-kind retorts, since I guess it's not cool to like Enterprise, or anything that Rick Berman and Brannon Braga are or were involved in (except for TNG, DS9, VOY and the appropriate Trek movies).

Oh well...this a road often traveled here, it seems, so I'll step off of it now.



Greg

[General Chang]

It is NOT Anti-prise.... It IS Enterprise. And now...Star Trek: Enterprise.

I have seen plenty of Star Trek elements in the show to justify it being called Star Trek.

TOS had no sense of continuity whatsoever. Why should we bitch about Enterprise? Someone had posted these sentiments before, and I feel it appropriate to echo them. TOS had the sexy scenes (as racy as possible for 60's fare), the lack of continuity, and the inconsistencies galore. It wasn't until a couple of story arcs in TNG, and the ongoing stories of DS9 and VOY that continuity became a consideration.

The primary problem is that there are so many camps of Star Trek fans.

We have the following:

1. The Gene Roddenberry Utopia Spewing types who continually profess that Starfleet is NOT a military organization, and that we even today live in a politically correct world. This world is FAR from politically correct. (And don't even get me started on the despicable folly of PC.)

2. The Continuity hounds who entertain the notion that every single story in Star Trek is connected somehow, and that if someone makes a deviation, then their world's end is nigh. Again, I direct them to the unchained universe of The Old Show...oops..I mean The Original Series.

3. The Action hounds like myself who KNOW that Starfleet is the MILITARY in the Star Trek Universe. We like some gunfights, fistfights, and epic space battles to go with our stories of exploration and the human condition.

4. The Plothole miners, whose sole purpose seems to be to find any plothole at all in a Trek film (except for the Wrath of Khan, which they hypocritically overlook because it was such an excellent film.) Yes, there are some plotholes that do jump out of some of the Trek films...but I've always felt that the True Trek fan can fill in the plotholes for his/herself, if they are well versed in Trek lore. (The only Trek movie that truly defies any convention of justification is The Final Frontier.) After all, if it can be accepted that Chekov was in the Enterprise's bathroom when Khan was on board in Space Seed (TOS) thus explaining how Khan in the movie so vividly remembered someone that wasn't even on the damned show at the time, surely it could be accepted that the Romulan Spy/Vulcan Ambassador in Data's Day (TNG) was the one who provided the Romulan's with Picard's DNA for NEMESIS.

5. The Techies who love every technical aspect of Star Trek. They can quote to you just how many megawatts a Type X phaser on a Galaxy Class Starship can put out, or the exact process of teleportation, or exactly how an EPS tap runs on a Defiant class WARSHIP!

6. You have the "cover it up" camp. By that, I mean the folks who seem to think that catsuits are too sexy for the show, and that they tend to exploit the beautiful women wearing them. Oh, my, how they seem to forget that the chicks in The Old Show wore far, far, less than the contemporary Chicks o' Trek. These less than happy campers are the ones who absolutely refuse to look beyond the uniform and the outer beauty to recognize that these characters are EMPOWERED, CAPABLE, and INDEPENDENT
women in the Trek Universe.

7. Then there is the camp that just enjoys Trek for what it is...a good science fiction romp consisting of any number of story possibilities. We do not concern ourselves with "Is it Trek?" because the stories at their heart are Trek. We also understand that the writers of these shows have nearly 40 years of storytelling to try and avoid repeating in some form or another. We love the eye candy, because we can see beyond it. We watch a movie the first couple of times, enjoy it, then worry about the plotholes later.

Now, look at this list, and you will discover, VOILLA, there are too many camps of Trek fans to try and satisfy. If you satisfy one camp, you offend one or more others. That is the dilemma that the Trek writers face every friggin' day, and it's all because people want to cry foul about CONTINUITY, or SEXISM, or PLOTHOLES big enough to fly V'ger through. Also, if you look at this list, you will see that each group probably considers themselves TRUE Trek fans. Kinda like asking what the one TRUE Religion is? Ya' can't answer it without pissing someone else off. That is the saddened state that Trek fandom finds itself in. It seems like no one camp is willing to acknowledge the other's right to TRUE Trek fandom. The bottom line is: WE ARE ALL TRUE TREK FANS, regardless of which aspect of Trek we hold dear.

If you wanna see sci-fi fans in a serious TIZZY, goto Sci-fi.com and check out the Battlestar Galactica Boards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTER INFURIATED RANT MODE:
Lemme line it out this way, people. WE DON'T WRITE THE FRIGGIN' STORIES! We are not the ones who have to go up against 40 years of backstory to avoid repeating! If we did, then Trek fandom would be in SERIOUS F***ING TROUBLE, because some camp is gonna get overlooked in our self-righteous Holy War to preserve or decry what another camp thinks is TREK!
All we do is bitch and moan about CONTINUITY, SEXISM, and PLOTHOLES, and completely show no appreciation for the people who are trying to entertain us!
F*** SEXISM!
F*** PLOTHOLES!
F*** CONTINUITY!
F*** POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!
And LONG LIVE STAR TREK!

EXIT INFURIATED RANT MODE:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is most unfortunate that Science Fiction in general is starting to become passe. Now, it's the Fantasy genre that seems to be taking over hearts and minds. Lord of the Rings? Ptui! Harry Potter? ROCK ON!

But anyhoo...Star Trek is Star Trek, regardless of the show. Whether it's The Old Show, or The Next Generation, or Deep Space Nine, or Voyager, or Enterprise, or The Motion Picture, The Wrath of Khan, The Search for Spock, Save The Whales, Search for God, The Undiscovered Country, Generations, First Contact, Insurrection, or NEMESIS. All the elements are there:

1. Starfleet/Federation
2. The Human Adventure
3. Action, Drama, Comedy, Sexual Tension
4. Romulans
5. Technobabble
6. Roddenberry's legacy
7. Exploration
8. Klingons

Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but to me that seems to spell out STAR TREK.

Boot enoof o' mah rantin'. Ken ah' get an amen from m'clansmen?




Respectfully,
General Chang

[Rayaru]

Originally posted by REG


Berman & Braga can slap on the trademarked label for commercial purpose, but longtime fans already know: it ain't Trek.

Uhhh.... I'm a pretty long-time fan and I consider it Trek... speak for your self, please.

[Kronok]

Originally posted by Hugh Casey
As of tomorrow, Enterprise will officially become Star Trek: Enterprise.

It's about time. Should have been from the "get-go."

The lack of respect for Gene and Crew by taking off the Star Trek name in the first place was/is inexcusable.

[JonA]

TROLL POST ALERT. TROLL POST ALERT!

Doesn't matter how you dress it up or not. Doesn't matter what you call it. Makes no odds. It's still pure, unalloyed pants.

IMHO.

[Scarecrow]

Originally posted by General Chang

F*** SEXISM!
F*** POLITICAL CORRECTNESS!

er... no. I'm with you on pretty much the rest of your post. I even agree with much of it but not those two points. It's far too easy to be complacent and dismissive when you're not on the recieving end of such attitudes. I am of the opinion that Star Trek should be above such outdated concepts. Sure the women in Trek are often these days portrayed as empowered equals to their male counterparts. That's good. It's a pity the show's production team don't see the actresses that way. It's possible to portray an empowered, independent woman without her having to have double-D sized breasts and squeeze into a catsuit. Take any woman from the 'West Wing' for example - or even Janeway.

I don't think any of us would tolerate racism on Star Trek, so why do we continually tolerate the use of women as mere ratings-pulling, eye-candy?

Crow

[JonA]

Originally posted by Scarecrow
[BI don't think any of us would tolerate racism on Star Trek, so why do we continually tolerate the use of women as mere ratings-pulling, eye-candy?[/B]

Some claim Star Trek is racist though (wrongly IMHO though).

I found this on the internet (before you click on the link may I distance myself from the comments on the webpage whole heartedly and I do not agree with any of his points).

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Racism.html

[Ramage]

Okay, deep breath time.

Has anyone ever checked the ratings on this show?

I haven't. I don't even care to guess, but ultimately that would be the test as to whether or not the show is doing well. Merely surviving in the ratings means very little -- Futurama survived many years just because Groening threatened to pull The Simpsons if it was canceled; UPN pretty much is the Star Trek channel, but this does not meant that Enterprise, with or without the Star Trek in front of the name, is doing poorly or well.

Enterprise is in a precarious situation, for many reasons that General Chang pointed out. In point of fact Star Trek is nearly dead. It is old hat to most viewers. Overexposure, under-hip, old school and all the rest. This explains why I can't get a Star Trek game together anymore -- no one in the area wants to play. Why? "Star Trek? Jeez -- too clean, too boring, the Federation is dull, it's too talking, the uniforms are dumb, etc."

This is general attitude towards Star Trek in general; Enterprise inherits all of that attitude, all the more so for putting "ST:" in front of its name.

The best thing we could do for Trek right now is to pull Enterprise, not make any more movies, and let it fade away for about 5-10 years and then, and only then, attempt a new series.

Star Trek, in any form, needs a Time Out.

[General Chang]

I agree there totally Ramage. Star Trek seems to have become inescapably saturated somehow into the media. Of course, to say that Star Trek would be gone for a while would not exactly be true.

Between the years of the end of TOS and the premiere of TMP, we only had two things to satiate a desire for anything Trek:
1. Syndicated reruns-- I never really saw them played that often.

2. The Animated Series-- This had a nice two year run, with occasional stints on Nickelodeon years later.

But there were no videotapes of Trek in anyform to tide us over, save for those that some people may have recorded off the air during reruns.

Today, even if Trek were pulled off the air as a first run show, and not another Trek film made for years, there are still tons of videos, DVD's, videogames, novels, comics, and of course--reruns of all the shows. Nothing would give us a hunger as badly as between TOS and TMP. Until a few years had rolled along and then we might finally whimper: "We need more Trek."
But that whimpering, that cry for deliverance from lack of Trek would be nowhere near as strong.

And then what happens? Someone comes up with a concept for a new Trek series. Would the fans be so desperate for Trek that they would accept the idea of cadets running a Starship? Would they perhaps accept the idea that the story takes place 100 years after the time of Picard and the Ent-E? Would we even need to have a Starship Enterprise in order for the new show to be called Trek? What if the idea of the new series was that the Federation was on the verge of collapse, and was now struggling to gather its allies together against overwhelming odds with its few remaining starships? Assuming there was an Enterprise F or better, suppose the Federation was just recovering from a great war? How would those fans who have missed Trek so much like it if the opening went something like this?:

"Space-- The final battleground. These are the continuing trials of the Warship Enterprise. Her continuing mission, once that of exploration, has now become one of survival. To seek out new friends, and new allies against the threat that will not go away.
To boldly show that we, as a people, will endure!"

Hmmm.....I wonder how many dogmatics would immediately balk at that? I wonder how many desperate Trek fans would jump at the chance?

This is merely one possible idea.

Another idea (one that would satiate the dogmatics), is that the Federation has fully established peace throughout the galaxy...and all her enemies are now friends. They could revert back to exploration again...but if they'd established peace throughout the entire galaxy, who would be the bad guy of the week? It would fall back on conservative Romulans, Klingons, Cardassians, or even--take a breath-- someone in the Federation.
Any new threats the writers could present would take a back seat to our favorite bad guys. The most interesting bad guy that has been brought forth in years has been the Borg...and even they have been played to death.

Now we have the Suliban and the Xindi. Well, it takes time for story characters and elements to develop.

Star Trek isn't always about good guys and bad guys. But Star Trek also isn't always about exploration either. Again, Star Trek was intended to be far more cerebral than TOS turned out. So, somehow, the two must harmoniously co-exist.


ENTER PREACH TO THE CHOIR MODE:
When Trek's first pilot was completed, the execs did not like it because it was too cerebral. (Consider that at the time, the number one show was The Beverly Hillbillies.) People weren't ready to think....or at least, so the execs felt. Nope, in order for the proposed show to fly, it would need to have more action, its women needed to be out of the scene of power, and that Satanic looking guy had to go.

Wesley Eugene Roddenberry conceded to the first two demands. But for the third, Spock, he stuck to his guns. Thus set the ground work for Star Trek TOS as we came to know and love it. Successive series that followed didn't want to retread such ground. TOS had its trinity friendship (Kirk, Spock, and McCoy). TNG chewed up a few TOS episodes in pale revisits..."The Naked Now," anyone? But after a while, despite the ire of many longtime TOS fans, TNG came into its own and became one of the most awesome science-fiction shows of the 80's and 90's. It's view was much more different that TOS. It was probably the closest Gene Roddenberry ever saw as matching his vision. Deep Space Nine was created with Gene Roddenberry's blessing. Then we got a totally different view of the galactic politics of Star Trek. Darker, edgier, completely opposite of Gene's Utopian vision. These weren't saints and altruists we were dealing with. These were people who were very much like we are today. Captain Benjamin Sisko put it best:
"It's easy to be a saint in Paradise!" The other series that followed: VOY and ENT are tried to get back to the exploration aspects of Trek. Sure, they have uber-babes in the shows...and folks...I consider Janeway an Uber-babe, especially when she got her hair shortened...so ! But the stories were entertaining. And again, try to sit down and avoid repeating yourself after forty years of backstory.

As to what makes Trek? That is a circular argument.

END PREACH TO THE CHOIR MODE:


Mr. Sulu, plot course to take us off topic for a moment.


Ok...now I do need to say something about Political Correctness. It is not enough that society tries to be polite as a common courtesy. Now, we have to have rules and guidelines RAMMED down our collective throats. Thought Police that invent gentle euphemisms for everything in the world...from descent, to ability, to workplace designations, etc. They think it is respect?! It is patronizing! And here's another folly of PC: You invent one gentle euphemism for something...after a while, it becomes grating to someone that belongs to that description, and thus, a euphemism for that euphemism must be invented. Just another vicious circle thrust upon us by bleeding hearts who think they're making the world a better place. The only people the bleeding hearts imagine they're making the world a better place for is themselves. Political Correctness is the invention of IDIOTS!

Folks, an American is an American! Period! Be an AMERICAN! Don't be an Afro-American, or a Chinese American, or what not! Just be an American! If you live in Europe, be EUROPEAN! Be proud of being a EUROPEAN! If you live in Africa, be proud of your rich AFRICAN heritage! And be AFRICAN! But if you come to live here in the United States as a citizen, then you have become AMERICAN!
White people are white people. No shame in that! White folks have their share of idiots.
Black people are black people. No shame in that! Black folks have their share of idiots.
Handicapped people are handicapped. No shame in that! No need to kiss their arses either. Most handicapped people prefer the sense of indepedence that a physically fit person does. Some of our greatest minds have come from this group of people. (Stephen Hawking, anyone?)
Retarded people are re--eally special. After all, someone had to be STOOPID enough to sue McDonald's because McDonald's serves their coffee HOT! No crime in being STOOPID, but perhaps a few safety labels need to be removed from certain things to cull the herd, so to speak. There are people who are retarded from birth. That cannot be helped, and I do have pity for them. But there are some who are retarded from sheer ignorance. And at that point, I don't know who needs more supervision...the naturally retarded, or those who worked hard at it!
And in the workplace...sigh....Affirmative Action, Sexual Harrassment, Equal Opportunity Employment, yada yada yada. No one is hired for their MERITS anymore. Now they are hired because a certain demographic is underrepresented in said workplace, and those people may not even be REMOTELY qualified to run the job they've been hired for. Also, in the workplace, we have to tread oh so gently on the eggshells...for even the slightest accidental word spoken out of turn can turn into a damned FEDERAL CASE! And we even have to adopt euphemisms for said workers too. Now, it's Flight Attendant...not Steward or Stewardess! Now it's Wait Staff, not Waiter or Waitress! Custodial Engineer, not Janitor!
In EDUCATION is where Political Correctness has really reared its ugly head. Now, there is no such thing as a right or wrong answer on tests anymore. Now, answers are regarded as..."Well, little Johhny sees that as the right answer, because that is the result of his upbringing, so congradulations, little Johnny...through no effort on your part, you've passed. And soon, you can claim that you've been educated while you're selling crack to others on the streets. Aren't you proud?" I would go on further with the folly of PC in Education, but what's the use?
Thanks to Political Correctness, future generations must bear the guilt of the crimes of our ancestors. Sorry, but I never owned any slaves. Don't hold me responsible for injustices that were committed at least a century before I was born. I have a rough enough time dealing with this thing called "Original SIN!", thank you very much. Ooops! I'm sorry, did I just step into theological territory? Sorry, didn't mean to tread on any Atheists out there.

Hey, did ya hear the one about the Atheist on his death bed? Ha! He found GOD! Isn't that hilarious?!

It was once said: "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." Hmmm....looks more like they just stole the earth out from under us...forgoing any inheritance.

Hey, folks, you know what?! How come in this enlightened age, we still call police officers COPS?! When at one time that was supposedly a denegrating term to call a police officer.

Sigh, the list of the anal retentive nature of political correctness
goes on.

The only other thing I have to say is this, and this is NOT a racist, or ill-willed statement whatsoever...merely FACT.

Thanks to Political Correctness, the White Heterosexual Male is NOW the ONLY endangered species on the planet.
Why?

1. White Heterosexual Males, if caught looking at a beautiful woman even innocently for a moment, (especially if said woman is dressed rather provocatively) are thought to be SEXUAL PREDATORS.

2. White Heterosexual Males with conservative views (whether religious or simply natural) regarding homosexuality are thought to be BIGOTS.

3. White Heterosexual Males who defend themselves against an attack by someone of another descent are charged with HATE CRIMES.

Sounds to me like we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. I can tell you right now, I will catch a lot of flak for this. And this, despite my preamble that I did not offer this statement in foul-spirit. There is no ill-will in the facts. TRUTH is TRUTH. TRUTH does not discriminate with regard to race, color, creed, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or handicap whether mental or physical. Sounds to me like the TRUTH is the only thing that cannot be sued by bleeding hearts and the slick ass lawyers they'd buy. The TRUTH can be twisted, bent, mangled, chewed up, spit out, perverted, even mixed in with lies, but in the end TRUTH snaps back to its irrefragable form.

Look...I love all races, colors, creeds, religions, genders, and handicaps. That is the God's (or whomever you hold to be the Higher Power in this Universe) honest TRUTH. The only thing I still have a rough time dealing with is homosexuality. I have friends who are homosexual, but we have a simple understanding. "Don't hit on me, and I won't HIT you." Otherwise, we get along great.

With all DUE respect to everyone, regardless of RACE, COLOR, CREED, GENDER, HANDICAP (whether mental or physical), RELIGION, and/or SEXUAL ORIENTATION,
General Chang