[Damage75]

Archer, I would direct you to the thread in this Topic call "If you could change one thing about ENT" or something to that name...

It disputes all of the b.s. that alot of people say is the reason why the show was bad.

Age is not a concern. As long as you have the passon for trek, you'll always be welcome.

[jorDe']

Originally Posted by starbase63

jorDe'? I don't think I quite get you.

Paramount at that point DID own Star Trek and everything related to it...including the network it was being shown on...

Berman was technically in Paramount's emply...

If you reread my post, I didn't say Paramount. I said the Producers. Paramount does not produce the shows. They own, and can distribute the show. The producers are the driving force behind any show. They are the ones that strive to make as much profit from any show. I also didn't say they didn't make any profit. The did. They just didn't make as much as they could have made from other ventures.

Just my opinion.

[BYUsinger84]

I honestly thought to myself that this show stunk at first. But, after letting it sit a few years, I watched it again. I just finished the last episode two days ago. It really is too bad that they cancelled the show. Granted, season 1 was a little slow, but I liked the whole Xindi plot/arc. Seasons 3 and 4 were just superb, especially season 4. I liked how an "episode" spanned two or three airings and allowed characters to be developed more. I thought that they REALLY had something going there. Right before they announced the show would be cancelled I was in South America for a few years and didn't finish it until I got back two years ago. After watching it for the past month and a half (couple episodes a day), I really, really enjoyed where this show was going. A lot of people said that they didn't like DS9, and I didn't at first either. I think the same thing happened with Enterprise. It takes a couple of seasons to really get the show going. TNG was the same way for me. I've now watched every episode of every show (I started last summer) and I have to say DS9 and Enterprise are my favorites. If you only watched Enterprise once, watch it again. You'll be suprised. Same with DS9 and/or Voyager. I hope that someday we get a new series, but I think it's good to let it rest some. This movie might get things going again, who knows. Anyway, I agree with the original poster in that this was too good of a show to be canceled. At any rate, I can't wait for the new movie. HURRY UP 2009!!!

[Saquist]

Originally Posted by starbase63

It was Star Trek all along...TPTB figured by that point people would be smart enough to recognize it was a Star Trek series without it having to be in the title. ESPECIALLY since what was the next thing you saw after the title "Enterprise"? You saw "Based upon 'Star Trek' Created by Gene Roddenberry." Guess the fans who complained either missed that or it wasn't enough.

Then again, how many people over the years have asked "Who sings the title song?" when it's in the episode credits after the episode title of every single installment of the series?

Not nearly alike. They new it was supposed to be trek they just didn't recognize it as trek but cause it didn't seem to have any semblance of Trek and the fans were regecting it loudly.

So them like myself held out that perhaps this was some sort of off shoot but not actually trek. Unfortunantly they pasted that on the title just to be defiant to the wishes of the fans.

[Damage75]

Originally Posted by Saquist

Not nearly alike. They new it was supposed to be trek they just didn't recognize it as trek but cause it didn't seem to have any semblance of Trek and the fans were regecting it loudly.

So them like myself held out that perhaps this was some sort of off shoot but not actually trek. Unfortunantly they pasted that on the title just to be defiant to the wishes of the fans.

Again, anybody who would like to see this nonsense he spews shredded should see the thread I mentioned above.

And again Saquist, why won't you respond to that thread?

[Saquist]

I never saw it.

[Damage75]

Originally Posted by Saquist

I never saw it.

Saquist, you posted a VERY long response to the thread...don't fib now...

[Saquist]

"Fibs" Are irrelevant. I do not know what tread you're talking about.
First you say "why won't you respond to the thread"
And now you say " don't fib now, you posted a long response to that thread."

Well if your aim is confusion then you've suceeded masterfully.

If I didn't respond to the thread, OBVIOUSLY, I didn't see it.
If I did respond in length then, OBVIOUSLY, I saw and that makes your claim of no response puzzling to say the least.

[Damage75]

Originally Posted by Saquist

"Fibs" Are irrelevant. I do not know what tread you're talking about.
First you say "why won't you respond to the thread"
And now you say " don't fib now, you posted a long response to that thread."

Well if your aim is confusion then you've suceeded masterfully.

If I didn't respond to the thread, OBVIOUSLY, I didn't see it.
If I did respond in length then, OBVIOUSLY, I saw and that makes your claim of no response puzzling to say the least.

Because...

1. You did respond to the thread...initially.
2. You stopped replying to the thread....

Here is the title of it: If you wrote for Enterprise & could turn back time, what ONE change would you have?

And I diredt you to our conversation where you specifically listed out reasons of why ENT did not follow Trek canon, and I disputed them.

Please do not try and change the subject as you always do. Just rspond DIRECTLY to the post.

[Saquist]

Your post lacked context. The result was confusion.
Accusations are intrusive and illgoical generalizations to an individual are always erroroneous; exagerative and incomplete.

I can not say why further rejoinder was not offered as I did not see your last post. Thus...this brings you back to my reply to your accusations on this thread. There was no reply because I did not read your statements.
At this point I am pondering the purpose in responding to the reply at all.