[omegaman]

Great Show. Had it's fair share of over the top bad acting just like every other Trek series or movie before and after it. Enjoyable and very memorable. Loved the raw look, power and feel of the NX-01.

[ThePhaige]

If they removed the actors who played T-Pol, Reed, Mayweather and Sato (especially Reed) and Bakula could have toned down his overacting, and the writing was not stale and hollow they might of had something there.

I didn't like the portrayal of the Vulcans,as arrogant and divided. They should have been more logical and Spock/Sarek Amok time/ST3 like. I didn't like the tensions between Vulcans and Humans. The characters were difficult to care about, and I think for me it was just they were mostly either poorly acted or miscast. There was a reason the show failed, and yes many did enjoy it but the majority of fans abandoned ship and non fans had no interest. These are just my opinions of course.

[omegaman]

Originally Posted by ThePhaige

If they removed the actors who played T-Pol, Reed, Mayweather and Sato (especially Reed) and Bakula could have toned down his overacting, and the writing was not stale and hollow they might of had something there.

I didn't like the portrayal of the Vulcans,as arrogant and divided. They should have been more logical and Spock/Sarek Amok time/ST3 like. I didn't like the tensions between Vulcans and Humans. The characters were difficult to care about, and I think for me it was just they were mostly either poorly acted or miscast. There was a reason the show failed, and yes many did enjoy it but the majority of fans abandoned ship and non fans had no interest. These are just my opinions of course.

The same can be said for TOS. Kirk over acted in most of his scenes. The inconsistencies with regard to the Vulcan mind meld technique, called by different names during the series. There has been no perfect Trek and never will be.

[ThePhaige]

Originally Posted by omegaman

The same can be said for TOS. Kirk over acted in most of his scenes. The inconsistencies with regard to the Vulcan mind meld technique, called by different names during the series. There has been no perfect Trek and never will be.

I absolutely agree with you, but I liked TOS , TNG , DS9 and some of Voyager all for different reasons although I think Voyager came close to the same fate as Enterprise, more so with the Techno-babble being used as cheap last minute resolutions to many of the stories. I still liked the characters, they were for the most part well acted. TOS was indeed a camp gem, but I genuinely felt these characters were friends/brothers and they worked despite the limitations, besides most 60s Sci fi was kinda offbeat anyway. I somehow don't see Enterprise gaining ground in syndication and returning for a motion picture ever, if ya catch my drift. TOS and TNG mainly had redeeming characteristics you cant put a finger on and DS9 was different enough from the Starship formula to attract a different kind of viewership, Voyager really played out the whole Starship formula but with a twist...being separated from everyone... and that was interesting for a while. By the time Enterprise came it was all played out...coupled with all of the problems it had that were inherent etc.

[horatio]

Originally Posted by ThePhaige

If they removed the actors who played T-Pol, Reed, Mayweather and Sato (especially Reed) and Bakula could have toned down his overacting, and the writing was not stale and hollow they might of had something there.

I didn't like the portrayal of the Vulcans,as arrogant and divided. They should have been more logical and Spock/Sarek Amok time/ST3 like. I didn't like the tensions between Vulcans and Humans. The characters were difficult to care about, and I think for me it was just they were mostly either poorly acted or miscast. There was a reason the show failed, and yes many did enjoy it but the majority of fans abandoned ship and non fans had no interest. These are just my opinions of course.

The Vulcan three-parter in the fourth season explained why the 22nd century pre-reformation Vulcans are unlike their 23rd or 24th century counterparts.
It is most interesting that a show gets blamed for change and stagnation at the same time.

By the way, the general idea of ENT was that Vulcans and Humans as well as the other founding members of the Federation, Tellarites and Andorians, don't start out as friends. This theme of very different species overcoming their differences and creating the Federation would have become clearer had ENT not been cancelled.
Portraying these four species as friends from the very beginning would have been boring and unrealistic.

[ThePhaige]

Originally Posted by horatio

The Vulcan three-parter in the fourth season explained why the 22nd century pre-reformation Vulcans are unlike their 23rd or 24th century counterparts.
It is most interesting that a show gets blaimed for change and stagnation at the same time.

By the way, the general idea of ENT was that Vulcans and Humans as well as the other founding members of the Federation, Tellarites and Andorians, don't start out as friends. This theme of very different species overcoming their differences and creating the Federation would have become clearer had ENT not been cancelled.
Portraying these four species as friends from the very beginning would have been boring and unrealistic.

That is very true, everything you said. I only mentioned I didn't like the Vulcan Human dynamics. The Tellarites and Andorians were handled fairly well actually and in keeping with how you might imagine. I also have a hard time with reusing actors who played memorable roles in previous series. Especially when they are almost playing them like the previous role. You know who I mean Im sure. Like I said Enterprise had its fan base and I don't want to give an impression of belittling that. It just didn't work for me as a whole and I think that was the general consensus. I'm just trying to be objective without being offensive.

I just hope my excitement and anticipations for the new Trek aren't met wit the same kind of disappointment I had with Enterprise.

[Livingston]

Agreed Horatio. The point of the show was to show how TOS came about, not to clone it. It's what made the show work, unfortunately it didn't really start making it work until it's fourth season when they got cancelled.

I liked the Xindi stuff quite a bit though. It was good scifi but never really felt like Star Trek to me. It seemed like a totally different show. In that fourth season though, we were getting a good Star Trek show.

[FireDevlin]

I never watched Enterprise when it was on weekly. I have found it recently and what I have seen I like. Actually, I like it alot. I think I am going to pull the trigger on the DVD's and watch it from start to finish.

[horatio]

I understand that Combs's face becomes too familiar after the third regular major role, on the other hand, wouldn't you play it safe and recast a good actor? IMO, Shran and Archer, embodying the relationship between Humans and Andorians, were better than the queer Vulcan-Human dynamics you mentioned.

Perhaps we might agree that ENT had some good ideas but that the realization of them was disliked by more fans than any previous Trek series.

[ThePhaige]

Hey good to see some good buzz on Enterprise here. The way it is for me is think of the Trek incarnation you LIKED the least and that is my Enterprise. You did see LIKED the least. I still caught every ep when it first aired, but it didn't fill the void for me by a long shot. This forum is so excellent because we can all agree to disagree and we don't have too many unreasonable peeps here. Thats why the debate is spirited in a good way.