OTHER SCIENCE FICTION SERIES

Boycott ENTERPRISE .. it's just that bad.

POSTED BY: GHOULMAN
UPDATED: Monday, January 24, 2005 10:10
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 28877
PAGE 3 of 3

Monday, September 27, 2004 10:57 AM

DESANGRO


Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Even more ... er, worse - this model of Fanboy pandering only encourages crap shows like SG-1 or Babylon 5 (which aren't horrific like ENT but are just as boring... if written competently, and that's not saying much). . . .

I want shows like Firefly!!!



How is Babylon 5 a bad show? I think that it's just as good as Firefly, albeit in a different way. The main characters in it have solid moral values, stand up against tyranny (no matter the cost!), and the show teaches that ideas, opinions, prejudices, and lies can have serious consequences. It is as meanful a message, in my humble opinion, as anything Firefly has given us.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 27, 2004 3:30 PM

JEST


Here is my two cents worth.
I've always found it very hard to respect anyone who has a "This show sucks and no other opinion matters". Likewise, the "This show is wonderful and no other opinion matters" doesn't win points with me either.
I'm a woman of very marked opinions, but I can still manage that huge leap of logic to think "Gee. This person is not a clone of me. And - hey! That's alright."
(Though, then I have to get over being disappointed that I don't have a clone, but that's another thread).
I don't watch Enterprise. Why? I'll be honest -> She-Who-Defies-Gravity-with-Pointy-Ears offends my sensibilities about what Vulcans should be. Its okay if you love her to death. I just miss the old Spock mode of Vulcanism.
Now - am I a fan girl? I haven't collected anything, I have no desire to collect and while I find threads about Picard vs. Kirk interesting, I don't participate.
But you know what? I can like a series, like the ideals it held once upon a time, and not be this Dark-Geek-Fan that He-Whom-I-Will-Not-Name seems to think is beneath him.
I ain' beneath you, baby. You should be so lucky ;)
My point? I don't care what you think about a series, idea, or point so much. What matters is that you have thought it through and find it to hold up for you.
Don't get me wrong. I believe whole heartedly in ultimate truth and the concrete nature of reality. A dog is not a cat and a cat is not a machine gun. But truth is something much more powerful than any of us. Someone who is searching will find it.
So the responsibility is to search.
And, of course, don't hinder others searching by being elitest and combative.If the goal is discussion for enlightenment....You don't get that by pointing to a group of people and insulting their intelligence.
See - that's a lot like racism. :)
This is all, of course, my most humble and modest opinion.
(As for the spelling errors and such? I apologize for those it will inevitably grate upon. But I'm writing in notepad and trying to do a hundred things at once. I don't have time to run for my dictionary and, yes, I am a bad speller.)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 27, 2004 4:06 PM

DANFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Lately, T'Pol has inexplicably decided that wearing a silly cat suit isn't enough to degrade herself so she has become a sort of ships whore by fucking the engineer... again for no apparent reason.



I've actually seen a fair amount of interesting debate about message vs. entertainment in this thread (in between the irritation many have felt over the tone and delivery).

But the claim that I qouted above really startled me. That one sentence sounded more misogynistic than any element I've ever seen in the show.

Here is my rationale... I think that all the alien characters in science fiction shows are intended to represent one or more human characteristics... when you imbue an alien character with a human trait, then you can explore that trait in a different light. Thus, I think that the Vulcans are just the embodiment of a few specific human traits.

If you agree with that, then what human trait is T'Pol displaying in her interest in Tucker? I'd say its all about isolation, loneliness, and the desire to connect. GM refers to her as a "whore" who is "fucking the engineer." It's an unnecessarily ugly way to characterize a woman who choses a lover. She has only just now done that for the first time in the show's run. Doesn't seem whorelike to me.

Very strange. Did it seem misogynistic to anyone else?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 12:42 AM

NEUTRINOLAD


Let me just hit the peaks and valleys as I see 'em.
Ghoulman, you are reading way WAY too much into the story lines. Frankly, I don't think there's any such depth to any of the stories, much less a concerted effort at misogyny, fascism, or any other isms.
I think the problem is, as I've read, that Bragga believes they've told every Star Trek story that can be told (pretty sure that's close to the quote). Hell, if you really believe that, stop telling them and get out of the way so someone else can. BTW, I consider Bragga's sentiment complete bushwah.
I just do not give a gorram about the characters on Enterprise, or their situation. Who cares if the Earth gets blowed up real good? Daniels will just come back and twist time around, no imagination required. No real drama generated.

For the fella who made the snide aside about, "I've seen better comic books...", well so have I. A lot. In fact, I would estimate there are more comics worth reading than television shows worth watching about now. Try Small Gods, Powers, Planetary, GCPD, or Deus Ex Machina. And dig into the stacks for From Hell, Jinx, and Moonshadow.

Well hell, there's even this new fella, Joss Whedon, writing this book about a team, well a family really. The X-Men I think they're called? Been a damn fine read so far, for a rookie. Been a damn fine read for anybody.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 2:15 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by DeSangro:
Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Even more ... er, worse - this model of Fanboy pandering only encourages crap shows like SG-1 or Babylon 5 (which aren't horrific like ENT but are just as boring... if written competently, and that's not saying much). . . .

I want shows like Firefly!!!



How is Babylon 5 a bad show? I think that it's just as good as Firefly, albeit in a different way. The main characters in it have solid moral values, stand up against tyranny (no matter the cost!), and the show teaches that ideas, opinions, prejudices, and lies can have serious consequences. It is as meanful a message, in my humble opinion, as anything Firefly has given us.


My point isn't that is was a "bad" show. It was well written, though I thought the acting and production was crap. My only real complaint was that it was boring, with simplistic and predictable plots. Pretty much Star Trek style space opera all over again. Oh, don't start the whole B5 DS9 thing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 2:17 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Jest:
Here is my two cents worth.
I've always found it very hard to respect anyone who has a "This show sucks and no other opinion matters". Likewise, the "This show is wonderful and no other opinion matters" doesn't win points with me either.


So my long and well thought out essay didn't impress you as anything more than that. Gee. Thanks.
Quote:

I'm a woman of very marked opinions, but I can still manage that huge leap of logic to think "Gee. This person is not a clone of me. And - hey! That's alright."

Oprah Winfred called, she wants her baloney back. Prolly because she's hungry again.

Quote:

(Though, then I have to get over being disappointed that I don't have a clone, but that's another thread).

Natch
Quote:

I don't watch Enterprise. Why? I'll be honest -> She-Who-Defies-Gravity-with-Pointy-Ears offends my sensibilities about what Vulcans should be. Its okay if you love her to death. I just miss the old Spock mode of Vulcanism.


Yes, yet another riveting Trek issue! Oh please. You recognize crap on the show but... I'm doing bad. Uhhh...

Quote:

Now - am I a fan girl? I haven't collected anything, I have no desire to collect and while I find threads about Picard vs. Kirk interesting, I don't participate.


Well then, you ain't! You are not a "Fan-girl". A "Fanboy" as defined by artists who work in Sci-Fi and Fantasy is not what you think one is... and neither do any of those others who attacked me in earlier posts.

Seems I'm the only one who is even AWARE of the Fanboy culture and body politic. I'm trying to point out the corporate manipulation of those, mostly young and impressionable, masses who are preyed upon by mega-corp-studios in a George Lucas inspired privateering orgy. It's a whole thing... something I was really hoping someone out there who actually has been in Fandom might converse about... but you ain't. Are you.

Why?

Because you DON'T buy the fetish objects.

Quote:

But you know what? I can like a series, like the ideals it held once upon a time, and not be this Dark-Geek-Fan that He-Whom-I-Will-Not-Name seems to think is beneath him.
I ain' beneath you, baby. You should be so lucky ;)



Are you comming on to me?

Quote:

My point? I don't care what you think about a series, idea, or point so much. What matters is that you have thought it through and find it to hold up for you.
Don't get me wrong. I believe whole heartedly in ultimate truth and the concrete nature of reality. A dog is not a cat and a cat is not a machine gun. But truth is something much more powerful than any of us. Someone who is searching will find it.
So the responsibility is to search.
And, of course, don't hinder others searching by being elitest and combative.If the goal is discussion for enlightenment....You don't get that by pointing to a group of people and insulting their intelligence.



Yea... because smelly little fanboy shits deserve respect? Well, they don't - buying lots of crap doesn't impress me. Fanboys are a black spot on Sci-Fi and Fantasy, they hurt good work (like Firefly... something in my essay you missed?). If you're not even AWARE of the issues then don't get onto a high horse. You're making a fool of yourself by taking a stand on an issue you don't even know exists (but that I bring up in my essay! Arg!). You aren't alone of course, others on this BBS (note - when I've posted this on other sites it's popular and begins discussions that have nothing to do with attacking the Ghoulman) don't seem any more aware.

Quote:

See - that's a lot like racism. :)



WHAT!?!?! You're a fool. Shut up.

Quote:

This is all, of course, my most humble and modest opinion.

You got that right sister.

Quote:

(As for the spelling errors and such? I apologize for those it will inevitably grate upon. But I'm writing in notepad and trying to do a hundred things at once. I don't have time to run for my dictionary and, yes, I am a bad speller.)


OMG!!! What is wrong with you??? Oh I'm ranting. Sorry.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 2:40 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by danfan:
Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Lately, T'Pol has inexplicably decided that wearing a silly cat suit isn't enough to degrade herself so she has become a sort of ships whore by fucking the engineer... again for no apparent reason.



I've actually seen a fair amount of interesting debate about message vs. entertainment in this thread (in between the irritation many have felt over the tone and delivery).

But the claim that I qouted above really startled me. That one sentence sounded more misogynistic than any element I've ever seen in the show.

Here is my rationale... I think that all the alien characters in science fiction shows are intended to represent one or more human characteristics... when you imbue an alien character with a human trait, then you can explore that trait in a different light. Thus, I think that the Vulcans are just the embodiment of a few specific human traits.

If you agree with that, then what human trait is T'Pol displaying in her interest in Tucker? I'd say its all about isolation, loneliness, and the desire to connect. GM refers to her as a "whore" who is "fucking the engineer." It's an unnecessarily ugly way to characterize a woman who choses a lover. She has only just now done that for the first time in the show's run. Doesn't seem whorelike to me.

Very strange. Did it seem misogynistic to anyone else?



Nice. Way to boomerang the blame. Sure, I'm the woman hater here because I say this character is misogynistic. What logic loop did you fall out of pal? Do you really think that is.. thinking???

Why don't you get some blue gel, rub the Doctor up, and then come back and ask that question.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 2:43 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by NeutrinoLad:
Let me just hit the peaks and valleys as I see 'em.
Ghoulman, you are reading way WAY too much into the story lines. Frankly, I don't think there's any such depth to any of the stories, much less a concerted effort at misogyny, fascism, or any other isms.



OK, Berman and Braga themselves have said so. Suliban = Taliban. The Expanse/Iraq storyline replacing the Temporal Cold War storyline, etc. Don't tell me it's in my imagination.

Why am I the only person aware of the facts while you so called "fans" are completely blind?

Quote:

I think the problem is, as I've read, that Bragga believes they've told every Star Trek story that can be told (pretty sure that's close to the quote). Hell, if you really believe that, stop telling them and get out of the way so someone else can. BTW, I consider Bragga's sentiment complete bushwah.


And this is why I ask "why?" when it comes to a 4th season of Enterprise. Not even the asshole makeing this crap show thinks it's worth it! Jebus save me!

See how everything the Ghoulman says is confirmed by the very people the Ghoulman is bitching about? Wow, insanity thy name is Hollywoodland!

Quote:

I just do not give a gorram about the characters on Enterprise, or their situation. Who cares if the Earth gets blowed up real good? Daniels will just come back and twist time around, no imagination required. No real drama generated.


Now, you might not care... but are you aware that with a franchise like Ent around shows like Firefly are shelved? Think about it.

Quote:

For the fella who made the snide aside about, "I've seen better comic books...", well so have I. A lot. In fact, I would estimate there are more comics worth reading than television shows worth watching about now. Try Small Gods, Powers, Planetary, GCPD, or Deus Ex Machina. And dig into the stacks for From Hell, Jinx, and Moonshadow.


Yea, I was being snide. Good on you for pointing out that there are comic books that are far better than many TV shows. Though, not that many.

Moonshadow? How old is that? I think I have one with the EPIC comic tag on it.

Quote:

Well hell, there's even this new fella, Joss Whedon, writing this book about a team, well a family really. The X-Men I think they're called? Been a damn fine read so far, for a rookie. Been a damn fine read for anybody.

You rock!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 3:57 AM

JEST




Quote:
"So my long and well thought out essay didn't impress you as anything more than that. Gee. Thanks."

Um. Yeah. I thought I'd made that clear. You see, your derogatory responses since then (not to mention the deliberately inflammatory language in the post itself) obscured /any/ thought that was in the essay.
*shrugs*
You had the bass up too high, babe. Couldn't hear the melody line. And, frankly, the bass was so sucky, I had no desire to.
The thought that I have had in regards to this has come from some other posters.
By the way, thanks guys!

Quote:
"Oprah Winfred called, she wants her baloney back. Prolly because she's hungry again."


*winces*
See? That right there. Yep. Your credibility just dove again.

Quote:
"Yes, yet another riveting Trek issue! Oh please. You recognize crap on the show but... I'm doing bad. Uhhh..."


Let me try another time. Yes. I can realize the bad being done on the show. But I can also recognize some of the good and I don't slam those who can recognize it as well.
That's a good thing.


Quote:
"Seems I'm the only one who is even AWARE of the Fanboy culture and body politic. I'm trying to point out the corporate manipulation of those, mostly young and impressionable, masses who are preyed upon by mega-corp-studios in a George Lucas inspired privateering orgy. It's a whole thing... something I was really hoping someone out there who actually has been in Fandom might converse about..."

Then the responsible course of action would have been, in that first post, to say: by the way Fanboy is being used as a term solely to define X type of person as a demographic. No offense is meant to those who like the show, I am referring to a specific mind set and group.
You didn't define your terms. Your argument thus had too much bass and lost almost all of its original intent.
Unless.... was this what you intended?


Quote:
"Are you comming on to me?"


*sigh* Ah, darling. I'd thought of it. But then you called me a fool.
And your sister.
Ick.


Quote:
"Yea... because smelly little fanboy shits deserve respect?"

Yes. They do.

Quote:
"Well, they don't - buying lots of crap doesn't impress me."

And you don't impress me. Lucky for all of us that the world doesn't revolve around who is impressed by whom. *gently*

Quote:
"Fanboys are a black spot on Sci-Fi and Fantasy, they hurt good work (like Firefly... something in my essay you missed?)."

we-ell... I got a bit of it. A couple notes made it through. *nods*
But the name calling in the following posts was just so much louder. I thought you might appreciate hearing how you 'sounded' to a relatively unbias audience.
But, then again, I'm a fool. Right?

Quote:
"If you're not even AWARE of the issues then don't get onto a high horse."


I'm sorry hon. *gently again* I thought I was making /you/ aware of the side issues your method of debate had created. Issues such as respect, politeness, credibility... Issues that all obscured your origional intent that barely anyone on this list has responded directly to that original intent.


Quote:
"WHAT!?!?! You're a fool. Shut up."

*Laughs*
Your logic has overwhelmed me!
Oh yes. *eyes glaze* I am a fool. I should shut up.


Quote:
"You got that right sister."

Tommy?! What the are you doing on the FireFly boards!? I've not seen you in years! *HUGS wildly*


And, yes, brother dear. I'm done. Because its not my intent to debate you, and I'm not going to waste effort saying and resaying what I was trying to get across.
Except one more time ->
You may or may not have had a valid point. I'm just sad that it never made it through your delivery method to be heard, and sad that you are apparently so emotionally invested in your own point of view that you cannot calmly and logically respond to counter arguments or counter ideas.





NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 3:59 AM

GHOULMAN


... Just for arguements sake I'll define my terms...

Fandom - People who appreciate Sci-Fi and fantasy literature, film, and television.


Fanboy/Fangirl - an obsessive consumer.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 9:57 AM

DANFAN


Brave try, Jest. You've done what you can...

I was impressed with your response regarding whether fanboys deserve respect. Doesn't matter what identifiable group/culture people refer to. That's a sentiment that seems to get lost way too often anymore. It lifts my spirits to see it restated so simply.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 28, 2004 11:26 AM

NEUTRINOLAD


Why am I the only person aware of the facts while you so called "fans" are completely blind?

I'm sorry, GhoulMan, I don't really read up on Enterprise much. Because I don't find it that interesting. Guess I'm not a fan. Guess that'd be clear if you'd calmed down before answering. Looks like you started this reply all het up about something.

As for Moonshadow, yeah, it's kinda old. So is To Kill A Mockingbird, Will Durante's The Story of Philosophy, and the game of Go.
Still wouldn't give 'em up for nothing in the 'Verse.

And yes, I do rock

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 1:53 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Jest:
Here is my two cents worth.
I've always found it very hard to respect anyone who has a "This show sucks and no other opinion matters". Likewise, the "This show is wonderful and no other opinion matters" doesn't win points with me either.



See... you didn't do anything but attack me.

Quote:

But truth is something much more powerful than any of us. Someone who is searching will find it.
So the responsibility is to search.
And, of course, don't hinder others searching by being elitest and combative.If the goal is discussion for enlightenment....You don't get that by pointing to a group of people and insulting their intelligence.
See - that's a lot like racism. :)



And I don't appreciate being called a racist.

Sorry to get snippy at you, but you piss me off.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 2:03 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by danfan:
Brave try, Jest. You've done what you can...

I was impressed with your response regarding whether fanboys deserve respect. Doesn't matter what identifiable group/culture people refer to. That's a sentiment that seems to get lost way too often anymore. It lifts my spirits to see it restated so simply.



And yet, not one point in my essay is brought up. You Fanboys are just defending your beloved Star Trek. I love how Jest claims not to watch it. Hmm.

My experience has been that a new group of corporate marketers have taken over fandom and replaced a small society who promoted Sci-Fi and fantasy to mere corporate sponsored huxterism.

Ask yourself - how many seniors do you see at your Cons (and Cons they are!).

Ask yourself - how many families go?

I've seen people who have been involved with Fandom get shut out of the "culture" by these sorts of people who, as you can see, attack other peoples POV if it hurts thier precious Star Trek fetish.

It's funny how my point is proven with every post that attacks me and fails to even recognise that the Fanboy rap is one that is deserved. There are artists out there, like Joss Whedon, who aren't welcomed at these Cons. Oh I've seen Joss struggle to be accepted... it's been ugly. But with the corporate take over of these "events" and "promotions" the imprtance of the genre has completely given way to crass commercialism. That is, sell the crap we got and don't let any new blood in to take our glory.

Oh.. there is more.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 3:01 AM

DANFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:


And yet, not one point in my essay is brought up.



That would be because you have proven your opinions useless and unimportant by your behavior. The last time I made a specific comment on a point in your essay, you misinterpreted my comment. To replay the point, I thought that your comment about a character was misogynistic because you referred to that character's behavior in sexually ugly and degrading terms that weren't necessary to make your point. You replied by saying that I called you a misogynist because you called the character misogynistic and suggested that I behave in some fictional behavior with another character in the show. Fewer people are responding to your essay because you do not respond to their responses... you are bankrupting any validity that your opinions ever had.

My post to Jest wasn't about you. It was about a simple, gracious statement made by her that impressed me.

I have wasted my last minute in this thread.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 5:06 AM

GHOULMAN


Whatever Dr. Phil. Don't let the door hit your smelly fanboy ass on the way out.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:41 AM

JEST


Danfan,

Yeah, I think that everything that can be said has been, in multiple ways by multiple people.
I come back merely to say thanks for the support. *winks*
And while the sentiment may not get said alot, I do see that respect happen in some of the threads in the actions.
I only say some because, frankly, I'm a newbie here and haven't been watching long ;) Don't want to say a lot when some experienced people have seen otherwise, but don't want to belittle the fact that respect was something that I saw in tons of posts previous to mine.
And while I don't want to get too 'mutual back-patting society'...

Here's to edifying eachother, eh? :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 8:01 AM

COSMICFUGITIVE


This thread makes Pammy and Tommy Lee look like a loving couple...
I read all the comments. There's some serious beef. It seems like a subject you're passionate about. Why's talking about Enterprise and politics important to you GM?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 29, 2004 9:21 AM

GHOULMAN


^^^ CosmicFugitive, first let me say thank you for asking - Enterprise is a wildly horrible show for any reason you can name. And it's fun to tease the Marketing sock puppets on the Net.

Have you ever noticed that any dissenting remark about Enterprise causes people who have never posted before to come out of the woodwork? Check thier histories... you might be surprised.

The main reason I did this was simply to express my horror at Enterprise and it's obvious polemic. Not to mention the racism and sexism.

Why no one else thinks that is a good thing to be mad about says far more about them than me.

And considering the USA is a fascist state these days it's important for everyone to PUT DOWN THE FANBOY CRAP AND GRAB A LITTLE REALITY! TAKE THE RED PILL!!!

But noooooo... I'm a bad person. :rollseyes:

There is, what is defined as "Fanboy culture" that refers to the commercialization of genre Fandom. Something that is a great detriment to the future of genre. After all... I'm saying that Fanboy culture is partly responsible for Fireflys' cancellation.

I know people like to think of themselves as "Fanboys" but that is a mistake. Why would anyone support such corporate sleaze? If a person calls themself a Fanboy... they don't know what's going on in genre and they need to put down the $100 Boba Fett doll and get a frellin' grip. When I see Fandom usurped by Paramount Marketing and thier ilk, who simply fill the Cons with thier crap, it pushes out all those "Fandom" people who used to go to "conventions" where they met people who loved genre just as they did... instead of simply being lead from table to table buying molded plastic from greedy vendors.

Fandom isn't Star Trek, Star Wars, and a few crappy TV shows.

Now, I didn't mean to get into a "Fanboy" argument but it's really my fault for using the term... see the first few posts. I've only myelf to blame. But hey... if being called a "smelly Fanboy" upsets someone then GET A LIFE. Sheesh. Personlly, being called a racist is a perfectly valid reason to tell that @%@$# where to get off.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 1, 2004 8:33 AM

COSMICFUGITIVE



It's true about the state of conventions. In the U.K, the numbers are going down slowly every year.

Although, Enterprise is set closer to our timeline and the show needs to reflect that.

In the Trek universe, humankind went through centuries of war (WWIII as hinted in First Contact and the Eugenics war or something as hinted in the original series?), before they changed their ways and formed the Federation.

Enterprise is just part of that process showing that war's never good and that humans aren't perfect at dealing with it no matter what type of enemy they face.

Quote:


Why no one else thinks that is a good thing to be mad about says far more about them than me.



I'd really like to hear your opinion on this.

Other examples of similarities to real life in Star Trek:

The Borg were a representation of The Roman empire who assimilated other cultures into its own. The same might apply to early christianity when it assimilated the gods and holidays from paganism into its religeon.

In Voyager, the Kazon were a mild reference to the troubles that early American settlers had with Native Americans. Technology differences between the two tribes? Native Americans without shotguns = Kazon without phasers.

Sci -fi is just a new way of re-telling myths based on human truths. It's old stuff. The Gods have just been replace by man. Their powers and the way they used it have been replaced by technology. Instead of the land and sea (which were humankind's final frontier in ancient times)it's now space.

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.
"And considering the USA is a fascist state these days it's important for everyone to PUT DOWN THE FANBOY CRAP AND GRAB A LITTLE REALITY! TAKE THE RED PILL!!!"



Bush ignored the will of those against the reasons for going to war in Iraq. It was wrong. When they protested, he ignored that percentage's opinions. He was so strong willed in his beliefs that nothing could change it. He thought he was right. Do you fall into that category?



Quote:


"It's senseless to get annoyed with the world, for it isn't in the least bit bothered if you do." - MARCUS AURELIUS, Roman Caesar.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 1, 2004 10:22 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by CosmicFugitive:
It's true about the state of conventions. In the U.K, the numbers are going down slowly every year.



Yes, 'Fanboy consumerism' has deminished Fandom. Worse, the "conventions" have been commercialized and are now called, ironically, "Cons". See, corporate interests are not to have Sci-Fi and Fantasy flurish, only to make as much money as fast as possible and damn anything that gets i the way... like good Sci-Fi such as Firelfy.

Quote:

Although, Enterprise is set closer to our timeline and the show needs to reflect that.

In the Trek universe, humankind went through centuries of war (WWIII as hinted in First Contact and the Eugenics war or something as hinted in the original series?), before they changed their ways and formed the Federation.



The wars you mention, the hardship of humanity comming to be a space faring species... is ignored from the first ep of Enterprise.

Ah, from my old Trek Memory Alpha I can tell you that the Eugenics War was in 1996, it was from this conflict (mostly in the Middle East region of Earth) that Khan (Noonien Singh) escaped in a "sleeper" spaceship.

And the Federation was formed after the Romulan War, before that Earth was simply the "United Earth" and the United Earth Space Probe Agency was still the authority for Star Fleet in Kirks time.

Quote:

Enterprise is just part of that process showing that war's never good and that humans aren't perfect at dealing with it no matter what type of enemy they face.


Nope. Enterprise is a new timeline. Ask Brannon Braga or his evil mutant Lord Berman. They have already admitted it.

Quote:

Why no one else thinks that is a good thing to be mad about says far more about them than me.

I'd really like to hear your opinion on this.

Other examples of similarities to real life in Star Trek:

The Borg were a representation of The Roman empire who assimilated other cultures into its own. The same might apply to early christianity when it assimilated the gods and holidays from paganism into its religeon.



I think you're being too specific with your examples but are essentially correct.

Quote:

In Voyager, the Kazon were a mild reference to the troubles that early American settlers had with Native Americans. Technology differences between the two tribes? Native Americans without shotguns = Kazon without phasers.


Well, an accurate parallel to the Native slaughter by the white man wouldn't look nearly as pretty. You certainly get interesting insights on your own.

Quote:

Sci -fi is just a new way of re-telling myths based on human truths. It's old stuff. The Gods have just been replace by man. Their powers and the way they used it have been replaced by technology. Instead of the land and sea (which were humankind's final frontier in ancient times)it's now space.


Allegory.
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm
I think there are few posts above that cover this pretty well. Star Trek is basically a greek play every week, heavy on the allegory. A large part of it's success is this simple and effective ancient story telling structure.

Thanks to Joss Whedon for keeping that going.

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.
"And considering the USA is a fascist state these days it's important for everyone to PUT DOWN THE FANBOY CRAP AND GRAB A LITTLE REALITY! TAKE THE RED PILL!!!"



Quote:

Bush ignored the will of those against the reasons for going to war in Iraq. It was wrong. When they protested, he ignored that percentage's opinions. He was so strong willed in his beliefs that nothing could change it. He thought he was right. Do you fall into that category?


Well, check out the "Real World Politics" forum here. My opinions about liars are pretty clear.

Quote:


"It's senseless to get annoyed with the world, for it isn't in the least bit bothered if you do." - MARCUS AURELIUS, Roman Caesar.


I'm not sure if I've answered your questions well. Anyhow, thanks for asking.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, October 2, 2004 1:50 AM

COSMICFUGITIVE


Quote:

"Is it bad that what she just said made perfect sense to me?" -MAL, 'Safe'


Thanks for replying, Ghoulman. I'll try to answer your comments as best as I can.

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman

"Ah, from my old Trek Memory Alpha I can tell you that the Eugenics War was in 1996, it was from this conflict (mostly in the Middle East region of Earth) that Khan (Noonien Singh) escaped in a "sleeper" spaceship.

And the Federation was formed after the Romulan War, before that Earth was simply the "United Earth" and the United Earth Space Probe Agency was still the authority for Star Fleet in Kirks time.



That's cool. I was misinformed. The old braincells aren't as sharp as they once were.

I have to admit Rick Berman had destroyed the Trek universe a little. Is it true that Gene Roddenberry hated him?

I read that Enterprise will be touching on more of the original series and TNG?

Do you see that as a good thing?

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Well, an accurate parallel to the Native slaughter by the white man wouldn't look nearly as pretty.



It wasn't a direct link, but that's how I interpreted it at first.

Voyager was all about survival in new territory. The Kazon had the upperhand on the Voyager crew because they knew the territory, but they were technologically weaker - similar to the Native Americans and the early settlers.

The Voyager crew were split into two factions too. They had to learn to co-exist with each other. It was funny that the second in command (Chakotay) had a Native American background. That's how I read it.

I don't understand why the show's racist or sexist. What do you mean? I'm counting on your comments here.

I read the link on Plato's cave. I agree. We still live in a world of bread and circuses.

This thread is a lot better. It's hard to disagree on much.

Quote:


Originally posted by CosmicFugitive

Bush ignored the will of those against the reasons for going to war in Iraq. It was wrong. When they protested, he ignored that percentage's opinions. He was so strong willed in his beliefs that nothing could change it. He thought he was right. Do you fall into that category?



Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Well, check out the "Real World Politics" forum here. My opinions about liars are pretty clear.



You misunderstood me.

A lot of what you're saying makes sense, but it's done in the wrong way - or people take it the wrong way. It comes across as a little extreme. That's not a criticism. Their behaviour can just be as bad too. Hell, it's been just as bad.

That's been part of the problem. There's been too many people with their thumbs up their a on the thread to bother about the bigger picture. (Plato's cave?)

It's easy for both sides to hurl abuse at each other when they don't understand what they're both trying to say. It's just how the world works.

It's good for people to be passionate about what they believe in too, and I respect that, but it's not a good look when they (both) don't listen to what others have to say. It becomes fascist.

I'm no Dr Phil , but I'm learning from this. It's been a lot easier to read than the other stuff.

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.

You certainly get interesting insights on your own.



I have a few interesting insights on stuff. There are things I believe that people get a little wigged out on. It's not their fault, 'cause they aren't aware of the facts. I respect their beliefs though.

Although, I have a fairly sober approach to what I believe. I'm not just gonna believe stuff outright. That would be crazy. I try to keep it balanced. It's always about challenging those beliefs.

It's easy to get bogged down in it too. Whenever I do, I just say: "It's all mad!"

Thanks for taking the time to work through this, and it would be good to hear your thoughts..

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 4, 2004 3:56 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman
"Ah, from my old Trek Memory Alpha I can tell you that the Eugenics War was in 1996, it was from this conflict (mostly in the Middle East region of Earth) that Khan (Noonien Singh) escaped in a "sleeper" spaceship.

And the Federation was formed after the Romulan War, before that Earth was simply the "United Earth" and the United Earth Space Probe Agency was still the authority for Star Fleet in Kirks time.



That's cool. I was misinformed. The old braincells aren't as sharp as they once were.

I have to admit Rick Berman had destroyed the Trek universe a little. Is it true that Gene Roddenberry hated him?



Yes. Rick Berman was nothing but a bean counter who got the Trek franchise handed to him by Paramount once Roddenberry became ill. No one was happy about it but the "Fanboys" credit Berman with making TNG great since his reign began in season 3. Of course, Berman had nothing to do with the shows improvments in reality.
Quote:

I read that Enterprise will be touching on more of the original series and TNG?

Do you see that as a good thing?


Well here's the thing - Enterprise should be portraying the early years of Star Trek, it IS a prequel... right?, but it's about Capt. Proton and his laser gun ship. Warp speed, phasers, Klingons, Ferrengi, etc. But it should not be that. Enterprise is about stealing Star Trek from it's roots. As a writer, it's obvious to me that the ENT people think Trek fans are morons who will watch anything. They are right of course.

You know - if you took the premise seriously Enteprise should be a nuclear powered ship.

Quote:

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Well, an accurate parallel to the Native slaughter by the white man wouldn't look nearly as pretty.



It wasn't a direct link, but that's how I interpreted it at first.

Voyager was all about survival in new territory. The Kazon had the upperhand on the Voyager crew because they knew the territory, but they were technologically weaker - similar to the Native Americans and the early settlers.

The Voyager crew were split into two factions too. They had to learn to co-exist with each other. It was funny that the second in command (Chakotay) had a Native American background. That's how I read it.



Well, Voyager is a show that dropped it's premise right after the first show. After that, Bermans' orders were to make the show as bland as possible. Or I can only imagine. Ever notice how the Voyager actors barely talk about the show and hated the experience? It's because the show was crap on a stick. Voyager was the hint that showed there was a real moral problem developing with Star Trek - that is, the stories were lacking in even basic morality (Janeways tendancy to murder whole species)... then came the camel toe from Borg.

Quote:

I don't understand why the show's racist or sexist. What do you mean? I'm counting on your comments here.


The eps Fusion and Stigma from Enteprirse demonstrate the mysoginistic aspects of ENT very well.

In these shows, T'Pol is raped, but she doesn't seem to know it. The Captain lets the rapist go, even after said rapist attacks the Captain. Then to make matters even more horrifically sexist and just plain unbelievable, T'Pol gains mind meld Vulcan AIDS - for one episode.

Frell me with a wet noodle!

See... what I'm pointing out is obvious. And has been talked about on Trek threads for a few years, since these eps were aired. Guess I'm more of a "Trekkie" than anyone else posting here?

Quote:

I read the link on Plato's cave. I agree. We still live in a world of bread and circuses.



"Bread and Circuses" refers to the Roman Spectaculum or "The Games" (and one of my fav Trek eps!). Gladiators and all that. It was the "opiot for the masses" that distracted people from the truth of thier society. Plato's cave refers to personal delusion. Something we all live with.

Quote:

This thread is a lot better. It's hard to disagree on much.


That's because you are talking to me, talking about the topic in this thread, and not attacking me. Notice this Jest person has disappeared? Sock puppet. The only purpose of that account was to attack me. Childish and pathetic. Something people love to accuse me of but the truth is they are such loosers they have to resort to smelly, Fanboy, tactics.


Quote:

Quote:

Originally posted by CosmicFugitive

Bush ignored the will of those against the reasons for going to war in Iraq. It was wrong. When they protested, he ignored that percentage's opinions. He was so strong willed in his beliefs that nothing could change it. He thought he was right. Do you fall into that category?

Originally posted by Ghoulman.
Well, check out the "Real World Politics" forum here. My opinions about liars are pretty clear.



You misunderstood me.

A lot of what you're saying makes sense, but it's done in the wrong way - or people take it the wrong way. It comes across as a little extreme. That's not a criticism. Their behaviour can just be as bad too. Hell, it's been just as bad.



Stupidity isn't an opinion. Ignorance and vindictive childishness isn't acceptable behavior. That goes for Fanboys and GWB.


Defending greedy, fascistic, hateful, story telling isn't going to give one any points or respect from me. Enterprise really has created a GWB character in Capt. Angry Archer... to deny this is like denieing Abu Ghraib.

But I mixed this essay with the "Fanboy culture issue" that is, as I contend, been a bane on Fandom for over 10 years. Yet, when I used this term in my essay it was the only thing people seemed to read. The ONLY thing.

And they seem to have reacted violently. Yet, I'm the bad guy?

Quote:

That's been part of the problem. There's been too many people with their thumbs up their a on the thread to bother about the bigger picture. (Plato's cave?)

It's easy for both sides to hurl abuse at each other when they don't understand what they're both trying to say. It's just how the world works.

It's good for people to be passionate about what they believe in too, and I respect that, but it's not a good look when they (both) don't listen to what others have to say. It becomes fascist.

I'm no Dr Phil , but I'm learning from this. It's been a lot easier to read than the other stuff.

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.

You certainly get interesting insights on your own.


I have a few interesting insights on stuff. There are things I believe that people get a little wigged out on. It's not their fault, 'cause they aren't aware of the facts. I respect their beliefs though.

Although, I have a fairly sober approach to what I believe. I'm not just gonna believe stuff outright. That would be crazy. I try to keep it balanced. It's always about challenging those beliefs.

It's easy to get bogged down in it too. Whenever I do, I just say: "It's all mad!"

Thanks for taking the time to work through this, and it would be good to hear your thoughts..



And I am grateful you asked.

It's like this. I wrote an essay about what a terrible show Enteprirse is. It's spectacularly bad - rascist, sexist, mysoginist, fascistic, and badly written. Great cast though.

But I used the term "Fanboy" and people desided I was the enemy and they attacked me for it. Shameful, childish behaviour.

The Fanboy culture is widely refered to by writers and artists as a bad thing. Either people are so stupid as to not be aware of this issue or they are lieing so as to censor me.

Prolly the latter. If anything I've learned that online the Fanboys have no problem using Nazi like tactics to kill opinions they don't like so their corporate overlords can get back to selling them homo-erotic dolls. *chuckle*.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 4, 2004 4:45 AM

DESANGRO


Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:

Originally posted by DeSangro:
Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Even more ... er, worse - this model of Fanboy pandering only encourages crap shows like SG-1 or Babylon 5 (which aren't horrific like ENT but are just as boring... if written competently, and that's not saying much). . . .

I want shows like Firefly!!!



How is Babylon 5 a bad show? I think that it's just as good as Firefly, albeit in a different way. The main characters in it have solid moral values, stand up against tyranny (no matter the cost!), and the show teaches that ideas, opinions, prejudices, and lies can have serious consequences. It is as meanful a message, in my humble opinion, as anything Firefly has given us.



My point isn't that is was a "bad" show. It was well written, though I thought the acting and production was crap. My only real complaint was that it was boring, with simplistic and predictable plots. Pretty much Star Trek style space opera all over again. Oh, don't start the whole B5 DS9 thing.



I don't watch any incarnation of Trek on a regular basis, so I can't really make comparisions.

As for simplistic plots, have you watched it past the first season? In S2 it gets a new leading man and gets more epic in scope. As for production values, I was disappointed by the look of the show at first-- then I remembered that it was made in the early '90s so of course the CGI was primitive!

That the acting is bad is a matter of opinion that I happen to disagree with. I would, however, like to see your essay on the culture that is FANBOY. Mind sharing the link? I'm fed up with semi-illiterate fangirls cluttering up the LOTR fandom's fanfic with their junky Legomances.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 4, 2004 5:05 AM

COSMICFUGITIVE


Thanks Ghoulman.

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.

Stupidity isn't an opinion. Ignorance and vindictive childishness isn't acceptable behavior. That goes for Fanboys and GWB.

Defending greedy, fascistic, hateful, story telling isn't going to give one any points or respect from me.

But I mixed this essay with the Fanboy culture that is, obviously, been a bane on Fandom for over 10 years. Yet, when I used this term in my essay it was the only thing people seemed to read. The ONLY thing.

And they seem to have reacted violently. Yet, I'm the bad guy?



I have to agree about the reactions. Especially when it can get all one sided. I think they call it the primacy or the recency effect in psychology or something. (I don't know.) It's an natural assumption of a person based on first impressions or recent behaviour.
It's kinda stupid...

Quote:



Originally posted by Ghoulman

Well, Voyager is a show that dropped it's premise right after the first show. After that, Bermans' orders were to make the show as bland as possible. Or I can only imagine. Ever notice how the Voyager actors barely talk about the show and hated the experience? It's because the show was crap on a stick. Voyager was the hint that showed there was a real moral problem developing with Star Trek - that is, the stories were lacking in even basic morality (Janeways tendancy to murder whole species)... then came the camel toe from Borg.



The characters were stuck in a personality bubble that meant they never changed over the years. It was annoying. They couldn't even deal with a crippled ship in "Year of Hell part 1 & 2" properly without it looking lame. The end of Voyager was a cop out too. It was rrrrrubbish!

About the rape thing on ENT, didn't Voyager cover a storyline like that or something similar with Tuvok once?

Quote:


Originally posted by Ghoulman.

That's because you are talking to me, talking about the topic in this thread, and not attacking me. Notice this Jest person has disappeared? Sock puppet. Th eoly purpose of that accout was to attack me. Childish and pathetic... something people love to accuse me of but the truth is they are such loosers they have to resort to smelly, Fanboy. tactics.



I've seriously appreciated this end of things than from reading the earlier posts. It's been cool. There wasn't much REAL debate or talking going on back then.

I'm not sure if there's anything else for me to say on this thread that hasn't already been covered. This'll be my last post.

(I agree it's a great cast and the stories have been a little poor. The theme tune is even more annoying.)

It's been good talking, and alot of it does make sense.

Although, I think I should end on this quote:

Quote:


"All truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third it is accepted as self evident." - Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 4, 2004 5:51 AM

GHOULMAN


Primacy? Well, I think it's a simple matter of people thinking I've attacked thier beloved "Fanboy" culture. They may not even understand what "fanboy" means.

However, there are those who work for Paramount/FOX marketing who just attack any critisizm online with these mean tactics, posting as your average "fan". It's a lie. Hey, Micro$oft's PR firm has been doing it for years. This is common!


Yes it is stupid. Worse, it shows that tptb have no interest in what fans are saying about thier productions. In fact, it shows that tptb in Hollywoodland would rather spend millions on creating a crass Fanboy culture that they might control. Control rather in the same way the Nazis controled members and dissent. Ugly isn't it?

I'm not sure what Tuvok rape thing you mean, I didn't watch Voyager much. Like many Trek fans I caught it in reruns on SPACE, who have been playing this crappy show for 7 years straight. Something about "payola"...

Anyho' it is great to talk to you and if you started a thread about Trek in general, the problems, solutions, etc. I'd be there.

Oh... and to the person who chided me waaay back in the first few posts above, saying the producers of Enterprise don't read online posts... well,

... let's just say that last year the ENT producers read every one of my posts on TrekBBS. I can't say for sure, but my posts may have contributed to the last seasons Xindie story line, at least as a suggested story course for the show.

So people, don't go thinking you post these things online without having an affect... you do!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 5, 2004 4:08 AM

BOOKSWORD


I pretty much stopped watching trek after DS9.

Captain Sisko, hero, soilder, father and god.

Literally.

Its not that Enterprise is bad. Ok, its not only that, but it started with so much poetential that to see it go to waste really is galling.

They start as possibly interesting that get stuck in permament states.

Captain Cardboard, horny Engineer, crispy britesh, wacky vulcan, kooky alien doc, naive translater and cheerful but bland Helmsman.

Three years of the same o, same o. Even the Xindi threat wasnt that interesting.

But I say we give it a few more years. I mean with the budget halved they **have** to go to character oriented episodes, dont they.

Still I still think UPN should have dropped it and picked up Angel instead.

Stray thought, Captain Sisko - alliance or browncoat ?

Maybe should start a thread ...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, October 5, 2004 5:07 AM

GHOULMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Booksword:
Still I still think UPN should have dropped it and picked up Angel instead.



{Charlie Brown Voice} That's it!

See? This is what I've been saying. And yet you're still in favour of "giving it another season... maybe this time..."

... well this time what? What could possibly be different from the same 17 producers who have been serving this shiet for the last three years?

You just like to be made a fool of? Well that's what B&B have done to every Trekkie. That's why we hate them.

Quote:

Stray thought, Captain Sisko - alliance or browncoat ?

Maybe should start a thread ...


Well, Sisko is a Star Fleet officer so he's on the Alliance side. If anything the Browncoats might be seen as the Maquis.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 7, 2004 9:47 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Some magazines and newpapers have come down hard on the new Star Trek Enterprise

Does USA-Today dislike the show
and do some of the USATODAY writers hate Enterprise ?? Well they don't say much nice about the show.

Here is a quote

Quote:

..

"It would be different if the ratings-and-quality-deprived Enterprise had been saved by some sudden, mass outpouring of fan support, as happened with Sci Fi's so-far superior Farscape. But no. Enterprise plods on, despite overwhelming national disinterest, simply because Paramount is determined to keep the Star Trek name in front of the public. And never mind how much damage this dull, misbegotten enterprise does to the franchise."

...

"No need for extermination camps," the alien says in one of the most cringe-worthy scenes of the new season.
.



http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/reviews/2004-10-07-enterprise_
x.htm

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 8, 2004 11:57 AM

LJC


heh. I wrote a piece on the Maquis for a VOY site once ( http://www.loony-archivist.com/lowerdecks/maquis.html) and I totally agree! Mal would so have thrown his lot in with Ro Laren, Eddington, Chuckles and B'Elanna... tho at least he was an idealist. Some of the Maquis were just hangers on, spoiling for a fight with the Cardies.

But I do think anyone whose home was suddenly on the wrong side of the DMZ thanks to their own government "selling" them to keep a peace that was worthless anyway, would have a hell of a lot in common with Mal and Zoe and the Browncoats.

The BEST thing about the Maquis, tho, was how it was one of the first timrs in Trek history that the Feds were seen as actually *wrong* (in ROddenberry's utopian view, the "good guys" weren't allwoed to be wrong. Ever.), and it added some shades of grey to the Alpha Quadrant that made that entire unievrse infinitely more inetresting. It may have been done just to set up the premise of VOY. But thanks to René Echevarria (who wrote the TNG ep which debuted the Maquis) and the rest of the DS9 writing staff, it was one of the best steps forward the Trek writing staff EVER made, in terms of fleshing out their universe.

(even if VOY did nothing interesting with the Maquis/Federation conflict it for 7 years *sigh*)

--
Some take the high road. Some take the low road.
And some just go screaming down the highway, dropping flaming bits of wreckage.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 8, 2004 1:45 PM

CLEANER


Just been watching TNG on DVD again.

TNG - Frist 3 seasons riddled with bad acting/stories and PC BS

Voyager - first 3 seasons were about the anomoly of the week.

DS9 - first 3 seasons was "Days of our Lives" in space.

Enterprise - first 3 seasons far more interesting, faster paced, better stories.

Trek has never been this good. Traditionally its taken a few episodes for the shows to find their feet. I look forward to seeing what they do with Enterprise.

If you want to trash something go choose one of the many reality TV shows out there. Leave Scifi alone.

"God bless the homeless, they make desperate passonite lovers but they will rob u blind" D Herbig.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, October 8, 2004 11:22 PM

METROPOLIS


Um, hate to say this, but I think Buffy and Angel played more into the "FanBoy" sexual fantasy thing you keep thinking about. What's more D 'n' D than vampires, witches, and demons? Oh, wait, LESBIAN witches. Raise your hand if you think single 30 year old men living in their parent's basement jacked off to Willow and what's her face. I'm not dissing Joss here (or lesbians), but you've got to admit that things go both ways. Guys are horny. Guys make up half the potential audience. Appeal to guys, get some ratings. It's that simple. If that weren't the case, half the "Friends" would have fat. They weren't. Anyway, yes, I agree, Enterprise is disappointing, but I don't think it's the travesty Ghoulman's making it out to be. Although, Nazi aliens???? Hmmm.....

"Once in flight school, I was laconic..." -Wash

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 10, 2004 7:06 PM

AX


Grrr....leave my show alone. If you don't like it--cool. But do you really have to stir up an entire campaign against it? I don't think so. I think that's just a little bit spiteful--and it irks me.

Quote:

Since ENTERPRISE began it has been hailed as being the very worst Star Trek ever done... and after Voyager that's quite an accomplishment. Now, after three seasons of fascistic, racist, and horrifically mysoginistic story lines the TV viewing public, who avoided this show like dog shit on the sidewalk, will get more.


First, I liked Voyager. It's the first Star Trek show I watched regularly. I also love DS9.

Next to the insane ramble about racisim, fascistic, mysoginistic storylines. Do you even watch this show. The first officer of the freaking ship is a woman. The pilot of the ship is black (and don't you even try to argue that simply because he's a bit character he doesn't count--he still doesn't fall into any sterotypes--he's just a person who is black). The communications officer is a woman. On and on I could go. Star Trek is about a lot of things, but it has never, never been about any of those things you mentioned.

Quote:

No one cares for the material except a very, very, smelly and small number of Fan boy freaks. You know... the kind who have no life but fetishizing dolls and other 'collectibles'. Forget those who appreciated the intricate and smart stories from the original series 40 years ago... those people are looong gone.


So I'm a fanboy freak because I like a show? Thanks for the vote of confidence. I don't even have any action figures, although some of my friends do--and I think they'd like if very much if you cut them some slack. A person's hobbies are there own business, but I guess it offends the senseiblities of a person like you to know that not everyone likes the same things as you. Oh, and by the way--I like TOS. As for intricate episodes...take off your rose colored glasses. It was a good show, for its time, but it was never perfect. And while it was often smart, it was never that complex.

Quote:

Notice how popular shows (can we think of one? Hmm... something by that Joss guy) get the shaft while "franchises" get perpetuated as if they deserve too. The lesson being that a brand name is far, far, more important than a good show.


Firefly was never anymore 'popular' than Enterprise. They got pretty damn similar ratings actually. And as for if it 'deserves' to continue, well I think both shows deserve to continue (I'm a proud Firefly fan btw). I'll agree that often times a brand name means more than it should.

Quote:

Notice how the protagonist, Capt. Archer, is the son of a "great man" who was held back by the (liberal) Vulcans.


If you're going to start comparisons--at least couldn't you pay enough attention to do things right? The Vulcans can't be considered liberal, because they want to keep the status quoe. Archer's father is the one who wants to make radical changes making him the liberal.

Quote:

As the show progresses, Archer becomes increasingly more angry and with a terrorist attack on Earth by an alien race he agrees to "do what it takes" to ... well, the actual goals aren't defined. Stop the bad guys? Sound familiar? Propoganda is not what I watch Star Trek for let alone a soft sell for the War in Iraq. It's become painfully obvious that Enterprise means to present the 'War against Islam" as a great adventure. Sick.


Oh god, where do I begin. The entire situation is different in so many ways. First off, the attack on Earth is perpetuated by a government--not a group of terrorists. Strike one. Secondly, the goals are defined. Well defined in fact. Archer's mission is to stop the Xindi from creating an even more powerful weapon, one that will be capable of genocide of the entire human race. Strik two. By the way if there was ever an instance where 'anything it takes...' is justified I'd say that the genocide of an entire race of people is one of those instances. Nextly, there is no religous motivation. The Xindi attack Earth because they believe that Earth will destroy them in the future(its a part of a large time travel plot that I've been less impressed with). We attack them because they make it clear that they are looking to wipe us out. It has nothing to do with Islam, or any comparable religon. Strike Three, you're out. Now am I going to say there are no comparisions? Of course not. That would be just plain stupid of me. There is definatly something being said about war here, and even by the end of season three it isn't clear if Archer was even right to do some of the things he did. Furthermore it turns out that the Xindi aren't 'evil' like they seemed at the start of the season (a character named Degra illustrates this). So I don't see how this a resounding support of the war in Iraq at all. In fact I think the argument could be made that the arc actually undermines the war in Iraq, and the principles it upholds. Consider that the Xindi attack on Earth is a premptive one, yet by the end of the season it turns out they were wrong to do so.

Quote:

Then, just to undermine the characters rather like on Voyager... soldiers are brought into the show to "solve the problem". Enterprise just failed first year English... sad.


Well, lets see here, its a science ship being sent to stop a weapon capable of destroying an entire planet. So--have to say--kind of seems realistic that soldiers are brought on board. Although its interesting to note that it isn't just fighting that saves the day. In fact diplomacy with the Xindi plays a large part in stoping the weapon. The soldiers do help when fighting is nesicary, but without the diplomacy they still would have lost. Looks to me like you're making things simplier than they actually were just to make your point sound stronger than it is.

Quote:

Looking at the original Trek compared to ENTERPRISE one has to wonder why in 1965 they had a multi-racial show that portrayed a ship full of different people while today they can't even give the one black guy on the show lines. The producers lack of giving a shit or even basic morals becomes more apparent. There is an asian girl who is portrayed rather like all women on Enterprise; a weak willed child who's job is so unimportant the stories forgot about her main skill early on. And just when you thought you'd seen the main characters turned into put upon tokens Enterprise will come along with an ep about fundamentalist suicide bombers that deserves an award for being the most racist and ignorant story put on TV in some years.


Damn it. I should have known you'd go here. I have to say, nothing proves how far we still have to go than the fact that any time a 'minority' character is on a TV show they either have to be the main character or else 'token' characters. Why can't they just be people on a freaking ship? Why does it have to be about race? The three main characters of the story(by the writers own admission) are Trip, Archer, and T'Pol. These are the three they focus the stories on. It has nothing to do about race (point in fact of this is Reed who is just as sidelined as the minority characters). Maywether is the pilot, he gets about a story a year. The writers don't seem to know what to do with him--its a mistake on thier part, but I don't think its a racist mistake. As for Hoshi. She's the communications officer, and she had a huge part in the resolution of the Xindi arc(in fact she displayed a great deal of strength doing it). As for Chosen Realm, eh, its a really simple episode whose theme could be summed up in a single phrase. "Religous Extremisim is bad". Guess what--its right. Religous extremisim has never led to good things(Crusades anyone?). I think its a bad episode, because it bored me and because it was just too damn simple for what is actually a very complicated issue. But it was hardly facist.

Quote:

If this weren't bad enough I can't leave without bringing up the horrifically mysoginistic undertone of Enterprise that is personified by the character T'pol. Even from the first show we see a woman who is attacked by Archer and yet she is drawn to him like a battered wife (and is a psychology T'Pol demonstrates consistantly. I think it's the producers true feelings about women. Scary). Make sense? Only to certain sexually twisted fanboy writers. Anyho', this has continued and is sure to keep on going. Lately, T'Pol has inexplicably decided that wearing a silly cat suit isn't enough to degrade herself so she has become a sort of ships whore by fucking the engineer... again for no apparent reason.


Sigh. Deep breath. Okay, here goes. First off, when did Archer ever attack T'Pol? Oh wait, thats right--never. True he was negative towards her at first, but that had less to do with her and more to do with the racisim he feels towards all Vulcans. You'll notice that over the series run he's grown to trust her, and even stood beside her against both Star Fleet and Vulcan High Command. He's become her friend, and would even risk his own life for her (I cite Twilight as an example). Cat suit--I don't like it, but then I think its sexist to say that woman can't wear clothes that make them look attractive, so I guess you aren't doing any better. Oh, and then you go and dig yourself an even deeper hole by calling her a whore for having sex with one person on the crew. And not even someone she has no reason to have sex with, but in fact with someone she has being helping to deal with a tramatic event. Her attraction to him makes even more sense when you consider that she's been experimenting with an emotion causing drug lately. That means that her sharing an emotional bond with Trip is a deeply singular thing for her. Not to mention the double standard your entire comment embodies--T'Pol is a whore for having sex with one member of the crew, but you don't say a single thing about Trip for doing the exact same thing. Who was sexist again?

Quote:

If you are wondering why Sci-Fi, that is... GOOD Sci-Fi is so rare it's because tptb don't want to pay a wonderful creator like Joss - they just want rehashed crap to sell fanboys fetish objects (Oh that coveted demographic). The days of trying to tell people to watch Star Trek (because it's good) are over. Worse, Enterprises' pro-war message is a complete betrayal of the shows past.


I think Joss is a wonderful creator, but I also think Enterprise is a decent show. Not brilliant maybe, but at times very good. Worth watching in my opinon, but unlike you I understand that opinons can defer. As for fetish objects, again I have good friends who collect action figures (Star Wars in this case) and I rather wish you'd back off. As for pro-war, I've already pointed out how Ent's mesg is more complicated than that. Further I think you might want to go back and rewatch the other Star Trek series. DS9 was all about a war, TNG I admit was a more diplomatic show, and TOS often had Kirk involving himself in conflicts he might have been better off staying out of.

In conclusion leave my show alone. I'm sorry if I sounded angry in this post, but your skewing of the facts, mixed with outright attacks on people who don't see the world your way, really wasn't the best way to get on my good side.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, October 10, 2004 7:43 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


" DS9 was all about a war "

An oversimplfication, the last two seasons took place during a war, the series dealt with many issues and my feeling was the best Trek.

Best Written and Best Acted

Enterprise... the first two seasons I felt were missing something

Looking back, I think they were a little too stuck on character development as they focused too much on only Archer and or T'pol. The episode I liked the most in that arc was Shuttlepod 1 which was mostly about Tucker and Reed.

The next two seasons they started a continueing storyline, a format I like much more than the stand alone episodes...also did more character development. combined with a few off story arc eps, some worked some not. I liked Exile, but hated North Star.

In addition, I think they went too far with time travel for this series. Building alliances, the occasional fight eps, morallity tales thats Trek. I think this Trek, being the first Trek should have been more TOS in that discovery should have been the focus. The search for tech and knowledge to get them out from under the overbaring Vulcan influence, etc.

Not saying dump it, just saying I would either like to see some new writers or I may not tune in.


" Don't Blame Me I Voted For Kudos "

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, October 11, 2004 9:04 AM

CAPTAINCDC


Bravo Ax. Well said. As someone who Ghoulman has stereotyped (with no basis in reality) as "a moron", "someone who lacks sagacity", and "a smelly fanboy" among other insults I applaud your effort to get him to face the facts before he talks down to and insults anyone who watches a show that he does not like.

Face it Ghoulman, some people just like to watch Enterprise for the hell of it. Not because it is the best show on TV, but because it is slightly better than anything else on at that time. Is Enterprise the best trek incarnation ever? Not by a long shot. They don't watch it to find out who to vote for in the next election or to catch up on right or left wing propaganda. They watch it because it is enjoyable enough. The show is not sexist, or racist, or pro Iraq war. These are all things that your conspiracy theorist's eye embellished to justify your argument. The idea that Capt. Archer is supposed to be a George W. Bush like character is ludicrous. And something else, if Enterprise had never aired guess what, firefly still would have been cancelled. Because fox execs had their collective heads up their asses. UPN would not have picked up the show no matter what. UPN publicly stated after buffy ended they had no desire to pick up a show from another network that had been cancelled. Enterprise had nothing to do with it. You don't like the show so why not blame it for the fate of firefly. Do I like Berman&Braga? No, I think the fate of star trek would have been in a lot better hands if people like Mike Piller, Ron D. Moore, Rene E., or Ira Behr had been given control of the franchise.

No matter how much you hate Enterprise Ghoulman, it is time you face up to some facts. Enterprise being on the air is not responsible for all of the bad shows on tv. Enterprise being on the air is not responsible for the winner of the next presidential election in the US. And so called "smelly fanboys" are not responsible for either of the outcomes above. If you think B&B and Paramount intentionally put out a sub par star trek series because they knew fanboys would keep them in business blindly giving their money for any merchandise the studio puts out, you are mistaken. Because I guarantee you if Enterprise were of the same ilk as TNG and DS9, sales would be better than they are now. I have no idea what the sales figures are since Enterprise came on the air. Contrary to what you assume about me, I am not part of that scene. I have never bought any memorabilia or been to a con (not that there is anything wrong with anyone that does). It's simple supply and demand theory. If they make a show that sucks, the sales will inevitably go down. If they make a show that is very good, interest in the show will go up most likely and sales would follow. It is not in the best interest of the studio or creators to create a sub par show. Short attention spans are destroying quality tv, which leads to more reality shows and stand alone eps in the scripted shows. I fear the days of long flowing story arcs may become few and far between. And if you think Enterprise and B&B are to blame, then you give them far more credit than they deserve.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 13, 2004 9:46 AM

GHOULMAN


Nice work! Can't complain you haven't taken things seriously and made honest comments. However, I think you are blind to the overt message of Enterprise - War good. Bitches are for sex. Aliens are for blowin' up!

I wonder how many of you would proudly call yourselves a Trekkie?

I used too.

Quote:

Originally posted by Ax:
Grrr....leave my show alone. If you don't like it--cool. But do you really have to stir up an entire campaign against it? I don't think so. I think that's just a little bit spiteful--and it irks me.


Well, it's the difference between understanding that the messages beaming from your TV are not what they seem to overt propoganda designed to imply an agenda, which my essay states ENT is.

One is ubiquitous in our culture, the other is wrong and evil and should be shouted down and ridiculed. Enterprise is not just a bad show with your average sexism, etc. It has gone far beyond mere crap.

Someday, CaptainCDC may come to learn others who are appreciative of Sci-Fi Fandom are just as disgusted with "Fanboys" as I am. Getting upset about what has, as far as I know, ALWAYS been a derogatory term reveals his nature. I found it really funny to see how far this would go. I was not disappointed! Not on this thread or others (Ghoulman loves to start a fight. What can I say, I'm a jerk... deal).

If one doesn't see ENTs terrible traits I pity that person since it's extreemly obvious... the soft porn of the Gel Room, the mission into Iraq (Xindi space). But hey, lots of people still think the Vietnam Conflict was a just and honourable war where American soldiers didn't kill babies and slaughter innocent civilians day after day.

And hey... fight the good fight.

*chuckle*

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, October 13, 2004 12:08 PM

CREVANREAVER


You guys might find this interesting:

The demise of Star Trek is greatly exaggerated. I always get a kick when rumors are stated as fact. Today I happen to stumble across an article posted by SciFiUniverse that claims that Star Trek may be cut down to14 episodes due to the poor ratings that the season opener received. I must say that speculation is not based on any facts. As of today the 10th episode is almost completed and the episodes that Brent Spiner will guest star in will be one of the best that Trek has had in years, trust me I have already seen them. The studio is firmly behind Enterprise and we will see the completed season.

Negotiations to have William "Capt. Kirk" Shatner return to Star Trek are still being actively pursued and insiders believe that it is almost a done deal. The studios would not still be pursuing Shatner if there was any doubts about the season. With Manny Coto now at the helm Enterprise will see it's best episodes thus far. To all the Trekkers out there be patient and you will be greatly surprised.

Star Trek Enterprise can be seen on its new time slot on Friday nights. Check your local listings.

Author: Robert Sanchez


http://www.iesb.net/tv/tv101304.htm

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, October 14, 2004 2:08 AM

GHOULMAN


Umm. Great site for news... NOT!

Quote:

Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
You guys might find this interesting:

The demise of Star Trek is greatly exaggerated.



3 years of articles and even a TV guide "special" called "how to fix Trek" isn't an exaggeration. Jesus save me.


Quote:

I always get a kick when rumors are stated as fact. Today I happen to stumble across an article posted by SciFiUniverse that claims that Star Trek may be cut down to14 episodes due to the poor ratings that the season opener received. I must say that speculation is not based on any facts.


Last summer UPN and the ENT production had discussed this. In fact, this was what Braga wanted originally but was turned down by UPN. Jesus... am I the only person who even knows what's going on? Maybe I should apologize to people since they are being brainwashed by an Internet full of crap and lies.

Quote:

As of today the 10th episode is almost completed and the episodes that Brent Spiner will guest star in will be one of the best that Trek has had in years, trust me I have already seen them. The studio is firmly behind Enterprise and we will see the completed season.


UPN lost it's Network status because of ENT. The only reason ENT is still around is because the Corporation is a brainless monster that can only perpetuate it's product.

Quote:

Negotiations to have William "Capt. Kirk" Shatner return to Star Trek are still being actively pursued and insiders believe that it is almost a done deal. The studios would not still be pursuing Shatner if there was any doubts about the season.


? Riiiight.

Quote:

With Manny Coto now at the helm Enterprise will see it's best episodes thus far. To all the Trekkers out there be patient and you will be greatly surprised.

Star Trek Enterprise can be seen on its new time slot on Friday nights. Check your local listings.

Author: Robert Sanchez

http://www.iesb.net/tv/tv101304.htm



More like "Dirty Sanchez".

Wait... the studio that is "The studio is firmly behind Enterprise and we will see the completed season." put the show on in ... the DEATH SLOT?

Thanks CrevanReaver but this article is crap on a stick.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2004 9:45 AM

BOOKSWORD


I do try.

Really.

But Enterprise is making me feel..well dirty. Captain Archer know has the mental mojo of a dead vulcan so he can be the bestest captain ever!

The poor mans Riker is having problems with the Anti-Spock and their relationship. Plus we get some character developments with Dr Phlox and Co with a racisim message so heavy handed it knocked my teeth out.

Its not their fault really. Its all been done before, thats not the problem. The problem is that it has been done before and so much better

The madness has to end. Let the old dog die, is the network so desperate that they screw over the legend and methos of Trek.

This is not screwing over an idea, literally messing up contuinity and pissing on the fans. This is an all out rape of a concept.

To qoute an old addage. ' Damn you, Damn you all to hell !'

Lifes an irony, originals like Firefly, Farscape, G vs E, Brimstone buy it but they keep giving us this!!!!!

Half the fans on this board alone can write better stuff.

Boycotting wont make a change. Still I got a fresh chicken in the pen, I think I can cast a gris gris or two.

And Im pretty sure the good Baron Samedi owes me a favour or two.

' Sometimes to stop the madness is to become mad, when that happens the madness because a version of sane and everybodies happy.'

FHS


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2004 11:41 AM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave


Quote:

Originally posted by CrevanReaver:
Negotiations to have William "Capt. Kirk" Shatner return to Star Trek are still being actively pursued and insiders believe that it is almost a done deal. The studios would not still be pursuing Shatner if there was any doubts about the season. With Manny Coto now at the helm Enterprise will see it's best episodes thus far. To all the Trekkers out there be patient and you will be greatly surprised.

Oh dear God, no... no... no... NO!!!

Find a happy place... find a happy place... FIND A HAPPY PLACE!

I did finally give up on this after T'Pol married what's his name and I realized the writers had copped out AGAIN!

Goulman, you were right all along.



Fans come and fans go...but zealots are with you until the bitter black end.
I draw...therefore I am. http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922
Minnesota Meetup - join us! http://firefly.meetup.com/45/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 21, 2004 5:22 PM

THEPLAGUE


Whoa, Enterprise still exists? I thought it would've been culled off by now. Does it still have that atrocious 80's power ballad as the theme song?

-------------------------------
Are these our lives? NNNOOOOOO!!!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, January 1, 2005 3:10 PM

AX


Quote:

Originally posted by Channain:
I did finally give up on this after T'Pol married what's his name and I realized the writers had copped out AGAIN!



Just a quick question--how do you define 'cop-out'? Because I've always used it to mean taking the easy way out.

Now, assuming you mostly agree with that definition, which is the easier road for the writers:

1)Having T'Pol marry a character not a part of the main cast, and thus complicating her relationship with Trip.

or

2)Having Trip give a big long cliched speech that stops her from marrying this man, and thus opening up a relationship between the two.

In my opinion the first one is a much harder road to take. Half way through the episode I thought I had it all figured out. And then the end came and I, at least, was suprised. Mostly I wasn't a huge fan of the episode. But the one thing I thought it did right is force T'Pol to make the more difficult, mundane, choice of marrying someone because life and logic necesitate it instead of following some human notion of love.

"Time is a face on the water." -Stephen King, The Dark Tower series-

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 2, 2005 4:06 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Quote:

Originally posted by theplague:
Whoa, Enterprise still exists? I thought it would've been culled off by now. Does it still have that atrocious 80's power ballad as the theme song?

-------------------------------
Are these our lives? NNNOOOOOO!!!



have a starwars Boycott while your at it

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 2, 2005 7:59 AM

CLEANER


Here's a suggestion. Post all this crap about cancelling Enterprise on a site that isn't full of fans of a show thats been cancelled.

"If wishes were horses we'd all be eating steak!!!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, January 2, 2005 2:53 PM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave


Quote:

Originally posted by Ax:
Just a quick question--how do you define 'cop-out'? Because I've always used it to mean taking the easy way out.

Now, assuming you mostly agree with that definition, which is the easier road for the writers:

1)Having T'Pol marry a character not a part of the main cast, and thus complicating her relationship with Trip.

or

2)Having Trip give a big long cliched speech that stops her from marrying this man, and thus opening up a relationship between the two.

Well... until I caught a recent rerun (trying not to write spoilers, but I'm sure you ken my meaning), I classified it as the ST writers emulating the Riker and Troy relationship. Whereby they waited until the movies before they finally had them take the plunge - both literally and figuratively

No, when I wrote that the writers had copped out, I meant they were following the ST:TNG pattern. HEAVEN forbid there should be a relationship on board ship. Of course now T'Pol is Starfleet, so there's regulations to consider, but then again, Starfleet isn't the Air Force, and has been known to be a little lax in that regard, hasn't it?

Bottom line - Trip was the sole reason I bothered to program that show into my VCR. He was the only character - and Connor Trinneer the only actor - that I found of any interest.

Fans come and fans go...but zealots are with you until the bitter black end.
I draw...therefore I am. http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922
Minnesota Meetup - join us! http://firefly.meetup.com/45/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 3, 2005 11:57 AM

AX


Quote:

No, when I wrote that the writers had copped out, I meant they were following the ST:TNG pattern. HEAVEN forbid there should be a relationship on board ship. Of course now T'Pol is Starfleet, so there's regulations to consider, but then again, Starfleet isn't the Air Force, and has been known to be a little lax in that regard, hasn't it?



Ahh...I gotcha. I would say though, that on the two other Star Trek shows between TNG and Ent there hasn't really been this problem. On DS9 Worf marries Dax, and Odo and Kira eventually got together. And on Voyager Tom and B'Elanna got married. So I don't know if you can really claim there's any real pattern going on.

On the other hand I can understand liking Trip, as he's my fav character (along with Phlox, of course). I guess I personally just find the story more interesting if Trip and T'Pol are kept apart. However, I'm not certain that you won't ever get to see them together. Just not yet.

"I'm so tired of days that feel like the nights." Something Corporate

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 3, 2005 12:18 PM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave


Wait - this is the BOYCOTT thread... we should be writing the "Aw Come on, Enterprise isn't THAT bad" thread :biggin: just to see Ghoulman blow a gasket.
Quote:

Originally posted by Ax:
Ahh...I gotcha. I would say though, that on the two other Star Trek shows between TNG and Ent there hasn't really been this problem. On DS9 Worf marries Dax, and Odo and Kira eventually got together. And on Voyager Tom and B'Elanna got married. So I don't know if you can really claim there's any real pattern going on.

That's true - they have evolved creatively. I loved the Tom and B'lanna arc. But the Ent writers have been "borrowing" so many other things from the previous incarnations, I was fearful that this would be one of them.
Quote:


On the other hand I can understand liking Trip, as he's my fav character (along with Phlox, of course). I guess I personally just find the story more interesting if Trip and T'Pol are kept apart. However, I'm not certain that you won't ever get to see them together. Just not yet.

There would still be the tension, yes, but imagine a human and a Vulcan trying to figure out how to coexist together? Especially when they're both very passionate, volatile people. I don't think having them get together would change that - and it shouldn't. Just because the couple is together, doesn't mean they don't stop being individuals. Tom and B'lanna, case in point. Television writers tend to be absent-minded in this regard. And DS9 was an entity in and of itself - the BEST Star Trek since the Classic was new.

Wait - this is the BOYCOTT thread... we should be writing the "Aw Come on, Enterprise isn't THAT bad" thread :biggin:

Fans come and fans go...but zealots are with you until the bitter black end.
I draw...therefore I am. http://www.mnartists.org/artistHome.do?rid=7922
Minnesota Meetup - join us! http://firefly.meetup.com/45/

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 24, 2005 4:26 AM

PANIC


Don't feed the trolls.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 24, 2005 10:10 AM

FARSCAPEPKWARS


Quote:

Originally posted by Ax:
Quote:

No, when I wrote that the writers had copped out, I meant they were following the ST:TNG pattern. HEAVEN forbid there should be a relationship on board ship. Of course now T'Pol is Starfleet, so there's regulations to consider, but then again, Starfleet isn't the Air Force, and has been known to be a little lax in that regard, hasn't it?



Ahh...I gotcha. I would say though, that on the two other Star Trek shows between TNG and Ent there hasn't really been this problem. On DS9 Worf marries Dax, and Odo and Kira eventually got together. And on Voyager Tom and B'Elanna got married. So I don't know if you can really claim there's any real pattern going on.

On the other hand I can understand liking Trip, as he's my fav character (along with Phlox, of course). I guess I personally just find the story more interesting if Trip and T'Pol are kept apart. However, I'm not certain that you won't ever get to see them together. Just not yet.

"I'm so tired of days that feel like the nights." Something Corporate



have you seen this news

Quote:

SFX magazine Christmas 2004 has a big interview with Jolene Blalock, in which she talks about Enterprise and her feelings about it with impressive honesty. I've never heard someone in an ongoing show let rip like this *cough*notevenRobertBeltran*cough*.

On the plus side, she really likes Manny Coto's work, and thinks he's making the changes that need to be made:

"... what's interesting is that I opened the first script of the fourth season ... and it was good! And that was weird! Then I got the second script - and it was good too!"

But she doesn't hold back about the stuff she's been unhappy with previously. When SFX mention that some of the semi-nudity and "Vulcan neuropressure" seems a little, uh "... unecessary", she replies:

"I agree. It was. You can't substitute tits and ass for good storytelling. You can have both, but you can't substitute one for the other, because the audience is not stupid. You can't just throw in frivolous, uncharacteristic ... well, bull and think it's gonna help the ratings. Because that's not our audience. I'd like to appeal to their intellect. I mean, God forbid we inspire the question, 'What if?' 'What if we travelled in space?' 'What if we met other species?' 'What if?' So it has been frustrating for me. But I don't have any say in it."

"If you can't find consistency in your character, then it's a transparent character, and that's very tough, because it turns out that you are a different person from episode to episode. And it's not fair, because I don't know what to count on!"

When asked if she flagged up her concerns with the show's creators:

"Absolutely! Well ... I did at first. Now, I've got to the point where I raise my hands. I wave my little white flag!"

On the positive changes in the show:

"It's bizarre that all of this is happening in our last season. Unfortunately, it takes people upstairs to turn their heads to a distraction in order for others to come in and freshen the concept and make the show good ..."

" ... I mean, you're talking about a show where the captain doesn't sweat! T'Pol's hair doesn't move - even in battle! And if it does, we reshoot it. We don't bleed here, and nobody dies. Give me a break! And we're all-knowing. Where's the risk? Where is the danger? Where's drama? Where's the challenge? Where's the story? Give me a break, I'm bored!"

Character consistency:

"You can't take T'Pol and say 'Okay, you're a Vulcan' and take away the Vulcan characteristics. You might as well clip the ears! For example, eating food with their hands - they don't do that! And yet they'll throw in episodes where she's eating popcorn, and I'll say, 'Can I use a napkin? How can I ...'" Jolene cuts herself off in the booming, uncaring voice of The Man. "'No! Use your hands!'"

Not very logical, say SFX:

"It's not, but that's not what they care about. They care about ... " Jolene sighs. "I don't know what they care about. But y'know ... I'm resigned."

On why she cares so much:

"... being a part of the Star Trek legacy is very important to me. It deserves a bit of respect. You can't just crap on it! It means something."

And despite her faith in Manny Coto's work, she seems to believe it's too late and this will be the last season:

"I think this will be our last season. I do. You can feel it. And after this show is over it's gonna be the first time in 17 years that Star Trek isn't on television. I don't know how people feel about that, but I know I'm affected by that thought. But I'd rather let it go than let it die a slow death. It deserves the respect it's due, and if we can't do that ... then let it go."



Quote:

The Trek Report: Beam Me Up, Beam Me Down
Is Paramount trying to hide Enterprise?

January 13, 2005 -
Is Paramount Trying to Silence Early Enterprise Reviews?

It hasn't been much of a secret that Enterprise feeds a day early to networks that run the series in Canada and that a number of fans who own satellite dishes have been able to view that feed. Until fairly recently, most television series that were produced by US studios and were also purchased for broadcast in Canada had early feeds like this. That was before the entertainment industry's latest scapegoat for everything from bad box office returns for bad movies to sliding ratings for mediocre television series: Internet .....

Coto talks to issue 125 of SFX magazine,
Question : You must feel like the kid who's been handed the keys to the sweet shop. The only problem is - will the shop get shut down ?

Coto : Well, it's always possible. It's the fourth year of the show and who knows ?

Question : Does it feel like a terrible burden of responsibility ?

Coto : Actually, there's very little. I think a lot of people are expecting it to end this year. If it does end, then that's what everybody expected, and if it doesn't, it's a pleasant surprise. So I don't really feel that much responsibility. It's not about 'saving it'; it's about doing a great season. And we can do a great season and people still might not watch ! A lot of great shows get cancelled. It's a lot of factors, it's not just putting on a great show. But we'll start with that and hope for the best

SFX mag out in the UK, few excerpts from brief interview found on trek web






sounds bad

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Three-Body Problem by Liu Cixin
Sat, March 23, 2024 18:09 - 7 posts
Video Games to movie and tv series and other Cartoon / video game adaptions
Thu, March 7, 2024 14:26 - 42 posts
Favourite martial arts film of all time-
Wed, March 6, 2024 15:02 - 54 posts
PLANETES
Tue, March 5, 2024 14:22 - 51 posts
Shogun, non scifi series
Tue, March 5, 2024 13:20 - 4 posts
What Good Sci-Fi am I missing?
Mon, March 4, 2024 14:10 - 53 posts
Binge-worthy?
Mon, February 12, 2024 11:35 - 126 posts
Are There New TV Shows This Fall You Must See?
Sat, December 30, 2023 18:29 - 95 posts
The Expanse
Wed, December 20, 2023 18:06 - 27 posts
What Films Do You Want To See In 2023?
Thu, November 30, 2023 20:31 - 36 posts
Finding realistic sci-fi disappointing
Thu, October 5, 2023 12:04 - 42 posts
Worst Sci-Fi Ever.
Wed, October 4, 2023 17:51 - 158 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL